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.

 

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

page: 24
75
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by kazanoom
Utter BS. Why do people post hyperbolic baseless threads? Do any of you people have jobs? Martial Law you say... har har, When a world renown event is terrorized, it's a good decision to keep folks inside.

Do you have a Job?

This event shows how blurry the lines are now between the Military and the Police- And its frightening as hell. Who needs "official martial law" when the Police ARE now the Military?

This closed down a city for 1 suspect. Folks were (as far as I can see) denied their own rights (some where pulled out of homes and the homes searched) as armed thugs took over the streets n paramilitary fashion.

--This was overkilll and STILL the "Police" didnt find anyone. The Boat owner did (and after having his Boat shot to # he now gets to pay for it himself- Others are crowdfunding to replace his boat as we speak)- Civil rights flew out the window.

-This is a scary precedent. Worse still is that others are so accepting of this.




posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by buckrogerstime
 


Actually, you can believe the police sometimes, but that's only in certain cases. In cases where the police themselves could get in trouble, or where it seems as though as though it could be a government conspiracy, I would never believe the police.

And I do not believe that the suspects are innocent, but I do not believe that the suspects were involved in the bombings either.

There is no evidence to believe that they are not involved in the bombing, but there is no evidence to believe that they are involved in the bombings, other than a bunch of people simply sprouting what they have heard from the media. I am only being objective and impartial here.
edit on 21-4-2013 by extraterrestrialentity because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by extraterrestrialentity

There is no evidence to believe that they are not involved in the bombing, but there is no evidence to believe that they are involved in the bombings, other than a bunch of people simply sprouting what they have heard from the media. I am only being objective here.
edit on 21-4-2013 by extraterrestrialentity because: (no reason given)


No, there is lots of evidence to believe they were involved in the bombings:

1) video footage of them behaving suspiciously at the marathon
2) visual ID from a victim who saw the younger brother place the backpack immediately next to him right before detonation
3) additional surveillance footage from at least two locations after they hijacked a vehicle
4) visual ID from the man who was carjacked that the suspects looked like the men from the marathon video; and
5) possible evidence of motive from the brothers' social-networking sites and statements to friends/family.

Meanwhile, there is no evidence at all to suggest that they weren't involved in the bombings.

Let's stay objective here.



posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 04:44 PM
link   
reply to post by buckrogerstime
 


Please show me videos of everything you just stated. I am not going to believe something just because the police said it.



posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Seems like you decided to throw the words "martial law" in your thread title to get more hits.

Realllly classy.



posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by SPACEYstranger
reply to post by neo96
 


Seems like you decided to throw the words "martial law" in your thread title to get more hits.

Realllly classy.


Whats classy is the failure to read the thread that was already addressed numerous times.

Back to the topic which can be found here: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Here: www.abovetopsecret.com...

And Here: www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by extraterrestrialentity

Please show me videos of everything you just stated. I am not going to believe something just because the police said it.


Seriously? I'm sorry, but I'm not going to collect all those sources right now. That is just unreasonable. If you haven't seen the footage of the suspects at the marathon, the surveillance footage from the Shell gas station and the Bank of America ATM, and the brothers' social-networking sites and interviews with acquaintances, then you have not been following this story at all over the past week. All of that information was on the front page of every newspaper in the world. If you missed any of that basic information, you should not have any opinion at all about this incident. You should get off ATS and go read some actual news of the day.

It is particularly baffling that you're not familiar with the photos of them at the marathon, the gas station, and the bank, since you only believe evidence in the form of photos/videos. I would assume you would make it a priority to seek that out.
edit on 21-4-2013 by buckrogerstime because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 04:52 PM
link   
My sympathy is with the police officers based on two theories - 1) if this was a government (not necessarily US) put up job then the police would not have known about it and 2) Many of the police would have had friends and / or family - even immediate family in the lock down zone. So this would have been more pressurised for the police and more personal.

As for lieing, then from day 1 of the siege, there was so much information and counter information partly because the story was breaking and TV coverage was grabbing at any piece of information, both official and unofficial and partly because truth was being overheard but then countered so that the police had a better chance of picking up all the criminals.



posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Ohhh yaaaa thats right, if there is BS in the article retrieved through "the daily paul" (most reputable source EVER) then you are fully justified in relaying that BS to the rightly skeptical readership of ATS.

You, sir, are a class act.
edit on 21-4-2013 by SPACEYstranger because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by buckrogerstime
 


A photo of them makes them the bombers? You said that they were the bombers so many times, and you say that there's videos of them behaving suspiciously, but yet as soon as I ask you to show me those videos, you all of a sudden refuse to show me them.

I think you are just getting all of this from the news, and not actually investigating this yourself.



posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 04:56 PM
link   
reply to post by buckrogerstime
 


And I wouldn't mind at least a few videos of them "behaving suspiciously".



posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by extraterrestrialentity

A photo of them makes them the bombers? You said that they were the bombers so many times, and you say that there's videos of them behaving suspiciously, but yet as soon as I ask you to show me those videos, you all of a sudden refuse to show me them.

I think you are just getting all of this from the news, and not actually investigating this yourself.


What in the world does that mean? Unless you have subpoena power to obtain surveillance videos, of course we're getting this information from the news. Where are you getting it from? Oh, wait, that's right: you don't have any information because you haven't been paying attention to the most basic aspects of this incident.

