Boston Marathon bombings.......

[Corkey]

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=1&theater

FBI releases photo of suspected Boston bombers. If *you* have any info go to FBI.gov.

[Kobi]

BOSTON—A late-night police chase and shootout has left one marathon bombing suspect dead and another on the run, police here said, as residents of the still-grieving city were ordered by officials to "shelter in place" while the manhunt continues. One police officer was killed and another was seriously wounded during the violent spree.

The Associated Press identified the surviving Boston bomb suspect as Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev, 19, of Cambridge, Mass., and said that the suspects were brothers. The second bombing suspect is Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26, according to NBC News, who was found with an IED on his body. The brothers are of Chechen origin, according to NBC, a volatile part of Russia's North Caucasus.

The suspects' uncle told the local CBS News station that the pair had lived in the country since 2001.

At sunrise, Gov. Deval Patrick ordered a shutdown of all public transit and residents on the edges of Boston to stay indoors as a massive manhunt for the second suspect was underway. The entire city in Boston was under a shelter in place order by late Friday morning.

“This is situation is grave and we are trying to protect the public safety,” said Massachusetts State Police Col. Timothy Alben, who ordered a lockdown of Watertown, Waltham, Belmont, Cambridge, Newton, Allston and Brighton. A no fly zone has been declared over Watertown.


http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/...064355149.html
----------------------------

[Wolfsong]

From one pair of Sox to another.......

Look this not reading him his Miranda rights thing is really bugging me. One of the most difficult things about the responsibility of freedom is living up to your own standards. Although we would prefer this kid's head on a stick, I am telling you that most of us are one color triangle or another away from a public safety exception.

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is a suspect that has not been convicted of anything yet. As an American citizen he is entitled to a fair and impartial trail by a jury of his peers. Authorities have already withdrawn the charges of these brothers robbing the 7/11.


Although I am NOT in favor of letting someone who murdered Americans free....I do however support and defend the Constitution of the United States......that means the kid gets a fair trial. He is still a US citizen. We ought to live by what we fought for. If we don't what's it worth?

[Kobi]

Originally Posted by Wolfsong

From one pair of Sox to another.......

Look this not reading him his Miranda rights thing is really bugging me. One of the most difficult things about the responsibility of freedom is living up to your own standards. Although we would prefer this kid's head on a stick, I am telling you that most of us are one color triangle or another away from a public safety exception.

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is a suspect that has not been convicted of anything yet. As an American citizen he is entitled to a fair and impartial trail by a jury of his peers. Authorities have already withdrawn the charges of these brothers robbing the 7/11.


Although I am NOT in favor of letting someone who murdered Americans free....I do however support and defend the Constitution of the United States......that means the kid gets a fair trial. He is still a US citizen. We ought to live by what we fought for. If we don't what's it worth?

I understand what you are saying. It just isn't that simple anymore. The Obama administration made the rules more flexible when it comes to terrorism suspects. They did it back in 2010.

From the WSJ:

Matthew Miller, a Justice Department spokesman, said the memo ensures that "law enforcement has the ability to question suspected terrorists without immediately providing Miranda warnings when the interrogation is reasonably prompted by immediate concern for the safety of the public or the agents." He said "the threat posed by terrorist organizations and the nature of their attacks—which can include multiple accomplices and interconnected plots—creates fundamentally different public safety concerns than traditional criminal cases."

Attorney General Eric Holder suggested changing the guidelines last year after dust-ups over Miranda's use in two major domestic-terror arrests. The suspect in the Christmas Day 2009 bombing, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, was questioned by FBI agents for less than an hour before being read his rights. Times Square bombing suspect Faisal Shahzad was questioned for three hours.

In both cases, the administration said suspects provided valuable information to the FBI despite being advised of their rights. But the decision nonetheless provoked criticism from Republicans and some Democrats who said an opportunity to gain time-sensitive intelligence was lost.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...LEFTTopStories


And, from the NYT:

WASHINGTON — The Federal Bureau of Investigation has instructed agents to interrogate suspected “operational terrorists” about immediate threats to public safety without advising them of their Miranda rights to remain silent and to have an attorney present.

A three-page F.B.I. memorandum, dated Oct. 21, 2010, also encouraged agents to use a broad interpretation of public safety-related questions. It said that the “magnitude and complexity” of the terrorist threat justified “a significantly more extensive public safety interrogation without Miranda warnings than would be permissible in an ordinary criminal case.”

