It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

BREAKING:Explosion At Boston Marathon

page: 88
220
<< 85  86  87    89  90  91 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 02:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Lulzaroonie
 


LOL. What? You're going to tell me what I seen? I'm not thinking of last year.

I'm thinking about what was reported now and earlier today.

8 year old girl killed. Don't try to tell me what I heard and I what I haven't.

and I gotta LOL at your picture comment. I certainly didn't say anything about pictures

edit on 16-4-2013 by nightstalker78 because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 02:10 AM
link   
Found it .
Here is the link to a picture taken before the blast . You can clearly see the concrete planter in the bottom left of the shot , yet it is not present in any shots taken after the explosion and it is in the exact position of the charred marks on the ground in later shots.

sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net...

EDIT.
Sorry folks . My mistake . it's not the same location .
edit on 16-4-2013 by Gideon70 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 02:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by nightstalker78
I've seen it all now. You're seriously comparing 9.11 to this?

I don't know where you live but I live in Florida. I've seen multiple angles of the explosions.They start at ground level. It's pretty clear.They've been showing it here all day and night.

9.11 is a completely different monster. Though I've seen more then one vid [color=#33eeff]of the plane hitting the Pentagon.

That's a story for another thread though.


Impressive.
Seeing as how every single last CCTV tape –of the dozens that were confiscated in the days post-9/11 – that would/could have shown the “projectile” (be it a Boeing or otherwise) and its impact with the Pentagon are still classified due to National Security. To this day.

/off topic



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 02:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maroboduus
In one breath you are saying that it wouldn't make sense for a domestic group to risk retaliation over something with so little impact (which you apparently measure solely by body count),


Um, sorry this is confusing for you to understand. See an insurgent counts on two things shock and anonymity. So here he is, taking all this time to plan with 4+ devices, successfully makes the purchases necessary without hitting the radar, plans the mission (recon and surveillance) without hitting the radar which indicates a high degree of counter surveillance/opsec skill. Then gets multiple devices into a very secure area crawling with bomb dogs and cops and such; however, after all that success he sucks at making bombs go off at the time in the race they could kill the most people. Further, 2 of the devices are captured and now can be analyzed by the government. So a group (or lone wolf) was so good at the craft he was able to do all the previous phases (recruiting, funding, planning, coordinating, reconnaissance and deployment) right but fails miserably at execution?

A key part of IED 101 is to never leave an undetonated device for someone to analyze. It shows where and when the components are acquired, how the bomb was made and intended for detonation. Even if the groups screwed up their timing again, IED 101 requires that all devices have a primary (safer for the agent) method of detonation (time/pressure etc.) and that in case that fails the device is under constant observation with a remote detonating method to ensure the device is at least destroyed.

So - knowing all that they failed miserably since there were times when many more people were around the finish line. A much better opportunity for their statement.

So either this was a false flag intended to leave a trail of breadcrumbs after offering some minimal death and mayhem or it was the half assed execution of a perfectly planned and rehearsed mission by some group who lost its focus when it mattered most.

I find the former more plausible than the latter. If this cell were real they'd just have compromised anonymity for minimal shock value - not a good trade off. No one brings down the whole might of a nation against them on purpose leaving a trail of undetonated bombs for them to analyze. Besides, all that planning, time and money went into killing 3 people maybe 30 or so after it is fleshed out and wounding 100 or so? When a proper detonation sequence could have resulted in a thousand or more? Makes no sense.

So I don't find it to be a credible group. Demonstrating they are very thorough then making huge mistakes.... I could be wrong and the cell or lone wolf did choke at the end and failed miserably.

The goal of an insurgent is twofold:
1) Serves their agenda by making the people (if they sympathize with the gov) feel the government is failing at protecting them and that government is incompetent and in need of change.
2) If the people do not trust/support the government they want to make the government over react and crack down on the citizens even harder for even harmless acts of anti-government speech and protest as they search for the actors.


