Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

(Vanity) Anyone watching Napolitano on O'Reilly? Gotta say I agree with him

Posted on 11/30/2010 5:26:24 PM PST by Red in Blue PA

It's not a crime to think a certain way. It may not be popular to say it (heck I know it isn't), but thought is not a crime, if the govt plants the seed as was done in Portland. Hate to agree with him on this one, but how many people have ever had an untoward thought toward DC? Thought is not a crime....hate crimes are Unconstitutional, and I believe the Judge is correct that this is too.


TOPICS: Miscellaneous; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: chat; islam; napolitano; nolink; notnews; oreilly; vanity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-70 last
To: Red in Blue PA

“I agree with this if it means allowing the perp to build the bomb”

Small wonder that PA is blue


61 posted on 11/30/2010 7:13:27 PM PST by Figment ("A communist is someone who reads Marx.An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx" R Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Figment
Small wonder that PA is blue

You must have missed Nov 2nd.
62 posted on 11/30/2010 7:14:59 PM PST by Red in Blue PA (Planning on using 911? Google "Brittany Zimmerman")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

“You think it’s easy for me to defend him? I would love to execute all jihadists....but we have a Constitution to live by”

Are you, by chance, Arlen Specter? You sound just like him


63 posted on 11/30/2010 7:23:14 PM PST by Figment ("A communist is someone who reads Marx.An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx" R Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: theDentist

Based on the arrest warrant Mohamud did not build the bomb. He ordered the components and chose the location after being given numerous opportunities to opt out, but he did NOT put them together.

Then he filmed his jihadi video statement after changing his clothes telling the fed agents he wanted to be wearing “Sheik Osama style’ clothes.

The day of the planned attack he left his location to look at the bomb which was fully inert and contained in the back of a late-model white panel van

The bomb was constructed by FBI technicians.

After looking at the fake bomb, Mohamud smiled and said it was “Beautiful”

They retreated to the hotel room the meeting was conducted in. He was then asked if he was sure he wanted to go through with the attack - TWICE. The room they were in at the time had the local tv news coverage on - they were reporting that 25,000 people were at the tree lighting event. Mohamud smiled and said he was pleased there was such a large crowd.

Mohamud and the agent drove the van to the location that MOHAMUD had identified as the prime location. They parked the van and MOHAMUD attached the blasting cap to the inert device MOHAMUD then flipped the toggle switch on the inert device. He then walked with the agent to the rendezvous point and dialed the number on the cell phone (MOHAMUD had purchased the phone) that would detonate the bomb.

It didn’t detonate. The agent suggested he step out of the van and try again - the signal might be better.

Mohamud stepped out of the van and dialed again.

He was arrested kicking and screaming Allahu Ackbar.


64 posted on 11/30/2010 7:25:51 PM PST by Dinah Lord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Dinah Lord
They parked the van and MOHAMUD attached the blasting cap to the inert device MOHAMUD then flipped the toggle switch on the inert device.

What if instead of a blasting cap, it was something else? Would he have known? I know this is splitting hairs, but this is a slippery slope if this is allowed to prevail without him actually building the bomb.
65 posted on 11/30/2010 7:31:27 PM PST by Red in Blue PA (Planning on using 911? Google "Brittany Zimmerman")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Raider Sam
But if you went to someone and offered it without solicitation, it would be entrapment.

Concur, but the initial solicitation does not have to be to the police. If someone is overheard talking about their desire to have someone killed and find a hitman to do it, then its not entrapment to provide one.

66 posted on 11/30/2010 7:54:02 PM PST by SampleMan (If all of the people currently oppressed shared a common geography, bullets would already be flying.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA
I didn't see this segment, but it sounds like it was a very interesting conversation.

I've long had some serious concerns about any kind of police "sting" operation like this -- where the government goes out and builds a case against a defendant based on a "Crime that Didn't Really Happen but Might Have Happened if the Undercover Police were Actually Terrorists Supplying This Guy with Weapons and Explosives" scenario.

67 posted on 11/30/2010 8:56:20 PM PST by Alberta's Child ("If you touch my junk, I'm gonna have you arrested.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

Would it have mattered if it was something else?

The intent was clearly there...


68 posted on 11/30/2010 10:09:10 PM PST by Dinah Lord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

Comment #69 Removed by Moderator

To: SampleMan

I agree. I guess what we have to see is did the FBI seek him after he declared he wanted to blow something up, or did they seek him out and convince him to blow something up.

It reminds me some of Ruby Ridge, where they asked a guy to saw off a shotgun, then tried to prosecute him for it. He wanted to sell a legal gun, and did not advertise as selling illegal weapons. If the same happened here, I will feel the same way, regardless of his religion, that I do about Ruby Ridge.

As far as I have seen, the initial contact has not been released, but I would be interested in seeing it.


70 posted on 12/01/2010 10:32:03 AM PST by Raider Sam (They're on our left, right, front, and back. They aint gettin away this time!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-70 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson