'Bring it down' was about a car, students' lawyer says (Florida-Georgia "terrorist hoax")

You keep stating, as a fact ( which it most assiredly is NOT ! ( that Eunice said that the punks sope in Arabic. Nothing will shake your position; yet, no one, NOT A SINGLE PERSON , said that that is what she said, except you and the punks, who didn't make that claim, until MONDAY night.

Enjoy yourself while I backpeddle a little bit. My strong recollection is that I heard Stone say on Friday that she had heard them talking in Arabic at one point. It is possible that I heard this statement attributed to her and incorrectly remembered it as if I'd heard her say it herself. It's possible, but I definitely heard on Friday that she'd reported they spoke in Arabic at one point.

Thus when the students mentioned on Monday I recognized what they were referring to. Why didn't I make the "charge" sooner? There was no charge to make; I had no reason to doubt they might have been speaking in Arabic at Shoneys. Why didn't the students mention it sooner? For all I know they'd just found out about it. This was mentioned on Friday while they were being held but I didn't hear it mentioned Saturday, Sunday or Monday; they're not going to know everything she said right away.

Now what will you conclude if it is confirmed she said she heard them speaking in Arabic?

I threw in the bit about the SWORN STATEMENT , by the toll both attendent, which you then made into an " affidavit " and threw in Monica, to boot. Apples and oranges.

The toll booth operator's affidavit was offered as hard evidence, I offered Lewinsky's affidavit as an example demonstrating that affidavits are not hard evidence. Affidavits and affidavits.

I've explained this several times. Do you want to argue that an affidavit is hard evidence?

Your conclusion that 'she made that up or else she's a terribly unreliable witness' is a false conclusion based on false statement that she heard them speaking in Arabic. Please cite a source where she said this.

I heard this on TV on Friday. I have no more specific source to cite, but I'll continue to look. I don't expect anyone to accept my word for it in the absence of evidence, but I do expect that now that the sutdents have said this it will be confirmed, at least that such a statement was attributed to her while they were detained.

What persuades you of this? 'Telling the truth about everything' is a rather broad statement to support.

I'm persuaded because they come across as sincere and authentic and there is no real case against them.

By "telling the truth about everything" I mean I believe them that they were not talking about 9/11 at Shoneys and I believe them that they did not run the toll booth.

But to the toll booth incident, someone is lying. You've staked your claim on the students "innocent until proven guilty". Therefore the toll booth operator must be lying to support your claim of innocence.

Yeah, if I'm right that the students are truthful about paying the toll and the operator swears they didn't then she's lying. But I have not called her a liar, perhaps they did run the toll and a video tape will bear this out.

I'm persuaded that they're telling the truth, which is certainly not to say that I'm persuaded beyond reasonable doubt that the operator is lying. I wouldn't vote to convict either side of lying based on what I know.

You johnny-one-note defenders of the students are of the position that there is an elaborate conspiracy at work to bust these men. If the conspiracy against them is that big, then why didn't the police drum up some evidence to convict them on?

No elaborate conspiracy, I have not suggested the police had it in for these students, or muslims in general or anything. I think the cops had good reason to be very concerned about threats of terrorism and thus they wanted to search these cars. I think they manufactured some grounds to do an end run on the 4th amendment, no more and no less.

I think this because it's just too damn convienient and useful for the cops that the students happend to run the toll where the cops were waiting and that the dogs happened to alert for explosives on the car, when in retrospect there is no good explanation for why either of these things should have happened.

A sheriff has said that she signed an avidavit. Is his word not good enough for you that she signed it or do you alledge that the sheriff is lying in this regard?

Sheriff Hunter said he had in his possession a signed affidavit from the toll taker, that the car definitely ran the tollbooth without paying, and that the videotape would bear him out.

Guess what. The Sheriff was lying. Eunice Stone was grossly mistaken about the bomb plan and the media got a lot of stuff wrong. The only parties who have been accurate throughout all of this have been the Choudary, Butts, and Gheith.

Now, I ask you. Who is most credible?

Collier Sheriff's Office voids ticket given to medical student

Hunter said investigators showed the tollkeeper, who'd already given a sworn statement saying Butt's car had run the tollbooth, the video which logs the transaction Wednesday.
"He reached his hand out. She reached her hand out," Hunter said. "There appears to have been a transaction. Then she excitedly waves her hand toward the east. We believe she was trying to flag us down."
Butt contended that he paid the toll, Hunter said.
"It would not be fair not to check it out," he said.
He said the second car did stop and ask if Butt had paid the toll.
Hunter described the toll taker as "nervous" at the time.
"She said she wasn't scared," he said.

I see where the toll booth operator gave a false statement, I know that I wouldn't put my name to anything I was unsure of (when they cashed out her bank at the end of the night, she should have been "over" by $1.50 at least). If she feels that she was pressured to put forth a false statement, she should go to the national media (they would certainly be interested in this story). I wouldn't want to work for employers who pressured me to give false testimony to keep my job (the good thing is that a whistleblower like this could get rid of such supervisors).

If the sheriff was going on her sworn statement, I don't see how his reporting that he had such a statement is a lie (he did have the statement). The toll booth operator may have been mistaken but I would not put my name to any statement until I verified my cash register and the video.

At least this videotape didn't disappear as some tapes do when it doesn't match the description claimed by LEOs.

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.