RUSH: The news out of Boston continues to roll out. More news about Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, and, you know, it's everywhere. We're trying to be a little unique on this program, but I am unique and so therefore it really doesn't matter what is discussed. 'Cause until I've talked about it you really haven't heard it, right?
Telephone number is 800-282-2882, and the e-mail address, ElRushbo@eibnet.com.
The media and the pundits are all wondering openly where the Tsarnaev brothers became radicalized. They're wringing their hands out there. They're trying desperately to figure it out. Where did they pick up their anti-America, anti-Christian notions? Did it happen in Chechnya? Did it happen in the home? Did it happen in America? Did it happen on the Internet? They're all trying to figure it out.
Well, let me try this. One of the more disturbing interviews that I have heard was with a man in Cambridge who knew Tamerlan Tsarnaev. This guy said that Tamerlan Tsarnaev often engaged in anti-American rants. It was common to hear this guy riff on what a rotten place America is. So they asked this guy, "Well, why didn't you ever say anything about it?" You know what this guy in Cambridge said? He said Tamerlan's rants are so commonplace in Cambridge, that he didn't think there was anything out of the ordinary. I believe it. Cambridge, of course, is the home of Harvard, and I made reference to this last Thursday when this was going down.
Everybody back then, "How did they get radicalized, when did this happen?" What do you think education in America is today? We talk about it here all the time, the fact that America's a racist, sexist, bigoted country. That it's homophobic. That all of that was brought to this country by western Europeans when they came and displaced the Native Americans. The multiculturalists have taken care of the curricula in many levels of education here and teach that this country was founded immorally, unfairly, unjustly, and this is nothing new.
You don't have to leave this country to be taught how rotten it is. And everybody knows this. And, in fact, the people out there wringing their hands over this, they know it, too, and in many cases the people wringing their hands happen to have the same views as Tamerlan Tsarnaev did to one degree or another. I mean, I can turn on certain cable networks and hear an absolute disgust for this country, day in and day out. Where do you think our president got his views of this country? He, I guarantee you, has a chip on his shoulder about it. Why does he find a book by Saul Alinsky called Rules for Radicals so intriguing?
Why did Obama want to become a community organizer? What's that all about? It's all about being rooted in the belief that this country isn't right; that this country needs to be fixed; that this country set up for a select future, and it was founded that way, it's been run that way, and the select few have been engineering things so that they get everything and we've run around the world and we've stolen everything that we've wanted from around the world and the people around the world are poor while we've gotten rich because we've stolen it. I mean, this is commonplace. Then you add to that whatever this guy might hear in a mosque and it really isn't that hard to figure out where he got radicalized.
But is that even the point, where? I mean, to a certain extent it could be. I think the fact that we're sowing the seeds of our own problems is a serious matter here. But the fact that people are becoming radicalized in this country is fact. Does anybody remember why legal immigration was dramatically reduced by Congress in the early 1920s?
Folks, I've told this story before, but not in a while. My grandfather lived to be 104. He was born in the 1890s. Before he died, when I would travel back home to Cape Girardeau and talk with him, he never listened to the radio program 'cause hearing was difficult and it was a difficult thing for him to do. So he would ask me, "What's happening on your radio show? What are people talking about?" This is in the early nineties, and I said, "Pop --" we all called him Pop -- I said, "Pop, everybody out there is worked up over immigration. They're just beside themselves over what's happening to the country because of immigration."
He said, "You know, at the normal school," which is what university was called when he went to it, Cape Girardeau in the early 1900s, he described for me the debate topic that he had to prepare for. In the early 1900s, resolved, immigration of eastern and western Europeans should be suspended because they're filthy, dirty, rotten, bringing crime and infestation and so forth is in the country. He said, "This is nothing new. This has been going on since before I was born, early era of my life, nothing new about it," and he tried to tell me how these things are just cyclical and how nothing really changes.
