If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN) NewsFlash American citizen to be tried as an American citizen. Sadly, in 2013, this warrants a news flash   (cnn.com) divider line 132
    More: NewsFlash, American citizens, Boston, Don Lemon, Americans, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, Tsarnaev, Boston area  
•       •       •

11204 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Apr 2013 at 2:07 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»


Want to get NewsFlash notifications in email?

Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-04-22 02:11:09 PM
14 votes:

FlashHarry: the kid is guilty as hell, but justice must be served.


This. No matter how heinous the charges or how solid the evidence, his rights must not be violated. Anyone who suggests otherwise basically hates America.
2013-04-22 02:04:05 PM
11 votes:
the kid is guilty as hell, but justice must be served.
2013-04-22 02:25:06 PM
9 votes:
I'll just leave this here.........

Xyphoid:

Pretty disturbing reading how many people want him tortured and/or extrajudicially punished, or just plain wishing suffering upon him.

My opinion, as an American, is I want him afforded every right I'd expect myself as an American. Those rights and the treatment we espouse to be sacred are a significant portion of what makes our country better than many others. As well, my country claims to stand against, and has hung people for, torture/"enhanced interrogation"/increasing suffering (even through inaction). In that regard I also believe any intentional suffering caused upon someone in custody is a crime that should be punished, as is the opinion of the legal system* (*- sadly, your mileage may vary).

My opinion in regard to my faith and as a human being is that no unnecessary suffering (excluding any pain due to life-saving or life-maintaining actions) should come to him, even though I believe he likely did it (to the effect I'd have to sit out of a jury). I also believe that he shouldn't be sentenced to death unless his continued existence, no matter what actions we could possibly undertake, would still pose a threat to innocent life.

Some of you guys should be ashamed of yourselves. Whatever this persons motivations were, you wishing those kinds of things upon him, suggesting you'd be ambivalent to them happening, or wishing you could do it yourself makes you the same kind of person you believe this fellow to be. You don't think terrorists have their own justification, like you, for thinking their actions (or willingness to cause suffering) as right?

/Two Iraq deployments for a year and a half
//Despite being shot at, fellow soldiers injured and killed, poisoned, threatened, insulted and knowing that if I was captured that terrible things would be done to me, 100% of any prisoners or suspects I had control of were treated like human beings. Not just because of my beliefs, but that's how decent and civilized human beings roll.
///So yeah, I can practice what I preach, even in the shiat.
2013-04-22 02:11:17 PM
7 votes:
THIS IS AN OUTR- actually, this is very logical
2013-04-22 02:29:11 PM
6 votes:
Let us take this moment to reflect on the death penalty itself, a cherished public institution whose existence means that if a single innocent is ever convicted and executed, we are all accessories to and responsible for that murder. So in this fervor where we joyously hope for the death and rape of a teenage boy, let us take a moment of silence for ourselves, and for the innocent blood we all have on our hands.
2013-04-22 02:13:32 PM
6 votes:
Because remember, there's nothing like sticking up for the principles the terrorists supposedly hate like abandoning them the millisecond your own personal safety is threatened.
2013-04-22 02:12:33 PM
5 votes:

Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.


I think the biggest problem with the WMD moniker is that it stands so strongly opposed to the law of conservation of mass.
2013-04-22 02:09:33 PM
5 votes:
Really, subby
CNN?

Have we forgiven them so soon?


/too soon, I say.
//too soon.
2013-04-22 02:22:13 PM
4 votes:

nekom: FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?

I can think of two mitigating factors. 1. His age. He's old enough to execute, but young enough that a jury might consider that. 2. The fact that it seems he was heavily influenced by his brother. Every single other aspect of the case are aggravating factors, though. It may be possible to cop a plea for life if he talks.


I think it would be a bigger show compassion to not kill him.

To show that we Americans are not some blood thirsty savages who can only be satiated by the icy grip of death.
2013-04-22 02:19:00 PM
4 votes:
Good.  terrorists need to be treated as the common criminals that they are.  Don't elevate them to some special kind of special super special enemy warrior status.  "Terror networks" should be treated as the criminal enterprises that are and prosecuted under RICO with the all the jail time and confiscation of personal assets that RICO allows.
2013-04-22 02:17:16 PM
4 votes:
Glad to hear. They are doing the right thing.

This is why, even though you may disagree with some of the things Obama Admin has done, such as drone policy, etc., you still vote for the guy who most closely resembles your views.
2013-04-22 02:38:29 PM
3 votes:

bloatboy: Nadie_AZ: Why is this even an argument?

From a legal/constitutional perspective, it is the difference between a criminal act, and an act of war.


To be fair, I don't think 2 guys going nutso is the same as a large group or country attacking the country.

I want them tried, so the idiots who actually liked what they did can see that our system is intact and stronger than their attempts to shake it.
2013-04-22 02:20:11 PM
3 votes:

FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?


I'd rather see him spend the next 60 years in one of these.

sometimesinteresting.files.wordpress.com
2013-04-22 02:16:45 PM
3 votes:

Vodka Zombie: What the hell else would you try an American citizen as?


sometimes we don't try them at all...

mycatbirdseat.com
2013-04-22 02:15:17 PM
3 votes:
What the hell else would you try an American citizen as?
2013-04-22 02:12:39 PM
3 votes:

Shrugging Atlas: Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.


It's more than Saddam had, and we went to war over it.
2013-04-22 02:11:26 PM
3 votes:

slayer199: He should be tried as an American citizen.

Of course, his defense will blame it on his older brother in an effort to get a reduction.


well, that's their job.
2013-04-22 02:11:22 PM
3 votes:
A dozen rightwing pundits and countless rightwing bloggers just fell to their knees and thanked the Lord, for now they have something to rage about for the next five years.
2013-04-22 02:11:19 PM
3 votes:
Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.
2013-04-22 02:10:01 PM
3 votes:
He should be tried as an American citizen.

Of course, his defense will blame it on his older brother in an effort to get a reduction.
2013-04-22 08:52:23 PM
2 votes:

BigNumber12: Cybernetic: Graham's statement sounds like a politician who feels a need to "do something" so that he can tell his constituents that he "did something" during his next election cycle.

But people eat that shiat up. They think with their emotions and demand all sorts of new laws to protect everyone from planes crashing into highrises and scary machine guns killing children. And they ram it down the public's throat with appeals to emotion, think-of-the-children, accusations of being a terrorist-lover, and plenty of other tricks / logical fallacies. Because "doing something is better than doing nothing" and "either like the new law, or you're obviously against making anything illegal and you should go to Somalia."


Yes, people do eat it up, and the resulting laws are rarely pretty, or even effective. And they often end up making the problem worse, or having unforseen consequences that are worse than the problems that the law was meant to address. Daniel Patrick Moynihan called this phenomenon "iatrogenic government".

There seems to be some part of human nature that wants to believe that tragedy can be legislated out of existence, and when the tragedy is still fresh in people's minds, politicians use that impulse to pass legislation that wouldn't get through if cooler heads were to prevail.
2013-04-22 08:05:32 PM
2 votes:

BigNumber12: It's depressing how eager much of the population has gotten when it comes to revoking rights they don't like, and the rights of people they don't like. And politicians are happy to indulge them. After all, who would want more restrictions on their personal power, when they could just be efficient and get shiat done and not have to worry about distractions like getting prosecuted?

And, every 4 to 8 years, rather than undoing the abuses of the previous Administration, the new Administration simply grabs the baton and continues the race towards ever greater government power.


I saw a interview with Sen Lindsey Graham last night and he was talking about how the FBI was aware of the older brother and his slide toward radical Islam.  The Senator said "We need to figure out whether the FBI simply failed in their task, or if we need new laws to help the FBI stop these things before they happen".

I was all "fark you Lindsey Graham!!!"  I farking KNEW this bombing was going to kick off a whole new round of congress shredding more of our rights, and right there we see that the Senators already have a plan in the works to do just that.
2013-04-22 07:00:15 PM
2 votes:

Cybernetic: Personally, I want that because I think he should be treated as an enemy combatant.


