• Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.

Bombing in Boston, WTF?

So lets get this straight......if I understand correctly.....the police should have driven up and down the streets asking the bomber to come out of hiding so they could arrest him over their loudspeakers and maybe hope to catch a glimpse of him sneaking away? .

Who said anything about that?

I'm talking about extracting people at gun point out of their home and just waltzing right on in. You can go door to door and chit chat and maybe do a quick scan of what is visible, if somebody is in the middle of a hostage situation then you will be able to tell if they are in a distressed state. Even just contact (or lack of) with families and neighbors would give away anomalies and give the authorities leads.

The TSA does what it needs to do, the Patriot Act does what it needs to do, NDAA does what it needs to do etc.... He who trades liberty for safety deserves neither. I know it's a worn out quote but highly relevant.

xB1tdaE.jpg


peekaboo!
 
Last edited:
.....and the trained swat teams in this case did exactly what they needed to do. One bad guy dead, one bad guy in custody...hopefully getting all and any pertinent information water boarded and beaten out of him before he gets exterminated like the p.o.s. that he is.
 
.....and the trained swat teams in this case did exactly what they needed to do. One bad guy dead, one bad guy in custody...hopefully getting all and any pertinent information water boarded and beaten out of him before he gets exterminated like the p.o.s. that he is.

Thats fine if that's the way you see it. Just admit that you think it's okay to erode liberty in the name of safety. Maybe not entirely but you clearly see it as an essential function of government at this point.

"We live in a complex word where you’re going to have to have a level of security greater than you did back in the olden days, if you will. And our laws and our interpretation of the Constitution, I think, have to change.”
-Bloomberg
 
Last edited:
Imposing a personal definition of "liberty" on someone else is a good way to actually take it away from them.
 
The Elvis impersonating RICIN suspect was released today.
 
When the police are searching for a terrorist in a small area I do not have a problem with them not having to go to the judge for a search warrant to search every house until they find him.....which they did very quickly at that. I think you think you are smarter than you are with your silly quotes from a moron like Bloomberg, and passing judgement on what I feel about our government and personal liberties or lack of as you would have it, based on the one scenario we are talking about here.

As far as the police being on edge and having drawn guns......you did notice in your infinite wisdom that it was a special tactical unit trained in a military style right? Pretty good also that from probably 75 feet away that the person holding and pointing something through a window didn't get shot, but rather the officer was able to quickly distinguish what was actually being pointed his direction after having been shot at hours earlier.
 
lol, the cowards surface after news comes out. I was up late listening to the live news, trying to provide info to Boston primers who were probably asleep while this was happening. Where were these guys? Who knows. .

Cowards eh? I was busy on vacation enjoying myself and taking care of mine.

I am kind of glad you guys are outing yourselves. Celebrating that these people are Muslim when we should all be mourning the tragedy. It's better that you reveal yourself to the public for who you are, instead of hiding behind closed doors..

Pot calling the kettle black here. YOU are lamenting these people ARE muslim when YOU should be mourning the tragedy. I'm glad you've revealed yourself to the public who you are. It doesn't take too many brain cells to figure out that a terrorist attack of this nature is probably the cause of radical muslims. Since evidence is of the contrary of what you think- you do yourself and your country a disservice to think otherwise.

BTW Silverstone, wtf does affirmative action have anything to do with anything? Or BET for that matter?..

You mentioned 'systemic racism'. I gave you a laundry list of systemically racist programs that our (in your words) 'racist' country promotes. Why are you surprised? You asked for it.

Maybe your own actions (e.g. that asinine post) should shed some light on the systemic racism you are so blind to.

Now i'm asinine? Aren't you the ass who asked about systemic racism then asked why I posted a list of systemically racist government programs? Angry much man? :wink:

But to answer your questions, I am not an underrepresented minority, I do not watch BET, I am not a Muslim, I am not Middle Eastern, I am not Brown, and I am not even a Liberal. Furthermore, I am AGAINST affirmative action or any discrimination based on race--much like your comment about BET, EAC's commentS about brown people, etc. But thanks for trying. And thanks for the heads up about who you are. :rolleyes:

Good for you since there is no such thing as an 'underrepresented' minority in this country whatever that may mean. This is probably the most sane thing you've said. In fact, most immigrants who come to this country legally do very, very well.

Furthermore who said anything about your being brown, liberal or anything of the like? Surely not me. You are drawing some pretty sensitive and presumptuous conclusions from my very brief and concise- and only post until now- in this thread. Guilty conscience, my friend?

Let me teach you a lesson. Go have a stiff drink. You deserve it after stressing so much over race and politics in this post.

Sincerely yours,

A brown man.

photo1_zps36d7035a.jpg
 
I wish I could get away with wearing a pink shirt...
 
Cowards eh? I was busy on vacation enjoying myself and taking care of mine.