So I began to check the history of this for myself, and it is true. Legal immigration in the early 1920s was dramatically reduced by Congress, not opened up, dramatically reduced. And do you know why? Does anybody remember why? Because of all the bombings and the general terrorism from anarchists and communists and other radical eastern and southern Europeans. It was so common, it became a cliche in the movies of that period. The radical with the bowling ball-like black bomb with the burning fuse. So we have a history in this country of this kind of thing happening before, just from different areas of the world and our immigration being dramatically reduced because of it.
Now, we're in a different era now. Now we want to vastly expand it. The more intelligent you are, the more educated you are, the harder it is to get into America. Go figure. But it is. So there are dramatic similarities, while at the same time dramatic differences in the way the country is approaching the problem. I think this is crucial. I think it is extremely important. You have a guy in Cambridge -- we had a audio sound bite from a guy yesterday who said that, well, yeah, he heard all this terrorism stuff coming out of the mouths of the Tsarnaev brothers, but he didn't say anything because, well, you know, "I don't want anybody dumping on these guys, they're Muslims. This country's biased against Muslims, I don't want to add to it."
So there's another guy who heard these guys ranting about how much they hate this country and what their plans are and what they'd love to happen and so forth, but I'm not gonna tell anybody because these guys are Muslims and this country's biased against Muslims. Where did he pick that idea up do you think? That we're biased and prejudiced against Muslims? He's not gonna tell the authorities about it. Here's another guy in Cambridge who knew Tamerlan and said that he often engaged in anti-American rants and didn't do anything about it because it was so commonplace that he didn't think it was anything out of the ordinary. Everybody in Cambridge talks this way. Everybody's a radical. Everybody's a revolutionary. Everybody's got a beef.
So there was nothing special about it. And we're now being told that the FBI did not know about Tamerlan's trip to Russia because his name was misspelled on the passenger list. Tamerlan left America, went to Russia. The old man Tsarnaev in Dagestan applies for political asylum. 60 Minutes did a piece on this many, many, many moons ago. If you want to get into this country, it's easy. Just claim or request political asylum, i.e., you are fleeing political persecution, and you're granted it. It's almost automatic. You get off the airplane at JFK, you walk through Customs and claim that you want asylum and they grant it to you and you're turned loose and they don't even track you. You're seldom followed, kept track of.
So old man Tsarnaev applies for and is granted political asylum because things are so rotten in Dagestan, and six months after having been granted political asylum, he heads back to Dagestan. He's still there. So people are now thinking, maybe one of the techniques of radical Islamists is citizenship. Political asylum, automatic entry into the country, don't have to worry about the southern border, get in here, claim political asylum, and then start your path to citizenship that way. Old man Tsarnaev got political asylum and then went back. This horrible place, politically oppressing him, he went back to and stayed there. Now, why?
Why would somebody come here to apply for political asylum, have it granted, and then go back to the place that's so horrible they wanted to leave? And Tamerlan went back to visit him. Which is the point. We're being told now the FBI didn't know about his trip to Russia -- Dagestan, Chechnya -- because his name was misspelled in the passenger list. How can you misspell your name on a flight? Don't you have to produce a photo ID for security? Stop and think of what we're being told. We lost track of this guy because of the misspelling of a name, and we're being told it isn't gonna be a big problem to legalize 11 million, or whatever the number is, of illegal immigrants. We're also told the FBI wasn't allowed to keep tabs on him after they questioned him. He told them he wasn't a terrorist so they weren't able to keep tabs on him.
Well, he said he wasn't a terrorist. Who would admit being a terrorist? Well, I don't know, but this guy didn't. So we're told the FBI wasn't allowed to keep tabs on him. I don't know why Dzhokhar didn't try that. He could have avoided all kinds trouble; just tell 'em you're not a terrorist. It's even better than saying you're just under the influence of your big brother. You notice also that the news media are doing to Dzhokhar what they did to Trayvon Martin. They're regularly showing a photo of Dzhokhar that was taken when he was about 14. Soft, angelic, nice little boy, harmless, cute, big lovable eyes.
