Jump to content

Bomb in Boston

Hatch

By Hatch,
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

Verbal

Verbal

Posted
Posted

Apparently the bombers are from Chechnya and have been in the US for about a year. One - suspect 2 - has been named as Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev, 19, of Cambridge, MA.

 

This will no doubt not change US right-wing conspiracy fantasists' and pap's view that they are more likely to be patsies set by 'The Government'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pap

pap

Posted
Posted
Apparently the bombers are from Chechnya and have been in the US for about a year. One - suspect 2 - has been named as Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev, 19, of Cambridge, MA.

 

This will no doubt not change US right-wing conspiracy fantasists' and pap's view that they are more likely to be patsies set by 'The Government'.

 

It's a shame you restrict yourself to three a day, mate.

 

However, I do find this development interesting.

 

The real test will be the policy agenda that follows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PhilippineSaint

PhilippineSaint

Posted
Posted
It's a shame you restrict yourself to three a day, mate.

 

However, I do find this development interesting.

 

The real test will be the policy agenda that follows.

 

They will obviously be disaffected muslims who were forced out of Chechnya and having lived a little while in the Good ole US of A have aligned with there followers in which ever war the US is fighting now against the imperialist warmongers and have taken matters into there own hands.

 

all my own opinion of course

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pap

pap

Posted
Posted
They will obviously be disaffected muslims who were forced out of Chechnya and having lived a little while in the Good ole US of A have aligned with there followers in which ever war the US is fighting now against the imperialist warmongers and have taken matters into there own hands.

 

all my own opinion of course

 

Not really referring to that. These events have a habit of leaving a trail of legislation in their wake. The link that Verbal posted earlier (in jest, I'm sure) suggests that the legislation in this case will be a tightening up of gunpowder.

 

Obama certainly isn't happy with the NRA:-

 

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/us/angry-obama-attacks-nra-after-gun-control-defeat-1.1365214

 

I wonder if these events, like Sandy Hook, will be used for further clampdowns gun ownership. I seem to remember much talk of loophole closure after that devastating school shooting.

 

Not that I think that's a bad thing, but I know many Americans who do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KelvinsRightGlove

KelvinsRightGlove

Posted
Posted
Not really referring to that. These events have a habit of leaving a trail of legislation in their wake. The link that Verbal posted earlier (in jest, I'm sure) suggests that the legislation in this case will be a tightening up of gunpowder.

 

Obama certainly isn't happy with the NRA:-

 

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/us/angry-obama-attacks-nra-after-gun-control-defeat-1.1365214

 

I wonder if these events, like Sandy Hook, will be used for further clampdowns gun ownership. I seem to remember much talk of loophole closure after that devastating school shooting.

 

Not that I think that's a bad thing, but I know many Americans who do.

 

I don't like to generalise, but Americans think arming teachers & generally putting more guns in schools is the answer to less shootings in schools.

 

They clearly don't know what is good for themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PhilippineSaint

PhilippineSaint

Posted
Posted
Not really referring to that. These events have a habit of leaving a trail of legislation in their wake. The link that Verbal posted earlier (in jest, I'm sure) suggests that the legislation in this case will be a tightening up of gunpowder.

 

Obama certainly isn't happy with the NRA:-

 

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/us/angry-obama-attacks-nra-after-gun-control-defeat-1.1365214

 

I wonder if these events, like Sandy Hook, will be used for further clampdowns gun ownership. I seem to remember much talk of loophole closure after that devastating school shooting.

 

Not that I think that's a bad thing, but I know many Americans who do.

 

What the Americans don't understand is the constitution states

 

" the right to bare arm's"

 

As they are not in a Muslim country tee shirts and vests in public are allowed as can be seen with the wife beater shirts in the southern states.

 

Not the right to carry guns and bombs to blow people up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Verbal

Verbal

Posted
Posted

This photo essay of the older brother Tamerlan (suspect no1, now dead), gives a curious insight - clearly someone interested in combat skills of various kinds. His Chechen background notwithstanding, this sounds more and more like a Columbine analogue rather than an act of international terrorism. The younger brother in particular is acting like a replica of Dylan Klebold - well liked, but easily led into the worst excesses of movie-glam violence.

