Why does Boston celebrate Martial Law with chants of ‘USA, USA’?

reply to post by neo96


You said:

I don't fault anyone calling it martial law if someone has another term for when the government, and police forces, armed with "assault" weapons out numbered the civilian unarmed population on the streets feel free to enlighten me

Now, clearly, the amount of armed Police did not outnumber the unarmed populace. Your question implied that was so and asked what else do you call it if not martial law. Evidently, your question is moot, therefore it isn't Martial Law, aside from the fact that ML wasn't declared, nor where people forced to stay in their homes now was the civil power suspended in favour of a Military Government, all of which says to me that this was never ML.

reply to post by ProfessorChaos


I would also like to apologize for going off topic in the thread and for the tone of my last 2 posts. I was upset and got a bit carried away.

reply to post by stumason


So there were more people on the streets than the police?

How is that accomplished when people were told to stay in their homes?

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by marg6043

 

That's just a ludicrous way of looking at things and your "refusal" to debate it simply shows you cannot defend your position.

I already defended my position many times over that is why i am not going over the same issue when i already did, I am tired right now of repeating myself over and over again.

If you care to read the thread you will read what we all have posted in the issue.

Originally posted by marg6043
If the police state would use the same effort and manpower that they used to go after one suspect in boston to go after every single criminal in the nation we will be a nation without crime.

Every day is a criminal in the run in any given state and town, but you don't see the same effort to go after them

I guess that is not part of the agenda.

Agree. I don't believe it was Martial Law, but definitely a push on civil liberties, disguised in behest of safety.


The majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime, abuses its strength, and by acting on the law of the strongest breaks up the foundations of society. Thomas Jefferson

reply to post by marg6043


I wouldn't say it was unprecedented Marg... What about the Beltway sniper? The Police hunt was massive and they set up checkpoints and cordoned off whole areas...

reply to post by neo96


I am willing to bet that there would be more than 9,000 people on the streets of the whole of metropolitan Boston, despite the "shelter in place" that was issued. It would only take 1 out of 100 people to ignore it (and they were free to do so, at their own risk) and you have your magic number. People have already said, in this thread, that they know people in Boston who went about their business normally.

reply to post by marg6043


I have read the thread, Marg, and you have failed to explain adequately how you think the US is a Police State. In fact, you shy away from doing so when challenged.

reply to post by stumason


But it was not as massive as what happen in Boston, no even after 9/11 attacks we had such show of force with tactical vehicles and armed to the teeth police security enforcements, it was to tell the truth an over kill.

We spend billions of dollars of tax payer money on security, surveillance and spying and what we have to show for? that America is nothing but a joke when it comes to security and the safety of the citizens.

Our enemies walk among us and live within us.

Sorry stumason I am not trying to be mean when I am refusing to debate the issue but is because i have been all day in the board and posting all this time. I am starting to feel like a broken record.

reply to post by stumason


The problem is the same problem many Americans see as a intrusion of our liberties. Big or small its still an intrusion based on hyping the fear of something( insert reason here) . Fear is the biggest way to get anyone to do something, they would normally not do.

I don't want 20000 drones in American skies, but its going to happen. I don't like the Patriot Act, executive decisions, or cameras on EVERY corner, like they have in England. I don't want big Government. Its really simple actually. I don't believe Government has our best interests at heart. I also believe Government cant stop Terrorism. MHO

reply to post by stumason


If you feel that way I am not even going to argue with you, I beyond arguing this days stumason specially after witnessing what my nation is becoming.

This thread is absolutely ridiculous. Does anyone that posted in here actually live in Boston and know first hand what happened? Or is everyone just jumping to conclusions based on the bits and pieces that they've heard?

First off, I live in Back Bay about a 5-10 minute walk from the site of the bombings. My office is literally across the street from the area that is still closed for investigation. Yes, the area may have looked like martial law for the past few days, but it was far from it. The police/soldiers were there to prevent another attack - not take away people's rights. They did not stop, question, or search anyone. I walked by dozens of officers everyday, and they never once interacted with me. That's no where near martial law, so stop the exaggerations and drama.

Secondly, the governor did request people to still indoors on Friday in all of Boston, as they did not know where the suspect was at that time. This was a request not a demand. Taxi service was still running for people who needed to travel. Let's stop pretending that people were forced to stay indoors. As for the searches of homes in Watertown, I would believe that everyone voluntarily complied to assist in the capture of the suspect. The individuals in that area knew how dangerous the suspect was from the incident that occurred earlier in the morning.

I've seen many posts talk about how it was 9,000 officers vs. just one 19 year old. They always tend to leave out the fact that this 19 year old was heavily armed. Over 200 rounds were fired in Watertown very early Friday morning. I was listening to the police scanner and the officers reported explosives/grenades being thrown at them during the chase. An MIT officer was killed, and an MBTA officer was severely injured and still in critical condition. This "19 year old" was extremely dangerous, and the large number of officers was a precaution to help prevent another innocent person from dying.

The cheers of "USA" was for the first responders putting their lives on the line and working tirelessly for nearly 24 hours.

Overall, I did not have to sacrifice 1 single right during this past week. The situation was nowhere near martial law. Yes, the number of police and soldiers was increased in the area in case of another attack. Not quite sure how that equates to forfeiting our rights. Again - if you weren't there to experience it, you really have no idea what you're talking about.

reply to post by williamATS


So you think it's okay for the government to keep the public ignorant for "security reasons"? And you think it's okay that we can't go outside, for our supposed safety? I thought America was the land of the free, but yet I can't even go outside for my own "safety".

