Why does Boston celebrate Martial Law with chants of ‘USA, USA’?

reply to post by buckrogerstime


So they just killed a boy without any evidence. Great.

And I don't need a video of my birth, I trust my parents enough to believe what they told me was my date of birth. The government on the other hand, is not always for your best intentions. As far as I remember, my parents aren't labeling me or my siblings terrorists.

By your logic, the government could go after anyone they want, since if videos are not needed, they can just hunt down and kill anyone they want.

Originally posted by extraterrestrialentity

So they just killed a boy without any evidence. Great.

And I don't need a video of my birth, I trust my parents enough to believe what they told me was my date of birth. The government on the other hand, is not always for your best intentions. As far as I remember, my parents aren't labeling me or my siblings terrorists.

By your logic, the government could go after anyone they want, since if videos are not needed, they can just hunt down and kill anyone they want.

Do you think that when someone points a gun at your face and attempts to kill you, you need to prosecute them in a court of law before you're allowed to respond?

And, yes, by my logic, the government does not need video of your criminal conduct to arrest or prosecute you. There are many other forms of evidence beyond video, such as eyewitness accounts. Ironically, in this case, they actually did have video of the suspects behaving strangely at the marathon.

The fact that there are forms of evidence beyond video explains why there were courts and jails before cell-phone cameras existed.

Originally posted by extraterrestrialentity
reply to post by buckrogerstime

 

So they just killed a boy without any evidence. Great.

And I don't need a video of my birth, I trust my parents enough to believe what they told me was my date of birth. The government on the other hand, is not always for your best intentions. As far as I remember, my parents aren't labeling me or my siblings terrorists.

By your logic, the government could go after anyone they want, since if videos are not needed, they can just hunt down and kill anyone they want.

What boy did they kill?
You mean the 26 year old adult that allegedly chose to engage in a gun battle with the police?

reply to post by buckrogerstime


Ever hear of a thing called a bribe? They can pay anyone off to do whatever they want. They can pay off a person to say that someone pointed a gun their face, or they pay them off to say that a specific person was the bomber. And even now, I don't see anyone saying that those were the kids that had the bomb.

Back in the honest days of the US, when such things happened, you could rely on witnesses, now the government will do anything to implement more laws, even kill it's own people.

reply to post by opethPA


And where did you get that from, local news? Official police report? Deny ignorance. Quite frankly I am tired of all the people here saying things, without any actual proof.

reply to post by buckrogerstime


And could you perhaps show me a video of the person saying that one of the boys pointed a gun to their face? I would very much like that.

Originally posted by extraterrestrialentity
reply to post by opethPA

 

And where did you get that from, local news? Official police report? Deny ignorance. Quite frankly I am tired of all the people here saying things, without any actual proof.

From the police scanners that most of us listened to that night.
From the reports submitted of the gunfire.
From the people in that area that reported it.
Notice how I said allegedly also.

Still haven't answered my question though what Boy did they kill?

It sounded like when Team USA is in the 3rd period of a hockey game losing to another nation, desperately hoping to score a goal in the power play, while the opposing team is down a man.

Came across as media hype to me. Instead of looking strong, which appeared to be the intended purpose of it, it looked weak. Just goes to show how deep the conditioning has taken hold. All that was missing was them carrying giant flags of their leader. Like I said weak.

Originally posted by extraterrestrialentity

And could you perhaps show me a video of the person saying that one of the boys pointed a gun to their face? I would very much like that.

Sure, here you go. Possible that he wouldn't have even died from the gunshot wounds if his brother hadn't run him over.

“We estimate there were over 200 shots fired in a five to ten minute period,” Deveau said.

One of the suspects also threw an explosive at the officers. According to the chief, that explosive was later found to be a pressure cooker bomb, similar to those used at the marathon on Monday. The suspects also threw other explosive devices at the officers, in all six devices were later recovered at the scene.

Eventually the older brother, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, walked directly at police coming within five to ten feet of the closest officer. Tsarnaev ran out of ammunition and thats when police officers tackeled him in the street.