Originally posted by Maroboduus
and in the next you're saying that a government response could lead to civil war. Civil war seems like a pretty large impact to me. Make up your mind.


The government specifically will not react by enacting martial law which was the question posed to me. That doesn't mean they won't go after the groups with more invasive monitoring and further restrictions on the general population’s rights of free speech and movement. The reason is as stated above it would turn the citizens on the cusp against them.



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 02:13 AM
link   
Sweet lord...


Originally posted by hoochymama
reply to post by proob4
 

So, Bomb Sniffing Dogs (Plural by the way, there wasn't just one at this event) overlooked the greatest dog sniffing bomb in history (only killed 2-3 people so far) is not a legit question??


I confess that i'm not certain what exactly "the greatest dog sniffing bomb in history" is supposed to mean. In fact, i'm not certain what purpose a dog sniffing bomb would even serve, although if they are going to exist it's good to be the best one in history, i suppose.

That being said...i'm not sure what is hard to grasp about the bomb sniffing dogs. Nobody is debating that they were there. That has been established. Why is it hard to fathom that they can miss something?
They aren't infallible, and there could be any number of logical reasons for them to have not detected the bombs.

If bomb-sniffing dogs were a perfect defense (in spite of their natural weakness to your aforementioned dog-sniffing bombs) then all we would have to do in order to end terrorism is line the streets with dogs. Unfortunately, this is real life, and they aren't perfect.



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 02:14 AM
link   
reply to post by 3mperorConstantinE
 


Yea you're way off topic. But I'm willing to bet due to your comment you know exactly what tape i'm talking about.I'm gonna ignore you and all of your 30 posts. You 9.11 truther you.

Anyway,back to the boston attack. Yea.

edit on 16-4-2013 by nightstalker78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 02:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
Sounds like "governor's discretion" then. I have known Guard people, though, and haven't heard of this, but it probably depends on where they are located. Still, using them in that capacity bothers me.

It's the Governors discretion because National Guard is the “State Militia”.

As they are being used in a law enforcement capacity, they will normally use the MP units for this type of work.

I don't know why this would bother you, the state militia is constitutionally guaranteed under the 2nd amendment, and has existed longer then our standing federal army has.



National Guard members are a subset of the Militia as defined by 10 U.S.C. § 311.

The National Guard traces its history to the establishment of three militia regiments by the General Court of the Massachusetts Bay Colony on 13 December 1636.[3] The first muster of the three regiments is generally thought to have occurred in the spring of 1637 on Salem Common.[4] The 101st Engineer Battalion, the 101st Field Artillery Regiment, the 181st Infantry Regiment, and the 182nd Infantry Regiment trace their lineage to these three regiments: the North, South and East Regiments.[5] The term "national guard" was first coined in the 1790s by the Marquis de Lafayette as a description of anti-royalist French Revolutionary citizen forces.[6] (Lafayette had earlier served as a general officer fighting under George Washington in the American Revolutionary War.)

The National Guard was established as a federally funded reserve component of the nation's armed forces on 21 January 1903 with the Militia Act of 1903 under Title 10 and Title 32 of the US Code. The National Defense Act of 1947 created the Air Force as a separate branch of the Armed Forces and concurrently created the Air National Guard as one of its reserve components, mirroring the Army's component structure. The National Guard of the several states, territories and the District of Columbia serves as part of the first-line defense for the US.[7] The state National Guard is organized into units stationed in each of the 50 states and US territories, and operates under their respective state governor or territorial adjutant general.[8] The National Guard may be called up for active duty by state governors or territorial adjutant general to help respond to domestic emergencies and disasters, such as hurricanes, floods, and earthquakes.[8]



edit on 4/16/2013 by defcon5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 02:14 AM
link   
my heart goes out to all the people affected by this

3 dead and over 140 injured very SAD



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 02:15 AM
link   
Latest from CNN


Investigators have warned police to be on the lookout for a "darker-skinned or black male" with a possible foreign accent in connection with Monday's bombings at the Boston Marathon, according to a law enforcement advisory obtained by CNN. The man was seen with a black backpack and sweatshirt and was trying to get into a restricted area about five minutes before the first explosion, the lookout notice states.



