Dzhokhar Tsarnaev

Originally posted by Havox

Originally posted by phantomjack

Originally posted by Havox

Originally posted by phantomjack
Ask the three dead victims and the 180+ Injured if they think Dzhokhar is a "Nice Kid"

You have to be kidding me!

DO YOU have two arms and two legs?

Right now, there are 30 people in boston hospitals that dont.

Idiot.

Ask anyone the kid hang out with before this, and I bet they'll say he was a nice kid. He made a terrible decision, and hurt tons of people. That doesn't mean he used to be a bad kid. A lot of people on his twitter that he knew are still defending him. He could've been a good kid before this, you don't know.
Idiot.

edit on 26-4-2013 by Havox because: (no reason given)

First, lets stop using the word "Kid".

As another poster already mentioned, my state, and I think most others, 18 is the cutoff into adult hood.

Second, let me again refer you to my post.

You are obviously brainwashed by the MSM's use of the picture of this TERRORIST when he was 14 years old. Everywhere you turn, the MSM is using a 5 year old picture. Why? To gain sympathy and to brain wash you into believing what you believe.

If he was a "nice little boy" then he would have run, instead of putting down backpack and pulling the trigger.

Regardless of what he was, a "good kid before this" doesn't nullify the fact that on April 15th he was a bloody vicious terrorist wanting to mame and torture humans. Damn man, he was so smart, he got scholarships! So you cant say he was naive either.

KILLER.

Okay, we can stop referring to him as a kid. Agreed.


I believe about 10% of the little bit of what I see on MSM. I try not to watch it because the majority of their reports are ridiculously wrong, it's not worth the time to sit and listen. Read my post again.
I mentioned his twitter, correct?
Yeah, I'm judging him mainly on how he acted on his twitter, he interacted with different people, and some of those people were quick to defend him when it his picture was first shown. I'd say he was at least a decent kid, but turned out to be a terrible adult.

Ok, how about this. Lets suggest for a moment that the twitter message of your OP is nothing more than a ruse == the playing of a particular character that he was forming to become who he is today? He seems to extend sympathy in the post, yet, I find it uncharacteristic of someone who 2 years ago was pushing the idea of innocent until proven guilty, and now sits in the very same position himself. Do you think his post was a seed? To be later used in his defense? As it is working on your conscience now?

...and...for the record.

I would make a terrible jurist! My own admission!

FYI.

reply to post by phantomjack

The post from the OP is not from twitter.
And, I guess it could have possibly been a seed, but I don't think it was. I think his brother talked him into it. Doesn't mean he's not responsible for is said to have done.

reply to post by phantomjack


Show me one shred of EVIDENCE that has been shown, that clearly shows either suspect committing a crime, or being directly involved with the bombings. Please. Because I have searched tirelessly. I'm not saying they didn't do it, but there is no EVIDENCE that would hold up as grounds to prosecute in terms of what the public has seen.

I'm sorry but if I was totally removed from the situation and had no idea what happened, and they put me in a court room as juror and showed me what I have seen so far, I wouldn't be able to say without a doubt that these two are the culprits. If you picked EVERY other person out that went to the marathon that day with a bookbag on, I'm sure at least one of them would have characteristics or a history that could be just as easily adapted to being a radical or terrorist.

Again, I'm not saying these guys are innocent.. I'm saying the whole "evidence" line is bull.. The "evidence" the public has seen places them at the marathon and at least one of them running from police.. (There are no images or videos that clearly display these individuals the night of the MIT shooting). The eyewitness videos are all too dark and grainy to verify the identities of anyone..

reply to post by phantomjack


I cannot answer your question per se about TPTB sticking their necks out because I'm not entirely positive what I believe, but I do think the establishment is incredibly arrogant and they have a system set up to protect them. The media does a very good job at this and they also hide behind the "incompetence" excuse.

I think they've (whoever we may surmise they are) done some pretty risky things in the past, like flying 3 airliners into well known American landmarks. We don't have all the answers about 9/11 but whether there were Islamic terrorists on those planes or not (I think there were), I still believe the event was engineered and pieces put in play like a pawn on a chessboard.

As far as the FBI, I would refer you to the video another user posted about the well documented involvement of the FBI in "terrorism" cases. There is a plethora of evidence to suggest they are quite manipulative and less than honest, as well. If and when I see the video of them dropping the backpacks, many of my views regarding this case will have to be altered, and they will be. But until that day, I do not trust the FBI and I would urge others not to.

And I have to disagree with your argument that those who consider Dzhokhar a kid or adult runs along political ideology lines, because I am a conservative libertarian (though socially liberal, in the traditional John F. Kennedy sense) and tend to think of him as a kid. I know by legal terms he is an adult and I have no qualms with that. He should be tried as an adult in court. Having said that, I remember being 19 years old and I still know many 19 year olds and I without a doubt consider them kids in my eyes, part of that may be based on the fact I am simply older than them but a large part of it is the fact that most 19 year olds I know are still incredibly immature even though they have children and families and find themselves in "adult" situations.

I'm also deeply disturbed by the media and those who for some reason take what they say as gospel to use this event once again to demonize Muslims. That is not to say I do not think there are extremists out there, because I know that there are. I just think it's speculative at best. Tamerlan had supposedly posted jihad related YouTube videos, visited mosques, and "turned Muslim" recently but I'm not ready to claim these things were behind his motivations.

