RUSH: We got a couple of sound bites. Obama has just weighed in on the Ted Cruz comments about increasing cop presence in Muslim neighborhoods. Obama's outraged. Everybody's outraged by this. Trump's out there saying we should have used torture, and nobody's caring. Nobody's even commenting on that because everybody is overwhelmed by what Ted Cruz said about having increased police presence in Muslim neighborhoods.
My question about that... Because Hillary has blown up over this. She can't believe it. "Hillary Clinton Calls Ted Cruz's Proposal to Patrol Muslim Neighborhoods 'Dangerous.'" May I ask a simple, obvious question? You would think the moderate Muslims that we are told about, the moderate Muslims who want no part of jihad and who have no inclinations toward jihad whatsoever -- and they're not interested in it, and they don't support it. You would think that moderate Muslims -- who, we are told, don't like the extremist jihadis just like we don't. We're told that moderate Muslims do not like the way their religion is being defaced and tarred and feathered and tarnished by the actions of the jihadis. (interruption) Hijacked, yes! We are told that the moderate Muslims -- peaceful, peace-loving -- living in neighborhoods all over America, don't like the fact that their religion of peace has been hijacked by the jihadis, the ISIS, the Al-Qaedas, the militant jihadists. The San Bernardino Two, for example. So why wouldn't they welcome help from law enforcement in keeping their neighborhoods safe?
Why wouldn't they welcome law enforcement presence to root out the people who are hijacking their religion of peace? I'm sorry, I need to be told. Is that an offensive question? Are some people going to think I'm trying to stir something up with that question? 'Cause I'm not. I'm just asking. To me... You know, I'm the mayor of Realville here. We are told that moderate Muslims don't like any aspect of jihad. They resent very much what's being done to their religion. Think it's being hijacked. It's a religion of peace. They want no part of this.
So Cruz comes along and says, "You know, we need added police patrols in Muslim neighborhoods to root out the jihadists who are killing and attacking innocent people and giving the religion of peace a bad name." Why wouldn't they support this? May I turn it around? May I ask that question a different way? And again, I'm really asking here. I'm not... This is not rhetorical. Somebody more informed than I on this is gonna have to answer this for me. Take your average gang neighborhood.
Do you think the mothers and the grandmothers in these neighborhoods who don't want their kids to have any part of gang life, don't want 'em to get anywhere near it... Do you think they would resent additional police presence in the neighborhood? To keep the neighborhood safe? Or would they distrust the cops to be there no matter why they claim? (interruption) Depends on the neighborhood? (interruption) Depends...? (interruption) So some...? (interruption) Even parents, mothers, grandparents that don't want their babies anywhere near the Crips, Bloods, or whatever gang, don't want them anywhere near that life
Even though some of those neighborhoods would be suspicious of the cops coming in, trying to keep the peace? (interruption) Some neighborhoods would welcome them, you're saying? Depends on...? (interruption) Yeah, some. (interruption) Yeah, quietly. They might not throw a party for the cops, wouldn't have an afternoon barbecue for 'em, but could quietly support them being there. It's a common sense thing, to me. I mean, everybody's concerned about crime. Everybody's always complaining about crime.
A lot of people say, "You've never got the cops around when you need 'em. Cops only show up after the fact. We need more cops!" Then cops somebody suggests that we have additional police presence to keep the peace -- and in this case, to keep the religion of peace from being hijacked, jaundiced, criticized, impugned, whatever -- and this is considered an attack on a whole religion? Think about this. This is considered an attack on a whole religion by suggesting the cops have a greater presence in neighborhoods? What is it...?
I know what they're thinking.
It's discrimination by accusation or some such thing.
The very idea that you would suggest it means you're biased and discriminating against the human rights of members of the religion of peace. You want to know what a spark this has become? I mean, this is a fuse. Even Obama weighed in on it in the middle apologizing to the Argentineans for keeping secret files on 'em. At a joint press conference in Buenos Aires, during a Q&A, the AP correspondent -- his name is Josh Lederman -- said, "What would you say that it says about the state of our debate when you have a major presidential candidate calling for surveillance of Muslim-American communities, Mr. President?"
