Arizona woman gets prison for plotting a terrorist attack

originally posted by: Soloprotocol

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Krakatoa

Piss in a metal tray, evaporate in the sun. The crystals are urea nitrate, add sugar and mix, thats the piss and sugar bottle rockets they shoot over their prison walls in the country of Gaza.

That's gonna take a lot of time, a lot of piss, a lot of Sun and blind prison guards who also have lost their sense of smell.

They make expedient alcohol in prison as well as fermented' piss and s*** bombs to throw in guards faces. The evaporation will occur naturally over time, sunlight just makes the process quicker. Ever smelled a prison before?

Me neither, I hear its rank. Beside I only heard of the one incident, where I got the idea from about rolled up magazines used as 'barrels'.

The Gazans have little in the way of arms but everyone has a little piss, especially them. Wouldn't you be pissed off if you were locked up 24/7 in a Warsaw style ghetto?

a reply to: johnb

So from that post if you are an american presumably you can now be sent to jail for terrorism as you have done exactly what she did by prviding plans on how to make a bomb.

You too... lulz.

One day they will be locking us up for our opinions...

a reply to: Krakatoa

SMH at the stupidity and myopic view (and before you accuse of of being myopic, consider that what she did was already illegal sneaking this information into a prison, for ANY reason).

But thats how the precedent is set to widen all legislation. Somebody uses some firearms in a crime and then legislation to make them illegal appears ...

derp.

All the while defended by people like you, 'for our own good', for the children, democracy, etc, etc.

One day all the cities will be naught but giant prisons keeping people, 'safe'.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Krakatoa

SMH at the stupidity and myopic view (and before you accuse of of being myopic, consider that what she did was already illegal sneaking this information into a prison, for ANY reason).

But thats how the precedent is set to widen all legislation. Somebody uses some firearms in a crime and then legislation to make them illegal appears ...

derp.

All the while defended by people like you, 'for our own good', for the children, democracy, etc, etc.

One day all the cities will be naught but giant prisons keeping people, 'safe'.

for how many decades have i heard the nra promise this scenario?

originally posted by: growler

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Krakatoa

SMH at the stupidity and myopic view (and before you accuse of of being myopic, consider that what she did was already illegal sneaking this information into a prison, for ANY reason).

But thats how the precedent is set to widen all legislation. Somebody uses some firearms in a crime and then legislation to make them illegal appears ...

derp.

All the while defended by people like you, 'for our own good', for the children, democracy, etc, etc.

One day all the cities will be naught but giant prisons keeping people, 'safe'.

for how many decades have i heard the nra promise this scenario?

I don't belong to the NRA.

You can pretend they haven't piece meal restricted (infringed upon) the right to own and 'bear' arms if you like,

All_Day_Long.

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad

originally posted by: turbonium1
A terrorist is anyone who made bombs, and/or used bombs to kill, and injure, innocent people.


Now, a terrorist is anyone who has instructions on how to make bombs!

Soon, a terrorist will be anyone who ever looked at an article on making bombs.

Or anyone who knows what a bomb is!

Or anyone who once knew someone who had read an article about bombs!

Or reads a book that mentions a bomb!



When you all applaud them for labelling people 'terrorists', and then sending them to prison, for daring to have magazines, and having articles on making bombs, it soon could be YOU are called a terrorist, for even speaking on the issue!

I applaud them because if you're actively plotting to kill people, you should go to jail...terrorist or not. Plus he plead guilty already so there is no argument based on how I see it. I think a major problem is people that sympathize with terrorists and we should lock those assclowns up too.

If your neighbor didn't like you, because you had a friend of Middle-Eastern heritage, so he looked like all those other terrorists, to your neighbor.

So then, your neighbor reports you as a potential terrorist, or sympathizer. She claims your friend is always at your place, and sees your lights are on all night long. Homeland authorities decide to stake out your apartment, just in case it is all true.

They see your Mid-East friend come over after work, about 8 pm. His cousin, who you know, also comes over.
You all have drinks, and watch movies, girls arrive, and it turns into a late night.

That doesn't make you a terrorist, or a terrorist sympathizer.

Your crazy neighbor then sneaks through a window, and plants evidence of you being a terrorist. She claims you and your Arab friends carried heavy bags into your apartment, and they spoke in Arabic!

So Homeland breaks into your apartment, after you leave for work. They find evidence of terrorist plans, your neighbor hid under your mattress.

And this, my friend, would be enough to make YOU a terrorist, and a lifetime in prison.


