Boston Bombing

Jonny7

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Here is a reason why
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-19/fbi-budget-cuts-risk-u-s-anti-terror-operations-mueller-says.html

FBI Budget Cuts Risk U.S. Anti-Terror Operations, Mueller Says


By Phil Mattingly - Mar 19, 2013 9:18 PM GMT+0100

Interesting hypothetical theory, not entirely impossible.

This conspiracy would obviously have to involve the FBI only (as the government are pushing for the cuts)

Is this the same government that conducted 911 as an inside job? one that promotes fear across the country?

Why would they be making such significant cuts to the FBI then? why were they about to shut down the CST team?

Hoop66

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Here is a reason why
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-19/fbi-budget-cuts-risk-u-s-anti-terror-operations-mueller-says.html

FBI Budget Cuts Risk U.S. Anti-Terror Operations, Mueller Says


By Phil Mattingly - Mar 19, 2013 9:18 PM GMT+0100

So the FBI are staging terror attacks against the US population in order to stop the US government cutting their budget?

I can see how the idea can come about, but you need to believe that the entire organisation is corrupt, from the lowliest, newly-qualified agent to the director.

Or do they have specialist groupings within the organisation that are there specifically to stage false-flag operations and the like?

How do they recruit "ordinary" FBI agents into these specialist groups?

"Well, Chuck, we've been watching your career with interest. You've really been a help to the organisation, the way you stopped that terrorist attack with your high quality investigation and personally put yourself on the line, we really appreciate that. So...how would you like to take the step up to murdering your fellow-countrymen".-

Torakx

Why would for example the head of a department inform everyone else on what he is organising?
Is it possible for them to form a task squad?
Or is it possible for them to recruit from groups in the middle east?
Maybe even the Elite Israeli special forces?

Excedion

Jonny7 wrote: »

So the FBI used these two men to conduct the Boston marathon bombings?

How and why?

Didn't say it was the FBI, at the end of the day there are thousands of people with the means to carry it out. Plenty of those have the motive as well. The American government has already lost most of its popularity world wide, the country is split down the middle towards the president and theres nothing like a good old common enemy to stir up the people.

I mean it wouldn't take much to link these patsies back to whoever they want by "tracing payments" to the two suspects. As everyone knows it doesnt take much more than speculation to convince the american media.

I'm not saying that it was a conspiracy, but the lack of a credible reason for the attack and the fact the two had nothing to gain certainly does bring up an air of suspicion.

Brown Bomber

Jonny7 wrote: »

Interesting hypothetical theory, not entirely impossible.

This conspiracy would obviously have to involve the FBI only (as the government are pushing for the cuts)

Is this the same government that conducted 911 as an inside job? one that promotes fear across the country?

Why would they be making such significant cuts to the FBI then? why were they about to shut down the CST team?

I was just responding to half of your questions. Namely why would the FBI carry out the attack.

Coincidenbce or not there seems to be a pattern developing between terrorist attacks following announcements of reductions in funding in recent times. The Times Square incident, the Eilat bus attacks and now this.

Jonny7

Excedion wrote: »

I mean it wouldn't take much to link these patsies back to whoever they want by "tracing payments" to the two suspects.

The recession might be bad, but I'm pretty sure all the pay in the world wouldn't entice anyone to kill and maim people at the Boston marathon in broad daylight under full view of CCTV and then go try and tackle the Boston PD..

What were they gonna do, spend it in the afterlife?

Excedion

Jonny7 wrote: »

The recession might be bad, but I'm pretty sure all the pay in the world wouldn't entice anyone to kill and maim people at the Boston marathon in broad daylight under full view of CCTV and then go try and tackle the Boston PD..

What were they gonna do, spend it in the afterlife?