“Depending on the facts, such interrogation might include, for example, questions about possible impending or coordinated terrorist attacks; the location, nature and threat posed by weapons that might post an imminent danger to the public; and the identities, locations, and activities or intentions of accomplices who may be plotting additional imminent attacks,” the memo said.

In the Miranda case, the Supreme Court ruled that if prosecutors want to use statements made by the defendant while in custody against him, police must have warned him of his rights before those statements were made. The court later created an exception for answers to questions about immediate threats to public safety.


It is a slippery constitutional slope when one has to weigh protecting the public from imminent danger vs. the rights of one person. I don't usually use Star trek quotes in a serious matter but this fits. "Do needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one."

I don't know the answer.

If I am reading the articles correctly, any self incriminating evidence discovered prior to his Miranda rights can not be used against him in a court of law either. So, it potentially makes charging and prosecuting him a tad more difficult.

But, these are the implications that came with the Patriot Act and 9/11. Anyone, citizen or not, suspected of potential terrorist activities or who is thought to have information about such activities are potentially subject to the same actions. Our houses can be searched without our knowledge or a court order, we can be held without charges or an attorney, we can be questioned without the right to know our rights and without the benefits of an attorney etc.

It's disturbing. It was disturbing to see Boston on lockdown. It was disturbing to see armored vehicles and military/law enforcement people with semi automatic weapons flooding the streets of Watertown. It was disturbing to see a swarm of armed people doing house to house searches. It was disturbing to have shootouts in a residential area. It reminded me of something I have seen in footage from Iran/Iraq/Afghanistan.

Is this the price we pay for the illusion of safety? I dunno. Scary and unsettling shit.

This article was interesting and informative as well:

What rights should Dzhokhar Tsarnaev get and why does it matter?

[Wolfsong]

Originally Posted by Kobi

It is a slippery constitutional slope when one has to weigh protecting the public from imminent danger vs. the rights of one person. I don't usually use Star trek quotes in a serious matter but this fits. "Do needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one."

I don't know the answer.

If I am reading the articles correctly, any self incriminating evidence discovered prior to his Miranda rights can not be used against him in a court of law either. So, it potentially makes charging and prosecuting him a tad more difficult.

But, these are the implications that came with the Patriot Act and 9/11. Anyone, citizen or not, suspected of potential terrorist activities or who is thought to have information about such activities are potentially subject to the same actions. Our houses can be searched without our knowledge or a court order, we can be held without charges or an attorney, we can be questioned without the right to know our rights and without the benefits of an attorney etc.

It's disturbing. It was disturbing to see Boston on lockdown. It was disturbing to see armored vehicles and military/law enforcement people with semi automatic weapons flooding the streets of Watertown. It was disturbing to see a swarm of armed people doing house to house searches. It was disturbing to have shootouts in a residential area. It reminded me of something I have seen in footage from Iran/Iraq/Afghanistan.

Is this the price we pay for the illusion of safety? I dunno. Scary and unsettling shit.

Good points all Kobi. I guess my line in the sand is this, and at any point the government takes a constitutional right away from a single person and justifies it under the guise of public safety my hackles raise a bit. All it takes is a single case to set a precedent.

Respectfully and carefully here.....I am going to point out a moment in history. The persecution of the Jews by Nazis did not start with concentration camps.

"Once in power, Hitler moved quickly to end German democracy. He convinced his cabinet to invoke emergency clauses of the constitution that permitted the suspension of individual freedoms of press, speech, and assembly. Special security forces—the Gestapo, the Storm Troopers (SA), and the SS--murdered or arrested leaders of opposition political parties (Communists, socialists, and liberals). The Enabling Act of March 23, 1933--forced through the Reichstag already purged of many political opponents--gave dictatorial powers to Hitler."

"In 1933, new German laws forced Jews out of their civil service jobs, university and law court positions, and other areas of public life. In April 1933, laws proclaimed at Nuremberg made Jews second-class citizens. These Nuremberg Laws defined Jews, not by their religion or by how they wanted to identify themselves, but by the religious affiliation of their grandparents. Between 1937 and 1939, new anti-Jewish regulations segregated Jews further and made daily life very difficult for them. Jews could not attend public schools; go to theaters, cinema, or vacation resorts; or reside or even walk in certain sections of German cities." (My Jewish Learning - 2013)

I am not saying that our government is anything like the Third Reich. I am saying that we as free citizens in a democracy need to be aware when boundaries are crossed, or about to be crossed, so that we don't find ourselves further down this path that anyone ever intended. I have been contemptuous of the Patriot Act since it was first conceived and that is about as close as I come to siding with the ideas of local militia groups. In my opinion it is dangerous to all of us.

