Please. Not showing any emotion while pictures of your victims bleeding out are shown in the courtroom is not typical human nature. Not once did he react to a single shred of testimony. Not once, but auntie brings out the tears. I'm sure he regrets his current position - he got caught, was taken alive, and now faces punishment. But there has been zero indication he regrets participating in the bombing.
He's trying to be tough. His survival instinct. Can't let reality of what he did surface.
We all lie to ourselves. We all justify.
Justifying killing is wrong. Period.
While he tries to be tough, his victims will never justify anything ever again.
True no doubt. But it's us now justifying revenge killing. We are no different. Cycle continues and no one can claim moral high ground.
Anything we do in response is 'revenge'.
We are quite a bit different: we haven't plotted and executed a demented plan to place a bomb to blow up indiscriminate victims who have done nothing to us. We are holding a person who has blown people up accountable for their depravity- we owe him nothing, but we have a responsibility to seek justice for those that are no longer here because they picked the wrong spot to watch a marathon from.
We haven't? Really? Come on thirty, you know that's just not true. If this guy did it, he deserves to be punished to the fullest, but let's not pretend we don't do shit like this. That's why he did this shit in the first place. Remember?
I hardly consider this idiot the torch bearer for the cause you are alluding to, Callen. If he had dug himself from the rubble, I could understand, but as it is... he's as culpable as his victims given his charmed western life.
Not callen, I made the post.
Thanks for not letting me take on response from your fraakin posts BB Have enough already.
Please. Not showing any emotion while pictures of your victims bleeding out are shown in the courtroom is not typical human nature. Not once did he react to a single shred of testimony. Not once, but auntie brings out the tears. I'm sure he regrets his current position - he got caught, was taken alive, and now faces punishment. But there has been zero indication he regrets participating in the bombing.
He's trying to be tough. His survival instinct. Can't let reality of what he did surface.
We all lie to ourselves. We all justify.
Justifying killing is wrong. Period.
While he tries to be tough, his victims will never justify anything ever again.
True no doubt. But it's us now justifying revenge killing. We are no different. Cycle continues and no one can claim moral high ground.
Anything we do in response is 'revenge'.
We are quite a bit different: we haven't plotted and executed a demented plan to place a bomb to blow up indiscriminate victims who have done nothing to us. We are holding a person who has blown people up accountable for their depravity- we owe him nothing, but we have a responsibility to seek justice for those that are no longer here because they picked the wrong spot to watch a marathon from.
We haven't? Really? Come on thirty, you know that's just not true. If this guy did it, he deserves to be punished to the fullest, but let's not pretend we don't do shit like this. That's why he did this shit in the first place. Remember?
I think you are giving him too much credit. He did this because he wanted to play terrorist. When it was over he went back to his dorm, got high, and partied with other college students. He has far more in common with James Holmes (the Aurora movie theater shooter) than he does with the jihadists he and his brother were hoping to emulate.
Please. Not showing any emotion while pictures of your victims bleeding out are shown in the courtroom is not typical human nature. Not once did he react to a single shred of testimony. Not once, but auntie brings out the tears. I'm sure he regrets his current position - he got caught, was taken alive, and now faces punishment. But there has been zero indication he regrets participating in the bombing.
He's trying to be tough. His survival instinct. Can't let reality of what he did surface.
We all lie to ourselves. We all justify.
Justifying killing is wrong. Period.
While he tries to be tough, his victims will never justify anything ever again.
True no doubt. But it's us now justifying revenge killing. We are no different. Cycle continues and no one can claim moral high ground.
Anything we do in response is 'revenge'.
We are quite a bit different: we haven't plotted and executed a demented plan to place a bomb to blow up indiscriminate victims who have done nothing to us. We are holding a person who has blown people up accountable for their depravity- we owe him nothing, but we have a responsibility to seek justice for those that are no longer here because they picked the wrong spot to watch a marathon from.
We haven't? Really? Come on thirty, you know that's just not true. If this guy did it, he deserves to be punished to the fullest, but let's not pretend we don't do shit like this. That's why he did this shit in the first place. Remember?
I think you are giving him too much credit. He did this because he wanted to play terrorist. When it was over he went back to his dorm, got high, and partied with other college students. He has far more in common with James Holmes (the Aurora movie theater shooter) than he does with the jihadists he and his brother were hoping to emulate.
So he basically just planted a bomb for the hell of it? Just to play terrorist?
Please. Not showing any emotion while pictures of your victims bleeding out are shown in the courtroom is not typical human nature. Not once did he react to a single shred of testimony. Not once, but auntie brings out the tears. I'm sure he regrets his current position - he got caught, was taken alive, and now faces punishment. But there has been zero indication he regrets participating in the bombing.
He's trying to be tough. His survival instinct. Can't let reality of what he did surface.
We all lie to ourselves. We all justify.
Justifying killing is wrong. Period.
While he tries to be tough, his victims will never justify anything ever again.
True no doubt. But it's us now justifying revenge killing. We are no different. Cycle continues and no one can claim moral high ground.
Anything we do in response is 'revenge'.
We are quite a bit different: we haven't plotted and executed a demented plan to place a bomb to blow up indiscriminate victims who have done nothing to us. We are holding a person who has blown people up accountable for their depravity- we owe him nothing, but we have a responsibility to seek justice for those that are no longer here because they picked the wrong spot to watch a marathon from.
We haven't? Really? Come on thirty, you know that's just not true. If this guy did it, he deserves to be punished to the fullest, but let's not pretend we don't do shit like this. That's why he did this shit in the first place. Remember?
I think you are giving him too much credit. He did this because he wanted to play terrorist. When it was over he went back to his dorm, got high, and partied with other college students. He has far more in common with James Holmes (the Aurora movie theater shooter) than he does with the jihadists he and his brother were hoping to emulate.
So he basically just planted a bomb for the hell of it? Just to play terrorist?
He planted a bomb for the same reason James Holmes fired the gun. He wanted to feel what it was like to kill people. Then he went back to his dorm and partied.
Unfortunately, it looks like we will never learn anything in regards to motives....what you're saying, Jimmy, is only what the lawyers want us to know.
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was raised to take the direction of the most powerful adult in his life, his attorneys say—and now all those powerful adults seem to be telling the 21-year-old to sit down and shut up.
And to make sure he shuts up, they have been holding him under Special Administrative Measures (SAMs) that restrict any contact with the outside world. This is presumably to prevent him from communicating to the outside world any plans that could result in death or bodily harm.
But is muzzling the defendant really in the interest of national security—or in the interest of the national security apparatuses?
