The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

I know this is a very fluid situation, but I think it prompts an interesting discussion. We know there were two explosions, and the news is reporting that two other explosive devices have been located. IF there was a suspect in custody, do you used enhanced interrogation techniques in order to find additional bombs or to get information about accomplices? 

I know this is a very fluid situation, but I think it prompts an interesting discussion. We know there were two explosions, and the news is reporting that two other explosive devices have been located. IF there was a suspect in custody, do you used enhanced interrogation techniques in order to find additional bombs or to get information about accomplices? 

Are we a country operating by "rule of law"...??

No. For purposes of my post, we are a fascist/communist dictatorship (you chooses) that doesn't follow the rule of law, nor have we ever. We also do not have a constitution, body of law protecting rights of the accused, and whatever other nonsense your post posits we don't have. We also randomly arrest would-be suspects and allow them to continue committing crimes already in progress, or allow them to facilitate other persons they know of or in conspiracy with. There, with those parameters, feel free to respond.

I wasn't positing anything at all...seems like I remember someone else raising the question encompassing all those things just a little bit earlier in the thread...
....something about enhanced interrogation techniques....to get information.  And all that implies from the above list.

If any commentary was implied at all, it was to pose the question to ask ourselves - do we want to keep all those protections we have - I vote yes.  We do.  (At least most of us do....)

do you used enhanced interrogation techniques in order to find additional bombs or to get information about accomplices? 

Only to make you feel good;  otherwise, it doesnt produce reliable information.

I heard Obama called it an act of terrorism. So, is it an act of war then? Does it matter if acts of terrorism=acts of war?

Here's my take, as it has ever been. An act of terrorism is not a criminal offense in the traditional sense. It's purposes are political and designed to scare people into submission or change. It rises to insurrection, sedition, and treason and should be investigated and prosecuted under whatever rules of war this country sees fit to establish (but still remaining reasonably compliant with applicable treaties).

Bring on water boarding, loud music, sleep deprivation, stopping short of the full "Lynddie England-ing" to stop another attack. 

Are you sure you are a lawyer?  You talk about prosecuting terrorism using the rules of war the country sees fit to establish - and adherence to treaties...  which we already have done.  Repeatedly over the last couple hundred years.  And the latest of which are actually still in effect.

And then you go off into the weeds advocating the use of what would constitute war crimes.  Much like we have been doing since 2002.

Can you clarify?  ....in a rational fashion...??


All that aside, my first inclination is to start flailing about in much the same way as you advocate.  Good thing I am not an officer of the law, or the court.  But if we go with the sentiment of that last sentence - the ends justify the means - then the rhetorical question I posed initially suddenly because less rhetorical and more reality based.

The FBI is so busy saving the world from terrorist plots they themselves create, that they have no resources to deal with the ones they dont create.

You can look into the eyes of fatherless children, or parents crying over a murdered baby, because you didn't do all you could to stop another terrorist attack, and can you tell them, "the ends didn't justify the means".  I can't. When people declare war on this country, you are an enemy of the constitution. You don't get the same rights you and I get. I do not want to get search warrants, read them their rights, pay for their attorney, or tie up 12 persons to sit in judgment of them. You get a ticket to Gitmo, right after you tell us everything you know--whether you want to or are "encouraged"...

As for me being a lawyer? So what? I am a father, son, former soldier, and citizen too. And I am not alone here. I have often linked to this article penned by notorious right wing nutjob Alan Dershowitz...http://www.alandershowitz.com/publications/docs/torturewarrants.html

Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.

You can look into the eyes of fatherless children, or parents crying over a murdered baby, because you didn't do all you could to stop another terrorist attack, and can you tell them, "the ends didn't justify the means".  I can't. When people declare war on this country, you are an enemy of the constitution. You don't get the same rights you and I get. I do not want to get search warrants, read them their rights, pay for their attorney, or tie up 12 persons to sit in judgment of them. You get a ticket to Gitmo, right after you tell us everything you know--whether you want to or are "encouraged"...

As for me being a lawyer? So what? I am a father, son, former soldier, and citizen too. And I am not alone here. I have often linked to this article penned by notorious right wing nutjob Alan Dershowitz...http://www.alandershowitz.com/publications/docs/torturewarrants.html

Perhaps the analysis of the explosive residue will offer some signature.  I have heard nothing about the chemistry of the explosions yet.  Anyone?

Apparently they are saying that the trail is cold now. 

Where do you get your opposite day information?  Who is your "they"?

As of this morning THEY, the New York Post, CNN and others, said that the original suspect was no longer a suspect and that THEY were aware of no other leads.

Same THEY you get your news from.

You don't get news from the New York Post.

However current reporting is that there is no arrest, but there may be two suspects. Photos are up on Reddit but I don't know that what they have is the real pair of people that the FBI is really looking at.

As of this morning THEY, the New York Post, CNN and others, said that the original suspect was no longer a suspect and that THEY were aware of no other leads.

Same THEY you get your news from.

I bet Skip Nicholson would have had the straight scoop though!

It's a shame Skip didn't make the big time.

Apparently one cannot get reliable news from CNN either.   ;D

I bet Skip Nicholson would have had the straight scoop though!

Unfortunate.  I was waiting to see what media outlet would be the first to point fingers without evidence.

Unfortunate.  I was waiting to see what media outlet would be the first to point fingers without evidence.

"the thinking."

"The thinking, as we've been reporting. . ."

Not the evidence, not authorities, not witnesses, but "the thinking."

Don't you know Aox/FOTARD/TTAC is toking away blaming it on angry white men?

I'd use the Post to line a bird cage before I'd read it.

REVERE, Mass. — A teenager said he is scared to go outside after he was portrayed on the Internet and on the front page of the New York Post as connected to the Boston Marathon bombings.
Photos of Salah Eddin Barhoum, 17, and friend Yassine Zaime were posted on websites whose users have been scouring marathon finish line photos for suspects. The two were also on the Post's front Thursday with the headline: "Bag men: Feds seek these two pictured at Boston Marathon."

So you believe in and subscribe to the ideals of the Constitution and the rule of law, right up to the point where it pisses you off enough to throw it all out the window.  Which means you really don't believe in all that messy law stuff....

You declare war on America, you don't get the rights. Sorry. That's my view. If you are caught, and have information of an ongoing terrorist/act of war event, or know of one in the future, sorry, you don't get the rights. Now, afterwards, once the danger subsides, we can talk. We can talk about not using the incriminating comments against you while you were getting "enhanced". Hell, file your civil right lawsuit or habeas petition. Do whatever. But an act of war is not a "crime", and should not be treated like one. And if you are a terrorist, and get enhanced, and file suit, play your tune to the jury and get a unanimous verdict. Go to OKC, or NYC, or now Boston. Those juries will be sympathetic...

Where do you draw the line on declaring war?  Are two ten year old kids in your neighborhood declaring war with an M80 in a mailbox?  Do you waterboard them?  No rights for little Bobby, straight to Cuba for him.

I'm not taking sides with any bomber but I have issues with what seems to be a no exceptions view that you have.

Has every malicious explosion been an act of war? 

Anyway, being reported on NBC this morning, one of the suspected Marathon bombers was shot and killed last night.  The other, his brother, is "on the run".

The video of the suspects is indeed two young white men.

Who cares what race they are!

They are terrorists.  They killed lots of brown, white, and beige people.
From the Salon article "Prey they are white. . ." to NPR's pre-classification, it seems that liberals really want some white terrorists.

Sorry, but most of us don't care. I just want them dead, that's the only classification I am really concerned about.

Who cares what race they are!

They are terrorists.  They killed lots of brown, white, and beige people.
From the Salon article "Prey they are white. . ." to NPR's pre-classification, it seems that liberals really want some white terrorists.

Sorry, but most of us don't care. I just want them dead, that's the only classification I am really concerned about.

Where do you draw the line on declaring war?  Are two ten year old kids in your neighborhood declaring war with an M80 in a mailbox?  Do you waterboard them?  No rights for little Bobby, straight to Cuba for him.

I'm not taking sides with any bomber but I have issues with what seems to be a no exceptions view that you have.

Has every malicious explosion been an act of war? 

Anyway, being reported on NBC this morning, one of the suspected Marathon bombers was shot and killed last night.  The other, his brother, is "on the run".

Wow!

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/04/boston-bombing-suspect-posted-video-al-qaeda-prophecy-youtube

http://vk.com/id160300242

Watching the epic FAIL of comments on the MJ site is unfortunately not surprising.

Watching the epic FAIL of comments on the MJ site is unfortunately not surprising.

Police scanner in Boston:

http://tunein.com/radio/Boston-Police-Fire-and-EMS-Scanner-s146109/#

The younger one's twitter feed: https://twitter.com/J_tsar

I blame soccer.  

He doesn't look dead yet in this photo:

(http://static.prisonplanet.com/p/images/april2013/190413suspect.jpg)

(http://i.minus.com/iWNCz5UYNtz2z.gif)

Batman and Spidey are on it.....

Thankfully, 19-year old Dzhokhar Tsarnaev has been apprehended and arrested alive.
Hopefully, we can find out why  IF he did what he did...
 

Tips about the identity of the suspects were still pouring in when the Tsarnaev brothers fatally shot Massachusetts Institute of Technology officer Sean Collier, 26, in his vehicle at 10:20 p.m., law enforcement officials said.

The brothers then carjacked a Mercedes SUV, holding the driver captive for a half-hour while they tried to use his cash card to get money from three ATM's, a source said. At the first, they put in the wrong number; at the second, they took out $800 and at the third, they were told they had exceeded the withdrawal limit, the source said.

The carjacking victim was released unharmed at a gas station in Cambridge, sources said. He told police the brothers said they were the marathon bombers and had just killed a campus officer.

As the duo sped in his car toward Watertown, a police chase ensued and they tossed explosive devices out the window, officials said.

Thankfully, 19-year old Dzhokhar Tsarnaev has been apprehended and arrested alive.
Hopefully, we can find out why he did what he did...

Gweed is a "situational constitutionalist". (just made it up but it fits doesn't it?)

This whole concept that these are terrorists at war with America instead of murderous criminals that are engaging in terrorist type activities might be a mistake. It indicates to the world that we may indeed shrug off our democratic principles when provoked.  That in turn encourages more heinous acts of murder by real terrorists. We are playing their game.

The terrorist nations take glory in sacrifice for their ideals but if their sacrifices are exposed as nothing more than murder, that is against their religion and principles.

I hope they water-board the smile outta the surviving piece of trash.....!!!!

Why Should I Care That No One’s Reading Dzhokhar Tsarnaev His Miranda Rights?
When the law gets bent out of shape for him, it’s easier to bend out of shape for the rest of us.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/04/dzhokhar_tsarnaev_and_miranda_rights_the_public_safety_exception_and_terrorism.html

Him being unconscious from blood loss was one reason given for not reading Miranda,
but to admit that opens up the can of worms surrounding the boat being shot up in the first place.