Pot calling the kettle black here. YOU are lamenting these people ARE muslim when YOU should be mourning the tragedy. I'm glad you've revealed yourself to the public who you are. It doesn't take too many brain cells to figure out that a terrorist attack of this nature is probably the cause of radical muslims. Since evidence is of the contrary of what you think- you do yourself and your country a disservice to think otherwise.



You mentioned 'systemic racism'. I gave you a laundry list of systemically racist programs that our (in your words) 'racist' country promotes. Why are you surprised? You asked for it.



Now i'm asinine? Aren't you the ass who asked about systemic racism then asked why I posted a list of systemically racist government programs? Angry much man? :wink:



Good for you since there is no such thing as an 'underrepresented' minority in this country whatever that may mean. This is probably the most sane thing you've said. In fact, most immigrants who come to this country legally do very, very well.

Furthermore who said anything about your being brown, liberal or anything of the like? Surely not me. You are drawing some pretty sensitive and presumptuous conclusions from my very brief and concise- and only post until now- in this thread. Guilty conscience, my friend?

Let me teach you a lesson. Go have a stiff drink. You deserve it after stressing so much over race and politics in this post.

Sincerely yours,

A brown man.

photo1_zps36d7035a.jpg

lol. are all of you still in here?

I won't even bother breaking it down for you. I think you were the one who said you won't bother going back to read through everything. You were right. You didn't read. Try it some time.

Not only have you tried to mix and match my posts in response to different people (the posts that weren't censored anyways), you are trying to gleam over your own racist comments about BET, affirmative action, etc. by playing them off as nothing more but a response to my using the term "systemic racism?" What on earth does BET have to do with ANYTHING? lol...exactly. It's astounding that you, along with others, bring up race and politics like you do, and then try to blame it on other people. I never brought up BET, affirmative action, Al Sharpton (this was some other guy's comment), or anything of that matter.

It's CLEAR AS DAY that that doesn't make ANY sense whatsoever. Just go back and read the posts. It wasn't an attempt to address anything. It was merely a pathetic attempt to fallaciously lump me into a category of people in a weak ad hominem attack. You had nothing for my argument, so you try to attack the person behind the argument. And you are still trying to do that.

But whatever makes you feel better.

You can go back to page 1. And if you try reading (I know it's hard, but try, champ) you will see that:

1. My concern has always been with the victims, the safety of people in Boston (my family in Brighton, which is 2 mi away from Watertown), and catching the perps (the actual perps based on more than profiling)
2. Some other people brought race and politics into the discussion, and I interjected when other primers were being called out on their race and/or when people started getting offensive. If you want to know who even brought the article that spurred that whole conversation, it was your pal EAC linking to that article when it really had nothing to do with anything here. He was also the first person to bring the Ricin issue into the thread, again, when it didn't really have anything to do with the Boston bombings. He's also that straight up asked another primer whether he was "Brown." So don't try to pin any of that on me.
3. Maybe you also missed the other post that was deleted here, but I've made it clear that we should be looking for the perps based on more than phenotype (e.g. backpack straps, location relative to the bombing). Other people here falsely pointed their finger at lots of innocent people.
4. I have no idea why people are still in here gladhandling each other about cats and pink shirts, but good for you guys. After the imminent danger ended to my family and Boston primers, I decided to go on with my life.

It was a nice attempt at backpeddling, and might work with your pals here. But the proof is in the posts themselves.

BTW, you were the one that brought up affirmative action. In case you have no idea how that program works, it's based on giving underrepresented minorities a boost in admissions/hiring. But nice try on that fallacious impeachment of my comment.

Again. If you actually read the posts, you might have better luck arguing against them.

And if you actually read mine, you probably wouldn't even be arguing with them. But who knows. There is a fun bunch in here.

Good luck, and enjoy yourselves, gentlemen.
 
Last edited:
lol. are all of you still in here?

I won't even bother breaking it down for you. I think you were the one who said you won't bother going back to read through everything. You were right. You didn't read. Try it some time.

Not only have you tried to mix and match my posts in response to different people (the posts that weren't censored anyways), you are trying to gleam over your own racist comments about BET, affirmative action, etc. by playing them off as nothing more but a response to my using the term "systemic racism?" What on earth does BET have to do with ANYTHING? lol...exactly. It's astounding that you, along with others, bring up race and politics like you do, and then try to blame it on other people. I never brought up BET, affirmative action, Al Sharpton (this was some other guy's comment), or anything of that matter.

It's CLEAR AS DAY that that doesn't make ANY sense whatsoever. Just go back and read the posts. It wasn't an attempt to address anything. It was merely a pathetic attempt to fallaciously lump me into a category of people in a weak ad hominem attack. You had nothing for my argument, so you try to attack the person behind the argument. And you are still trying to do that.

But whatever makes you feel better.

