Boston is a Farce to Take your Rights Away

reply to post by buckrogerstime


That is an outstanding point. Sure, you can cling to your god-given, red-blooded american right to remain in your dwelling and cling to your bill of rights and choke and cough through the smoke that you wont be removed by the Government because you have RIGHTS and they won't be violated by the over-reaching arm of the Fire Department!

Then you die. And you're an idiot.

reply to post by THE666OCCULT


The other interesting thing about this thread is that Boston PD was actually very accommodating to residents. Boston is a big-government town, but it's also the sort of place where all the liberal college students and professors go absolutely crazy at the slightest instance of police brutality or injustice. Even with the lockdown, I've heard of no instance where police detained or arrested anyone - or even chastised anyone - for leaving their house or going to work/school (outside of the immediate Watertown vicinity). I have not heard of any Fourth or Fifth Amendment violations. And they even managed to take the suspect in without killing him.

reply to post by buckrogerstime


That sounds like great success to me. And no civilian, civil-liberty loving, it's my right to walk down this sidewalk types got injured.

In all seriousness though, it's a legitimate concern to have, the loss of the American justice system and bill of rights, but this Boston thing is kind of grasping at straws.

9000 LEO's to catch 2 scared punks. Unbelievable and LE still had to have a lock down, so they could be safe. A bit over the top, maybe?

The media was in a sick frenzy. CNN anchor's didn't want to give up their screen time to the next anchor's time slot.

Unbelievable madness.

BuckRogersTime:

...do you consider a forest fire an example of martial law because firefighters ask people to evacuate and not re-enter the area while they attempt to extinguish the flames? If not, how was what happened in Boston today different?

A forest fire is an entirely different form of threat, and is too much of a contrast to support a linkage between it and the threat of a terrorist. Depending upon the severity of the fire, the situation might require the invocation of the 'emergency powers act', which is a form of martial law, although nowhere near as severe as a declaration of full blown martial law, which would be given for an entirely different reason.

I believe your question revolves around 'appropriate response'? What happend in Boston was not an application of full blown martial law, but the application of a few elements of what you can expect if ever such a declaration was to be given. Was the lock down of the whole of Boston an appropriate response by the authorities against the threat of a single person termed a terrorist? To such a question I would say no, it wasn't appropriate, it was too much, it was overkill.

It finally caught him, not because of the city-wide lockdown, but because the lock down was lifted and a citizen was free to inspect the grounds of their own property. Under full blown martial law, they would not have been able to do this, they would have been restricted to their house, and would not have seen the the disturbance to their boat. In effect, the lockdown didn't capture the suspect, and was therefore an inappropriate response.

If you have a fire approaching Boston from the North, you would not want to lock down the East, South, and West portions of the city, you'd want them open to allow citizens an escape route from the approaching fire, and also a route for the necessary appliances to reach the fire.

Boston isn't a 'farce' .. it's very serious.

However, now that we know that bomber #2 won't be mirandized,
we do indeed know that it is being used to take away the rights
of Americans. This tragedy is probably being used as a testing
ground.

But it's not a 'farce' ... not at all.

Originally posted by verylowfrequency
9000 LEO's to catch 2 scared punks.

No. 9,000 law enforcment agents engaged in protecting the public and catching two mass murdering terrorists who had killed, and who were on the loose with firepower and desire to kill more people.

Big difference.

Don't believe in the eugenics lies about IQ scores and all that garbage, I have spent plenty of time disproving all of the major claims they are simple to defeat. Look up the history of where the IQ testing came from, it's straight up Nazi Ideology before it became known by that name. I would know IQ scores are a scam, mine is 156 to 172.
IQ Wiki

Englishman Francis Galton coined the terms psychometrics and eugenics, and developed a method for measuring intelligence based on nonverbal sensory-motor tests.

Francis Galton

He was the first to apply statistical methods to the study of human differences and inheritance of intelligence, and introduced the use of questionnaires and surveys for collecting data on human communities, which he needed for genealogical and biographical works and for his anthropometric studies.

