ACLU: Denying Miranda rights to marathon bombing suspect is 'un-American'

Edit:- Nevermind. Not worth the effort of illumination.

reply to post by SeekerofTruth101


Again, what does that even mean?
Some of your posts are seriously confusing - I got a few PM's of forum members warning me that you're utterly incomprehensible at times but even so I'm surprised.

===> Ah the old posters remorse
What part of that paragraph was going to illuminate anyone, it was just another attack.
I can only assume you thought the post was directed at you or something? (since you were quoting a response for someone else)

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101
reply to post by MaxSteiner

 

Is there a need to attack another person because he shares some of my view?

Is there a need to disparage me as you did in your post, the ONLY way to silence my right to express my views freely without fear and favor, the very CONSTITUTIONAL right from the CONSTITUTION you unashamedly lied to fool others with your terrrorist sympathizing ways, to uphold?

Leave them alone, I alone am fully responsible for what i say and wrote, and take on me instead, bravely if you have it in you, and I will respond accordingly, to the T&C of this site which I am a guest, and in my time should your responses be worth it, and ignored as is my right, if they are frivolous.

Behold brave forum warrior! Take this pipe as a signal of friendship between our peoples! I bring you trinkets! I bring you beads! Lets sit around the fire and commune with nature that unites us under this great white moon!

No one "attacked" anyone you silly boy... this is a discussion forum and as expected people are, well... discussing... things. You on the other hand are accusing people of being "terrorist sympathizers" simply because they dont agree with your opinion. Do you see anyone else doing the same? I don't. You're just rude - which is your most recognizable trait.

Your constitution btw does not apply to a private forum by the way - you are, again, silly. And yes, it is in your right to ignore people like you did in the North Korea thread when I was trying to provide you some help and a point of you that you refused to see because it didnt fit your bloodlust, great forum warrior. You're just uneducated, rude and have this incomprehensible bloodlust that I cant understand, and on top of that theres this self righteousness and this feeling of superiority - "and in my time should your responses be worth it" - I mean... you're a bit sad. That "applause" back there was cute also - you better try harder to be a mod so you can really applause, cause nobody gives a crap about your applauses.

So watch your tongue boy especially when calling people "terrorist sympathizers" when they believe someone is entitled to rights or to a fair trial. You dont know them, you dont know what they do or what they did. Maybe those "terrorists sympathizers" bled and watched their friends die, at home or overseas, fighting those terrorists for those rights, for those very same rights that allow you to sit your fat ass in front of your stupid little computer screen spewing out hate words and insults under the umbrella of safety and the blanket of freedoms those "terrorist sympathizers" provide.

Respect is earned. Want it? Earn it.

reply to post by MaxSteiner

What ended the troubles is dialogue and compromise.

I am not trying to be glib.

But do you really think that Radical Islamist are willing to compromise?

Do you also think that if the U.S simply quits all actions, and vacates all areas we have forces in. That the radical Islamist will quit all terrorism?

reply to post by SeekerofTruth101
maxsteiner will always have something to say, so will you and so will I. It is up to you whether you choose to accept others' opinions or not .

As long as you think you are a victim you victimize yourself.

Just say what you have to say and let everyone else do so as well. This is a public forum for discussion and as others already have indicated we are not always going to agree with all opinions offered here.

"American" is what ever the state decides it is, and what is most convenient for, the propaganda being spewed at the time. It fluctuates. You may as well be asking people what they think of the weather, and using that as a basis for booking a two week holiday on the other side of the planet. Seriously, if someone accused me of being "american" Id either take a long hard look in the mirror and/or shoot myself.

It is the worst contradiction of a term there is. Land of the free and home of the brave? So cowardly and paranoid they need to spy on their own people, who think they are free. ROFL.

Who in their right mind would be proud to be one? I'd lie, and say I was Mexican, or Canadian, eh.

reply to post by rockymcgilicutty


Thanks. I disappear quite often for there is only so much discussion I can tolerate in ATS. It is peopled by some very forceful, opinionated folk who seize on any word or inference to attack and/or to ridicule the postee. Having said that I do enjoy the repartee for awhile as there are many intelligent posters in ATS.

My opinions are subject to change at any time. I try to learn from others' thoughts and ideologies so I consider it an opportunity to grow. Just so you know that I am not a "waffling" sort of personality...I just keep an open mind so I do not become blinded by personal, pet beliefs to the detriment of the world around me.

A huge problem, worldwide, is that people put forth their personal opinions and hold those to the death no matter how it affects them, their families or the world around them. Duh, how stupid is that?

It is oft too much for this older lady to continueo on with for very long. I have my say, ignore the replies after awhile and retreat back into a kinder society. .

Originally posted by Elderlight
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101

 

maxsteiner will always have something to say, so will you and so will I. It is up to you whether you choose to accept others' opinions or not .

As long as you think you are a victim you victimize yourself.

Just say what you have to say and let everyone else do so as well. This is a public forum for discussion and as others already have indicated we are not always going to agree with all opinions offered here.

edit on 22-4-2013 by Elderlight because: addition

You are awsome. Post more. Help make ATS better.

Originally posted by rockymcgilicutty
reply to post by MaxSteiner

 

What ended the troubles is dialogue and compromise.

I am not trying to be glib.

But do you really think that Radical Islamist are willing to compromise?

Do you also think that if the U.S simply quits all actions, and vacates all areas we have forces in. That the radical Islamist will quit all terrorism?

Let me ask you this in return: Do you believe that before a man can complain about the shoddy state of their neighbors yard, that their yard must first be neatly trimmed?


I would say that until we get those unruly hedges under control, and do something with all that crabgrass, we are just casting stones from our glass houses (to mix/mangle some metaphors).