It was while the officers were attempting to handcuff Tamerlan, that one of the officers yelled to get back. Officers dove out of the way as the younger brother, Dzhokar, drove directly over his brother, dragging him a short way down the street.

www.wggb.com...

If somewhere like Iraq shut down a city every time there was a bomb, they would have ground to a halt completely.

Oh, and because I know you'll say, "show me someone who was at the scene who was neither a policeman nor a mainstream journalist," let me point something else out:

There aren't too many people in the middle of massive firefights at 1 a.m. who aren't police or mainstream journalists.

reply to post by buckrogerstime


The only person talking is the chief of police. Like I would believe what he says.

reply to post by extraterrestrialentity

And where did you get that from, local news? Official police report? Deny ignorance. Quite frankly I am tired of all the people here saying things, without any actual proof

Oh but it's perfectly fine if this were CNN right ? In fact mainstream can try and convict and everyone can save money right ?

reply to post by opethPA


Police scanners? How did you know which one was shooting? It could have easily been that the boy did not fight back, and the police were doing all of the shooting.

And if you did hear the police screaming as if the boy was shooting at them, I wouldn't trust them very much. The biggest liars are the police. They will do anything to get what they want.

Originally posted by extraterrestrialentity
reply to post by buckrogerstime

 

Ever hear of a thing called a bribe? They can pay anyone off to do whatever they want. They can pay off a person to say that someone pointed a gun their face, or they pay them off to say that a specific person was the bomber. And even now, I don't see anyone saying that those were the kids that had the bomb.

Back in the honest days of the US, when such things happened, you could rely on witnesses, now the government will do anything to implement more laws, even kill it's own people.

edit on 21-4-2013 by extraterrestrialentity because: (no reason given)

Personally I am "with you"-
But when were these "honest days in the US"?

-As a student of History I am amazed at all the "founding father" and "back in the old days of this nation" talk I hear. Things were so corrupt 150 years ago that often Judges would browse a catalog when deciding on the Fine to give 'suspects"- In other words, if the Judge wanted something from the catalog he would fine the "suspect" the exact amount and keep the money.

Things are the same as they ever were. Corrupt. Just like they have been from the Founding.

-They never show us Video or proof of very much do they? I see all the local issues on Video, Car Chases, Shootings, Robberies, complete with the suspects face, etc..etc... But these "national" events like 911/ James Holmes/ Sandy Hook and now Boston- We (at best) are allowed to see still shots and carefully orchestrated photos... But they expect us to trust everything they say.

reply to post by buckrogerstime


So you are essentially saying that, because no one other than mainstream news or police was there, we should automatically assume that whatever the police are saying is true. Correct?

Martial Law starts as protection of the people from the state and ends up as protection of the state from the people.

reply to post by randyvs


Actually, I wanted to include them as well as a few other networks, but I thought the reply would have been too long. Local news, CNN, ABC, they're all the same, just a bunch of liars.

Originally posted by extraterrestrialentity
reply to post by opethPA

 

Police scanners? How did you know which one was shooting? It could have easily been that the boy did not fight back, and the police were doing all of the shooting.

And if you did hear the police screaming as if the boy was shooting at them, I wouldn't trust them very much. The biggest liars are the police. They will do anything to get what they want.

Then this is a sad state of affairs for you because the only people that could ever even begin to offer proof to you would have to be: 1) police officers with a vested interest in denying guilt; 2) a seriously injured terrorist with a vested interest in denying guilt; and 3) a dead terrorist. Given those options, you'll never have anything more than a he-said, he-said, and you will never be able to have an opinion one way or the other on what really happened.

I guess you could say you generally think terrorists are more credible than police officers, which is fine, but maybe you can just say that in a sentence instead of pretending like you have any external proof that the brothers are innocent.

Will some of you people get off it! They were chanting because they found the guy who caused the whole mess and took him alive. They were chanting and thanking all the hard work, the medical staff and cops (some of which were killed and wounded) .