Boston Bombing Suspect Charged With Using Weapon of Mass Destruction

page: 1
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 12:57 PM
link   
Yep that is what they plan on doing, here is the link
abcnews.go.com... here is the before report, from the same link

Boston Bombing Suspect's First Court Appearance in Hospital Bed
PHOTO: A tearful Zubeidat Tsarnaeva, the mother of the Boston bomb suspects, told ABC News that her sons are innocent.
Bombing Suspect Told Mom 'I Love You' Moments Before Shootout: Report
Auto Start: On | Off

Share
More Sharing ServicesShare
Share on emailEmail
18 Comments
Print
Single Page
Text Size
- / +

By KIRIT RADIA (@KiritRadia_ABC) and PIERRE THOMAS (@PierreTABC)
April 22, 2013

Accused Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev made his first court appearance in his hospital bed this morning in connection with the blasts that killed three and wounded at least 176 last week.

The charges were filed under seal, but they could lead to the death penalty, a decision being left to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.

Tsarnaev could possibly be slapped with a "weapon of mass destruction" charge, which carries a penalty of death. Authorities are using the public safety exemption that gives authorities the legal bases to question Tsarnaev without delivering Miranda rights. That's because authorities believe there is imminent threat out there.

Law enforcement sources say Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19, was arraigned at his hospital bed, which was first reported byABC News affiliate WCVB.

Tsarnaev was awake and responding sporadically in writing to questions Sunday night. They are asking about any possible cell members and other unexploded bombs.




posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:02 PM
link   
wanted to get that up before the link went down ,{ been having the "bugs" lately.} there will be a lot to this , first will he or will he not be charged as an enemy combatant. will he go to gitmo ? or get death? will there be more attacks if so when and where? something was said about a 12 man cell FBI,{ any one got info on that , found squat so far } will this thread die ?



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:02 PM
link   
So THAT'S why they invaded Iraq and killed Saddam Hussein, he bought some new kitchen utensils!

Looks like we'll all be getting back ground checks when we go out to buy pots and pans next.




posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:07 PM
link   
In perhaps the most bizarre turn of events, now shrapnel is a "wmd"?


Justice Department says Boston bombing suspect charged with using a weapon of mass destruction, Reuters reports. He also is charged with one count of malicious destruction of property resulting in death, according to Reuters.

He had a college ID credit cards in his pocket when he was arrested, the complaint states.
www.chicagotribune.com...


I guess after seeing how completely roll-over this society has become, now devices that use black powder to spit metal bits are constituted as WMD's?

Next step: guns will become "WMD"...
edit on 22-4-2013 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:08 PM
link   
Shrapnel = explosions of some sort. Mass shrapnel = mass destruction....

These were bombs that were used....remember...

The charge applies here.

Des



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by bekod
 


Here's a pdf of the charges from the WSJ...

PDF of the Charges

Screenshot:




posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by OratoryHeist
 
ball caps, back packs, Pressure cookers, black powde,r or gun powder, nails, ball bearings, RC battery packs... Did i forget anything? the big question is should he be charged as an enemy combatant ? if so should he go to gitomo or Leavenworth? Death or life? does he get to have a trial at all?



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:09 PM
link   
Well, as they closed the other thread...

This explains why America never found WMD in Iraq..The Iraqis had 3000 ICBM parked in the street and the feds were looking for pressure cookers....

Explains why the feds raided Sears and Roebucks they day after 9/11 when an a tip off said BED LINEN was on the third floor...
edit on 22-4-2013 by andy1972 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Destinyone
Shrapnel = explosions of some sort. Mass shrapnel = mass destruction....

These were bombs that were used....remember...

The charge applies here.


There's the logic I predicted:

Next it will be mass murderer shoots a mass of people... with a GUN... now the gun is the WMD... following that logic.



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Originally posted by Destinyone
Shrapnel = explosions of some sort. Mass shrapnel = mass destruction....

These were bombs that were used....remember...

The charge applies here.