OBAMA: I've got a lot of things on my plate but my top priority is to defeat ISIL. As far as what some candidates have said, I think I've been very clear on this. We have a[n] extraordinarily successful, patriotic, integrated Muslim-American community. They do not feel ghettoized. They do not feel isolated. Their children are our children's friends, going to the same schools. They are our colleagues in workplaces. They are our men and women in uniform, fighting for our freedom. And so, any approach that would single them out or target them for discrimination is not only wrong and un-American, but it also would be counterproductive.
OBAMA: The notion of having surveillance of neighborhoods where Muslims are present? I just left a country that engages in that kind of neighborhood surveillance.
RUSH: Oh, no.
OBAMA: Which, by the way, the father of Senator Cruz escaped --
OBAMA: -- for America.
RUSH: You hear this?
OBAMA: The land of the free.
RUSH: You hear this?
OBAMA: The notion that we would start down that slippery slope --
OBAMA: -- makes absolutely no sense. It's contrary to who we are.
RUSH: Oh, yeah, it's contrary to who we are. It's not our values. It's not who we are, certainly not our values. He just compared Ted Cruz to the Castros, folks. Hee-hee. From the guy who's conducting surveillance with drones all over the Middle East, from the guy who's in charge of the Kill List, from the guy who's pulling the trigger killing Muslims all over the world from drones. Barack Obama is claiming that he finds the notion of surveilling neighborhoods where Muslims are present offensive!
You know, you put things together. Don't forget the story we had in Politico yesterday, after Brussels. The first story from The Politico, "'Why Do They Hate Us So Much?'" None of this has made any sense to me within the sphere of common sense. The sphere of common sense is this: On 9/11, we're minding our own business, and the next thing we know 3,000 Americans are dead because 19 militant Islamists have hijacked airplanes, flown two of them into the World Trade Center and another into the Pentagon. A fourth was probably intended the White House. There have since then been a few additional attacks.
But since 9/11, since 19 militant Islamic hijackers, many of them Saudi Arabian, under the direction of Osama Bin Laden and other leaders of Al-Qaeda, ever since then it has been the obsession of the Democrat Party that there not be a single word of criticism of Islam.
Now, in the sphere of common sense, this is really curious. After each subsequent attack by militant jihadists, radical Islamists, after each one, Brussels just being the most recent, the first thing that happens is that members of the Washington establishment, predominantly Democrats, and certainly from the Regime, stand up and tsk-tsk-tsk us and warn us to not say anything about Islam, to not say anything about Muslims, to remain silent about radical Islam. No, no, no, no. You are being discriminatory. You're being bigoted or whatever you are if you at all acknowledge the perpetrators, if you ask questions, you're not to go there.
In the realm of common sense, none of this computes. This is as if Mars attacked the United States, and we were told, "Do not dare say anything about Mars. Do not say one word about Martians," everybody would say, "But, but, but." Don't care. Not all Martians did it. Just a precious few, and they by no means speak for the whole planet. Or some silly comparison. After every attack we are not to verbalize what everybody knows. We're not to ask questions. We are not to make reference in any way, shape, manner, or form. The first person that does, powerful forces array themselves in line and single-handedly start attacking whoever it is that makes the obvious observation.
And it's always puzzled me. We know who attacked the World Trade Center. We know who did Brussels. We know who did Paris. We know where they came from. We know who teaches them. We know who inspires them. We know where to go to find out what they think. And yet don't you dare, don't you dare even bring it up. Why?
In World War II, do you realize that we had all kinds of surveillance programs to find out if the enemy might have been working within our shores. And when a famous Democrat president, FDR, said (imitating FDR), "You know what, I see some people that look strangely like those people that blew us up on Pearl Harbor." He rounded up 110,000 of 'em and he put 'em in the same place out in California. It is true. No "but, but, but." It is true. It's since been condemned, of course. Well, actually it hasn't been condemned.
Any other instance of lawbreaking, whenever you find out that there is a tendency of certain neighborhoods, certain people, certain wherever, even without profiling, just using statistics, anecdotal evidence, when you have good intel, an idea that something's gonna happen, we surveil, we've got drones flying all over the world. We are surveilling. Who knows what kind of drones we're flying over our own country and who they are spying on. I'll bet you we got some drones flying over some good old boys at NASCAR tracks. I'll betcha we got drones surveilling all kinds of Americans. If not drones, we've got agents surveilling. But do not ever suggest surveillance of members of the religion of peace. Don't ever. Don't even talk or go there. It doesn't make any sense.
