Tuesday, May 4, 2010

New York City Times Square Wannabe Bomber: and We Still Don't Know Everything

It looks like Faisal Shahzad is very involved in the Times Square wannabe bombing. He's a Pakistani-American, according to the news: and it sound like there may be an international conspiracy involved.

Or, not.

Oh, yeah: The Miranda thing:
"Alleged terrorist Faisal Shahzad was initially questioned by authorities under the public safety exception to the Miranda rule, Deputy Director of the FBI John S. Pistole said today at a press conference. Shahzad, who faces terrorism charges for a failed attempt to blow up a car in Times Square, was later read his Miranda rights and continued to cooperate with authorities after that, Pistole said...."
(CBS News)

Times Square Bombing, Protecting People, and Politics as Usual

Maybe things have changed in the last several years: but I'm pretty sure that some of the more overheated minds in America are already busy warning us that
  • Miranda warnings are
    • Part of a commie plot to enslave us all
    • Nowhere near strong enough to protect us from those brutal police
  • All foreigners are terrorits
    • And they smell funny
  • Any foreigner questioned by law enforcement is the victim of racial profiling
    • And/or police brutality
Me? I'm glad that the investigation is progressing - and I still hope that Congress keeps its hands off the investigation. They can grill the folks who are trying to protect us later.

At the rate this case is going, there should be plenty of time before the next election.

Cynical? Pessimistic? No, getting over some sort of an annoying bug.

Related posts:In the news:

No comments:

Unique, innovative candles

Visit us online:
Spiral Light CandleFind a Retailer
Spiral Light Candle Store


Note! Although I believe that these websites and blogs are useful resources for understanding the War on Terror, I do not necessarily agree with their opinions. 1 1 Given a recent misunderstanding of the phrase "useful resources," a clarification: I do not limit my reading to resources which support my views, or even to those which appear to be accurate. Reading opinions contrary to what I believed has been very useful at times: sometimes verifying my previous assumptions, sometimes encouraging me to change them.

Even resources which, in my opinion, are simply inaccurate are sometimes useful: these can give valuable insights into why some people or groups believe what they do.

In short, It is my opinion that some of the resources in this blogroll are neither accurate, nor unbiased. I do, however, believe that they are useful in understanding the War on Terror, the many versions of Islam, terrorism, and related topics.