Boston is a Farce to Take your Rights Away

Originally posted by Antigod

Apply simple logic my friends. See, historically the way to treat terrorists is to never give into their demands and never grant unreasonable publicity to them. This way there is no incentive to commit terrorism acts for political gain.

I'm British. Bypassing the current Boston situation I want to comment on what you posted above.

The IRA committed masses of terrorist acts in the UK and Sinn Fein cheerfully admitted it. Now they are part of the Irish govt.

Muslim bombers took out four trains just before an election and managed to affect the way the populace voted and got them to pull out of Iraq.

So two instances where terrorism worked.

Terrorism exists. The bombs aren't all planted by your own govt. There are genuine nutters out there who think blowing up a few hundred people is worth it to get what they want..

yes but
remeber the SAS who were caught dressed as Iraqis setting IEDs and then the brits had to go in an level the Iraqi police station where they were being held, to get them out before the legal process and the publicity got them?
yep
terrorists exist all right

Lest we forget who the real Terrorists are… You might recall this incident in Iraq, back in September 2005. It’s a rare instance where the perps of a false flag op were caught red-handed. Every time one hears of “terrorist” bombings in Iraq or Afghanistan, chances are it’s US, Brit, or Mossad agents creating mayhem in order to justify the illegal occupations of these countries. Yet, the sheeple hardly give this a second thought — even after this incident was blown wide open in the MSM (original CNN and Wash. Post reports further below)… From 2005

conspireality.tv...
photos included

how many times will the nato governments need to get caught red handed before people get it?
oh yeah don't get me started on the brit intelligence and the false flag stuff in Ireland

reply to post by AmatuerSkyWatcher


I read a lot of your posts, I may have missed one or two though so I apologize. I am going back over everything so I will hopefully find anything I missed.

But I must say you are determined, I am not sure why or anything but you do have conviction.

However, as I have pointed out many times over and over again, that all of these "false justifications" for sacrificing Constitutional philosophy are simply not acceptable. There isn't really any justification for the most part.

Just about anytime a city is actually in dire jeopardy of mass death, an evacuation would be more appropriate.

In the case of a few criminals with very crude weaponry are on the loose, normal police activity should be more than enough.

Look at what happened to Dorner, he was 100x more dangerous than these kids, he was actually smart and well trained and knew govt operation standards, strategy, and their tactics. Did they call Martial Law for him? (Oh sorry they are calling it shelter in place - which is complete BS)

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by WaterBottle

Originally posted by muzzleflash
What's a Nationalist Socialist? (Yes it's Republicans and Democrats but what else?)

A Fascist Communist.
That's right.

Please learn what political terminology means. You cannot be fascist and communist at the same time.

There isn't really a difference.

In Fascism, the state is run by corporations.
In Communism, the corporations are run by state.

In BOTH cases, they put a boot in our face and tell us to bow down to the State.

Do you know anything about the real political scale? It goes right and left, and it goes up and down (individualist vs totalitarian).

Just because the Dems are on the left or the Repubs are on the right it doesn't matter, they are both totalitarian and therefore the enemies of free people's everywhere, despite their contempt for such a truth or not.

Wiki Political Spectrum Chart

edit on 19-4-2013 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-4-2013 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)

Well, there are marked similarities in practice.
However, the consensus in WW2 was that already the stated goals of Fascism were openly brutal, tribal and antisocial. Unlike those of Communism.
You can argue about tyrannies and states claiming to be on the left side (they have not much to do with your friendly Western Socialist), but no arguments could be made (in civilized conversation) to openly support the stated goals of Nazis.
Plus what we can term later semi-Fascist dictatorships seem to follow a pattern not followed by Korea or the CCCP: they made a practical religion, a cult of the Family, the Nation and usually Church too (this was different in Germany, Japan and Italy though). Statistically, semi-Fascist dictators and troops tend promote the death penalty everywhere, to crack down on gays and light drugs, they love flouting rich people and arms, they are against modernizing women's style, and while Communists censored books, the Nazis openly burned them. And in many parts of the world, the right wing is usually the worst for physical torture.