 

http://johanneshirn.photoshelter.com/gallery/Will-Box-For-Passport/G0000VQW7v6xWA7o/

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KelvinsRightGlove

KelvinsRightGlove

Posted
Posted
This photo essay of the older brother Tamerlan (suspect no1, now dead), gives a curious insight - clearly someone interested in combat skills of various kinds. His Chechen background notwithstanding, this sounds more and more like a Columbine analogue rather than an act of international terrorism. The younger brother in particular is acting like a replica of Dylan Klebold - well liked, but easily led into the worst excesses of movie-glam violence.

 

http://johanneshirn.photoshelter.com/gallery/Will-Box-For-Passport/G0000VQW7v6xWA7o/

 

friends quoting the younger brother saying that he said he believed in the right circumstances terrorist acts were justified.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pap

pap

Posted
Posted

I've been watching the footage all evening.

 

According to the BBC, the pair were driving around throwing IEDs out of the car window. Boston on complete lockdown, Black Hawk helicopters circling residential areas - government agents all over the shop. Someone, somewhere will be taking the public temperature.

 

The BBC keep on going on about there being no evidence that this is foreign sponsored at present, although they do repeatedly keep mentioning it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pap

pap

Posted
Posted

 

That's probably the best summary of those photos and those gentlemen so far. I certainly didn't know they were called The Craft until reading that link.

 

I think this looks dodgy as hell and I certainly don't believe that it is happening in a vacuum. The state response has been terrifying; they've got a major urban population under lockdown.

 

This is also very interesting. I have to confess, I don't know whether this bill has got all the way through to law yet, but bloody scary all the same.

 

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-711747

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hatch

Hatch

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

reports of a plane crash in Washington , i have no further details than that.

 

source ; my daughter via twitter

 

 

edit : doesn't seem to be that bad, small plane, only pilot died, bad for the pilot obviously

Edited by Hatch
Link to comment
Share on other sites
buctootim

buctootim

Posted
Posted
That's probably the best summary of those photos and those gentlemen so far. I certainly didn't know they were called The Craft until reading that link.

 

I think this looks dodgy as hell and I certainly don't believe that it is happening in a vacuum. The state response has been terrifying; they've got a major urban population under lockdown.

 

This is also very interesting. I have to confess, I don't know whether this bill has got all the way through to law yet, but bloody scary all the same.

 

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-711747

 

Pap you might find your paranoia about government might diminish somewhat if you learnt a little about the way it works, and how CNN works come to that. How about actually reading the bill, a routine annual appropriations (finance) bill to see what it actually says rather than what some cerbrally fantasist claims it says. Btw ireport on CNN is just that - anybody can and does report and post up anything theiy like, mostly crazies desperately seeking a platform.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pap

pap

Posted
Posted
Pap you might find your paranoia about government might diminish somewhat if you learnt a little about the way it works, and how CNN works come to that. How about actually reading the bill, a routine annual appropriations (finance) bill to see what it actually says rather than what some cerbrally fantasist claims it says. Btw ireport on CNN is just that - anybody can and does report and post up anything theiy like, mostly crazies desperately seeking a platform.

 

I honestly don't know why you're so interested, Tim.

 

Saving up one of your three a day just to tell people how mad I am. Are you working to a schedule, perhaps checking in periodicially? Perhaps you have a series of ready-made strategies.

 

I love your assumption that cnn = official and trustworthy. That wasn't why I posted the link - there are several other references to S 1867 doing the rounds.

 

Still, loss of habeas corpeas, the use of torture ( confirmed this week by bi-partisan committee ), indefinite detention, extraordinary rendition, bomb squad all over Boston before the event, a whole city on lockdown and full of federal personnel for the manhunt of one 19 year old bloke?

 

Yeah, paranoid little me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Verbal

Verbal

Posted
Posted

Pap, you may or may not be paranoid, but you certainly lack perspective, and you're also prone to naivete. The '19-year-old bloke' you refer will go on trial, at the very least, for the murder of an eight-year-old boy and the terrible maiming of his sister, his mother, and many other bystanders whose extremities were ripped to pieces by IEDs filled with the kind of shrapnel with one sole intention: to cause as much pain and human misery as possible. This '19-year-old bloke' will also, no doubt, go on trial for his alleged part in the murder of a young campus cop, apparently shot in cold blood as he sat in his car, and the wounding of a transit cop in a ferocious firefight that included the hurling of IEDs and grenades from the car.

