Explosion at Boston Marathon

1209210212214215220

Comments

  • Ethel_FredEthel_Fred Posts: 34,127
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    You're working backwards from what's in a typical pipebomb ;) I seem however to remember announcements that Tamerlan was found with military grade-explosives (or traces of it) about his person...
    If he'd had military grade explosives then a lot more people would be dead.
  • slick1twoslick1two Posts: 2,877
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    A bit more on the De Menezes incident. This makes for interesting reading, what our very own Police, media and Government got up to.

    http://www.rinf.com/news/aug-05/67.html

    Chris Talbot
    03/19/2012 11:57:42

    More evidence has emerged relating to the July 22 police killing of the young Brazilian Jean Charles de Menezes in London, providing further proof that the police systematically lied about the subway shooting and have been conducting a cover-up, with the aid of the Labour government of Prime Minister Tony Blair and a largely compliant media.

    Claims that there were no closed-circuit television tapes of the underground tube station where de Menezes was shot dead by eight bullets fired at close range have been refuted by the staff working at the station. According to Monday's London Evening Standard , the staff were “amazed and furious” when told by police that tapes from the cameras were blank.

    An official with the rail workers' union said that at least three of the four cameras were working. “It is most unusual to say the least,” he said of the police claims. Normal procedure is that tapes are replaced every 24 hours and kept for 28 days, and it is inconceivable that station staff would not keep to this procedure shortly after the July 7 bombings of the capital's transport network that killed 56 people and a failed attempt to detonate devices on July 21.

    Police have claimed that the stories that were circulated in the aftermath of the event— and used to excuse the killing—did not come from them, although they did nothing to contradict them. Until exposed as lies by ITV News, the public had been told that de Menezes had vaulted the ticket barrier at the station, had run away from the police and was wearing a heavy coat or jacket that could be concealing bombs. Witnesses were widely quoted in the press backing up this story, describing de Menezes as an Asian and even with electric wires poking out of his clothes. In fact, none of this was true. De Menezes wore a light jacket, used his pass for the ticket barrier, and moved leisurely into the station.

    But ITV News has now pointed out in a follow-up report that the pathologist's report on de Menezes's death, five days after the shooting, referred to him having “vaulted over the ticket barriers” and run down the stairs of the tube station. Harriet Wistrich, the de Menezes family lawyer, has alleged that this false information in an official document could only have come from the police.

    After ITV news revealed leaked evidence from the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) showing the extent of the lies and cover-up, de Menezes's family and their lawyers demanded the resignation of Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair. Much of the media speculated that the revelations could lead to his resignation.

    Not only had the lies been allowed to circulate in the media, but it also emerged that Commissioner Blair had attempted to delay the IPCC investigation, so that it only began taking evidence several days after the killing. Even more damning was the revelation that the Metropolitan Police, in a visit by Deputy Assistant Commissioner John Yates to Brazil, had offered the de Menezes family a £15,000 “ex gratia” payment.

    According to the Mail on Sunday , the family had been pressured into meeting Yates without a lawyer present. De Menezes's brother, Giovani, said, “They thought we were poor people, stupid people. We may be poor but we are not that stupid. We will not exchange money for my brother's life—but we will punish them.”

    Of course mainstream media barely covered these proceedings, but see how the "official" story did not match that of station staff etc. So whether or not the FBI were involved in the Boston Bombing, remains to be seen, but just to give context to how "Higher Authority" can manipulate an event/incident to their advantage. Food for thought.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 25,366
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I asked already, but why do people treat terrorist acts differently to other crimes like murder? I mean, why demand CCTV footage, etc.? What, does the basic principals of a fair trial all of a sudden go out the window? It seems completely bonkers to me!
  • Ethel_FredEthel_Fred Posts: 34,127
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    skipjack79 wrote: »
    Ethel_Fred even more bizarrely seems to be suggesting they were trying to "sort their problems" out in a "typically American" fashion. I'm unaware of what problems are resolved by murdering and maiming innocent people.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers:_Americas
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers#School_massacres
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_familicides_in_the_United_States
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers#Workplace_killings

    If you had bothered to read what I had written properly you would have realised I was referring to their perception of what they were doing - thus "problems" in quotes.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 25,366
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    slick1two wrote: »
    A bit more on the De Menezes incident. This makes for interesting reading, what our very own Police, media and Government got up to.



    Of course mainstream media barely covered these proceedings, but see how the "official" story did not match that of station staff etc. So whether or not the FBI were involved in the Boston Bombing, remains to be seen, but just to give context to how "Higher Authority" can manipulate an event/incident to their advantage. Food for thought.