How would you ever prove that you're not a terrorist, then?

You wouldn't.


That's what you applaud, right?

It allows them absolute power...

A criminal has to commit a crime to be guilty. A plan to rob a bank is not a crime. Attempting to rob the bank is a crime.

A terrorist doesn't need to do anything at all, to be a terrorist. A plan to do something they see as terrorism is enough to be guilty.


Do you see the serious problem here?

a reply to: turbonium1

A plan to commit a crime between 2 or more people IS a crime. It's called Criminal Conspiracy and it is a felony in all 50 states.

originally posted by: Arizonaguy
a reply to: turbonium1

A plan to commit a crime between 2 or more people IS a crime. It's called Criminal Conspiracy and it is a felony in all 50 states.

Not quite.

"A criminal conspiracy exists when two or more people agree to commit almost any unlawful act, then take some action toward its completion. The action taken need not itself be a crime, but it must indicate that those involved in the conspiracy knew of the plan and intended to break the law. One person may be charged with and convicted of both conspiracy and the underlying crime based on the same circumstances.

For example, Andy, Dan, and Alice plan a bank robbery. They 1) visit the bank first to assess security, 2) pool their money and buy a gun together, and 3) write a demand letter. All three can be charged with conspiracy to commit robbery, regardless of whether the robbery itself is actually attempted or completed."

criminal.findlaw.com...


"(1) A person is guilty of criminal conspiracy when, with intent that conduct constituting a crime be performed, he or she agrees with one or more persons to engage in or cause the performance of such conduct, and any one of them takes a substantial step in pursuance of such agreement."

app.leg.wa.gov...


As you've conveniently left out, it is not a crime to plan, or allegedly plan, a bank robbery, - either alone, or with others.
The crime is to take a substantial step, or series of actions, in accordance with your plan. This is the important point - the actions, and the intent, to carry out a crime, is a criminal conspiracy.

a reply to: turbonium1

They tookaction. Materials were provided illegally to make explosives. Duh

a reply to: turbonium1

They tookaction. Materials were provided illegally to make explosives. Duh

Other 'terrorists' in Arizona...


Prior to the summer of 2016, no one had ever been arrested or prosecuted under Arizona’s anti-terrorism laws. Since then, cases have been brought against four alleged terrorists, in three unrelated terror plots.
Each alleged terrorist was said to have ties to, or sympathies with, the Islamic State, commonly referred to as ISIS. The cases have been prosecuted by Arizona’s Republican Attorney General, Mark Brnovich, based on investigations conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Mia Garcia, a spokeswoman for Brnovich’s office, said Arizona is in heightened danger, with “more threat, more plots, more planning” underway in the state’s “neighborhoods and communities.”
Yet in each of the Arizona terror cases, arrests and indictments came in the absence of any actual terrorist attack. Thanks to lower prosecution standards under Arizona law, the cases were based solely on words that had allegedly been spoken, written, or committed to Internet search engines.

Civil liberties advocates warn these prosecutions may mark the beginning of a new and dangerous trend.

“What we are seeing in Arizona does seem to be a new issue,” said Hugh Handeyside, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union’s National Security Project. “And it does raise the question of whether the FBI is using the lower threshold for the prosecution of terrorism-related crimes in Arizona as a way to get around what is already quite a low threshold of investigation and prosecution at the federal level.”

Mahin Khan of Tucson was arrested by the FBI on the afternoon of July 1, 2016, at the outset of a long Fourth of July weekend. Khan, who had just turned eighteen, was said to be an “ISIS supporter” and a “violent jihadist,” plotting attacks against several targets in Arizona and California.
Last October, Khan accepted a plea agreement, pleading guilty to a terrorism conspiracy charge and related subordinate offenses. In November, he was sentenced to eight years in prison, to be followed by a lifetime of probation.

