It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Jakomo
I can play the "RELEVANTLY quote the founding father's game".
I was responding to the post above mine.
Your quote appears to be Mr Adams telling people to cherish freedom over wealth (which obviously is now mostly the opposite - see Bush taxcuts, see Bush educational reforms, see Bush social security reforms).
Just because his bomb didn't go off doesn't mean he didn't try to strike a blow in the war.
HE DIDN'T HAVE A BOMB! He was apparently PLANNING to build one.
Crimes of thought and crimes of intent are not crimes.
Actually it was the tranquility of servitude but I guess I shouldn't have expected you to read the whole thing
No, he had the necessary ingredients to actually blow up the plane. And the intent.
Jose Padilla was actively pursuing materials, again in a time of war, to carry out an attack. It is still a crime and a national security issue and his intent was a military attack.
Originally posted by Jakomo
Marid Auran:
Jose Padilla was actively pursuing materials, again in a
That you say a crime of INTENT is a crime shows to me that you are actually more suited to living in a totalitarian regime than a democratic one.
If you SAY you intend to do harm to your country, you can be arrested for it? If you just SAY it? You know how people change their minds all the time and sometimes say something in the heat of the moment?
So, again, to reiterate, do you believe it is okay to arrest someone and deny them access to a lawyer for 3 years because of something they APPARENTLY intend to do?
Jako
Intent is absolutely a crime. If someone goes out to buy a gun to shoot someone would you rather wait until they have commited the crime? There are some things that you shouldn't say.
If a kid in school says he is going to make a pipe bomb and bring it to school and blow up his home room, should we wait until he has done it?
Intent is absolutely a crime. If someone goes out to buy a gun to shoot someone would you rather wait until they have commited the crime? There are some things that you shouldn't say.
If a kid in school says he is going to make a pipe bomb and bring it to school and blow up his home room, should we wait until he has done it?
Originally posted by Marid Audran
But back on to this excellent topic, Padilla chose sides in a war. His mission failed and he was captured as a result. It isn't the matter of a civilian crime that he is being held for. He is being held as a combatant. Just because his bomb didn't go off doesn't mean he didn't try to strike a blow in the war.
Originally posted by WestPoint23
If I go out and get legal bomb materials and tell the police I intend to blow up the school you think they will tell me "ok son we’ll wait until you do it or until we find a bomb to charge you''.?
Originally posted by finnman68
That’s pretty naive to think that the American government is holding him just because of a press release.
Originally posted by Jakomo
Any reason why I would get a warning from Ngydan on this thread?
Originally posted by Nygdan
Difficult to say, by becoming a terrorist and working for a foreign army its arguable that he gave up his citizenship, but that woudl be predicated on him actually being guilty. Obviously, a case like this can't be handled in regular courts and by regular civilian means, but just as obviously he can't just be thrown away like a foreign detainee. Very tricky situation, I certianly don't have any answer.