    Food for thought? Interesting read? Not really, it's got bugger all to do with the incidents in Boston.

    I just wish you'd admit to being a CTist.
  • jzeejzee Posts: 25,498
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I think there is a lot more to this story than meets the eye, and there was a wider terror cell at work, these two just strike me as classic fall guys. If we are to believe that they made the bombs themselves, then planned and carried out the attacks alone, then why didn't they have a plan for after the event? They clearly didn't intend to kill themselves, but nor did they try to disguise their identities for the CCTV cameras, or try to leave Boston (or indeed the country) despite having three days to do so.
    You don't know they didn't intend to kill themselves eventually i.e. they may have figured that they plant the bombs, then get away to kill as many police officers or other civilians as they could later. I've heard people being surprised that they didn't get away, that DT went to a party etc., if they had left, they would have instantly shown themselves as suspect. They probably didn't realise how quickly they might be identified from CCTV or photos.
  • Ethel_FredEthel_Fred Posts: 34,127
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    slick1two wrote: »
    A bit more on the De Menezes incident. This makes for interesting reading, what our very own Police, media and Government got up to.



    Of course mainstream media barely covered these proceedings, but see how the "official" story did not match that of station staff etc. So whether or not the FBI were involved in the Boston Bombing, remains to be seen, but just to give context to how "Higher Authority" can manipulate an event/incident to their advantage. Food for thought.
    What was really appalling was that it should have been obvious to the police officers there that he wasn't either acting suspiciously or that he had a bomb, preferring to believe what a panicked HQ was telling them
  • bollywoodbollywood Posts: 67,769
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    slick1two wrote: »
    A bit more on the De Menezes incident. This makes for interesting reading, what our very own Police, media and Government got up to.



    Of course mainstream media barely covered these proceedings, but see how the "official" story did not match that of station staff etc. So whether or not the FBI were involved in the Boston Bombing, remains to be seen, but just to give context to how "Higher Authority" can manipulate an event/incident to their advantage. Food for thought.

    Do you think the FBI also killed the MIT policeman? Or was that just an actor?
  • slick1twoslick1two Posts: 2,877
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Gilbertoo wrote: »
    Food for thought? Not really, it's got bugger all to do with the incidents in Boston.

    I just wish you'd admit to being a CTist.

    It's got bugger all to do with the fact that authorities lie? which is what my point was. Not quite sure how you saw me saying the London incident was related to the Boston bombing, but there you go. :rolleyes:
  • TakaeTakae Posts: 13,555
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Gilbertoo wrote: »
    I asked already, but why do people treat terrorist acts differently to other crimes like murder? I mean, why demand CCTV footage, etc.? What, does the basic principals of a fair trial all of a sudden go out the window? It seems completely bonkers to me!

    I was thinking that earlier. Really odd.
  • dekafdekaf Posts: 8,398
    Forum Member
    IIRC one of the U.S. news channels has - he was shot in the neck...

    I heard that he tried to kill himself. Put a gun in his mouth and fired.
  • skipjack79skipjack79 Posts: 3,250
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Ethel_Fred wrote: »

    So we have two brothers with Jihadist sympathies, one of which has links to radical Islamist groups in the Caucasus, and authorities believe they have links to a 12-man sleeper cell. They successfully execute a well planned terrorist attack with anti-personnel IEDs. But you don't think that has anything to do with anything, and they were just trying to simultaneously sort their problems out?
  • slick1twoslick1two Posts: 2,877
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    bollywood wrote: »
    Do you think the FBI also killed the MIT policeman? Or was that just an actor?

    Did I say the FBI killed anyone, or did I say that people in Authority do lie. Actually go and read my posts what i said about this. I said that there is nothing to prove that the FBI set this up, from what we know now. But At the same time, an official story is not always the truth. From what we know, even in recent times, how governments and police etc lie, it's not totally out of the realms of possibility if there was foul play. If you can't interpret that correctly, that's your problem. But I never said the FBI actually set this up.
  • Ethel_FredEthel_Fred Posts: 34,127
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    jzee wrote: »
    You don't know they didn't intend to kill themselves eventually i.e. they may have figured that they plant the bombs, then get away to kill as many police officers or other civilians as they could later. I've heard people being surprised that they didn't get away, that DT went to a party etc., if they had left, they would have instantly shown themselves as suspect. They probably didn't realise how quickly they might be identified from CCTV or photos.
    No-one suspected them at all, so why didn't they just leave for Chechnya? If they wanted to kill more why didn't they just plant more bombs - which from reports they clearly had.

