Witness says Boston bomb suspect run over and executed by police!

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by darkbake
I thought that the younger brother sent a tweet out because he was angry that the cops killed the older brother. It seems pretty clear-cut to me. I don't even know why they are trying to hide it and blame it on the younger brother.

Anyway, can we all agree that the cops / homeland security at least somewhat killed him? I mean, even if he got run over, he was apparently shot multiple times.

edit on 22-4-2013 by darkbake because: (no reason given)

Only if we all can agree that the bombers had the option of not bombing the marathon...

Only if we can all agree that they could have surrendered instead of the actions they chose.

As for the comment about the tweet do we know its actually his? Secondly, if you just killed 3 people and wounded over 160 people, are you going to tell the truth about it?

edit on 22-4-2013 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

That was not his real twitter account, that was a fake created as soon as his identity had been revealed. His real twitter acct was @j_tsar, I believe.

Originally posted by bluemirage5
With all those many police officers, he jumped a police car and took off with it? I highly doubt it.

I agree,6000 cops,ATF,FBI,SWAT,ARMY +,against 2 kids.

reply to post by NickDC202


I think this was a trial run of a new play in the playbook. A lot of the more recent plots that have been thwarted, involve multiple events simultaneously, to a) be more successful, so if some are intercepted, others succeed, and b) split up resources to both aid in escape and cause more confusion. This strategy deals effectively against this type of threat, but this appears to be the first time it was put into practice.

It has some dangerous implications though, if used loosely. I don't think the feds are going to try this tactic without a major event happening, but the scary thing is that they COULD do so, if they desired it, and be within the legal boundaries, with present law.

reply to post by captaintyinknots


I did not realize police had Mercedes Benz SUV's. I will be writing a letter to my congressman about that one. Can you say a waste of tax payers dollars?

And why is there no mention that the one driving the "Police SUV" was an officer?

Why was the car jack victim not shot? They had just shot two other officers. So they let this one go? Uhhh huh.

reply to post by drock905


It's a 6th Gen actually (96-00), definitely not 5th, going just by the posted pics here. en.wikipedia.org...

We've had the Acura version, and a 2dr 6th Gen. There's no mistaking the body of the car, though I can't entirely rule out 1.6EL either. I'd still say civic, with what kind of looks like aftermarket back lights, because the chrome outline I don't think is normal for a lowest-end acura with hub-caps, while even the mid-end sport model with rims doesn't have it at least on one of the models (2000), while the civics do.

reply to post by NickDC202

Instead of noting the ineffectiveness of the devices and simply cautioning the public to remain vigilant but go about your normal activities, professional sports games were cancelled out of fear that the two suspects would implode a stadium. Instead of adding additional officers to public transit, they simply shut down all public transit.

I'm sorry but your view is waaaay off.
Their devices were very effective. 3 dead and 140 wounded.

And LE shut down all public transport AFTER the police officer was executed point blank.

How would you be acting if LE failed to shut things down and the two escaped to deposit some of their grenades in outher public places killing/wounding other innocent people?
Ill bet you would be saying they let them escape intentionally just to increase the terror so TPTB would have more reason to impose more laws.

No matter what they do conspiracy people want to read something elses into it.

reply to post by ProfessorChaos


Why are you responding to defend CaptaintyInKnots as though you are defending yourself?

Originally posted by ProfessorChaos

Originally posted by Cobaltic1978

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by AmberLeaf
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

Witness accounts...like in the attached video

You mean the one that is completely refuted by all other accounts?

Like I said, the boys were in a police SUV. Mystery solved.

Didn't they carjack a Mercedes SUV, the driver escaped and was able to confirm that they were the bombers, because they told him.

When did they steal a Police SUV?

I have no idea how reliable they were, but I do recall hearing murmurs of them stealing a police vehicle through the media that night. Again, I stress, I have no idea how credible those murmurs were, but I know I heard them.

Your comment (to which I am replying) is clearly intonated as a defence of something YOU wrote, and this is re-emphasised by your use of extensive imbedded quoting of the discussion leading to the post I question you regarding - despite the fact that 'Professor Chaos' was not involved in the 'q&a' between AmberLeaf (the OP) and CaptaintyInKnots.

This makes precisely ZERO sense, unless you are replying in the first person, in order to defend your own position, because not only do you post as ProfessorChaos, but you're active on this forum also as 'CaptaintyInKnots', and in the 'chaos' of playing two characters simultaneously (see what I did there?), you got a little confused and blew your cover.

I trust my point is clear enough? Seems you bit off a little more than you could chew. You must have been awfully busy this past week, so it's understandable, I'm sure you won't get into too much trouble.

Now I will microwave some popcorn and wait for your entertaining and creative response.

reply to post by FlyInTheOintment


Mods please be aware that if I have gotten it wrong, and the above-highlighted apparent double account user is not a double account user, I believed in good faith that if we are to deny ignorance, we should also remain vigilant as to the possibility of improper account management & the resultant opinion-shaping that might occur in topics of great societal importance, engineered through the use of seemingly disparate identities in order to stage the appearance of 'other people agreeing' and thus unfairly influencing the readership as regards the correct way to interpret the question of 'false flag or no false flag'.