 

Your naivete, it seems to me, stems from two things: your hopeless belief that the world is binary - filled, on the one hand, by those who typically reject the wilder fantasies of conspiracy theorists, and who are, ipso facto, unquestioning champions of the goodness of governments, while the fantasists themselves are accorded a privileged status of 'evidence' and 'truth' precisely because of their fantasies; the other, rather more curious, naivete is that you, as an avowed left-of-centre individual, are signing up to conspiracy theories advanced by a viscerally right-wing, paranoid and in some cases racist fringe in American politics - the kind of fringe that denies 9/11 principally on the grounds that dumb Arabs could not have committed it, and denies the validity of Obama's presidency because he is a Marxist, Muslim fundamentalist foreigner, or, in short, Black.

 

Your endorsement of the claims in the article on the 'Craft' is a model of naive nonsense. By endorsing it, you presumably endorse its specific claims - notably that 'the media' has 'censored' the presence of privately contracted security, when a much more likely explanation is that it is hardly worthy of mention; and, worse, that the fact that the 'Craft' personnel are carrying rucksacks renders these rucksacks indistinguishable from the ones that contained the IEDs. Or in short: the Craft killed and maimed in the marathon bombings.

 

Remember some of the damage your co-conspiracy theorists have done just in the last few days. Here are a few choice examples.

 

The family of a missing student from Brown University in Rhode Island, Sunil Tripathi, had to take down internet appeals calling for information about his fate, because he was named by

Reddit as the younger of the two bombing suspects.

 

Mike Mulugeta, a young black man, was also named by Reddit as the older of the bombers.

 

A Morrocan-American student, Salah Eddin Barhoum was fingered by Reddit as the 'bag man' of the two bombers. Pictures were posted of him in his distinctly blue tracksuit top, carrying a sports bag across his shoulder. Astonishingly, the Reddit sleuths claimed that other pictures showed Barhoum without his bag - implying that he had planted his bomb - and yet anyone with half-decent eyesight can see the bag's shoulder strap still in place. Barhoum had to run, terrified, to the nearest police station to clear himself.

 

The 'Saudi man'. Actually this was someone injured by the bombers. A false story gained momentum on the internet that he was a suspect, and the fanatical right-winger Glenn Beck took to the airwaves to claim he was being deported. None of this was true.

 

The 'running away man'. Internet sleuths identified a young man, his clothes in shred, running away from one of the bomb scenes - which is, hardly, on the race of it, a surprising thing to do. but the claim was that he was the bomber fleeing. Fortunately no one ever put a name to him, so he has not suffered.

 

The 'roof man.' Photos were latched onto of a man watching the marathon from a rooftop - again, hardly a surprising or even remotely suspicious thing to do. Yet his photo led to speculation that he was the orchestra conductor of the attack.

 

Built into your stance is the assumption that unless the authorities release all and every piece of information that relates to their inquiry, they are somehow part of a massive Matrix-like inter-governmental conspiracy. You will surely have to concede, though, that placing all inquiries leads into the public domain is both absurd and damaging - not least of the principle of jury trials. This does NOT mean that accepting this argument means that you're a kind of sheep-like idiot who believe everything someone in power or authority says. On the contrary, an informed, critical citizenry is a crucial part of modern democracy, and an important bulwark against the abuse of power. Conspiracy theorists, on the other hand, let those in power off easily because the wilder theorists' claims are for the most part, and for all the appeal to 'evidence', merely falling for a characteristic kind of what psychologists call confirmation bias. They end up in a world of complete, and circular fantasy.

 

So be an informed critic by all means. But don't think the best way of doing that is quoting David ****ing Icke.

 

In the meantime, let's just see how the trial pans out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pap

pap

Posted
Posted

Blimey Verbal, I'm amazed you got that much response from me raising some eyebrows. Given that you seem to enjoy this, I'd advise getting yourself over to genuine conspiracy sites. You'd have a field day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KelvinsRightGlove

KelvinsRightGlove

Posted
Posted
I honestly don't know why you're so interested, Tim.

 

Saving up one of your three a day just to tell people how mad I am. Are you working to a schedule, perhaps checking in periodicially? Perhaps you have a series of ready-made strategies.

 

I love your assumption that cnn = official and trustworthy. That wasn't why I posted the link - there are several other references to S 1867 doing the rounds.

 

Still, loss of habeas corpeas, the use of torture ( confirmed this week by bi-partisan committee ), indefinite detention, extraordinary rendition, bomb squad all over Boston before the event, a whole city on lockdown and full of federal personnel for the manhunt of one 19 year old bloke?