You can go back to page 1. And if you try reading (I know it's hard, but try, champ) you will see that:

1. My concern has always been with the victims, the safety of people in Boston (my family in Brighton, which is 2 mi away from Watertown), and catching the perps (the actual perps based on more than profiling)
2. Some other people brought race and politics into the discussion, and I interjected when other primers were being called out on their race and/or when people started getting offensive. If you want to know who even brought the article that spurred that whole conversation, it was your pal EAC linking to that article when it really had nothing to do with anything here. He was also the first person to bring the Ricin issue into the thread, again, when it didn't really have anything to do with the Boston bombings. He's also that straight up asked another primer whether he was "Brown." So don't try to pin any of that on me.
3. Maybe you also missed the other post that was deleted here, but I've made it clear that we should be looking for the perps based on more than phenotype (e.g. backpack straps, location relative to the bombing). Other people here falsely pointed their finger at lots of innocent people.
4. I have no idea why people are still in here gladhandling each other about cats and pink shirts, but good for you guys. After the imminent danger ended to my family and Boston primers, I decided to go on with my life.

It was a nice attempt at backpeddling, and might work with your pals here. But the proof is in the posts themselves.

BTW, you were the one that brought up affirmative action. In case you have no idea how that program works, it's based on giving underrepresented minorities a boost in admissions/hiring. But nice try on that fallacious impeachment of my comment.

Again. If you actually read the posts, you might have better luck arguing against them.

And if you actually read mine, you probably wouldn't even be arguing with them. But who knows. There is a fun bunch in here.

Good luck, and enjoy yourselves, gentlemen.

Man..go get that drink as Silverstone suggested. Life is too short.

As for calling out people for mix and matching posts, I'M the one who said I wasn't about to go back and read every detail of this mess. So there goes your theory that he hasn't read anything you wrote, but whatever sounds good right..

Meanwhile calling people cowards and claiming that you've outed them... wow.
 
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Wpu6_kArb9U" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

With every attack there's more going on than meets the eye - (9/11 etc) and unfortunately we'll never know *exactly* what happened....

Not even remotely interested in jumping into the flame wars in this thread but this video does bring up some valid questions.....
 
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Wpu6_kArb9U" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

With every attack there's more going on than meets the eye - (9/11 etc) and unfortunately we'll never know *exactly* what happened....

Not even remotely interested in jumping into the flame wars in this thread but this video does bring up some valid questions.....

Factually incorrect (i.e. purposely misleading) in several areas. That being said I still watched the entire video; the martial law enacted in Boston and storming of homes without warrants makes me very uneasy though.
 
Last edited:
Like other primer as stated " different strokes for different folks" . One , getting warrants to search every houses in the whole city would take forever. Two, you want to catch the guy as soon as possible before he has the chance to either bail out of the city or he might take another hostage and he/she might get killed. Then other folks would scream at the law enforcers for doing a poor job and not protecting the innocent people. Everyone can argue whichever way....." Different strokes for different folks."
 
Last edited:
Any criminal lawyers here to comment?
I always thought in the criminal arena probable cause is important in two respects. First, police must possess probable cause before they may search a person or a person's property, and they must possess it before they may arrest a person w/ or w/o a warrant. Second, in most criminal cases the court must find that probable cause exists to believe that the defendant committed the crime before the defendant may be prosecuted.
 
Any criminal lawyers here to comment?
I always thought in the criminal arena probable cause is important in two respects. First, police must possess probable cause before they may search a person or a person's property, and they must possess it before they may arrest a person w/ or w/o a warrant. Second, in most criminal cases the court must find that probable cause exists to believe that the defendant committed the crime before the defendant may be prosecuted.

I don't believe Marshal Law was ever explicitly ordered or announced. Does anyone else know this?

If not, then all those cases of forced entry without a warrant would appear to be illegal.

-J
 
Who said anything about that?

I'm talking about extracting people at gun point out of their home and just waltzing right on in. You can go door to door and chit chat and maybe do a quick scan of what is visible, if somebody is in the middle of a hostage situation then you will be able to tell if they are in a distressed state. Even just contact (or lack of) with families and neighbors would give away anomalies and give the authorities leads.

The TSA does what it needs to do, the Patriot Act does what it needs to do, NDAA does what it needs to do etc.... He who trades liberty for safety deserves neither. I know it's a worn out quote but highly relevant.

xB1tdaE.jpg


peekaboo!

dude in the humvee pointing a gun at u..... :eek: :eek: this makes me feel like it was all ready to go as a training exercise - not saying the attack was fake but it gives the authorities to roll out their entire militarized arsenal and shut down an entire city...... to condition ppl to think that its normal and to "OBEY"......
 
Last edited:
I personally wouldn't have a problem with an unwarranted search in this particular incident. While some may feel their rights are violated, and I'm not here to argue that, but here we have a terrorist suspect on the loose with the good possibility of more explosives. Time is a huge factor here with a very small window of opportunity to find him in the shortest amount of time. I think extreme situations call for extreme measures sometimes. I think they did what they thought was best for the community. Again, this is just my personal .02. I'm not debating anyones rights or wrongs.
 
So, if this was such an extraordinary situation why didn't the police and courts arrange for an extraordinary work-around to get warrants in minutes. Could have been done. It's not like the cops saw the suspect run into a particular house.
 
Back
Top