    What is certain is that the evidence is incomplete and at times contradictory. If an amateur had committed mass murder would they be able to act normal?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 25,366
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    slick1two wrote: »
    It's got bugger all to do with the fact that authorities lie? which is what my point was. Not quite sure how you saw me saying the London incident was related to the Boston bombing, but there you go. :rolleyes:

    Then you're being completely off topic and should consider saving your CT ramblings for a different thread.
  • bollywoodbollywood Posts: 67,769
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    slick1two wrote: »
    It's got bugger all to do with the fact that authorities lie? which is what my point was. Not quite sure how you saw me saying the London incident was related to the Boston bombing, but there you go. :rolleyes:

    You inserted it into a thread on the Boston bombing as food for thought. That is how some got that impression.
  • egghead1egghead1 Posts: 4,782
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Gilbertoo wrote: »
    Can't you just copy and paste the info?

    Basicaly its this article http://www.hstoday.us/briefings/correspondents-watch/single-article/guards-wmd-civil-support-teams-can-respond-faster-than-other-federal-assets/af2160975c8dc3d4ab7f17f0942bdcdc.html
    In the above article, note how many public events these guys are on standby at, it's in the 100s every year, it is perfectly reasonable the Boston Marathon is one of them.

    Also, note the mention of the ADVON Suburban, which perfectly matches the description and operation of the Suburban with communications gear that showed up at the finish line just after the explosions, which these guys then congregated around. The picture of the one gentleman with the radiation detector, and of others ripping the skirting off the bleachers so they could see if anything was hidden underneath them, would be exactly the behavior I would expect from members of such a unit. They also interacted with what is assumed to be the FBI bomb squad once they showed up on scene.

    Oh, and the baseball cap with the Punisher logo that one of them is wearing is available for purchase by anyone online. No one else is wearing anything with that logo (the logo on the one mans chest is not a Craft logo, no Craft logo has white writing like that underneath). It is not a part of the teams 'covert' gear, it is just a baseball cap this guy wore to work, and I guess he thinks it looks badass.
  • Ethel_FredEthel_Fred Posts: 34,127
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    skipjack79 wrote: »
    So we have two brothers with Jihadist sympathies, one of which has links to radical Islamist groups in the Caucasus, and authorities believe they have links to a 12-man sleeper cell. They successfully execute a well planned terrorist attack with anti-personnel IEDs. But you don't think that has anything to do with anything, and they were just trying to sort their problems out?
    Currently the evidence that either of them had jihadist links is inconclusive - and there's also some evidence to contradict that. It could be they went to Jihadist websites to get the information they needed to make the bombs as Jihadists are the experts on IEDs

    No-one has claimed they were part of a a 12 man sleeper cell apart from one report in the Sunday Mirror. Other reports have said they acted alone.

    Plenty of Americans have successfully used IEDs.

    So until they come up with consistence evidence I'll assume they were acting what is unfortunately oh too typical.
  • jzeejzee Posts: 25,498
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Ethel_Fred wrote: »
    No-one suspected them at all, so why didn't they just leave for Chechnya?
    The public didn't, we don't know when the FBI first saw the footage from the department store. I've no doubt they thought they'd get caught eventually.
    Ethel_Fred wrote: »
    If they wanted to kill more why didn't they just plant more bombs - which from reports they clearly had.
    I imagine you can only fit one bomb in a backpack, it would've been much more risky to plant things before the race started as they would likely be spotted & the bombs disarmed. I think the elder brother was specifically filled with hatred to the US, no doubt for completely pathetic irrational reasons to do with his own failure, and possibly even more sickly, because he was jealous of his own younger brother's success & likely high achievement as things were going. If he or both had left for Dagestan (they have never been to Chechnya BTW), he would not have further opportunity to kill Americans.
    jzee wrote: »
    I think what we know about him paints its own picture, take a look at this new 26 minute interview with his uncle Ruslan Tsarni , Tsarni states he found out from a mutual acquiantance that Tamerlan had come under the influence of an Armenian convert imam, who he states brainwashed him. We also know now that the mother appears to have abruptly turned more religious at some point, apparently changing from dressing in fashionable clothes (she was previously a beautician) to wearing traditional Islamic dress as her son did for a month or so. The uncle is saying he believes the brothers weren't being brought up properly, but he's not too clear whether it's his brother or wife he is criticising more, or the fact they were constantly arguing (they eventually divorced). Tamerlan apparently called his uncle an infidel.
    Sorry to bump my own post, but people should really watch this interview with the uncle, it paints a much more clear picture of the family's situation. He is absolutely clear on the belief that the younger brother was used as a tool, and that the elder brother would have bombed the marathon, even if the uncle himself was there.
  • egghead1egghead1 Posts: 4,782
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I think there is a lot more to this story than meets the eye,
    Ding ding! 3 points
    and there was a wider terror cell at work, these two just strike me as classic fall guys.
    Because people never work on their own do they? Tim McVeigh anyone? Unabomber? Evidence?
    If we are to believe that they made the bombs themselves, then planned and carried out the attacks alone, then why didn't they have a plan for after the event?
    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
    .They clearly didn't intend to kill themselves, but nor did they try to disguise their identities for the CCTV cameras, or try to leave Boston (or indeed the country) despite having three days to do so.