For the two years since the April 15, 2013, Boston Marathon bombings, WhoWhatWhy has documented the myriad ways that arms of the US government have contradicted its claim that the two Tsarnaev brothers were “lone wolves” motivated by ideology, with the feds consistently seeking to suppress information that could shed light on the bombings. This includes keeping the defendant totally mute.
To date, we have not heard a word from him—and now, even after he was convicted, we still have not heard a peep. This is in part, too, due to the strategy his own attorneys employed. Seeing the impossibility of their own investigators getting to the bottom of the many mysteries in the case, they threw in the towel, claiming their client “did it,” and blamed the influence of his dead older brother, Tamerlan, in hopes of achieving the dubious victory of a life sentence without parole.
Now, in the “penalty phase,” while he awaits word of whether he will face the death penalty, Tsarnaev sits there, mute and virtually expressionless, causing some to wonder just how bad were the injuries he sustained when police fired upwards of 100 bullets into the boat where he was hiding, or if he might be heavily medicated.
And yet he seemed particularly astute during the defense’s presentation of its case during the guilt phase. He frequently spoke with his attorneys, and wrote Post-it notes to them as they were examining witnesses. If he wasn’t incapacitated, why wouldn’t his legal team allow him to speak in his own defense?
Any thinking person (and we’ve heard from far too few as this affair has unfolded in all its tabloid luridness) would wonder:
Does Dzhokhar Tsarnaev want to testify? If so, why has he been stopped from doing so? What would he have had to lose? Do his lawyers think the prosecution would provoke him into behaving in a manner that would harden the jury against him even more? If he is the victim of more complex circumstances, why not give him a chance to say so? And if he is a terrorist, why would he not want to publicize his cause and have his lawyers show photos of dead Muslim children killed by American drone strikes?
Why bomb a public event if you’re not making a political statement?
The defense’s strategic decision not to help us learn more about what the Tsarnaev brothers were up to—and why—seems a strange one. But then so does the constant invocation of “national security” by government agencies in repeatedly blocking disclosures and sealing a plethora of motions. The paradox is that we’ve been repeatedly told that this plot was about nothing larger than two misguided young people operating alone.
But as our reports have shown, the FBI had a prior relationship with Tamerlan, sought to recruit others in his orbit as plot infiltrators, and, bizarrely, failed to monitor his doings and international travel even after a warning from Russian intelligence.
Somehow, all of this has been lost or buried. It barely came up in the trial, perhaps because of the strategy: blame it all on the elder brother, then assure that virtually nothing about the elder brother can be deemed germane, because he is dead and not on trial.
“Tsarnaev had been raised all his life to take direction from the most powerful adult.”
Rather tellingly, the person who argued that point might just be one of the most powerful adults in the convicted Boston Marathon bomber’s life: his attorney, David Bruck.
Bruck, together with Tsarnaev’s other lead attorneys Judy Clark and appointed federal defender Miriam Conrad, hold Tsarnaev’s life in their hands as they attempt to show that their client was really nothing more than a “lost teenager” without any real motivation to bomb anything. They are arguing, during the sentencing phase of the trial, that Tsarnaev would never have committed this crime had he not taken direction from his older brother, Tamerlan.
Remaining rigidly locked into this approach, they have sought to demonstrate their cooperation with every point asserted by the government.
If he is given life in prison, his lawyer has said that he would be completely cut off from the outside world.
We get a rare look at the inner-workings of his trial team’s strategy in a transcript released by the court during the sentencing phase. The transcript was of a lobby conference to which the jury was not privy.
The transcript reveals that Tsarnaev’s attorneys were so determined to show their cooperation and commitment to ensuring that their client would never again pose a risk that they agreed to any conditions of confinement—including his total muzzling. In his opening argument to the penalty phase, Bruck virtually guaranteed that should the jury send him to prison for the rest of his life, Tsarnaev would live a lifetime of pained silence in retribution for what he did.
“There are no interviews with the news media. There will be no autobiography. There will be no messages relayed from Dzhokhar onto the internet. There will be no nothing. There will be no media spotlight coming back on him as an execution date approaches. And one important thing you’ll learn is that the FBI and the U.S. Attorney’s Office here in Boston are in a position to help ensure that Dzhokhar is cut off from the outside world forever if they think it best. So the evidence will show that if you sentence Dzhokhar to a lifetime of thinking about what he did, you’ll both punish him and protect society at the same time.”
To be sure, the defense likely hopes that promising he will never cause further anguish to the victims will be an effective bargaining chip. But there seems to be more to it.
One phrase above stands out:
”If they think it best.”
Best for whom that he be silenced?
Bruck was referring to the SAMs, which allow the govt to restrict a prisoner’s communications in ways that may include “housing the inmate in administrative detention and/or limiting certain privileges, including, but not limited to, correspondence, visiting, interviews with representatives of the news media, and use of the telephone, as is reasonably necessary to protect persons against the risk of acts of violence or terrorism.”
The law was established to prevent presumably dangerous inmates—those accused of terrorism, espionage, mob or gang activity—from communicating to the outside world any plans that could result in death or bodily harm.
Tsarnaev will most likely go to a federal supermax prison—whether he is given life without parole or the death penalty—and be kept in solitary confinement. As the measures currently stand, he would never be able to tell his version of events, communicate the reason behind his murderous rampage or cry out that he was framed, coerced, or caught up in something larger.
Assuming he was, as convicted, involved in a plot to harm large numbers of people, it would seem to be in the interest of public safety to learn something from and about those who would commit such acts. And if this story is much more complicated—as suggested by the anomalies WhoWhatWhy has uncovered—then it is in the rather urgent interests of a democracy increasingly beset by an unaccountable security state to hear directly from Dzhokhar Tsarnaev
He has been in the courtroom every single day. He could have taken the stand in his own defense at any time. Defense attorneys have wide latitude to present alternative theories of a crime. He has hardly been silenced.
stop polluting yourself with this Jimmy. I know it happened in Boston, but you're gonna make yourself sick following this. He did it, it's over (not for the families) but don't dwell on it buddy. Self pollution is a bitch.
I'm sure he's been told that he needs to remain silent to avoid the death penalty, and this seems to be the approach of the defense....who knows what else he's been told. I honestly have not followed the case closely - that article just popped up in my online meanderings. Either way, I think it's unfortunate that we will never know the full story.
stop polluting yourself with this Jimmy. I know it happened in Boston, but you're gonna make yourself sick following this. He did it, it's over (not for the families) but don't dwell on it buddy. Self pollution is a bitch.
Not bad advice at all. I will be glad when this trial is over. Soon.