Obamacare profiles by race. They believe certain groups don't receive adequate health care. I mean, this administration is obsessed with race. This administration is obsessed with the differences between us. They profile and surveil and who knows what else. But on this, this doesn't make any sense. In the realm of common sense, this doesn't make any. In fact, it's worse than not making any sense. It is so pointedly purposeful that it's suspicious.
Why are we not to mention the obvious? Why are we not to acknowledge the obvious? Why are we not to see it? What happens to those of us who do see it and comment on it? We just want to make the neighborhood safe. "You can't..." And then the whole world lines up, and we have the president of the United States equating Ted Cruz to the Castros.
RUSH: This is Ed in Greenville, New York, as we go back to the phones. Ed, great to have you. Hi.
CALLER: Thank you, Rush. Good afternoon. What Ted Cruz is describing really amounts to nothing more than community policing in Muslim neighborhoods. You know, you look at what happened in San Bernardino, their investigations into the mosques there and Obama terminated the investigation. And it would have maybe uncovered this plot against these people in San Bernardino. So I don't understand how he thinks that he can somehow fight radical Islam without addressing the fact that there is radical Islam.
RUSH: Well, that's the point here. Fighting radical Islam, he won't even say it exists. This is one of Ted Cruz's points, that Obama will not even use those words. And there have been Drive-Bys interviewing Cruz, you know, all snooty, "What does that matter? What does it matter what you call them?" And Cruz says it matters everything. If you're not going to properly frame who it is perpetrating these acts of terror, there's no way you're gonna adequately target them in trying to wipe them out.
Folks, it's really strange. Radical Islamic terrorists are radical Islamists. And yet saying that is considered to be insulting, prejudiced, discriminatory, and worse. Anybody who makes reference, as I just did, somebody comes down on 'em, leans on 'em real hard, like is happening to Ted Cruz. But the caller, community policing has long been a standard operating procedure. Meanwhile, Trump is out, The Politico, "Trump: Torture Could Have Prevented Brussels Attacks." Now, stop and think of this. Everybody is so worked up over what Cruz said about cops in Muslim neighborhoods. Nobody's gotten around Trump's pro-torture comment yet.
RUSH: Yeah, hang on here, folks. One more thing to print out. All right. Turn on the Dittocam and welcome back. Looky here. "Police..." This from the Times of Israel website. "Police Uncover High Explosives in Home of Brussels Terror Suspect." Gee, I wonder how that happened! The cops must have gone there! Can you believe that? The cops actually went to the neighborhood? Wait 'til Obama finds out about this. Wait 'til the media finds out about this! You're talking about civil rights violations, maybe. The cops went to the neighborhood in Brussels where the bomber lived.
"Belgian authorities uncovered 15 kilograms (33 pounds) of high explosives and a mass of bomb-making material at a Brussels apartment shared by bombers of the city’s airport and subway, amid growing suggestions that the attacks were the work of the same Islamic State cell that attacked Paris last year. Belgian prosecutor Federal Prosecutor Frederic Van Leeuw identified two of the Brussels attackers as brothers -- Ibrahim El Bakraoui, a suicide bomber at the airport, and Khalid El Bakraoui, who blew himself up at a subway station.
"At least 30 people were killed in the attacks and more than 200 more were wounded, some critically. Investigators raided the apartment where the brothers had stayed in the Brussels neighborhood of Schaerbeek after the attacks, and found 15 kilograms of TATP explosives, nails and other material for making explosives, the prosecutor said." Right there it is: "Police Uncover High Explosives in Home of Brussels Terror Suspect."
RUSH: Okay. Get this, folks. I'm sorry, you know, but I've gotta hit reality here. I've gotta hit this phoniness with reality. Associated Press, August 23rd, 2011, five years ago. Headline: "With CIA Help, NYPD Moves Covertly in Muslim Areas."
AP, August 23rd, 2011, the CIA, according to AP, helped the NYPD monitor Muslims.
Here is an excerpt from the story. "A months-long investigation by The Associated Press has revealed that the NYPD operates far outside its borders and targets ethnic communities in ways that would run afoul of civil liberties rules if practiced by the federal government. And it does so with unprecedented help from the CIA in a partnership that has blurred the bright line between foreign and domestic spying."
