And now we will learn who is behind these brothers that made them change into the terrorists they were. It will be interesting to find out who in America was "guiding" them into this situation for I'm certain it wasn't just them that were the master minds behind this plot. I'm glad they did not kill this one because if they did they might never have gotten the opportunity to interrogate either one and they may never have gotten to the bottom of this situation. I do hope they do not allow someone to kill him while he is in police custody nor allow him to commit suicide , which he just might.
The Boston Marathon Bombing
- Thread starter Tiassa
- Start date
Likely the same as his brother's. Something to do with Islamic end-times prophecies. (Though careful saying that out loud around here) That, and some unhealthy older-brother worship.
I dunno, that joke was a pretty big bomb...
http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_new...errogation-of-the-boston-bombing-suspect?lite
He was busted for beating up a girlfriend. How dare the american cops interfere with his right to beat up his girlfriend. Islamic property rights and all...
FBI man climbs open gate.
[video=youtube;Th-UGLWLeRo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Th-UGLWLeRo[/video]
Heh Heh.
@ Bebelina
You could be a sex bomber.
[video=youtube;Th-UGLWLeRo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Th-UGLWLeRo[/video]
Heh Heh.
@ Bebelina
You could be a sex bomber.
A 19- year old can't have that much religious motives, one would think, so I would also go for unhealthy older brother worship. Wanting to prove himself, not bailing out on his brother.
Was it? In your tiny little world perhaps.
Well, I read some positive news about USA's death penalty ratings. Only three people killed since 1963 by the government. If that is true, then I would call it progress.
So they didn't read him his right either, and now their are trying to justify that mistake by claiming he was a foreign combatant. Was he? Or just an exchange student gone wild?
No, in America there's a law that gives the police the right not to tell anyone they arrest for terrorism that they can have a lawyer for them because the police are given the right to interrogate the terrorist to see if they have planted more explosive devices anywhere or might have others doing something that might lead to more problems. This law for the police can only be enacted if the prisoners are terrorists only from what I understand and no others can this be done to.
This affair is confused as it is, without lawyers.
"Caught" is an exaggeration.
Those dumb cops can't even open an open gate.
What happened was this. They spent a whole day searching for him, waving their guns around,
(and probably shooting the odd chair or two)
then they called off the curfew.
As soon as they called off the curfew, a man found the bomber in his back yard, in a boat.
After an hour of shooting at the boat, and climbing open gates,
they eventually apprehended him.
(ever thought of becoming a cop Balerion?)
Re arguing.
The troll may be arguing with me, but I don't argue with him.
I'm above that kind of thing.
I've got him on ignore.
Those dumb cops can't even open an open gate.
What happened was this. They spent a whole day searching for him, waving their guns around,
(and probably shooting the odd chair or two)
then they called off the curfew.
As soon as they called off the curfew, a man found the bomber in his back yard, in a boat.
After an hour of shooting at the boat, and climbing open gates,
they eventually apprehended him.
(ever thought of becoming a cop Balerion?)
Re arguing.
The troll may be arguing with me, but I don't argue with him.
I'm above that kind of thing.
I've got him on ignore.
What would make you think a 19-year-old wouldn't have religious motives? Some of the most passionately ideological people in the world are young adults. His pious older brother was all of 26 years old.
Was it? In your tiny little world perhaps.
Dunno why you'd think my world is so tiny, but okay...
By the federal government. Forty-three were executed by states just last year, according to Wikipedia. And you can add this clown to the list, because there's no way he's not getting executed.
It wasn't a mistake, it was intentional. I don't know the details, but they did it on purpose.
Yet you can't keep my name out of your posts.
We all know why you won't address anything I say directly. It's because you can't. You tried once, got embarrassed, and ran off like a scolded puppy. Now you know better.
That questioner had a hell of a lot more contempt coming than he got from the mealy mouthed over-diplomatic Napolitano. For starters, she addressed the question, rather than the questioner, a probably reflexive courtesy which has proven to be a problematic way of dealing with that odiferous faction of US politics.
Supposing – with no evidence whatsoever – that he is someone who needs deporting for some reason: From the Saudis I’ve met – especially the rich young princelings of that ornamental little kingdom – I can think of quite a few possible reasons for quietly dealing with him in collaboration with his family more likely than his getting his hands dirty in some actual terrorism, or any other crime involving hard work and risk.
But not having met this guy, I don’t see any reason to even speculate on the matter – here’s hoping he’s OK, and gets well soon, regardless.
Amnesia, the best medicine.
Uh, dude, you’re talking about Fox and Blaze – why are you paying any attention to them in the course of searching for information about actual events, and why would you mention “journalistic” at all, much less “ethics”, in connection with either of them?
Write down the actual, responsible source of those mysteriously provenanced “early reports”, and don’t post any more stuff from them in this forum - OK?
Yeah, it’s pretty bad here - ever since that American depravity Rupert Murdoch took over things the credibility score has been nosediving.
He's odiferous?
How?
Perhaps he is. I'm not familiar with him.
I looked him up on wiki.
He's very unusual for a congressman.
He has very few assets, a few hundred thousand dollars.
In the UK, MPs avoid a question by answering a completely different question.
All questions and answers are directed through the speaker, a kind of chairman.
Such directness would be viewed very dimly.