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was raised to take the direction of the most powerful adult in his life, his attorneys say—and now all those powerful adults seem to be telling the 21-year-old to sit down and shut up.
And to make sure he shuts up, they have been holding him under Special Administrative Measures (SAMs) that restrict any contact with the outside world. This is presumably to prevent him from communicating to the outside world any plans that could result in death or bodily harm.
But is muzzling the defendant really in the interest of national security—or in the interest of the national security apparatuses?
For the two years since the April 15, 2013, Boston Marathon bombings, WhoWhatWhy has documented the myriad ways that arms of the US government have contradicted its claim that the two Tsarnaev brothers were “lone wolves” motivated by ideology, with the feds consistently seeking to suppress information that could shed light on the bombings. This includes keeping the defendant totally mute.
Why bomb a public event if you’re not making a political statement?
The defense’s strategic decision not to help us learn more about what the Tsarnaev brothers were up to—and why—seems a strange one. But then so does the constant invocation of “national security” by government agencies in repeatedly blocking disclosures and sealing a plethora of motions. The paradox is that we’ve been repeatedly told that this plot was about nothing larger than two misguided young people operating alone.
But as our reports have shown, the FBI had a prior relationship with Tamerlan, sought to recruit others in his orbit as plot infiltrators, and, bizarrely, failed to monitor his doings and international travel even after a warning from Russian intelligence.
Somehow, all of this has been lost or buried. It barely came up in the trial, perhaps because of the strategy: blame it all on the elder brother, then assure that virtually nothing about the elder brother can be deemed germane, because he is dead and not on trial.
“Tsarnaev had been raised all his life to take direction from the most powerful adult.”
Rather tellingly, the person who argued that point might just be one of the most powerful adults in the convicted Boston Marathon bomber’s life: his attorney, David Bruck.
Bruck, together with Tsarnaev’s other lead attorneys Judy Clark and appointed federal defender Miriam Conrad, hold Tsarnaev’s life in their hands as they attempt to show that their client was really nothing more than a “lost teenager” without any real motivation to bomb anything. They are arguing, during the sentencing phase of the trial, that Tsarnaev would never have committed this crime had he not taken direction from his older brother, Tamerlan.
Remaining rigidly locked into this approach, they have sought to demonstrate their cooperation with every point asserted by the government.
If he is given life in prison, his lawyer has said that he would be completely cut off from the outside world.
We get a rare look at the inner-workings of his trial team’s strategy in a transcript released by the court during the sentencing phase. The transcript was of a lobby conference to which the jury was not privy.
The transcript reveals that Tsarnaev’s attorneys were so determined to show their cooperation and commitment to ensuring that their client would never again pose a risk that they agreed to any conditions of confinement—including his total muzzling. In his opening argument to the penalty phase, Bruck virtually guaranteed that should the jury send him to prison for the rest of his life, Tsarnaev would live a lifetime of pained silence in retribution for what he did.
“There are no interviews with the news media. There will be no autobiography. There will be no messages relayed from Dzhokhar onto the internet. There will be no nothing. There will be no media spotlight coming back on him as an execution date approaches. And one important thing you’ll learn is that the FBI and the U.S. Attorney’s Office here in Boston are in a position to help ensure that Dzhokhar is cut off from the outside world forever if they think it best. So the evidence will show that if you sentence Dzhokhar to a lifetime of thinking about what he did, you’ll both punish him and protect society at the same time.”
To be sure, the defense likely hopes that promising he will never cause further anguish to the victims will be an effective bargaining chip. But there seems to be more to it.
One phrase above stands out:
”If they think it best.”
Best for whom that he be silenced?
Bruck was referring to the SAMs, which allow the govt to restrict a prisoner’s communications in ways that may include “housing the inmate in administrative detention and/or limiting certain privileges, including, but not limited to, correspondence, visiting, interviews with representatives of the news media, and use of the telephone, as is reasonably necessary to protect persons against the risk of acts of violence or terrorism.”
The law was established to prevent presumably dangerous inmates—those accused of terrorism, espionage, mob or gang activity—from communicating to the outside world any plans that could result in death or bodily harm.
Tsarnaev will most likely go to a federal supermax prison—whether he is given life without parole or the death penalty—and be kept in solitary confinement. As the measures currently stand, he would never be able to tell his version of events, communicate the reason behind his murderous rampage or cry out that he was framed, coerced, or caught up in something larger.
Assuming he was, as convicted, involved in a plot to harm large numbers of people, it would seem to be in the interest of public safety to learn something from and about those who would commit such acts. And if this story is much more complicated—as suggested by the anomalies WhoWhatWhy has uncovered—then it is in the rather urgent interests of a democracy increasingly beset by an unaccountable security state to hear directly from Dzhokhar Tsarnaev
Sorry but no. Fuck this "kid." This sounds like a conspiracy theorist apologist. Fuck him, he does not pass go, he does not become a martyr, he doesn't get married to some whack innocent conspiracist, have kids, nor inspire or write a book or garner anti-government conspiracist to his "cause." No 999 virgins, no joy. Dwell on what he participated in and cry himself to sleep with visions of his auntie. This kind of analysis, view, or whatever, is what lends credence to the Bundy Ranchers. If he wanted to "speak?" , he should have chosen a better legal team or better yet, a public defender. Let him rot away with nary a tear shed for his existence. Remember the Unabomber? Yea, like that.
NOTE: I had to delete 780 characters of the post I'm responding to because I was over the limit and couldn't figure it out. My apologies.
Not sure how you got all that from the article I posted. It didn't say he wanted to speak; it questioned why he hasn't. I swear to Christ: since a year or two after 9/11 it has become virtually impossible to look at any news story from outside popular opinion / the official story, without being smeared as a conspiracy theorist. Not that I see anything very conspiratorial in that article. I think it's only natural to want a peak inside this guy's mind. And there are probably things we could learn from doing so. I know that opinion pisses people off...oh well. Like I said, I've barely followed this story, so I'm not going to put myself out there over it. I hope justice is served and the families victimized find some closure.
And ya, fuck character limits! So annoying. I had to do some editing to the story to make it fit, and it's not even long. Nothing like a current events forum that makes it painful to post articles on current events!
Not sure how you got all that from the article I posted. I swear to Christ: since a year or two after 9/11 it has become virtually impossible to look at any news story from outside popular opinion / the official story, without being smeared as a conspiracy theorist. Not that I see anything very conspiratorial in that article. I think it's only natural to want a peak inside this guy's mind. And there are probably things we could learn from doing so. I know that opinion pisses people off...oh well. Like I said, I've barely followed this story, so I'm not going to put myself out there over it. I hope justice is served and the families victimized find some closure.
