1. #5321
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya420 View Post
    AP just reported that the suspect has been charged in hospital with 'conspiring to use weapons of mass destruction'. Also AP, Obama stated he will not be treated as an enemy combatant.
    I just read that on a news site as well. Good and sensible choice.

    'Conspiring to use weapons of mass destruction' is weird to me though.

    Can someone comment on:
    - Any bombs in general being considered WMD in MA/Federal law?
    - Intent to cause as much dmg as possible just not having the means for it being considered conspiracy to use WMD?

    I think it is obvious from the bomb types and the damage they caused that they were pretty far off from acquiring ABC material.
    Also wouldn't this mean that any mass killer that used any kind of (set) explosives should be charged with conspiracy to use WMD, since if those crazy people actually had WMD they would have used them to cause more damage?
    Last edited by gend; 2013-04-22 at 07:48 PM.

  2. #5322
    Quote Originally Posted by Istaril View Post
    A weapon of mass destruction?

    Seriously?

    I know there's no 'Official' definition of WMD's, but the US Military definition is:



    Just seems to be an odd choice of sentence. Further more I hear he possibly faces the death penalty. I don't agree with the Death Penalty in the slightest for anyone, but hell, it's almost bound to happen, the bloodlust following this event guarantees it.
    Having fragmentation elements renders the IED that was used as WMD.

  3. #5323
    How much money are we gonna spend on this guy? 9000 public employee's on overtime pay. A huge medical bill to save his life.

    Mass doesnt have a death penalty, so another 60 years to keep him fed and housed.

    Anyone hoping for rehabilitation and an early release? im sure he isnt a "bad person" just fell on hard times (typical sob story people fall for).

  4. #5324
    Quote Originally Posted by chadwix View Post
    How much money are we gonna spend on this guy? 9000 public employee's on overtime pay. A huge medical bill to save his life.

    Mass doesnt have a death penalty, so another 60 years to keep him fed and housed.

    Anyone hoping for rehabilitation and an early release? im sure he isnt a "bad person" just fell on hard times (typical sob story people fall for).
    Could you imagine if they released him?
    People would attack him everywhere he went.

  5. #5325
    Titan Themius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    13,801
    Quote Originally Posted by N-7 View Post
    In that case I get to choose whatever I like right? Then Sandy and Aurora shootings are included.
    The only definitions are "we don't really have one" and "politically or religious"motivated, so no you can't just claim those two are terrorist attacks... The Political and religious motives outweigh the "we don't really have one"

  6. #5326
    Bloodsail Admiral Madkitty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    England
    Posts
    1,007
    Quote Originally Posted by nameuser View Post
    We are talking about killing motivated by an ideology here. Where Islam is WAY ahead of ANY other ideology with 280 mill. Deaths caused by Christianity is around 20 mill. This continues to this day. And still most atheists seem to hate Christianity more than Islam.
    Holocaust: Jews and gypsies(religious), even homosexuals could be classed as that.
    IRA: Part for the 'freedom' and against protestants.
    majority of all european conflicts (england vs span and france was mainly due to catholic vs protestant)

    Fairly sure alot of the islam fuelled deaths are internal (the muslim equivalent of catholic vs protestaant)
    Quote Originally Posted by Windwalker View Post
    - Russia asking the US agencies to investigate the older brother as a possible extremist several years agocleared
    - FBI having investigated them before on their owndid not identify him as a terrorist
    - The older brother becoming radical in the last couple of years as seen in social media and explained by people that knew him being disillustioned doesn't mean he is a terrorist, saying you don't understand them
    - Them being on the place where the explosion happenedjust like hundreds of other people
    - Video showing them putting the backpacks down and leaving video of them there, and with similar bags. Pjoto of them near the area
    - A man who had his legs blow off acting as a witness and helping law enforcement find them witnesses aren't always reliable, due to the trauma he may of merely recognised a person in the crowd
    - Them killing a police officermurder=/= terrorist
    - hijacking a car and running away (unlike other photo suspects that gave themselves in)grand theft, other factors may be why they ran (they had a weapon and paniced with the cop and it all escalated from there
    - Unfinished explosives found in their housepossesion or planning..not yet commited
    - Them shooting at the police, as well as throwing explosives at the policekilled a cops so ofc they would, explosives were different than those used at the marathon
    - Older brother having explosives strapped to his bodyBrother had the bomb, if your brother is arrested for possession of drugs or guns are you guilty of using them as well by association
    - Probably lots of stuff that isn't public
    without the facts there are parts to say that is merel concidence

    Quote Originally Posted by ringpriest View Post
    Read what you wrote yourself to begin with!

    Sure, he can lose his citizenship after a trial. That's been my point all along. You implied above that it can be "taken away" before trial. The law you're quoting agrees with me that losing your citizenship requires a trial.