He was a pioneer in eugenics, coining the term itself and the phrase "nature versus nurture". His book Hereditary Genius (1869) was the first social scientific attempt to study genius and greatness.[1]

What a tool this guy was, straight up Nazi racist hateful scumbag all the way. He thought blacks were inferior, IT IS SO DISGUSTING !!!!! But he never had a kid? What a joke that eugenicist was. Too bad we believe his LIES!!!

The name of evil changes constantly so don't worry about names so much just do your homework and put the dots together to double check and move on.

I will tell you the TRUE HIERARCHY of MAN
It is not Money
It is not Power
It is not Looks

It is your Heart.

For the true inferiors are not the cripples, the maimed, nor the downtrodden.
They are the fascist scum that harm innocent humans and make up all sorts of reasons to justify it.
But it isn't just. Oh it never is just. It is injustice at the highest degree.

I declare that the true superior beings are the freedom peace loving good people.
And that those who wish to harm freedom and goodness, are the inferiors, for their way brings destruction, the opposite of advancement.

Who is the best psyop now huh? Two can play this game, and the good will outsmart and deprogram the bad. It's the biggest weakness ever.
Because actually, being a good freedom loving citizen is more important than anything else. And that's smart as heck because it brings prosperity and abundance for all. That's ultra-smart in my book.

I am siding with Freedom and the side of all that is Good.
The Free: peaceful, loving, caring, helpful, sharing peoples of all races creeds cultures you name it.
The Tyrant : violent, hateful, uncaring, saboteur, greedy peoples of all races creed cultures you name it.

Those who side with good promote progress, and therefore have the true IQ score of 1.
Those who side with evil promote iniquity, and therefore have the true IQ score of 0.

Maybe I need to add more info, so I can aid in completing the deprogramming cycle.

By siding with team 1, (good) we can create +
Team 0 (bad) loses -
Yin Yang, everything is a balance of opposites. The light vs the dark. Up vs down. etc.

This is complete BASIC COMMON SENSE for ANY THINKING HUMAN of any stripe!!!!!!

See why giving up our rights to terrorists is letting (bad) - and the eugenicists win? And we all get to die dumb idiot slaves from all our diseases they milk us for because we aren't smart enough to check what kind of food we eat?

+ is about being courageous and living life to it's fullest. Fearing no terrorist scumbags at anytime anywhere.
Sure duck a bullet that's common sense. But why fear fate? Fearing mortality? It's absurdity.

Take control of yourself, stop trying to control anyone else. Just control you. This is the key to fixing Earth everyone knows it in their Heart it's as plain as day.

And hell yeah gun rights for all citizens even ex-cons are important, if you want to take guns away from a free person (even one who DID THEIR TIME), you are on the side of - (bad), because you want to Control people and how they protect their families from any host of realistic contingencies that all people everywhere face in our worst times.

reply to post by muzzleflash


Man, where did all that come from?

The666Occult:

Man, where did all that come from?

I was thinking that myself...scratching my head on that one!

Originally posted by elysiumfire
BuckRogersTime:

...do you consider a forest fire an example of martial law because firefighters ask people to evacuate and not re-enter the area while they attempt to extinguish the flames? If not, how was what happened in Boston today different?

A forest fire is an entirely different form of threat, and is too much of a contrast to support a linkage between it and the threat of a terrorist. Depending upon the severity of the fire, the situation might require the invocation of the 'emergency powers act', which is a form of martial law, although nowhere near as severe as a declaration of full blown martial law, which would be given for an entirely different reason.

I believe your question revolves around 'appropriate response'? What happend in Boston was not an application of full blown martial law, but the application of a few elements of what you can expect if ever such a declaration was to be given. Was the lock down of the whole of Boston an appropriate response by the authorities against the threat of a single person termed a terrorist? To such a question I would say no, it wasn't appropriate, it was too much, it was overkill.