But he wasn't an enemy combatant. The dude moved here when he was like seven or eight years old. He was a US citizen who committed a crime on US soil and he should be tried as such. I mean we could do what you suggest but it would be rather pointless considering the mountains of evidence they have. he's going to be found guilty and after his sentencing never see the light of day again. All the rest of it is just emotional horseshiat that serves no constructive purpose.
2013-04-22 04:22:14 PM
2 votes:

Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.


Saying any bomb is a WMD is ridiculous.

Is a hand grenade a "weapon of mass destruction?" If so, then obviously Saddam did have WMD after all.

And, if an improvised bomb is indeed a WMD, then shouldn't we track the explosive material that could be used for them - you know, like we do with ammonium nitrate?

Ammonium nitrate is good as a fertilizer and an explosive. Gunpowder is for bullets and explosives, so naturally we can't do any proactive regarding that.

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/436-2nd-amendment-rights/170 46 -how-the-nra-impeded-the-boston-bomber-investigation
The inability to quickly track the gunpowders in the Boston bombs is due to government policy designed and promoted by the NRA, which has found a way to transform every massacre associated with weapons into an opportunity for the munitions companies that sustain it to sell more guns, gunpowder and bullets.

The price for such delays was put on terrible display Friday morning when the two brothers, who had been caught on video placing the bombs, killed one police officer, wounded another and carjacked a motorist, creating conditions so unsafe that the 7th largest population center in America spent Friday on lockdown.

But for the NRA-backed policy of not putting identifiers known as taggants in gunpowder, law enforcement could have quickly identified the explosives used to make the bombs, tracking them from manufacture to retail sale. That could well have saved the life of Sean Collier, the 26-year-old MIT police officer who was gunned down Thursday night by the fleeing bomb suspects.

If Tsarnaev had escaped on Friday, the NRA (and the GOP) would have been fine with him buying additional weapons without a background check. And if we didn't have numerous photos and videos to identify the bombers, they could very well be out and causing more death today, since there would have been no way to track the explosives they used..
2013-04-22 03:32:12 PM
2 votes:
*sigh*

Once again, to all of the Farkers fantasizing about male rape and prison justice... prisoners in Federal Supermax don't see each other. Ever. No communal dining, exercise, anything. Supermax was created because some inmates had a habit of killing other people while in prison. It's simply not possible in Supermax, where you spend 23 hours a day in 'solitary' and all time outside of that is just you under heavy guard. The place is supposedly quiet as a tomb.
2013-04-22 03:08:56 PM
2 votes:
It should be tried as a criminal act... unless if there is more information that we don't know yet it appears to be a criminal act by a couple of malcontents rather than an act with a political message. I guess it depends on what one's definition of terrorism is. I always imagine terrorism as something with a message, possibly backed by an organisation of some kind, targetting the public, aiming to strike fear into the population in hopes of furthering one's political cause, whatever screwball cause it might be.   Its not the method of murder that makes it terrorism but the message behind it.  I also figured terrorist act intends to undermine state authourity, therefore lessening the legitimacy of a states domestic power (since it can't protect its own people) and leading to increased domestic chaos, especially as the state resorts to more extreme measures to stop terrorism and therefore cracks down on civil liberties in the name of security,  thus fuelling discontent.

I just don't see that kind of motivation here.  Charge him with murder and bodily harm or whatever. Life imprisonment or death penalty, whatever the laws are. :Let's not bring terrorism into the equation.  I'm sick of hearing oh noes islams are terrorists! . What new draconian thing are they going to introduce to prevent this kind of attack?   The thing is, there are always going to be people who are murderous and discontented. Some people might be simply drawn to the notoriety presented by such a large attack. This attack seems closer to a columbine type thing rather than a "terrorist" attack. Just the method of murder is different.  Would we be talking about terrorism if they had just used a gun to shoot randomly into a crowd, potentially killing even more people?

1st degree murder and take away the notoriety that comes with being labelled a terrorist.

/end rant
2013-04-22 02:56:18 PM
2 votes:
Too bad for the rightwingers who seemed to be getting sexually excited about torturing him.

I think that torture as punishment can often contain religious overtones - "Our God is better than yours because yours is powerless to stop the torture".

But still, why is the bombing a Federal crime rather than a state one?
2013-04-22 02:37:57 PM
2 votes:

FlashHarry: slayer199: He should be tried as an American citizen.

Of course, his defense will blame it on his older brother in an effort to get a reduction.

well, that's their job.


Yep.
"The part I took in defense of captain Preston and the soldiers, procured me anxiety, and obloquy enough. It was, however, one of the most gallant, generous, manly and disinterested actions of my whole life, and one of the best pieces of service I ever rendered my country. Judgment of death against those soldiers would have been as foul a stain upon this country as the executions of the Quakers or witches, anciently."

John Adams (in his diary, thus the bit of backslapping) - a member of the original Tea Party, not the farce that currently calls itself that.
2013-04-22 02:30:12 PM
2 votes:

Galloping Galoshes: NostroZ: I think it would be a bigger show compassion to not kill him.

To show that we Americans are not some blood thirsty savages who can only be satiated by the icy grip of death.

You might be showing yourself (and the rest of the 1st world countries) that, but your enemies see only weakness.  You don't even have the stones to execute a murderer of children.  They will respect you even less than they already do.  Of course, if you do kill him, you make a martyr out of him.


Yes, I say, lets play by the THIRD WORLD RULES.
Kill him, his relatives, & his relatives-relatives...  as an EXAMPLE.

Maybe that's why we live in the FIRST WORLD.
We follow a set of laws and principles that draws people of principle and intelligence to this country from all over the world.
2013-04-22 02:28:25 PM
2 votes:
Carney said that because Tsarnaev is a naturalized U.S. citizen, he cannot be tried by a military commission.

Which Lindsay Graham and John McCain would know if they ever bothered to read the Constitution that they swore to uphold.

2013-04-22 02:26:57 PM
2 votes:

Joe Blowme: If ever there was a time to use teh Patriot act, now would seem to be it.


Wrong! Now is the time to show we DON'T USE the Patriot act against every deranged US Citizen.
2013-04-22 02:24:36 PM
2 votes:
I'm not sure I agree with that description.  One does not have to be a "citizen" in the US to be tried in accordance with US law and to be entitled to due process rights.  In any case, I am relieved by this decision.  Our civilian court system can handle cases like this.
2013-04-22 02:24:19 PM
2 votes:
Sadly, in 2013, some people elected officials who have taken oaths to protect and serve have a problem with an American citizen being treated like an American citizen.
2013-04-22 02:22:16 PM
2 votes:

ongbok: That is all he is going to get. I'm pretty sure he will plead out and give up any information he has in return for life.


That's assuming that he has other information to give.  If his brother was a lone-bomber type and he just helped, then he might literally have nothing else to tell the police beyond what they already know.

Personally, I don't mind the idea of him getting life in prison instead of the death penalty if he does help roll up other terrorists, here and/or abroad.  But he should die in prison.  If he's got nothing, well... sucks to be him, but he got a lot more years than the kid he set down his bomb next too.
2013-04-22 02:15:24 PM
2 votes:

FlashHarry: the kid is guilty as hell, but justice must be served.


The scary part is what it means for the rest of us....

...if the government doesn't have a rock solid case against you, like they do here against this punk, then they'll do whatever they can to paint you as a terrorist so they can try you outside our legal system, and minimize your right to defend yourself.

Scary.
2013-04-22 02:13:14 PM
2 votes:

Kibbler: A dozen rightwing pundits and countless rightwing bloggers just fell to their knees and thanked the Lord, for now they have something to rage about for the next five years.


This and this, again.
2013-04-22 02:12:00 PM
2 votes:
Phony GOP Americans must be inconsolable.
2013-04-22 02:10:18 PM
2 votes:

TheShavingofOccam123: AFTER BEING INTERROGATED  BY THE CIA AND OTHER "INTERROGATION" EXPERTS.