Not at all what he looks like today. Whenever we're shown Osama Bin Laden, it's in his shepherd pose with his walking stick, walking through the mountains or wherever. But the news media seem to be making him look like an innocent little angel who was totally willing to drive over his own beloved brother to try to get away with his killing spree.
RUSH: The latest theme, by the way, from the Boston bombing brothers is that they couldn't possibly have any connections with a larger conspiracy. Nope, just a couple of radicalized kids, happen to be Muslims, but they're not connected in any way with a larger conspiracy. Why would anybody believe that? After all, again, Tamerlan did go and stay in Dagestan. Dagestan, you have to understand, Dagestan, Chechnya, these are basically countries run by thugs and gangs. That's why Putin hates 'em. Putin would wipe 'em out if he could. These guys are rebels, revolutionaries. They hate the Russians. Putin hates these guys. Dagestan is a hotbed of Muslim terrorists.
A local Dagestan police source reported claims that Tamerlan met at least six times with an underground militant there. But, anyway, forget about the technical knowledge that it would take to make kind of a devices they had. Where'd they get the money? Where'd they get the money for their cars, for their clothes, Tamerlan's trip to Russia? As I said yesterday, I'm somebody who pays for everything I do and everything I have, and I wonder... these guys didn't have jobs. Where did they get the money for all of this? The guy is bragging about his Mercedes and Porsche. Where'd they get the money? And why do we want to be so eager, what's the point in lying to ourselves in telling us that no one was helping them? Just 'cause Dzhokhar said so?
The AP has a story. "Two U.S. officials say preliminary evidence from an interrogation suggests the suspects in the Boston Marathon attack were motivated by their religious views but were apparently not tied to any Islamic terrorist groups. The two brothers, from southern Russia, practiced Islam. The U.S. officials spoke Monday on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to publicly discuss the investigation." Yet they were. Preliminary evidence. Bombers motivated by religion but acted alone. Why are we so eager -- you know, political correctness has reared its head here. We have a story we hope is true. Official Washington has a story and hopes it's true. And of course the libs are out there, they were panicked over the fact that the terrorists were not white.
Quick audio sound bite. We have a montage here of the Drive-By Media trying to take the edge off of this by referring to Dzhokhar as just a kid, same thing they're doing with the photo of this guy.
JULIA IOFFE: This kid seemed to be out of place in Boston. He seemed to be alienated.
DON LEMON: He’s 19 years old, he’s still a kid, he’s still a teenager.
CHRISTINE ROMANS: It's not as if you look at this kid and his background, and see hardship that could have turned his heart hard.
ANDERSON COOPER: He was a seemingly normal college kid.
DEBORAH FEYERICK: Remember, this is a kid who is on a ventilator.
JESSICA STERN: Why is it that one kid is susceptible and not another.
ERIN BURNETT: All-American kid, smoked pot, went to parties. Totally normal kid.
DR. DREW PINSKY: What seems to be a normal kid in high school on the wrestling team to being radicalized.
DAVID REMNICK: This is a mixed up kid.
RUSH: Yeah, just a mixed up kid, totally normal American kid, out there smoking pot, watching YouTube, driving around in his Porsche, not liking America, totally normal kid, nothing to see here. Very sad, in fact. This poor kid, he's got a tube down his throat. Just a normal college kid. This kid's on a ventilator. My God, we need to feel sorry for him. Why do we do this? Why in the world do we do this? Why do we take what we know is truth and reality and try to hide from it? How does that help anything?
RUSH: I want you to stop and think here for a minute, folks, what the media is telling us about Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. He's just a normal college kid. Does that not bother anybody? A normal college kid is capable of putting together a pressure cooker bomb, setting it to explode at the Boston Marathon, injuring hundreds, and killing a few people. Normal college kid. This is how this stuff ends up getting bastardized. This is how we end up not thinking ill of bad people.
Normal college kids do not do this. Radical college kids do this. And, by the way, this guy's not a kid. The boy he killed is a kid. This guy is 19 years old. He's not a kid, and he's not a normal kid. He smokes marijuana, watches YouTube videos, sits around with his brother talking about how much he hates America. Yeah, just a normal kid. Then he goes and makes a couple of bombs and blows up the Boston Marathon. Yeah, just a normal kid. I'm sorry, that offends me. That offends my sensibility. He's not a normal kid. There's nothing normal about this, and we don't want it to be normal.