    (I snipped Section 2384 Title 18, since it has no bearing on the loss of citizenship.)
    If you agree that, while the suspect can lose his citizenship if found guilty, he cannot lose it without a trial, then we're just arguing past each other and can stop throwing law quotes back and forth.
    I think what he is implying is once you charge and try him, and his citizenship is revoked, he will become Russian and wether they can claim custody since he isn't an American then.If the US revoke after he 'serves' his time changes the story.
    Since the russians suspected his brother had links with chechen rebels, an enemy of russia, i can see them requesting him otherwise so they can 'question' him.
    Quote Originally Posted by Themius View Post
    Well... it looks pretty suspicious when one of you gets into a 2 hour long gun fight with police and post suspicious things on twitter and such. Oh and your brother got into a gun fight with police.
    2 Hour gunfight after killing a security guard, Murder.
    Bags they had could be a "coincidence" they were in bags similar to those with the bombs.
    Suspicious? Posting islamic doesn't make you a terrorist, like posting German doesn't make you a nazi, posting like a 'gangsta' doesn't make you one (idiot yes, gangsta no). You need proof they made the bombs, be it explosives at home of prints on the bomb or instructions at home
    Quote Originally Posted by lokithor View Post
    Infracted - forbidden topics
    Traitor is open to debate, technically Russia is his country (since they are linked with Chechen rebel, after 'independence' he would class his country as Chechnya

    May of already been said.

    Chechen blow up school in russia killing hundreds: generic terrorist attack
    Chechen blows up a marathon in US wounding hundreds: fears its a globally supported religious attack

    Tiny over-the-top response, why they target the US because the terror lasts,

  7. #5327
    Quote Originally Posted by Themius View Post
    The only definitions are "we don't really have one" and "politically or religious"motivated, so no you can't just claim those two are terrorist attacks... The Political and religious motives outweigh the "we don't really have one"
    Don't forget the CFR definition that you supplied which contained the phrase "in furtherance of political or social objectives". As I stated above, "social objectives" is so vague that it could mean anything.

  8. #5328
    Quote Originally Posted by lockedout View Post
    Could you imagine if they released him?
    People would attack him everywhere he went.
    Peoples attention span is very short. In 30 years nobody will care anymore.
    In germany they recently released domestic terrorists from the 70s. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Army_Faction)

    There was a political discussion if that was the right choice but nobody would 'attack' them. Barely anyone could even recognize them.

  9. #5329
    Quote Originally Posted by gend View Post
    Peoples attention span is very short. In 30 years nobody will care anymore.

    In germany they recently released domestic terrorists from the 70s. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Army_Faction)

    There was a political discussion if that was the right choice but nobody would 'attack' them. Barely anyone could even recognize them.
    news still covers every time charles manson is up for another parole hearing. even if people forget the media will be there to remind them
    Quote Originally Posted by TradewindNQ View Post
    The fucking Derpship has crashed on Herp Island...
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    Meet the new derp.

    Same as the old derp.

  10. #5330
    Quote Originally Posted by Deadvolcanoes View Post
    I'm guessing here, but "conspiring to use a WMD" implies they didn't use one. Perhaps the investigation has turned up the fact that he tried to obtain chemical or nuclear material.
    I think legally it means they're alleging that there was an agreement between two or more people to use a WMD. If you're involved in a conspiracy to do something illegal, you can also be charged and convicted for anything illegal done by any member of the conspiracy in furtherance of the conspiracy. It also changes the evidence rules about hearsay.

    I would assume they'll be charging him with more stuff.
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    This is frankly, really god damn fucking stupid.
    Potato.

  11. #5331
    Quote Originally Posted by belfpala View Post
    I think legally it means they're alleging that there was an agreement between two or more people to use a WMD. If you're involved in a conspiracy to do something illegal, you can also be charged and convicted for anything illegal done by any member of the conspiracy in furtherance of the conspiracy. It also changes the evidence rules about hearsay.

    I would assume they'll be charging him with more stuff.
    They could have also found more things at their home. We also don't know what they used to bomb the police during the confrontation.
    Go Hawks!!!!

  12. #5332
    Scarab Lord ringpriest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Front Range Free Zone
    Posts
    4,448
    Quote Originally Posted by Deadvolcanoes View Post
    I'm guessing here, but "conspiring to use a WMD" implies they didn't use one. Perhaps the investigation has turned up the fact that he tried to obtain chemical or nuclear material.
    Doubtful. More likely, they're just using the government's definition of WMD, which is so overkill its laughable. Besides potato guns, anything with even a few ounces of gunpowder it technically a "Weapon of Mass Destruction" if you try to hurt someone with it. If I put four ounces of black powder substitute in saran wrap and tape it to the end of my nerf gun along with a cap from a kid's cap gun and then shoot it at someone, I've just created a "Weapon of Mass Destruction" in the exact same legal category as the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. <shakes head>

    ---------- Post added 2013-04-23 at 06:24 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Didactic View Post
    Fun fact; laws vary between countries. I happen to agree with the death penalty in some circumstances.
    In theory, I might be able to support the death penalty, but in practice, I'm opposed to it. Between our justice system's "bugs" (prosecutors and police acting in bad faith, honest mistakes, etc), the huge cost of actually executing someone (it's much more expensive than keeping them in prison for life), and the potential to make already violent crimes worse ("Oh crap, someone died during a robbery. Guess the criminals had better kill all the witnesses, since they're already sure to get the death penalty if they get caught") I don't think the death penalty can be justified in the United States today.

