What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Explosions at Boston Marathon (1 Viewer)

Mr. Cross said:
CurlyNight said:
Leeroy Jenkins said:
Boston police handled this so much better than the lapd's fiasco. No random people got shot up or anything.
This is true but now they are deciding if shutting down the whole city for the day for one dude was the best way to handle this. Seems Boston is out 300 mil for yesterday's shutdown. :dunno:
You care that innocent people had money taken from them? I guess people can change.
I keep seeing people troll this crappy poster. What is the deal here? Who did he take money from?
 
I am not in favor of making this guy an enemy combatant, but this slippery slope stuff is as nonsensical here as it is in the gun control debate. This is NO historical example of liberty being lost incrementally, over time, through well meaning action or laws. It doesn't work that way, ever.

 
Czechs: we're not Chechens

PRAGUE (AP) A number of comments by Americans on social media mistaking the Czech Republic for the country of origin of the Boston Marathon bombing suspects ethnic Chechen brothers prompted the Czech ambassador to the United States to act.

In a statement posted on the embassy Web site, Petr Gandalovic said "the Czech Republic and Chechnya are two very different entities the Czech Republic is a Central European country; Chechnya is a part of the Russian Federation."

Gandalovic calls it "a most unfortunate misunderstanding," but some responses on Twitter are less diplomatic.

Mirca Sekerova recommends Americans "open a geography book once in a while...stop blaming our country for this."

And Petr Manda commented: "Well done, U.S. education system."
Good thing nobody here would be that foolish.
### #### it.
 
I am not in favor of making this guy an enemy combatant, but this slippery slope stuff is as nonsensical here as it is in the gun control debate. This is NO historical example of liberty being lost incrementally, over time, through well meaning action or laws. It doesn't work that way, ever.
You don't think declaring this guy an enemy combatant is a slippery slope? Please explain.

 
I am not in favor of making this guy an enemy combatant, but this slippery slope stuff is as nonsensical here as it is in the gun control debate. This is NO historical example of liberty being lost incrementally, over time, through well meaning action or laws. It doesn't work that way, ever.
You don't think declaring this guy an enemy combatant is a slippery slope? Please explain.
England has had the Official Secrets Act and has been doing this stuff for decades. But it is still a free country.
 
timschochet said:
Tony Jabroni said:
Premier said:
When do they begin the waterboarding? Now?
Ask Tim.
You know what? I've tried to be nice, but I'm tired of putting up with your ####. I didn't write anything that would warrant a response like that. Earlier I asked, because I was curious, whether he would be tried by the state, or federally, or named a combatant. I thought it was an interesting question, and I was hoping that some people around here more familiar with the legal system than I am could provide some insight. They did. But you've engaged in attacking me ever since. I don't even know you. I don't think people reading this thread are interested in you attacking me. If you have nothing of substance to offer, then get the #### out of here.
I am somewhat interested.:Snoggerhipple:
 
Neil Diamond on hand to sing Sweet Caroline at the Sawx Game. Seems like he might be drunk, an odd performance.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Neil Diamond on hand to sing Sweet Caroline at the Sawx Game. Seems like he might be drunk, and odd performance.
Neil: Ah, ha ha ha ha! This first song.. [ Kenny the Keyboard Player intros "Sweet Caroline", crowd applauds ] Thank you. That, of course, "Sweet Caroline". I wrote that song after a big show at the Forum. Gary and I had been drinking pretty heavily, and we were driving..

Gary: [ worried ] Oh, I can't believe you're gonna tell this story..

Neil: Ha ha ha ha ha! Yeah, well, we were driving down this dark road, and I hit a kid. [ the crowd is stunned ] So, we got out, and sure enough he was dead. So, we just took off. Pretty fast. And, two hours later, I wrote "Sweet Caroline". Sweet Caroline. Good times never seemed so good. Thank you.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ilov80s said:
Raider Nation said:
Gotta love the uncle. Reporter: "What do you think provoked this?" Uncle: "Being losers!" :lmao:
It was an incredible interview. Somehow, this middle aged immigrant is a master of spin. He took what should have been a really nasty PR situation and came out of it with a reallity positive image.
Telling the truth is usually good for your pr.
 
