Beck Breaks Exclusive Information on Saudi National Allegedly Connected to Boston Bombings

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by TauCetixeta

Why don't you ban yourself and stop attacking other ATS members?

More than happy to when those particular members cease attacking an innocent bomb victim.

Innocent Bomb Victim has a suspicious last name Al-Harbi.

He has 5 brothers in Gitmo.

I guess he was just out for a stroll one day when all of sudden 2 terrorist bombs go off

at the Boston Marathon. Then Mrs. Obama stops by the hospital to say " Hi."

Originally posted by esdad71
reply to post by TauCetixeta

 

I was asking Indigo for proof...I know where I (we) stand and what I have seen. I also have the name of the second Saudi national that was held that you are trying to use as 'the other guy".

Problem is, he was interrogated because he looked like bomber #2. The young kid. It had nothing to do with a fly list. So, there are 2 Saudis....I have the proof Beck did not show which is the name of the second one....so, if he was not on the no fly or watch list, and we have one that was...where does that lead us.

Crickets? no, more like loud mouth New Yorkers or Bostonians that when cornered let you know where you stand with them. I have a liar and a name...you got jack.

edit on 26-4-2013 by esdad71 because: (no reason given)

Now you are confusing the missing kid...who left a depressing note...and the body that was found...as being the "other" guy...NO WRONG AGAIN

That kid was pegged as being the potential bomber briefly by the media (actually 4chan first) cuz he looked like the younger brother and was missing.

A different guy altogether from the Saudi that was stopped at port with a student visa that was not valid cuz he wasn't attending school.

Originally posted by TauCetixeta

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by TauCetixeta

Why don't you ban yourself and stop attacking other ATS members?

More than happy to when those particular members cease attacking an innocent bomb victim.

Innocent Bomb Victim has a suspicious last name Al-Harbi.

He has 5 brothers in Gitmo.

I guess he was just out for a stroll one day when all of sudden 2 terrorist bombs go off

at the Boston Marathon. Then Mrs. Obama stops by the hospital to say " Hi."

Wow...has a "suspicious last name"??

No brothers at gitmo...care to back that lie up???

"just out for a stroll one day when all of sudden 2 terrorist bombs go off"...yah...him and over a hundred others...taht is how terrorism works,

"Mrs. Obama stops by the hospital to say " Hi.""....Mrs. Obama visiting hospitalized victims of a terrorist attack in Boston?

can't help you guys...you don't want help...conspiracy is fine, but calling an innocent bomb victim a terrorist cuz he has a funny name...just gross.

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by Indigo5

 

The student they tagged for deportment was tagged for not attending school. That invalidates a student Visa...the student had nothing to do with Boston. "Security Concerns at all related to Boston" seems to be what you missed?

No.
It was the "I don't know where that rumor came from" part of it.

She would have been well aware of where the rumor came from, because it was such a simple answer that they had for it... you know. The rumor came about because of supposed mistaken identities, there was a second unnamed student that caused the confusion..... very simple, but she didn't seem to know what caused the rumor?

That is a strange Premise...You think her job affords time to follow Glen Beck? Why would she be aware of some hopped up crazy theorey of his that wing nut congressman decide to hit her with?

So, you are saying that you have it under control... you get it.... but she, as a Department head.... gets a pass?

She would not understand where the confusion came from? How is that? She went up there with half of the info that she needed? She wasn't briefed to the point that she knew there were two Saudi nationals, and that one was a wounded student that wouldn't be deported and the other was a former student that would be?

Her job ought to allow for her to be briefed about all aspects of the case, before congressional hearings... or maybe even without them.

reply to post by Indigo5


Nope not the Indian kid...nice try...you can't find it can you?

Originally posted by butcherguy

She would not understand where the confusion came from? How is that? She went up there with half of the info that she needed?

All the info she needed, assuming that the congressman were grown-ups and not getting thier info from a wing-nut named Glen Beck.

Originally posted by butcherguy
She wasn't briefed to the point that she knew there were two Saudi nationals, and that one was a wounded student that wouldn't be deported and the other was a former student that would be?