There's the logic I predicted:

Next it will be mass murderer shoots a mass of people... with a GUN... now the gun is the WMD... following that logic.


Mass shrapnel.....Yet a woman doctor who spent 48 hours straight in ER said she hadn't seen one wound with nails or ball bearings...



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:16 PM
link   
Surely that is only one of the multitude of charges they hit the guy with, right? Wasn't there car jackings, shootings, evading police, non-registered firearms, illegal carries, property damage, etc?



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:19 PM
link   
I guess that makes sense, if you allow for IED's to be considered WMD's and therefor a valid reason to have invaded Iraq, which I don't.

If you're like me and don't consider IED's as WMD's, and IED's wouldn't be reason enough to invade Iraq, then Boston wasn't WMD's either. Can't just go changing definitions whenever you feel like. That's what hurts us citizens the most in the end.



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by andy1972
 
thanks for the lol but can we pleas stay on the thread topic for now, here is what he is being charged with www.law.cornell.edu... and www.law.cornell.edu... from the link www.law.cornell.edu...

18 USC § 2332a - Use of weapons of mass destruction

USC-prelim
US Code
Notes
Updates
Authorities (CFR)

USCPrelim is a preliminary release and may be subject to further revision before it is released again as a final version.

Current through Pub. L. 112-283. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)
(a) Offense Against a National of the United States or Within the United States.— A person who, without lawful authority, uses, threatens, or attempts or conspires to use, a weapon of mass destruction—
(1) against a national of the United States while such national is outside of the United States;
(2) against any person or property within the United States, and
(A) the mail or any facility of interstate or foreign commerce is used in furtherance of the offense;
(B) such property is used in interstate or foreign commerce or in an activity that affects interstate or foreign commerce;
(C) any perpetrator travels in or causes another to travel in interstate or foreign commerce in furtherance of the offense; or
(D) the offense, or the results of the offense, affect interstate or foreign commerce, or, in the case of a threat, attempt, or conspiracy, would have affected interstate or foreign commerce;
and then

8 USC § 844 - Penalties

USC-prelim
US Code
Notes
Updates

USCPrelim is a preliminary release and may be subject to further revision before it is released again as a final version.

Current through Pub. L. 112-283. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)
(a) Any person who—
(1) violates any of subsections (a) through (i) or (l) through (o) ofsection 842 shall be fined under this title, imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both; and
(2) violates subsection (p)(2) ofsection 842, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.
(b) Any person who violates any other provision of section 842 of this chapter shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
(c)
(1) Any explosive materials involved or used or intended to be used in any violation of the provisions of this chapter or any other rule or regulation promulgated thereunder or any violation of any criminal law of the United States shall be subject to seizure and forfeiture, and all provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 relating to the seizure, forfeiture, and disposition of firearms, as defined in section 5845(a) of that Code, shall, so far as applicable, extend to seizures and forfeitures under the provisions of this chapter.
(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), in the case of the seizure of any explosive materials for any offense for which the materials would be subject to forfeiture in which it would be impracticable or unsafe to remove the materials to a place of storage or would be unsafe to store them, the seizing officer may destroy the explosive materials forthwith. Any destruction under this paragraph shall be in the presence of at least 1 credible witness. The seizing officer shall make a report of the seizure and take samples as the Attorney General may by regulation prescribe.
(3) Within 60 days after any destruction made pursuant to paragraph (2), the owner of (including any person having an interest in) the property so destroyed may make application to the Attorney General for reimbursement of the value of the property. If the claimant establishes to the satisfaction of the Attorney General that—
(A) the property has not been used or involved in a violation of law; or
(B) any unlawful involvement or use of the property was without the claimant’s knowledge, consent, or willful blindness,
the Attorney General shall make an allowance to the claimant not exceeding the value of the property destroyed.
(d) Whoever transports or receives, or attempts to transport or receive, in interstate or foreign commerce any explosive with the knowledge or intent that it will be used to kill, injure, or intimidate any individual or unlawfully to damage or destroy any building, vehicle, or other real or personal property, shall be imprisoned for not more than ten years, or fined under this title, or both; and if personal injury results to any person, including any public safety officer performing duties as a direct or proximate result of conduct prohibited by this subsection, shall be imprisoned for not more than twenty years or fined under this title, or both; and if death results to any person, including any public safety officer performing duties as a direct or proximate result of conduct prohibited by this subsection, shall be subject to imprisonment for any term of years, or to the death penalty or to life life imprisonment.
The above is from this link www.law.cornell.edu...
edit on 22-4-2013 by bekod because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Destinyone
Shrapnel = explosions of some sort. Mass shrapnel = mass destruction....

