Four men were arrested late Wednesday in a plot to blow up two synagogues and shoot down planes at an airport in New York.
Late Wednesday the FBI announced the arrest of four men in a plot to bomb two synagogues in the Bronx and simultaneously shoot down planes at an Air National Guard base near New York City.…
Article comments
26 - Cindy
I think in this case the dividing line is between weapons which target specific targets and those which kill indescriminately. At least that makes some sense.
I think using the words 'weapons of mass destruction' for a car bomb but not for anti-aircraft missiles is an attempt to hype up and 'terrorize' weapons that would be chosen by non-US government entities while leaving government owned weapons as 'non-terrorized'--it legitimizes gov't. weapons.
I can't see any other reason to call a car bomb a 'weapon of mass destruction'.
27 - Ruvy
Prosecutor Eric Snyder described them as "extremely violent men and said that they "pose an extreme risk of danger to the community," as he argued at the arraignment that they should be held without bail. He said, "These people were eager to bring death to Jews."
I guess that what concerns me about the story is the continued desire of so many for Jews to die to purify the race, as one Brazilian neo-nazi is reported to have said.
While you guys whine about GITMO, torture, and imprisoning terrorists, I'd rather see my people come home from Exile in New York, Paris, Buenos Aires, Porto Alegre, London, Sydney - and if someone tries to kill us here, execute the SOB's and ask questions later. Then my blood pressure might go down a bit....
28 - Cindy
“Prolonged Detention” " WTF?
Obama to enforce preventative detention, prolonged detention. Indefinite imprisonment with no charges!
29 - Cindy
There you go Roger. I didn't look at the post after I made it. So, I didn't realize the link was missing.
30 - Jordan Richardson
If you can't have that, would you settle for a box of kittens?
31 - roger nowosielski
Cindy, you link expired;
here is one but it's an old one. There's got to be something recent.
32 - roger nowosielski
Didn't work either. Try this
33 - roger nowosielski
I guess they're withdrawing these articles.
34 - Cindy
Roger I just tried my link in #28 and it worked for me. It is actually right in Obama's speech he just gave. Rachel Maddow discusses it.
35 - roger nowosielski
Yes. It works now.
36 - roger nowosielski
Dan Miller/Cindy:
That's the latest I could find on the legal opinion concerning indefinite detention.
Dan, what's the ramification (application) of this ruling to the Gitmo issue?
37 - Ruvy
Moroccans arrested in planned attacks on Jews.
More attacks on Jewish synagogues documented at Atlas Shrugged.
This article was about a thwarted attack on Jews in New York City. I want to see if the Sages of the Infantile left will continue to studiedly ignore this topic and bullshit on and on about Gitmo other unrelated garbage, or if they will finally pay attention to the actual topic of the post.
This might be an opportunity to give the commenters here a little attention from the outside. Light a fire under their butts, so to speak. I think I'm going to enjoy this....
38 - zingzing
"New York, Paris, Buenos Aires, Porto Alegre, London, Sydney"
man, that's some destinations! sounds like an awesome trip. of course, not in that order... that would be ridiculous. i mean, no offense to sand, but israel is a desert. and no offense to jerusalem, but it does suffer more than its fair share of terrorist attacks, car bombings, missile attacks, racial violence and godfullness. shudder.
seriously. people don't want to leave the places you mention because life is good in those places.
39 - Cindy
It doesn't have any implications for Gitmo. It applies to indefinite detention of a U.S. citizen. Not non-citizens in foreign countries.
But this has made me wonder whether the real reason for keeping the Gitmo prisoners out of the US is to prevent them gaining habeas corpus.
40 - Cindy
39 is re 36
41 - roger nowosielski
#39. That may be right.
Dan Miller provided an extensive legal opinion re #36 on the other thread. I don't quite understand it.