Drowned, my apologies as my response is not toward you for posting what you posted but rather the author of the article and what he wrote. You want inside his head? Pick up "Two Brothers." It's new, it's out and it's their history. I thumbed through it today but, I'm sorry, the wounds are too fucking raw to buy it. Someday, I will, but not now. As for your 9/11 comment, did you watch/read/listen to the trial? The evidence, prior to the defense, in their opening statement, was overwhelming. You admitted to not paying attention and thus, it is not evidence that it's virtually impossible to question the official narrative, to paraphrase. Not everything is a fucking conspiracy. Fuck that "kid" and let him dwell on what he had done. With all due respect.
And ya, fuck character limits! So annoying. I had to do some editing to the story to make it fit, and it's not even long. Nothing like a current events forum that makes it painful to post articles on current events!
Sometimes, when I'm really organized, I write in a word document and cut and paste. Fuck me. Who's got the App for that?
Not sure how you got all that from the article I posted. I swear to Christ: since a year or two after 9/11 it has become virtually impossible to look at any news story from outside popular opinion / the official story, without being smeared as a conspiracy theorist. Not that I see anything very conspiratorial in that article. I think it's only natural to want a peak inside this guy's mind. And there are probably things we could learn from doing so. I know that opinion pisses people off...oh well. Like I said, I've barely followed this story, so I'm not going to put myself out there over it. I hope justice is served and the families victimized find some closure.
Drowned, my apologies as my response is not toward you for posting what you posted but rather the author of the article and what he wrote. You want inside his head? Pick up "Two Brothers." It's new, it's out and it's their history. I thumbed through it today but, I'm sorry, the wounds are too fucking raw to buy it. Someday, I will, but not now. As for your 9/11 comment, did you watch/read/listen to the trial? The evidence, prior to the defense, in their opening statement, was overwhelming. You admitted to not paying attention and thus, it is not evidence that it's virtually impossible to question the official narrative, to paraphrase. Not everything is a fucking conspiracy. Fuck that "kid" and let him dwell on what he had done. With all due respect.
It's not the official narrative I have questions about...it's the fbi's involvement with the older brother prior to the bombing, and the older brother's friend who was shot during interrogation. The fbi has a history of virtually cultivating home-grown terrorists...seems they really dropped the ball with this guy. And with both of them dead, and the younger brother not talking (ever), we will never hear what he has to say about that. I'll read a synopsis on the book...and dig a bit about the author. Thanks for the recommendation. And hey, no need for an apology; you have my respect for your views, and your passion...but ya, also for the apology. Canadians love apologies
Not sure how you got all that from the article I posted. I swear to Christ: since a year or two after 9/11 it has become virtually impossible to look at any news story from outside popular opinion / the official story, without being smeared as a conspiracy theorist. Not that I see anything very conspiratorial in that article. I think it's only natural to want a peak inside this guy's mind. And there are probably things we could learn from doing so. I know that opinion pisses people off...oh well. Like I said, I've barely followed this story, so I'm not going to put myself out there over it. I hope justice is served and the families victimized find some closure.
Drowned, my apologies as my response is not toward you for posting what you posted but rather the author of the article and what he wrote. You want inside his head? Pick up "Two Brothers." It's new, it's out and it's their history. I thumbed through it today but, I'm sorry, the wounds are too fucking raw to buy it. Someday, I will, but not now. As for your 9/11 comment, did you watch/read/listen to the trial? The evidence, prior to the defense, in their opening statement, was overwhelming. You admitted to not paying attention and thus, it is not evidence that it's virtually impossible to question the official narrative, to paraphrase. Not everything is a fucking conspiracy. Fuck that "kid" and let him dwell on what he had done. With all due respect.
It's not the official narrative I have questions about...it's the fbi's involvement with the older brother prior to the bombing, and the older brother's friend who was shot during interrogation. The fbi has a history of virtually cultivating home-grown terrorists...seems they really dropped the ball with this guy. And with both of them dead, and the younger brother not talking (ever), we will never hear what he has to say about that. I'll read a synopsis on the book...and dig a bit about the author. Thanks for the recommendation. And hey, no need for an apology; you have my respect for your views, and your passion...but ya, also for the apology. Canadians love apologies
But, but, but here's the thing, if you really question the FBI, then why didn't he take the stand? Under direct questioning by his legal team, he would have been afforded every opportunity to speak "truth to justice." Are you insinuating that the most prominent criminal anti-death penalty lawyer rolled to protect the FBI? I'm not buying it. The evidence, the testimony, the narrative, the swagger, the driving over his brother, dear god, if you believe in such things, not to mention that if they had gassed the car they carjacked, driven to an airport with tickets to fly, they would have gotten away with it. But no, they strutted like peacocks. They were brainwashed, informants of the FBI, lead along to do what they did for they not know what they did, sorry, not buying it. And the guys in Texas were set up too? The guy who whacked the cop with a hatchet in NYC? Set up by the FBI?
There are attorneys who have done time on behalf of GITMO suspects. This is the US, not China or North Korea. He was afforded every opportunity to present a solid defense. There is no "there" there.
Please. Not showing any emotion while pictures of your victims bleeding out are shown in the courtroom is not typical human nature. Not once did he react to a single shred of testimony. Not once, but auntie brings out the tears. I'm sure he regrets his current position - he got caught, was taken alive, and now faces punishment. But there has been zero indication he regrets participating in the bombing.
He's trying to be tough. His survival instinct. Can't let reality of what he did surface.
We all lie to ourselves. We all justify.
Justifying killing is wrong. Period.
While he tries to be tough, his victims will never justify anything ever again.
True no doubt. But it's us now justifying revenge killing. We are no different. Cycle continues and no one can claim moral high ground.
Anything we do in response is 'revenge'.
We are quite a bit different: we haven't plotted and executed a demented plan to place a bomb to blow up indiscriminate victims who have done nothing to us. We are holding a person who has blown people up accountable for their depravity- we owe him nothing, but we have a responsibility to seek justice for those that are no longer here because they picked the wrong spot to watch a marathon from.
We haven't? Really? Come on thirty, you know that's just not true. If this guy did it, he deserves to be punished to the fullest, but let's not pretend we don't do shit like this. That's why he did this shit in the first place. Remember?
I hardly consider this idiot the torch bearer for the cause you are alluding to, Callen. If he had dug himself from the rubble, I could understand, but as it is... he's as culpable as his victims given his charmed western life.
Not callen, I made the post.
Sorry about the confusion. I'm on the road- sorry about the late reply too.
