Monday, April 22, 2013
Charging Document in Boston Bombing
http://7thamendmentadvocate.org/blog/criminal%20complaint%20130421%201847.pdf
Saturday, April 20, 2013
Questions that MUST be answered concerning the Boston suspects and the plot
In the excitement of the apprehension of "Suspect 2" in the Boston Marathon bombing, several critical issues have already begun to be forgotten.
First, is, of course, what of the Saudi National, Abdul Rahman Ali Al-Harbi? Initial reports had him as a "Person of interest" usually a police euphemism for a suspect, that is used so that someone can be questioned without an arrest or a Miranda warning.
The authorities in Boston were concerned enough to effect a search warrant on his home.
Some reports claim that the search was conducted "by consent", i.e. the authorities, whether federal, local or state, did not have to go in front of a judge and show probable cause.
Reports from Boston, including photos, show authorities removing several boxes of materials as well as computers.
Shortly thereafter, it was reported by Steve Emerson, and than seconded by various sources including yahoo news, The Blaze, and others, that Al-Harbi had had his visa revoked and was being deported on "National Security grounds".
1)So, who is Al-Harbi? The family name is associated with a veritable who's who of Al-Qaeda operatives.
2)Is he being deported? Congressional sources, at least half a dozen offices, confirm the original report that he was being deported or at least that the original deportation order did exist.
During the late night of Thursday, shortly after initial reports of the fatal shooting of MIT Police Officer Sean Collier the Boston Police Scanner clearly identified the two suspects pictured in the photographs and videos that the FBI had released just hours earlier.
However, the ID's were of two entirely different individuals, than the brothers finally identified. Mike Mulugeta and Sunil Tripathi's names were clearly sent out over the scanner and the twitterverse and web aggregaters were on fire. Pictures of Tripathi were everywhere as he is a Brown University student who mysteriously disappeared. This identification of the suspects went on until approximately 4 am on Friday morning.
At that time, Pete Williams of NBC reported that his sources said that the suspects were NOT the two previously identified but were two individuals who had been here "at least a year", and had military backgrounds and training.
Shortly thereafter, the names of the brothers, Tsarnaev, was reported by Williams and then all sources.
So,
3) How was the official police reports over the Boston Police radio so wrong?
4) Where did the reports of Military training and short term residence in the US come from?
Next, not surprisingly, the two were quickly located in Watertown and it's environs. Many police officers encountered them and, of course, killed the older brother in the firefight shortly thereafter.
While not as important and curious as the above questions -
5) how did a wounded, bleeding 19 year old, escape from a huge police contingent who he had been in a gun battle with and even more,
6) how did he manage to evade THOUSANDS of police and FBI agents for the next 13 or so hours?
Next, it is well known that the Chechnyan conflict is another site of Al Qaeda rebels.
In fact, famously, three of the 9/11 attackers had traveled to Al Qaeda training sites specifically to prepare to fight in Chechnya against the Russians, only to be told by Bin Laden and his leadership, that they had other plans for them.
7) What is the relationship, if any, between Al Harbi and the Tsarnaev brothers?
Finally, only a fool could believe that the production of the sheer number of IED's that these two were in possession of, including throwing home made grenades at the police during the car chase on Thursday night/Friday morning, went unnoticed by EVERYONE in their lives.
8) WHo, if any, was their recruiter, trainer?
9) Which family members were aware, as much of the family lived together in an apartment complex?
10) How is their father involved as the older brother traveled to visit him and seems to have become radicalized at that point (not that I necessarily believe that. clearly he had turned before that)
It was revealed today that the FBI had been contacted by a foreign government, presumably the Russions, asking to investigate the older brother.
11) How did THEY get information on someone who had been in the United States for several YEARS at that point - and enough information to make a formal request of the US Government to investigate him?
12) How could the FBI possibly have "cleared" him?
Finally,
13) What happened to the three people reported by all sources to be "in custody" from U Mass Dartmouth on Friday night? and..
14) Are there others there?
15) Where and how did two supposedly broke immigrants, one a student, another with a wife who supported him, get the money to purchase a veritable arsenal of weapons to engage in two separate firefights with police?
16) Where did they get all of these weapons?
First, is, of course, what of the Saudi National, Abdul Rahman Ali Al-Harbi? Initial reports had him as a "Person of interest" usually a police euphemism for a suspect, that is used so that someone can be questioned without an arrest or a Miranda warning.
The authorities in Boston were concerned enough to effect a search warrant on his home.
Some reports claim that the search was conducted "by consent", i.e. the authorities, whether federal, local or state, did not have to go in front of a judge and show probable cause.
Reports from Boston, including photos, show authorities removing several boxes of materials as well as computers.
Shortly thereafter, it was reported by Steve Emerson, and than seconded by various sources including yahoo news, The Blaze, and others, that Al-Harbi had had his visa revoked and was being deported on "National Security grounds".
1)So, who is Al-Harbi? The family name is associated with a veritable who's who of Al-Qaeda operatives.
2)Is he being deported? Congressional sources, at least half a dozen offices, confirm the original report that he was being deported or at least that the original deportation order did exist.
During the late night of Thursday, shortly after initial reports of the fatal shooting of MIT Police Officer Sean Collier the Boston Police Scanner clearly identified the two suspects pictured in the photographs and videos that the FBI had released just hours earlier.
However, the ID's were of two entirely different individuals, than the brothers finally identified. Mike Mulugeta and Sunil Tripathi's names were clearly sent out over the scanner and the twitterverse and web aggregaters were on fire. Pictures of Tripathi were everywhere as he is a Brown University student who mysteriously disappeared. This identification of the suspects went on until approximately 4 am on Friday morning.