Then there is the question of how long they knew he was there after the police chopper spotted his body heat on FLIR.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/20/boston-marathon-dzhokhar-tsarnaev-mirnada-rights
First, the Obama administration has already rolled back Miranda rights for terrorism suspects captured on US soil. It did so two years ago with almost no controversy or even notice, including from many of those who so vocally condemned Graham's Miranda tweets yesterday. In May, 2010, the New York Times' Charlie Savage - under the headline "Holder Backs a Miranda Limit for Terror Suspects" - reported that "the Obama administration said Sunday it would seek a law allowing investigators to interrogate terrorism suspects without informing them of their rights." Instead of going to Congress, the Obama DOJ, in March 2011, simply adopted their own rules that vested themselves with this power, as reported back then by Salon's Justin Elliott ("Obama rolls back Miranda rights"), the Wall Street Journal ("Rights Are Curtailed for Terror Suspects"), the New York Times ("Delayed Miranda Warning Ordered for Terror Suspects"), and myself ("Miranda is Obama's latest victim").

It does, and some like-minded confederates also think due process and civil rights can selectively be ignored.
As a free country, we have certainly lost something fragile and precious in this.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcJPaJt1VoE[/youtube]

Now you are talking. Maybe an amputation without anesthesia, just like this guy got.

Rated PG-13 version.

(http://cdn.newsday.com/polopoly_fs/1.5076578.1366199819!/httpImage/image.JPG_gen/derivatives/display_600/image.JPG)

Him being unconscious from blood loss was one reason given for not reading Miranda,
but to admit that opens up the can of worms surrounding the boat being shot up in the first place.

Was this "person" shooting at the police from the boat?  If so, I have no problem with the police shooting back.  I also think the boat owner should be compensated without having to make a claim on his insurance.  I would be willing to send a few bucks.  

That's  our Patric, more worried about the evil police than the perpetrator that robbed our society of this child:  

Talk about unintended consequences. With the current Congress being adamantly against anything and everything Obama, they left the door open for him to arbitrarily change policy. Its no lose for the executive branch. Way to go Teapartiers.

I still think we are playing stupid by calling these crimes terrorism, to placate right wing politicians who hope to be reelected on chest thumping. Unless the intent is to exact increased control of our population through irrational fear, which is what the far right is most afraid of anyway.

Call it what radicals most fear....not sacrifice but pre-meditated murder....and they lose their power to persuade losers to throw away their lives for nothing.

Im not so much worried about his civil rights as I am yours
when sidestepping them becomes easier with each justification.

$50K ought to do it.

I hope they water-board the smile outta the surviving piece of trash.....!!!!

I hope they water-board the smile outta the surviving piece of trash.....!!!!

Anyway, one has to wonder just how effective water boarding would be on a semi conscious, suicidal, seriously injured patient SUSPECT.

This will make you happy Patric, a 26 year old police officer was killed, and another seriously wounded. The cherry on top? They left families behind. Party time at Patric's house!!!

I just heard an informed, intelligent discussion of why he may not have been mirandized. First off, he had tried to cut his own throat which makes it difficult to respond. Secondly, he was semi conscious which also is a problem and lastly, they have enough evidence accumulated that lack of a Miranda doesn't really hinder prosecution.

Anyway, one has to wonder just how effective water boarding would be on a semi conscious, suicidal, seriously injured patient.

I'd chance "suspect" to "terrorist". But your point is taken.

Curious how informed that was considering it has been reported repeatedly it was a gunshot wound to the neck or mouth or is this a new development since this morning?

An "enemy combatant" is an individual who was part of or supporting Taliban or al Qaeda forces, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners. This includes any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported hostilities in aid of enemy armed forces.

Where the Government accuses a citizen of waging war against it, our constitutional tradition has been to prosecute him in federal court for treason or some other crime. Where the exigencies of war prevent that, the Constitution suspension Clause, Art. I, ß9, cl. 2, allows Congress to relax the usual protections temporarily. Absent suspension, however, the Executive’s assertion of military exigency has not been thought sufficient to permit detention without  charge. No one contends that the congressional Authorization for Use of Military Force, on which the Government relies to justify its actions here, is an implementation of the Suspension Clause. . . .. The very core of liberty secured by our Anglo-Saxon system of separated powers has been freedom from indefinite imprisonment at the will of the Executive.

Blackstone stated this principle clearly:
". . .Of great importance to the public is the preservation of this personal liberty: for if once it were left in the power of any, the highest, magistrate to imprison arbitrarily whomever he or his officers thought proper . . . there would soon be an end of all other rights and immunities. . . . To bereave a man of life, or by violence to confiscate his estate, without accusation or trial, would be so gross and notorious an act of despotism, as must at once convey the alarm of tyranny throughout the whole kingdom. But confinement of the person, by secretly hurrying him to gaol, where his sufferings are unknown or forgotten; is a less public, a less striking, and therefore a more dangerous engine of arbitrary government. . . . ìTo make imprisonment lawful, it must either be, by process from the courts of judicature, or by warrant from some legal officer, having authority to commit to prison; which warrant must be in writing, under the hand and seal of the magistrate, and express the causes of the commitment, in order to be examined into (if necessary) upon a habeas corpus. If there be no cause expressed, the gaoler is not bound to detain the prisoner. For the law judges in this respect, . . . that it is unreasonable to send a prisoner, and not to signify withal the crimes alleged against him.î 1 W. Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England

I read that he and his Brother had a suicide pact. And that is why he ran over and helped kill his hancuffed Brother with the stolen SUV.
It is reported he put the gun in his mouth and fired. Only to have the bullit tear through his throat and not kill him.