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 02:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by hoochymama
There didnt seem to be that many people injured from both of the blasts than. There are what, 4 people in that photo seriously injured?? This is supposed to be the worst of it??

The Video I saw of the first blast, that seemed the worst to me. Again, the first hand accounts will probably tell you more but according to what I saw from the first blast there were more people injured than in this pic.


I'm sorry, but i've read most of your posts and I have no clue what you're talking about. I think you need to calm down a little bit, I can tell you're hyper by the use of two (2) ? after each question.



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 02:17 AM
link   
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


I am a veteran 1987-1994

edit: Army




edit on 16-4-2013 by RickinVa because: service



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 02:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maroboduus
Last i saw, there were at least 140 injured. At least 30 of those were in critical or serious condition, some of whom were small children. Many of the victims lost limbs, either in the explosions themselves or in amputation surgeries afterwards. The body count is almost certain to be significantly higher once more information trickles out.



Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
Reports are of at least 140 people injured, and many (30+ reported) with limbs blown completely off. At least three are known to have been killed. So, definitely more than a handful of serious injuries, and those numbers could easily increase. We probably won't have a good count on injuries for a day or two, and some that are seriously injured could die as a result of the injuries.

That came from multiple sources, not just one. Seeing as how you somehow weren't aware that the library thing had been reported as an unrelated fir in spite of that happening many hours ago, i somehow doubt that you were staying up-to-date on all of the latest info and statistics.



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 02:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by SolarE-Souljah

Originally posted by Xtrozero

You know, photographers don't just randomly take pictures, they look for angles to create an impressin on the observer. Who ever took that picture saw the chair cover flag and wanted to make an impression, nothing more nothing less.


I believe he was actually being sarcastic.

Sometimes it's hard to pick up on sarcasm just through text.


You are most likely right, but being the ATS crowd I give it the chance of 20% sarcastic and 80% serious...



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 02:23 AM
link   
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


Why does it bother you? They're there to help. I really do not understand this logic.



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 02:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gideon70
Found it .
Here is the link to a picture taken before the blast . You can clearly see the concrete planter in the bottom left of the shot , yet it is not present in any shots taken after the explosion and it is in the exact position of the charred marks on the ground in later shots.

sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net...

EDIT.
Sorry folks . My mistake . it's not the same location .
edit on 16-4-2013 by Gideon70 because: (no reason given)


The black spot for ground zero of blast at the Forum seems to be by the mail box and tree.



edit on 16-4-2013 by JBA2848 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 02:27 AM
link   
Just heard about this, whatever the cause it's an appalling tragedy and my sympathy & condolences are with the people of Boston and the US.



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 02:32 AM
link   
reply to post by JBA2848
 


I was referring to this blast mark .

bostonherald.com...

But it was the wrong location . My apologies.
edit on 16-4-2013 by Gideon70 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 02:32 AM
link   
reply to post by JBA2848
 


Honestly that black spot in that photo looks like the darker inlays the city used around trees.
ETA: there is a nice CCTV on that building....wonder what it captured!
edit on 16-4-2013 by ownbestenemy because: post script



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 02:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Golf66
 


There are so many things wrong with your statement that i'm honestly not even certain i have the energy to tackle them tonight. Your homework is to re-read what you just posted, and count just how many completely baseless assumptions that you just made (many of which are just plain silly).


edit on 16-4-2013 by Maroboduus because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2013 @ 02:35 AM
link   
Okay, maybe I'm thinking wrong:
But is it possible that the bomber(s) were among the dead?

I know, an eight year old is killed as well and I have absolutely no intention of accusing the dead. Just throwing out ideas.




top topics



 
220
<< 85  86  87    89  90  91 >>

log in

join