Mahin’s mother, Shazia Khan, said in an interview that her son has behavioral and intellectual difficulties. At the time of his arrest, a former tutor told local media that the boy had the mental capacity of a six-year-old and was not capable of the plot he was charged with. “He doesn’t have the ability of learning anything,” said the tutor, Auguste El-Kareh.
A former tutor told local media that the boy had the mental capacity of a six-year-old and was not capable of the plot he was charged with.
Mahin’s behavioral and intellectual impairments were so severe, said Shazia, that local schools would not accept him. Instead, Mahin stayed at home with his mother and took educational courses online.
According to court documents, Mahin had come to the attention of the FBI in 2013 “after the FBI received information that Khan expressed interest in performing acts of terrorism.” According to Shazia, Mahin had written an email to one of his instructors, expressing frustration and anger over U.S. drone strikes in the Middle East.
Shazia said the FBI told her that Mahin needed to undergo a mental health evaluation; the family consented. FBI agents, she said, transported Mahin to a private mental health facility in Tucson, where Mahin was held for forty-five days—undergoing evaluations and receiving counseling and medication.
After his release, Shazia said, FBI agents would visit the house “every month or every two months” and question Mahin about such things as ISIS and acts of terror. Prior to these discussions, she said, Mahin had not been aware of ISIS.
Meanwhile, Shazia became aware of suspicious people around her son—including a man named “Nathan” who attended their mosque and who presented himself as an Afghan bodybuilder.
Shazia kept a close eye on her son, even taking away his cell phone. When Mahin would use the house phone, his mother would listen in. Shazia recalled one such overheard conversation in which Nathan, whom she believed was around twenty at the time, tried to persuade her then fourteen-year-old son to move in with him—saying he and others would protect the boy from the FBI.
Shazia said she confronted Nathan, telling him to stay away from her son—and even reported the man to the FBI. However, as she began making inquiries within the local Muslim community about Nathan, she was told that the man was widely believed to be an FBI informant.
“We tell everything [about Nathan] to the FBI also, we give his photograph, we give everything,” said Shazia. “[But] because that’s their informer, that’s why they don’t do anything. You can’t believe how they play this game.”
According to court documents, Mahin drew renewed FBI interest in April 2015 after emailing a “known operative” of ISIS/ISIL in Syria and describing himself as a jihadist living in the United States. In October 2015, according to court records, Mahin began communicating with an undercover FBI employee who claimed to be an ISIS operative. According to Shazia, this man was known to her as “Omar.”
“Omar called at my house, trying to talk to Mahin, because I never leave Mahin alone. . . . I told him, ‘Why you call my son? Stop calling my son. Next time if you call my son, I am telling the FBI your number, your name and everything,’ ” said Shazia. “And I'm stupid, because I don’t know that’s FBI person. I’m talking to FBI person.”
Court records show that the FBI did an end-run around Mahin’s protective mom. It took two undercover FBI employees approximately a month and a half to smuggle a phone to the boy. They finally succeeded on May 19, 2016—an occasion where, according to Shazia, she had let Mahin out of her sight while visiting family in Minnesota.
On June 18, 2016, Mahin Khan turned eighteen and became an adult. The FBI arrested him less than two weeks later.

The statement of probable cause issued at the time of Khan’s arrest listed two Arizona state charges. The first was an offense of “terrorism,” the allegation being that Khan had prepared or planned “for an act of terrorism by seeking assistance in obtaining weapons, a recipe for an improvised explosive device and identifying potential targets to commit a terrorist attack against.”
The document alleged that, in February 2016, Khan had contacted an alleged representative of the terrorist group Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan and requested a “pressure cookie revepir [sic].” This, the FBI stated, was believed to be a reference to a “recipe” to build an improvised explosive device using a pressure cooker."


progressive.org...

One more important piece from the above link...


Early this year, Arizona Attorney General Brnovich touted a piece of legislation, SB 1350, seeking to expand the state’s definition of “terrorism” to include civilian/private sector targets, as well as federal targets and county or city agencies. The bill also criminalized statements of “advice, assistance, or direction” in support of “terrorism,” created new terrorism offenses, and provided mandatory minimum sentences for those convicted.

On March 29, 2017, Arizona Governor Doug Ducey signed SB 1350 into law.

Arizona appears tp be the first 'testing ground' for the PWB to imprison anyone, under the 'legal' guise of 'terrorism'.

A 'pressure cookie revepir' is "believed to be" 'a pressure cooker recipe'. Because a 'pressure cookie' is never a 'pressed cookie'. It is always a 'pressure cooker'. And 'revepir' must mean 'recipe'.

You an find many 'pressed cookie recipes' online. They can't charge you with terrorism if you ask for a cookie recipe (even a Martha Stewart recipe!) So it's obviously a 'pressure cooker recipe', and 'recipe' is always code for 'recipe for making a bomb'. Because recipes never use pressure cookers, of course!

It's a new low when the FBI actively frames people as 'terrorists', by using paid informants, who prey on mentally challenged children, and the FBI smuggles a phone into the home of the child, to frame him as a 'terrorist'.

If that is all true, it is absolutely sickening, and frightening. For all of us.


