You can check off the “witch hunt against Eric Holder” as the latest political agenda Fox is trying to work into the Boston Marathon bombings. How else to explain hosting a victim of the Fort Hood shootings, pretending he’s an expert on terrorism and prosecuting terrorists and then goading him into attacking Attorney General Holder as being soft on terror?
Yesterday, Fox & Friends Weekend hosted Alonzo Lunsford, who was seriously injured in the Ft. Hood shooting. Lunsford is certainly an expert on what happened at that awful event. But that hardly makes him an expert on terrorism or the Obama administration's efforts to prosecute it. Except on Fox News.
Tucker Carlson opened with the leading question, “The question may be, is this administration too politically correct to deal with the harsh realities of terror attacks when they occur on American soil?”
Lunsford was in synch with the Fox agenda. He quickly asked, “How many more times are we gonna let events like this happen on U.S. soil?” Saying we need to “stop being reactive” to terrorist attacks and “start being proactive,” he added, “We have enough power and enough technology in our grasp where we can stop this from happening.” When asked by co-host Alisyn Camerota what might have been done to prevent the Boston bombings, he said the Boston Marathon area should have been “more secure” and that the FBI should have bore down harder on now-deceased Boston suspect Tamerlan Tsarnaev when they first interviewed him “until he is no longer a threat.”
It’s not known at this point whether or not Tsarnaev was actually a threat when the FBI was investigating him (and concluded that he was not). As CBS News reported – but nobody in this segment did:
As the investigation into the Boston Marathon bombings unfolds and authorities look to prevent future attacks, U.S. intelligence agencies will have to take what (CBS News’ senior correspondent John) Miller calls a “second look” at two possible scenarios that allowed Tamerlan and any possible associates to remain under the radar.
“Were there things going on in Tamerlan’s life that were so far beneath the surface that they didn’t come up in his communications, his travels, or his associations and does that need another look?” Miller asked. “Or, did his radicalization on U.S. soil start later than [the FBI investigation] in 2011?”
This is not the first act of terrorism that has highlighted the FBI’s attempt to walk the line between preserving an individual’s rights and doing everything it can to head off a potential attack.
Individual rights? Those must be for gun owners, not Muslims! Carlson changed the subject away from those nit-picky details in order to lead Lunsford back to attacking the Obama Department of Justice, headed by Holder:
I just want to go back to something because some of our viewers may not be fully aware of it. I just want to make absolutely sure and clear to our viewers that the Fort Hood shootings, of which you are a victim, are still not recognized by this administration as an act of Islamic terror. …That is true?
It’s a legitimate controversy but a legitimate news network would have explained, as ABC News did, why the administration made such a decision:
As defined by U.S. law, a terrorist act must be “premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by sub-national groups or clandestine agents,” and for it to be an international terrorist act, it must involve “citizens or the territory of more than one country.” All of those killed and a majority of those wounded in the (Ft. Hood) attack were either active duty or reserve military personnel.
No such explanation needed for “fair and balanced” Fox & Friends! Lunsford called Attorney General Holder a liar for not calling the shootings a terror attack. Then, Lunsford went on to say what Foxies undoubtedly had hoped he’d say:
Both events are terrorist acts. And if our Commander-in-Chief and our president called (the Boston bombings) a terrorist act, OK, then fine. But you have to make sure that it’s like that across the board. Don’t distinguish between the two. Because the difference between both events is that one, that Major Hasan got his orders from Anwar Al Awlaki, who was already on our wanted list. So there again it’s a terrorist act and the FBI is proving that it’s a terrorist act so let’s go ahead and call it what it is.
Again, it's not clear that Hasan "got orders" from Al Awlaki, as even Fox News has acknowledged. But again, nobody bothered to bring up that little detail. Instead, Carlson asked Lunsford a question he almost certainly could not know the answer to: “Why the hesitance, do you think, to call something for what it is?”
Bingo! Lunsford called it “political correctness" and specifically suggested Holder is unfit for office. "We need to hold people accountable for things that they are doing that are correct and things they are doing that is incorrect. And bottom line is, if you are in charge of the organization, i.e. the Department of Justice. If you are gonna be in charge, be in charge. Do your job. And if you cannot do your job, then move out the way for someone else in their place is willing to do their job without any prejudice.”
“We need to hold people accountable for things that they are doing that are correct and things they are doing that is incorrect.”
sooo…..Fox Nation posting a picture of Eric Holder back in 2009 on their website with a gun pointed at him was…..?