Lawyers for Terrorists

  By Florida Bill

                           There is real competition for the most outrageous comments in the investigation of the San Bernadino killings.  Without a doubt, however, the four-star winners are the family lawyers whose inane mouthings defy all sense of reason.              

                            At first, it seemed like  President Obama was right up there in the running, when he looked at the unmistakable evidence of terrorism and opined that no motive was yet known. His first suggestion was "workplace violence." But didn't he use that same lame excuse for the Ft. Hood killings?  But then that is what you might expect from Obama, who consistently shows a cool hand when it comes to describing the atrocities perpetrated by radical Islam.  

                  Conservative commentator Glenn Beck heard Obama and came unglued.  Either the President is “delusional” or is the “dumbest-son-of-a-bitch on the planet,” he ranted. So maybe Beck was a bit over-the-top, but there are those of us who don't see him as very far off base. 

                                        Another contender for empty-headed statements came from Attorney General Loretta Lynch with her stern warning that she would prosecute anyone who makes "anti Muslim speech that edges toward violence." (Hmmm, is edging towards violence the same as yelling fire in a crowded theater? It seems like the freedoms guaranteed by our First Amendment might get in the way of calling out Muslim fanatics for the carnage they create.  Her words definitely suggested that America is not at war with Islam, only extremists, so she gets points for backing up Obama.
              And then there was press secretary Josh Earnest, who lived up to his name when he spoke of "tightening gun control." But then he had to spoil it all by acknowledging that new gun laws would not have prevented this mass shooting.  

              Then the curtain went up on the main act: a pair of attorneys hired to represent the family of the shooters. It seems like the "right to an attorney" covers press conferences as well as courtroom arguments these days.
              Their incredible performance came in the face of overwhelming evidence that the storm trooper type slayings of 14 persons and the wounding of 21 others by Syed Rizwan Farook and his betrothed, Tashfeen Malik, who was in America on a visa  from Pakistan, was unabridged terrorism. 

                 Investigators spelled it all out and confirmation came from the FBI.  Farook and his wife were dressed in black, tactical style vests and masks when they stormed into a holiday gathering firing assault weapons--just a small part of the arsenal later discovered at their house.  It was there that investigators found a half dozen pipe bombs and another 13 empty pipes ready to be fashioned for future use; 5,000 rounds of ammunition, handguns, assault rifles and tools for the fashioning of explosive devices.  Also in their car, authorities recovered another 1,400 assault rifle rounds and even more handgun bullets.

                 Although Farook's wife, Tashfeen, had posted her allegiance to ISIS and its leader, Abu Bakr al Baghdadi on Facebook, the lawyers continued to urge reporters not to "rush to judgment." They still felt that it was too early to abandon the ever-popular possibility of "workplace violence." Maybe Farook was annoyed because a coworker had teased him about the beard he was growing.  They also questioned the accuracy of events as had been disclosed by the FBI.  

                 Their comments about the San Bernardino incident are absurd enough, but then they went so far as to suggest that the 2012 shooting of elementary school children in Sandy Hook, Ct., were questionable. That alone makes Attorneys Mohammad Abuershaid and David Chesley the first place  winners for the most outrageous performance. They also expressed frustration at media attention to the religious aspects of the slayings.  "This is not a Muslim act," insisted Chesley.

                 Chesley, who said he was a "criminal defense" lawyer and the bearded Abuershaid, his associate, held forth in a televised news conference for the better part of an hour.   They said that they had been retained to represent the interests of the family of Farook.

                  Expanding on the beauty and peacefulness of the religion of Islam, Chesley said that proof of terrorism is not there. There is no evidence" that Farook was involved with radical elements," Abuershaid insisted.  In fact, the "only thing remarkable about Farook was how normal he appeared." 

               Please, no jumping to conclusions, said Chesley.   The lawyers floated the possibility that Farook reacted in anger at co-workers who were teasing him because of a Islamic-style beard he was growing. The fact that he just happened to have military gear, assault weapons, and a copious supply of bombs and ammo on hand never entered into their equation.

             Farook's wife was a tiny woman, a "caring" and "typical" housewife; a soft-spoken mother of a six-month old infant, who was assimilating into American life. Chesley just couldn't believe that this petite woman would be involved in this sort of crazy Bonnie and Clyde scenario, even with all those weapons laying around the house.

            She was conservative and as a devout Muslim, always wore her burqa. Farook's brother had never seen her face. "She was just Syed's wife," one attorney said.   

            Newsmen watching the conference reacted with disbelief at the lawyers' horse and pony show.  

            The attorneys indicated that they would be available to respond to further questions about Farook and his wife. No need. Their gold medals are already in the mail. 

                                               xxx