Probably without legal counsel present.  And I'm sure they'll wait until he's off all medication, out of critical condition  and in reasonable health before they tortu...er, question him.


are you retarded?
2013-04-22 02:09:20 PM
2 votes:
blog.synthesis.net
2013-04-22 02:09:04 PM
2 votes:

FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?


He'll get the DP in prison too.
2013-04-22 02:07:54 PM
2 votes:
AFTER BEING INTERROGATED  BY THE CIA AND OTHER "INTERROGATION" EXPERTS.

Probably without legal counsel present.  And I'm sure they'll wait until he's off all medication, out of critical condition  and in reasonable health before they tortu...er, question him.
2013-04-23 10:13:46 AM
1 votes:

hinten: Next time I'm in court for a speeding ticket I'll bring up my citizenship. Let's see if that gets me anywhere.


the fact that you are in court already demonstrates that you have rights that many others around the world do not enjoy.
2013-04-23 12:50:01 AM
1 votes:

Vodka Zombie: What the hell else would you try an American citizen as?


Unlawful combatant which, thanks to Bush, now gets called "enemy combatant" (a completely different thing altogether).   Prior to that deliberate confusion of terms, the two were known to be completely different things.

It's a bit like calling a fetus a "baby."
2013-04-22 11:24:37 PM
1 votes:

Cybernetic: The term "act of war" is far more a historical and political term than a legal one. If you have a citiation of international law that specifies what is and is not an act of war, I'd be very interested to see it.


Try the UN Charter, then work your way out to the conventions, treaties, and accords that are still in effect. Wiki might help you.

Cybernetic: Given that there is already substantial information tying Tamerlan Tsarnaev to radical Islamists, I believe that the Tsarnaev brothers can be considered "unlawful combatants,"


No, they are not. Association with criminals and acting like a criminal doesn't magically make the criminal a combatant. (And I'm fully aware of the Geneva criteria for combatants, noncombatants, saboteurs, spies, and the like, thankyouverymuch.

NB A foreign power is, by definition, a state actor: What is the identity of this alleged state actor, what territory does it control, who is its chief executive and where is its seat of government?
2013-04-22 10:00:36 PM
1 votes:
The investigation is more and more certain that they were working alone, last I heard.

Merely being inspired by some crackpot ideology doesn't automatically make you a member in a secret army.
2013-04-22 10:00:10 PM
1 votes:

Debeo Summa Credo: How many tears have you shed since you realized it was muslims who did this and not teabaggers?


His religion will only be relevant if he is citing scripture for his actions.
2013-04-22 08:55:14 PM
1 votes:

World Traveling Navy Vet: How can we as a nation stop building more jails, reduce the amount of inmates currently in jail, and give criminals pause to think of what will happen when they are caught?  Tough question of which I know not the answer.


Three thoughts:
1. Ban all private, for-profit prisons. Imprisonment is strictly a government function.
2. Legalize, regulate and tax marijuana, then release all nonviolent marijuana offenders.
3. remove sentencing guidelines and truth in sentencing laws because they are unconstitutional interference with the judicial branch of government. Judges should be able to exercise judgment, for fark's sake.

/*dusts hands* What's next on your list, squidey?
2013-04-22 08:50:33 PM
1 votes:

Cybernetic: But where would you draw the line? At what point does an act committed on US soil cross the threshold where it is no longer a crime, but instead the action of an enemy combatant?


There is no threshold or line to draw: You're conflating two very different concepts.

A crime is a crime when committed by US persons on US soil. Before "terroris*" got shoehorned into the criminal code, it was easy to see. It's only now that you're confused.

An act of war is an act of war, which is still, fortunately, very well defined in international law.
Who constitutes a combatant - and who is a noncombatant - is also defined in international law, as well as who is a saboteur or spy.
2013-04-22 08:38:58 PM
1 votes:

demaL-demaL-yeH: Cybernetic: I guess that depends on how you define "enemy combatant". There absolutely are segments of radical Islam that consider themselves to be at war with the United States. Should the fact that those people are not tied to a specific geopolitical entity upon which the United States can declare war determine whether or not they are enemy combatants? Or should it instead cause us to realize that the nature of modern conflict has evolved in part away from conflict between nation-states, and therefore reevaluate the definition of what causes a person to be recognized as a combatant?

Had the Boston bombing been perpetrated by agents of a foreign nation, it would be an act of war. Period. There would be no discussion or debate.

Instead, the bombings were carried out by agents of an ideology that considers itself at war with the United States. IMHO (and others will disagree) that makes the bombing an act of war, and the perpetrators enemy combatants.

This is certainly not "emotional horseshiat". This is recognizing a situation for what it is, and responding accordingly

Farking nonsense.
These assholes were no soldiers in an army.
Don't dignify them with the title "combatant".
Don't call their crimes "acts of war" - they were the acts of douchebag domestic criminals.
Period.

/Get your elbows off the table and chew before you swallow.


I suppose that we can agree to disagree on that point, seeing how neither of us has any input into the decision.

But where would you draw the line? At what point does an act committed on US soil cross the threshold where it is no longer a crime, but instead the action of an enemy combatant?
2013-04-22 08:25:32 PM
1 votes:

Cybernetic: Graham's statement sounds like a politician who feels a need to "do something" so that he can tell his constituents that he "did something" during his next election cycle.


But people eat that shiat up. They think with their emotions and demand all sorts of new laws to protect everyone from planes crashing into highrises and scary machine guns killing children. And they ram it down the public's throat with appeals to emotion, think-of-the-children, accusations of being a terrorist-lover, and plenty of other tricks / logical fallacies. Because "doing something is better than doing nothing" and "either like the new law, or you're obviously against making anything illegal and you should go to Somalia."
2013-04-22 08:11:28 PM
1 votes:

BigNumber12: It's depressing how eager much of the population has gotten when it comes to revoking rights they don't like, and the rights of people they don't like. And politicians are happy to indulge them. After all, who would want more restrictions on their personal power, when they could just be efficient and get shiat done and not have to worry about distractions like getting prosecuted?

And, every 4 to 8 years, rather than undoing the abuses of the previous Administration, the new Administration simply grabs the baton and continues the race towards ever greater government power.


No shiat. It is truly depressing.
2013-04-22 08:10:32 PM
1 votes:

Cybernetic: There are people who consider themselves to be at war with the United States, acting on behalf of a stateless ideological and political entity that will continue to carry out attacks like this at any opportunity. History has shown convincingly that treating those who act on behalf of that entity as criminals rather than enemy combatants is folly.


No, it has not. However, history has shown people would gladly destroy the Bill of Rights, because they are scared.
2013-04-22 07:46:38 PM
1 votes:

Cybernetic: JohnBigBootay: Cybernetic: Personally, I want that because I think he should be treated as an enemy combatant.

But he wasn't an enemy combatant. The dude moved here when he was like seven or eight years old. He was a US citizen who committed a crime on US soil and he should be tried as such. I mean we could do what you suggest but it would be rather pointless considering the mountains of evidence they have. he's going to be found guilty and after his sentencing never see the light of day again. All the rest of it is just emotional horseshiat that serves no constructive purpose.

I guess that depends on how you define "enemy combatant". There absolutely are segments of radical Islam that consider themselves to be at war with the United States. Should the fact that those people are not tied to a specific geopolitical entity upon which the United States can declare war determine whether or not they are enemy combatants? Or should it instead cause us to realize that the nature of modern conflict has evolved in part away from conflict between nation-states, and therefore reevaluate the definition of what causes a person to be recognized as a combatant?

Had the Boston bombing been perpetrated by agents of a foreign nation, it would be an act of war. Period.


Would it?  It depends on whether the agents were acting in the agency of a foreign power, or if they were acting on their own.  For example, what if a foreign diplomat was just trying to kill his wife's lover who he knew to be at the race, and he wanted to do it with a bomb.  Is that an act of war?   Or a murder?
2013-04-22 07:09:30 PM
1 votes:

Cybernetic: JohnBigBootay: Cybernetic: If the oath of citizenship was taken with the intent of using the privileges of citizenship to aid in committing an act of terror on US soil, then wasn't the oath of citizenship taken fraudulently? And isn't the oath--and thus his citizenship--invalid on those grounds?