This “enemy combatant” thing is a lowly argument anyway.  He isn’t a prisoner of war, and he isn’t accused of a crime.  We don’t want to return him to his home when the war is over, but we don’t want to put him on trial.  Let’s just call him an enemy, not charge him, and throw him a cell somewhere and forget about him!  I REALLY do like that solution, most of these people are not right in the head and wish ill to everything I hold dear… but it isn’t right (and the Supreme Court rejected the notion of holding people indefinitely without charge, even foreigners caught killing Americans over seas).  If some foreign nation snatched up Americans under a similar situation we would be outraged.  But when we did it we sat silent.



But if Uncle Sam can strip a fellow Citizen of his rights without due process – he can strip my rights, he can strip your rights, and our rights are meaningless.    The argument isn’t about how one horrible person is treated.  The argument is weather the United States Government can summarily strip the rights of a US Citizen with no due process of law.

The answer is no.
 

Careful with that enemy combatant argument...that will piss off a lot of people - here and nationwide.  I didn't sit silent and it has cost me at times.


As for stripping rights - well said!!  All of that was well said!!  The big disappointment is how often attempts are made to make it happen.  Even at this late date!  ....especially at this late date...!

Sorry for the novel, but it Is important to both put the issue in perspective and then address it factually and legally. . . 

But if Uncle Sam can strip a fellow Citizen of his rights without due process – he can strip my rights, he can strip your rights, and our rights are meaningless.    The argument isn’t about how one horrible person is treated.  The argument is weather the United States Government can summarily strip the rights of a US Citizen with no due process of law.

The answer is no.
 

In pursuit of justice, we quickly forget that these rights do not exist to protect the guilty, but to protect the innocent, but to protect the innocent, than they must also be afforded to the guilty.

Well done, CF.

BOSTON: A body found floating in the Providence River was that of a 22-year-old student who was falsely implicated in the Boston Marathon bombings, Rhode Island officials confirmed on Thursday.

But the body found was of a student that had went missing before the bombings took place. Most likely unrelated.

It's a conspiracy created by members of the Bilderberg group. Coordinated by all branches of law enforcement using alien technology to cover up.

members of the Bilderberg group. Coordinated by all branches of law enforcement using alien technology to cover up.

Damn, dirty aliens.

There's only one guy that can fix this
(http://wac.450f.edgecastcdn.net/80450F/screencrush.com/files/2012/06/they-live.jpg)

"...you sh!t heel"?

Man, those Bostonians are creative.

He worked in profanity the way other artists might work in oils or clay. It was his true medium; a master.

"...you sh!t heel"?

Man, those Bostonians are creative.

He worked in profanity the way other artists might work in oils or clay. It was his true medium; a master.

"In the heat of battle my father wove a tapestry of obscenities that as far as we know is still hanging in space over Lake Michigan."

Homeland Security is your clusterfark here. But then you have that knee jerk thing going on.

Homeland Security is your clusterfark here. But then you have that knee jerk thing going on.

So when the suspects were first identified, classmates and friends "unfriended" them and deleted social media group photos of them together out of fear that crazies might see them and target them.
They probably would have not guessed that the FBI would call that "conspiracy to obstruct justice" and start arresting them (including a guy cleaning the dorms  arrested for throwing out fireworks).

A little more insight on what these kids removed.  The FBI already knew about the explosive used in the blasts, because it was a typical IED design (propellent or powder from over the counter fireworks and petroleum jelly).  By themselves those items are moderately dangerous but when put into a steel pressure vessel they become a big bomb.  This is one of the popular recipes in Afganistan and Iraq. The FBI also has records showing that the bombers sent text messages to their buddies, telling them to go to the room and take the items.  They took the laptop, the empty fireworks tubes, a bottle of Vaseline and BBs.  A rather odd rubbish list.  They did not do any windows or clean the toilet.

That's a lot if information gleaned from a one paragraph criminal complaint.  Do we know this didnt take place when two entirely different suspects were still in the cross hairs?

Gaspar, don't rely on second hand information around here!  Unless, YOU were actually in Iraq its not a valid statement according to some of our fact checking posters.

Being in Iraq, in and of itself, is not sufficient.  Specific duty stations and job descriptions would also be required qualifications.

I assume blood type would also be helpful.   :D

Kos and the various conspiracy sites are likely poor places to get news.  Try CBS, NBC, ABC and the AP.

Thrill your aluminum foil friends with your ability to quell or fuel their fears about hidden agendas and the secret organizations that control their lives.

Gaspar, don't rely on second hand information around here!  Unless, YOU were actually in Iraq its not a valid statement according to some of our fact checking posters.

You got your "terrorista" info from the Daily Mail UK tabloid, so that's the pot calling the kettle black.
The gag tag was a dig from their college friends, which is street slang for a heavy partier.

So it's a conspiracy to be skeptical of a conspiracy claim?

They shot off some fireworks earlier, which usually leaves you with spent tubes.
..and Im sure the first thing that comes to my mind when I find Vaseline in someone's bathroom is 'they make bombs with it'.  ::)

It's quite a reach to tie all these circumstances into a terrorism conspiracy.  Even if it turns out to be so, the quality of evidence at this point is poor (and not likely to improve if you have to resort to personal attacks to advance your conspiracy theory).