Daniel Patrick Moynihan: defining deviancy down. When a culture is unable to stop a deviant activity or a criminal activity or a perverted activity, they simply say, "Well, this is the new normal," and you move on. Defining deviancy down. Ah, normal college kid. Can't believe he would do this. He's not a normal kid. He's not a kid. He is a terrorist. "Mr. Limbaugh, he said that he wasn't a terrorist." Yeah, I know, he said he wasn't, so that's what we go on. Alan Dershowitz, the famed law professor at Harvard, the famed practicing lawyer defended Claus von Bulow, who was accused of murdering his wife Sunny von Bulow, said, "I don't understand the way some people on the left glorify American terrorists."
Professor Dershowitz was on a television show on NewsMax hosted by our good buddy Steve Malzberg. And Dershowitz pointed the hypocrisy that he hears. He talked about the point we made here, that Kathy Boudin, a murderer, a terrorist, domestic terrorist in the same vein as Bill Ayers, is now teaching at Columbia. Angela Davis, well known terrorist, distinguished career teaching. Distinguished. Ayers and his wife. Dershowitz, "These are all people who were terrorists."
So Malzberg said, "Well, would you agree there's no difference between them and this kid, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev?" And Dershowitz said, "Well, they're much worse because they're much better educated," meaning Kathy Boudin, Ayers, Angela Davis, "They're much better educated. They had all the privileges in the world. So I see them as much, much worse. I don't understand the way some people on the left glorify American terrorists without realizing that it's indistinguishable morally from kinds of terrorism we're condemning here. I just don't buy it."
Now, Dershowitz is a leftist. Dershowitz is a liberal. And he said, "I don't understand what it is. Why do we glorify these people?" And that's exactly what we're in the process of doing here, slowly but surely some on the left who happen to be people in the media are trying to diminish who the Tsarnaev brothers are, particularly Dzhokhar, and they're doing everything they can, "Just a kid, normal American college kid, nothing to see here," and then express shock and surprise that he'd build a bomb out of a pressure cooker and kill people.
And what's the elephant in the room that nobody wants to notice? Can anybody say Islam? Can anybody say Muslim? Can anybody say Chechnya? Can anybody say Dagestan? Can anybody say radical? It's right there. Nobody wants to see it or admit it, at least on the left. And so their hatred or their disgust or their dislike for this country is so intense that they glorify these people. And Dershowitz doesn't understand it. He doesn't understand why some people on the left glorify American terrorists. Take a look at who those people are, professor, and take a look at what they think of this country in the first place. Many of them think this country deserves this, professor.
Robert Redford has a movie out right now glorifying the Weather Underground. It's called The Company You Keep. And he's out promoting it. He was on Good Morning America on April 2nd, three weeks ago. George Stephanopoulos was gushing over this movie 'cause it's Redford. Redford turns all these people into groupies. Redford shows up on Good Morning America, Stephanopoulos starts gushing about the new movie, The Company You Keep. It's about a Weather Underground activist and Redford said to Stephanopoulos (paraphrasing), "Man, you ought to get on the marketing here for this movie, I mean, you're really selling this movie."
They're already saying the Redford movie's gonna mop up at the Oscars. And what is it? It glorifies terrorism, glorifies people who kill Americans, glorifies people who take action against oppressive white America. That's what all this domestic terrorism is about. And we have people saying, "I don't understand, he's a normal kid, why would he do this?" Not a normal kid. He's not a kid. The boy he killed is the kid.
Let's listen to couple more audio sound bites that fit into this theme. David Remnick, who is the editor of New Yorker, the magazine, was on with Charlie Rose on PBS last night. Now, David Remnick lives in a liberal fantasy world, and he's out there trying to figure out why the bombers did it. He's struggling with why the bombers did it. Charlie Rose says, "You wanted to know what? You wanted to know why they did it?"