Why would you even want that in the first place?

Personally, I want that because I think he should be treated as an enemy combatant. If the government can show reasonable evidence that citizenship was obtained under false pretenses, then strip his citizenship, which again makes him a foreign national, and dump him in Guantanamo and let the military interrogators have a go at him before his tribunal.

Anyone who prefers he be tried in U.S. civilian courts will obviously have a different opinion.


Before you go messing around with taking away citizenship you should probably have some evidence. We are supposed to represent the good guys. He is a citizen of this country and his rights should only be affected with due process. Do you honestly think he'll walk?

Take away his citizenship then what do you have? A legal resident of the US charged with a crime and taken to an offsite prison for interrogation? What stops the government from taking away your citizenship if you do something un-citizenly?

If we are going to claim to be the good guys, then we should practice that approach. Afford him his day in court, upon conviction and exhaustion of appeals, then maybe you revoke citizenship, or maybe you don't.
2013-04-22 06:56:24 PM
1 votes:

Cybernetic: JohnBigBootay: Cybernetic: If the oath of citizenship was taken with the intent of using the privileges of citizenship to aid in committing an act of terror on US soil, then wasn't the oath of citizenship taken fraudulently? And isn't the oath--and thus his citizenship--invalid on those grounds?

Why would you even want that in the first place?

Personally, I want that because I think he should be treated as an enemy combatant. If the government can show reasonable evidence that citizenship was obtained under false pretenses, then strip his citizenship, which again makes him a foreign national, and dump him in Guantanamo and let the military interrogators have a go at him before his tribunal.

Anyone who prefers he be tried in U.S. civilian courts will obviously have a different opinion.


The Constitution still applies to non-citizens
2013-04-22 06:50:52 PM
1 votes:

Uchiha_Cycliste: I'm honestly curious to hear what you think about this viewpoint.


Sorry, had to run some errands.

I can't disagree with your statement. I don't think he should be given a puppy and told that it's going to be OK. I believe in the death penalty and I believe that once he's convicted, he should recieve that sentence.
It is difficult to look past emotion and deal with logic. It is something that has to be learned and isn't taught. But if we are supposed to be enlightened human beings in the 21st century, then we souldn't be acting like the apes around the monolith. I know that's not realistic, and we are much closer to the apes around the monolith now more than ever, but if people like Xiphoid don't point out a better way then those who are screwing up won't know they are screwing up and won't have an idea on how to change.
Yes, the people who deny this even happened at all other than as a staged play to take away our guns (yes, people are spreading that shiat already) aren't likely to be swayed from their views. But to stand by idly and not call bullshiat the really whacked out stuff is irresponsible at best.  I'm not saying that there isn't a larger terrorist connection, as we are still on just the first few pages of this story.
2013-04-22 06:22:06 PM
1 votes:
I totally agree with trying the accused in a court of law as a citizen.  I am amused at the differences of opinions on life or DP in this thread.  Personally I believe in the Death Penalty but not in the sheer amount of time one on death row can languish there.  If it takes 28 years (4 appeals @ 7 yrs each) to die on death row than it is NOT producing any fear that would cause a reduction in the actions that warrent a death penalty.  On the other hand, Life in prison is a waste of yours and mine tax dollars.

And before everyone explodes with these statements, my point is that every criminal in jail has more rights and privileges than your average citizenry.  Where else can you get three square meals a day, a roof over your head, free medical and dental, free education, and possibly free cable?  The average Joe that is at or below poverty level may not know where their next meal is coming, will most likely not have medical or dental even if they are working, and there living conditions would be below that of a prisoner.  And to think that we are building more prisons all the time.

I would rather the expense of one lethal injection than footing the bill for him for 60+ years, cheaper in the long run.
2013-04-22 05:47:07 PM
1 votes:

Kibbler: A dozen rightwing pundits and countless rightwing bloggers just fell to their knees and thanked the Lord, for now they have something to rage about for the next five years.


Fun. Projection.

Liberals are angry they simply couldn't use a drone strike and avoid the trial completely.

Fun stuff.
2013-04-22 05:45:31 PM
1 votes:

Shrugging Atlas: ZAZ: Shrugging Atlas

Quoting my post from yesterday's thread:

For purposes of federal criminal law, a "weapon of mass destruction" includes any "destructive device." 18 USC 2332a. A "destructive device" includes any bomb, grenade, rocket with more than four ounces of propellant, and any projectile launcher with a caliber over .50 inches (except for Attorney General approved shotguns). 18 USC 921. A potato gun is a weapon of mass destruction, if "designed for use as a weapon" and used against a U.S. national.

Ah, thanks for the knowledge.  Sweet christ that's a pretty wide open definition.


That's what I've been thinking.  So we consider a couple of pressure cookers filled with nails to be on the same level as a goddamned nuclear bomb? How does that even work?  I had to look it up because I thought my co-worker was crazy when she said any bomb falls under "weapon of mass destruction"
2013-04-22 04:33:15 PM
1 votes:
Thanks, Obama.

No, really.
2013-04-22 04:30:32 PM
1 votes:
He's a US citizen, protected by the Constitution. End of story. He wasn't a combatant in the theater of war, he is accused of committing a single violent act of terrorism on the streets of Boston.

We start down the slippery slope of deciding citizens are not protected by the rule of law because the are accused of doing something especially heinous we open Pandora's box. When we start calling citizens "enemy combatants" we start to give up everything that the Bill of Rights were written for. It may seem harmless now, only using a reduced justice system on enemy combatants  or terrorists as we know them now, but it is not hard to see some future administration come in different or varied criteria as to what is a terrorist act and could possibly strip anyone who does not agree with the government of their due process rights.

As to the questioning without Miranda, all it means, at worse, is that prosecutors may be prevented from using whatever he may tell them when his trial starts.
2013-04-22 04:25:04 PM
1 votes:

Silverstaff: The idea of just locking somebody up for a long time doesn't seem like much of a punishment though. They get food, and shelter, and medical care, and probably a TV and a gym too. They won't have to worry about losing their job and thus their home and health insurance, they won't have to worry about the cost of living or commuting to work. People want prison to be something to fear, to be scared of, and just going into a safe, clean, well built and orderly prison where there is no real risk of brutal violence seems. . .not much to fear at all compared to everyday life.

The idea of prison rape, that seems to add the "Karmic justice" factor. As a people, we would never officially sanction this, we'd never sentence people to be raped. . .but if some criminal gets brutalized by his fellow degenerates for being bad even by their standards (much like it's common knowledge that pedophiles get the worst treatment in prison), we feel better knowing justice was served. Jeffrey Dahmer eluded the death penalty for his cannibalistic serial-killer spree. . .so a fellow inmate killed him, and no tears were shed.


Right.
Prison Rape is a tool of fear to keep people in line.
Something like 200,000 a year and its only now slowly getting ANY voice to stop.
It's wrong. It's not what the justice system is supposed to represent.
It shows a disregard for that very justice that is supposed to be served when someone can be killed in prison and we say good.
2013-04-22 04:18:05 PM
1 votes:

Daedalus27: NostroZ: dallylamma: [farm4.static.flickr.com image 479x383]

And that's how young Dzhokhar Tsarnaev got to become cellmates with the man know to inmates and guards alike as Rape-Assaurus Rex. My my.

Why do we as American citizens tolerate RAPE in prison?
If there's a CRUEL and UNUSUAL punishment, it's to be PHYSICALLY RAPED while you're in the "custody of the government".

Seriously people.
Prison rape in the USA is a casual joke... about human rights abuse!!!