And for dang sure I wouldn't go clean the room of a guy i knew was suspected of a bombing unless I had just as much to risk.

Perhaps I have overstepped my bounds.

You are correct.

Then please help me to understand your opinion on the evidence.  Dialoge is very difficult when you won't make clear your point.

Do you suspect that the bombing is likely to have been perpetrated by the Tsarnaev brothers?

Do you believe that they confessed as much to man who's car they carjacked, as he has claimed?

Do you have reason to suspect that the three students from Kazakhstan that attempted to despose of the backpack containing empty pyrotechnic devices and the laptop, did so in an effort to hide that evidence from the authorities for any reason?

Do you suspect that there is another person or group behind this act of terrorism with another motive?

Of course not.  It's a false flag inside job, silly!

Or we are reading more ramblings because of this:

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Lj5KP8OgZVk/SCOqfKtAOsI/AAAAAAAACFA/2zl-Lq5PzLE/s400/8557060_f14bd4f251.jpg)

Not the first time the FBI and BPD haven't worked well together.  The Winter Hill Gang comes to mind.

Why Did the FBI Kill an Unarmed Man and Clam Up?
Law enforcement can't get its story straight in the worrisome case of Ibragim Todashev.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/05/why-did-the-fbi-kill-an-unarmed-man-and-clam-up/276369/

What led an FBI agent, or some other law enforcement official, to shoot and kill an unarmed man in Orlando, Florida? The man, Ibragim Todashev, was being questioned about the Boston bombing, as well as an unsolved 2011 triple murder that he may or may not have confessed to committing. Does that sound sketchy? Don't blame me. Once he died, law enforcement started releasing anonymous, conflicting explanations so dubious that they warrant an inquiry all by themselves.

Did the dead man have a knife? A gun? A sword? None of those? Let's run through a timeline of what we've been told, and then assess all the information that the FBI hasn't released about the killing.

May 22, 2013

Ibragim Todashev is shot in the early morning hours. At least three law enforcement personnel, including at least one FBI agent, were reportedly present. Later that day, The New York Times quotes "officials" from either the Massachusetts State Police or the FBI. They say that after two hours of questioning in his apartment, Todashev "exploded and leapt at" an FBI agent. A second "law enforcement official" told the Times that "the shooting occurred after Mr. Todashev had admitted his role in the killings" -- the 2011 triple murder -- "and had also implicated Mr. Tsarnaev. The official said he had begun writing out a statement when he asked to take a break."

The quote from the second official:

    They got him to confess to the homicides, and they say, 'Let's write it down,' and he starts writing it down. He goes to get a cigarette or something and then he goes off the deep end. I don't know what triggered him, and he goes after the agent.

The same day, the Orlando Sentinel reports, "Federal officials said he lunged at the agent with a knife during questioning, and the agent opened fire."

The Associated Press also reported that "law enforcement officials say a man was shot while he was being questioned in the Boston Marathon bombing case after he lunged at an FBI agent with a knife," adding, "The FBI initially said the agent fired the fatal shot, but later in the day the bureau left open the question of who was responsible." And Dave Couvertier, "a special agent and spokesman for the FBI's Tampa field office," told Yahoo News that an FBI team would be dispatched from D.C. to investigate the shooting, and that the FBI agent "sustained non-life-threatening injuries."

The FBI also put out a statement on May 22:

    The FBI is currently reviewing a shooting incident involving an FBI special agent. Based on preliminary information, the incident occurred in Orlando, Florida during the early morning hours of May 22, 2013. The agent, two Massachusetts State Police troopers, and other law enforcement personnel were interviewing an individual in connection with the Boston Marathon bombing investigation when a violent confrontation was initiated by the individual. During the confrontation, the individual was killed and the agent sustained non-life threatening injuries. As this incident is under review, we have no further details at this time.

A friend of the dead man, Khusen Taramov, told a TV station, "They were talking to us, both of us, right? And they said they need him for a little more, for a couple more hours, and I left, and they told me they're going to bring him back. They never brought him back."

That brings us to the last story of that day, time-stamped after 8pm by the Associated Press, which reported: "Three law enforcement officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Todashev had lunged at the FBI agent with a knife. However, two of those officials said later in the day it was no longer clear what had happened. The third official had not received any new information."

May 23

The Orlando Sentinel reports that "an FBI review team from Washington was in Orlando on Thursday investigating the death of Ibragim Todashev," and that they'd be questioning "witnesses who were at the Orlando condo when the shooting occurred early Wednesday morning, including two Massachusetts State Police troopers and other law-enforcement officials."

The story ads that "the FBI agent who fired the lethal shot, who has not been publicly identified, is from the agency's Boston division," and "an autopsy was expected to be completed Thursday, but the report will not be made public for several weeks -- if not months -- because the case is under criminal investigation." The FBI team investigating the killing is reported to be 13 agents strong.

May 24

The dead man's father, Abdul-Baki Todashev, speaks from Chechnya:
 

    My son was in full cooperation with the F.B.I. but they just murdered him after an almost 8-hour-long questioning. Before this trouble I thought America was a free democratic country, where unlike in Russia, laws worked. I was deeply mistaken--now I think Russia is a golden place compared to the United States. My attitude for America flipped 180 degrees in one minute.