  13. #5333
    Quote Originally Posted by Madkitty View Post
    without the facts there are parts to say that is merel concidence
    Your lack of critical thinking is probably related to your poor spelling, though it might be a merel coincidence

  14. #5334
    Titan Themius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    13,801
    Quote Originally Posted by Windwalker View Post
    Your lack of critical thinking is probably related to your poor spelling, though it might be a merel coincidence
    He correctly spelled coincidence the second time. Stop picking on his spelling and grammar it adds nothing to the conversation.

  15. #5335
    The Lightbringer N-7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,574
    Quote Originally Posted by Themius View Post
    The only definitions are "we don't really have one" and "politically or religious"motivated, so no you can't just claim those two are terrorist attacks... The Political and religious motives outweigh the "we don't really have one"
    Why can't I again? Using definitions obtained from your government, they count as such.

  16. #5336
    Titan Themius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    13,801
    Quote Originally Posted by N-7 View Post
    Why can't I again? Using definitions obtained from your government, they count as such.
    If my Government has several definitions but one type of definition is more popular it would make more sense to use that one. There's a reason why when shady hook happened no one on the super long thread said anything about terrorism but once this happened in this forum this was marked as terrorism, the reason is quite simple and you're just arguing for the sake of it now, and it's going nowhere.

  17. #5337
    We could be back to the Iraq scenario here. So how about the following scenarios staring us in the face. What should the United States' course of action be in each one?

    1. We definitively find a link between the bombers and some terrorist training camp / group in Chechnya.

    1a. Russia fully cooperates with our investigation.

    1b. Russia does not fully cooperate with our investigation.

    1c. Russia prevents us from investigating.

    2. We only can reasonably assume based on the intel we gather that the bombers were aided and trained by some group in Chechnya. The intel may be good or bad.

    2a. Russia fully cooperates with our investigation.

    2b. Russia does not fully cooperate with our investigation.

    2c. Russia prevents us from investigating.

    3. We find not even the slightest link between the bombers and any terrorist group in Chechnya.

    For a frame of reference, when dealing with Iraq, Bush faced scenario 2b, and that was over the 1991 cease-fire rules, not bombers. Bush decided that non-compliance with inspections / our investigation was enough to invade to make sure they had no WMDs. The democrats then told some enormous lies and shouted that Bush went to war because he thought they had WMDs, which was never true. Bush invaded Iraq over non-compliance. Finding WMDs didn't matter at that point. Unfortunately, enough of the public bought those lies and that destroyed Bush.

    It will be interesting to see how Russia plays this depending on what evidence comes to light. Russia may be more prone to comply since they have had problems with Chechnya themselves, so we never wind up in scenario 2b.

    I'm afraid that after the lies told by the political left about the Iraq invasion that common sense goes out the window and we take the "wimp clause", deciding to do nothing about Chechnya, even if the strongest links are found.
    Last edited by Grummgug; 2013-04-23 at 12:36 PM.

  18. #5338
    Quote Originally Posted by chadwix View Post
    Mass doesnt have a death penalty, so another 60 years to keep him fed and housed.
    That's why they charged him on federal charges. There is a federal death penalty.

  19. #5339
    Quote Originally Posted by Themius View Post
    He correctly spelled coincidence the second time. Stop picking on his spelling and grammar it adds nothing to the conversation.
    I wasn't picking on his grammar. I was picking on his inability to connect the dots by claiming, that dropping bags at the place of the explosion, having bombs at their house, killing a cop, running from the police and having a history with the FBI is not a mere coincidence that you can blow off. The spelling part was just food coloring.

  20. #5340
    Ok figure its time to post now that ive talked to a few of my Boston police dept buddies. First off all the FBI really dropped the ball here. They knew there was an attack coming which is why there was hightened security. They also knew about the older brother. Under boston pds nose they tried.to arrest the Thursday morning without backup. This from a reliable soirse. They lost them as they bailed. Its the reason why it took so long for the pictures to be released. Next they were not robbing the 7/11 it was just bad timing as someone else was robbing it. The big time gap comes in here with the supposed robbery and the chase. The MIT cop was on campus over seeing the Nuclear power station there. That was their next target. Granted the bombs would have done shit to it but they were trying. They were trying to melt down the power station, reason why hes actually charged with WMD. The FBI failed baddly they knew of immenent danger and did nothing. RIP and may God be with you to the victims but this should never have happened. The FBI majorly fucked this one up.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •