Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 
 

Explosion at Boston Marathon


Closed Thread
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 21-04-2013, 18:16
slick1two
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,363
I don't know I just searched google and clicked this link. But the Menezes cover up is pretty well documented anyways.
slick1two is offline  
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 21-04-2013, 18:17
thomas pain
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,235
I've already addressed that, that was in the original heated interview in his garden, he doesn't state 2005 in this interview, it was just a mistake.
in the first interview he states 2006 .. then corrects himself and says december 2005.

in the cnn interview he maintains that he hasn't seen them since 2005 but he seems to know a lot about the brothers, even though he hasn't seen them for nearly a decade.

Nothing to with his interpretation of Islam is what he says.
perhaps.
thomas pain is offline  
Old 21-04-2013, 18:19
Kolin Klingon
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 4,198
How silly of the Mayor of Boston to say that they may never be able to question Dzhokhar Tsarnaev as he was shot in the throat.

Never heard of a pen and paper? How much are these officials paid for their stupidity?
Kolin Klingon is offline  
Old 21-04-2013, 18:19
Gilbertoo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 16,950
Haha you know what. Seems you are pretty paranoid. CT all around you everywhere you look?

Theres a CT.....oooh wait, there is one, hmmmmm arrghhh!!! another CT.....wait wait, hope he's not behind me or under my bed!!! STOP!! CT!!!! ARRGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

But you are though. A pretty poor one, too. At least have the courage of your convictions. It's rather ironic that you, a CTist, is calling someone else paranoid....especially since your recent sources has a section on the NWO!
Gilbertoo is offline  
Old 21-04-2013, 18:23
Christa
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Down to earth
Posts: 11,078
But you are though. A pretty poor one, too. At least have the courage of your convictions. It's rather ironic that you, a CTist, is calling someone else paranoid....especially since your recent sources has a big section on the NWO!
I've said this before but it's a conspiracy either way: either 2 brothers conspired to bomb the marathon or someone else did.

Personally I think all the available theories are far-fetched...
Christa is offline  
Old 21-04-2013, 18:23
SOHCAHTOA88
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,169
Who is stopping them? I hardly think people discussing the bombing in a DISCUSSION forum will prevent the authorities from doing their job.

Also how is it conjecture? By givign some context on how authories have known to lie
You objected to people discussing the possible ties to islam (with some relevent evidence) in a discussion forum but are happy to discuss the possibilities of government involvement (with no direct evidence).
SOHCAHTOA88 is offline  
Old 21-04-2013, 18:27
slick1two
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,363
But you are though. A pretty poor one, too. At least have the courage of your convictions. It's rather ironic that you, a CTist, is calling someone else paranoid....especially since your recent sources has a section on the NWO!
It's more a case that someone so paranoid is labeling someone a CT as all the more absurd. You're the one that started the witch hunt.

yes yes, if it makes you happy then, I'm a CT. Happy now? Not sure how you got to that, but I won't hold it against you.
slick1two is offline  
Old 21-04-2013, 18:28
vanzandtfan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 8,367
Can't believe that despite the evidence some people still can't bring themselves to admit then link with jihadism. Real head in the sand stuff.
vanzandtfan is offline  
Old 21-04-2013, 18:28
egghead1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,978
I don't know I just searched google and clicked this link. .
That figures
egghead1 is offline  
Old 21-04-2013, 18:29
slick1two
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,363
You objected to people discussing the possible ties to islam (with some relevent evidence) in a discussion forum but are happy to discuss the possibilities of government involvement (with no direct evidence).
Yes, do you have a problem with that? Did I ever say there was any evidence? that's why it's being discussed. So what's so weird about that? The mother made a claim about a setup, I found that interesting, so I explored it in a discussion forum. What is so strange about that?
slick1two is offline  
Old 21-04-2013, 18:31
slick1two
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,363
But can you find anything in that article to be wrong? When it talks about staff workers contradicting the police? As i said, this stuff was well documented at the time anyways, mainstream media ran the stories. This is nothing new.
slick1two is offline  
Old 21-04-2013, 18:33
skipjack79
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 3,091
You objected to people discussing the possible ties to islam (with some relevent evidence) in a discussion forum but are happy to discuss the possibilities of government involvement (with no direct evidence).
It's ironic isn't it.