    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.:rolleyes:
  • slick1twoslick1two Posts: 2,877
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Gilbertoo wrote: »
    Then you're being completely off topic and should consider saving your CT rumblings for a different thread.

    Haha That's all you have to say? When you run out of arguments, run straight for the CT Safety net. What you fail to realize is that I never passed off any theories as fact and said I believe them. I actually said and have maintained based on what it is we know, the brothers pulled off a bomb attack in Boston. There are also things we don't know like a motive. There are also a statement from the mother saying the FBI were involved with her son, for the past 3 to 5 years. Whilst it may just be a defense mechanism from her, as a mother defending her son, there could be some basis to this. Other media outlets have reported what the mother has said also.

    So why is it off topic to discuss this? Since these are reports that have come out, then there is nothing wrong in looking at the context of how the FBI operate and the terrorism plots they have set up over the years, and then nabbing the suspects they have set up.

    Now there may be no basis to the mother's claims, but it's something which has come out in public an so therefore, it's grounds for debate.

    if you cannot handle it, don't bother. using the old CT card appears to be proof of this.
  • egghead1egghead1 Posts: 4,782
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Heres AP link regarding possible further attack planned before capture
    http://bigstory.ap.org/article/police-commissioner-no-suspect-interview-yet
  • lemoncurdlemoncurd Posts: 57,778
    Forum Member
    I think there is a lot more to this story than meets the eye, and there was a wider terror cell at work, these two just strike me as classic fall guys. If we are to believe that they made the bombs themselves, then planned and carried out the attacks alone, then why didn't they have a plan for after the event? They clearly didn't intend to kill themselves, but nor did they try to disguise their identities for the CCTV cameras, or try to leave Boston (or indeed the country) despite having three days to do so.

    But again, if it was a wider terror cell, why no claim? :confused:
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 25,366
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    slick1two wrote: »
    Haha That's all you have to say? When you run out of arguments, run straight for the CT Safety net. What you fail to realize is that I never passed off any theories as fact and said I believe them. I actually said and have maintained based on what it is we know, the brothers pulled off a bomb attack in Boston. There are also things we don't know like a motive. There are also a statement from the mother saying the FBI were involved with her son, for the past 3 to 5 years. Whilst it may just be a defense mechanism from her, as a mother defending her son, there could be some basis to this. Other media outlets have reported what the mother has said also.

    So why is it off topic to discuss this? Since these are reports that have come out, then there is nothing wrong in looking at the context of how the FBI operate and the terrorism plots they have set up over the years, and then nabbing the suspects they have set up.

    Now there may be no basis to the mother's claims, but it's something which has come out in public an so therefore, it's grounds for debate.

    if you cannot handle it, don't bother. using the old CT card appears to be proof of this.

    The long post was off-topic and a straw-man argument, too.

    CTists offer plenty of silly conjecture and nudge-nudge-wink-winks, which is what you're doing. It's all rather silly. Just let the authorities get on and do their jobs. Unless you have anything concrete regarding the Boston bombings,, it's all just silly conjecture and nudge-nudge-wink-wink.
  • thomas painthomas pain Posts: 2,318
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    jzee wrote: »


    Sorry to bump my own post, but people should really watch this interview with the uncle, it paints a much more clear picture of the family's situation. He is absolutely clear on the belief that the younger brother was used as a tool, and that the elder brother would have bombed the marathon, even if the uncle himself was there.

    woudn't give the uncle too much credibility. he hasn't seen the boys since 2005. he doesn't really know them. CNN probably paid ruslan to do this interview.
This discussion has been closed.