 

Yeah, paranoid little me.

 

I don't get what is so bizarre about having bomb squads at a large event?

 

I'd be willing to bet there are bomb squads police dogs, and various other parts of police and security at most events on this scale.

 

That really is clutching at straws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pap

pap

Posted
Posted
I don't get what is so bizarre about having bomb squads at a large event?

 

I'd be willing to bet there are bomb squads police dogs, and various other parts of police and security at most events on this scale.

 

That really is clutching at straws.

 

The thrust of my point is really about what the US has seemingly become to defend its "freedom", not about trying to prove a conspiracy.

 

I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything here; you can all leave with the opinions you had before.

 

Personally, seems very fishy to me. Lack of people, inconsistencies with the photography, the official non-existence of a private military contractor group. I'll reserve the right to hold my own opinion too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Horley CTFC Saint

Horley CTFC Saint

Posted
Posted
Blimey Verbal, I'm amazed you got that much response from me raising some eyebrows. Given that you seem to enjoy this, I'd advise getting yourself over to genuine conspiracy sites. You'd have a field day.

 

I'd advise you to respond objectively to Verbal's post with a properly argued critiscism of his comments if you are to be taken seriously on here by anyone with an ounce of a brainpower at their disposal

Link to comment
Share on other sites
buctootim

buctootim

Posted
Posted
Pap, you may or may not be paranoid, but you certainly lack perspective, and you're also prone to naivete. The '19-year-old bloke' you refer will go on trial, at the very least, for the murder of an eight-year-old boy and the terrible maiming of his sister, his mother, and many other bystanders whose extremities were ripped to pieces by IEDs filled with the kind of shrapnel with one sole intention: to cause as much pain and human misery as possible. This '19-year-old bloke' will also, no doubt, go on trial for his alleged part in the murder of a young campus cop, apparently shot in cold blood as he sat in his car, and the wounding of a transit cop in a ferocious firefight that included the hurling of IEDs and grenades from the car.

 

Your naivete, it seems to me, stems from two things: your hopeless belief that the world is binary - filled, on the one hand, by those who typically reject the wilder fantasies of conspiracy theorists, and who are, ipso facto, unquestioning champions of the goodness of governments, while the fantasists themselves are accorded a privileged status of 'evidence' and 'truth' precisely because of their fantasies; the other, rather more curious, naivete is that you, as an avowed left-of-centre individual, are signing up to conspiracy theories advanced by a viscerally right-wing, paranoid and in some cases racist fringe in American politics - the kind of fringe that denies 9/11 principally on the grounds that dumb Arabs could not have committed it, and denies the validity of Obama's presidency because he is a Marxist, Muslim fundamentalist foreigner, or, in short, Black.

 

Your endorsement of the claims in the article on the 'Craft' is a model of naive nonsense. By endorsing it, you presumably endorse its specific claims - notably that 'the media' has 'censored' the presence of privately contracted security, when a much more likely explanation is that it is hardly worthy of mention; and, worse, that the fact that the 'Craft' personnel are carrying rucksacks renders these rucksacks indistinguishable from the ones that contained the IEDs. Or in short: the Craft killed and maimed in the marathon bombings.

 

Remember some of the damage your co-conspiracy theorists have done just in the last few days. Here are a few choice examples.

 

The family of a missing student from Brown University in Rhode Island, Sunil Tripathi, had to take down internet appeals calling for information about his fate, because he was named by

Reddit as the younger of the two bombing suspects.

 

Mike Mulugeta, a young black man, was also named by Reddit as the older of the bombers.

 

A Morrocan-American student, Salah Eddin Barhoum was fingered by Reddit as the 'bag man' of the two bombers. Pictures were posted of him in his distinctly blue tracksuit top, carrying a sports bag across his shoulder. Astonishingly, the Reddit sleuths claimed that other pictures showed Barhoum without his bag - implying that he had planted his bomb - and yet anyone with half-decent eyesight can see the bag's shoulder strap still in place. Barhoum had to run, terrified, to the nearest police station to clear himself.

 

The 'Saudi man'. Actually this was someone injured by the bombers. A false story gained momentum on the internet that he was a suspect, and the fanatical right-winger Glenn Beck took to the airwaves to claim he was being deported. None of this was true.

 

The 'running away man'. Internet sleuths identified a young man, his clothes in shred, running away from one of the bomb scenes - which is, hardly, on the race of it, a surprising thing to do. but the claim was that he was the bomber fleeing. Fortunately no one ever put a name to him, so he has not suffered.