I would say we tolerate it not so much because most we want to (regardless of the callous comments), but rather because it is difficult and almost impossible to stop.  Prisoners do not typically bring a complaint about rape because that is against the norms of prisoners to cooperate with prison officials against other inmate.  Usually it results in an attempt on the life of the inmate for cooperation.  So the rapes occur and there is nothing that can be done (Wrong) because there is no cooperation with any investigation (assuming officials know something was going on). No one outside ignorant individuals in jest really wants crime to occur in prisons, it is just so darn hard to stop it because prisons are full of criminals who typically don't obey rules or cooperate with law enforcement to solve crimes.

TL:DR Rapes don't happen because snitches get stitches.


Wrong.  It is PREVENTABLE.
The US has had a culture of abuse in their prisons.  Even though it is the world's LARGEST prison system.
If we truly value human rights, prison rape would not be a joking matter.
2013-04-22 04:17:08 PM
1 votes:
Good he's standing trial.  Anything otherwise is cowardice on our parts.
2013-04-22 04:12:44 PM
1 votes:
pipe bombs are WMDs now?  Iraq really did have WMDs, everyone.  Bush was right!
2013-04-22 04:11:39 PM
1 votes:

Purdue_Pete: He's accused of blowing up an sweet 8 year old boy, two beautiful young women and a cop.


Try not to weasel things up by playing Daily Mail with your sentences.
2013-04-22 04:09:51 PM
1 votes:

skullkrusher: keylock71: Think the best outcome this kid can hope for is Life Without Parole...

If he truly is guilty, then I want him to live the rest of his miserable life in prison and be reminded daily he is nothing more than a murderer and a coward.

and the fact that he's slight and pretty, you can probably add "biatch" to that list


What is it with you sick farks that you get off so hard on the idea of prison rape?
2013-04-22 04:06:06 PM
1 votes:

FlashHarry: the kid is guilty as hell, but justice must be served.


Yep, and yep. If we don't stick to the rule of law, what's the point of claiming that our nation has the rule of law?

He's an American citizen. He needs to be treated like one. We've tortured enough Americans this decade.
2013-04-22 03:58:57 PM
1 votes:

hinten: What does his citizenship to do with anything?


well, it doesn't. however, if he were a tea party patriot named fred johnson, i guarantee lindsey graham wouldn't be asking him to be charged as an "enemy combatant." so i'm guessing his citizenship was mentioned to reinforce this fact.
2013-04-22 03:46:21 PM
1 votes:

Keizer_Ghidorah: Well, it makes sense. Something that can harm a number of people at once would be considered a mass destruction weapon.


Really though?  Are guns WMDs?  What about the model of planes flown into WTC 1 and 2?  A car driven by an 80 year old anywhere near a Farmer's Market?

I wouldn't consider them WMDs because I think the argument pivots to the intent of the item.  Planes and cars aren't designed to kill people, but what about guns?  If we're talking explosives, what about standard explosives used in highway construction?

Look at Sandy Hook.  26 dead in minutes through the use of a single weapon.  How is that not Mass Destruction?  And look at the impact...a nation further divided over yet another issue.  Talk of armed guards in schools, increased survelliance.

I'll be honest...I'm not sure where I'm going with this.  My original comment was just to point out the rather odd evolution of the term WMD from back in the day when I worked in the field and we were talking fusion bombs to now where it seems to include potato guns.
2013-04-22 03:26:44 PM
1 votes:

Uchiha_Cycliste: I feel like this is an over idealized response. We are inching towards a society where people are equals, and we can detach emotion from our judicial responses to horrific acts but we aren't there yet. There is a lot of anger about what these kids did and there is going to be a lot of resentment for a very long time. Just playing devil's advocate here. If letting the limbless beat this kid were able to annihilate the majority of that anger. I'm not talking about beating him to death, I'm not talking about permanently ruining his body, but just a good old fashioned ass whooping was able to satiate the population who right now is rightfully angry and has no where to funnel those feelings isn't it worth considering? Let's add some silly numbers and scenarios to the situation: let's say that all that pent up rage results in an uptick in domestic violence and child beatings. Angry people who decided to take out their anger on those close to them because they are cowards and have no other outlet. And let's say a public act of this kid being beaten by the limbs he dismembered were able to prevent those acts of domestic violence. Can you truly say it's still not worth considering?


I'm glad you prefaced that with an admission it was a silly conjecture.  If you have to reach that far to justify giving in to atavistic violence then I think that might be a tacit acceptance that it's not worth the stretch.

Yes, I'm an idealist.  There needs to be something worthy to strive for, to keep reminding ourselves that we're members of a civilization.  It's precisely at moments like this that we have to be better than our ape selves.  It's easy to be civilized when things are pleasant and drama-free.  It matters more right now, when our animal natures are screaming for blood to answer for blood.
2013-04-22 03:15:06 PM
1 votes:

cretinbob: I'll just leave this here.........

Xyphoid:

Pretty disturbing reading how many people want him tortured and/or extrajudicially punished, or just plain wishing suffering upon him.

My opinion, as an American, is I want him afforded every right I'd expect myself as an American. Those rights and the treatment we espouse to be sacred are a significant portion of what makes our country better than many others. As well, my country claims to stand against, and has hung people for, torture/"enhanced interrogation"/increasing suffering (even through inaction). In that regard I also believe any intentional suffering caused upon someone in custody is a crime that should be punished, as is the opinion of the legal system* (*- sadly, your mileage may vary).

My opinion in regard to my faith and as a human being is that no unnecessary suffering (excluding any pain due to life-saving or life-maintaining actions) should come to him, even though I believe he likely did it (to the effect I'd have to sit out of a jury). I also believe that he shouldn't be sentenced to death unless his continued existence, no matter what actions we could possibly undertake, would still pose a threat to innocent life.

Some of you guys should be ashamed of yourselves. Whatever this persons motivations were, you wishing those kinds of things upon him, suggesting you'd be ambivalent to them happening, or wishing you could do it yourself makes you the same kind of person you believe this fellow to be. You don't think terrorists have their own justification, like you, for thinking their actions (or willingness to cause suffering) as right?

/Two Iraq deployments for a year and a half
//Despite being shot at, fellow soldiers injured and killed, poisoned, threatened, insulted and knowing that if I was captured that terrible things would be done to me, 100% of any prisoners or suspects I had control of were treated like human beings. Not just because of my beliefs, but that's how decent and civilized ...


SO MUCH THIS. ^^^

Thanks to being wayyy oversaturated with the background early on, I already understood these guys had citizenship.

The Miranda Rights exceptions bother me, but I'm aware that police "time" the Miranda readings very carefully and to their own advantage, most of the time anyway. That's kind of a foregone conclusion.

When later there was this immediate noise of "Try them as Enemy Combatants!!!111" making the rounds in certain news media, I was incredulous.

They're citizens, try them as citizens to the fullest possible extent of the law and quit even considering extrajudicial nonsense. It worked against Timothy McVeigh, it'll work here.

You don't have to be a frothing conspiracy theorist to want to see others' rights respected as American citizens, however heinous the crime and charges.

Always, always remember:

Rights eroded in the name of prosecutorial fervor will quickly come to bear on the rest of us.
2013-04-22 03:11:01 PM
1 votes:

NostroZ: dallylamma: [farm4.static.flickr.com image 479x383]

And that's how young Dzhokhar Tsarnaev got to become cellmates with the man know to inmates and guards alike as Rape-Assaurus Rex. My my.

Why do we as American citizens tolerate RAPE in prison?
If there's a CRUEL and UNUSUAL punishment, it's to be PHYSICALLY RAPED while you're in the "custody of the government".

Seriously people.
Prison rape in the USA is a casual joke... about human rights abuse!!!


Because we want prison to be a punishment.  We, as a people, want the guilty to suffer for what they have done.  (Not saying it's me personally, but this seems to be our consensus as a society).  We have completely given up on rehabilitation, and have turned prisons into long-term criminal containment/disposal facilities.  Remove the criminal element from society forever by locking them away.