It finally caught him, not because of the city-wide lockdown, but because the lock down was lifted and a citizen was free to inspect the grounds of their own property. Under full blown martial law, they would not have been able to do this, they would have been restricted to their house, and would not have seen the the disturbance to their boat. In effect, the lockdown didn't capture the suspect, and was therefore an inappropriate response.

If you have a fire approaching Boston from the North, you would not want to lock down the East, South, and West portions of the city, you'd want them open to allow citizens an escape route from the approaching fire, and also a route for the necessary appliances to reach the fire.

Yes, you're correct that I'm asking about the scope of "appropriate response." Do you think some number/capability of terrorists would ever justify a citywide lockdown? If so, what would it look like?

As for why police would want to shut down the entire city, and not just a couple of blocks, there were circumstances here that would not be present in a major fire. While a fire is of course somewhat predictable in magnitude and direction, there were two other considerations here: 1) law enforcement was not fully aware of what weapons and explosives the suspect had; and 2) the suspect had the ability to rapidly move across the city (or even escape to another city) via carjacking, buses, MBTA, and trains, all of which would have possibly led to intractable hostage situations. (It's also worth noting that Boston itself is dense, but geographically quite small, and it's easy even in rush hour to drive across town in 15 minutes.)

One correction: The lockdown was not solely intended to restrain the suspect's movements, though this was of course part of it. It was also to protect the safety of citizens, which is why it did not start until daybreak even though the incident itself began much earlier in the night. Again, my understanding is that outside the immediate Watertown area, the lockdown was more advisory than anything else and that no one was arrested/detained for leaving their house. That being said, I imagine the large majority of people would have stayed inside regardless of any police warning.

In carrying out this extraordinary and sinister police state exercise, the Obama administration, the military, the police and state and local officials relied on the media to create a climate of fear and anxiety so as to discourage careful consideration by the public of its long-term implications.

Originally posted by THE666OCCULT

Just stop believing in this utter garbage slave crap.
Please I want us all to be FREE and I won't ever give up!

If you acknowledge the fact that the Government has given you rights which is hinted at by your fear of the Government taking them away, are you truly free?

You pay your taxes, don't you?

Freedom is a great big lie.

edit on 20-4-2013 by THE666OCCULT because: (no reason given)

It's all in our heads, so only a lie if you choose for it to be.
It can be true as well, but one must choose it and stick to it.

That's what all of this is about, breaking people out of their own mental cell. Getting them out into the fresh air of reality.

That's why the MSM is so powerful, because it convinces us we live in a mental cell, by building false walls that aren't factually correct according to the books.

This thread runs the opposite direction I hope, where people just don't care what I say or anyone says really, and start really thinking about their own awesome life they can cherish right now, through embracing freedom.

Self-determination is the only way we can stop the violence. Because self-determination's 2 rules are to not harm others and to lead one's self.

reply to post by buckrogerstime


That goes back to my point about the police doing too much or not enough. If they would have let eneryone move about their business and the suspect threw more pipebombs out of another stolen car or detonated a vest, the narrative of this thread would be "Boston Police disregard public safety in pursuit of known terrorist: dozens injured when officials fail to inform public of known bomb threat".

Also, I don't think any of us were in Boston so it's kind of like monday morning quarterback for us.

I do appreciate all of us who are keeping this thread moving along on course.

Good points all around.

Originally posted by unknown known
In carrying out this extraordinary and sinister police state exercise, the Obama administration, the military, the police and state and local officials relied on the media to create a climate of fear and anxiety so as to discourage careful consideration by the public of its long-term implications.

They failed.
We Win

The IMPLICATIONS ARE ON THE TABLE BABY!!!!


Speak up People! NOW
Words of Truth are invincible weapons.