Do you even realize that virtually anyone in Arizona might be charged, and convicted, of terrorism, under SB 1350?

'Terrorism', under their 'new' definition, includes people, or buildings, or parks, or a hot dog stand, as 'targets'. Which is exactly what I said they would do - 'criminal' acts are now morphing into 'terrorist' acts.

Before long, jaywalkers can be charged as 'terrorists'. The authorities 'believed' that you were jaywalking over the street, to go into the Home Depot, and purchase materials used to make bombs! Of course, the FBI had earlier been 'tipped off' by their 'anonymous informants' that these people were involved in terrorist activities. So after a week of spying on the 'suspected terrorists', they were identified crossing the street, illegally, to buy materials for bombs. As well, two of them were recorded on their cell phones talking about how American bombs have killed thousands of innocent people in the Middle East. They are clearly terrorist sympathizers!


I suppose you would 'applaud' them for making everyone a potential 'terrorist', using informants who manipulate mentally challenged people, sneaking them cell phones so they can bait them into saying something they can "believe" is terrorist-related?


As I said, your neighbor could plant terrorist magazines in your home, under your mattress, report you to the FBI as being a terrorist sympathizer. The clincher is when your neighbor pays some Iraqis 100 bucks each, just to go into the restaurant you frequent, make small talk with you, laugh, and joke, and pat you on the back. Shaking your hand as they leave, maybe.

If this is videotaped by the FBI, you are.... toast.


Slippery slope, indeed.

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad

originally posted by: turbonium1
A terrorist is anyone who made bombs, and/or used bombs to kill, and injure, innocent people.


Now, a terrorist is anyone who has instructions on how to make bombs!

Soon, a terrorist will be anyone who ever looked at an article on making bombs.

Or anyone who knows what a bomb is!

Or anyone who once knew someone who had read an article about bombs!

Or reads a book that mentions a bomb!



When you all applaud them for labelling people 'terrorists', and then sending them to prison, for daring to have magazines, and having articles on making bombs, it soon could be YOU are called a terrorist, for even speaking on the issue!

I applaud them because if you're actively plotting to kill people, you should go to jail...terrorist or not. Plus he plead guilty already so there is no argument based on how I see it. I think a major problem is people that sympathize with terrorists and we should lock those assclowns up too.

If your neighbor didn't like you, because you had a friend of Middle-Eastern heritage, so he looked like all those other terrorists, to your neighbor.

So then, your neighbor reports you as a potential terrorist, or sympathizer. She claims your friend is always at your place, and sees your lights are on all night long. Homeland authorities decide to stake out your apartment, just in case it is all true.

They see your Mid-East friend come over after work, about 8 pm. His cousin, who you know, also comes over.
You all have drinks, and watch movies, girls arrive, and it turns into a late night.

That doesn't make you a terrorist, or a terrorist sympathizer.

Your crazy neighbor then sneaks through a window, and plants evidence of you being a terrorist. She claims you and your Arab friends carried heavy bags into your apartment, and they spoke in Arabic!

So Homeland breaks into your apartment, after you leave for work. They find evidence of terrorist plans, your neighbor hid under your mattress.

And this, my friend, would be enough to make YOU a terrorist, and a lifetime in prison.


How would you ever prove that you're not a terrorist, then?

You wouldn't.


That's what you applaud, right?

That's a lot of if's and specific circumstances for that to come true. I read the story linked in the OP and it didn't mention anything like the story you are telling. I'd assume you would have a comparable chance of seeing a Unicorn being abducted by aliens in Times Square to the situation you describe.

a reply to: Middleoftheroad

Its known as hyperbole. It has only a fleeting resemblance to the topic at hand.

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad

That's a lot of if's and specific circumstances for that to come true. I read the story linked in the OP and it didn't mention anything like the story you are telling. I'd assume you would have a comparable chance of seeing a Unicorn being abducted by aliens in Times Square to the situation you describe.

That's never going to happen, no chance!

Everyone thought there was no chance of Hitler wanting war, or sending Jews to concentration camps, either.


This works because it is a very gradual change of law, not all at once...


Only Arizona's laws have changed, yes?

Except it's run by the FBI, or Homeland Security, which means it's federal ops.

'Terrorism' can be anything they 'believe' is terrorism, whether it is or not, makes no difference. This allows them to identify it as 'terrorism'.

So a 'belief' replaces 'proof'.

A 'terrorist' has no legal rights to defend him/her against all, or any, of the charges. He/she is guilty, and proof is whatever they say is proof. And that's that.



I