Report Topic Do you believe the Boston Marathon bombing suspects ACTUALLY DID IT "No Evidence"!

"You've clearly never read the transcript of the hearing and apparently not heard that he was even heard. Please, inform yourseld, . http://documents.latimes.com......... . The fact that hearings are done even when the suspect is still in an hospital is not that extraordinary. What is the alternative ? Do you wait til he can walk ? Wait til he can run ? Wait til he doesn't have any more migraines ? Wait til the bruises are not visible ? What's the threshold ? The threshold has been put when the suspect can respond, and that's what's been done. At ANY point before the hearing started he could have just communicated "No, I can't talk I'm too bad" but he chose not to. Read the transcript, and the questions asked by the court. " "I did and it's soooooo shady, it speaks for itself. It's clearly stating that the suspect's responses are all by nodding his head "not even talking". So yo obviously didn't read from a bias point of view and you read it based on feeling that they are bomber and they should be dead just like any conservative would read and think. " What ? ?? You're aware that his lawyer was there right ? Do you think his lawyer is "in on it" too ? Yeah, I obviously did not read from a "bias point of view". I read what is written. You read what you want to believe. "And no don't wait until he is up on his legs so he can run away. They just need to wait until he is some what recovered so he is in a stable condition and is able to talk and think straight. You've never been injured and hospitalized that's why you don't know how it feels. " I've been hospitalised, thanks. And you also don't have any freaking idea how he was. You assume he was bad, because your theory demands that he was. Not because you have any proof of that. He was judged to be clearly able to handle that. And, BEFORE THE HEARING BEGAN, he was asked if everything was fine and he would be able to do that hearing. He agreed. "I have been to a minor surgery to my knee and I wasn't able to think straight for the next 2 weeks because of the pain "even with pain relievers", as any one how it feels while recovering from an injury or a surgery. I believe you are talking emotionally and all what is going on in your head is "damn it! these terrorist did it again! !". " Yeah, your own experience is a great way to prove that it was the same case for Dzorkhav. Not. No, I don't think that. I think people did something very stupid like bombing innocents. They are not terrorists for me because they don't terrorize me. "How about reading between the lines and uncovering the lies and see what you'll find out. It looks like I'm just wasting time responding to you. Just please go ahead and re-read the court hearing but with open mind and if you can't be open minded have someone else in your family to read it for you, young or old and just don't tell them that this is the bombing terrorist and you'll be surprised of their responses as they gonna say that it is inhuman to have a hearing in someone's hospital room after a couple days of sustaining a serious injuries all over his body! ! Did you see the grenade that blew up in his face in the boat in one of the videos. I don't wish you bad but if you had one blow up in your face I don't think you'll be able to recover for months or think straight for weeks. Sorry for the harsh example but you seem to block your brain from receiving any information in opposition to what you believe as solid evidence that are actually very weak and inconsistent. Thanks! " If he couldn't get the hearing, he could have delayed it probably however long he wanted, I said that already. What you say is pure belief without evidence. Conclusions: My opponent dropped some points he raised at the beginning that I addressed and never talked about it again: - He thinks the backpacks of the bomber are different from the one found at the scene. I explained that you can have difference in lightning, and the fact that the bag shown found at the scene might not be the bomb bag anyway. - He thinks he wasnt mirandize, while he was at the hearing. - He blames the FBI for not predicting the future and that would prove the bombers did not bomb, how, anyway ? Final point I'd like to add, is that the position of my opponent is an understandable one, he basically doesn't care about the truth, he just doesn't want that the world he lives in is a world where two young men can go freely, buy stuff to make bombs and blow up a crowd. He wants a world where that chaos doesn't happen. He wants a world where the bombing is done "for a reason", by "powerful people", to "advance an agenda". Because it's much more comforting, having *someone* to blame and not be afraid of the chaos.