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

Originally posted by rockymcgilicutty
reply to post by MaxSteiner

 

What ended the troubles is dialogue and compromise.

I am not trying to be glib.

But do you really think that Radical Islamist are willing to compromise?

Do you also think that if the U.S simply quits all actions, and vacates all areas we have forces in. That the radical Islamist will quit all terrorism?

Let me ask you this in return: Do you believe that before a man can complain about the shoddy state of their neighbors yard, that their yard must first be neatly trimmed?


I would say that until we get those unruly hedges under control, and do something with all that crabgrass, we are just casting stones from our glass houses (to mix/mangle some metaphors).

So until that time, we should just let Radical Islamist terrorize innocent men, women, and children of all countries ?

reply to post by rockymcgilicutty


All sorts of buzzwords. "Radical Islam" being the worst.

No, we should not allow other humans to victimize us.

But the hypocrisies in our policies make it absolutely morose to think we can police the world. Because honestly, no one has any issue with anyone killing anyone else, until it has a negative economic impact on us.

I think that people are going to kill people. That is just the way things are. Do what you can to mitigate and move on. I am wholly offended, however, at the prospects of having my junk fondled before I can fly. So it you are asking if our response has been reasonable: absolutely not.

Something to consider, however: there has been direct correlation between environmental lead levels, on a neighborhood to neighborhood basis, and violent crime. Not knowing the lead levels of ME nations, I cannot comment too much on that. BUt what effect does all that depleted uranium have? Are we possibly our own worst enemy?

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

All sorts of buzzwords. "Radical Islam" being the worst.

Radical Islam is not a buzz word. I don't have any problem with Moderate Muslims ( except their failure to police their radicals) But I do have a Big Problem with the 3 to 10% that are radicalized.

If somebody asked me the best way to handle the Terrorist threat. It would be to find a way to force the moderate Muslims to police their own radicals. Then the world would be a LITTLE better.

reply to post by rockymcgilicutty


"Radicalized".

That is a word that is thrown at us by our military. The enemy has been named: the "radical" muslims. not the moderate ones, they are our friends.

Have you considered that the muslim part is only part of it? Or that we make ourselves a target? Instead of picking sides, why are we just not picking our own side, and staying out of it?

Of course....oil. It is the energy that keeps our economy afloat.

so THAT, my friend, is our problem. We aren't wanted somewhere, but we are putting ourselves there anyway. and now we feel the repercussions.

As it involves Boston...that has little to do with radical islam. Or whatever it is that the military calls it.

ETA: i think "policing their own" is the right answer in all cases. But what we have to remember is: first, the ruling class has to care. The US does very little to endear itself to the people of the 3rd world. Right about now, we have laid waste to massive parts of it, and contaminated their soil with endless quantities of munitions. We currently not only keep soldiers on the ground in these countries, but perform airstrikes via drone into neighborhoods.

If you want them to police their own, then we have to stop trying to do it ourselves.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


I could agree with most of your post if only viewed by a eye for the U.S. I'll just shoot one question at you what did Greece do to Arab Terrorist before the Athens Airport attack. BTW the first use of the term Radical

late 14c., in a medieval philosophical sense, from Late Latin radicalis "of or having roots," from Latin radix (genitive radicis) "root" (see radish). Meaning "going to the origin, essential" is from 1650s. Political sense of "reformist" (via notion of "change from the roots") is first recorded 1802 (n.), 1817 (adj.), of the extreme section of the British Liberal party (radical reform had been a current phrase since 1786); meaning "unconventional" is from 1921. U.S. youth slang use is from 1983, from 1970s surfer slang meaning "at the limits of control." Radical chic is attested from 1970; popularized, if not coined, by Tom Wolfe.radical (n.) Look up radical at Dictionary.com1802, in the political sense, from radical (adj.).

1802 ? If the military threw that word at me, they did it a long time ago.

Count me in as well.
The Rights of an American Citizen regardless of who they are should be non negotiable.
The execution of justice however should be equal among all men, and sadly this is not the case where you have those that can buy their way out of their crimes, like Wall Street Bankers and Investors running over people.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

If you want them to police their own, then we have to stop trying to do it ourselves.

We tried that until 2001, against Radical Islam. Only retaliation, that didn't work so we went on the offensive.

We even supported them some times. You need to only listen to the radicals them self's ,they will not quit until the world is under their version of Islam and Sharia law.

reply to post by rockymcgilicutty


We tried leaving them alone up until 2001, huh?



Did I step into a bizarro world where Israel doesn't exist?

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


It's kind of hard to pin someone down to a subject, when they hop from topic to topic.

Or is the U.S the ONLY country that ever helped Israel.

reply to post by gladtobehere


It's my understanding that this 19 yr old kid is a naturalized citizen of the US. He should be Mirandized and tried in a court of law. It would have set a terrible precedent if he was held as an enemy combatant.

There seems to be a fairly selective policing of the 'Islamic World', with 'allies' like Saudi Arabia (despite perhaps being the centre of 'Wahabbi' terrorism, as well as home to the Bin Laden clan) left very much alone as there is too much America needs from them whereas it is open season on less privileged states like Libya.

People forget the U.S support for such people as Saddam Hussein in Iraq, and the Mujahideen in Afghanistan when fighting a proxy war against the USSR, which can be turned on its head once the friend either turns, or is no longer so useful.

If the USA is the land of the free, and upholder of the law, they should set the example they claim to uphold rather than allow 'the terrorists' (whoever they may be) to chip away at the rights of everyone.

Still, I guess it's blowback, where the US are importing the same terror policies they are happy to play in the developing (read oil, opium, strategic resources/location) world.