He also was a conspiracy theorist (they both were supposedly), listened to Alex Jones, liked the Spiderman movies, and visited a CIA sponsored Jamestown Foundation workshop in Georgia. So are these things relevant, as well? Of course jihadists are more prone to attack than Spider-Man fans but my point is we should not be so quick to judge. I've visited and read al-Jazera before and listened to Alex Jones, if I got arrested tomorrow for something I didn't do, people would point to these things as behind my actions. We have to be careful is all.

Originally posted by PatriotGames2
reply to post by phantomjack

 

I cannot answer your question per se about TPTB sticking their necks out because I'm not entirely positive what I believe, but I do think the establishment is incredibly arrogant and they have a system set up to protect them. The media does a very good job at this and they also hide behind the "incompetence" excuse.

I think they've (whoever we may surmise they are) done some pretty risky things in the past, like flying 3 airliners into well known American landmarks.

And I have to disagree with your argument that those who consider Dzhokhar a kid or adult runs along political ideology lines, because I am a conservative libertarian (though socially liberal, in the traditional John F. Kennedy sense) and tend to think of him as a kid. I know by legal terms he is an adult and I have no qualms with that. He should be tried as an adult in court. Having said that, I remember being 19 years old and I still know many 19 year olds and I without a doubt consider them kids in my eyes, part of that may be based on the fact I am simply older than them but a large part of it is the fact that most 19 year olds I know are still incredibly immature even though they have children and families and find themselves in "adult" situations.

edit on 26-4-2013 by PatriotGames2 because: (no reason given)

You make many valid point here, especially the political divisions between "kid" and "adult". However, regardless of the behavior of this 19 year old, he is and always will be a legal adult, and legal citizen of the United States (as of Sept 11, 2012). As an adult, we should not be thinking of anyone that age as "kids". At that age, you are legally allowed to change the course of the United States in many ways: Paying Taxes, Voting, Running for Office, Being in the Military and trained in advanced killing techniques and responsible for millions of dollars in taxpayer funded weapons. That threshold into adulthood does not warrant the constant and incessant "coddling" IMO. When, at what age, does someone warrant "cutting the apron strings (mothers accepted as they will always see their children as their children)? The sooner we stop this behavior, the sooner growing adults can actually believe they are responsible for themselves. If not, then you do a disservice to them by continuing to treat them as children.

reply to post by Krakatoa


I completely agree. The coddling and naivety with assuming or treating them as kids is counterproductive.

I had my sister and her friends in mind as I wrote that, and although my sister is a couple years older than 19 now, she's still quite immature in many ways despite having children. She's a good person, she doesn't get in trouble, but she isn't very adept at handling real world and adult situations. However, I would never treat her as a child, because she isn't. And as you've pointed out, we need to prepare young adults for the fact their actions have repercussions and help them grow into that role, so to speak, instead of keeping them stunted.

Originally posted by ZiggyMojo
reply to post by phantomjack

 

Show me one shred of EVIDENCE that has been shown, that clearly shows either suspect committing a crime, or being directly involved with the bombings. Please. Because I have searched tirelessly. I'm not saying they didn't do it, but there is no EVIDENCE that would hold up as grounds to prosecute in terms of what the public has seen.

I'm sorry but if I was totally removed from the situation and had no idea what happened, and they put me in a court room as juror and showed me what I have seen so far, I wouldn't be able to say without a doubt that these two are the culprits. If you picked EVERY other person out that went to the marathon that day with a bookbag on, I'm sure at least one of them would have characteristics or a history that could be just as easily adapted to being a radical or terrorist.

Again, I'm not saying these guys are innocent.. I'm saying the whole "evidence" line is bull.. The "evidence" the public has seen places them at the marathon and at least one of them running from police.. (There are no images or videos that clearly display these individuals the night of the MIT shooting). The eyewitness videos are all too dark and grainy to verify the identities of anyone..

I can't. And that is in fact very disturbing. But, then we must consider that everything we know to date is false:

1. The Pressure Cooker Bombs used and then found un-detonated during the chase
2. The alleged materials found in their apartment
3. Allegedly he confessed in the hospital to the bombing
4. They allegedly told the driver of the SUV they "did it"
5. And as politically incorrect as this may seem, they were radical muslims. (ouch)

I know...all circumstantial, right?

reply to post by phantomjack


Tamerlan didn't really seem like a devout Muslim, the MSM is trying to paint him as one though, I've heard he didn't have many friends and was a bit secluded but I have no idea if it's true

reply to post by Chrisfishenstein

Sure, I'll give it a shot.

Their backpacks didnt match.

They dont fit the typical MO, one was in an Ivy League school, the other in medical school.

The alleged confession was given by a drugged semi-conscious prisoner surrounded by establishment jack booted thugs.

The OS is filled with inconsistencies and lies.

They have yet to address any of the alleged guns used by the suspects which may never happen since we now learned that the younger brother was unarmed.

There was no robbery at 7-11.

We're first told that it was "dark skinned males spotted by the Lord and Taylor cameras" and that they had a suspect in custody.

As the media gathered outside the courthouse, there was an alleged bomb threat, the court house was cleared, then it was announced that there was no suspect...

The aunt says that it was her nephew who was forced to strip down then arrested.

There are now other pictures to suggest that the actual suspect was a female and had an explosive device in her purse, which she clearly dropped.

The authorities fully intended to kill the younger brother but were SHOCKED to see that he emerged from the boat ALIVE.

The whole thing smacks of event echos and stand-ins/back-ups with Tamerlan Tsarnaev / Mike Mulugeta & Dzhokhar Tsarnaev / Sunil Tripathi.

Coincidence that they're all dead except one...