What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Explosions at Boston Marathon (1 Viewer)

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.
Except that this is completely false.
Initially, in NY (where the law originated), you could not be pulled over for this offense; I have received a fine for a seatbelt offense that the judge would not dismiss though it was the only reason I was in court. Am I missing something about your reply?
The part that is false is the part where Jon claims that a seat belt law only passed because of some kind of "promise" that the law would never be amended.

The very idea that such a promise could exist is laughable to anyone with basic knowledge of how laws are created.

Also, I believe you're wrong about New York's law. A quick Google search (here and here, for example) indicate that New York enacted "primary enforcement" from day one.

 
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.
Yeah just ask the Guilford Four.
 
This growing paranoia from both the Left and the Right in this country is really starting to concern me. Even if we do make this guy an enemy combatant, that doesn't mean we're removing all Miranda rights from everyone. Even if we were to register all guns, that would never lead to confiscation. Some of you guys have a very unhealthy fear of dictatorship right around the corner- stop worrying, it's never gonna happen.
I agree that fears about impending dictatorship are unfounded, but only because of the good folks at the ACLU and NRA who insist on fighting every infringement on our rights tooth and nail. If it was up to people like you, we'd be serfs.
:goodposting:

 
Not sure why anyone would insist on these guys being called an enemy combatant.

These are American citizens and should be treated as such. With that said, has the guy been arrested yet? To my knowledge, he was in a shootout and taken to the hospital. He has not been booked, brought in, put in front of a judge or put behind bars without his rights being read to him yet. He is in a hospital recovering at which time he is able to understand his rights, they will be read to him.

 
It will be interesting to see what FBI investigation of the bombers' computers and interrogation of White Hat reveal about their motivations behind the attack.

I haven't heard too much speculation on their motivations, but I have a theory. I am thinking that it may be general Islamist-backed support of Palestine in the conflict with Israel. There are a few things that lead me to think this. Generally, terrorist attacks are designed to be symbolic in nature in ways that help convey their message to a wider audience. For example, Al-Queda clearly chose their targets of the World Trade Centers and the Pentagon to convey their message.

In this case, the first bomb was set off right behind a barracade lined with flags from numerous different countries. I don't think that was a coincidence, but rather part of the terrorist's intended message of an "F you" to the world with regard to their handling of the Israel-Palestine situation.

I also think that the location of the attack in Boston is potentially symbolic. Boston is the site of America's rebellion against their oppressive overseers in the British empire. One sympathetic to the Palestinian cause could potentially analogize the American revolution against Britain to that of the Palestinian's rebellion against Israeli occupation. I'm not saying that I think it is a great analogy, but I could see how it could resonate with some Islamist-supporters living in Boston.

Also, the tactics used in the Boston marathon (crude explosive devices used in a gathering of citizens in a public place) are the same as those generally used by Islamist terrorist groups in Palestine.

Also, White Hat expressed pro-Palestinian sympathies on his Twitter account last year saying saying "Free Palestine" and saying that he was going to make a joke about Hamas but that is was "Israeli inappropriate."

Who knows what the motivation will ulimatley turn out to be, but my guess is that it is general Islamist support of Palestinians in Israel and against America and the world at large's support of Israel In the conflict.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
10 years ago I worked in Law Enforcement software....and I met with the newly appointed Homeland Security Chief of a state. We discussed the current state of the data sharing between the city, county, and state LE agencies....and the technical capabilities that were available to allow more of it.At the end of the meeting, he thanked me for the info and said the first priority for him was to spend his new federal funding on hazmat suits and other equipment of that type to prepare them more for nuclear facility attacks or similar.It was a typical small-picture reactive mindset I'm sure is common in many levels of the DHS. I can't help but think of that when hearing about the government being warned about the older brother.
You work on SCMODS?

 
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.
Except that this is completely false.
Initially, in NY (where the law originated), you could not be pulled over for this offense; I have received a fine for a seatbelt offense that the judge would not dismiss though it was the only reason I was in court. Am I missing something about your reply?
The part that is false is the part where Jon claims that a seat belt law only passed because of some kind of "promise" that the law would never be amended. The very idea that such a promise could exist is laughable to anyone with basic knowledge of how laws are created. Also, I believe you're wrong about New York's law. A quick Google search (here and here, for example) indicate that New York enacted "primary enforcement" from day one.
I stand corrected, sir. I seem to recall when this law was proposed, the "secondary offense" aspect was what softened it to the public; it seems clear that it was passed as a primary offense enforceable law.
 
Did someone in here say that the range on remote car controllers is 200 ft?
I made some references to RC equipment. But, I don't believe I said 200ft. More like 200-300 yards with average RC equipment. Some RC plane equipment can reach much farther. (perhaps as far as a mile) There was a discussion about how far away the bombers could get from the bombs and still be able to manually detonate with RC equipment. I still contend that with all the buildings and other interference, they needed to be within 75-100 yards to get it to work.

 
I'm still trying to figure out where these two were getting the finances for this operation. There has been no mention of jobs for either of these two. Guns, bullets, pressure cookers, Mercedes, backpacks and golf hats cost money.

 
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.
The fact that you regard the laws you describe as taking away from liberty demonstrates that you have a very different concept of that word than I do.
Apparently, so does the dictionary, Humpty Dumpty.

"freedom from control, interference, obligation, restriction, hampering conditions, etc.; power or right of doing, thinking, speaking, etc., according to choice."

 
Did someone in here say that the range on remote car controllers is 200 ft?
I made some references to RC equipment. But, I don't believe I said 200ft. More like 200-300 yards with average RC equipment. Some RC plane equipment can reach much farther. (perhaps as far as a mile) There was a discussion about how far away the bombers could get from the bombs and still be able to manually detonate with RC equipment. I still contend that with all the buildings and other interference, they needed to be within 75-100 yards to get it to work.
Okay, this is what I don't get and I am also :banned:ing

This picture shows the younger brother:

http://www.runnersworld.com/races/runner%E2%80%99s-photo-apparently-shows-suspect-after-bomb

but if you look to the right of the pink jacket, it looks like the older brother too. This is at Fairfield and Boylston. The bombs were approx. 550 ft apart and detonated 15 seconds apart. The older brother had to run past the 2nd bomb to get to this point. Why would he run towards a spot he knows will blow up but at the same time get past it with enough distance to detonate the first one?

Fairfield/Boylston<-----200 ft------bomb 2 at Forum<--------550 ft------bomb 1 at finish line

 
Do you guys think they'll treat David Ortiz as an enemy combatant?
This will all be over soon.

So who takes custody of him? Will he go through the court system? Will there be a trial? Or does he go to Guantanamo?
Good question, but what I want to know is who takes custody of him? Will he go through the court system? Will there be a trial? Or does he go to Guantanamo?
As will this. . .

 
Did someone in here say that the range on remote car controllers is 200 ft?
I made some references to RC equipment. But, I don't believe I said 200ft. More like 200-300 yards with average RC equipment. Some RC plane equipment can reach much farther. (perhaps as far as a mile) There was a discussion about how far away the bombers could get from the bombs and still be able to manually detonate with RC equipment. I still contend that with all the buildings and other interference, they needed to be within 75-100 yards to get it to work.
Okay, this is what I don't get and I am also :banned:ing

This picture shows the younger brother:

http://www.runnersworld.com/races/runner%E2%80%99s-photo-apparently-shows-suspect-after-bomb

but if you look to the right of the pink jacket, it looks like the older brother too. This is at Fairfield and Boylston. The bombs were approx. 550 ft apart and detonated 15 seconds apart. The older brother had to run past the 2nd bomb to get to this point. Why would he run towards a spot he knows will blow up but at the same time get past it with enough distance to detonate the first one?

Fairfield/Boylston<-----200 ft------bomb 2 at Forum<--------550 ft------bomb 1 at finish line
Doesn't look like the black hat to me. The guy looks different and I see a red jacket. :shrug:

 
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"
Yer wrong. How ignorant if you don't see the difference between a guy who is the primary suspect in an act of terrorism on America and the need to determine ASAP what, if any other imminent threats there may be, and the average US citizen's constitutional rights, so ya it was quite a leap. Pretty clear difference from my perspective.
 
Did someone in here say that the range on remote car controllers is 200 ft?
I made some references to RC equipment. But, I don't believe I said 200ft. More like 200-300 yards with average RC equipment. Some RC plane equipment can reach much farther. (perhaps as far as a mile) There was a discussion about how far away the bombers could get from the bombs and still be able to manually detonate with RC equipment. I still contend that with all the buildings and other interference, they needed to be within 75-100 yards to get it to work.
Okay, this is what I don't get and I am also :banned:ing

This picture shows the younger brother:

http://www.runnersworld.com/races/runner%E2%80%99s-photo-apparently-shows-suspect-after-bomb

but if you look to the right of the pink jacket, it looks like the older brother too. This is at Fairfield and Boylston. The bombs were approx. 550 ft apart and detonated 15 seconds apart. The older brother had to run past the 2nd bomb to get to this point. Why would he run towards a spot he knows will blow up but at the same time get past it with enough distance to detonate the first one?

Fairfield/Boylston<-----200 ft------bomb 2 at Forum<--------550 ft------bomb 1 at finish line
Doesn't look like the black hat to me. The guy looks different and I see a red jacket. :shrug:
Yeah, the picture was discussed a few days ago, when they released the pictures of the bombers. I questioned the path that the brothers took as they entered the marathon area. I also pointed out that it would have been difficult for the older brother to put the pack down and move to the other side of the second bomb site before he detonated. I would guess that they left the area separately.

Which was my point. Why did they walk so close together as they entered the area. Seems like a mistake. Not knowing what video or picture evidence the FBI had of the 1st bomb site, it may have been tougher to identify the 1st suspect, had they not walked around the corner together in the FBI video.

 
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"
Yer wrong. How ignorant if you don't see the difference between a guy who is the primary suspect in an act of terrorism on America and the need to determine ASAP what, if any other imminent threats there may be, and the average US citizen's constitutional rights, so ya it was quite a leap. Pretty clear difference from my perspective.
Quite the uproar over not reading Miranda rights to a domestic terrorist, isn't it?
 
iStalking White Hat's twitter led me to a couple of friends of his who are still defending him - Troy Crossley and Junes Umarov. Junes is a fellow Chechen who seems like he was with White Hat on a night (March 15) that bombs were set off in Hanover.

