16yr old u.s citizen taken away under Patriot Act by FBI!?

[NattyDrez]

Originally Posted by 636blurr

Sounds like the government, whats your point?


Not gonna flame you drez, but would like your input on what you think of this being as though you have been kind of raised with it.

Sorry, I dont really come back to these threads as nothing ever gets done. Well not that anything is supposed to get done, but like...its just numerous pages of people going back and forth. I have other shit to do rather than sit on here and argue with people that disagree with me. Thats why Im rarely in any P&R threads

I just think the Patriot Act should be abolished, and I cant believe it was voted upon in the first place [and put in place]. Of course Bush and good ol' Rumsfeld and Condo had whatever to do with it, but thats a whole different topic.

I dunno, I dont really have much to say about it. I think Obama should abolish it and thats it, end of story. Its not only getting a foot in the door to spy on people and invade their privacy, but its also allowing themselves (government) to pretty much do whatever the fuck they want.

We, as the people, don't really have much to say about this, unfortunately. I mean sure we can 'protest' and 'call our Reps and Governors' and tell them 'blah blah blah, patriot act should be abolished blah blah' but nothing will ever get done. The only people (nowadays) that can have any effect on this, and 99% of political shit, is...oh yeah, the government, of course. I mean Obama by the way, but I hear he is for it so looks like its not going away in any time soon.

Hell, I wouldnt be surprised if some FBI agent was watching my computer. I do numerous projects, papers, and essays about terrorism, law enforcement, CJ, etc etc, but its all research papers and not 'how to be a terrorist' articles so its no big deal.

It would be funny though since he would see a small portion is school stuff, then the other 80% is milf, lesbian, and office pr0n hahahaha. Hed have a field day with that shit.

[bassjones]

This is some scary shit. I'm not sure he's innocent, but he is entitled to due process. Obama won't change shit. He's in power now. Men with power are dangerous and it could be argued Obama has more power than any American President in a LONG time. He's got the Patriot Act which gives him unlimited power and unlike Bush he's got a VERY friendly media that's not paying a lick of attention. That might change, but I'm not counting on it.

[Speculative]

What's this Freedom fighter vs Terrorist nonsense? It's the same thing. It just depends on what perspective you're looking at the individual from.

The patriot act is America's version of Nazi Germany's Gestapo. It's the same principle. I was dumbfounded when the Patriot act was passed. It's like holding a match up to the constitution, "Dare me to keep going?" Land of the free.. yeah.. right... how long till we become a facist country? That's where it seems to be heading to me.

[dasnotty1]

everyone is assuming this kid is innocent. Why would the goverment go and arrest this kid if he's not guilty of something?
Of course the mom is gonna defend her son it's only natural. I don't ever under estimate people reguardless of how old they are. If the kid is not guilty than i'm pretty sure the goverment will compensate the family.
When I was sixteen I was to busy looking at playboy and hustler and trying to get laid. But than again we did'nt have the internet. But still i never thought about making bombs and blowing shit up.

[enos]

Originally Posted by Speculative

The patriot act is America's version of Nazi Germany's Gestapo. It's the same principle. I was dumbfounded when the Patriot act was passed. It's like holding a match up to the constitution, "Dare me to keep going?" Land of the free.. yeah.. right... how long till we become a facist country? That's where it seems to be heading to me.

You mean being rude to a flight attendant doesn't make you a terrorist?
Quick, tell these 200 people!
In-flight confrontations can lead to terrorism charges - Los Angeles Times
Some even end up on the terrorist watch list and one lady almost lost her children from the resulting bogus charges.

"But in this post-9/11 world, ..." Bullshit. Our gov't did more to create that world than Al-Qaida could ever hope to.

For those who think I'm saying we should just let these people go, no. There are ways to deal with this already without all that terrorist nonsense.

[BurnMyHeartDown]

Originally Posted by dasnotty1

everyone is assuming this kid is innocent. Why would the goverment go and arrest this kid if he's not guilty of something?
Of course the mom is gonna defend her son it's only natural. I don't ever under estimate people reguardless of how old they are. If the kid is not guilty than i'm pretty sure the goverment will compensate the family.
When I was sixteen I was to busy looking at playboy and hustler and trying to get laid. But than again we did'nt have the internet. But still i never thought about making bombs and blowing shit up.

Innocent until proven guilty.....ring a bell?

Where's the proof of guilt?

If you're arguing they arrested him knowing he was guilty, what is it that requires such high levels of secrecy?

Something doesn't add up with this whole situation, and I don't know what it is.

[Speculative]

Originally Posted by dasnotty1

everyone is assuming this kid is innocent. Why would the goverment go and arrest this kid if he's not guilty of something?
Of course the mom is gonna defend her son it's only natural. I don't ever under estimate people reguardless of how old they are. If the kid is not guilty than i'm pretty sure the goverment will compensate the family.
When I was sixteen I was to busy looking at playboy and hustler and trying to get laid. But than again we did'nt have the internet. But still i never thought about making bombs and blowing shit up.

I wasn't arguing it one way or the other. He could be guilty or he could be the victim of having a zombie computer (A computer that can be controlled to do malicious deeds without the owner being aware of what they're computer is doing). If it's the latter I feel bad for him. If he was indeed doing this, well, too bad for him. He should have thought about the consequences of his actions.