People have killed for money before, on numerous occasions. And they have killed for a lot less as well. Operating under the assumption that they did actually do it there are many conceivable methods to get someone to do what you want. Paying them is one option, maybe they need money for a relatives medical bills or something similar. Blackmail is another very potent way to get people to do what you want, a task well within the capabilites of a great many people in the US, government agents, police, PMCs, Private investigators, any number of them could dig up enough dirt on someone or send death threats etc.

Even aside from this they couldve been told the CCTV would be taken care of and an escape route was in place by whoever hired them, then when the **** went down they realised they were alone and got desperate.

Really there are so very many more likely situations that point to a third party that are so much more conceivable than two random teenages blew up a ****load of people for no reason whatsoever.

Killinator

Excedion wrote: »

Really there are so very many more likely situations that point to a third party that are so much more conceivable than two random teenages blew up a ****load of people for no reason whatsoever.

There may be many more possible scenarios but to suggest there way more likely then the current story is ridiculous,
The two lads from Columbine did much more damage and they did it without help from pmc's, FBI, cia or any number of bogey men organisation.
People keep calling them 'pasties' without any SOLID PROOF that they are.
So far it seems people who believe the current version of events( which have yet to be ulot detailed) need to provide second by second evidence suchvand such happened but for a conspiracy theory all one needs is wild speculation that needs no backing,
I just don't get it!

Brown Bomber

Hoop66 wrote: »

So the FBI are staging terror attacks against the US population in order to stop the US government cutting their budget?

I didn't say that. I said it was A reason not THE reason.

Hoop66 wrote: »

can see how the idea can come about, but you need to believe that the entire organisation is corrupt, from the lowliest, newly-qualified agent to the director.

Or do they have specialist groupings within the organisation that are there specifically to stage false-flag operations and the like?

How do they recruit "ordinary" FBI agents into these specialist groups?

With respect I think it's clear you don't understand how the intelligence services operate. It's dirty and corrupt and involves partnerships with the worst kinds of criminals and terrorists imaginable such as violent child rapists, sadistic murderers and people like bin Laden and his network

. It is also highly compartmentalised and everything operates on a "need to know" basis.

An excellent crash course is this round table with former agents from the CIA, DEA and FBI with over 100 years of experience behind them. It's from the 90's and they actually predict the 9/11 attacks.

http://www.expertwitnessradio.org/site/100-years-episode/

Hoop66 wrote: »

"Well, Chuck, we've been watching your career with interest. You've really been a help to the organisation, the way you stopped that terrorist attack with your high quality investigation and personally put yourself on the line, we really appreciate that. So...how would you like to take the step up to murdering your fellow-countrymen".-

Yes it's Machiavelian and treasonous but false-flag attacks have happened througout history to manipulate public opinion into supporting an otherwise unpopular program.

Here is another conversation which is just a single preposterous episode in the whole preposterous narrative,

Brother 1: You tell him!
Brother 2: No you tell him!
Hostage: Tell me what?
Brother 1: Y'know those guys on TV with the caps on TV that the FBI are saying planted ....wait a minute.... can you keep a secret?
Hostage: ... yeah
Brother 1: OK. Well that's us!!! We only gone and done a bombing!
Hostage: I see. Well I guess you are going to kill me then too considering I am now a witness?
Brother 2: How dare you! We would never take anyone's life.
Hostage: huh? Didn't you just tell me....Well are you at least going to knock me out tie me up gag me and stick me in the boot?
Brother 2: Nah, we are intentionally being careless for reasons that we haven't quite worked out yet.
Brother 1: We are at the 7-11 now...
Brother 2: We are just going in to get some P.ringles. Only one of us needs to go in but both of us are going to go in because it will be much easier for people to recognise us if we are seen together.
Brother 1: Now then, do you promise not to run away if you leave you here by yourself?
Hostage: Yeah, sure, I promise.
Brother 2: I am not sure about this. Shouldn't one of us stay with him to be on the safe side?
Brother 1: I'll make him pinky swear
Brother 2: Works for me. What could possibly go wrong? Let's eat. See ya hostage pal
Brother 1: Byeeee buddy

Killinator

Brown Bomber wrote: »

.