Before the suspects had been identified, I suggested that the use of pressure cooker bombs and the nature of the target made it more likely to be the work of Jihadists. I was roundly slapped down and called "prejudiced", and apparently I had an agenda.

Now it's been revealed that it was indeed a terrorist attack, by Muslims, one of which had confirmed links to radical Islamism (to such an extent that Russia had warned the FBI about the older brother, as they suspected he was engaged in terrorist activity).

However, the same people who slapped me down for suggesting it was a terrorist attack, are now still refusing to believe the evidence, and are grasping at straws, claiming it was either an FBI setup, staged, or that they were just "angry", and had no motive whatsoever in their well planned and coordinated attack, despite all the evidence suggesting nothing of the sort. Incredible. Their awe & wonder of Islam is truly effecting their ability to think rationally.
skipjack79 is offline  
Old 21-04-2013, 18:34
Ethel_Fred
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 25,771
Can't believe that despite the evidence some people still can't bring themselves to admit then link with jihadism. Real head in the sand stuff.
Probably because the evidence boils down to someone went places where they would be expected to go. It may come as a surprise to you but because a Muslim kills people it doesn't mean they are doing it because of Jihadism.

There's no evidence that anything they did could not have been done by someone surfing the net
Ethel_Fred is offline  
Old 21-04-2013, 18:39
slick1two
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,363
It's ironic isn't it.

Before the suspects had been identified, I suggested that the use of pressure cooker bombs and the nature of the target made it more likely to be the work of Jihadists. I was roundly slapped down and called "prejudiced", and apparently I had an agenda.

Now it's been revealed that it was indeed a terrorist attack, by Muslims, one of which had confirmed links to radical Islamism (to such an extent that Russia had warned the FBI about the older brother, as they suspected he was engaged in terrorist activity).

However, the same people who slapped me down for suggesting it was a terrorist attack, are now still refusing to believe the evidence, and are grasping at straws, claiming it was either an FBI setup, staged, or that they were just "angry", and had no motive whatsoever in their well planned and coordinated attack, despite all the evidence suggesting nothing of the sort. Incredible. Their awe & wonder of Islam is truly effecting their ability to think rationally.
You all seem so paranoid. No one said the FBI staged it, no one said the suspects are not muslim. But people are questioning the possible motives, and I looked in to that claim about the FBI setup thing. Which I said no actual evidence points to, so what exactly are you on about?
slick1two is offline  
Old 21-04-2013, 18:43
slick1two
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,363
Probably because the evidence boils down to someone went places where they would be expected to go. It may come as a surprise to you but because a Muslim kills people it doesn't mean they are doing it because of Jihadism.

There's no evidence that anything they did could not have been done by someone surfing the net
Exactly. so the next time a muslim commits murder, shall we always put it down to jihadism? There could be a number of reasons they have done it. It is such flawed reasoning and simplistic. Because they are muslim, they have done it in the name of Islam. Whilst it could well turn out to be the motive here, it's not a given from the off, until the actual motive has been found.

Still it doesn't stop some making an instant link to jihadism. People kill for all manner of reasons and it just so happens that these people are from all walks of life and religious persuasions.
slick1two is offline  
Old 21-04-2013, 18:45
SOHCAHTOA88
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,169
Yes, do you have a problem with that? Did I ever say there was any evidence? that's why it's being discussed. So what's so weird about that? The mother made a claim about a setup, I found that interesting, so I explored it in a discussion forum. What is so strange about that?
What is strange is that you objected to people exploring the links to Islam (which were based on some evidence) but are now wishing to explore links to a goverment inside job (based on no direct evidence).
Do you not see the hypocrisy of those double standards?
SOHCAHTOA88 is offline  
Old 21-04-2013, 18:58
skipjack79
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 3,091
Exactly. so the next time a muslim commits murder, shall we always put it down to jihadism?
No. However, when a well planned multiple bombing occurs, committed by a radical Muslim (and his younger brother), who was already known to the authorities as a potential terrorist, and whose YouTube page was full of Jihad related videos, then it's reasonable to make the assumption that the attack was religious in nature.