You want to hear more from this article? Well, here you go. "Many of these operations were built with help from the CIA, which is prohibited from spying on Americans but was instrumental in transforming the NYPD's intelligence unit." The AP reported that this started under George W. Bush, but it continued under Obama and it was still going on when the AP discovered it and reported on it in 2011.
This is the very program Ted Cruz is referencing. And look at this irrational reaction that seems to be coordinated and combined from every vantage point in this country, from Obama down in Argentina comparing Cruz to the Castros, to the Drive-By Media, to others in the Republican Party. And I tell you again, the AP discovered and reported in 2011, August 23rd, "With CIA Help, NYPD Moves Covertly in Muslim Areas."
The NYPD was doing what Ted Cruz is talking about. This is the program he was talking about. It is happening. Well, it was. It continued under Barack Hussein O. Let's go to the audio sound bites. Last night in Times Square the Mayor Bill de Blasio and the police station commissioner Bill Bratton held a press conference to talk about the city's preparations in the wake of the Belgium attacks. During the Q&A a reporter said, "Senator Ted Cruz said today that in light of the Belgium terror attacks, the city should return to monitoring Muslim neighborhoods." Return! This is the program he was talking about. And here is what the mayor said.
DE BLASIO: I just have to say it's reprehensible. We have peace-loving, law-abiding Muslim Americans in neighborhoods all over New York City. To paint an entire community with that brush is absolutely counterproductive. It's immoral. It does not conform with American values.
RUSH: Here we go again! These leftists keep talking about, "That's not who we are. We are not being consistent with our values." I don't know if de Blasio, you never know where his head is. He may not even know this happened. But I wish he did. I hope he does know what happened, and I hope he does know he's being hypocritical. And I hope he does know, all of these people.
Here's Bratton. This is the police commissioner. He hasn't been the same since they shut Elaine's, so you have to cut him some slack. Bratton then jumped in, said this.
BRATTON: The statements he made today is why he's not gonna become president of this country, because we don't need a president that doesn't respect the values that formed the foundation of this country. I take great offense at his characterization of that whole population, particularly with my intimacy with the population in my organization of Muslim officers who are willing to sacrifice their lives in foreign countries and every day step up willing to sacrifice their lives here.
RUSH: This really is thin, and it is transparent, and it's not believable. You guys are all acting like an entire population has been targeted here as being impugned? This is the where, again, in the realm of common sense, none of this makes any sense. Who is it that blew up the World Trade Center and the Pentagon? Who is it that attacked in Brussels? Who is it that attacked in Paris? And, damn it, you better not say so. You had better not reference it. Because when you do you are impugning an entire group of people. You are attacking. You are painting with a broad brush an entire religion.
No, we're not. Just like you don't paint with a broad brush when you talk about any instance of crime and going after the perpetrators. But this seems to be a protected group for some reason. I know, folks. I get it. I'm just raising the question here. I know you can answer the question yourself here, fill in the blanks. But it's still very curious. It's still really peculiar here.
Here's more Cruz from CBS This Morning, Norah O'Donnell. "That program in New York, that was disbanded. They said it didn't lead to any leads and it didn't work."
CRUZ: It is true that the de Blasio political henchmen say that. But it's also true that the NYPD said it provided valuable intelligence. As I travel the city of New York and as I travel the country, police officers over and over again stop me and they say, "Thank you for standing up and having my back." If you look at the attack in Brussels, it's a direct result of the failed immigration policies in Europe that have allowed vast numbers of radical Islamic terrorists to come to Europe, and they've been ghettoized in neighborhoods that have become isolated, that have become separate, and they've become incubators for radical Islamic terrorism.
O'DONNELL: I have news for you, that's not, that’s not similar.
RUSH: That was Norah O'Donnell, a little snooty, "I have news for you, that's not, that's not similar. I have news for you." These people are so focused with their hatred of Cruz, and nobody's supposed to talk about this program. Nobody's supposed to admit that it happened. So Cruz acknowledges the program happened, he wants to reinstitute it, and everybody that was responsible for that program or had any to do with it is trying to act like it never happened. And then when they acknowledge that it did, "Well, it didn't work. It didn't work."