May 25

Citing "officials briefed on the investigation," The Boston Globe reports that the dead man "was shot in the kitchen of his apartment after overturning a table and attacking the agent with a blade," adding, "two law enforcement officials said that the Boston FBI agent felt he was in grave danger when Todashev attacked him and that he fired in self-defense." The "regional medical examiner" who had the body wouldn't reveal how many times Todashev was shot, saying "we can't release any information on that case." That same friend, Khusen Taramov, is quoted saying that the dead man had a serious knee injury and that "agents had kept tight control over him at prior interviews."

May 29

Remember that knife? Forget about it. "FBI sources say Ibragim Todashev, a friend of accused Boston Marathon bomber Tamarlen Tsarnaev, was unarmed when he was shot and killed by an FBI agent during questioning at an Orlando apartment last week," says an Orlando television station.

The story goes on:

    Officials said Todashev pushed a table and possibly threw a chair.

    Sources said a sword was inside the apartment, but the weapon was moved to the corner of the room before questioning began. Law enforcement said when Todashev lunged, the FBI agent believed he could have possibly been going for his gun or the sword in the room, and that's when the agent opened fire.

ABC News has a similar account:

    Ibragim Todashev, an Orlando, Fla., associate of one of the Boston bombing suspects, was not armed when he was involved an alleged violent confrontation with an FBI agent that resulted in Todashev being shot to death in his apartment, law enforcement sources told ABC News...Officials initially told ABC News and other news outlets that a knife was involved in the confrontation... A samurai sword was in the room, which may have accounted for some of the initial confusion over whether a weapon was involved, sources added.

The Washington Post added a detail:

    One law enforcement official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation, said Wednesday that Todashev lunged at the agent and overturned a table. But the official said Todashev did not have a gun or a knife. A second official also said Todashev was unarmed.

    An official said that according to one account of the shooting, the other law enforcement officials had just stepped out of the room, leaving the FBI agent alone with Todashev, when the confrontation occurred.The shooting followed hours of questioning by the law enforcement officials that had begun the night before.

May 30

The Orlando Sentinel is one of several outlets to note that a Florida chapter of CAIR is calling for the Civil Rights division of the Justice Department to investigate the shooting. CAIR-Tampa Executive Director Hassan Shibly says the dead man was hit by bullets seven times, including once in the head.

The article continues:

    Though early accounts from unnamed federal law-enforcement sources claimed Todashev might have been armed with a knife, the latest version, released by a Fox affiliate in Boston, reported that Todashev lunged with a sword at the agent.

    Shibly said there was a sword at the apartment, but it was mounted on the wall, ornamental and had a dull blade and a broken handle.

Tentative Conclusions

It is difficult to understand how, having shot the man dead, the multiple law enforcement personnel on scene could've gotten the details wrong. Discrepancies can creep into an account of a stressful situation. But how can there possibly be confusion about whether the suspect was a) wielding a knife, per the original story; b) unarmed, per subsequent versions; c) or lunging with or toward a samurai sword? We're supposed to believe that multiple law enforcement personnel went to a man's apartment, confirmed via his own confession that he participated in a triple murder with an alleged terrorist, and still left him within reach of a samurai sword? And that, after he lunged toward one agent with the sword, or else lunged toward the sword, or an officer's gun, or something, there was so much confusion that it was reported for days that the suspect attacked with a knife? Come on. Law enforcement couldn't get its story straight.    

At best, an incompetently handled suspect was given access to a weapon so dangerous it justified using deadly force in response. Perhaps that's all this is. Or perhaps it will turn out that Todashev was wrongfully killed. The facts known to the public are worrisome enough that an independent inquiry is justified. In addition, this case illustrates why the FBI ought to be required to record all of its interrogations, using video when possible and at least audio in all circumstances

It reminds me of the time when Ronald Reagan folks illegally gave arms to our enemy Iran, bought and sold drugs in Nicaragua to finance it, then lied to Congress about it.

Now that was a scandal. I wonder what ever happened to the President on that one.

Oh. I remember. They named the airport in DC after him.

Maybe you should start an airport re-naming pool.  Which airport gets re-named after Pres. Obama?

As of late, everything with our government is getting weird. From the IRS becoming the president's personal gestapo, to the administration demanding that the hospital in Benghazi label Ambassador Stevens as a John Doe to fool the media, to classifying reporters as criminals for attempting to report the news.
Now we have federal officers shooting an unarmed suspect SEVEN times during an interrogation.  It seems that the incompetence is not just at the top of the chain of command, but throughout.

It reminds me of the time when Ronald Reagan folks illegally gave arms to our enemy Iran, bought and sold drugs in Nicaragua to finance it, then lied to Congress about it.

Now that was a scandal. I wonder what ever happened to the President on that one.

Oh. I remember. They named the airport in DC after him.

When the Obama administration comes under fire, the tactic becomes to dredge something bad from a previous administration.  Why are those of you who support Obama okay with continually lowering the bar for what is acceptable behavior from a president and those he surrounds himself with?  The defense always seems to start like this: "Well Bush...", "Well Nixon...", "Well Reagan..."

Why should the low points of a previous administration make future malfeasance justified?

"continually lowering the bar"?  Obviously the bar was already well-lowered by those GOP administrations.  Not defending Obama on anything, but neither should he be held higher than previous administrations.  It's kind of like when Clinton was under fire for the whole Lewinsky thing.  Kennedy and LBJ both had flings and mistresses, but the GOP forced Clinton into a corner via congressional testimony, so it became a huge thing.  Now I'm not condoning Clinton either, but it's not like it hasn't happened before. 