I don't care about 1 terrorist that much! A little but it's not the big picture of life for all humanity. I care way more about the millions of terrorists in governments and corporations world wide hurting innocents in every land you can name, every day of the week.

the more i look at this case the more i have to ask questions...in another recent case (dorner) we have a man ambushing people, shooting officers in thier car, on the loose in a major city...that city wasnt 'locked' down. in a news report from boston news station, just after the police lifted the 'lock down' the reporters were talking about the 'lockdown' being lifted. 1 report thought it wasnt safe to do that because a dangerous person was on the loose..the other reporter brought up the fact that murders who had killed more people were still on the loose but the police didnt lock down the city...this went back and forth..1 useing emotion and fear, the other using reason and thought.

first thing i thought while watching that was 'wow, how quickly lots of people will give some freedom for not security but what they are being TOLD is security' and to call it a 'lockdown'...will that be the new 'politicaly correct' term that will be used for martial law? thats is what they did..they declared martial law for a very short period of time butdidnt want to call it that........never let a good crisis go to waste....even if you made it up yourselves......

Originally posted by THE666OCCULT
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

Man, where did all that come from?

Everywhere, there is way more.

You have it too!
Everyone does.

Originally posted by clearmind
the more i look at this case the more i have to ask questions...in another recent case (dorner) we have a man ambushing people, shooting officers in thier car, on the loose in a major city...that city wasnt 'locked' down. in a news report from boston news station, just after the police lifted the 'lock down' the reporters were talking about the 'lockdown' being lifted. 1 report thought it wasnt safe to do that because a dangerous person was on the loose..the other reporter brought up the fact that murders who had killed more people were still on the loose but the police didnt lock down the city...this went back and forth..1 useing emotion and fear, the other using reason and thought.

first thing i thought while watching that was 'wow, how quickly lots of people will give some freedom for not security but what they are being TOLD is security' and to call it a 'lockdown'...will that be the new 'politicaly correct' term that will be used for martial law? thats is what they did..they declared martial law for a very short period of time butdidnt want to call it that........never let a good crisis go to waste....even if you made it up yourselves......

Yeah but, it only took like watching it for 2minutes to figure out what was going on once they pulled the martial law switch. Then I flipped. HAH!
Automatic Alarm Liberty - Bell!

Originally posted by clearmind
the more i look at this case the more i have to ask questions...in another recent case (dorner) we have a man ambushing people, shooting officers in thier car, on the loose in a major city...that city wasnt 'locked' down. in a news report from boston news station, just after the police lifted the 'lock down' the reporters were talking about the 'lockdown' being lifted. 1 report thought it wasnt safe to do that because a dangerous person was on the loose..the other reporter brought up the fact that murders who had killed more people were still on the loose but the police didnt lock down the city...this went back and forth..1 useing emotion and fear, the other using reason and thought.

first thing i thought while watching that was 'wow, how quickly lots of people will give some freedom for not security but what they are being TOLD is security' and to call it a 'lockdown'...will that be the new 'politicaly correct' term that will be used for martial law? thats is what they did..they declared martial law for a very short period of time butdidnt want to call it that........never let a good crisis go to waste....even if you made it up yourselves......

Just to be clear, they did a very similar citywide lockdown in the Dorner case. However, he was in the City of Big Bear (one of the most remote areas of the county), not Los Angeles proper.

I also don't think this suspect was "just one murderer among many." He did bomb a major city event and possessed other explosive devices. In terms of threats to the general public, there are not many parallels there.

Originally posted by THE666OCCULT
reply to post by buckrogerstime

 

That goes back to my point about the police doing too much or not enough. If they would have let eneryone move about their business and the suspect threw more pipebombs out of another stolen car or detonated a vest, the narrative of this thread would be "Boston Police disregard public safety in pursuit of known terrorist: dozens injured when officials fail to inform public of known bomb threat".

Also, I don't think any of us were in Boston so it's kind of like monday morning quarterback for us.

I do appreciate all of us who are keeping this thread moving along on course.

Good points all around.

That is a straw man argument though.

By saying "If we hadn't declared martial law, you Muzz the freedom guy would have begged us to declare it"?
I would never beg them to declare such a vile disgusting thing that reminds me of the freaking Gestapo.

I think they raid way too many houses already over the most absurd reason$.

You said clearly "The Narrative of THIS thread" AKA Me the OP.

Straw man is burning.