Jimmy already spoke to this: the guy is a little shitbird that 'played terrorist'. As a US citizen, he was just as culpable as the people he blew up for the offences which you suggest motivated him.
Please. Not showing any emotion while pictures of your victims bleeding out are shown in the courtroom is not typical human nature. Not once did he react to a single shred of testimony. Not once, but auntie brings out the tears. I'm sure he regrets his current position - he got caught, was taken alive, and now faces punishment. But there has been zero indication he regrets participating in the bombing.
He's trying to be tough. His survival instinct. Can't let reality of what he did surface.
We all lie to ourselves. We all justify.
Justifying killing is wrong. Period.
While he tries to be tough, his victims will never justify anything ever again.
True no doubt. But it's us now justifying revenge killing. We are no different. Cycle continues and no one can claim moral high ground.
Anything we do in response is 'revenge'.
We are quite a bit different: we haven't plotted and executed a demented plan to place a bomb to blow up indiscriminate victims who have done nothing to us. We are holding a person who has blown people up accountable for their depravity- we owe him nothing, but we have a responsibility to seek justice for those that are no longer here because they picked the wrong spot to watch a marathon from.
We haven't? Really? Come on thirty, you know that's just not true. If this guy did it, he deserves to be punished to the fullest, but let's not pretend we don't do shit like this. That's why he did this shit in the first place. Remember?
I hardly consider this idiot the torch bearer for the cause you are alluding to, Callen. If he had dug himself from the rubble, I could understand, but as it is... he's as culpable as his victims given his charmed western life.
Not callen, I made the post.
Sorry about the confusion. I'm on the road- sorry about the late reply too.
Jimmy already spoke to this: the guy is a little shitbird that 'played terrorist'. As a US citizen, he was just as culpable as the people he blew up for the offences which you suggest motivated him.
A worthless rodent.
I would argue he was even more culpable. The Boston Marathon is an international event with participants from all over the world. He and his brother had no idea who they were going to kill, just that they were going to kill. They didn't know who they were going to injure until the bombs went off. More than two hundred were injured in the blasts and they weren't just Americans. Of those they killed, Lu Lingzi was a Chinese national here for college and Martin Richard was an eight year old boy. Neither one of them had a single thing to do with the offenses these two murderers used to justify their actions.
Please. Not showing any emotion while pictures of your victims bleeding out are shown in the courtroom is not typical human nature. Not once did he react to a single shred of testimony. Not once, but auntie brings out the tears. I'm sure he regrets his current position - he got caught, was taken alive, and now faces punishment. But there has been zero indication he regrets participating in the bombing.
He's trying to be tough. His survival instinct. Can't let reality of what he did surface.
We all lie to ourselves. We all justify.
Justifying killing is wrong. Period.
While he tries to be tough, his victims will never justify anything ever again.
True no doubt. But it's us now justifying revenge killing. We are no different. Cycle continues and no one can claim moral high ground.
Anything we do in response is 'revenge'.
We are quite a bit different: we haven't plotted and executed a demented plan to place a bomb to blow up indiscriminate victims who have done nothing to us. We are holding a person who has blown people up accountable for their depravity- we owe him nothing, but we have a responsibility to seek justice for those that are no longer here because they picked the wrong spot to watch a marathon from.
We haven't? Really? Come on thirty, you know that's just not true. If this guy did it, he deserves to be punished to the fullest, but let's not pretend we don't do shit like this. That's why he did this shit in the first place. Remember?
I think you are giving him too much credit. He did this because he wanted to play terrorist. When it was over he went back to his dorm, got high, and partied with other college students. He has far more in common with James Holmes (the Aurora movie theater shooter) than he does with the jihadists he and his brother were hoping to emulate.
So he basically just planted a bomb for the hell of it? Just to play terrorist?
He planted a bomb for the same reason James Holmes fired the gun. He wanted to feel what it was like to kill people. Then he went back to his dorm and partied.
Jimmy he did it for the same reason we want him dead. Revenge of killing "members of my tribe".
Please. Not showing any emotion while pictures of your victims bleeding out are shown in the courtroom is not typical human nature. Not once did he react to a single shred of testimony. Not once, but auntie brings out the tears. I'm sure he regrets his current position - he got caught, was taken alive, and now faces punishment. But there has been zero indication he regrets participating in the bombing.
He's trying to be tough. His survival instinct. Can't let reality of what he did surface.
We all lie to ourselves. We all justify.
Justifying killing is wrong. Period.
While he tries to be tough, his victims will never justify anything ever again.
True no doubt. But it's us now justifying revenge killing. We are no different. Cycle continues and no one can claim moral high ground.
Anything we do in response is 'revenge'.
We are quite a bit different: we haven't plotted and executed a demented plan to place a bomb to blow up indiscriminate victims who have done nothing to us. We are holding a person who has blown people up accountable for their depravity- we owe him nothing, but we have a responsibility to seek justice for those that are no longer here because they picked the wrong spot to watch a marathon from.
We haven't? Really? Come on thirty, you know that's just not true. If this guy did it, he deserves to be punished to the fullest, but let's not pretend we don't do shit like this. That's why he did this shit in the first place. Remember?
I think you are giving him too much credit. He did this because he wanted to play terrorist. When it was over he went back to his dorm, got high, and partied with other college students. He has far more in common with James Holmes (the Aurora movie theater shooter) than he does with the jihadists he and his brother were hoping to emulate.
So he basically just planted a bomb for the hell of it? Just to play terrorist?
He planted a bomb for the same reason James Holmes fired the gun. He wanted to feel what it was like to kill people. Then he went back to his dorm and partied.
Jimmy he did it for the same reason we want him dead. Revenge of killing "members of my tribe".
So we are just like him if we want to execute him. Yes.
No. See my post above. He had no idea who he was going to kill, nor whose " tribe" they belonged to. He wanted to kill and he did. Now he has received a trial and a defense and all the benefits of his citizenship. If the jury votes to execute him we will be nothing like him.
Please. Not showing any emotion while pictures of your victims bleeding out are shown in the courtroom is not typical human nature. Not once did he react to a single shred of testimony. Not once, but auntie brings out the tears. I'm sure he regrets his current position - he got caught, was taken alive, and now faces punishment. But there has been zero indication he regrets participating in the bombing.
He's trying to be tough. His survival instinct. Can't let reality of what he did surface.
We all lie to ourselves. We all justify.
Justifying killing is wrong. Period.
While he tries to be tough, his victims will never justify anything ever again.
True no doubt. But it's us now justifying revenge killing. We are no different. Cycle continues and no one can claim moral high ground.