So all these people are guilty of everything they're accusing Cruz of being. They did it! They constructed the program. They implemented the program. They administered the program. They used the CIA to spy on these beloved neighborhoods. And here comes Ted Cruz bringing it up, and it's as though it never happened, and it's as though this guy is the worst reprobate that ever came down the pike. Here's more Ted Cruz, he's been charged, "You're painting one community with one brush."
CRUZ: No, I'm not. There's a difference between Islam and Islamism. Islamism commands that you either murder the infidels or you forcibly convert them, you wage jihad. And here's the consequence of President Obama and Hillary Clinton and Bill de Blasio refusing to acknowledge what we're fighting. You end up with policies that don't keep us safe. President Obama and Hillary Clinton both still support bringing tens of thousands of Syrian Muslim refugees to America. The first obligation of the president as commander-in-chief should be to keep America safe. I will apologize to nobody for how vigorous I will be as president fighting radical Islamic terrorism, defeating ISIS.
RUSH: That was Gail King that said: "You're painting one community with one brush." This is outrageous the way this is shaking out here, folks.
And we'll be back. Don't go away.
RUSH: Now, Andy McCarthy, National Review Online, posted a story back on the 14th of January this year, and the headline is: "As Terror Threat Rises, de Blasio and Islamists Blind the NYPD." Now, this story has to with an ISIS attack in Jakarta that happened on January 13th. "ISIS has claimed credit for [January 13th]'s jihadist bombings in Jakarta that killed at least two civilians ... Those attacks follow hard on the jihadist bombing earlier this week in Istanbul, which killed ten. These, in turn, come quickly after the jihad struck Philadelphia ... and San Bernardino ... and Cologne ... and Paris ..."
The attacks are frequent. And after every one (impression) "Don't you dare say Islam had anything to do with it! Don't you dare! You don't paint with a brush. That's not who we are. This is not representative of our values," or some such drivel. And then there's the story: "President Obama somehow managed not to mention in his ... State of the Union address [in January]: Federal authorities have apprehended an Iraqi refugee who ... turns out to be an ISIS supporter who was allegedly plotting to blow up malls in Houston." Remember, now, this is a dispatch from January.
"The Justice Department says the jihadist," whose name happens to be Omar Faraj Saeed al-Hardan (Skyhook), "was coordinating with another Iraqi refugee living in California, Aws Mohammed Younis al-Jayab. Jayab is in custody in Sacramento, charged ... with making false statements in an international terrorism investigation. Like al-Hardan, he is a Palestinian born in Iraq... He was accepted into the US as a refugee in 2012 and proceeded to travel at least twice to Syria, where he joined affiliates of al-Qaeda and ISIS in the fighting. So the threat of jihadists embedded or 'radicalizing' in our midst grows more pronounced every day."
We know that it is happening!
We are tracking these clowns!
"What a perfect time, then, for New York City ... to willfully blind itself to indicators of terrorism." On January 13 of this year, the "administration of Mayor Bill de Blasio has caved in a lawsuit brought by Islamist activists who demand that the NYPD make like the White House and pretend that Islam has nothing to do with terrorism committed by Muslims who proclaim -- with immense scriptural support -- that they are acting on behalf of [dadelut dadelut dadelut] Islam." But we're being told (impression): No, no, no, no, no! We must all pretend that Islam has nothing to do with terrorism committed by Muslims who claim they are acting on behalf of Islam.
"Among the concessions the city has made" caving in this lawsuit back in January "is that the NYPD will no longer be permitted to rely on 'Radicalization in the West,' a painstaking 2007 report in which, by studying actual terrorism cases, intelligence officers outlined a pattern they’d detected that could alert police to signs that an ostensibly ordinary person could be evolving into a jihadist." The New York mayor caved in a lawsuit and promised that report would never again be consulted.
Again: Radicalization of the West, a 2007 report, which studied actual terrorism cases, patterns were found that could detect and alert police to signs that an apparently ordinary, peace-loving individual could be a jihadist. So that research was cast aside; the mayor promised not to use it. The basic surveillance involved was thrown out, and the police were not allowed to any longer use any of that research back in January. So what we have here, this in Brussels happens, and a number of other acts of terrorism happen.