You and others (including those who slapped me down for suggesting the bombers were Muslim), have now been forced to admit this was a terrorist attack committed by Muslims, but are incredibly still trying to claim it was nothing to do with religion or Jihadism, and they just randomly decided to bomb a charity event because they were perhaps "angry" at something you've not made clear.
skipjack79 is offline  
Old 21-04-2013, 19:01
vanzandtfan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 8,367
Probably because the evidence boils down to someone went places where they would be expected to go. It may come as a surprise to you but because a Muslim kills people it doesn't mean they are doing it because of Jihadism.

There's no evidence that anything they did could not have been done by someone surfing the net
If you think that's all the evidence then you simply haven't been paying attention. The tactic of using synchronised explosions is typical of jihadists. The method, pressure cooker based IEDs, is typical of jihadists. The profile of the elder brother (angry young man alienated fro his adopted culture looking for an identity) is typical of a western jihadist. The extremists videos on his YouTube channel show a clear interest in jihadism. The reportsn from family that he had become more and more serious and extreme about his religion. Hell, he was even reported to the FBI for suspicions that he was connected with jihadist groups. And yet, despite all of this you still can't bring yourself to admit the jihadist link. And why? Because it happened in america, this may surprise you but just because someone lives in america they aren't automatically a murderer
vanzandtfan is offline  
Old 21-04-2013, 19:04
habby
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: East London
Posts: 8,586
Have I been reading the last few pages correctly?

Are people now coming up with conspiracy theories to while away the time?
habby is online now  
Old 21-04-2013, 19:12
slick1two
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,363
What is strange is that you objected to people exploring the links to Islam (which were based on some evidence) but are now wishing to explore links to a goverment inside job (based on no direct evidence).
Do you not see the hypocrisy of those double standards?
I did nothing of the sort. I argued my case, which was that, there is no concrete evidence that these guys are jihadists. Of course they are muslim however.

As for the FBI thing and no direct evidence, i said from the start there is no direct evidence. Just something worth discussing. This is a discussion forum, I was discussing something. That's the way it works isn't it? People can discuss the islam link, I never branded insulted them personally or labeled them anything did I? plenty have done that to others though, for having a differing opinion.
slick1two is offline  
Old 21-04-2013, 19:13
jzee
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 15,666
in the first interview he states 2006 .. then corrects himself and says december 2005.

in the cnn interview he maintains that he hasn't seen them since 2005 but he seems to know a lot about the brothers, even though he hasn't seen them for nearly a decade.
He clarifies it as 2006 in the second interview, so Tamerlan would have been about 19, Djokhar 13, & he seems to have stayed in relatively regular phone contact up to 2009 when he says he broke off contact with the parents as he disapproved of the way they bringing the kids up, I assume he means the arguing/screaming that went on, although he doesn't elaborate on that. He says that he also had a conversation with Tamerlan in 2009, and he stated in response to Ruslan's question about what he was doing for work, Tamerlan responded :

"In god's will, Inshallah"

"I will be doing what he wants"

He recognised this & other parts of the conversation were the same type of language used by people that:

"put entire caucasuses into war", "Chechnya was burning almost for 10 years....just because of people like that"

He persisted in saying Tamerlan needed to study or work, but he responded that the uncle was "confused" and "an infidel".

He says the father lost control over the family some time before 2009. He contacted a mutual friend in the area, who told him Tamerlan had been brainwashed by an Armenian convert to Islam, and had no longer showed respect for his own father. Uncle states those who now preach jihad, such as this convert,

"don't understand what jihad is... I wish these people knew what they were talking about"

"Just go and find the truth, it's a way to morality, a way to be a good person"

questioner "did that suggest radicalization to you at the time?"

Ruslan: "it suggests that is when it started..it started right there in Cambridge in 2009"

"The seed was planted there, he didn't bring it from Dagestan...using Chechnya is irrelevent at all..they have nothing to do with Chechnya..they never lived in Chechnya
"

"Their mother is Dagestani, and they more lean towards mother, which somehow offended us...we were the ones who more more cared about them, supported them
"

interviewer "what kind of influence do you think Tamerlan had on Dzhokhar?"

