FBI In Hot Water Over Claims About Suspect Who Held Hostages At Synagogue

After events that took place late Saturday into early Sunday morning, the FBI is currently looking down the barrel of extreme backlash in regards to statements that is issued about a suspect who held multiple people hostage inside a synagogue in Texas.

Matt DeSarno, the FBI Special Agent in Charge of the situation, “said the hostage taker was specifically focused on an issue not directly connected to the Jewish community and there was no immediate indication that the man had was part of any broader plan, but DeSarno said the agency’s investigation ‘will have global reach,'” reported the Associated Press.

The suspect in question was already dead by the end of the evening and all of the hostages were able to be released safely. The FBI did not provide an answer when questioned about who ended up shooting the suspect.

Various journalists, media personas, and many other notable figures issued tweets in response to a tweet put out by the Associated Press that said, “The FBI says the Texas synagogue hostage taker’s demands were specifically focused on issues not connected to the Jewish community.”

Of the responses, the most notable include:

  • Seth Mandel, Washington Examiner: “He took a shul hostage and demanded to free a notorious antisemite and forced one rabbi to call another rabbi in NY to help with this. Motive is likely indigestion, though we can’t rule out ‘lost a bet.’”
  • Dan McLaughlin, National Review: “Hitler was mad about the Treaty of Versailles, which wasn’t Jews’ fault, either.”
  • Alberto Miguel Fernandez, retired U.S. diplomat: “Such a bizarre take by the FBI.”
  • Gregg Carlstrom, The Economist: “Just a coincidence that he targeted a house of worship used by this one particular religious minority, a coincidence that seems to happen an awful lot throughout history.”
  • Kyle Orton, researcher: “This is absolutely absurd from @AP . In an era when the most micro-identities receive excess coverage and the most innocent slight can be interpreted as evidence of bias, even a hostage-taking at a synagogue doesn’t qualify as hostility to Jews.”
  • Josh Hammer, Newsweek: “These people defy parody.”
  • John Cardillo, political commentator: “The Bureau is in a race with itself to destroy whatever microscopic fraction of credibility it might have left.”
  • Kurt Schlichter, attorney: “I’m just shocked the FBI didn’t know about him beforehand like it knew about all those other terrorists. It didn’t, right? Right?”
  • Benjamin Weingarten, RealClearInvestigations: “Obama is fully back.”
  • Michael Berry, radio host: “It wasn’t related to religion? Oh, ok, FBI.”
  • Isaac Schorr, National Review: “For all we know, the guy might have chosen a synagogue because he wanted to spend his last day on Earth hanging out with Jews.”
  • Michael Scott Doran, analyst: “The FBI worries more about kowtowing to the progressive cult than about remaining legitimate in the eyes of the American people.”
  • Stephen L. Miller, political commentator: “Parents at school board meetings are instantly labeled domestic terrorists in writing on official DOJ letterhead. Armed guy takes Jewish hostages at synagogue during religious services demanding the release of an anti-Semitic convicted terrorist is a mystery they can’t solve.”

 

You Might Like
Share

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Send this to a friend