POLICE STATE THREAD!!!...

[Ryoki]

To be fair he was carrying a concealed puppy without a licence.

[MKJ]

he was raising it to be a terrorist cell attack dog trained to sniff out retired patriot warfighters.
it had to be put down.

[Eraser]

justice.

You're just saying that because he's black.

[Plan B]

Stealing spare ribs.
50 years seems a bit steep.
Guess Texas is gonna Texas.

[seremtan]

50 years is totally mental, but he did pull a lot of other shit, as well as a knife. also, Rick Perry

[Eraser]

Say something stupid on Facebook, face 10 years in jail. Hence Facebook:

http://www.businessinsider.com/teen-jus ... ent-2013-7

PA's take on it:
[lvlshot]http://art.penny-arcade.com/photos/i-79 ... x10000.jpg[/lvlshot]

[Ryoki]

Only 1% of terrorist suspects nabbed since 9/11 by the FBI was actually a terrorist

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties ... error-scam

the majority of the foiled attacks that they cite are really only foiled attacks because the FBI made the attack possible, and most of the people who are caught in these so-called foiled attacks are caught through sting operations that use either an undercover FBI agent or informant posing as some sort of Al-Qaeda operative.

In all of these cases, the defendants, or the would-be terrorists, are people who at best have a vague idea that they want to commit some sort of violent act or some sort of act of terrorism but have no means on their own. They don’t have weapons. They don’t have connections with any international terrorist groups.

In many cases they’re mentally ill or they’re economically desperate. An undercover informant or agent posing as an Al-Qaeda operative gives them everything they need… gives them the transportation, gives them the money if they need it, and then gives them the bomb and even the idea for the terrorist attack. And then when that person pushes a button to detonate the bomb that they believe will explode—a bomb that was provided to them in whole by the FBI—agents rush in, arrest them and charge them with conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction and then parade that person out to the public saying, "Look at us. We caught a terrorist. This is us keeping you safe."

[MKJ]

clear case of entrapment?

[Eraser]

clear case of entrapment?

I don't think US authorities care.

[MKJ]

sadly no.
hence the police state thread amiritejerrjerr

[scared?]

Had u seen gasland 2? The real terrorists are the ppl who get sick from shale oil extraction...

[Ryoki]

clear case of entrapment?

The interviewee explains further on in the article how it's legally speaking not entrapment. Which is clearly stone crazy, but that's what the law apparently says.

JH: I’m no attorney, but this sounds like it gets close to entrapment. Have defense attorneys raised that?

TA: Yeah, and this is an interesting area of this story. Obviously, a layman like you or me looking at this thinks this is definitely entrapment. Unfortunately, the legal definition of entrapment is very different, and what we know is that 11 defendants have formally argued entrapment in these cases and none have been successful.

A large reason for that is the government is able to argue against entrapment in two ways; one is to say the person was predisposed to commit the crime. That he had done something that suggested he was interested in committing a crime before the introduction of the government agent.

Traditionally speaking, if this was a bank robbery plot, the government would have to prove that the defendant was researching bank robberies or casing banks prior to the FBI informant getting involved. The FBI and the Department of Justice are able to do this very easily in these terrorism cases in part because they are able to introduce evidence that is really sketchy to prove that there was predisposition.

For example, often the government will cite the fact that someone watched a jihad video and they’ll put on the stand a government expert who will testify that, "Hey, you know, because he watched the jihad video and this is one of Al-Qaeda’s classics," that meant he was becoming a terrorist and the government line essentially, rather an absurd one, is that if you watch a Jihad video then, trance-like, you become a terrorist. It’s absurd on its face because I’ve watched those videos. You’ve watched those videos and I don’t think either of us are going to become terrorists.

At the same time, how the government is able to argue against entrapment is to really weight the jury in its favor and it does that by – in these sting operations, the government controls every aspect of the plot so they could have a guy who wants to commit violence and they say to him, "Okay, here’s a nine millimeter handgun. Go to the mall and shoot a couple people in the knee."

