Two Explosions at the Boston Marathon

kbot · Post by **kbot** » 05-06-2013 09:00 AM

http://isbcc.org/al-marhama/

Interesting site. This group is the Islamic Center for Massachusetts, and THEY HAVE an Islamic cemetary that mees all the needs of the Islamic community. So, surely, they can accomodate "the suspect" his familyand their funeral needs.

You'd think, right?

Not so fast...... They have a link to issues regarding the Boston area bombings, but, if you click on it, you get nada......

Seems to me that the Islamic Society of all people would be the group rushing forward to provide funeral services acording to their beliefs.

Post by **Fan** » 05-06-2013 09:13 AM

kbot wrote: Excuse me, but these people came here and attacked people here. They committed a terrorist act. As far as I'm concerned, once they did THAT, all bets were off. if they had stayed and lived here, and were law-abiding, that would be one thing. No on forced them to come here or STAY here for that matter. That is one of this country's most beautiful things - if you don't like it here, LEAVE!!!!! No one is forcing anyone to stay. As it is, even this "suspect's" own mosque is moving away from him as fast and as far as they can. No one even wants to allow him to be buried in their community. Seems that you're the only one defending this person.

Yes, indirectly, by pointing out that your constitution guarantees rights to individuals - yourself included, I am defending someone accused (not found guilty, and therefore innocent) of a criminal act. You should be defending their rights as well, because it just so happens that those are also your own rights. Seems like I am the only one who understands the foundation of your country, and I don't even live there.

HB3 · Post by **HB3** » 05-06-2013 09:27 AM

kbot wrote: http://isbcc.org/al-marhama/

Interesting site. This group is the Islamic Center for Massachusetts, and THEY HAVE an Islamic cemetary that mees all the needs of the Islamic community. So, surely, they can accomodate "the suspect" his familyand their funeral needs.

You'd think, right?

Not so fast...... They have a link to issues regarding the Boston area bombings, but, if you click on it, you get nada......

Seems to me that the Islamic Society of all people would be the group rushing forward to provide funeral services acording to their beliefs.

I'm assuming they don't want to give the impression they're burying this guy as a martyr.

Doka · Post by **Doka** » 05-06-2013 10:19 AM

I can see where the confusion arises. These "people" that have attacked America in the past have always been tried by a Military Tribunal. In my opinion that is where these "actions" belong. Obama changed the game with the Fort Hood shooter, they, with "slight" of hand have been turned loose into our American Judicial system. They don't belong there. More "Divide and Conquer" and it is working like a dream for O. Actually , a brilliant ploy by the regime!

Doka · Post by **Doka** » 05-06-2013 10:36 AM

Our Constution has been so screwed, we don't even know that it is just about gone.

Doka · Post by **Doka** » 05-06-2013 10:56 AM

The bombings where an "act of war" on America and it's citizens. If you or I did that deed, we have NO rights! We would be giving up those rights, through our horrible act. And we would be gone, gone,gone.

Riddick · Post by **Riddick** » 05-06-2013 11:13 AM

Fan wrote: your constitution guarantees rights to individuals

http://youtu.be/m9-R8T1SuG4?t=2m33s

kbot · Post by **kbot** » 05-06-2013 11:24 AM

Fan wrote: Yes, indirectly, by pointing out that your constitution guarantees rights to individuals - yourself included, I am defending someone accused (not found guilty, and therefore innocent) of a criminal act. You should be defending their rights as well, because it just so happens that those are also your own rights. Seems like I am the only one who understands the foundation of your country, and I don't even live there.

And this leads to the issue of when these rights apply. Under Bush 43, peopole who engaged in these practices (terroist activities) were handed over to the military for interrogation and trial. Handing them over to thecivilian courts leads to what we are experiencing.

I think that one needs to ask - how many terrorist acts were commited by American citizens? A handful? Of these, how many were directly linked to overseas conflicts in terms of their reason for commiting such acts?

