100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Who's behind the Boston Marathon bombings? 4 theories. | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Russia warned that we were backing the terrorists in Syria and we shouted them down. . Now it appears they warned us twice about the boston bomber and we did not listen. It is a sad day when you can get more reliable info from the Russians than from our own government. How on earth do we happen to be on the side of al-Qaeda in Syria? Crazy! I am tired of my lying Government, Democrats and Republicans alike. We (the CIA) created al-Qaeda. Without al-Qaeda there would be no permanent "war on terror" to keep the citizens terrified enough to give up all their rights to privacy and guns and illegal searches. to msharmony: who askED "why would anyone refuse to allow a search?" The answer: Because we have a right to privacy and should be protected against illegal searches. WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A REASON TO REFUSE. If they don't have a search warrant, they should gracefully STAY THE HELL OUT. We don't need a reason to say no to an illegal search. That might be the most logical thing I have ever seen you write! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
  There is always a conspiracy. And also: the government IS THAT STUPID. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Russia warned that we were backing the terrorists in Syria and we shouted them down. . Now it appears they warned us twice about the boston bomber and we did not listen. It is a sad day when you can get more reliable info from the Russians than from our own government. How on earth do we happen to be on the side of al-Qaeda in Syria? Crazy! I am tired of my lying Government, Democrats and Republicans alike. We (the CIA) created al-Qaeda. Without al-Qaeda there would be no permanent "war on terror" to keep the citizens terrified enough to give up all their rights to privacy and guns and illegal searches. to msharmony: who askED "why would anyone refuse to allow a search?" The answer: Because we have a right to privacy and should be protected against illegal searches. WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A REASON TO REFUSE. If they don't have a search warrant, they should gracefully STAY THE HELL OUT. We don't need a reason to say no to an illegal search. That might be the most logical thing I have ever seen you write! if you t hink so,,, sounds to me like 'because I can' which is more an egocentric statement than a reason,,,, so many other questions I could ask which we have a 'right' to do , but doing them would be stupid under certain circumstances like,,,, why would anyone leave an injugred child in the street,,? well, legally, if its not my child I am not legally bound to keep it safe, ,so its my RIGHT to do so but that does little to give a reasonable response to the question.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Tue 04/30/13 10:26 AM
|
|
Russia warned that we were backing the terrorists in Syria and we shouted them down. . Now it appears they warned us twice about the boston bomber and we did not listen. It is a sad day when you can get more reliable info from the Russians than from our own government. How on earth do we happen to be on the side of al-Qaeda in Syria? Crazy! I am tired of my lying Government, Democrats and Republicans alike. We (the CIA) created al-Qaeda. Without al-Qaeda there would be no permanent "war on terror" to keep the citizens terrified enough to give up all their rights to privacy and guns and illegal searches. to msharmony: who askED "why would anyone refuse to allow a search?" The answer: Because we have a right to privacy and should be protected against illegal searches. WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A REASON TO REFUSE. If they don't have a search warrant, they should gracefully STAY THE HELL OUT. We don't need a reason to say no to an illegal search. That might be the most logical thing I have ever seen you write! if you t hink so,,, sounds to me like 'because I can' which is more an egocentric statement than a reason,,,, so many other questions I could ask which we have a 'right' to do , but doing them would be stupid under certain circumstances like,,,, why would anyone leave an injugred child in the street,,? well, legally, if its not my child I am not legally bound to keep it safe, ,so its my RIGHT to do so but that does little to give a reasonable response to the question.... How about because politicians have corrupted the human morality so badly with stupid laws in favor of the corporations and insurance companies that to touch that injured child jeopardizes all you own and the ability to support your own family due to lawsuits. Human kindness is now against the law..... unless it's gov't issued, regulated, taxed, and approved! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Russia warned that we were backing the terrorists in Syria and we shouted them down. . Now it appears they warned us twice about the boston bomber and we did not listen. It is a sad day when you can get more reliable info from the Russians than from our own government. How on earth do we happen to be on the side of al-Qaeda in Syria? Crazy! I am tired of my lying Government, Democrats and Republicans alike. We (the CIA) created al-Qaeda. Without al-Qaeda there would be no permanent "war on terror" to keep the citizens terrified enough to give up all their rights to privacy and guns and illegal searches. to msharmony: who askED "why would anyone refuse to allow a search?" The answer: Because we have a right to privacy and should be protected against illegal searches. WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A REASON TO REFUSE. If they don't have a search warrant, they should gracefully STAY THE HELL OUT. We don't need a reason to say no to an illegal search. That might be the most logical thing I have ever seen you write! if you t hink so,,, sounds to me like 'because I can' which is more an egocentric statement than a reason,,,, so many other questions I could ask which we have a 'right' to do , but doing them would be stupid under certain circumstances like,,,, why would anyone leave an injugred child in the street,,? well, legally, if its not my child I am not legally bound to keep it safe, ,so its my RIGHT to do so but that does little to give a reasonable response to the question.... How about because politicians have corrupted the human morality so badly with stupid laws in favor of the corporations and insurance companies that to touch that injured child jeopardizes all you own and the ability to support your own family due to lawsuits. Human kindness is now against the law..... unless it's gov't issued, taxed, and approved! quite a sad perspective,, but to each their own,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Russia warned that we were backing the terrorists in Syria and we shouted them down. . Now it appears they warned us twice about the boston bomber and we did not listen. It is a sad day when you can get more reliable info from the Russians than from our own government. How on earth do we happen to be on the side of al-Qaeda in Syria? Crazy! I am tired of my lying Government, Democrats and Republicans alike. We (the CIA) created al-Qaeda. Without al-Qaeda there would be no permanent "war on terror" to keep the citizens terrified enough to give up all their rights to privacy and guns and illegal searches. to msharmony: who askED "why would anyone refuse to allow a search?" The answer: Because we have a right to privacy and should be protected against illegal searches. WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A REASON TO REFUSE. If they don't have a search warrant, they should gracefully STAY THE HELL OUT. We don't need a reason to say no to an illegal search. That might be the most logical thing I have ever seen you write! if you t hink so,,, sounds to me like 'because I can' which is more an egocentric statement than a reason,,,, so many other questions I could ask which we have a 'right' to do , but doing them would be stupid under certain circumstances like,,,, why would anyone leave an injugred child in the street,,? well, legally, if its not my child I am not legally bound to keep it safe, ,so its my RIGHT to do so but that does little to give a reasonable response to the question.... How about because politicians have corrupted the human morality so badly with stupid laws in favor of the corporations and insurance companies that to touch that injured child jeopardizes all you own and the ability to support your own family due to lawsuits. Human kindness is now against the law..... unless it's gov't issued, taxed, and approved! quite a sad perspective,, but to each their own,,,, But yet.....prove me wrong..... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
just put 'hero' in your favorite search engine
apparently people take that risk daily and aren't sued because of it not to mention there are other ways to help a child down in the street, even if you cant 'move them' and even if it is your right to keep on going,,,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Breaking: 3 more suspects in Boston Marathon bombings case taken into custody.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/breaking-boston-police-three-boston-marathon-bombing-suspects-151027478.html Authorities have arrested three additional suspects in connection to the Boston Marathon bombings, the Boston Police Department confirmed to Yahoo News. Two of the suspects are Azamat Tazhayakov and Dias Kadyrbayev, both Kazakh nationals who attended school with bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. Their attorney, Robert Stahl, said the charges will be unsealed in federal court Wednesday afternoon and both plan to plead "not guilty." The third suspect, a U.S. citizen who has not been publicly identified, was reportedly arrested today. NBC's Pete Williams reported that the suspects are friends of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's from the University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth. The three have been under FBI surveillance for 10 days and are suspected of aiding Tsarnaev after he allegedly committed his crimes. Tazhayakov and Kadyrbayev were detained on civil immigration violations on April 20 and have been in federal custody since then. The two appeared in immigration court Wednesday morning. Boston attorney Linda Cristello, who represented the two in immigration court, confirmed in an email to Yahoo News that her clients now face additional federal charges and will appear in court Wednesday afternoon. She referred further questions to Stahl and Harlan Protass, criminal defense attorneys who have been tapped to represent the pair on the new charges. Stahl said the new charges would be unsealed in federal court Wednesday. Protass said they will release a more detailed statement after the hearing. Tsarnaev, a 19-year-old college student, is charged with killing three and injuring more than 200 in the two bombs last month. He is in custody at a federal prison medical facility at Fort Devens, 40 miles outside of Boston, where he is being treated for injuries incurred in a shootout with police before his arrest. His older brother and suspected co-bomber, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, was killed while fleeing arrest. In a statement, the Police Department said there was no threat to public safety at this time. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I would think they are going to call it a "sleeper cell" but it seems that the only ones sleeping are our government officials.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I would think they are going to call it a "sleeper cell" but it seems that the only ones sleeping are our government officials. our gov is not sleeping, but just the opposite... they let this happen to further their agenda... i'm thinking to see how far they could push martial law and it's effect... |
|
|
|
|