That would be awful but it wouldn’t be something that would necessarily shatter the security of the United States of America. Instead, in these sting operations, they give the defendants these bombs that are so enormous and so big that even a sophisticated criminal organization would have trouble obtaining them. Then they have them unleash those bombs at subway stations or downtown skyscrapers and it makes the jury think, You know what? I ride that subway system. I have a son who works at that skyscraper. What that does is effectively erode any empathy that the jury might have for the defendant and that empathy is necessary for a jury to say, You know what? That person was entrapped.

What we’ve seen is a very effective role by the government in battling against this entrapment defense and now that we have 11 cases where entrapment has been formally argued, none being successful. I’m among those who say if you’re a Muslim charged with terrorism in the United States there really is no such thing as entrapment today.

[seremtan]

Say something stupid on Facebook, face 10 years in jail. Hence Facebook:

http://www.businessinsider.com/teen-jus ... ent-2013-7

PA's take on it:
[lvlshot]http://art.penny-arcade.com/photos/i-79 ... x10000.jpg[/lvlshot]

at first i thought "this has got to be UK", but no

did someone put LSD in the US water supply? sure has gone full paranoid retard over the last 12 years

[Eraser]

clear case of entrapment?

The interviewee explains further on in the article how it's legally speaking not entrapment. Which is clearly stone crazy, but that's what the law apparently says.

~snip~

That is pretty fucking sick.

[scared?]

Back to front...Lol texas...

http://youtu.be/9ob7BDGx3Zo

[Pext]

Anti-Terror-Laws abused as an excuse to pressure the family of a critical journalist:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/a ... n-heathrow

[seremtan]

that was fucking outrageous - not just that it happened, but that the intimidation tactics are so open and blatant now

[scared?]

What's up with all the liberals attacking Glenn? Fucking politics being treated like a spectator sport by the masses is depressing...

[seremtan]

you don't take an active interest in how your country is run for just 45 years, and look what happens!

[GONNAFISTYA]

you don't take an active interest in how your country is run for just 45 years, and look what happens!

The same fucking thing is happening in Canada...buncha fucking idiots.

[mrd]

you don't take an active interest in how your country is run for just 45 years, and look what happens!

The same fucking thing is happening in Canada...buncha fucking idiots.

Seen cunt-bag trying to prorogue again? Fuck me if anything makes my blood boil, it's that. All the shitstain news outlets are writing how it's standard practice. Fuck off it is. Harper invented it as a standard practice. To the best of my knowledge, before Harper, Parliament has been prorogued twice in Canadian history! Once in the 1800s and once for Chretien. Harper has done it like four fucking times. What a fucking piece of shit. Oh, I'm sorry, all your senators are snarled in bullshit expense scandals and juicy details about their taxpayer rips offs are coming to light? Oh, better prorogue! Fuck me...

[GONNAFISTYA]

Oh didn't you hear? American-style childish antics are the new "Canadian politics".

Harper's done. I'd seriously be shocked beyond belief if he was re-elected again.

















But then again, Canadians are every bit as stupid, short-sighted and selfish as the yanks, so he'll probably run the country for the next 20 years.

[HM-PuFFNSTuFF]

Oh didn't you hear? American-style childish antics are the new "Canadian politics".

Harper's done. I'd seriously be shocked beyond belief if he was re-elected again.

















But then again, Canadians are every bit as stupid, short-sighted and selfish as the yanks, so he'll probably run the country for the next 20 years.

so true.

[seremtan]

Anti-Terror-Laws abused as an excuse to pressure the family of a critical journalist:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/a ... n-heathrow

the Guardian was one of the cheerleaders of last year's Leveson Inquiry, which saw a number of tabloid journalists arrested in dawn raids over accusations that they'd acquired their stories via illegal means. apparently it didn't occur to them if you hand over the power to decide what's in the public interest to law enforcement, you could end on the receiving end of law enforcement yourself

oh, the derp

[Pext]

ah well, their past error on this matter does not in any way justify what has happened now.