The idea of just locking somebody up for a long time doesn't seem like much of a punishment though.  They get food, and shelter, and medical care, and probably a TV and a gym too.  They won't have to worry about losing their job and thus their home and health insurance, they won't have to worry about the cost of living or commuting to work.  People want prison to be something to fear, to be scared of, and just going into a safe, clean, well built and orderly prison where there is no real risk of brutal violence seems. . .not much to fear at all compared to everyday life.

The idea of prison rape, that seems to add the "Karmic justice" factor.  As a people, we would never officially sanction this, we'd never sentence people to be raped. . .but if some criminal gets brutalized by his fellow degenerates for being bad even by their standards (much like it's common knowledge that pedophiles get the worst treatment in prison), we feel better knowing justice was served.  Jeffrey Dahmer eluded the death penalty for his cannibalistic serial-killer spree. . .so a fellow inmate killed him, and no tears were shed.

My theory on this anyway.
2013-04-22 03:10:34 PM
1 votes:

ManRay: slayer199: He should be tried as an American citizen.

Of course, his defense will blame it on his older brother in an effort to get a reduction.

How about this: My older brother was the mastermind of the bomb plot and trigger man in the shooting. He threatened me with my life if I didn't go along with it. I was hiding out because I was scared and didn't know who to trust.


It doesn't even really need to be under threat of life. The father returned to Russia, so it seems like Tamerlan was probably the father figure in Dzhokar's life. I dunno. When you're 19 and your family tells you to drop a backpack somewhere, you may not be smart enough to know better.

Be a whole lot easier if the other brother was alive instead of the young one.
2013-04-22 03:02:45 PM
1 votes:

Electrify: Three people died. Not to dismiss the importance of the incident or to belittle the importance of the lives lost, but it is looking as if he would have got less jail time if he simply bought a gun and shot four people to death.

/not trying to troll here, sorry if it comes off that way
//just that this may be the most pathetic "terrorist" attack in the history of terrorist attacks


Terrorist attacks don't usually have the goal of "get the highest kill count".   They're more aimed at "cause the most disruption".

The pitiful ones are the ones that disrupt a small goat herding town in the mountains somewhere for an afternoon and then it's back to normal the next day because it's so routine.  A major economic center was shut down for a full day because of two jokers with home made bombs.  Therepercussions to how security will be handled in the future are impossible to see yet, but we weren't back to normal the next day.  Hell, we're still not 'back to normal' from 2001.

This was far from pitiful.
2013-04-22 02:55:28 PM
1 votes:

dallylamma: [farm4.static.flickr.com image 479x383]

And that's how young Dzhokhar Tsarnaev got to become cellmates with the man know to inmates and guards alike as Rape-Assaurus Rex. My my.


What is it with you guys and your prison-rape fantasies? Get help.
2013-04-22 02:54:08 PM
1 votes:

dallylamma: [farm4.static.flickr.com image 479x383]

And that's how young Dzhokhar Tsarnaev got to become cellmates with the man know to inmates and guards alike as Rape-Assaurus Rex. My my.


Why do we as American citizens tolerate RAPE in prison?
If there's a CRUEL and UNUSUAL punishment, it's to be PHYSICALLY RAPED while you're in the "custody of the government".

Seriously people.
Prison rape in the USA is a casual joke... about human rights abuse!!!
2013-04-22 02:54:08 PM
1 votes:

sirgrim: Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.

How is killing 3 people, blowing off 15 limbs and wounding 180 people NOT mass destruction?


Well, my point was the term WMD which harkens from the Cold War used to only apply to Nuclear, Biological, or Chemical Weapons.  The term seems to have expanded quite a bit since back in the day to now include pressure cooker bombs.

But to your point, that the number of injured or killed dictates mass destruction.  Be careful with that kind of stupidity.  The cretin in Aurora killed 12 and wounded 50 something with a gun, all on his own.  Are guns now WMDs?
2013-04-22 02:44:31 PM
1 votes:

skullkrusher: Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.

I think any bomb is considered a WMD. Not to be confused with the WMDs that Saddam moved to Syria


True, True. The Boston Marathon bombs actually existed
2013-04-22 02:42:50 PM
1 votes:

whenIsayGO: The weirdest thing about all this is the definition of WMD. The Iraq War made it sound like it's limited to nukes, bio/chem weapons -- the kind of things that can kill millions in a single attack.  Not a pot with some gunpowder and nails in it.

Now we need a new word for the things that can kill more people than conventional weapons.


These guys killed four people. Lanza killed 26 with a gun. "Killing more people" has little to do with it.

A farking spork will be a WMD before some people are done.
2013-04-22 02:42:47 PM
1 votes:

Joe Blowme: Kittypie070: Kibbler: A dozen rightwing pundits and countless rightwing bloggers just fell to their knees and thanked the Lord, for now they have something to rage about for the next five years.

Wonderful.

They're gonna RAGE about lawful Constitutional legal procedure being correctly upheld.

This is a police matter, not war.

[www.cheshirecatstudios.com image 400x302]


No, she's right. We screwed up by letting it be defined by Al Qaeda. I'd rather AQ not get to tell us how we treat the matter.
2013-04-22 02:42:09 PM
1 votes:

letrole: If you ever wonder why the motivations of the left are generally suspect in the minds of regular people in fly-over country, then have a look at this thread.

Correlation does not equal causation, I suppose, but it does seem that if you supported the dweebs in the failed Occupy-X movement, your are more likely to worry about the Miranda rights of bombers.


What do Miranda rights have to do with anything? These aren't rights that are conveyed to a person prior to an interrogation, these are rights all U.S. citizens always have. The only relevance Miranda has is that anything he says prior to being given the Miranda warning may not be admissible in court.
2013-04-22 02:41:48 PM
1 votes:
Funny how the people who claim to love the constitution and their rights the most are usually the first to want to take them away from someone they disagree with.

Sorry rednecks, no lynching for you.
jvl
2013-04-22 02:41:33 PM
1 votes:
I really don't see this as surprising. During the Bush admin, twice a terrorist was found on US soil and twice they were tried normally. I'm pretty sure the Supremes would be pissed if it went any other way.
2013-04-22 02:40:28 PM
1 votes:

thurstonxhowell: Treygreen13: we must also consider the innocent blood on our hands if even one person is killed by someone who should have been put to death, but wasn't.

Maybe you do. I don't.


Well we'll have to agree to disagree. There are plenty of stories of people getting out of prison and killing again. We're responsible (as a society) for that as well.
2013-04-22 02:40:08 PM
1 votes:
If you ever wonder why the motivations of the left are generally suspect in the minds of regular people in fly-over country, then have a look at this thread.

Correlation does not equal causation, I suppose, but it does seem that if you supported the dweebs in the failed Occupy-X movement, your are more likely to worry about the Miranda rights of bombers.
2013-04-22 02:39:23 PM
1 votes:

Kittypie070: Kibbler: A dozen rightwing pundits and countless rightwing bloggers just fell to their knees and thanked the Lord, for now they have something to rage about for the next five years.

Wonderful.

They're gonna RAGE about lawful Constitutional legal procedure being correctly upheld.

This is a police matter, not war.


You ever read Michael German's essay, "Squaring the Error," about Law v War?
2013-04-22 02:38:33 PM
1 votes:

Nabb1: I am opposed to the death penalty, but it is just a fact of life that some people need killin'.


Not this one.

No martyrdom for this asshat, just a long, long lifetime of sitting in a box contemplating just how badly he screwed the pooch.
2013-04-22 02:38:15 PM
1 votes:

Great Janitor: FlashHarry: Great Janitor: Good, put him on trial, convict him, no plea bargain, and execute the son of a biatch.  Make the execute as soon as possible.  He doesn't deserve to live.

This isn't Russia. Is this Russia? This isn't Russia .

What does Russia have to do with anything?


it's a caddyshack quote.

my point was, your post read like you wanted a soviet-style kangaroo court in which the verdict is already known before it begins. and that here in america, everyone has the right to a fair trial.
2013-04-22 02:37:27 PM
1 votes:

ManRay: slayer199: He should be tried as an American citizen.

Of course, his defense will blame it on his older brother in an effort to get a reduction.

