Boston is a Farce to Take your Rights Away

A straw man or straw person, also known in the UK as an Aunt Sally,[1][2] is a type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[3] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and to refute it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.[3][4] This technique has been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly in arguments about highly charged, emotional issues.

Strawman wiki

So what was that argument? That you do not know how to properly debate logically and fairly?
Please, play by the rules.

reply to post by muzzleflash


I respect what you are doing.

I do not respect the condescending nature of the way you go about dealing with people who disagree with you. It is not a sign of intellegence to rip apart word for word what people say, or to post quote by quote. It is not constructive or necessary to lash out, as you did to the police officer earlier at the beginning of this thread.

Most of all, the way you jump from grand scheme uplifting melodrama about the human condition, to telling people what they are saying and how they are saying it is wrong, makes it hard to take you seriously.

At this point, I will return to my usual lurking and leave this discourse....

Keep fighting the good fight.

BuckRogersTime:

Do you think some number/quality of terrorists would ever justify a citywide lockdown? If so, what would it look like?

That's a pretty good question, although I note that you don't call it martial law. The response I give has to be an opinion only.

To justify a 'city-wide' lockdown, I should think it would depend upon the form of attack and how severe it was. A chemical or biological or nuclear (so called 'dirty bomb') attack, or multiple attacks in multiple locations, may very well justify such a case. In these instances, it would probably be better for the people to stay in their homes, rather than have them out on the streets or seeking to leave the city, as they would be exposing themselves to the continuing and on-going effects of the attacks.

I am not unaware of the correllation between on-going terrorist effects and the threat of a terrorist loose in the city. You obviously do not want citizens to encounter either circumstance, but the response must always be appropriate. A single terrorist cannot be in multiple locations at the same time, whereas the effects of chemical and biological attacks can be, because they can drift with the wind, or contaminate where people converge.

Appropriate response is a compromise between safety and liberty, and not always in equal amounts. In contrast, full blown martial law is not a compromise, not by any stretch of the imagination. It is the full subjugation of the populace with no exceptions. Like I stated, Boston was not full blown martial law, but a few elements of it, and one I consider to be as an inappropriate response.

Originally posted by THE666OCCULT
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

I respect what you are doing.

I do not respect the condescending nature of the way you go about dealing with people who disagree with you. It is not a sign of intellegence to rip apart word for word what people say, or to post quote by quote. It is not constructive or necessary to lash out, as you did to the police officer earlier at the beginning of this thread.

Most of all, the way you jump from grand scheme uplifting melodrama about the human condition, to telling people what they are saying and how they are saying it is wrong, makes it hard to take you seriously.

At this point, I will return to my usual lurking and leave this discourse....

Keep fighting the good fight.

I know what you mean.

I do get vicious at times and I am sorry.
I will continue attempting to address my human proclivity towards treating posting as a warlike affair.
Need to work further on temperance.

Thanks for helping me see what I need to work on though. Not sarcasm.

Originally posted by THE666OCCULT
to telling people what they are saying and how they are saying it is wrong, makes it hard to take you seriously.

That part is probably due to that I have been here almost the whole time and my mood, thoughts, etc, differ drastically over the course of a day. I have a tendency to jump around quite a bit, and I get lost a lot too.

Originally posted by elysiumfire

A forest fire is an entirely different form of threat,

Agree 100%, total common sense here.

However Martial Law is the wrong procedure.

Calling an Evacuation is the correct procedure if an entire city is actually in jeopardy.

True Facts.

reply to post by muzzleflash


No worries.

I'm just not going to polute this thread by going tit for tat with you on things that don't matter, I said my piece, and now I'm done.

And in the grand scheme,you are right..

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it" - Thomas Jefferson

reply to post by muzzleflash


Muzzleflash, I've been following you since 2008 or so when I joined ATS and it is good to see you back.

There is significance in the Boston events, and that is in the ease at which over 20 armored vehicles, Homeland Security officers, helicopters, and police shut down a whole city. Think about it, this is the kind of response they are capable of. When searching for two people.

Now there's no more conspiracy about Homeland Security buying armored trucks and ammo, obviously they did.

In case anyone was wondering, apparently the videos were taken down, but I watched them live.

Originally posted by muzzleflash
What's a Nationalist Socialist? (Yes it's Republicans and Democrats but what else?)

A Fascist Communist.
That's right.

Absolutely wrong. You are misinformed in this regard, but correct on just about everything else.

What we have is totalitarian global croney capitalism. The bilderbergers who attend bohemian groove know so you should ask them.



I WISH we had a mixed economy and basic nationalism/patriotism. Campaign money would be irrellevant and this is how politicians make it big. The taxpayers contribute peanuts to them. We seen it with monsato protection act, the war on guns, the wars in the middle east, etc. I can't be bothered listing everything because it gets boring.

reply to post by elysiumfire


If there were a biological or chemical attack, and you went outside, you would probably die.

But I suppose tons of govt troops will be out and about in their govt made chemical wonderland, because they have tons of suits and equipment just for the occasion.

I would think Evac is also a likely procedure to consider in these contingencies, barring a specific reason that precludes it.

Wow, where to start with this mess?

OP, please could you define for me what a "police state" is please?

Given your statements about the current Government of the USA, and the insinuation they are using this particular series of events to further their agenda, what would you or your supposed ideal government have done in the same situation?

In general, and not aimed at the OP, the pictures from Alex Jones, comparing the Gestapo checking papers and military police checking papers, it is not anywhere near in the same context that those parties were doing the check. Yes, they were both checking papers, but the reason for doing so was completely different. Do you compare the lady at check in at the airport with the Gestapo? No, you don't.

So i was watching faux news of the manhunt anyway they were interviewing some guys that knew the brothers they were saying they were good guys that would never do this. And that the older brother worked out at the gym and boxed were real nice guys and they could not believe they were capable.. then they were abruptly cut off went to commercial. Then later the news states it talked to a unknown person that said "they knew they had to be the ones" yet did not say why. WOW if there is not propaganda and damage control at play then id be damned. This whole thing stinks, wanna bet they drug the captured brother like James Holmes much like a zombie? Get him to say things to incriminate himself?


When will it end ?

Originally posted by PsykoOps

Originally posted by muzzleflash
The pure simple fact that the Mainstream Media is pushing this so hard, with all caps and bold letters, is giving the terrorists exactly what they want. Maybe the MSM is in cahoots with them ?

Mainstream media isn't pushing this hard. Everyone is. Just look at ATS, twitter, every indie news media out there etc. Everyone is doing it. Cause it's a big story.

They don't sensationalise ufos and aliens that much though. They don't sensationalise the monsato protection act though. They don't talk about libertarians, greens, constitutionalists, etc except once every four years during elections.

They don't talk about how bad capitalism is. They DO sensationalise negatively about muslims while attacking them in their own countries based on false flags. They DO sensationalise about how bad innanimate objects such as guns are.

THEY PICK AND CHOSE WHAT THE # THEY WANT TO SENSATIONALISE! THAT IS AGENDA DRIVEN AND EVIL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

reply to post by Rob7774

The first two words in your post say it all...one man. 9000+/_ people?

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by elysiumfire

A forest fire is an entirely different form of threat,

Agree 100%, total common sense here.

However Martial Law is the wrong procedure.

Calling an Evacuation is the correct procedure if an entire city is actually in jeopardy.

True Facts.

edit on 20-4-2013 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-4-2013 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)

Exactly! If someone had a dirty bomb, there were hundreds of terrorists on the loose, it was state sponsored terrorism like biological or chemical warfare then YES it is wise to call martial law for a limited duration.

But one, two, three terrorists on the loose and they close down an entire city?? This doesn't even happen in the movies. The keystone cops would have gotten them by now and everything would have been solved. Try robbing a bank with a skimask, gloves, silencer on your gun, etc and see HOW FAST they STILL catch you.

Its all about sensationalism, preying on gullible people who believe lamestream media because they don't know better. It is sickening! I have stopped watching news now for over 5 years and even ATS has become a bit mainstream.

Respects for starting the thread. I feel the same way!

Originally posted by THE666OCCULT
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

No worries.

I'm just not going to polute this thread by going tit for tat with you on things that don't matter, I said my piece, and now I'm done.

And in the grand scheme,you are right..

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it" - Thomas Jefferson

Thank you.

Thomas Jefferson sounds like a smart guy to me.
He spoke many simple truths.

Originally posted by buckrogerstime
There is a lot of evidence that all your evidence is wrong. But, here, I won't prove it to you. You probably wouldn't believe me anyway.

I think you're more likely to believe me if I don't provide any sources or links at all.

What do you think of the evidence posted on page 15 showing the bombings were staged with actors?

How can you explain the medical impossibilities?

Originally posted by Hendrick99
Please provide your iron-clad evidence showing that this was a false flag.

Sure its on page 15.

Its the encroachment of the central government taking over control from individual States.
If this continues, there will be no more "United States", it will probably become a country
called by a new name like Columbia.

Just like Mexico.

United Mexican States (1824–1864)

The United Mexican States (Spanish: Estados Unidos Mexicanos), was established on 4 October 1824, after the overthrow of the Mexican Empire of Agustin de Iturbide. In the new constitution, the republic took the name of United Mexican States, and was defined as a representative federal republic, with Catholicism as the official and unique religion.

Antonio López de Santa Anna, a former federalist turned centralist and eventual dictator, suspended the 1824 Constitution and replaced it with the Siete Leyes in 1835, a radical amendment that institutionalized the centralized form of government.

Several states openly rebelled against these changes. Northern Coahuila y Tejas, San Luis Potosí, Querétaro, Durango, Guanajuato, Michoacán, Yucatán, Jalisco, Nuevo León, Tamaulipas, and Zacatecas all disapproved. Civil war quickly spread across the Mexican states and three new governments declared independence: the

Republic of Texas, the Republic of the Rio Grande and the Republic of Yucatán.
In May 1835 Santa Anna brutally crushed a revolt in Zacatecas and marched towards Coahuila y Tejas. In April 1836, he was defeated in Texas, where Texans retained their independence and formed a separate republic.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
But one, two, three terrorists on the loose and they close down an entire city?? This doesn't even happen in the movies.

Since when the movies are the reference for law enforcement and practice of law? Hilarious.

Try robbing a bank with a skimask, gloves, silencer on your gun, etc and see HOW FAST they STILL catch you.

Been on a jury, I can tell you it does not always work this way.

Its all about sensationalism, preying on gullible people who believe lamestream media because they don't know better. It is sickening!

If anything is sickening here it's the superficiality of this statement. In truth, it's more likely that LE were covering their @sses in case these Chechen morons would decide to take more lives. It's pretty reasonable, actually. You have the benefit of hindsight (DUH), the cops didn't have that luxury. The deaths were real, the Chechen tards were real.