Ruslan: "big time influence..the influence of looking up for older brother...even in conversation with Tamerlan he tried to be so persuasive with me..he knows me...he knows how harsh I am..how strict I am...and this kid who was just looking up at me...I was his hero...he was one of my favourite...I had all hopes in him...I just wanted him to be older brother to my children..."

"so all of a sudden he started lecturing me..when I was even asking Tamerlan, wait, be reasonable...but he said...

"the life is wrong" this is wrong"


interviewer "do you have any knowledge that Tamerlan was espousing his views towards Dzhokhar?"

Ruslan: "Indeed, yes, I assumed that..because mother also at the same time, the mother change her attire, only attire, not her behaviour, she just ...hijab on herself...she had not done it before....some time in 2008...I was shocked to see that..as I knew nothing had changed in her morals..she hasn't become a better person...

"Dzhokhar was just a kid..I hoped since he was in school, he would not be exposed to that..nonsense...I thought it was not serious..they jumped from one to the other..what is the fashion today"

"Dzhokhar has been used by his older brother. He used him as...it's not even as an accomplice..as some kind of instrument"

"I say even if I were among the spectators, he would not stop going there. So the person that brought so much suffering, 200 people, 4 dead, Martin, Krystle, Lingzi Lu, student, young officer who just started his career..all grief he brought"


"he used his younger brother, he wasted his life...he messed up his own..that's why he decided to take lives of innocent people, hurt innocent people.. I believe he is full of evil, he turned to be evil, confused, entirely confused...but there is no any..there were no political views, based on what I know about him"

interviewer: "what would be your message to Dzhokhar now?"

Ruslan: "I would say Dzhokhar, say everything, everything you know, even say what you feel, be honest, lay it out, lay it out all. In time, he will realize what he has done...He has no clue what he was doing"

"we have losses in our family ...but ...I am just questioning myself whether I personally have right to mourn them at this moment"

he ends the interview in tears

http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video...uncle-long.cnn
jzee is offline  
Old 21-04-2013, 19:15
slick1two
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,363
No. However, when a well planned multiple bombing occurs, committed by a radical Muslim (and his younger brother), who was already known to the authorities as a potential terrorist, and whose YouTube page was full of Jihad related videos, then it's reasonable to make the assumption that the attack was religious in nature.

You and others (including those who slapped me down for suggesting the bombers were Muslim), have now been forced to admit this was a terrorist attack committed by Muslims, but are incredibly still trying to claim it was nothing to do with religion or Jihadism, and they just randomly decided to bomb a charity event because they were perhaps "angry" at something you've not made clear.
And this could still be the case. Do you know anything about how they were emotionally? No you do not. They may well have lost hope, as it's been said the older brother grew disillusioned so what makes these guys any different to some of the other young Americans who have committed mass murder?
slick1two is offline  
Old 21-04-2013, 19:18
Generalissimo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,471
Ding ding! 3 points

Because people never work on their own do they? Tim McVeigh anyone? Unabomber? Evidence?

Maybe the after events hadnt transpired,a report from someone in Boston police today via AP suggests they were planning a second attack when the shootout occurred


Not everyone is a suicide bomber. Did you expect them to wear burkhas,scarves over their faces,clown masks? That would look perfectly normal of course.
Showing your ignorance there. Timothy McVeigh didn't 'work alone' One of his accomplices was convicted, and there is plenty of evidence to suggest that there were others.
Generalissimo is online now  
Old 21-04-2013, 19:19
phylo_roadking
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: in yo' mamma
Posts: 16,708
If he'd had military grade explosives then a lot more people would be dead.
Nope. You use a small amount of military grade - Semtex, C4 etc. - as the best "primer charge" for enriched fertiliser

In other words - a given amount of military-grade explosive could be used in one BIG as in powerful bomb...or used to make a lot of less powerful but more reliable than "normal" enriched fertiliser-based bombs
phylo_roadking is offline  
Old 21-04-2013, 19:20
skipjack79
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 3,091
People can discuss the islam link, I never branded insulted them personally or labeled them anything did I? plenty have done that to others though, for having a differing opinion.
You labeled me prejudiced and said I had an agenda.
skipjack79 is offline  
 
Closed Thread



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 00:15.