And Ted Cruz comes along and says (summarized), "You know what? We need to re-implement this program where the NYPD was surveilling neighborhoods to find and isolate, identify examples of ordinary people that were in line giving off indications they were prone to jihad." And the reaction to Cruz is... It defies common sense. Trying to explain the reaction... I mean, it's coming from everywhere. It's coming from the mayor of New York, coming from the police commissioner, coming from Obama in Argentina, coming from Hillary Clinton. It's coming from everywhere. In the realm of common sense...
Forget politics of this. It's hard to do that, but if you look at this as just straight out crime, and forget that there's a political, ideological, even religious component to it...
Just look at it as crime.
Some people are blowing up other people. People are blowing up buildings, public buildings, and we are actively telling ourselves we cannot investigate, we cannot do any research to find out who might be in line to do it next. Because that somehow is violating somebody's human rights, civil rights, what have you. It makes no sense. It makes no sense that we are not permitted to use law enforcement to prevent future acts like this. And the reason that we can't is because they are committed by one specific group of people that we will never publicly acknowledge or admit are engaging in these acts. It just doesn't compute.
This, by the way, throw this on the pile of things that has a lot of people in this country wanting to throw Washington overboard. Throw this on the pile of things that just doesn't make sense to average, ordinary, everyday people. Because it doesn't. It doesn't make any sense one way or the other. And there is no honesty. When you ask people, "Why are you willing to not use the tools? Why is surveilling a neighborhood where known acts of terror could effervesce --" "Well, because it's not our values. It's not who we are."
What do you mean, not who we are? Are you afraid of these people, do you secretly support these people, do you want their votes, what is it? Why deny this? Is it just political correctness? Is that all it is, or is it fear? I don't know. Whatever it is, it makes no sense whatsoever. Back to the audio sound bites.
Try this. CNN today, Chris Cuomo -- don't forget this guy. I'm telling you, I'm never, as long as I live, gonna forget the sound bite from this guy on Monday about communism. I still can't get over it. Chris Cuomo asking somebody (paraphrasing), "Isn't it about time that Castros got their act in gear, don't they know that communism is about individual liberty and freedom and lifting everybody up equally, not --" whatever he said. "Isn't it about lifting them up? Isn't communism about everyone being equal with great economic opportunity?" Really? Does he really think that? Is that what he's been taught communism is?
Anyway, he still has his job, so apparently nobody else was bothered by it.
He's talking to former Islamic extremist and author Maajid Nawaz and Michael Weiss, the senior editor of The Daily Beast about the attacks in Belgium. Cuomo said, "The French are quick to point out that Belgium is different. Geography, population density. It's farther behind than the French are in dealing with the homegrown terror threat. Is that a fair criticism, Maajid?"
NAWAZ: The security services are absolutely inundated. There is too much to do. If you just look at Brussels with those 100 fighters who've gone to join, imagine all of their siblings, all of their cousins, all of their neighbors and friends, and imagine how many people that is just in the city of Brussels to monitor. The global jihadist insurgency has hit home in Europe, but this was the eighth of seven other attacks in the month of March alone across the world. There was two in Pakistan, two in Turkey, one in Mali, one in Nigeria and one in the Ivory Coast. This is something which is unprecedented.
RUSH: Yeah, people better wake up here. Europe is overwhelmed is what this guy is saying. An invasion has taken place. ISIS is not just attacking in Syria or in Iraq. ISIS has moved to the West. ISIS hit the seat of the European Union. ISIS, in this attack, basically blew up utopia, as far as the left is concerned. Brussels, Belgian, Europe, European Union, utopia, and ISIS hit 'em, and they're not gonna stop there.
And this CNN terror expert: Europe inundated with third- and fourth-generation jihadis? Why do you think that is? How did that happen, by the way? Can anybody say, open borders? Can anybody say, we must not discriminate? Can anybody say, this is not our values? Can anybody say, we must not be judgmental? Can anybody say anything the average American leftist says? Here's Michael Weiss. This is the Daily Beast guy reacting to that.
WEISS: It's not just a generational thing. They have established connections, friendships, acquaintanceships with all manner of veteran jihadis. These people have been living in Europe for decades, and now they have these third- and fourth generation knock-on jihadis rising to the fore.
RUSH: And don't forget the first point made in the sound bites. There are too many of them to monitor. There are too many of 'em to keep track of. Belgium is not equipped. It's utopia, but it's not equipped. Paris, maybe a little bit more equipped, but what good did it do them?