At CFIF, I explain why the Boston bombing was the predictable outcome of (even if not, of course, directly blamable on) policies deliberately forced on the FBI by the Obama administration. This is actually really important stuff, and it's not jsut some ex post facto blame-game: Some of us were warning about these policies six months (or more) ago.
Here's a rather lengthy, key passage:
Granted, hindsight is 20/20. But the whole point is that it should not have taken hindsight; it should have taken at least semi-vigilant contemporary oversight all along.
Meanwhile, to what can we owe the suspicion that the Obamites anti-profiling atmosphere contributed to the FBI’s laxity? Well, it’s documented: The administration has issued orders just short of a fatwaagainst anything officially linking Islam with terror. It removed hundreds of FBI training documents containing what it claimed were inaccurate descriptions of Muslims.
Also, according to a key FBI document, “Mere association with organizations that demonstrate both legitimate (advocacy) and illicit (violent extremism) objectives should not automatically result in a determination that the associated individual is acting in furtherance of the organization’s illicit objective(s).” Indeed, the Obama Justice Department has gone even farther, not only refusing to follow obvious potential links between angry Islamism and terrorism but also leaving open the possibility ofcriminalizing speech (like this column) that dares criticize Islamic practices.
It is absolutely fair to say that this general attitude at least made it significantly tougher for the FBI to keep watch over people like the Tsarnaevs. And it is absolutely sensible to insist that the policies at issue should be reversed.