Might is right was a disgusting, open Fascist slogan. Neo-Darwinism. Hitler fancied his folks like a Tyrannosaurus Rex. Even more unsavory was the might was supposed to be racist. Bad blood, comes out, your a Gypsy criminal. I mean, that 's how they thought.
Whereas, the Commie thought: let's explain to this Gypsy guy that he had been oppressed for centuries and alienated by racists - why not jump on the bandwagon then? It's not a blood question for him - no genes, no racism, Is the guy politically smart enough to grab this historical truth or not?

Did you notice that small, insignificant difference? The difference between a sand viper and a rattlesnake?
Communism supported heavy-handed ideology. They wanted to convince you that they are right. I need to agree with its main philosophical undercurrent though: no one should be left under the bridge while others cruise in yachts...

Getting back to the Tsarbayov Brothers, they are obviously nationalist, and religious - perhaps rightly so - and violent. Nothing to do anything with the left. The whole drama approach belongs to the right - during the War, Stalin was using a far more very left-brained strategy, that is how he could understand American strategy. If it were not his total paranoia, he could have cut the number of war heroes back a bit.

Originally posted by Danbones

yes but
remeber the SAS who were caught dressed as Iraqis setting IEDs and then the brits had to go in an level the Iraqi police station where they were being held, to get them out before the legal process and the publicity got them?
yep
terrorists exist all right

The fact these guys got caught like this, is extremely revealing. Too bad the story got buried.
I do remember it, and a few other similar instances of equally eye-opening nature.

Even if they aren't SAS or CIA or anything, what are two "White guys" doing setting off terrorist bombs in Iraq of all places? There are very few decent explanations outside of government inside job population manipulation tactics.

By looking back at historical precedent we can glean exactly what is going on today geopolitically in a more accurate light.

reply to post by Kokatsi


Those are some interesting points of discussion, thank you for bringing them up Kokatsi. Great post!

However I have a strong feeling that you are viewing the Nazi vs Soviet paradigm based more on what was written and said, rather than on what actually happened physically.

The only real difference between Nazi and Soviet systems, were the fact that Nazis openly pushed their beliefs, while Soviets used more deceptive practices. However in reality, the Soviets did murder far more of their own peoples, albeit they had more time to accomplish it.

Another interesting set of similarities is the structure of leadership organization.
When we compare the way hierarchies worked (and ignore the terminology while looking at the face value), it becomes apparent quickly that the Nazis and Soviets had far more similarities than they did differences.

reply to post by Danbones

Yes the British disguised themselves as Iraqis - that was bad - and done deliberately to foment strife between the shia and sunni population of Iraq. But another nasty deed that should not be forgotten and should be known to US citizens (now that they are aware of the rest of the world and how such actions may affect their lives) is when the British government infiltrated the UDA and the IRA. (Irish Unionist terrorists and republican terrorists) It is extremely important that US citizens are aware of the tactics used at that time. They have been tried and tested by the British government.

Just when it seemed that the Irish terrorist problem was about to be resolved a bomb was detonated in Enniskillen, Northern Ireland in 1987. The IRA was blamed however, MI5 had infiltrated the IRA and the UDA - and the British agents had been so successful that they had reached the top of the tree in these organisations. It is widely understood that the British government itself was, in actual fact, behind the 1987 bombing. Why? To perpetuate the troubles in Northern Ireland. Why? Is anyone's guess.

Originally posted by christina-66
reply to post by Danbones

 

Just when it seemed that the Irish terrorist problem was about to be resolved a bomb was detonated in Enniskillen, Northern Ireland in 1987. The IRA was blamed however, MI5 had infiltrated the IRA and the UDA - and the British agents had been so successful that they had reached the top of the tree in these organisations. It is widely understood that the British government itself was, in actual fact, behind the 1987 bombing. Why? To perpetuate the troubles in Northern Ireland. Why? Is anyone's guess.

Thanks for taking the effort to chime in Christina.

I have a suggestion for why they may have orchestrated attacks against themselves:

Hegelian Dialectic

Hegelian dialectic, usually presented in a threefold manner, was stated by Heinrich Moritz Chalybäus as comprising three dialectical stages of development: a thesis, giving rise to its reaction, an antithesis, which contradicts or negates the thesis, and the tension between the two being resolved by means of a synthesis.