Donations for his boat?

The FBI and PD shot it up cornering the most wanted suspect at the time.

I think insurance and the town can cover this one?

Not covering it would be a bigger PR disaster.

 
Donations for his boat? The FBI and PD shot it up cornering the most wanted suspect at the time. I think insurance and the town can cover this one?Not covering it would be a bigger PR disaster.
I agree. I mean, hopefully a boat company does the right thing here but I'd rather donate to these poor people who had their ####### legs blown off them.
 
When he was taken into custody from the bottom of a boat in the backyard of a Watertown home Friday night, the suspect was bleeding badly and too weak to resist any longer, officials said.
:thumbup:

And has to live with knowing he killed his brother.

Look forward to the death penalty. The kid didn't have the sack to off himself so have it done for him.

 
The Miranda thing is interesting...but cops have already found ways around that...just look at DUI's...everything being said is prior to being arrested, yet it's used against you in the court of law. Even during the arrest, they don't even have to read you your rights. Miranda is dead already so don't hang your hat on it.

 
Donations for his boat?

The FBI and PD shot it up cornering the most wanted suspect at the time.

I think insurance and the town can cover this one?

Not covering it would be a bigger PR disaster.
I agree. I mean, hopefully a boat company does the right thing here but I'd rather donate to these poor people who had their ####### legs blown off them.
Yes, the victims need help with their huge medical bills. Please donate.http://onefundboston.org/

 
I am not in favor of making this guy an enemy combatant, but this slippery slope stuff is as nonsensical here as it is in the gun control debate. This is NO historical example of liberty being lost incrementally, over time, through well meaning action or laws. It doesn't work that way, ever.
I am big time in favor of whatever tools we have at our disposal that allows us to question this guy without the benefit of an attorney. No doubt.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am not in favor of making this guy an enemy combatant, but this slippery slope stuff is as nonsensical here as it is in the gun control debate. This is NO historical example of liberty being lost incrementally, over time, through well meaning action or laws. It doesn't work that way, ever.
This is a patently ridiculous statement, unless you qualify it by saying "liberty being totally lost incrementally.... Liberty is continually being lost as more and more laws are passed. People are not free to drive drunk on the highways, although there was a time when they were; people are not free to drive at whatever speed they choose, although there was a time they were; people are not free to spank their children in public, although there was a time they were; people are not free to drive without car insurance, although there was a time when they were...All these laws have been passed for what we believe are good and cogent reasons, but to say they do not circumscribe liberty is fatuous.

 
I am not in favor of making this guy an enemy combatant, but this slippery slope stuff is as nonsensical here as it is in the gun control debate. This is NO historical example of liberty being lost incrementally, over time, through well meaning action or laws. It doesn't work that way, ever.
Tax Code down????? :loco:

 
How did black hats suicide vest not hurt anyone tackling him? I'm not sure I understand how that works.

 
Seat belt laws in our state is a good example of incrementalism. They only passed because it was promised that they would never being able to pull anyone over for a seat belt violation. It could only be an offense ticketed if they pulled you over for something else and they law barely passed. Now I have driven through check points where all they are looking for are seat belts. The government thrives on incrementalism policies which chip away at our freedoms.

 
I am not in favor of making this guy an enemy combatant, but this slippery slope stuff is as nonsensical here as it is in the gun control debate. This is NO historical example of liberty being lost incrementally, over time, through well meaning action or laws. It doesn't work that way, ever.
I am big time in favor of whatever tools we have at our disposal that allows us to question this guy without the benefit of an attorney. No doubt.
So we should throw out Miranda rights, rights to an attorney, and the Constitution for all accused US citizens?

 
I am not in favor of making this guy an enemy combatant, but this slippery slope stuff is as nonsensical here as it is in the gun control debate. This is NO historical example of liberty being lost incrementally, over time, through well meaning action or laws. It doesn't work that way, ever.
I am big time in favor of whatever tools we have at our disposal that allows us to question this guy without the benefit of an attorney. No doubt.
So we should throw out Miranda rights, rights to an attorney, and the Constitution for all accused US citizens?
Quite the leap and not worthy of a response.
 
I am not in favor of making this guy an enemy combatant, but this slippery slope stuff is as nonsensical here as it is in the gun control debate. This is NO historical example of liberty being lost incrementally, over time, through well meaning action or laws. It doesn't work that way, ever.
I am big time in favor of whatever tools we have at our disposal that allows us to question this guy without the benefit of an attorney. No doubt.
So we should throw out Miranda rights, rights to an attorney, and the Constitution for all accused US citizens?
Quite the leap and not worthy of a response.
:lol: :lol: Classic!! The easy way of saying "You are correct, but no way will I admit it"

 
Two questions in the aftermath:

1) Why did they start firing on #2 in the boat when they first encountered him? From what I understand he didn't fire any shots at them, but just peeked out. Seems like they would want him alive.

2) So, the FBI did some checking on #1 (older brother), and even interviewed him a few years ago. How did they not identify him when they had pictures the next day. Why did they have to go to the public to identify him? Seems like they should have ID'd him and apprehended him instead of this manhunt that had 1 officer killed and one injured. From everything I read, these 2 suspects weren't in hiding/on the run, until their photos were released.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Two questions in the aftermath: 1) Why did they start firing on #2 in the boat when they first encountered him? From what I understand he didn't fire any shots at them, but just peeked out. Seems like they would want him alive.2) So, the FBI did some checking on #1 (older brother), and even interviewed him a few years ago. How did they not identify him when they had pictures the next day. Why did they have to go to the public to identify him? Seems like they should have ID'd him and apprehended him instead of this manhunt that had 1 officer killed and one injured. From everything I read, these 2 suspects weren't in hiding/on the run, until their photos were released.
1) because they wanted him dead or trigger happy or nervous or all three.2) they thought they could catch them without the help of the public. Which if they had the info on #1 why didn't they just stake out his home and his brothers home since they weren't hiding or on the run? Hmmmmm
 
Two questions in the aftermath: 1) Why did they start firing on #2 in the boat when they first encountered him? From what I understand he didn't fire any shots at them, but just peeked out. Seems like they would want him alive.2) So, the FBI did some checking on #1 (older brother), and even interviewed him a few years ago. How did they not identify him when they had pictures the next day. Why did they have to go to the public to identify him? Seems like they should have ID'd him and apprehended him instead of this manhunt that had 1 officer killed and one injured. From everything I read, these 2 suspects weren't in hiding/on the run, until their photos were released.
White Hat did fire shots from the boat, according to the Watertown Police chief.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Two questions in the aftermath: 1) Why did they start firing on #2 in the boat when they first encountered him? From what I understand he didn't fire any shots at them, but just peeked out. Seems like they would want him alive.2) So, the FBI did some checking on #1 (older brother), and even interviewed him a few years ago. How did they not identify him when they had pictures the next day. Why did they have to go to the public to identify him? Seems like they should have ID'd him and apprehended him instead of this manhunt that had 1 officer killed and one injured. From everything I read, these 2 suspects weren't in hiding/on the run, until their photos were released.
Re 2 - we don't know that they didn't know his identity. We don't know that they didn't release the pictures to try and lure them out in to doing something stupid (worked) or to lure out associates (not yet). The briefings included what the FBI wanted the public to know as a tool of furthering the investigation, not as a tool to quench the public thirst to know what was going on.
 
That last article said the cops shot 'flash bombs' or something like that at him in the boat.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top