In all seriousness, all of the photos I just mentioned were basically on every possible media source - newspapers, TV, internet, even ATS - for the last several days. They were literally shown around-the-clock. If you are genuinely not familiar with them, I'm gonna have to stop talking to you until you figure out a way to locate a single news source.

Cannot believe I actually put this together for you:
www.nytimes.com...
www.nytimes.com...
www.boston.com...
www.telegraph.co.uk...
blog.foreignpolicy.com...

Again, you may not find any or all of that persuasive. But, considering you have no evidence whatsoever suggesting that they are not responsible for the bombings, you're probably not going to convince me. I mean, you're also not going to convince me because you seem unfamiliar with the basic facts of the week.


edit on 21-4-2013 by buckrogerstime because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by buckrogerstime

Originally posted by extraterrestrialentity

Please show me videos of everything you just stated. I am not going to believe something just because the police said it.


Seriously? I'm sorry, but I'm not going to collect all those sources right now. That is just unreasonable. If you haven't seen the footage of the suspects at the marathon, the surveillance footage from the Shell gas station and the Bank of America ATM, and the brothers' social-networking sites and interviews with acquaintances, then you have not been following this story at all over the past week. All of that information was on the front page of every newspaper in the world. If you missed any of that basic information, you should not have any opinion at all about this incident. You should get off ATS and go read some actual news of the day.

It is particularly baffling that you're not familiar with the photos of them at the marathon, the gas station, and the bank, since you only believe evidence in the form of photos/videos. I would assume you would make it a priority to seek that out.
edit on 21-4-2013 by buckrogerstime because: (no reason given)

They were certainly involved in some way, form and fashion. No doubt.

-I do not need to see the "evidence" on that due to the fact of how things progressed once their "names were out"- Had this been me (or pretty much any innocent person) I would have immediately turned myself in to the nearest Police Station for my own safety, or called 911 myself (of coarse after contacting an attorney)- I can also surmise that they did in fact have weapons (of some sort) and there was an engagement with Officers.

Generally speaking, a wrong ID on the Bombers would not statistically lead to such an outcome.

-That still doesnt change the fact that "martial law" (lets clarify here, I am not saying it was declared- My issue is the factt hat the Police are now so close to a paramilitary group that it looks to me like "martial law" is unneeded.)

-It also doesnt answer a plethora of questions.

I am leaning towards accepting the OS (for the most part) on this one for a myriad of reasons- But I am already seeing lies being used towards some unknown agenda. For example, I heard on CNN a coupe hours ago how "advanced" the device must have been to detonate from a cellphone and "they didnt learn that from Google" (this was from an official) when its common knowledge how easy it is to make a "spark" with a cellphone/pager which would "detonate" when a call was placed- Its the same principal as twisting the positive and negative wire on a flashlight bulb to light a cigarette (something I learned in basic Training when we needed a cigarette- which were banned)- There is nothing "technical" about making this device.

I think they are blowing this all way out of proportion, using this to condition the public (which seems to be working) and cheer for it all. I also would not be surprised if this would lead back to an agency of government who was using these guys (willingly or not) towards this goal.

-I just do not know- And neither does anyone. We cant "know" anything . There are so many lies and competing agendas from all sides that the truth is honestly lost and there is no way to discern it on pretty much any and everything.



posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 05:06 PM
link   
reply to post by buckrogerstime
 


I'm sorry, but I don't blindly follow whatever the news says. I actually do my own investigating. And it seems like you haven't even seen any videos, and instead are saying whatever you hear from the media. And I'll make it easier for you, give me at least one video of them behaving suspiciously, not a photo, not an article, but a video.



posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by extraterrestrialentity

I'm sorry, but I don't blindly follow whatever the news says. I actually do my own investigating. And it seems like you haven't even seen any videos, and instead are saying whatever you hear from the media. And I'll make it easier for you, give me at least one video of them behaving suspiciously, not a photo, not an article, but a video.


Great, I anxiously await your investigative report.

Oh, but do you have an established background in criminology and journalism? That would probably help.



posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by buckrogerstime
 


Also, I'm really trying hard to stay away from personal attacks here, but your policy on this site - that you refuse to believe anything unless you've seen video footage of it - is truly one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard in my life. All the more so because video is just as easy to fake as any other type of evidence - if not easier.



posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by extraterrestrialentity
 



Actually, I wanted to include them as well as a few other networks, but I thought the reply would have been too long. Local news, CNN, ABC, they're all the same, just a bunch of liars.


There you go.

edit on 21-4-2013 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by buckrogerstime
 


I never said that I have investigated this event. I simply said that if I want to find out what truly happened, I'll find it out myself.



posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by extraterrestrialentity

I never said that I have investigated this event. I simply said that if I want to find out what truly happened, I'll find it out myself.


If you haven't investigated this event, and you also don't rely on anyone else's investigation, then why are you in this thread?

I'm in this thread because I have read many news investigations and then evaluated their claims independently by searching for any countervailing evidence.



posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by buckrogerstime
 


Whenever someone says that they have seen a UFO, if the person does not have a video, there is no actual proof that what the person is saying is true. But when it comes to the government, people immediately accept it. Talk about denying ignorance.



new topics




 
75
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join