Here is another conversation which is just a single preposterous episode in the whole preposterous narrative,

Never heard thst one,
You asked me before to provide a link about the hostage being released and I obliged so it's time to return the favour and give me a link that proves the above

Brown Bomber

Killinator wrote: »

Never heard thst one,
You asked me before to provide a link about the hostage being released and I obliged so it's time to return the favour and give me a link that proves the above

Link?

It's a caricature of the absolutely ridiculous official story that we are supposed to believe.

Answer me this:

Assuming that there ever was a 3rd person in the car

1 - Both brothers left a "hostage" alone in the car while they went shopping.
2 - Both brothers left an associate/confidant who they trusted in the car alone while they went shopping

Killinator

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Link?

It's a caricature of the absolutely ridiculous official story that we are supposed to believe.

Answer me this:

You didnt ask a question for me to answer, you just made two statements

Brown Bomber

Killinator wrote: »

You didnt ask a question for me to answer, you just made two statements

Sorry, I cut it out by accident. Of itself which of those two statements is more likely to be the case in your opinion?

Killinator

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Sorry, I cut it out by accident. Of itself which of those two statements is more likely to be the case in your opinion?

There both as likely as the other but neither are necessarily what happened,
The jist I've gotten is he escaped when they stopped to get petrol.

How you say something completely alters the scenario if you get my meaning

Jonny7

Excedion wrote: »

Really there are so very many more likely situations that point to a third party that are so much more conceivable than two random teenages blew up a ****load of people for no reason whatsoever.

Who is suggesting that but you?

The truth is we don't exactly know why these two brothers did what they did. Precisely what their motives were.

Thankfully, in a grim way, one of them survived. He managed to say "no" in court yesterday and has been apparently communicating non-verbally. The interrogation should bring us this information, but from we know already, a general picture is already forming.

Dozens of bombs go off every other month in Iraq and never in here have I see them getting this treatment - yet America, the evil empire, so "loathed" suffers an attack.. and suddenly it's impossible.. it must be a false flag, or any number of imagined scenarios.

Again, appears to be a case of grasping for the conspiracy, any conspiracy rather than objectively trying to reach the less interesting or appealing truth

Jonny7

Brown Bomber wrote: »

1 - Both brothers left a "hostage" alone in the car while they went shopping.

They needed a hostage for what exactly?

Subsequently going to MIT in the middle of the night with an arsenal of guns and explosives doesn't come across as much of an escape plan. Sounds like making a break for Mexico was a very distant second priority at that stage.

2 - Both brothers left an associate/confidant who they trusted in the car alone while they went shopping

It's almost as if they weren't planning on living long isn't it. A bit like the Columbine shooters worrying about "leaving witnesses" and "not taking hostages" when they went to their inevitable deaths.

arius

Saw a fairly good video about these bombings today.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wpu6_kArb9U

The man arrested in the video does indeed look like one of the brothers.
Another peculiar part of this story is the presence of security contractors at the scene of the blasts...

Anynama141

Brown Bomber wrote: »

With respect I think it's clear you don't understand how the intelligence services operate. It's dirty and corrupt and involves partnerships with the worst kinds of criminals and terrorists imaginable such as violent child rapists, sadistic murderers and people like bin Laden and his network

Perhaps you have worked in intelligence BB, having these insights?

Anynama141

arius wrote: »

Another peculiar part of this story is the presence of security contractors at the scene of the blasts...

Peculiar in that somebody claimed that some guys were security contractors and everybody believed them for some reason, even though the claim was baloney?

Jonny7

arius wrote: »

Saw a fairly good video about these bombings today.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wpu6_kArb9U

The man arrested in the video does indeed look like one of the brothers.
Another peculiar part of this story is the presence of security contractors at the scene of the blasts...