I think that there is a line between domestic terroirsm perpetrated by, say The Weather Underground, the Unibomber, People Inc, etc and Islamic terrorism, and based on those differences, they should be handled differently. Radical Ismalic terrorsm has a religiously-based, foreign-focused element to them, and based on those criteria, I feel anyway, these should be handled differently.

kbot · Post by **kbot** » 05-06-2013 11:27 AM

Doka wrote: I can see where the confusion arises. These "people" that have attacked America in the past have always been tried by a Military Tribunal. In my opinion that is where these "actions" belong. Obama changed the game with the Fort Hood shooter, they, with "slight" of hand have been turned loose into our American Judicial system. They don't belong there. More "Divide and Conquer" and it is working like a dream for O. Actually , a brilliant ploy by the regime!

That's the issue exactly. These acts occured because of what is happening overseas. Either our military handles it or the UN. I'll take my changces with the military courts. The World Court would screw this up about as much as Obama has....

kbot · Post by **kbot** » 05-06-2013 11:34 AM

Riddick wrote: http://youtu.be/m9-R8T1SuG4?t=2m33s

Some differences between the Carlin/ POW issue and this issue - while the Japanese citizens didn't commit any acts against the US prior to their being arrested, these two "suspects", appear to have. So, there is already probable cause. Subsequent investigations seem to bear this out, Their own e-mails and web browsing history seems to at least indicate that they were active in this activity. None of this appears to have been the acse with the Japanese internments. That was based on widespread fear and prejudices. We pretty much have these "suspects" on tape.

Riddick · Post by **Riddick** » 05-06-2013 12:03 PM

Rather than as a direct comparison, my response to Fan's post was aimed at the idea of constitutional "guarantees"....

From Carlin's perspective of we don't have rights so much as privileges, so much as you're guaranteed a fair trial? If the government's out to get you you can know how it's gonna turn out.

Doka · Post by **Doka** » 05-06-2013 12:23 PM

If the government's out to get you you can know how it's gonna turn out.

And if the government is out to Protect you, well we all know how that is going to turn out.................

kbot · Post by **kbot** » 05-06-2013 12:59 PM

Riddick wrote: From Carlin's perspective of we don't have rights so much as privileges, so much as you're guaranteed a fair trial? If the government's out to get you you can know how it's gonna turn out.

Oh, if the government "wants you", you're pretty much cooked....

It all depends on whether the governmet wants you and how they plan to "get" you. As much as I couldn't stand Bush43 most of the time, at least with terrorist suspects we all knew where he stood on the subject. With Obama, you just know the ACLU will get involved and before you know it, the appeals will stretch on for years, even though there's so much evidence connecting "the suspects" with the attacks.

HB3 · Post by **HB3** » 05-06-2013 02:08 PM

Doka wrote: I can see where the confusion arises. These "people" that have attacked America in the past have always been tried by a Military Tribunal. In my opinion that is where these "actions" belong. Obama changed the game with the Fort Hood shooter, they, with "slight" of hand have been turned loose into our American Judicial system. They don't belong there. More "Divide and Conquer" and it is working like a dream for O. Actually , a brilliant ploy by the regime!

Yes, and this is what I was getting at. What do you do when the various loopholes in the American system are deliberately exploited in order to do harm? It's disingenuous to then castigate Americans for somehow denying or discrediting their constitution on that basis -- in fact, it's not only disingenuous, it's the very tactic being exploited by the people causing harm in the first place.

Riddick · Post by **Riddick** » 05-06-2013 08:14 PM

kbot wrote: Oh, if the government "wants you", you're pretty much cooked....

It all depends on whether the governmet wants you and how they plan to "get" you. As much as I couldn't stand Bush43 most of the time, at least with terrorist suspects we all knew where he stood on the subject. With Obama, you just know the ACLU will get involved and before you know it, the appeals will stretch on for years, even though there's so much evidence connecting "the suspects" with the attacks.

Wonder what the administration response would be like if the bombers had been involved with right-wing extremists...? I imagine something no less than along the lines of "No ACLU for you!"

For sure though they'd know they won't die dancing at the end of a rope, hanging'd be too good for 'em.