Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Robb

(39,665 posts)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:04 AM Jul 2012

Mass. man to plead in remote-controlled plane Pentagon bomb plot

Source: Christian Science Monitor

BOSTON -- A Massachusetts man charged with plotting to fly remote-controlled model planes packed with explosives into the Pentagon and U.S. Capitol plans to plead guilty to two charges, his lawyers and prosecutors said in a plea agreement filed in federal court Tuesday.

Rezwan Ferdaus, a Muslim-American from Ashland with a physics degree from Boston's Northeastern University, was arrested in September after federal employees posing as al-Qaida members delivered materials he had allegedly requested, including grenades, machine guns and what he believed was 24 pounds of C-4 explosives.

In the plea agreement, prosecutors and Ferdaus' lawyers say Ferdaus will plead guilty to attempting to provide material support to terrorists and attempting to damage and destroy federal buildings by means of an explosive. Prosecutors and defense attorneys have agreed to request a 17-year sentence.

Under the agreement, prosecutors have agreed to dismiss four other charges.

Read more: http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-News-Wires/2012/0710/Mass.-man-to-plead-in-remote-controlled-plane-Pentagon-bomb-plot

16 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

Arctic Dave

(13,812 posts)
1. Wait! You are telling me it is illegal to fly remote control
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:19 AM
Jul 2012

planes to blow things up and kill people?

The irony is immense.

 

permatex

(1,299 posts)
2. OMG, I must be stupid,
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:24 AM
Jul 2012

or in dire need of some coffee, it just hit me what you meant. Your right, the irony is immense.

 

Nihil

(13,508 posts)
9. Hmmm ... I see what you did there ...
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 09:24 AM
Jul 2012

> Wait! You are telling me it is illegal to fly remote control
> planes to blow things up and kill people?
> The irony is immense.

Well done!



Atman

(31,464 posts)
4. Glad they pointed out that he's not an American...he's a MUSLIM American.
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:12 PM
Jul 2012

Big difference. Americans don't do this kind of shit, but MUSLIMS do...even American ones.

Oh, wait, there was this Timothy McVeigh guy, but I never heard of him called a Christian American. Oh, never mind.

Keep the fear alive!


 

RZM

(8,556 posts)
10. What's so bad about providing details about the guy? Isn't that media's job?
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 10:25 AM
Jul 2012

It's possible that his religious affiliation was a motivating factor in his plans. Thus it's not a bad idea to put it in the story. I don't understand how reporting facts constitutes 'keeping the fear alive.'

Stories about McVeigh frequently mentioned that he was an anti-government nut. Was that 'keeping the fear alive?' Or was it relevant information the public should know?

Atman

(31,464 posts)
11. If it is possible that his religious affiliation was motivation...
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 10:43 AM
Jul 2012

...then where is that in the story? No discussion about it at all, just pointing out that, you know, he's one of those evil Muslims. What possible rationale is there for pointing out his religion? Does the police blotter in the local paper indicate "John Dough: Presbyterian: pulled over for DUI"? What offing difference does his religion make, unless it actually makes a difference, in which case it should be reported upon and investigated further. Pure fear-mongering.

 

RZM

(8,556 posts)
12. I'll keep that in mind next time a Christian shoots an abortion doctor
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 10:52 AM
Jul 2012

I'll check back with you to make sure you're expressing the proper outrage if their religious affiliation is mentioned in the story.

Because by your logic, the accused will have to make some sort of statement explicitly tying the crime to their religion. If such is lacking (as it seems to be here), then I trust you'll take the media outlet to task and complain about fear-mongering.

 

4th law of robotics

(6,801 posts)
14. +1
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 11:57 AM
Jul 2012

If it were a Christian shooting an abortion doctor people would be outraged if his religion weren't mentioned often enough in the article.

Atman

(31,464 posts)
16. Thank you for completely missing the point.
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 02:17 PM
Jul 2012

By your logic, you applied no logic.

Of course, you could actually try to read what I posted.

surrealAmerican

(11,361 posts)
8. Note that he did not need to be held for years ...
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 04:59 PM
Jul 2012

... tortured, or tried by a military tribunal. Our justice system can cope with terrorists.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Mass. man to plead in rem...