Phew - longest sentence ever..

reply to post by Gazrok


Salient points, these are worrying times. I reacted similarly to the CISPA matter - I figure they can snoop already, and indeed do so already. How much worse will it be if CISPA gets through? God only knows.

Similarly, now they've managed a dry run of de facto martial law, with zero resistance, what on Earth might they try next?

reply to post by neo96


I saw this interview and the Dr. DID NOT SAY THIS. He said the victim had what appeared to be bullet wounds and had a lot of trauma around his torso, possibly from an explosion (or it could have been from being run over) so he couldn't, or wouldn't, say what lead to his death. That's when he made the comment about letting the ME determine what actually killed him.
It's amazing how the words get twisted.

Most of you older readers have probably been through the drill where two people share some information and then pass it along, one person to the next, through like 10 people. At the end, they see how the original message is corrupted by the time it gets back to the originator. Usually it's pretty bad. This is an example of how quickly information, or what you think your heard, can get changed.

reply to post by FlyInTheOintment


The good news about CISPA, is that it really only legitimizes something they can do anyways. Also, they simply don't have the manpower to have people actually followup on anything other than major hits from their software. In the grand scheme of things, it really doesn't change a whole lot in actual daily life, but just from a moral standpoint, it is a big infringement on rights, but sadly, legislation granting those rights in cyberspace is pretty vague to non-existant in the first place.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by darkbake
I thought that the younger brother sent a tweet out because he was angry that the cops killed the older brother. It seems pretty clear-cut to me. I don't even know why they are trying to hide it and blame it on the younger brother.

Anyway, can we all agree that the cops / homeland security at least somewhat killed him? I mean, even if he got run over, he was apparently shot multiple times.

edit on 22-4-2013 by darkbake because: (no reason given)

Only if we all can agree that the bombers had the option of not bombing the marathon...

Only if we can all agree that they could have surrendered instead of the actions they chose.

As for the comment about the tweet do we know its actually his? Secondly, if you just killed 3 people and wounded over 160 people, are you going to tell the truth about it?

edit on 22-4-2013 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

Sorry, I'm not thinking clearly at the moment. Can you explain how (more importantly why) they got their hands on assault rifles and explosives (IEDs) and were able to hold off police for so long if they weren't involved?

I'm just saying that it seems pretty clear to me that the older brother was killed by the police, maybe his dead body was run over by his younger brother I guess? But no reason to shoot a dead body...

Anyway... the younger brother is being held for questioning, luckily. Just like James Holmes is...

if either of these people were involved in a government conspiracy (which is possible) they are loose ends that probably weren't expected to survive. So. Something might come of that.

reply to post by neo96


sorry , if anyone who supposedly has explosives on them is coming towards me in a threatening manner and i got a gun , i am emptying the clip and going for another one.

Finally an actual video of a witness talking about what happened. For days all I've been hearing and seeing is people saying that witnesses saw this, police saw that, without any actual video proof.

Perhaps this is proof that the suspects did not actually throw any bombs or shoot at any police officers, and this really is all a conspiracy? I myself do not know if it is solid proof of that, but it's much, much more evidence than an article or police report.

reply to post by captaintyinknots


I've got a question for you - do you still believe every police and media report concerning Rodney King or the LA Riots?
Because much of that was proven to be lies after the event.

That's clear evidence that thee police and media can and do collude to present a lie when it suits them.

One difference here, is that a lot of members (myself included) were listening to police scanner traffic of Boston, and heard it all go down. I can't think of anything in the traffic that contradicts the official story of the kid's takedown, and that'd be pretty difficult to fake in real time.

For those that do not want to rummage through the mega-thread that was the real-time account that long night, I've posted a summary with links to the posts in the thread to key events here: Summary Links

reply to post by Gazrok


And how could you know who was shooting who? It could have been the police doing the shooting. It is pretty much impossible to know if the suspects were shooting as well, simply from listening to what was going on.

reply to post by Gazrok


They do have a 5 Yetabyte storage facility coming online though...
Given that you could store everything on the internet in half a yeta they should be able to store everything that occurs online for a good few years to come.

Don't really need to be all that quick on the intelligence if you have it all on file, thanks to CISPA it's all legally admissible now.

Makes you wonder what use it would have been if the act didn't pass, I mean it would still be kinda useful, but having it all legally admissible is the killer app.

Originally posted by unknown known
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

I did not realize police had Mercedes Benz SUV's. I will be writing a letter to my congressman about that one. Can you say a waste of tax payers dollars?

And why is there no mention that the one driving the "Police SUV" was an officer?

Why was the car jack victim not shot? They had just shot two other officers. So they let this one go? Uhhh huh.

The jacking victim has released a statement that he was released because he was NOT an American, but of foreign ethnicity. He was told this by the 2 suspects at the time. So, here we have, an eyewitness, that spent at least 30 minutes with the 2 suspects explaining this "inconsistency". If this is true (and we have no reason to disbelieve him at this point), then the 2 suspects were at war with America.