Thesis - Antithesis - Synthesis
Problem - Reaction - Solution

reply to post by muzzleflash


I concur - but daren't say it. The reality of the inhumanity is simply too frightening.

Originally posted by muzzleflash
Apply simple logic my friends.
See, historically the way to treat terrorists is to never give into their demands and never grant unreasonable publicity to them. This way there is no incentive to commit terrorism acts for political gain.

However on our MSM, what do we have?

TERROR-MONGERING.
HYPE
MISINFORMATION
FEAR-MONGERING

Yesterday was all fear induced obedience.
2nd

The police should not be militarized. Period. House to house invasion should not be tolerated. I can imagine a situation wherein an armed nuclear warhead was set to detonate that might call for such an emergency, but it should be done solemnly and openly and there should be no celebratory behavior after the fact. Nobody should be happy about what happened yesterday.

Nobody knows anything but everyone assumes they do because of they are told it by the same source they spend the rest of time decrying as illegitimate.

A presumed innocent 20-something was allegedly killed yesterday. A 19 year old kid was presumably taken into custody, apparently injured and it will be quite a surprise if he lives to speak and if the public is allowed to hear. Oh, we cannot hear because of "public safety". Remember innocent until proven guilty?

Oh, but they shot and threw grenades right? And we have evidence of this, right? How many of those shots were simply law enforcement agents firing at 'fleeing suspects'?

I'm not saying anything did or did not happen. I'm suggesting you turn on your critical thinking and remember that you don't know something just because you see it on TV or read it on the internet.

Nobody should be cheering and clapping that it takes ten thousand militarized jack boots to find one unarmed frightened teen on the run. Nobody should be cheering and clapping that people's homes were invaded.

Nobody should be calling ten thousand militarized troops in full ballistic armor, urban tanks, helicopters and automatic weapons hunting one skinny little kid "heroes".

This should be a very sober affair, and what follow should be a hard core discussion and analysis in D.C. about how these things are being handled. But that's not going to be what happens. What happens is everyone believes everything without serious question, new laws are passed, nobody debates this crass demonstration of the overwhelming militarization and expense of the new domestic enforcement battalion. We get pictures of jackboots in darth vader outfits high-fiving little blond hair blue eyed american boys like it's as American as apple pie and burger joints.

Most disappointing of all is the people of the country who have forgotten what due process is and cheer on death and destruction as the Romans cheered on throwing people to the lions. Filled with bloodlust and rage against people who may or may not be responsible for things that may or may not have happened in ways that we may or may not know the first thing about.

Originally posted by stussy123

Talk about speedy recovery. Its kinda nice to see that I get accused of partial knowledge from inconsistencies Im merely pointing out. I think Im on to something! lol. Ive already asked about the photo. It has already been proven fake. YOU HAVE NO EXPLANATION OF THE PHOTO LIKE I SAID. If you work at a hospital then you would know. And UCLA Medical Center sources gave me the info so why would I look somewhere else.

edit on 20-4-2013 by stussy123 because: (no reason given)

Their is no if I work at a hospital as a matter of fact I work at one one of the top ranked hospitals in the world which is actually number 1 in what it does.

The trauma docs and nurses I talked to all explained exactly what they saw going on in the photo. I will take their words over yours 100% of the time.

Probably not much more point in doing this, you are convinced it was fake and I am convinced it was not.

Though I don’t condone the loss of life, I believe America needs a wake-up call. If America gets attacked by another country, and loses a tens of thousands (if not more) due to an attack, than Americans need to understand that there are consequences for our government’s actions. Consequences to Americans who sit on the side lines doing nothing. And if an attack does happen (which I have no doubt will happen in the future), than Americans will have to stand up and take action. Of course, that will never happen. The Government along with the media will have Americans believing we were attacked by a super-duper extremist group hell bent on raping and pillaging our woman and children! And the terrorists of course, will be doing all of this in the name of the anti-Santa clause!

So there are three questions that beg to be asked…

1. Do you think the anti-Santa Clause could have set off those bombs in Boston?
2. What super-duper extremist group did it?
3. WHEN DO WE ATTACK?

Most Americans are oblivious, and in all reality, care not to know the truth. Our Government should be afraid of its people. Not the other way around. It’s so easy to sit behind a computer screen talking smack about those who are destroying America, but when have any of you actually stood up demonstrating against the corruption? I have done so, and on one occasion, I was put in jail because of it.