It's a great thing to hold the office to higher standards, but don't be surprised when it's the same thing all over again.

"continually lowering the bar"? 

Watergate and Iran-Contra were the scandals that were going to bring down the USA according to Democrats and the Mainstream Press.  These little things during the Obama administration are just a minor disturbance according to Democrats and the Mainstream Press.

Maybe you should start an airport re-naming pool.  Which airport gets re-named after Pres. Obama?

When the Obama administration comes under fire, the tactic becomes to dredge something bad from a previous administration.  Why are those of you who support Obama okay with continually lowering the bar for what is acceptable behavior from a president and those he surrounds himself with? 

No, it is not. It is wrong. I have not defended Obama on Benghazi, IRS or any recent scandal.

But it should be allowed to reference other President's behavior without you and gaspar acting as if anything this president did as reprehensible.

Reagan should have been imprisoned for the actions of his cabinet. They didn't, but 138 indictments for everything mentioned above and plus the HUD scandals (rigging bids to give republican contributors millions), EPA scandals punishing political opponents with fines and harrassment, the savings and loan crisis which bankrupt thousands of companies, etc. sure are proof that he was the most corrupt president ever.

What Obama and his people are being accused of is petty in comparision, yet gaspar writes it as if it is the worst scandal ever. Showing historical perspective is not defending.

What Obama and his people are being accused of is petty in comparision, yet gaspar writes it as if it is the worst scandal ever. Showing historical perspective is not defending.

While applying with the Internal Revenue Service for tax-exempt status in 2009, an Iowa-based anti-abortion group was asked to provide information about its members' prayer meetings, documents sent by an IRS official to the organization reveal.

On June 22, 2009, the Coalition for Life of Iowa received a letter from the IRS office in Cincinnati, Ohio, that oversees tax exemptions requesting details about how often members pray and whether their prayers are "considered educational."

"Please explain how all of your activities, including the prayer meetings held outside of Planned Parenthood, are considered educational as defined under 501(c)(3)," reads the letter, made public by the Thomas More Society, a public interest law firm that collected evidence about the IRS practices. "Organizations exempt under 501(c)(3) may present opinions with scientific or medical facts. Please explain in detail the activities at these prayer meetings. Also, please provide the percentage of time your organizations spends on prayer groups as compared with the other activities of the organization."

The IRS is currently under fire for allegedly targeting conservative groups that applied for nonprofit status in recent years. In response, two IRS officials have stepped down, including Acting Commissioner Steven Miller.
That portion of the questionnaire, in which the IRS also asked about signs the group intended to carry at rallies at Planned Parenthood offices, is below:

Screenshot from IRS letter sent to Coalition for Life of Iowa in 2012.
In response, the group's attorneys at Mosher & Associates, a firm based in Chicago, responded:

...

During a Ways and Means Committee hearing Friday on Capitol Hill, Illinois Republican Rep. Aaron Schock asked Miller specifically about the Campaign for Life of Iowa letter from 2009.

“Would that be an inappropriate question to a 501(c)3 applicant?” Schock asked. “The content of one’s prayers?”

“It pains me to say I can’t speak to that one either,” Miller said. He had said earlier that he would not be able to discuss individual cases during the hearing.

"You don't know whether or not that would be an appropriate question to ask?" Schock replied.

"Speaking outside of this case, which I don't know anything about, it would surprise me that that question was asked," Miller said.

The Brady District's going to be renamed before Reagan airport gets renamed.

I was thinking more of Obama's "home town" and O'Hare airport.

When the Obama administration comes under fire, the tactic becomes to dredge something bad from a previous administration.  Why are those of you who support Obama okay with continually lowering the bar for what is acceptable behavior from a president and those he surrounds himself with?  The defense always seems to start like this: "Well Bush...", "Well Nixon...", "Well Reagan..."

Why should the low points of a previous administration make future malfeasance justified?

This isn't about lowering the bar as much as it's about scoring political points.  As I've noted before, sometimes the difference isn't between right and left rather than right and wrong.  Instead of frantically searching for someone to blame, perhaps we should be asking if our government should be compiling these huge databases on all of us.  It's not a problem that originated with the Obama administration, and in fact, it probably goes back long before the Bush presidency.  All administrations want to (1) control the flow of information and (2) consolidate more power.  That's simply human nature.

For us liberals, the Obama presidency has been a mixed bag.  One writer said that when it comes to data collection via the internet and monitoring our phone calls, this is actually the fourth term for President Bush.  That our president didn't put an end to those practices is a huge disappointment.  Of course, if he had done so, our conservative friends would be whining about how he gutted national defense.  And so it goes.

Gotta go mow the lawn, but here's an interesting photo.  Dunno if it's 'shopped:

(https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/1003423_653120451368127_1068785246_n.jpg)

As of late, everything with our government is getting weird. From the IRS becoming the president's personal gestapo, to the administration demanding that the hospital in Benghazi label Ambassador Stevens as a John Doe to fool the media, to classifying reporters as criminals for attempting to report the news.

Now we have federal officers shooting an unarmed suspect SEVEN times durring an interrogation.  It seems that the incompetence is not just at the top of the chain of command, but throughout.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2333101/Friend-Boston-Marathon-bomber-UNARMED-killed-FBI-agent-confess-triple-murder.html

FBI: "We dont know exactly what happened, but we're absolving ourselves of any wrongdoing"

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2014/03/21/cbs-news-fbi-agent-cleared-in-shooting-death-of-tsarnaev-associate

BOSTON (CBS/AP) – An FBI review has cleared the agent who shot Ibragim Todashev last year, CBS News reported Friday.
Todashev, 27, was killed in Orlando, Florida in May while FBI agents and others questioned him about his friendship with suspected Boston Marathon bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev.
Officials originally said Todashev lunged at an agent with a knife. They later said it was no longer clear what happened.

