Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Apr 21, 2013, 10:21 PM   #1
Merkava_4
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: USA
Senator Lindsey Graham wants Bombing Suspect Held as Enemy Combatant

The New York Times

Senator Graham wants the kid held as an enemy combatant so that he can be questioned without a lawyer present because Graham is concerned that the kid may belong to a wider terrorist organization and that there may still be more operatives with explosives out there ready to strike. I can tell you people right now from pure common sense that the kid and his older brother had nothing to do with a terrorist organization and that the bombings were planned and carried out by them and no one else. Senator Graham must be assuming all you people are idiots. Don't let him take away your natural rights as U.S. born citizens because that's exactly what he's trying to do. Senator Graham is one of the last Bush era holdouts that should be tried for High Treason in my opinion.
Merkava_4 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 21, 2013, 10:49 PM   #2
MuddyPaws1
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
And if there is another group and they set off a bomb and hurt someone you love....you will think differently. If they don't do EVERYTHING they can to get every bit of info out of this jackass, and another attack happens, then people will be screaming for the heads of the people that didn't get the info out of the guy.



And.....This isn't a KID. He is an adult. Quit calling him a kid to get sympathy for a terrorist. Who should be charged with treason?
MuddyPaws1 is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 21, 2013, 10:49 PM   #3
Tilpots
macrumors 68040
 
Tilpots's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Carolina Beach, NC
You lost me at "Senator Graham."
Tilpots is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 21, 2013, 10:51 PM   #4
2020mike
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: May 2012
I don't think they were US born citizens either.
__________________
iPad Air 16gb Wi-Fi,iPhone 5S 16gb
2020mike is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 21, 2013, 10:52 PM   #5
MuddyPaws1
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2020mike View Post
I don't think they were US born citizens either.
No they weren't
MuddyPaws1 is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 21, 2013, 10:57 PM   #6
Technarchy
macrumors 68040
 
Technarchy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merkava_4 View Post
Senator Graham must be assuming all you people are idiots. Don't let him take away your natural rights as U.S. born citizens because that's exactly what he's trying to do.
For some reason, I am greatly amused by the combining of these two sentences.
__________________
Steve Jobs, January 9th 2007, 10:44am: "We filed for over 200 patents for all the inventions in iPhone and we intend to protect them."
Technarchy is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 21, 2013, 10:58 PM   #7
Merkava_4
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tilpots View Post
You lost me at "Senator Graham."
Did I misspell something?
Merkava_4 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 12:47 AM   #8
Renzatic
macrumors 604
 
Renzatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Who puts the washers in the woods?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MuddyPaws1 View Post
No they weren't
They weren't born here, but they're still naturalized citizens. They have every reason to temporarily suspend his Miranda Rights for public safety, but no more. Beyond that, he should get his due process.
Renzatic is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 12:58 AM   #9
Peace
macrumors P6
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Space--The ONLY Frontier
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
They weren't born here, but they're still naturalized citizens. They have every reason to temporarily suspend his Miranda Rights for public safety, but no more. Beyond that, he should get his due process.
The younger brother is a naturalized citizen. The older brother was using his green card and was denied citizenship because of some domestic problems that held up his citizenship.

Which can lead to the real reason behind the bombing. IMHO

ymmv

As for Senator Graham. He should stick to being a bad senator instead of a DOJ employee.
Peace is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 01:39 AM   #10
hulugu
macrumors 68000
 
hulugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: the faraway towns
Quote:
Originally Posted by MuddyPaws1 View Post
And if there is another group and they set off a bomb and hurt someone you love....you will think differently. If they don't do EVERYTHING they can to get every bit of info out of this jackass, and another attack happens, then people will be screaming for the heads of the people that didn't get the info out of the guy.
Here's the thing. That's why victims of crimes aren't in charge of the case or its prosecution. We have a rule of law and allowing victims to make those decisions is a step toward blood feuds and anarchy.

The DoJ should dispassionately work through the law and in this case, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is a criminal, not an enemy combatant.

Quote:
...Who should be charged with treason?
Treason has specific legal requirements and they're hard to make. In this case, the DoJ has a slam dunk case, why muddy the waters with a difficult to make treason charge, or for that matter, a trip to Guantanamo to be tried by the military.

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev isn't an Al-Qaeda operative with knowledge of the group's future plans or the location of Osama Bin Laden, he's a criminal. Try him and fry him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MuddyPaws1 View Post
No they weren't
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is a naturalized US citizen, his brother had a green card and was in the process of getting his citizenship. However, this doesn't matter since Constitutional protections are due to people in the United States regardless of their citizenship status.

Much noise has been made of the FBI's refusal to mirandize Dzhokhar. The requirement to read Miranda rights to an arrestee has been mitigated by a two-year old move by the White House, allowing the FBI (and presumably other agencies) to question a suspect without reading these rights.

Keep in mind, you can just stay quiet except for endlessly repeating your lawyer's phone number. But, the FBI is now allowed to arrest and question you without reading Miranda rights.
__________________
I look like a soldier; I feel like a thief
hulugu is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 06:59 AM   #11
MuddyPaws1
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by hulugu View Post
Treason has specific legal requirements and they're hard to make. In this case, the DoJ has a slam dunk case, why muddy the waters with a difficult to make treason charge, or for that matter, a trip to Guantanamo to be tried by the military.
The treason comment was directed at another comment where it was said:


Quote:
Senator Graham is one of the last Bush era holdouts that should be tried for High Treason in my opinion.
MuddyPaws1 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 07:13 AM   #12
yg17
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: St. Louis, MO
We wouldn't even be having this discussion if the bomber was a right wing Christian extremist. But because the guy is Muslim, suddenly we have to throw him in Gitmo and take away his constitutional rights.
__________________
Barack Obama is not a foreign born, brown skinned, anti-war socialist who gives away healthcare. You're thinking of Jesus.
yg17 is offline   7 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 07:37 AM   #13
quagmire
macrumors 603
 
quagmire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by hulugu View Post
Keep in mind, you can just stay quiet except for endlessly repeating your lawyer's phone number. But, the FBI is now allowed to arrest and question you without reading Miranda rights.
If what I read about the public safety clause is right, the things he reveals won't be admissible in court. They will read him his miranda rights eventually in order to try him.
__________________
Crimes against US History:
CV-6 USS Enterprise
Yankee Stadium
Penn Station-New York
quagmire is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 07:40 AM   #14
Huntn
macrumors 604
 
Huntn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: The Misty Mountains
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merkava_4 View Post
Senator Graham is one of the last Bush era holdouts that should be tried for High Treason in my opinion.
Looking at the definition of treason (below) as "harming the parent nation", it could be argued that the W Administration is guilty of something punishable such as fabricating a reason to go to war, resulting in tens of thousands dead, but treason implies that the actions are willful to cause harm, not based on ineptitude and general malfeasance directed outward.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MuddyPaws1 View Post
And if there is another group and they set off a bomb and hurt someone you love....you will think differently. If they don't do EVERYTHING they can to get every bit of info out of this jackass, and another attack happens, then people will be screaming for the heads of the people that didn't get the info out of the guy.



And.....This isn't a KID. He is an adult. Quit calling him a kid to get sympathy for a terrorist. Who should be charged with treason?
You mean when emotion clouds your better judgement... Don't be so willing to piss the other guy's civil rights away, as it could be your rights too that evaporate. IMO Senator Graham is a disgrace of a senator and an idiot, one of several reasons our governing body is currently a disaster.

As far as treason, if you look at all the charges being leveled at them, my impression is that would be just more icing on the cake, but that might be a justified charge. I found this description at Wiki:

Quote:
Oran's Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as "...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation]." In many nations, it is also often considered treason to attempt or conspire to overthrow the government, even if no foreign country is aiding or involved by such an endeavor.
source.

Terrorist acts do harm the nation.
__________________
The modern business ethos: "I'm worth it, you're not, and I'm a glutton!"
MBP, 2.2 GHz intel i7, Radeon HD 6750M, Bootcamp: W7.
PC: i5 4670k, 8GB RAM, Asus GTX670 (2GB VRAM), W7.

Last edited by Huntn; Apr 22, 2013 at 09:01 AM.
Huntn is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 08:02 AM   #15
Mac'nCheese
macrumors 68020
 
Mac'nCheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by yg17 View Post
We wouldn't even be having this discussion if the bomber was a right wing Christian extremist. But because the guy is Muslim, suddenly we have to throw him in Gitmo and take away his constitutional rights.
Yes some would.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_McVeigh

People screamed for his blood too. Couldn't send him to Gitmo because this was pre-9/11.
Mac'nCheese is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 08:08 AM   #16
Don't panic
macrumors 68040
 
Don't panic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: having a drink at Milliways
there are no differences under the law between 'natural born' citizen and naturalized citizens, except as a qualification for being elected president.
nor there should be.
__________________
I do not believe in lot of things, but I do believe in duct tape.
Miles Straume
linky to stonyc's ww table
Don't panic is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 08:59 AM   #17
VulchR
macrumors 68000
 
VulchR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Scotland
It is a slippery slope if the US government decides to treat the alleged bomber as an enemy combatant who does not deserve constitutional rights. Given that terrorism is meant to chip away at our moral values, everything done to he alleged bomber should be strictly according to the Constitution.

In this regard it appears that the courts both established Miranda rights and then curtailed them under conditions of public safety. Now we're left with controversy about what is appropriate. Maybe it is time that elected officials actually propose a Constitutional amendment that clarifies things in this regard.
__________________
My first was a Mac+. Now I own an iPhone with 3.5x the pixels, a colour display, WiFi, 512x the RAM, >1500x the data storage, and 100x the speed. And it fits in the palm of my hand.
VulchR is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 11:54 AM   #18
Eraserhead
macrumors G4
 
Eraserhead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
This is pretty damn ridiculous...

I hope the Judge has the balls to throw the case out of court - that would be hilarious.
__________________
If they have to tell you every day they are fair you can bet they arent, if they tell you they are balanced then you should know they are not - Don't Hurt me
Eraserhead is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 12:50 PM   #19
thekev
macrumors 603
 
thekev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by MuddyPaws1 View Post
And if there is another group and they set off a bomb and hurt someone you love....you will think differently. If they don't do EVERYTHING they can to get every bit of info out of this jackass, and another attack happens, then people will be screaming for the heads of the people that didn't get the info out of the guy.
It's possible to perform such an investigation without classifying him as a combatant.


Quote:
“You can’t hold every person who commits a terrorist attack as an enemy combatant, I agree with that,” Mr. Graham said. “But you have a right, with his radical Islamist ties and the fact that Chechens are all over the world fighting with Al Qaeda — I think you have a reasonable belief to go down that road, and it would be a big mistake not to go down that road. If we didn’t hold him for intelligence-gathering purposes, that would be unconscionable.”

Mr. Graham said 30 days of confinement and interrogation as an enemy combatant would be an appropriate amount of time to allow the government to look for evidence that would justify his continued detention under the law of war. He also said he believed that federal judges would grant the government that amount of leeway.
There's probably more to that quote, but I would be surprised if the unabridged version was any less disturbing.
__________________
world's largest manufacturer of tin foil hats, none of that aluminum foil crap.
thekev is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 01:04 PM   #20
Tomorrow
macrumors 603
 
Tomorrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Always a day away
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merkava_4 View Post
I can tell you people right now from pure common sense that the kid and his older brother had nothing to do with a terrorist organization and that the bombings were planned and carried out by them and no one else.
If you were talking only about the younger brother, I might buy into this line of thinking - but it looks like the older brother had recently spent six months back in Russia, and his YouTube channel was apparently full of a bunch of anti-U.S. hatemongering. I have a hunch the older brother may have persuaded the younger brother to help him with the attacks, and I'm not ready to accept that there were no ties whatsoever to any terrorist organizations.
__________________
I would scream just to be heard, as if yelling at the stars - I was bleeding just to feel.
You would never say a word, kept me reaching in the dark - always something to conceal.
Tomorrow is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 01:30 PM   #21
hulugu
macrumors 68000
 
hulugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: the faraway towns
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomorrow View Post
If you were talking only about the younger brother, I might buy into this line of thinking - but it looks like the older brother had recently spent six months back in Russia, and his YouTube channel was apparently full of a bunch of anti-U.S. hatemongering. I have a hunch the older brother may have persuaded the younger brother to help him with the attacks, and I'm not ready to accept that there were no ties whatsoever to any terrorist organizations.
Sure, but the link is probably tenuous at best. Many of the recent attempts to attack the United States have come from men operating alone with little material support.

Faisal Shahzad spent a few weeks in Peshawar before returning to the United States and trying to set off a bomb in the United States; Nidal Hasan never traveled anywhere, instead he tried to communicate with Anwar al-Awlaki (who was also connected to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, who may have trained with Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (though al-Awlaki denied this connection).

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by quagmire View Post
If what I read about the public safety clause is right, the things he reveals won't be admissible in court. They will read him his miranda rights eventually in order to try him.
That's a good clarification.
__________________
I look like a soldier; I feel like a thief
hulugu is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 02:00 PM   #22
lannister80
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicagoland
Still trying to find a a real, legitimate reason that they charged the bomber at the Federal level.

Interstate commerce is SUCH a stretch...
__________________
Early 2008 Mac Pro, 8x2.8GHz, 3.25TB, 18GB RAM
UnRAID NAS, 9TB storage, 3TB parity, 400GB cache
lannister80 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 02:17 PM   #23
Eraserhead
macrumors G4
 
Eraserhead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by lannister80 View Post
Still trying to find a a real, legitimate reason that they charged the bomber at the Federal level.

Interstate commerce is SUCH a stretch...
Is terrorism not a federal crime?
__________________
If they have to tell you every day they are fair you can bet they arent, if they tell you they are balanced then you should know they are not - Don't Hurt me
Eraserhead is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 02:26 PM   #24
lannister80
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicagoland
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eraserhead View Post
Is terrorism not a federal crime?
Yes it is, but most things that are illegal at the State level are also illegal at the Federal level.

So how do you decide what to jurisdiction (city/county/state/fed) to charge someone under? Honest question.
__________________
Early 2008 Mac Pro, 8x2.8GHz, 3.25TB, 18GB RAM
UnRAID NAS, 9TB storage, 3TB parity, 400GB cache
lannister80 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2013, 02:28 PM   #25
Peace
macrumors P6
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Space--The ONLY Frontier
This is now a useless thread. The guy was charged and will be tried in a Federal Court. If he lives that long.
So Mr. Graham can now go back to complaining about Obama.
Peace is offline   0 Reply With Quote


Reply
MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Looting in the wake of the Boston bombing ugahairydawgs Politics, Religion, Social Issues 17 Apr 17, 2013 04:28 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:02 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC