Ok...i dont want to debate the point that the younger brother of the boston bombing did a terrible thing beyond belief.

What did catch my attention after he was caught was the fact that he was denied his miranda rights....correct me if i am wrong but he is a naturalized U.S citizen and like it or not the Constitution still applies...even to bastards like him.

Is anyone else the least bit concerned that the U.S. Govt can suspend individual rights at will?
Is every terrorist act a chance for the Govt to suspend more rights in the name of "public safety"?
At what point do we lose so many freedoms that we cant get them back?

Like i said...the guy is a monster...but are our rights being offered up as trade for our "security"?
While the Constitution promises our rights and provides them..as the Govt promises our security in exchange...something they cant do 100%.

My two cents.....for what they are worth.

 

My wife thinks I'm nuts, to the point that we get in heated discussions about it......but it's my personal opinion that our government's goal is to remove control from the people, one idea at a time, until our rights and freedoms are gone. Need an example? Look at every Marxist movement in history, and compare it to the way our government has been treating things as of the past few years. Need to control the probability of a revolution? "He who controls the weapons, controls the people."

That said, what does FEMA need artillary for to help in disaster relief?



Martial Law is right around the corner, sad thing is, the general population can't see it coming. All they needed was a stunt like this so they could swoop in, people in terror, BEGGING them to come in and take control. Then the government looks like the good guys. LoL

I'm only 35, and I'm ashamed of the once great country my kids will inherit. I'm very proud of America, proud to BE American, but I'm not proud of what it's become. Yes, that violent little turd deserves everything he gets, but the judicial system doesn't work unless all people are treated the same. This young man shouldn't have had his miranda rights revoked. What need is there for a trial amongst his peers? Apparently, he's been judged and convicted already. The situation sure stinks of corruption, and I doubt it'll get better any time soon. Worst part is, all the letters written to our local congressmen and women are as useles as a screen door on a submarine.

~end rant~

 

Well said

I think one of the things that annoys me most is when people put all of the blame on Obama. The say that he has is so little in anything. Its the government as a whole. not just one person. And no matter who is in office. We are still on a bad road.

 

You don't have to read a terrorist his or her Miranda Rights because they are a "terrorist." It's in the "public safety exception" rule.

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev will not hear his Miranda rights before the FBI questions him Friday night. He will have to remember on his own that he has a right to a lawyer, and that anything he says can be used against him in court, because the government won’t tell him. This is an extension of a rule the Justice Department wrote for the FBI—without the oversight of any court—called the “public safety exception.”

There is one specific circumstance in which it makes sense to hold off on Miranda. It’s exactly what the name of the exception suggests. The police can interrogate a suspect without offering him the benefit of Miranda if he could have information that’s of urgent concern for public safety. That may or may not be the case with Tsarnaev. The problem is that Attorney General Eric Holder has stretched the law beyond that scenario. And that should trouble anyone who worries about the police railroading suspects, which can end in false confessions. No matter how unsympathetic accused terrorists are, the precedents the government sets for them matter outside the easy context of questioning them. When the law gets bent out of shape for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, it’s easier to bend out of shape for the rest of us.

 

In my opinion. if the evidence is so obvious of what they did, there should not even be a trial... just my opinion on that.

 

unfortunately he is a naturalized American Citizen.
He ,as much as i hate to say it, is owned the same rights from the Constitution as we are.
The problem i have is the govt being able to potentially hold any Citizen without Miranda rights at their discretion. Having watching what happened at Waco and knowing of Ruby Ridge, i have seen the Govt being heavy handed (to put it mildly). This is like Pandora's box being opened ever so slowly.

 

Better watch what you say in public the government will put you on their watch doglist and have people watching your every move just because of how you think.The little helicopters not always black could be purple or red will be circling overhead.That said I agree with your statement.Think Im joking I googled it and its true.

 

helicopters....think drones.

"You'd think someone who was held in a tiny cell without the rights to due process, freedom from self-incrimination, a speedy trial, and a jury of his peers would understand the importance of doing things the right way in America."

 

Speaking of google, I try not to use it whenever possible. (Or any software or other services owned and/or operated by them). Search for google, and who's been purchasing the rights to their information and content. Scary stuff......I'll bet my bottom dollar they're using that information in the most honest way possible. LmFAO

 

This is why we need to keep our guns, once they are taken away, they can take away anything they want to. And our current administration is saying terrorist as little as possible. They want us to believe the war on terror is over. It will never be over.