How about this: My older brother was the mastermind of the bomb plot and trigger man in the shooting. He threatened me with my life if I didn't go along with it. I was hiding out because I was scared and didn't know who to trust.


How about "Guilty of multiple counts of Felony Murder"? Do you want life in prison with no possibility of parole, or the same shot we give stray dogs?
2013-04-22 02:35:43 PM
1 votes:

FlashHarry: Great Janitor: Good, put him on trial, convict him, no plea bargain, and execute the son of a biatch.  Make the execute as soon as possible.  He doesn't deserve to live.

This isn't Russia. Is this Russia? This isn't Russia .


lh4.ggpht.com

No, this is AMERICA!
In Russia the executioner's don't put on ski masks
2013-04-22 02:35:09 PM
1 votes:
I have a gentle reminder for the "enemy combatant" bullshiat crowd.

Our criminal justice system worked just fine for dealing with the following terrorists:

Timothy McVeigh, Terry Nichols, the Unabomber, Eric Rudolph, Kevin Harpham, Charles Polk, Willy Lampley, Joseph Bailie, Peter Langan, Ray Hamblin, Larry Shoemake, Robert Starr III, John Pitner, Charles Barbee, Floyd Looker, Edward Taylor, Jr., Todd Vanbiber, William Goehler, James Cleaver, Chevie Kehoe, Daniel Lee, Faron Lovelace, Jack Grebe Jr., Johnnie Wise, Buford Furrow, Richard Baumhammers, Fritz Springmeier, Clayton Wagner, Michael Smith, Charles Barefoot, Jr., Larry Raugust, Matt Hale, David Hinkson, Sean Gillespie, Wade Lay, Ivan Braden, Demetrius "Van" Crocker, Daniel Schertz, Raymond Dillard, and Dennis Mahon.

/So sit the fark down, shut the fark up, and stop trying to spread fear, you maroons.
//Your unjustified poutrage is giving the adults among us headaches.
2013-04-22 02:34:44 PM
1 votes:

FlashHarry: The Southern Dandy: Well,  there's a helluva lot more evidence that this was motivated by religion, than there is evidence that God exists.

i was just wondering if it was confirmed - if they'd found a manifesto or anything. i know the older brother was religious, but the younger one just seems like he was a regular american kid and not a little johnny jihadi.


I think he's probably just a kid that looked up to his older brother, and unfortunately, blindly followed his older brother into the whackiness.
2013-04-22 02:33:20 PM
1 votes:

Great Janitor: Good, put him on trial, convict him, no plea bargain, and execute the son of a biatch.  Make the execute as soon as possible.  He doesn't deserve to live.


This isn't Russia. Is this Russia? This isn't Russia .
2013-04-22 02:31:53 PM
1 votes:

StatelyGreekAutomaton: Also, sterilize your entire family or some shiat.


that's actually banned directly by the Constitution.  You don't punish anyone but the criminal in question.
2013-04-22 02:31:08 PM
1 votes:
If a pressure cooker full of black powder and nails is a "Weapon of mass destruction" what the fark is a tomahawk cruise missile?
2013-04-22 02:30:50 PM
1 votes:
Nabb1: Iam opposed to the death penalty, but it is just a fact of life that some people need killin'.

yeah, that pretty much sums up my position too.

my main gripe against the DP is that it is irreversible.
2013-04-22 02:29:28 PM
1 votes:

NostroZ: Joe Blowme: If ever there was a time to use teh Patriot act, now would seem to be it.

Wrong! Now is the time to show we DON'T USE the Patriot act against every deranged US Citizen.


Actually, I think now is the time to repeal it, since we don't need it to prosecute these morons.
2013-04-22 02:28:19 PM
1 votes:
do we even know that this crime was motivated by religion yet?
2013-04-22 02:27:32 PM
1 votes:

ManRay: TheShavingofOccam123: AFTER BEING INTERROGATED  BY THE CIA AND OTHER "INTERROGATION" EXPERTS.

Probably without legal counsel present.  And I'm sure they'll wait until he's off all medication, out of critical condition  and in reasonable health before they tortu...er, question him.

Yeah. The idea of a "special terrorism interrogator" getting to him before he is officially questioned bothers me. You can't put due process on hold.


If they're using that questioning to potentially track down others but not use it during the trial, what's the problem?


slayer199: He should be tried as an American citizen.

Of course, his defense will blame it on his older brother in an effort to get a reduction.


Just because everyone's pissed off right now doesn't mean it isn't true. It wouldn't surprise me at all if this kid didn't truly understand what was going on. Of course he should be held accountable, but we shouldn't pile his brother's punishment onto him just because the brother is dead.

As for the brother; if the reports of him being interested in joining an extremist group and/or going overseas for training are true, it wouldn't surprise me if this was some sort of initiation or proof that he's not a cop. Ultimately, though, it's probably going to come down to a case the petulant soul who's mad at the world for some perceived slight.


AngryJailhouseFistfark: But what if he's a Sovereign Citizen, not subject to the Crown or some phoney-baloney Imperial Navy of the British Colonies laws? He should be free to not pay taxes and do as he pleases without Federal harassment, seems to me.


Those claims always struck me as a great opportunity to say, "OK, fine, Sovereign Citizen. You are not subject to our laws, nor will you be protected by them. We're going to let you go, and if someone guns your ass down the second you reach the sidewalk, so be it."
2013-04-22 02:26:55 PM
1 votes:

slayer199: Of course, his defense will blame it on his older brother in an effort to get a reduction.


And, what if that is exactly what happened?  Do we ignore that just to feel better?

The fact that you (and so many others) are willing to abandon what could be the truth just to exact some vengeance is one of greatest things wrong with this country.
2013-04-22 02:26:20 PM
1 votes:
Anyone venture over to FreeRepublic for their reaction?  I can't visit that website anymore. It frightens me and I have to be sedated when I close the page.
2013-04-22 02:26:15 PM
1 votes:

FlashHarry: BlueGreenSwirly: Good point, subby. As an Islamic terrorist, he should be declared an enemy combatant.

as a christian terrorist, should eric rudolph have been declared an enemy combatant?


Sure. Why not? He was attempting in his own pathetic way to circumvent the rule of the American government and intimidate the public into establishing a Christian theocracy. It's basically a form of sedition any time you use a non-democratic method to try to overrule the government in a democracy.
2013-04-22 02:25:48 PM
1 votes:
s17.postimg.org
2013-04-22 02:25:14 PM
1 votes:

NostroZ:
I think it would be a bigger show compassion to not kill him.

To show that we Americans are not some blood thirsty savages who can only be satiated by the icy grip of death.


Personally, I agree. I oppose the death penalty in all cases for a variety of reasons. I do, however, understand the other side of that debate, especially when it comes to mass murder and other especially heinous crimes. I'll feel just as safe if they merely house him in a cage for the rest of his life. I live near a maximum security state prison, I took the tour when they opened it, escape is for Hollywood movies, not for reality. He ain't going nowhere.
2013-04-22 02:22:10 PM
1 votes:

TheShavingofOccam123: AFTER BEING INTERROGATED  BY THE CIA AND OTHER "INTERROGATION" EXPERTS.

Probably without legal counsel present.  And I'm sure they'll wait until he's off all medication, out of critical condition  and in reasonable health before they tortu...er, question him.


Just leave him to rot in the US prison system, and the fellow residents will torture him for us.

Hey, we're not a nation of torturers if we lock you in a facility where the other inmates are doing the torturing, am I right?

/just throwing that out there, we've been torturing people for a long, long time, for much lesser offenses.
//yes, this guy deserves punishment
2013-04-22 02:21:31 PM
1 votes:
The point of the Justice System is to protect the public, not to extract revenge.
He is still accused and not convicted.
I understand this.  I agree with this.
However, it would save time and money if they granted him bail and released him at a memorial service for his victoms.

/especially if they announced it in advance and gave all victom's families one baseball bat each.
2013-04-22 02:21:18 PM
1 votes:

skullkrusher: FarkedOver: skullkrusher: FarkedOver: Let's hope this is handled at the state level rather than the federal level.

