What's the scoop on the conspiracy stuff?
Owners of 'Terrorista #1' BMW taken into custody over Boston bombings AGAIN: Feds arrest two men 'who were friends with suspect for immigration violation'
Boston bombers: FBI hunting 12-strong terrorist sleeper cell linked to brothers Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev
What's the scoop on the conspiracy stuff?
All kinds of stuff.
The Saudi national they caught and are now deporting is on the terror watch list, has 6 terrorist brothers.
There were bomb sniffing dogs at the start and finish line along with a heavy amount of FBI and private Operators, kept announcing a drill over loudspeakers, left the blast area before the bombs went off.
Police actually ran over the older brother with an SUV.
Israeli news claims brothers were double agents setup by our government as patsies.
etc etc etc
White House: Tsarnaev won't be treated as enemy combatant
http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_new...rnaev-wont-be-treated-as-enemy-combatant?lite
I do not agree with this...
Personally I do.
When I was a JAG I knew people who served as both prosecutors and defense counsel for combatants held at Gitmo. I could never wrap my head around that process, and it has always felt to me like a kangaroo court. I do not like the idea of holding people indefinitely (now, more than a decade) without charges based on the proposition that we are still at war (a war which will presumably never end), because I think it's totally contrary to American values.
In this particular case we are talking about an American citizen who committed his crimes on American soil, against American civilians. I can't see treating him as an enemy combatant even if his actions were motivated by Islamic extremism (which appears to be the case but is not totally certain).
Personally I do.
When I was a JAG I knew people who served as both prosecutors and defense counsel for combatants held at Gitmo. I could never wrap my head around that process, and it has always felt to me like a kangaroo court. I do not like the idea of holding people indefinitely (now, more than a decade) without charges based on the proposition that we are still at war (a war which will presumably never end), because I think it's totally contrary to American values.
In this particular case we are talking about an American citizen who committed his crimes on American soil, against American civilians. I can't see treating him as an enemy combatant even if his actions were motivated by Islamic extremism (which appears to be the case but is not totally certain).
I can see how/why one could pick either yes or no on this issue. In my opinion, he and his brother chose to 'attack' America. Their intent was to kill and terrorize Americans which is substantially different than a homicide committed by a citizen. They knew exactly what they were doing and the effect it would have.
for his brother...possibly. for Dzokdar, absolutely no.
He is a US citizen and for all the baly-hoo on the administration about taking out a US Citizen with a drone outside of US soil--this is the exact same circumstance.
In one case, it is presumably a violation of the constitution and yet in this case, it is presumably not?
as for the bolded, I don't think that is necessarily true. intent to kill and terrorize is, in a certain aspect, the intent to kill. All of the mass murders we have recently had in schools resulted in the same effect, perpetrated by a US citizen and in the case of the suspects that survived--were not treated as enemy combatants.
Should Timothy McVeigh have been treated this way? The wackadoo in Colorado? They are/were also US citizens whose intent was to murder and terrorize. Why is there no call to treat them as enemy combatants? Is it this believe that we are at war with Islam rather than being at war with psychos? It's almost like turning this one event into a separate specific form of mass homicide. Many of us dislike the notion of a "hate crime" being differentiated from a "crime" of the same result. Why would that not apply here?
for his brother...possibly. for Dzokdar, absolutely no.
I don't think I'd ever be able to move on after something like that. It's things like that that make me double down on my ideology that the US killing innocent civilians overseas leads to more radical Islam.
Nice circular logic there, Its our fault the brothers decided to bomb the marathon.
In this exact case absolutely, I would have apologized, said I was horribly wrong and likely changed my opinion of the right.
This wasn't a theory though, almost all the experts said this showed signs of radical Islam. I watched most all the news channels and with the exception of a few anchors on MSNBC I never heard of a serious explanation other than radical Islam. The only surprise came from these guys not actually being Arabic.
What baffled me here is that dumbasses kept saying it was a RWE through and through and now they barely say anything.
White House: Tsarnaev won't be treated as enemy combatant
http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_new...rnaev-wont-be-treated-as-enemy-combatant?lite
I do not agree with this...
I can see how/why one could pick either yes or no on this issue. In my opinion, he and his brother chose to 'attack' America. Their intent was to kill and terrorize Americans which is substantially different than a homocide committed by a citizen. They knew exactly what they were doing and the effect it would have.
In my opinion, the shooters were not trying to terrorize Americans into changing our way of life. They just wanted their 15 seconds or they just wanted to simply kill people. They were not driven by a hatred of the American way of life.
I believe that an argument could be made about treating McVeigh as a combatant but his intent was not the same (he hated the US government, not the US way of life which is a significant difference, again IMO) as the Marathon Bombers who I assume believed in an idealogy to hate America.
So when are the leftists going to apologize for being wrong? I remember several of them on here and even that idiot chris matthews hoping it was a right winger. Is it islamophobic to point out the religion of these terrorists?
Are you saying he was just an innocent bystander who had no clue of what he was doing, why he was doing it or what effect it would have and that he was just simply following his older brother's instructions?
neither do I. But I never suggested that at all.I do not believe that 'brainwashing' from his older brother is a valid excuse...He is an adult and should be responsible for the consequences of his actions and decisions.
Wasn't he made a US citizen a year ago? If so, he should still be entitled to his rights as a citizen. Go take a look at how they have expanded "terrorism" to include damn near anything they want. If they can declare this asshole an enemy combatant they can likely do the same to some kid blowing up his neighbors mailbox with a cherry bomb.
Give him his fair trial and if/when found guilty punish him to the fullest extent of whatever jurisdiction he will be prosecuted in. I don't see why people want him to be treated as an enemy combatant. What exactly do "we" gain from that?
These asshats hate our way of life
Not to be a grammar nazi or anything but thats a pretty serious contradiction.
You are narrowing it to an extreme degree. White is white. These terrorists are white. White males. Just like Loughner, Page, Holmes, Lanza, etc. As another poster stated, even the FBI claimed that the terrorists are white males.
The fact of the matter is the owner started buying, storing and selling ammonium nitrate. Apparently didn't realize the dangers of doing so nor the requirement that an amount greater than 200 pounds had to be reported to the DHS. The owner also didn't update his emergency response or inform the local emergency services.