These were bombs that were used....remember...

The charge applies here.

Des


No, the definition of "Weapons of Mass Destruction" has been changed to dupe an idiot public.

A weapon of mass destruction is a nuclear weapon, a biological weapon, or a chemical weapon, capable of killing or maiming hundreds or potentially thousands of individuals EACH.

A pressure cooker device is not a weapon of mass destruction, and people should be asking why they are being treated like idiots who do not understand basic English.

Americans are being treated like idiots by their government, and many seem to be okay with that
edit on 22-4-2013 by Rocker2013 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:22 PM
link   
Breaking news:
Every house in the U.S. contains at least one WMD.
Obama has now declared war on the U.S., overtly for a change...
edit on 22-4-2013 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:24 PM
link   
So I went on the hunt to find out what exactly classified as a Weapon of Mass Destruction domestically, and here is what I came up with:


What are Weapons of Mass Destruction?

Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) are defined in US law (18 USC §2332a) as: “
(A) any destructive device as defined in section 921 of this title (i.e. explosive device);
(B) any weapon that is designed or intended to cause death or serious bodily injury through the release, dissemination, or impact of toxic or poisonous chemicals, or their precursors;
(C) any weapon involving a biological agent, toxin, or vector (as those terms are defined in section 178 of this title)
(D) any weapon that is designed to release radiation or radioactivity at a level dangerous to human life.”


Source

So then I went to look up 18 USC section 921 and found this:



(4) The term “destructive device” means—
(A) any explosive, incendiary, or poison gas—
(i) bomb,
(ii) grenade,
(iii) rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces,
(iv) missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce,
(v) mine, or
(vi) device similar to any of the devices described in the preceding clauses;

(B) any type of weapon (other than a shotgun or a shotgun shell which the Attorney General finds is generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes) by whatever name known which will, or which may be readily converted to, expel a projectile by the action of an explosive or other propellant, and which has any barrel with a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter; and
(C) any combination of parts either designed or intended for use in converting any device into any destructive device described in subparagraph (A) or (B) and from which a destructive device may be readily assembled.


Source

Hope this clears this up a little for others as it did for me.
edit on 4/22/2013 by SpaDe_ because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocker2013
 


No...you are wrong. Read Spade's post above for definitions.

Des



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:27 PM
link   
It's not shrapnel, it's fragmentation or frag.

Shrapnel is produced by the Shrapnel Round which hasn't been used since WWII.

Man that makes me nuts.

Mini rant over.



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by UberL33t
 
thanks but when posting form a link to link add the link not just WSJ online.wsj.com...



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 01:33 PM
link   
That is complete horse #.

They have more than enough to charge him with already. Stop playing semantics and trying to create an ignorant precedent. Charge him with terrorism, murder, etc.

In my opinion, there should be legislation in place that makes it so you get suspended to practice law, if you fail to make a precedent like this as a prosecutor, or a DA, what have you.

It is pure ignorance and offensive.

What then, are they going to call something that's 10x as large as a "pressure cooker"? Say, a truck bomb, or a real bomb.. or God forbid, a "dirty bomb"? Super Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Sir, we hereby charge you with two counts of "Using a Super Weapon of Mass Destruction", and 1 count of "Attempting to use a Super Duper Weapon of Mass Destruction"....

edit on 22-4-2013 by guymontag because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join