 

The 'roof man.' Photos were latched onto of a man watching the marathon from a rooftop - again, hardly a surprising or even remotely suspicious thing to do. Yet his photo led to speculation that he was the orchestra conductor of the attack.

 

Built into your stance is the assumption that unless the authorities release all and every piece of information that relates to their inquiry, they are somehow part of a massive Matrix-like inter-governmental conspiracy. You will surely have to concede, though, that placing all inquiries leads into the public domain is both absurd and damaging - not least of the principle of jury trials. This does NOT mean that accepting this argument means that you're a kind of sheep-like idiot who believe everything someone in power or authority says. On the contrary, an informed, critical citizenry is a crucial part of modern democracy, and an important bulwark against the abuse of power. Conspiracy theorists, on the other hand, let those in power off easily because the wilder theorists' claims are for the most part, and for all the appeal to 'evidence', merely falling for a characteristic kind of what psychologists call confirmation bias. They end up in a world of complete, and circular fantasy.

 

So be an informed critic by all means. But don't think the best way of doing that is quoting David ****ing Icke.

 

In the meantime, let's just see how the trial pans out.

 

What a great post Verbal. Coherence and balance that the conspiracy sites dont even strive for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pap

pap

Posted
Posted
I'd advise you to respond objectively to Verbal's post with a properly argued critiscism of his comments if you are to be taken seriously on here by anyone with an ounce of a brainpower at their disposal

 

What's the point?

 

The vast majority of his points relate to things others have said, not anything I've put forward. It's mostly strawman b*llocks based on nothing I've said. I won't be drawn into it.

 

The rest is amateur character assassination which I'd hoped he'd do better than. I wonder how we feels about the link he mockingly posted earlier in the week, which suggested that someone in their late-teens/early 20s would be caught on Friday? I think we only need the reloading powder and drafting of new laws for a full house!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pap

pap

Posted
Posted
Marvellous to have Verbal back.

 

I think so too. He should pay his fiver and get fully onboard.

 

No matter who was responsible for this, some massive precedent has just been set in the USA. Martial law in all but name in Boston, just for the manhunt of a 19 year old man. It's undoubtedly good telly, but it doesn't look much like due process. People are being prosecuted by the media, their actions pre-empted.

 

I've posted a couple of things:-

 

Video of the cameraman getting straight to the aftermath of the explosion, and there being very few people there, . I don't see anything like 170 people there, but that doesn't fit the narrative, so it's excluded. Par for the course.

 

Video of suspect's aunt - thought an alternative perspective was warranted after seeing the uncle plastered over BBC news for around three hours straight. We've got two relatives of equal import; one sticking up for her nephews and suggesting they've been framed, another looking like he's reading from the script ( half "they're f**king guilty, half "Come to the USA, it's nice" ). He hasn't seen them in eight years, says that they were kids the last time he saw them, yet is fit to pronounce judgment on their personalities. Fair enough; the man has his opinion - but so did the aunt, and so did the mother. They did not appear on the news for 3 hours straight because they didn't fit the narrative.

 

The narrative is perhaps felt most strongly in the aunt video. Talk about leading questions:-

 

Questioner 1: "So are you suspicious that they really did do this?"

A: "No, I am suspicious that this was staged. The picture was staged"

Questioner 2: "By who?"

A: "Whoever needs this. Whoever is looking for ... those who need to be blamed for ... these acts"

Questioner 1: "So you think they're being set up by someone else, not the authorities, by someone else?"

A: "What do you mean, someone else? Who is interested in this case? When you blowing up people and you want to bring attention to something, for some purpose, you know, you do that [maths], but why don't you do that math, why me? I am used to being set up. Before I left ... er .. former Soviet Union countries, that's how I lived. Always."

 

 

I think I'll reserve the right to wait and see on the Craft International angle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pap

pap

Posted
Posted
Pap is heavily outnumbered here and is suffering heavy losses. Still hasn't bothered to answer verbal's points either...

 

I like the commentary. Personally, I prefer an evidence-based assessment when considering a poster's attributes.

 

e.g.

 

I say "hypo is a complete c**t and not worth listening to".

 

Then I back it up, with Exhibit A, an excerpt from the SaintsWeb 2012 Awards Thread, if I'm not mistaken.

 

hypocropped.png

 

It's not hard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})

  I accept