Todashev's father, saying his son was killed execution style, produced autopsy photos that allegedly showed six gunshot wounds to the torso and one to the back of his head.

Todashev’s widow spoke to WBZ-TV exclusively by phone from Russia.
“No. I don’t believe it,” Reni Manukyan said of the report. “Besides that, there were so many different versions of what happened. They had released so many different things that he was with a gun, with a knife, with a grate, with a broomstick, with a chair.”
An official with knowledge of the situation told CBS News that an FBI internal review cleared the FBI agent who shot Todashev. The agent has not been identified.

“For them to admit themselves that yes we killed somebody and we were wrong I don’t think that will ever happen and that goes for Ibragim’s case as well,” Manukyan says.

The New York Times reports in about 150 FBI shootings since 1993, about 70 of them fatal, not one agent has been found at fault in internal reviews.

(http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2013/05/30/169655419-a681fbc097c067a52f719d040ae14e0c72fa97b9-s4-c85.jpg)
Abdul-Baki Todashev, father of Ibragim Todashev, shows pictures of his son's bullet-riddled body at a news conference in Moscow.

A Chechen man who was fatally shot by an FBI agent last week during an interview about one of the Boston bombing suspects was unarmed, law enforcement officials said Wednesday.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/officials-man-who-knew-boston-bomber-was-unarmed-when-shot/2013/05/29/21f05b74-c8a8-11e2-9f1a-1a7cdee20287_story.html?hpid=z2

You can spread it out over 500 pages.

You can stock it with photos of overturned chairs, the stitches on top of an FBI agent’s head, sketches of the trajectory lines made by the seven bullets that entered Ibragim Todashev’s body, and the recollections of two unnamed Massachusetts state police and one unidentified FBI agent.

But a whitewash is still a whitewash. Once again the FBI waltzes away from a mess. No harm, no foul.

A Florida state attorney released the long-awaited, but not highly-anticipated, report on the bizarre death of Ibragim Todashev in his Orlando apartment last May.

It contained plenty of words that did nothing to lift the fog that has surrounded this incident. What we do get from Jeffrey L. Ashton, the Florida state attorney, is some weird editorializing at the end of his five-page letter.

He seemed to blend a suicide-by-cop scenario in with a generous helping of the Incredible Hulk.

“For reasons which we will never know,” Jeffrey Ashton writes, “Mr. Todashev’s response to his impending arrest and probable incarceration was not to flee from the residence out the easily accessible door that was right behind him.”

So, the state attorney concludes that it was Todashev’s mix of wild Cossack and enraged mixed martial arts Hulk that all but invited his own demise in a hail of FBI gunfire.

“I find the statements of those who knew him from his fighting career most illuminating,” Ashton opines. “The one common thread among all was the observation that (Todashev) was, at his core, a fearless fighter.”

A tip of the hat to the dead wild man. It’s an interesting way to both tiptoe around a mess, while buttressing the image of Todashev — armed with nothing more than “a pole of some sort” — scaring the living bejeezus out of two state cops and one FBI agent.

Missing from this report is any serious discussion about how or why it was that two law enforcement officers (plus another waiting just outside) did not even try to subdue Todashev with anything other than bullets.

The FBI agent with no name who appeared to be leading the 41/2 hour conversation (or was it an interrogation?) of Todashev apparently turned his attention away long enough to allow this “fearless fighter” to hurl a coffee table off the back of his head.

That’s when all hell broke loose and before anyone could say Tamerlan Tsarnaev, his fearless fighting buddy, Ibragim Todashev, was just as dead.

Before those seven bullets ended the discussion, the cops were in-house for almost five hours. There is nothing in those 500 pages about any information they may have gleaned over all those hours about a triple murder in Waltham, or the bombing on Boylston Street.

Maybe there’s another 500 pages on the way. Does anyone think they would contain a shred of enlightenment?
http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/columnists/peter_gelzinis/2014/03/gelzinis_fairy_tale_just_fbi_whitewash

And here is "the other side"

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/03/25/todashev/rt3K7PSMY1ykZiU0DaaiuI/story.html

King of Spam strikes again......

So the suspect, recovering from knee surgery and was barely able to walk, who, in the 5th hour of an interrogation, unexplicably produced either a Samuri sword or a broomstick or a metal pole or tried to grab a agents gun,  and had to be stopped, according to an agent with a long history of brutality, facing four internal affairs investigations for falsifying reports abiyt timecard fraud, disability fraud, beatings and false arrests.

Got it.

So a 27 year old MMA fighter with a proclivity for violence (Todashev had been arrested for violent incidents in 2010 and 2012 and again in early May, when he beat a man in a parking lot.) confessed to helping plot and carry out a murder.   He did this with a state trooper AND the FBI agent in the room (Finally, Todashev said, “I was involved in it.”   A trooper read him his Miranda rights and Todashev appeared to sign the waiver indicating he understood. “Will you guys help me?” Todashev asked.)

It's not spam, it's "activism".

Sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar.

Sounds like but not the same. Unless the entire Boston pd, FBI and the press is corrupt, there appears to have been video shared with the press on this one.