Boston Explosions.

[PreachersWife2004]

Once you decide to kill people, you don't deserve any more rights.

But that's not how we operate. We work on an innocent until proven guilty ideology, and what you're proposing is that just because YOU think someone is guilty, they don't deserve that right. God forbid your ideology was ever in place and someone accused you of a crime they know for certain you committed.

 

[variant]

Once you decide to kill people, you don't deserve any more rights.

Trials are for determining guilt based upon something other than a mob mentality, they are rights that everyone deserves.

Victims don't get trials and that is sad, but the trials are because we, all of us, deserve a just society.

 

[I Eat Pie]

I'm not opposing the trials. I'm opposing the jailing of these kinds of criminals. Let them have their trial, but once they're found guilty, they should be put to death.

 

[USincognito]

This is obviously the work of the Jews. Why else would Steven Spielberg have been there?
Google image search result.

Well then no matter why they did not kill many people still does not matter if that was their goal. Now if their goal was just to kill people any number of people or to make a point they were successful on both counts.

While it's an axiomatic definition, terrorism is defined as acts meant to terrorize. Than including bombing attacks that merely blow up empty buildings to those which cause mass casualties. The goal of the bomber was clearly to kill and maim, but the primary goal was to effect the psyche of all Americans.

 

[QueSi]

This is obviously the work of the Jews. Why else would Steven Spielberg have been there?
Google image search result.

While it's an axiomatic definition, terrorism is defined as acts meant to terrorize. Than including bombing attacks that merely blow up empty buildings to those which cause mass casualties. The goal of the bomber was clearly to kill and maim, but the primary goal was to effect the psyche of all Americans.

Acts meant to terrorize...like the news outlets?

 

[QueSi]

Once you decide to kill people, you don't deserve any more rights.

...once they're found guilty, they should be put to death.

Hmm...so....

 

[I Eat Pie]

So....

 

[AceHero]

...So your argument contradicts itself on a ridiculous level.

 

[BlandOatmeal]

At the Atlantic, security expert Bruce Schneier has a short but compelling article on how urgent it is that we not react to this Boston attack irrationally or with exaggerated fear, and that we particularly remain vigilant against government attempts to exploit fear to impose all new rights-reducing measures. He notes in particular how the more unusual an event is (such as this sort of attack on US soil), the more our brains naturally exaggerate its significance and frequency (John Cole makes a similar point).

In sum, even if the perpetrators of Monday's attack in Boston turn out to be politically motivated and subscribers to an anti-US ideology, it will still be a very rare event, one that poses far less danger to Americans than literally countless other threats. The most important lesson of the excesses arising from the 9/11 attacks should be this one: that the dangers of overreacting and succumbing to irrational fear are far, far greater than any other dangers posed by these type of events.

The Boston bombing produces familiar and revealing reactions | Glenn Greenwald | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

Hi, Muslimah

I second Wing in agreeing with you. There are three groups that stand to profit from this disaster:

1. The press, who are having a heyday
2. The US Government, the largest and wealthiest employer in the country, which can make big bucks with gun control, Homeland Security and a whole raft of expensive bureacracies
3. Al Qaeda, which can pin yet another "campaign ribbon" to its chest in a society that judges one's power by the strength of his enemies.

I would like the perpetrators to be Al Qaeda; because if our own government is stooping to false flag operations like this, we are in deep doo-doo.

Homeland security jobs available:

• Risk Manager (Senior) - PEO C3T
• Intelligence Analysts with Cyber focus
• Supervisory Public Affairs Specialist, GS-1035-15
• ISR Mission Management Liaison Officer Job
• Law Enforcement Instructor Job
• Princ Subject Matter Expert
• External Affairs Specialist. (Multilingual CORE)
• Materials Examiner and Identifier
• Security Specialist (Port), GS-0080-12
• Intergovernmental Affairs Specialist GS-0301-13/14
• INTELLIGENCE TRAINING SPECIALIST 3 Job
• Logistics Analyst
• Proposal Manager
• Training Center Operations Manager - Tucson, AZ
• Symbology Analyst
• ...
• many more

 

[AceHero]

Why? Would you not be happy to find them dead? honest question.

We can't question the dead. If we find the cowards alive we can find out who they are, why they did what they did and maybe who else was involved. Not that we can't potentially find these things out via investigation later but it'd be much easier if we have a living prisoner to interrogate.

Agreed. Whoever did this must be held accountable. Escaping with death is too easy of a punishment.

While I can understand the psychological need to try and make sense of what seems to be a very senseless act, I don't understand how some people can be so quick to jump to very specific conspiracy theories.

I think some people just want them to be true.

Just logged in to say I was looking forward to all the zany conspiracy theories this would surely generate, but I see i'm already late. What DID conspiracy nutters do before the internet?

The John Birch Society. Eisenhower was a Communist, fluoridation was a Soviet plot. Things haven't changed. People have just gotten louder.

Until I saw people here calling Israel a terrorist state, and news reports trying to link the bombing to "right wing crazies" (translation: Christians)

Christians are "right wing crazies?"

 

[BlandOatmeal]

Eilat under rocket attack from Sinai
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report April 17, 2013, 9:46 AM (GMT+02:00)

Three rocket warning sirens sounded in Eilat Wednesday morning, April 17, alerting Israel’s southernmost town to falling Grad rockets fired from Sinai. One of the three exploded outside a residential district in the town. There is no immediate word on casualties. On April 4, debkafile reported that southern Israel had been placed on alert on intelligence that al Qaeda cells in Egyptian Sinai and the Gaza Strip had finished preparations for launching a multiple terror attack on targets in the southern Israeli Negev and Eilat. Two Iron Dome missile interceptors were deployed near Eilat against attacks from Sinai and Ashkelon further north in case Salafist Bedouin associated with al Qaeda started firing rockets.

