This is just a reminder of my prior blog where I pointed out how incompetent our President Obama is. He said two things so far that prove that he is incompetent. First, "We will hunt down those who did this and bring them to justice." The people who do things like this have zero fear of punishment so bring them to justice does nothing to prevent future such events. Second, he said, "Until we get all the fact, we can not say anymore about this event. We do not want to get ahead of the facts." Did Obama ever hear of Bayes' Theorem? If you read my prior blog, I tried to explain Bayes' Theorem which states that it is stupid not to take into account all "prior" knowledge. Obama acts like he just set foot on the Earth and has no prior knowledge about terrorists. We have so much prior knowledge about events like this that an idiot would know that it was 99% chances that this was a terrorist. It may be proven to be some kind of lightning strike, but until that can be proven, I am going with the position that it was a terrorist.
Why is it that our President Obama just can't say the word "terrorist"? I know a few mentally retarded people who could get the correct answer on this one in less than 10 seconds. Is our President that stupid or just a dishonest Judas?
Do not think because of my position on the event at the Boston Marathon that I do not have sad feelings for those injured. I do. My concern is with the very strange behavior of our President. I have been working to connect the dots on Obama and the picture that connecting the dots paint is not good for the future of our country. What else would you expect of a clever Judas?
PS----It is just like clock work. Obama is trying to close the barn door after the horse has gotten out. They should have not left the barn door open in the first place. Capturing and punishing those who set the bomb will have zero affect on any other similar event happening again. If you figure, for example, that there are 1,000 people here in the USA who want to kill us and you capture 2, how much do you think it will reduce the chances of another event? There will still be 998 people out there who want to kill us. That is the reason that "prevention" is the only logical action. Further, if rather than catching the actual people who set the bomb, you just went out and grabbed 2 people from the 1,000 out there who want to kill us, wouldn't the odds of another event be exactly the same? The bottom line is, where should we spend out money? Catching people who have no fear of punishment or preventing similar events? We only have so much money to spend. Why is it that we can not understand that terrorists are "fungible". If you don't know what that means, look it up.
PS---One more point. Look at it this way. Rather than spending more than 50 million dollars trying to find tha bad guys and bring them to justice, why don't we just give each of those killed 10 million dollars? It would do the same to prevent more future events!