There is quite literally zero chance of that happening.

Sadly, that's a fact.  I'm sure he is being charged with some P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act crap, which is why I'd rather let MA handle this.

He's probably gonna be charged as a mass murdering terrorist because he's a farking mass murdering terrorist.


Not saying he isn't a terrorist.  I just don't want him executed for his crimes.  I want him incarcerated.
2013-04-22 02:20:13 PM
1 votes:

FlashHarry: BlueGreenSwirly: Good point, subby. As an Islamic terrorist, he should be declared an enemy combatant.

as a christian terrorist, should eric rudolph have been declared an enemy combatant?


He DOES have a dark complexion, but he's still white, so....No.
2013-04-22 02:19:52 PM
1 votes:

Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.


Yes, that's what I thought too. Seems like someone at the US Attorney's Office is trying to stretch the definition to sex up the charges. Once upon a time it was Nuclear/Biological/Chemical (NBC) to cover anything that wasn't conventional explosives. Only the Soviets called it WMD and even they meant it the same way we did. But now you call it "Mass Destruction" and suddenly a large black powder or fertilizer bomb qualifies. No, it doesn't.

As for charging this guy, it's absolutely the right thing to do. He's here legally, with permanent residential status. For us to treat him differently is to turn our back on the Bill of Rights. We don't have lynch mobs anymore, no matter how loathsome and shiatty the perpetrator may be. To do otherwise is to shame our constitution and make us no better than the dictators we accuse as oppressive tyrants. We got laws and due process and WhatNot, folks. It protects the innocent and it also protects America as a nation when we can show, "yes, this guy's not a political prisoner, but a shiatbag and here's the evidence."
2013-04-22 02:19:51 PM
1 votes:

Shrugging Atlas: ZAZ: Shrugging Atlas

Quoting my post from yesterday's thread:

For purposes of federal criminal law, a "weapon of mass destruction" includes any "destructive device." 18 USC 2332a. A "destructive device" includes any bomb, grenade, rocket with more than four ounces of propellant, and any projectile launcher with a caliber over .50 inches (except for Attorney General approved shotguns). 18 USC 921. A potato gun is a weapon of mass destruction, if "designed for use as a weapon" and used against a U.S. national.

Ah, thanks for the knowledge.  Sweet christ that's a pretty wide open definition.


I suppose most of the characters in Big Bang Theory could be arrested for WMD possession.

/kind of ironic, considering Iraq didn't have any
2013-04-22 02:19:00 PM
1 votes:

BlueGreenSwirly: Good point, subby. As an Islamic terrorist, he should be declared an enemy combatant.


as a christian terrorist, should eric rudolph have been declared an enemy combatant?
2013-04-22 02:18:39 PM
1 votes:

FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?


I can think of two mitigating factors. 1. His age. He's old enough to execute, but young enough that a jury might consider that. 2. The fact that it seems he was heavily influenced by his brother. Every single other aspect of the case are aggravating factors, though. It may be possible to cop a plea for life if he talks.
2013-04-22 02:17:49 PM
1 votes:
All of you third world tinpot dictator types wishing for the death penalty for the guy. Most civilized countries have abolished the death penalty. And then there's the good ol' USA.
2013-04-22 02:17:44 PM
1 votes:

FlashHarry: the kid is guilty as hell, but justice must be served.


Right.  That's what being TRIED in COURT means... Justice.

Or, we can tear him apart in the streets to feed the hungry mob.
2013-04-22 02:17:05 PM
1 votes:

tinyarena: FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?

Yes, a conviction on using 'weapons of mass destruction' could result in the DP
We shall see.

Personally, I wish they'd just torched the boat, and had a few weapons malfunctions.
I would make a truly awful policeman.  But my beat would be quite
so quite

4.bp.blogspot.com
2013-04-22 02:17:05 PM
1 votes:
This is such an open and shut case that we can't entrust it to the courts!

/ this is what some Americans actually believe about accused terrorists
2013-04-22 02:16:57 PM
1 votes:

slayer199: He should be tried as an American citizen.

Of course, his defense will blame it on his older brother in an effort to get a reduction.


How about this: My older brother was the mastermind of the bomb plot and trigger man in the shooting. He threatened me with my life if I didn't go along with it. I was hiding out because I was scared and didn't know who to trust.
2013-04-22 02:16:36 PM
1 votes:

skullkrusher: FarkedOver: Let's hope this is handled at the state level rather than the federal level.

There is quite literally zero chance of that happening.


Sadly, that's a fact.  I'm sure he is being charged with some P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act crap, which is why I'd rather let MA handle this.
2013-04-22 02:16:35 PM
1 votes:

FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?


Phrasing!
2013-04-22 02:16:32 PM
1 votes:

FlashHarry: the kid is guilty as hell, but justice must be served.


A fair trial and a fine hangin'.

slayer199: Of course, his defense will blame it on his older brother in an effort to get a reduction.


Of course, if they can only get his brother to testify on his behalf.  Otherwise, hey bud, you're 19.  That should be old enough to know that you're not supposed to blow up the Boston Marathon.

Seriously, though, what were they trying to achieve?  The Chechens don't have a beef with the US, or even Boston.  They're not even Canadians/Yankees/the entire NFL fans.
2013-04-22 02:16:08 PM
1 votes:

Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.


yeah... i dunno... i mean there were mass casualties, but this would mean that just about any bomber could be charged with this. not that i'm against it, i guess, but it does seem to lump it in with someone with a dirty bomb or sarin canister or something similar.
2013-04-22 02:15:29 PM
1 votes:

slayer199: Of course, his defense will blame it on his older brother in an effort to get a reduction.


well...from everything that's been released, it was his older brother that got pissy and started planning this, they younger brother was more of "oh hey, I'll help you bro"
2013-04-22 02:15:04 PM
1 votes:

ManateeGag: TheShavingofOccam123: AFTER BEING INTERROGATED  BY THE CIA AND OTHER "INTERROGATION" EXPERTS.

Probably without legal counsel present.  And I'm sure they'll wait until he's off all medication, out of critical condition  and in reasonable health before they tortu...er, question him.

are you retarded?


Investigators are going into Tsarnaev's room every few hours to ask questions in the presence of doctors, the source said.

Ill-informed, opinionated and yes, retarded. Yes, I am.

/smack dab in the middle of that Fark.com bell curve
2013-04-22 02:14:58 PM
1 votes:

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: Treygreen13: Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.

I think the biggest problem with the WMD moniker is that it stands so strongly opposed to the law of conservation of mass.

Weapons of mass conversion.


There we go. We need to try to limit WMCs.
2013-04-22 02:14:14 PM
1 votes:
Why is this even an argument?
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-04-22 02:14:06 PM
1 votes:
Shrugging Atlas

Quoting my post from yesterday's thread:

For purposes of federal criminal law, a "weapon of mass destruction" includes any "destructive device." 18 USC 2332a. A "destructive device" includes any bomb, grenade, rocket with more than four ounces of propellant, and any projectile launcher with a caliber over .50 inches (except for Attorney General approved shotguns). 18 USC 921. A potato gun is a weapon of mass destruction, if "designed for use as a weapon" and used against a U.S. national.
2013-04-22 02:12:40 PM
1 votes:
Let's hope this is handled at the state level rather than the federal level.
2013-04-22 02:12:26 PM
1 votes:

HMS_Blinkin: He's a citizen?  I thought I read that he had a green card, and was a legal immigrant, but not a US citizen.

Or is that just CNN/NYPost being derpy again?


He took the oath in september.
2013-04-22 02:11:20 PM
1 votes:
meh, I don't think this was ever much of a question
2013-04-22 02:10:40 PM
1 votes:
If USCIS can find any fraud on his application they can revoke his citizenship.  Just sayin'.
2013-04-22 02:08:59 PM
1 votes:
If it doesn't warrant a news flash then why did you news flash it?
 
Displayed 132 of 132 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report