REMNICK: I want to know what anybody wants to know. You see these two schmucky looking guys in baseball caps and one's just outta high school, and a kind of a not-so-great college student. One kid is 26 and is a boxer, and people know them. You want to form a picture. You want to understand. This is not a question -- I was getting hammered on Twitter by some right-wing groups that somehow I was sympathetic with them. This is ridiculous. I wasn't sympathetic with people who do something so horrendous and cruel and kill people and had plans for more. But there's the human impulse to want to try to understand the -- maybe something that's impossible to understand.
RUSH: You know what's rooted in this wanting to understand? 'Cause, frankly, I don't care why people commit crimes. I frankly am not interested. They're perverts, they're psychopaths, they're sociopaths, I don't care why they did it. I want 'em punished. But these guys want to find out because in their minds there must be some justification for it. There's gotta be some reason they did it that makes sense. And then they make the move into what is it about us that they hate? Or what is it about America that they hate that would justify this? And we do seminars, "Why do they hate us?" Seminars, trying to examine why sociopaths, psychopaths hate us. Or, in this case, a couple of radicalized Muslims.
It answers itself, but that can't be because, no, the narrative is that Islam has nothing to do with this. The narrative is that Muslims have nothing to do with this. The narrative is these guys are lone wolves acting on their own. Why did they do it? We don't care, Mr. Remnick. "Mr. Limbaugh, if you knew why these kids did it then maybe we could stop it in the future." No, no. Because you guys are gonna construct a reason that justifies why they did it. That's where you guys are headed on the left, it justifies it and in no way are you guys gonna be responsible for anything that stops this.
I guaran-damn-tee you nothing anybody on the left is gonna do that will stop this. They're gonna look for ways that will justify it, to explain it, because for whatever perverted reason, they don't like this country, either. So they're curious, what is it? Now, Charlie Rose said, "They had a grievance. Did he feel he was a failure or that somebody was misjudging him?"
REMNICK: There have been psychological studies about young men between, I don't know, 15 to their mid-twenties, and some vast number of crimes and awful things happen because of the disaffection of and the inability for young men, for whatever reason, psychological or biological, to make good decisions. So it's not unusual to see a disaffected 19-year-old or a disaffected 25-year-old guy. Again, we have to admit what we don't know and what we don't know is how disaffection or even interest in radical ideas leads to an evil act.
RUSH: You don't? How in the world could you not know that?
REMNICK: That may or may not be determined, and sometimes that's the stuff of novelists. I mean, you can only find it out when you make it up. You don't always know.
RUSH: It does not take a novelist to discover their motivations, or make 'em up. Motivations are clear. I can't believe he said this. (imitating Remnick) "Well, again, Charlie, we have to admit that we don't know, and what we don't know is how disaffection or even interest in radical ideas leads to an evil act." You don't know how interest in radical ideas leads to an evil act? You certainly have no trouble when you start imagining all the stuff the Tea Party never did. This is unbelievable. And this is a leading light of the liberal elite in the literary culture of New York. "And what we don't know is how disaffection or even interest in radical ideas leads to an evil act that may or may not be determined and sometimes that's the stuff of novelists."
No, it's not. It's right there in the middle of the room. You just don't want to admit it. Remnick, by the way, is the guy who called Tea Party supporters racists. You know what he said? This is the guy who said, you'll remember this, "When you hear people in the Tea Party saying I want my country back, I lost my country, something's being said there very often that has to do with race. It has to do with otherness. It has to do with a nostalgia for an imagined America some time ago."
So they've got all the vitriol in the world that they're harboring for conservatives and they got no problem believing that conservatives would do this kind of stuff 'cause every time it happens, they admit openly, "My God, I hope a white guy did this, because that's who I know wants to do it. Boy, I know the bitter clingers and those Tea Party people, I know they want an America that never was. They want to blow things up to get it." That never happens. And reality stares them in the face, and they just can't come to grips with it. People who, if they're voting, vote Democrat, are doing this kind of stuff. Certainly not voting Republican.