I cannot help but laugh when I hear people talk of rebellion. I have numerous friend addressing how (IN NO WAY), they’ll let the Government come into their homes and take their guns. But really, be honest, If you have to make a choice between your wife, children, home, cars, etc., etc., etc., and your guns, which are you going to choose? If you don’t give up your guns, and end up in jail (or even worse), what is going to happen to your family if you’re not there?

I hate to say it, but America is going to see its day! And it’s not going to be pretty! And when our children ask us why the world is attacking America, what are we going to tell them?

I at least can say I did something to stop it. How about you?

Sorry if someone already posted it, great video on past false flags which have been uncovered, mainly done by the Israelis, Americans, British and Russians, and who really benefits from false flags, and it is certainly not the citizenry:

reply to post by Danbones

yes but
remeber the SAS who were caught dressed as Iraqis setting IEDs and then the brits had to go in an level the Iraqi police station where they were being held, to get them out before the legal process and the publicity got them

I have never read about that would you please send me some concrete sources.
So I can read up.

Originally posted by rockymcgilicutty
reply to post by Danbones

 

yes but
remeber the SAS who were caught dressed as Iraqis setting IEDs and then the brits had to go in an level the Iraqi police station where they were being held, to get them out before the legal process and the publicity got them

I have never read about that would you please send me some concrete sources.
So I can read up.

Its in the video I posted right above your post, or at least similar documentation about other SAS FF's in Iraq.

Originally posted by AmatuerSkyWatcher
reply to post by Mykah

 

I said your post was idiotic. I am not going to waste my time even bothering to write a rebuttal to that post.

Good point.

Originally posted by AmatuerSkyWatcher
You claim you are an EMT, so you are therefore not a physician of any kind.

I am trained and have EMS experience, which means I've seen more trauma then the average hospital physician who deals in non-emergency medicine. I can understand the confusion for someone with zero medical training like yourself.

Originally posted by AmatuerSkyWatcher
Does the human body act the same in every situation and trauma? No it does not.

You're giving medical advice to someone with more education and experience than you? The answer is no it doesn't, but generally you can make some basic assumptions like 10 injured is not 170.

Originally posted by AmatuerSkyWatcher
Others have refuted your claims, who have been in a position to do sot. yet you rejected their testimony out of hand, as it didn't fit your viewpoint.

It didn't fit the photographic evidence I provided which is why I rejected it. The picture of the amputee actor's tourniquet is so obviously fake anyone with experience not in denial can see it. As for the cop's statements, do you know what cops do at car wrecks? They stand 20 feet back and put out road flares until the EMTs get there.

Originally posted by AmatuerSkyWatcher
What about the hundreds of soldiers blown to pieces by IED's in Afghan or Iraq, who have lain in situ with minimum treatment, until they have been air evacuated to a field hospital, yet still survive until this day? Surely your 2 mins until complete bleed out, does not quite add up here, no?

US Soldier's are trained how to tourniquet themselves and others in basic.

Originally posted by AmatuerSkyWatcher
Does your training give you the authority to analyse photos? No it does not.

Wow talk about rhetoric. You assume the authority to claim my training and experience in the emergency medical field does not give me the authority to analyse photos involving the emergency medical field. Its not possible to take you seriously after a statement that insanely benign.

Originally posted by AmatuerSkyWatcher
In the first post, the entire list of photos look to be taken within a 10 to 15 second window, yet you want us to believe that there was guy directing these 'actors' and a guy pouring fake blood around the area AND putting together a pretty convincing scene

And that's where having training and experience give me a degree of authority in talking about those photos. To an inexperienced armchair would be debater like you that is a convincing scene. To me I see ten or so people laying around with no blood or injuries and very strange behavior in a blast zone that supposedly was half responsible for killing 3 and injuring over 170 people. Its clearly fake, you just have no frame of reference as to the reality of medical scenes outside of your television set.

Originally posted by AmatuerSkyWatcher
In your second post, you claim a black woman looks fine in the first photo, just a little blood on her blouse, yet later on she is covered in blood.

I didn't simply claim it, I showed photographic evidence of it. What's more interesting is why she is making hand signals in tangent with the amputee actor who has no blood on him whatsoever.