You may have nothing to hide now, but soon more and more laws will be implemented, and even the slightest thing you do could get you in trouble. That's when everyone will become a "suspicious person", and the police will give you pat downs and searches for the almost anything.

How can you be fine with cameras everywhere? Whatever you do, spit, pick your nose, or whatever, will be seen no matter where you go. If you dare talk about how you don't like what the government is doing, you will become a terrorist, or at least what the government classifies as a terrorist.

No offense, but if the majority of America is like you, I don't want to live in the US anymore. I'd rather go live in Africa or Antarctica.

reply to post by marg6043

no even after 9/11 attacks we had such show of force with tactical vehicles and armed to the teeth police security enforcements, it was to tell the truth an over kill.

Wasn't 9/11 the reason LEO's have become armed to the teeth?

Originally posted by TheHonestMan


Overall, I did not have to sacrifice 1 single right during this past week.

You have sacrificed your liberties, as all of us have. Some don't even know that they did.....

Opponents of the law have criticized its authorization of indefinite detentions of immigrants; searches through which law enforcement officers search a home or business without the owner’s or the occupant’s permission or knowledge; the expanded use of National Security Letters, which allows the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to search telephone, e-mail, and financial records without a court order, and the expanded access of law enforcement agencies to business records, including library and financial records. Since its passage, several legal challenges have been brought against the act, and Federal courts have ruled that a number of provisions are unconstitutional.

Patriot Act

Nine states have introduced bills aiming to adjust or repeal the detainment provisions of the 2012 NDAA.[25] In June, Rhode Island passed a resolution calling on Congress to repeal Sections 1021 and 1022.[26] In mid June, Michigan began considering a block against any state cooperation with federal officials who wish to detain Americans under sections 1021 and 1022.[27] The bill passed unanimously on December 5, 2012.[28][29] In July, the Clark County Republican Party Central Committee of Nevada unanimously passed a resolution denouncing the 2012 NDAA, and requesting the Sheriff act against it immediately. The group called sections 1021 and 1022 “blatant attacks on the United States Constitution, specifically Amendments 4, 5, 6, and 8 of our Bill of Rights”.[30]

National Defense Authorization Act

I could go on, but why bother.

reply to post by TheHonestMan


Interestingly is other post in other threads of people that claim to be from Boston and pain a different story.

But I guess I can only believe what I see on the news unless the news as usual are not trustworthy.

Anyway thanks for the input.

reply to post by jam321

Wasn't 9/11 the reason LEO's have become armed to the teeth?

I thought it was because of the North Hollywood shootout ?

Originally posted by TheHonestMan
This thread is absolutely ridiculous. Does anyone that posted in here actually live in Boston and know first hand what happened? Or is everyone just jumping to conclusions based on the bits and pieces that they've heard?

First off, I live in Back Bay about a 5-10 minute walk from the site of the bombings. My office is literally across the street from the area that is still closed for investigation. Yes, the area may have looked like martial law for the past few days, but it was far from it. The police/soldiers were there to prevent another attack - not take away people's rights. They did not stop, question, or search anyone. I walked by dozens of officers everyday, and they never once interacted with me. That's no where near martial law, so stop the exaggerations and drama.

Secondly, the governor did request people to still indoors on Friday in all of Boston, as they did not know where the suspect was at that time. This was a request not a demand. Taxi service was still running for people who needed to travel. Let's stop pretending that people were forced to stay indoors. As for the searches of homes in Watertown, I would believe that everyone voluntarily complied to assist in the capture of the suspect. The individuals in that area knew how dangerous the suspect was from the incident that occurred earlier in the morning.

I've seen many posts talk about how it was 9,000 officers vs. just one 19 year old. They always tend to leave out the fact that this 19 year old was heavily armed. Over 200 rounds were fired in Watertown very early Friday morning. I was listening to the police scanner and the officers reported explosives/grenades being thrown at them during the chase. An MIT officer was killed, and an MBTA officer was severely injured and still in critical condition. This "19 year old" was extremely dangerous, and the large number of officers was a precaution to help prevent another innocent person from dying.

The cheers of "USA" was for the first responders putting their lives on the line and working tirelessly for nearly 24 hours.

Overall, I did not have to sacrifice 1 single right during this past week. The situation was nowhere near martial law. Yes, the number of police and soldiers was increased in the area in case of another attack. Not quite sure how that equates to forfeiting our rights. Again - if you weren't there to experience it, you really have no idea what you're talking about.

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

Thank you for bringing a little sanity to these forums.
Unfortunately, yours will be shortly overshadowed by the sheer volume of conspiratorial paranoia that people like the OP post on a minute by minute basis.

reply to post by ProfessorChaos

Okay, this is REALLY easy...
Did they continue to limit your rights after they captured the suspect?
Did the military replace the local government?
Did they suspend Habeas Corpus?
Did they suspend Posse Comitatus?
If the answer to any or all of these are “No”, then it wasn't “Martial Law”.

reply to post by sonnny1


I said that I didn't sacrifice any rights during the past week due to the events that took place after the bombings in Boston. I didn't mention anything about the Patriot Act and NDAA. I am fully against those pieces of legislation.