According to our sources, the attack on Eilat Wednesday was the opening salvo of a broad al Qaeda terror offensive against southern Israel...

-- Eilat under rocket attack from Sinai

Just coincidence, of course. We know that all these attacks were actually lone wolf operations by disgruntled postal workers. Yesterday's Al Qaeda (oops) postal worker attack was in Iraq -- 55 killed. There really is no such thing as "Al Qaeda". Right?

Oliver North: Boston Horror 'A New Norm' for the Nation

Tuesday, 16 Apr 2013 02:59 PM
By Bill Hoffmann and Kathleen Walter

"Col. Oliver North says the deadly bombings at the Boston Marathon unfortunately represent “a new normal’’ as bloodthirsty terrorists continue to plot deadly attacks against the United States.

“'Yes, this is the new normal. This is the new world disorder that we’re at,’’ North, a decorated former Marine lieutenant colonel and founder of Freedom Alliance, told Newsmax TV...'"

-- Oliver North: Boston Horror 'A New Norm' for the Nation

I tend to agree -- postal terror, and homeland security... here to stay.

 

[BlandOatmeal]

Boston Marathon blasts: FBI clueless about who did it and why
Associated Press : Boston, Wed Apr 17 2013, 09:46 hrs

Clueless
​

-- Boston Marathon blasts: FBI clueless about who did it and why - Indian Express

Why am I not surprised? When did my ennui start? 9/11? Benghazi?

 

[Oafman]

Once you decide to kill people, you don't deserve any more rights.

they should be put to death.

Sounds like you've done yourself out of your rights IEP

 

[Blackwater Babe]

Once you decide to kill people, you don't deserve any more rights.

How do you know if someone's killed anyone without giving them a fair trial?

 

[ChristOurCaptain]

How do you know if someone's killed anyone without giving them a fair trial?

That question is usually, and in this case certainly, a good one. However, there are cases where the matter of guilt is not in question. Breivik, Stalin, Hitler (the last two of which were never brought to justice), etc.

 

[ChristOurCaptain]

Victims don't get trials and that is sad, but the trials are because we, all of us, deserve a just society.

A just society doesn't reward proven (beyond doubt) murder with free room and board.
Agreed: Justice must be done, that means that guilt must be proven.

...So your argument contradicts itself on a ridiculous level.

No, it doesn't. Not unless you also believe that judges who sentence people to jail should also be locked up themselves.
Utter nonsense.

 

[ChristOurCaptain]

And I invite people into dialogues with me all the time. At the university I went to, I was part of a Muslim group that had a table set out each week to talk about my religion. I got into very, very long conversations with religious Christians who were trying to disprove my religion (which always fails).

(bolding mine)
Let me guess: They "failed" because you refused to talk about anything once they didn't acknowledge that the koran was the words of God supposedly given to the pedophile merchant?

The only thing that was off-limits was if they were using language that a.) was insulting and b.) could've been said much more politely which would show sincerity in talking to me.

Again: Your type (The "oh woe is me! I'm a muslim and therefore a poor innocent victim of evil, evil westerners and JEWS!"-type, not muslims as such) considers not agreeing with islam's claims "insulting".

If it reached that point, I would simply say that we were done until they wanted to come back and speak more respectfully. And I believe we have reached this point.

Heh...the MO is clear and I've seen it a hundred times before: Try to shame people using "western guilt", and when that doesn't work, throw a tantrum. When THAT doesn't work, announce loudly that you're leaving the discussion........but isn't in reality.

So Israel not only gets control of another land, they get control of international waters and can tell people what to do there?

It is perfectly legal to stop an attempt at running a blockade, even in international waters. That's what Israel did. Nothing more, nothing less.

Secondly, the Palestinians would not shoot rockets if a.) Israel did not take the land from them in the first place

But Gaza isn't "taken". There isn't a single Israeli anywhere in Gaza. Care to try again?

b.) hadn't created unbearable living conditions and

Hamas does a pretty good job of that without any help from Israel. Israel is the one who supplies Gaza with pretty much everything it gets. That the Arabs are incapable of maintaining a stable society, is hardly Israel's fault.

c.) (ties in with b) hadn't enforced a blockade designed to starve the Gazans.

Designed to hinder Hamas' ability to attack Israel, which it has been doing constantly for nigh-on 8 years, since Israel withdrew from Gaza.

Anyways, I'm not really interested in a discussion about Palestine. I have discovered that there is no reasoning with the staunchest Zionists, no matter how compelling the evidence. All that results in is me being exhausted and a whole bunch of hours wasted.

The evidence is strongly against Pallywood, and there's a better chance of having an intelligent conversation with a pig than with a Pallywood-propagandist. However, Pallywood does seem to have a better PR agent, as most do not seem to completely reject the bovine manure it puts out.

 

[LoveBeingAMuslimah]

(bolding mine)
Let me guess: They "failed" because you refused to talk about anything once they didn't acknowledge that the koran was the words of God

No, they failed because their arguments could be answered. They were typical arguments. Plus, they could never make us understand the trinity. The most beautiful and most important thing about Islaam is how monotheistic it is and how it doesn't ascribe to God things that are not befitting.

Anyways, I only replied to this portion because I wanted to clear it up since it's about my religion, but otherwise I'm done with your post.

 

[Oafman]

It is perfectly legal to stop an attempt at running a blockade, even in international waters.

Not if the bloackade is illegal.

Carry on.

 

[ChristOurCaptain]

Not if the bloackade is illegal.

Carry on.

True, but how that applies to this case, I'm not sure of. Israel's blockade of Gaza is not illegal.