Anything we do in response is 'revenge'.
We are quite a bit different: we haven't plotted and executed a demented plan to place a bomb to blow up indiscriminate victims who have done nothing to us. We are holding a person who has blown people up accountable for their depravity- we owe him nothing, but we have a responsibility to seek justice for those that are no longer here because they picked the wrong spot to watch a marathon from.
We haven't? Really? Come on thirty, you know that's just not true. If this guy did it, he deserves to be punished to the fullest, but let's not pretend we don't do shit like this. That's why he did this shit in the first place. Remember?
I think you are giving him too much credit. He did this because he wanted to play terrorist. When it was over he went back to his dorm, got high, and partied with other college students. He has far more in common with James Holmes (the Aurora movie theater shooter) than he does with the jihadists he and his brother were hoping to emulate.
So he basically just planted a bomb for the hell of it? Just to play terrorist?
He planted a bomb for the same reason James Holmes fired the gun. He wanted to feel what it was like to kill people. Then he went back to his dorm and partied.
Jimmy he did it for the same reason we want him dead. Revenge of killing "members of my tribe".
So we are just like him if we want to execute him. Yes.
No. See my post above. He had no idea who he was going to kill, nor whose " tribe" they belonged to. He wanted to kill and he did. Now he has received a trial and a defense and all the benefits of his citizenship. If the jury votes to execute him we will be nothing like him.
He knew he was killing Americans and it was in response to US actions/killings in Middle East No ? Did I not read that?
Please. Not showing any emotion while pictures of your victims bleeding out are shown in the courtroom is not typical human nature. Not once did he react to a single shred of testimony. Not once, but auntie brings out the tears. I'm sure he regrets his current position - he got caught, was taken alive, and now faces punishment. But there has been zero indication he regrets participating in the bombing.
He's trying to be tough. His survival instinct. Can't let reality of what he did surface.
We all lie to ourselves. We all justify.
Justifying killing is wrong. Period.
While he tries to be tough, his victims will never justify anything ever again.
True no doubt. But it's us now justifying revenge killing. We are no different. Cycle continues and no one can claim moral high ground.
Anything we do in response is 'revenge'.
We are quite a bit different: we haven't plotted and executed a demented plan to place a bomb to blow up indiscriminate victims who have done nothing to us. We are holding a person who has blown people up accountable for their depravity- we owe him nothing, but we have a responsibility to seek justice for those that are no longer here because they picked the wrong spot to watch a marathon from.
We haven't? Really? Come on thirty, you know that's just not true. If this guy did it, he deserves to be punished to the fullest, but let's not pretend we don't do shit like this. That's why he did this shit in the first place. Remember?
I think you are giving him too much credit. He did this because he wanted to play terrorist. When it was over he went back to his dorm, got high, and partied with other college students. He has far more in common with James Holmes (the Aurora movie theater shooter) than he does with the jihadists he and his brother were hoping to emulate.
So he basically just planted a bomb for the hell of it? Just to play terrorist?
He planted a bomb for the same reason James Holmes fired the gun. He wanted to feel what it was like to kill people. Then he went back to his dorm and partied.
Jimmy he did it for the same reason we want him dead. Revenge of killing "members of my tribe".
So we are just like him if we want to execute him. Yes.
No. See my post above. He had no idea who he was going to kill, nor whose " tribe" they belonged to. He wanted to kill and he did. Now he has received a trial and a defense and all the benefits of his citizenship. If the jury votes to execute him we will be nothing like him.
He knew he was killing Americans and it was in response to US actions/killings in Middle East No ? Did I not read that?
He attacked an international event and killed people who had nothing to do with the Middle East. He didn't know who he was killing. Nor did he care. There are plenty of military bases around that could have been attacked if he did.
Please. Not showing any emotion while pictures of your victims bleeding out are shown in the courtroom is not typical human nature. Not once did he react to a single shred of testimony. Not once, but auntie brings out the tears. I'm sure he regrets his current position - he got caught, was taken alive, and now faces punishment. But there has been zero indication he regrets participating in the bombing.
He's trying to be tough. His survival instinct. Can't let reality of what he did surface.
We all lie to ourselves. We all justify.
Justifying killing is wrong. Period.
While he tries to be tough, his victims will never justify anything ever again.
True no doubt. But it's us now justifying revenge killing. We are no different. Cycle continues and no one can claim moral high ground.
Anything we do in response is 'revenge'.
We are quite a bit different: we haven't plotted and executed a demented plan to place a bomb to blow up indiscriminate victims who have done nothing to us. We are holding a person who has blown people up accountable for their depravity- we owe him nothing, but we have a responsibility to seek justice for those that are no longer here because they picked the wrong spot to watch a marathon from.
We haven't? Really? Come on thirty, you know that's just not true. If this guy did it, he deserves to be punished to the fullest, but let's not pretend we don't do shit like this. That's why he did this shit in the first place. Remember?
I think you are giving him too much credit. He did this because he wanted to play terrorist. When it was over he went back to his dorm, got high, and partied with other college students. He has far more in common with James Holmes (the Aurora movie theater shooter) than he does with the jihadists he and his brother were hoping to emulate.
So he basically just planted a bomb for the hell of it? Just to play terrorist?
He planted a bomb for the same reason James Holmes fired the gun. He wanted to feel what it was like to kill people. Then he went back to his dorm and partied.
Jimmy he did it for the same reason we want him dead. Revenge of killing "members of my tribe".
So we are just like him if we want to execute him. Yes.
No. See my post above. He had no idea who he was going to kill, nor whose " tribe" they belonged to. He wanted to kill and he did. Now he has received a trial and a defense and all the benefits of his citizenship. If the jury votes to execute him we will be nothing like him.
He knew he was killing Americans and it was in response to US actions/killings in Middle East No ? Did I not read that?
He attacked an international event and killed people who had nothing to do with the Middle East. He didn't know who he was killing. Nor did he care. There are plenty of military bases around that could have been attacked if he did.
Again, this is giving him too much credit.
Jimmy I respectfully disagree. So will stop beating this dead horse.
Do also realize this is your Home and has to suck and this guy is truly a piece of shit human.
Please. Not showing any emotion while pictures of your victims bleeding out are shown in the courtroom is not typical human nature. Not once did he react to a single shred of testimony. Not once, but auntie brings out the tears. I'm sure he regrets his current position - he got caught, was taken alive, and now faces punishment. But there has been zero indication he regrets participating in the bombing.
He's trying to be tough. His survival instinct. Can't let reality of what he did surface.
We all lie to ourselves. We all justify.
Justifying killing is wrong. Period.