[enos]

Originally Posted by dasnotty1

everyone is assuming this kid is innocent. Why would the goverment go and arrest this kid if he's not guilty of something?
Of course the mom is gonna defend her son it's only natural. I don't ever under estimate people reguardless of how old they are. If the kid is not guilty than i'm pretty sure the goverment will compensate the family.
When I was sixteen I was to busy looking at playboy and hustler and trying to get laid. But than again we did'nt have the internet. But still i never thought about making bombs and blowing shit up.

Nobody's assuming he's innocent.

Since more than one person here failed reading comprehension, I'll repeat that
It doesn't matter if he's innocent or not, it's the process applied to him.

The problem is that nobody knows what's happening to him. Does he have a lawyer? Does he even know the charges against him? Will he have a trial in a timely manner?

He, like anyone facing criminal charges in this country, is ENTITLED to these things. The last two specifically come from the Constitution. If you assume that the gov't will provide this even when nobody's looking, you're quite naive.
If you don't understand why due process is important then look at any totalitarian regime and see how much abuse is possible.
Every country that does this is universally condemned for it, with the loudest criticism coming from this country.

Why the fuck am I, as an immigrant here, telling you about how your own damn civic system works? Maybe used to work is a better phrase.

[joe1971]

Originally Posted by dasnotty1

everyone is assuming this kid is innocent. Why would the goverment go and arrest this kid if he's not guilty of something?
Of course the mom is gonna defend her son it's only natural. I don't ever under estimate people reguardless of how old they are. If the kid is not guilty than i'm pretty sure the goverment will compensate the family.
When I was sixteen I was to busy looking at playboy and hustler and trying to get laid. But than again we did'nt have the internet. But still i never thought about making bombs and blowing shit up.

Are you dumb?

^^^^^^THAT is one of the dumbest most asinine statements I've ever come across

The kid is innocent until definitive proof is found proving other wise.

Oh and learn to use spell check

[joe1971]

I predict that this will end with..............................Oh we're sorry for the inconvenience

[Gimpdiggity]

America...fuck yah!!!

[Scratch33]

Originally Posted by 636blurr

Thats kitkat blither and I expect more from you, innocents die all the time inadvertently, be it in war, medicine, hell just eating, dozens of ways.

boring give me more of a discussion scratch.

Even a starving fish would pass up that bait.

[Scratch33]

Back to the news story -- hopefully everyone here can agree it provides far too little information to make any accurate conclusions as to what (if anything) that kid's involved in. For instance, that video clip features former U.S. Attorney "Dan Boyce", who advises how bad the Patriot Act is. Well okay then - but a read of the print article reveals that Boyce is "not connected to the Lundeby case."

So what IS Boyce's connection to this matter? Was he sought out by the TV reporters, or the mother, or did he contact them and offer to comment? IS there a lawyer connected to the case? Does the mother even have one yet? I'm having a hard time imagining any mom with a kid that's been incarcerated and held incommunicado for two whole months, and who's convinced of his innocence, who wouldn't either a) have a lawyer already or b) be pleading for one if given the chance for a television interview.

And what serious, responsible news reporter wouldn't find out whether there's a lawyer on the case? I'm having a hard time imagining a lawyer for the mom & kid who wouldn't want to be interviewed on TV. I'd think any civil rights attorney (or civil rights group such as the ACLU) would relish the opportunity to look into the matter of a 16-year old falsely imprisoned by the Feds, even if on a pro bono basis. A case like this could make somebody's career. The reporters mention a search warrant - no details as to what was in it? WTH?

But again - the news article is silent on those aspects. Something's just not right about this story. There's more to it IMO.

[prodigal27]

Originally Posted by Scratch33

Back to the news story -- hopefully everyone here can agree it provides far too little information to make any accurate conclusions as to what (if anything) that kid's involved in. For instance, that video clip features former U.S. Attorney "Dan Boyce", who advises how bad the Patriot Act is. Well okay then - but a read of the print article reveals that Boyce is "not connected to the Lundeby case."

So what IS Boyce's connection to this matter? Was he sought out by the TV reporters, or the mother, or did he contact them and offer to comment? IS there a lawyer connected to the case? Does the mother even have one yet? I'm having a hard time imagining any mom with a kid that's been incarcerated and held incommunicado for two whole months, and who's convinced of his innocence, who wouldn't either a) have a lawyer already or b) be pleading for one if given the chance for a television interview.

And what serious, responsible news reporter wouldn't find out whether there's a lawyer on the case? I'm having a hard time imagining a lawyer for the mom & kid who wouldn't want to be interviewed on TV. I'd think any civil rights attorney (or civil rights group such as the ACLU) would relish the opportunity to look into the matter of a 16-year old falsely imprisoned by the Feds, even if on a pro bono basis. A case like this could make somebody's career. The reporters mention a search warrant - no details as to what was in it? WTH?

But again - the news article is silent on those aspects. Something's just not right about this story. There's more to it IMO.

You're missing the point entirely. He has no rights to a lawyer, and there is a gag order on the issue. By law, nobody involved is allowed to speak to anyone about the issue. The only information that anyone has to go off of, is the conversation that took place between the mother, and the officers.
To sum things up:
Nobody is allowed to contact the kid, not even a lawyer.
No government entity is allowed to speak on the matter, period.

It makes it easier to understand, if you assume the kid was kidnapped. ALL rights, are stripped from him.

[Scratch33]

Originally Posted by prodigal27

The only information that anyone has to go off of, is the conversation that took place between the mother, and the officers.

Incorrect. The only information anyone has to go on is the news article.