There is a photo of someone walking on the roof of a building behind the explosion, could be anyone, out having a smoke, whatever - yet the narrator tries to quickly draw a tenuous link between that individual and debunked 4chan photos of CST team members (WMD task group who were there on the day obviously as part of security) We are then shown more photos with the narrators own embellishment and suggestion at the photos.

The narrator shows a clip in which we hear an infowars member asking a tinfoil hat question at the press conference about bomb drills (they weren't drills at all, they were post-explosion bomb checks)

By this stage of the video the narrator proclaims

"Just what we showed here clearly indicates that the Tsarneav brothers weren't acting alone if they were indeed involved in the bombing"

It just gets ridiculous after that.

lanyard

It's amazing how many people lap up every word Alex Jones says. His thoeries on the Boston Bombing don't make any sense. He backups his wild claims by going through articles from the main stream media at a 100mph, picking up headlines without telling the viewer the substance behind the articles. He distorts facts and misleads people.

MDPolak

Ok guys, look at this web site:

http://enfordummies.com/wordpress/more-proof-evidence-boston-bombing-man-leg-blown-off-fake/

There's a story about an amputee actor taking part in Boston bombing. Some really stupid people claim that this poor fella who had his two legs blown off during explosion is one of them. These silly people show that video as evidence, proof that amputee actors really exists and are use during military drills. I'm sure it's all fake:

Oh my, I can't stop laughing, who comes with such a stupid ideas!?

darced

This post has been deleted.

SniperSight

The one about the "fake amputees" is not only wildly stupid, but quiet insulting.

Would people not have noticed the the guy with no legs bleeding profusely in the crowd, or did they do the make up and drain the blood from his face in the seconds after the explosion?

Jonny7

SniperSight wrote: »

The one about the "fake amputees" is not only wildly stupid, but quiet insulting.

Would people not have noticed the the guy with no legs bleeding profusely in the crowd, or did they do the make up and drain the blood from his face in the seconds after the explosion?

They are shills paid by the government to go online, produce over-the-top videos and claims to make genuine open-minded conspiracy theorists look .. well, crazy

Anynama141

Jonny7 wrote: »

They are shills paid by the government to go online, produce over-the-top videos and claims to make genuine open-minded conspiracy theorists look .. well, crazy

I don't really think you need another CT to explain the existence of ridiculous CTs. Some people just aren't very good at weighing evidence, and some people are predisposed to see false positives everywhere.

Brown Bomber

Jonny7 wrote: »

There is a photo of someone walking on the roof of a building behind the explosion, could be anyone, out having a smoke, whatever - yet the narrator tries to quickly draw a tenuous link between that individual and debunked 4chan photos of CST team members

We are shown a small clip of two gentlemen walking down the street, could be going to watch the marathon on a state holiday, whatever - yet the FBI tries to quickly draw the tenous link between these individuals and the bombings.

Killinator

Brown Bomber wrote: »

We are shown a small clip of two gentlemen walking down the street, could be going to watch the marathon on a state holiday, whatever - yet the FBI tries to quickly draw the tenous link between these individuals and the bombings.

I don't want you to think I'm only responding because it's you, I apologise if it seems that way, but
We were shown a clip with these guys walking buy, the FBI have more footage than that, thats why they fingered these guys.

Brown Bomber

Jonny7 wrote: »

The narrator shows a clip in which we hear an infowars member asking a tinfoil hat question at the press conference about bomb drills (they weren't drills at all, they were post-explosion bomb checks)

How do you explain this then?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HWRQ8YnrWg

Brown Bomber

Killinator wrote: »

I don't want you to think I'm only responding because it's you, I apologise if it seems that way, but
We were shown a clip with these guys walking buy, the FBI have more footage than that, thats why they fingered these guys.

Haha, no worries. The only footage that has been released at the marathon by the FBI as far as I am aware is the cctv and a few stills of them in the crowd with one with the shorter guy moving away after the blasts like everyone else where it is unclear if he still has his backpack on. Nothing that indicates their guilt.