She was briefed on the one related to the bombing...why the hell would she be briefed on some kid that was skipping school and had effed up his Visa...he wasn't a security issue...he was an immigration issue...How many people do you think they deport a year? why would Janet Napolitano be briefed on some student that had dropped out of school?

Originally posted by butcherguy
Her job ought to allow for her to be briefed about all aspects of the case, before congressional hearings... or maybe even without them.

And the kid who was skipping school wasn't ANY "aspect" of the case...he was an "Aspect" of Glen Beck's theorey...but his theorey was that the kid was a terrorist and one in the same as the innocent bombing victim being hammered by beck.

Why the hell would she be briefed on the confused, wrong, ramblings of Glen Beck????

reply to post by Indigo5


The congressmen got the information from FBI and DHS so how did she not know? 25 pages and you still don't know how silly it sounds. can't find that name can you?

Again, Beck is not involved here. You feel ok with the head of DHS going before Congress un briefed?

Then again, Eric Holder never knows either. Transparency and honesty...

Originally posted by esdad71
reply to post by Indigo5

 

The congressmen got the information from FBI and DHS so how did she not know?

25 pages and you still don't know how silly it sounds. can't find that name can you?

No...if the Congressman had the information, he would have asked the embarrassing, confused question that originated with Becks rantings..

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by blamethegreys
reply to post by TauCetixeta

 

Agreed. I battle Indigo and the like here only for the sake of keeping our POV heard in the thread. If we didn't, "they" would swamp the thread completely. It's almost like there's an instruction manual or playbook they are taking cues from...

The allegations as they stand now, will play out and vindicate themselves. If Congress has possession of what Beck says they do, then all the smearing aimed at Beck, and all the unfounded dismissals of the evidence we are reading mean nothing.

Facts vs. POV? Deny Ignorance. You are welcome to an opinion up until the FACTS prove otherwise....then you are either wrong or dishonest.

How about this bet...given your posts above...

If Beck is right...then I will cease posting on ATS forever and ask the mods to delete me account.

And if his BS continues to stink like the bigoted fantasy it is...

YOU can cease posting on ATS forever...?

Here..I'll sign...

Indigo5

How about you?

Anyone else? Or is effen with innocent bomb victims lives just sport to you?

edit on 26-4-2013 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-4-2013 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)

I would seriously consider taking up you bet, putting my 3.5 yr account on the line. In comparing what we would each be wagering, your account is younger, but you have me hands down in thread creation and number of postings. With that comes more stars and flags for you as well. But you are almost exclusively planted in a few political forums, and you began your career here on ATS in the months leading up to the presidential election. Go figure.

I have a good reputation here on ATS for rational discussion and debate in many forum topics, without resorting to name calling and mud slinging. I don't flood threads with endless spamming of the same points over and over. I participate reservedly, but thoughtfully. I have concluded that while it's a close call, it would be a larger bet for me than you.

But lets be completely honest here: We could never hammer out the terms of surrender. I have said from the beginning that this is about administration incompetence or corruption being covered up by DHS et al. That is where the facts lead me to. That has in small measure already been proven by Napolitano's testimony.

Your terms would require Beck to be correct on everything he ever said, including linking Alharbi to the bombing.
My terms would be Beck is wrong on everything he ever said, and I would already have won. Recall Wednesday last week I think, Beck began to question this situation publicly? Napolitano and ICE tried to squash his claims, media denounced him & pushed the DHS story...Remember that? Then he obtained further evidence, pressed the issue and as a result, Napolitano had to answer to Congress again, this time changing her story to match Beck's evidence?

SO no, I don't want to engage in a pointless debate on terms with you. You hoped to trap someone into an all-or-nothing situation, where any failure on Beck's part would be a loss for your opponent. I ain't biting.


PS: In THIS reply you are referencing last week's news to discount this week's allegations. A lot has changed since 3 days after the bombing.

"I am not going to answer that question. It is so full of misstatements and misapprehensions that it's just not worthy of an answer," Napolitano said. He tried again, but she said: "There's been so much reported on this that's been wrong I can't even begin to tell you, congressman. We will provide you with accurate information as it becomes available."

Source: msn.com

How about accurately naming the actual student that broke the rules and is being deported for just that?

He isn't going to be called a terrorist, he is just guilty of staying on a student visa after he dropped out of school.

Originally posted by esdad71
reply to post by Indigo5

 

The congressmen got the information from FBI and DHS so how did she not know?

25 pages and you still don't know how silly it sounds. can't find that name can you?

Again, Beck is not involved here. You feel ok with the head of DHS going before Congress un briefed?

Then again, Eric Holder never knows either. Transparency and honesty...

edit on 26-4-2013 by esdad71 because: (no reason given)

Glenn Beck didn't take this picture of Mrs. Obama saying " Hi. " to Abdul Al-Harbi.

reply to post by Indigo5


He did...and she denied knowing about it.

Originally posted by esdad71
reply to post by Indigo5

 

He did...and she denied knowing about it.

Damage Control kicking in when she arrived in the U.S. Senate.

Originally posted by blamethegreys
, without resorting to name calling and mud slinging.

This entire thread is premised on name calling and mud slinging...the difference being that this victim of the bombing isn't a terrorist and child killer...whilst those claiming he is despite the evidence are exactly what they are.

Just bizzare to see people slandering an innocent victim of the Boston Bombings...calling him a terrorist and child killer because he has a funny name...to take umbrage when someone gives a name to that ugly and very real behavior.

I am whole-heartedly relieved that I am not of the ilk that does such things.

It is fundementally unAmerican...it is immoral...ugly...hateful...bigoted...and none of that is name calling...it is simply accurate.

reply to post by Indigo5


Try harder to reframe the debate. It still isn't working. I think I'm going to try a new tactic with you: Non-rebuttal. I will continue to add to constructive commentary on the evidence and events that surround this story, but I find myself being drawn in by your tactics, and I am choosing to disengage.

The thread will hear from me again when new material is brought to light, I think a few pages ago this got out of hand. I apologize to everyone, because I got sucked into it as well.

reply to post by blamethegreys


Wow - long response...I'll keep it simple on terms...Just wether or not this kid that beck and his minions have been relentlessly attacking had anything what-so-ever to do with the Boston Bombings, aside from being a victim of it.

That's simple isn't it?

Beck is out of this...he gave us the tools and it is up to you to you to give us the names of those involved. There are more than 2 you know so find one. If you can, we can then all determine if someone made a mistake. You are not doing that.


Bottom line is, Glenn Beck is not in charge of our National Security. Janet N. Is. She lied, Beck didn't. He is just giving the American people some food for thought.

But this claim...

This entire thread is premised on name calling and mud slinging...the difference being that this victim of the bombing isn't a terrorist and child killer...whilst though claiming he is despite the evidence are exactly what they are.

This happens before someone calls defeat and then contacts the mods to close because the debate is lost. Predictable.

Now, How do you know this kid is innocent. Do you know him?

Originally posted by TauCetixeta

Innocent Bomb Victim has a suspicious last name Al-Harbi.

He has 5 brothers in Gitmo.

I guess he was just out for a stroll one day when all of sudden 2 terrorist bombs go off

at the Boston Marathon. Then Mrs. Obama stops by the hospital to say " Hi."

Seriously, how are you still selling this stuff? He has no brothers in Guantanamo. He has a last name shared by 4 million other people.

Are you really this credulous? Or are you just trolling?

Originally posted by butcherguy

Her job ought to allow for her to be briefed about all aspects of the case, before congressional hearings... or maybe even without them.

At that point nobody knew the other Saudi (the visa one, not Al Harbi) was part of the case. Indeed he wasn't part of the case. It's completely reasonable that she wouldn't be in possession of those facts.

Originally posted by esdad71
reply to post by Indigo5

 

He did...and she denied knowing about it.

But why would she know about it? Explain in simple terms why you think she would or should have known about an obscure student visa issue.