While he tries to be tough, his victims will never justify anything ever again.
True no doubt. But it's us now justifying revenge killing. We are no different. Cycle continues and no one can claim moral high ground.
Anything we do in response is 'revenge'.
We are quite a bit different: we haven't plotted and executed a demented plan to place a bomb to blow up indiscriminate victims who have done nothing to us. We are holding a person who has blown people up accountable for their depravity- we owe him nothing, but we have a responsibility to seek justice for those that are no longer here because they picked the wrong spot to watch a marathon from.
We haven't? Really? Come on thirty, you know that's just not true. If this guy did it, he deserves to be punished to the fullest, but let's not pretend we don't do shit like this. That's why he did this shit in the first place. Remember?
I think you are giving him too much credit. He did this because he wanted to play terrorist. When it was over he went back to his dorm, got high, and partied with other college students. He has far more in common with James Holmes (the Aurora movie theater shooter) than he does with the jihadists he and his brother were hoping to emulate.
So he basically just planted a bomb for the hell of it? Just to play terrorist?
He planted a bomb for the same reason James Holmes fired the gun. He wanted to feel what it was like to kill people. Then he went back to his dorm and partied.
Jimmy he did it for the same reason we want him dead. Revenge of killing "members of my tribe".
I know you tried to opt out, but I needed to emphasize the fact that his bombs killed members of his tribe- his fellow countrymen (not to mention members of the international community as well).
Please. Not showing any emotion while pictures of your victims bleeding out are shown in the courtroom is not typical human nature. Not once did he react to a single shred of testimony. Not once, but auntie brings out the tears. I'm sure he regrets his current position - he got caught, was taken alive, and now faces punishment. But there has been zero indication he regrets participating in the bombing.
He's trying to be tough. His survival instinct. Can't let reality of what he did surface.
We all lie to ourselves. We all justify.
Justifying killing is wrong. Period.
While he tries to be tough, his victims will never justify anything ever again.
True no doubt. But it's us now justifying revenge killing. We are no different. Cycle continues and no one can claim moral high ground.
Anything we do in response is 'revenge'.
We are quite a bit different: we haven't plotted and executed a demented plan to place a bomb to blow up indiscriminate victims who have done nothing to us. We are holding a person who has blown people up accountable for their depravity- we owe him nothing, but we have a responsibility to seek justice for those that are no longer here because they picked the wrong spot to watch a marathon from.
We haven't? Really? Come on thirty, you know that's just not true. If this guy did it, he deserves to be punished to the fullest, but let's not pretend we don't do shit like this. That's why he did this shit in the first place. Remember?
I think you are giving him too much credit. He did this because he wanted to play terrorist. When it was over he went back to his dorm, got high, and partied with other college students. He has far more in common with James Holmes (the Aurora movie theater shooter) than he does with the jihadists he and his brother were hoping to emulate.
So he basically just planted a bomb for the hell of it? Just to play terrorist?
He planted a bomb for the same reason James Holmes fired the gun. He wanted to feel what it was like to kill people. Then he went back to his dorm and partied.
Jimmy he did it for the same reason we want him dead. Revenge of killing "members of my tribe".
I know you tried to opt out, but I needed to emphasize the fact that his bombs killed members of his tribe- his fellow countrymen (not to mention members of the international community as well).
Oh that was with Jimmy. With you TB it's on!!! You are wrong!!!!!
I kid. I don't want to be source of the greying of your hair so will gracefully bow out and obviously my message is not conveying well.
Please. Not showing any emotion while pictures of your victims bleeding out are shown in the courtroom is not typical human nature. Not once did he react to a single shred of testimony. Not once, but auntie brings out the tears. I'm sure he regrets his current position - he got caught, was taken alive, and now faces punishment. But there has been zero indication he regrets participating in the bombing.
He's trying to be tough. His survival instinct. Can't let reality of what he did surface.
We all lie to ourselves. We all justify.
Justifying killing is wrong. Period.
While he tries to be tough, his victims will never justify anything ever again.
True no doubt. But it's us now justifying revenge killing. We are no different. Cycle continues and no one can claim moral high ground.
Anything we do in response is 'revenge'.
We are quite a bit different: we haven't plotted and executed a demented plan to place a bomb to blow up indiscriminate victims who have done nothing to us. We are holding a person who has blown people up accountable for their depravity- we owe him nothing, but we have a responsibility to seek justice for those that are no longer here because they picked the wrong spot to watch a marathon from.
We haven't? Really? Come on thirty, you know that's just not true. If this guy did it, he deserves to be punished to the fullest, but let's not pretend we don't do shit like this. That's why he did this shit in the first place. Remember?
I think you are giving him too much credit. He did this because he wanted to play terrorist. When it was over he went back to his dorm, got high, and partied with other college students. He has far more in common with James Holmes (the Aurora movie theater shooter) than he does with the jihadists he and his brother were hoping to emulate.
So he basically just planted a bomb for the hell of it? Just to play terrorist?
He planted a bomb for the same reason James Holmes fired the gun. He wanted to feel what it was like to kill people. Then he went back to his dorm and partied.
Jimmy he did it for the same reason we want him dead. Revenge of killing "members of my tribe".
I know you tried to opt out, but I needed to emphasize the fact that his bombs killed members of his tribe- his fellow countrymen (not to mention members of the international community as well).
Oh that was with Jimmy. With you TB it's on!!! You are wrong!!!!!
I kid. I don't want to be source of the greying of your hair so will gracefully bow out and obviously my message is not conveying well.
Peace to you TB.
Hahaha!
The hair is beginning to turn... I'm not going to lie. Single units right now, but in time... clusters I'm sure.
Sorry I had to toss that in there (my last post). I just wasn't sure if what I was trying to get at was successfully conveyed or not?
Comments
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
http://whowhatwhy.org/2015/05/05/the-sound-of-silence/
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was raised to take the direction of the most powerful adult in his life, his attorneys say—and now all those powerful adults seem to be telling the 21-year-old to sit down and shut up.
And to make sure he shuts up, they have been holding him under Special Administrative Measures (SAMs) that restrict any contact with the outside world. This is presumably to prevent him from communicating to the outside world any plans that could result in death or bodily harm.
But is muzzling the defendant really in the interest of national security—or in the interest of the national security apparatuses?
For the two years since the April 15, 2013, Boston Marathon bombings, WhoWhatWhy has documented the myriad ways that arms of the US government have contradicted its claim that the two Tsarnaev brothers were “lone wolves” motivated by ideology, with the feds consistently seeking to suppress information that could shed light on the bombings. This includes keeping the defendant totally mute.