Quote

troy ‏@TroyCrossley 20 Mar

@J_tsar yo i heard u n @xXjungaXx were poppen fireworks

Expand

Jahar Jahar ‏@J_tsar 20 Mar

@TroyCrossley @xxjungaxx yea cuddi, we done did it. I told him to hit yu up but the bird abstained from doing so
I've yet to see either of these guys post "They were huge fans of marathon racing and that's why they packed such heavy backpacks to enjoy the day there".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Did someone in here say that the range on remote car controllers is 200 ft?
I made some references to RC equipment. But, I don't believe I said 200ft. More like 200-300 yards with average RC equipment. Some RC plane equipment can reach much farther. (perhaps as far as a mile) There was a discussion about how far away the bombers could get from the bombs and still be able to manually detonate with RC equipment. I still contend that with all the buildings and other interference, they needed to be within 75-100 yards to get it to work.
Okay, this is what I don't get and I am also :banned:ingThis picture shows the younger brother:

http://www.runnersworld.com/races/runner%E2%80%99s-photo-apparently-shows-suspect-after-bomb

but if you look to the right of the pink jacket, it looks like the older brother too. This is at Fairfield and Boylston. The bombs were approx. 550 ft apart and detonated 15 seconds apart. The older brother had to run past the 2nd bomb to get to this point. Why would he run towards a spot he knows will blow up but at the same time get past it with enough distance to detonate the first one?

Fairfield/Boylston<-----200 ft------bomb 2 at Forum<--------550 ft------bomb 1 at finish line
Doesn't look like the black hat to me. The guy looks different and I see a red jacket. :shrug:
Yeah, the picture was discussed a few days ago, when they released the pictures of the bombers. I questioned the path that the brothers took as they entered the marathon area. I also pointed out that it would have been difficult for the older brother to put the pack down and move to the other side of the second bomb site before he detonated. I would guess that they left the area separately. Which was my point. Why did they walk so close together as they entered the area. Seems like a mistake. Not knowing what video or picture evidence the FBI had of the 1st bomb site, it may have been tougher to identify the 1st suspect, had they not walked around the corner together in the FBI video.
I don't think they cared about being identified. The younger one was wearing his hat backwards not trying to disguise himself at all.
 
iStalking White Hat's twitter led me to a couple of friends of his who are still defending him - Troy Crossley and Junes Umarov. Junes is a fellow Chechen who seems like he was with White Hat on a night (March 15) that bombs were set off in Hanover.

troy ‏@TroyCrossley 20 Mar

@J_tsar yo i heard u n @xXjungaXx were poppen fireworks

Expand

Jahar Jahar ‏@J_tsar 20 Mar

@TroyCrossley @xxjungaxx yea cuddi, we done did it. I told him to hit yu up but the bird abstained from doing so
ask these yokels if their friend didn't do it why did he go on the run, shoot at cops and throw explosives when cops tried to arrest him? :loco:

 
iStalking White Hat's twitter led me to a couple of friends of his who are still defending him - Troy Crossley and Junes Umarov. Junes is a fellow Chechen who seems like he was with White Hat on a night (March 15) that bombs were set off in Hanover.

troy ‏@TroyCrossley 20 Mar

@J_tsar yo i heard u n @xXjungaXx were poppen fireworks

Expand

Jahar Jahar ‏@J_tsar 20 Mar

@TroyCrossley @xxjungaxx yea cuddi, we done did it. I told him to hit yu up but the bird abstained from doing so
ask these yokels if their friend didn't do it why did he go on the run, shoot at cops and throw explosives when cops tried to arrest him? :loco:
I've yet to see either of these guys post "They were huge fans of marathon racing and that's why they packed such heavy backpacks to enjoy the day there".
 
iStalking White Hat's twitter led me to a couple of friends of his who are still defending him - Troy Crossley and Junes Umarov. Junes is a fellow Chechen who seems like he was with White Hat on a night (March 15) that bombs were set off in Hanover.

troy ‏@TroyCrossley 20 Mar

@J_tsar yo i heard u n @xXjungaXx were poppen fireworks

Expand

Jahar Jahar ‏@J_tsar 20 Mar

@TroyCrossley @xxjungaxx yea cuddi, we done did it. I told him to hit yu up but the bird abstained from doing so
ask these yokels if their friend didn't do it why did he go on the run, shoot at cops and throw explosives when cops tried to arrest him? :loco:
I've yet to see either of these guys post "They were huge fans of marathon racing and that's why they packed such heavy backpacks to enjoy the day there".
Gotta be a better res pic of this:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BIRa50jCEAAS4hT.jpg:large

The good thing about these tweets is that (hopefully) the FBI will be all over these guys defending the bombers.

ETA _ I found this: http://planet.infowars.com/worldnews/usnews/craft-international-boston-marathon-false-flag-suspects-further-exposed

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top