Probably I'm judging it by inappropriate standards.
Some of the things you quoted are from myself, and some are not.
Oh, and Murdoch owns our worst rag too.
It's called the Sun.
How?
Perhaps he is. I'm not familiar with him.
I looked him up on wiki.
He's very unusual for a congressman.
He has very few assets, a few hundred thousand dollars.
In the UK, MPs avoid a question by answering a completely different question.
All questions and answers are directed through the speaker, a kind of chairman.
Such directness would be viewed very dimly.
Probably I'm judging it by inappropriate standards.
Some of the things you quoted are from myself, and some are not.
Oh, and Murdoch owns our worst rag too.
It's called the Sun.
Almost all politicians do that.
If you watched the Romney-Obama debates, both of them did not answer the questions they were asked by the audience. Their answers were of course tailored to the national audience watching them on TV.
And yet it sells so well.
Non sequitur. She evaded. Done. Stop crying.
Yes: it's called a complete answer, down my way. Sorry to have impugned the character of your girlfriend.
I had no idea you looked up to me so much. Will you be able to get through? It's always darkest before the dawn.
Sorry: you can't make the jump from suspect to judgement. What, exactly, do you think "judgement" means? Here's the comment, yet again:
GeoffP said:
That would be mischaracterization of your argument, not your person. Just for laughs, which point am I meant to have strawmanned?
By contrast:
Whoops! Don't play the innocent if you're going to pull this nearly simultaneously. And since when Kremmen is the 'resident crank'? Oh, sure: he's the terror of the forums for this kind of stuff. Like Happeh on acid.
Making up sources is journalistic fraud. I don't think I really need to tell you this.
Shit, this seems to be just a suspicion of some kind. Don't you think it's a little early for a judgement call like this?
You don't know the details... but you know they did it on purpose.
haha, I said that by the time you guys finish arguing, the fugitive would've been caught.
Now he's been caught and you guys are still arguing.
Oh the arguing is just getting started. We are going to hear the right wing kooks (e.g. McCain) want him treated as an enemy combatant and denied all civil rights. And the people on the left are going to want to give him every right imaginable, which is kind of strange when you think about it. Folks on the right are supposed be against big intrusive government. And folks on the left are supposed to be for big government. What they do is more telling than what they say.
Motor Daddy
Valued Senior Member
I say they have a speedy trial and hang him in the center of town next Saturday night. Everyone invited! Bring your own Popcorn. Fun for all!
Bells
Staff member
Are you serious?
Please tell me this is just a delayed April Fool's joke from you.
She answered the question. Unless of course you expected her to genuflect in doing so? Offer tea and biscuits perhaps?
Because the media never make mistakes? As much as I detest sites like those run and owned by the likes of Beck and Geller, prosecuting them for their conspiracy theories would leave open an ugly door that would result in the media being prosecuted on a daily basis. Because mistakes do happen. While Beck, Geller and their ilk do so maliciously, one would expect that taking information from any such "sources" seriously would not be the norm unless once buys into the woowoo.
Think about it for a second.
If he was somehow connected and was facing deportation as a result of his connection to the terrorist attack in the US, do you really think they would not have arrested him and kept him under arrest while he was in hospital?
This money thing seems to be an ongoing theme for you in this thread.
Just because he is rich does not mean he is guilty.
What perspective?
You have been linked the answer from credible news sites, you have her answering the question saying that she was not aware of anyone being deported from Boston in relation to the bombing, you have the ICE saying the reports that he was being deported was "categorically false"..
And instead, you rely on crank and woowoo sites and falling into a full blown conspiracy theorist. I mean you were giving credence to Info Wars earlier in this thread. This isn't perspective GeoffP. This is paranoia and woowoo. And that is worrying. You should know better. And you are better than this.
Yes, because Geller and Beck focusing on the 'brown' kid is not racist at all. And they weren't alone in doing so. However, looking at their sites, they are still more concerned about the Saudi connection than anything else. Which is bizarre, don't you think? Given what is known about the bombers?
Firstly, as you well know, I am an Atheist and thus, I do not "pray".
Secondly, you are open on record in this thread in giving credence to what Info Wars posted and actually took it seriously. Then you switched to taking the utter drivel posted on Atlas Shrugs, The Blaze and Beck and Shoebat seriously. It isn't a matter of you "will start to sound like that". You are sounding like that.
And thirdly, the only person getting angry here is you. You are overly defensive and sniping at people for pointing out the fact that the sources you are relying on are known conspiracy twats.
Perhaps it is you who should calm down, take a step back and actually look at what you are expecting people to take seriously.
Last edited:
Bells
Staff member
The Government invoked the public safety exception.
Which means he can be questioned and interrogated and his statements admitted to court. If the Government declares him an enemy combatant, it will mean that they can virtually hold him indefinitely, and use what most countries view as torture, to elicit information out of him (such as what goes on at Gitmo).. The Republicans want him declared an enemy combatant for that reason.
The Obama Administration has taken one step in that direction by invoking the public safety exception. Whether it goes further in declaring him an enemy combatant remains to be seen. If he cannot answer questions because of his injuries, he could be declared an enemy combatant so that he can be interrogated once he is medically sound before he is read his Miranda Rights and charged. As I believe the exception has a time limit.