To date, we have not heard a word from him—and now, even after he was convicted, we still have not heard a peep. This is in part, too, due to the strategy his own attorneys employed. Seeing the impossibility of their own investigators getting to the bottom of the many mysteries in the case, they threw in the towel, claiming their client “did it,” and blamed the influence of his dead older brother, Tamerlan, in hopes of achieving the dubious victory of a life sentence without parole.
Now, in the “penalty phase,” while he awaits word of whether he will face the death penalty, Tsarnaev sits there, mute and virtually expressionless, causing some to wonder just how bad were the injuries he sustained when police fired upwards of 100 bullets into the boat where he was hiding, or if he might be heavily medicated.
And yet he seemed particularly astute during the defense’s presentation of its case during the guilt phase. He frequently spoke with his attorneys, and wrote Post-it notes to them as they were examining witnesses. If he wasn’t incapacitated, why wouldn’t his legal team allow him to speak in his own defense?
Any thinking person (and we’ve heard from far too few as this affair has unfolded in all its tabloid luridness) would wonder:
Does Dzhokhar Tsarnaev want to testify? If so, why has he been stopped from doing so? What would he have had to lose? Do his lawyers think the prosecution would provoke him into behaving in a manner that would harden the jury against him even more? If he is the victim of more complex circumstances, why not give him a chance to say so? And if he is a terrorist, why would he not want to publicize his cause and have his lawyers show photos of dead Muslim children killed by American drone strikes?
Why bomb a public event if you’re not making a political statement?
The defense’s strategic decision not to help us learn more about what the Tsarnaev brothers were up to—and why—seems a strange one. But then so does the constant invocation of “national security” by government agencies in repeatedly blocking disclosures and sealing a plethora of motions. The paradox is that we’ve been repeatedly told that this plot was about nothing larger than two misguided young people operating alone.
But as our reports have shown, the FBI had a prior relationship with Tamerlan, sought to recruit others in his orbit as plot infiltrators, and, bizarrely, failed to monitor his doings and international travel even after a warning from Russian intelligence.
Somehow, all of this has been lost or buried. It barely came up in the trial, perhaps because of the strategy: blame it all on the elder brother, then assure that virtually nothing about the elder brother can be deemed germane, because he is dead and not on trial.
“Tsarnaev had been raised all his life to take direction from the most powerful adult.”
Rather tellingly, the person who argued that point might just be one of the most powerful adults in the convicted Boston Marathon bomber’s life: his attorney, David Bruck.
Bruck, together with Tsarnaev’s other lead attorneys Judy Clark and appointed federal defender Miriam Conrad, hold Tsarnaev’s life in their hands as they attempt to show that their client was really nothing more than a “lost teenager” without any real motivation to bomb anything. They are arguing, during the sentencing phase of the trial, that Tsarnaev would never have committed this crime had he not taken direction from his older brother, Tamerlan.
Remaining rigidly locked into this approach, they have sought to demonstrate their cooperation with every point asserted by the government.
If he is given life in prison, his lawyer has said that he would be completely cut off from the outside world.
We get a rare look at the inner-workings of his trial team’s strategy in a transcript released by the court during the sentencing phase. The transcript was of a lobby conference to which the jury was not privy.
The transcript reveals that Tsarnaev’s attorneys were so determined to show their cooperation and commitment to ensuring that their client would never again pose a risk that they agreed to any conditions of confinement—including his total muzzling. In his opening argument to the penalty phase, Bruck virtually guaranteed that should the jury send him to prison for the rest of his life, Tsarnaev would live a lifetime of pained silence in retribution for what he did.
“There are no interviews with the news media. There will be no autobiography. There will be no messages relayed from Dzhokhar onto the internet. There will be no nothing. There will be no media spotlight coming back on him as an execution date approaches. And one important thing you’ll learn is that the FBI and the U.S. Attorney’s Office here in Boston are in a position to help ensure that Dzhokhar is cut off from the outside world forever if they think it best. So the evidence will show that if you sentence Dzhokhar to a lifetime of thinking about what he did, you’ll both punish him and protect society at the same time.”
To be sure, the defense likely hopes that promising he will never cause further anguish to the victims will be an effective bargaining chip. But there seems to be more to it.
One phrase above stands out:
”If they think it best.”
Best for whom that he be silenced?
Bruck was referring to the SAMs, which allow the govt to restrict a prisoner’s communications in ways that may include “housing the inmate in administrative detention and/or limiting certain privileges, including, but not limited to, correspondence, visiting, interviews with representatives of the news media, and use of the telephone, as is reasonably necessary to protect persons against the risk of acts of violence or terrorism.”
The law was established to prevent presumably dangerous inmates—those accused of terrorism, espionage, mob or gang activity—from communicating to the outside world any plans that could result in death or bodily harm.
Tsarnaev will most likely go to a federal supermax prison—whether he is given life without parole or the death penalty—and be kept in solitary confinement. As the measures currently stand, he would never be able to tell his version of events, communicate the reason behind his murderous rampage or cry out that he was framed, coerced, or caught up in something larger.
Assuming he was, as convicted, involved in a plot to harm large numbers of people, it would seem to be in the interest of public safety to learn something from and about those who would commit such acts. And if this story is much more complicated—as suggested by the anomalies WhoWhatWhy has uncovered—then it is in the rather urgent interests of a democracy increasingly beset by an unaccountable security state to hear directly from Dzhokhar Tsarnaev
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
Either way, I think it's unfortunate that we will never know the full story.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
NOTE: I had to delete 780 characters of the post I'm responding to because I was over the limit and couldn't figure it out. My apologies.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
And hey, no need for an apology; you have my respect for your views, and your passion...but ya, also for the apology. Canadians love apologies
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
There are attorneys who have done time on behalf of GITMO suspects. This is the US, not China or North Korea. He was afforded every opportunity to present a solid defense. There is no "there" there.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Jimmy already spoke to this: the guy is a little shitbird that 'played terrorist'. As a US citizen, he was just as culpable as the people he blew up for the offences which you suggest motivated him.
A worthless rodent.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
Again, this is giving him too much credit.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
Do also realize this is your Home and has to suck and this guy is truly a piece of shit human.
Peace.
I kid. I don't want to be source of the greying of your hair so will gracefully bow out and obviously my message is not conveying well.
Peace to you TB.
The hair is beginning to turn... I'm not going to lie. Single units right now, but in time... clusters I'm sure.
Sorry I had to toss that in there (my last post). I just wasn't sure if what I was trying to get at was successfully conveyed or not?
Cheers, man!
"...I changed by not changing at all..."