At that time, Pete Williams of NBC reported that his sources said that the suspects were NOT the two previously identified but were two individuals who had been here "at least a year", and had military backgrounds and training.
Shortly thereafter, the names of the brothers, Tsarnaev, was reported by Williams and then all sources.
So,
3) How was the official police reports over the Boston Police radio so wrong?
4) Where did the reports of Military training and short term residence in the US come from?
Next, not surprisingly, the two were quickly located in Watertown and it's environs. Many police officers encountered them and, of course, killed the older brother in the firefight shortly thereafter.
While not as important and curious as the above questions -
5) how did a wounded, bleeding 19 year old, escape from a huge police contingent who he had been in a gun battle with and even more,
6) how did he manage to evade THOUSANDS of police and FBI agents for the next 13 or so hours?
Next, it is well known that the Chechnyan conflict is another site of Al Qaeda rebels.
In fact, famously, three of the 9/11 attackers had traveled to Al Qaeda training sites specifically to prepare to fight in Chechnya against the Russians, only to be told by Bin Laden and his leadership, that they had other plans for them.
7) What is the relationship, if any, between Al Harbi and the Tsarnaev brothers?
Finally, only a fool could believe that the production of the sheer number of IED's that these two were in possession of, including throwing home made grenades at the police during the car chase on Thursday night/Friday morning, went unnoticed by EVERYONE in their lives.
8) WHo, if any, was their recruiter, trainer?
9) Which family members were aware, as much of the family lived together in an apartment complex?
10) How is their father involved as the older brother traveled to visit him and seems to have become radicalized at that point (not that I necessarily believe that. clearly he had turned before that)
It was revealed today that the FBI had been contacted by a foreign government, presumably the Russions, asking to investigate the older brother.
11) How did THEY get information on someone who had been in the United States for several YEARS at that point - and enough information to make a formal request of the US Government to investigate him?
12) How could the FBI possibly have "cleared" him?
Finally,
13) What happened to the three people reported by all sources to be "in custody" from U Mass Dartmouth on Friday night? and..
14) Are there others there?
15) Where and how did two supposedly broke immigrants, one a student, another with a wife who supported him, get the money to purchase a veritable arsenal of weapons to engage in two separate firefights with police?
16) Where did they get all of these weapons?
Tuesday, April 2, 2013
To support "gay marriage" or not to support it, that is the question.
Or is it? As with most issues on the current docket of the US popular scene, no one is asking the right questions OR dealing honestly with the issue.
It's simple, marriage is, was and always has been a religious institution.
In 20th century US history, another Progressive idea, the "state" decided to take over marriage as a way of regulating commerce.
This is part of what led to increased divorce rates, but it also had specific benefits b/c of the financial interests that again, the Progressives had built into the "institution of marriage".
So, for the last 120 years or so, marriage is TWO things. A religious ceremony/rite, and a civil contract - a binding financial document, no different than any other.
Religious questions are ones that NO government has the right to interfere with, so, it's pretty simple, if your religious institution supports gay marriage, you can marry in your church/synagogue or whatever other house of worship you choose (in my case, as a conservative jew, The Jewish Theological Seminary has largely punted, leaving it up to the individual congregataions, however they DO ordain gay rabbis; reform judaism supports them, orthodox, not).
In the United States, Contracts have ALWAYS been state documents unless of course, it's a contract with the federal government. Even contracts that cross state lines are considered to be written in the place of business, or are required to state which court will have jurisdiction.
The Federal court system only interferes as much as the contract may interfere with interstate commerce. But federal courts virtually NEVER get involved with personal contracts.
So, again, the only question is Does YOUR state support gay marriage?
Contracts have ALWAYS received reciprocity among the states so recognition should not be a problem, either.
Had the Federal government not grown so enormously in the last century, the issue of benefits for the federal employees who want to marry and are gay, would not be such a big issue.
However, the same rules apply.
The best example of this is that the difference in ages that states allow children/young adults to marry. Here in NY, the age of consent is considered to be 17. That varies state to state.
Some states require blood tests, others do not. Again. ALL of these issues are respected across state lines.
The same should apply here.
Simple, no mess, no federal issue.
It's simple, marriage is, was and always has been a religious institution.
In 20th century US history, another Progressive idea, the "state" decided to take over marriage as a way of regulating commerce.
This is part of what led to increased divorce rates, but it also had specific benefits b/c of the financial interests that again, the Progressives had built into the "institution of marriage".
So, for the last 120 years or so, marriage is TWO things. A religious ceremony/rite, and a civil contract - a binding financial document, no different than any other.
Religious questions are ones that NO government has the right to interfere with, so, it's pretty simple, if your religious institution supports gay marriage, you can marry in your church/synagogue or whatever other house of worship you choose (in my case, as a conservative jew, The Jewish Theological Seminary has largely punted, leaving it up to the individual congregataions, however they DO ordain gay rabbis; reform judaism supports them, orthodox, not).
In the United States, Contracts have ALWAYS been state documents unless of course, it's a contract with the federal government. Even contracts that cross state lines are considered to be written in the place of business, or are required to state which court will have jurisdiction.
The Federal court system only interferes as much as the contract may interfere with interstate commerce. But federal courts virtually NEVER get involved with personal contracts.
So, again, the only question is Does YOUR state support gay marriage?
Contracts have ALWAYS received reciprocity among the states so recognition should not be a problem, either.
Had the Federal government not grown so enormously in the last century, the issue of benefits for the federal employees who want to marry and are gay, would not be such a big issue.
However, the same rules apply.
The best example of this is that the difference in ages that states allow children/young adults to marry. Here in NY, the age of consent is considered to be 17. That varies state to state.
Some states require blood tests, others do not. Again. ALL of these issues are respected across state lines.
The same should apply here.
Simple, no mess, no federal issue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