[Kobi]

Massachusetts' welfare agency says public interest in case trumps privacy rights

BOSTON —Reversing course once again, Massachusetts' welfare agency made available new details Friday about state benefits received by the family of the Boston bombing suspects, saying public interest in the case trumped the privacy rights of Tamerlan and Dzokhar Tsarnaev.

Questions about the brothers' time on welfare began to surface Wednesday when the Boston Herald reported that they had received benefits and the state confirmed some of the details. But the next day, the department said it had made a mistake and should have refrained from releasing the benefits information because of state and federal privacy rules.

On Friday, however, a letter from the interim commissioner of the state Department of Transitional Assistance, Stacey Monahan, was released to the news media along with an explanation from her that she now believed "the public interest outweighs the privacy interests of Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev in this instance."

Read more: http://www.wcvb.com/news/local/metro...#ixzz2RbPJUCi1

--------------------------------------


I have seen a lot of bizarre things occur under the guise of national security but this has got to be one of most idiotic rationalizations I have ever seen.

[Kobi]

Former GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul has slammed US law enforcement for responding to the Boston Marathon bombing with “police state tactics.”

In a post on the website of libertarian activist Lew Rockwell, Mr. Paul said Monday that the governmental reaction to the tragic explosions was worse than the attack itself. The forced lockdown of much of the Boston area, police riding armored vehicles through the streets, and door-to-door searches without warrants were all reminiscent of a military coup or martial law, Paul added.

“The Boston bombing provided the opportunity for the government to turn what should have been a police investigation into a military-style occupation of an American city,” according to Paul.

Furthermore, this response did not result in the capture of suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, Paul charged. He was discovered hiding in a boat by a private citizen, who called police.

“And he was identified not by government surveillance cameras, but by private citizens who willingly shared their photographs with the police,” Paul wrote on Lew Rockwell’s site.

Yikes. This isn’t going to go down well in Watertown, is it? Citizens there applauded when police finally carted off Tsarnaev alive. The Boston police commissioner told his troops over the radio that “it’s a proud day to be a Boston police officer.” In the wake of the suspect’s capture the media have generally portrayed law enforcement officers as heroes.

But Paul’s contrarian take perhaps should not be surprising. After all, he’s a committed libertarian who at one point in the GOP presidential debates said that the border fence with Mexico might at some point be used to keep US citizens penned in.

And while Paul’s position here is, um, not in the majority, there are other public figures who charge that the Boston response was overkill. In some ways this is one of those points in the circle of American politics were conservative libertarianism and liberal progressivism meet.

The generally left-leaning Guardian columnist Glenn Greenwald, for instance, told PBS host Bill Moyers over the weekend that the public lionization of police in the wake of the Boston bombing isn’t necessarily a good thing.

“The way in which Americans now related to their government, the way in which they get nationalistic pride is through the assertion of this massive military or police force, and very few other things produce that kind of pride,” Greenwald said. “I think [this] shows a lot about our value systems and what the government is failing to do. And that’s the way in which this culture becomes coarsened.”

However, state and local officials have continued to defend their decision to shut down much of Boston for the Tsarnaev manhunt. At the time they did not know whether the suspect had more explosives or fellow conspirators, and they did not want to risk another tragedy.

“I think we did what we should have done and were supposed to do with the always-imperfect information that you have at the time,” Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick (D) said at a news conference last week.

And Paul in particular is now drawing criticism for the company he keeps. Lew Rockwell, Paul’s former congressional chief of staff, now heads the Ludwig von Mises Institute, a think tank with “deep ties to the neo-Confederate movement,” which believes the wrong side won the Civil War, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.

As a Paul employee, Rockwell oversaw newsletters published under the former congressman’s name that contained controversial statements about race, homosexuality, and other hot-button topics.

Furthermore, Paul’s own new organization, the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity, has an advisory board that contains a “bevy of conspiracy theorists, cranks, and apologists for some of the worst regimes on the planet,” according to Daily Beast writer James Kirchik.

These include Southwestern Law School professor Butler Shaffer, who has written a post for the Lew Rockwell website titled “9/11 was a conspiracy,” notes the Daily Beast.

http://news.yahoo.com/ron-paul-slams...170321289.html
----------------------


Controversial point of view but, in some respects, his opinion merits consideration.