Originally posted by AmatuerSkyWatcher
You also claim that the black woman was the first to be treated, whilst the double amputee was left on the floor, yet in the photo where the black woman is on a spinal board, the double amputee is nowhere to be seen in shot, yet the area of blood where he was sat, is clearly in shot. Can you explain that?

There is clear photographic evidence the black woman was moved before the amputee actor recieved evaluation much less treatment. This would not happen in real triage.

Originally posted by AmatuerSkyWatcher
Well what if there were multiple first responders on the scene, and both the black lady and the double amputee were being treated at the same time? Well wouldn't that just put a spanner in the works?

It would if not for the fact there is a clear picture of the black woman removed from the scene while the amputee actor still has not recieved any treatment. This would mean she was evaluated for spinal injury, spine boarded and moved which for the fastest emt would take over three minutes. This means our double amputee actor would have been laying there for over four minutes before recieving a tourniquet.

Why don't you leave medical examination to the people with experience in the field.

Originally posted by Masterjaden
reply to post by redtic

 

The response was NOT appropriate. The ends do NOT justify the means. Their response was unconstitutional. It violates the fourth amendment and posse comitatus.

Morons that spout off that extreme situations require anticonstitutional measures need to find another country to live in so they can feel their false sense of safety.

When people fear their government, it is not safety.

Jaden

How so? There was no martial law declared. The "lockdown" was voluntary and if the terrorist was loose in your neighborhood would you deny entry to the police asking to enter?

The people in the neighborhood cheered the police as they were leaving once the kid was captured.....does that look to you like they felt like their rights had been violated?

reply to post by PlanetXisHERE


I have seen that, I would like a better evidence before I use it. Since they were caught is there any court records, or anything like that?

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by masta12d


Pretty sure that bombing you speak of was prefaced by yet another "drill" was it not? You know, never mind. I suppose it doesn't matter anymore.

It matters to me, all of it does.

If people don't realize how politics and government are actually operating today, and don't actually research history, they will never understand the point of this discussion.

So yes, the admission by the very head of the drill itself, they were having a drill mimicking the exact events in complete detail, is a massively important fact.

And the fact that no one ousted their government for these types of scams? It's unbelievable!!!
We are doomed to see a lot more of these types of things if we don't stop the culprits at their source.

I was saying these words since 2003. "We all just need to wake up!" Up until maybe 4hrs ago....I'd have to check my last post lol. I say this because I re-read your thread it reminds me of one I wrote in 2003 or 2004 on a different site. It doesn't seem to make a difference. These guys have committed so many atrocities in "our name" for their GREED that there isn't anything they WON'T do to keep it quite. Therefore nothing short a coup d'etat will do any good. Bush primed the engine and Obama hit the ignition, here we go.

So long as people allow themselves to be divided by this right/left bull# we don't stand a chance. That my friend is truth.

Originally posted by masta12d
If we stopped murding people with Shock-n-Awe and pay concessions to those we have wronged in the name of oil perhaps we my receive forgiveness.

edit on 20-4-2013 by masta12d because: (no reason given)

So...who were we raping and pillaging in the middle east prior to 1993 that provoked the bombing of the WTC?

"We may receive forgiveness"..... are you really that naive?

You have a class of people in the MIddle East that are raping their own people and taking virtually all the oil proceeds for themselves. The lower class people cannot effectively, in many cases, (they are learning different though) seek justice there, but they can take out their frustrations on westerners (and, indeed, are encouraged to do so). As long as the US is recognized as not being an Islamic state...as long as we are perceived as being rich and powerful, as long as those in power seek to weaken us, there will continue to be acts of terrorism.

There is an undeclared war being fought by proxy by those in power in the middle east. They cannot confront us head-on, so instead they fund underground organizations to recruit the dis-affected to combat us for them, all the while covering up any connections as they possibly can.

If you follow the money you find that even members of the Saudi family are funding terrorism and the brand of Islam responsible for fomenting the emotional content that leads to suicide bombers.

Do not, ever, be so naive as to believe that if we leave them alone they will not bring the fight to us. Do not, ever, be so naive as to believe they will "forgive" us if we retreat from the area.

We are damned if we do, and damned if we don't. Period.