Beck Breaks Exclusive Information on Saudi National Allegedly Connected to Boston Bombings

Originally posted by TauCetixeta


Law enforcement questioned Saudi National Abdul Al-Harbi at the hospital and asked permission

to search his apartment. He said "Go ahead."

Which obviously you would do if you were a terrorist and had plenty to hide.

They spent 9 hours at his apartment and carried away a few bags of evidence.

CBS News showed them putting the bags into the car.

CBS News also reported that Abdul Al-Harbi was tackled to the ground at the scene of the

terrorist bombing.

Bags? Tackled??

They should put him in the electric chair tomorrow.

reply to post by JuniorDisco

But you're not a professional police investigator.

Well that was a good guess.
Neither are a lot of the people that do searches and seizures..
Just like a lot of coroners are not doctors or even have any training in the medical field.

reply to post by JuniorDisco


Yes, Abdul al-Harbi WAS tackled to the ground and placed in custody.

Yes, the FBI removed bags of evidence if you watch the entire video.

Originally posted by butcherguy

Originally posted by JuniorDisco
reply to post by butcherguy

 

I suppose that could have been partly simultaneous. What I'm saying is that a brief search (and nine hours is actually not that long) of someone's apartment is hardly suspect. Especially when it's thought - at least temporarily - that the guy might be implicated in something like the Boston bombing.

It just seems a bit odd that they would search for nine hours at an apartment of a student that they confirmed was not the bomber. They got his name, verified his credentials, cleared him (let's say it took them four hours to do that, I am being generous.... it doesn't take long to run an ID today) then searched his apartment for five more hours???

And they would not have known where his apartment was, until they verified his ID, then would have needed to go there.
Oh, and a 'brief search'? I could pack out the entire contents of a college student's apartment in 9 hours, less with a helper.

edit on 29-4-2013 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)

And don't forget about this Event File that appears to be genuine.

212 -3B ? What is that?




Imagine the look on the faces of FBI Agents when they discover Abdul was

already in the system on a Prior Event File #1648067.

Originally posted by butcherguy

Well that was a good guess.
Neither are a lot of the people that do searches and seizures..
Just like a lot of coroners are not doctors or even have any training in the medical field.

So your suspicion about this situation is based on the idea that the people who searched Al-Harbi's apartment in the wake of a terror attack on US soil may not have been professionals? You don't know this for sure, but it's possible that the nine-hour search time is strange because they may have used amateur or partially-trained investigators?

This is dynamite stuff. You should go to the papers with it immediately.

Originally posted by TauCetixeta
reply to post by JuniorDisco

 

Yes, Abdul al-Harbi WAS tackled to the ground and placed in custody.

Yes, the FBI removed bags of evidence if you watch the entire video.

I know. It's just that everybody except you and Glenn Beck has very little issue with this.

Scratch that, even Glenn isn't with you on this one.

Originally posted by TauCetixeta

Imagine the look on the faces of FBI Agents when they discover Abdul was

already in the system on a Prior Event File #1648067.

You see, this is where you are running into trouble. You have no evidence that he was 'already in the system', because you don't know what the Prior Event File #1648067 means or when it was from. It could be a traffic violation, it could refer to him arriving in the US - you don't know, so your conclusion is pure bunk.

Originally posted by JuniorDisco

Originally posted by TauCetixeta
reply to post by JuniorDisco

 

Yes, Abdul al-Harbi WAS tackled to the ground and placed in custody.

Yes, the FBI removed bags of evidence if you watch the entire video.

I know. It's just that everybody except you and Glenn Beck has very little issue with this.

Scratch that, even Glenn isn't with you on this one.

It appears that at least 4 U.S. Congressmen have issue with Saudi National

Abdul Al-Harbi. Is this document real or fake?





Glenn Beck stated that Congressman Duncan has the original Event File in his hand.

Is that statement true or false?

Originally posted by JuniorDisco

Originally posted by TauCetixeta

Imagine the look on the faces of FBI Agents when they discover Abdul was

already in the system on a Prior Event File #1648067.

You see, this is where you are running into trouble. You have no evidence that he was 'already in the system', because you don't know what the Prior Event File #1648067 means or when it was from. It could be a traffic violation, it could refer to him arriving in the US - you don't know, so your conclusion is pure bunk.

You see, this is where my argument trumps your argument.

You already admitted that the Event File appears genuine.

Prior Event #1648067 can be clearly seen on the file.

You just can't wish it away.

Originally posted by TauCetixeta


It appears that at least 4 U.S. Congressmen have issue with Saudi National

Abdul Al-Harbi. Is this document real or fake?

Probably real. But you'll note that it's quite old. And none of the congressmen seem worried about Al-Harbi anymore.

So I guess they got their answers and are happy with them.

Glenn Beck stated that Congressman Duncan has the original Event File in his hand.

Is that statement true or false?

It may be true, but Glenn has gone awfully quiet, hasn't he? And even if it is true, you don't know anything about that file or what's in it, so your conclusions are worthless.

Originally posted by TauCetixeta

You see, this is where my argument trumps your argument.

You already admitted that the Event File appears genuine.

Prior Event #1648067 can be clearly seen on the file.

You just can't wish it away.

edit on 29-4-2013 by TauCetixeta because: (no reason given)

I'm not saying the Prior Event isn't real. I'm saying that until you can describe what it is you can forget about this being proof of anything.

What is the prior event? Unless you can show that it is a significant occurrence from before the bombings that landed him on a watchlist your "evidence" is worth about as much as your claims that the guy's name is suspicious. Nothing.

So go ahead. Tell us what it is? And while you're at it, explain why, if it's so bad, Duncan hasn't bothered with it for nearly two weeks.

Originally posted by JuniorDisco

Originally posted by TauCetixeta


It appears that at least 4 U.S. Congressmen have issue with Saudi National

Abdul Al-Harbi. Is this document real or fake?

Probably real. But you'll note that it's quite old. And none of the congressmen seem worried about Al-Harbi anymore.

So I guess they got their answers and are happy with them.

Glenn Beck stated that Congressman Duncan has the original Event File in his hand.

Is that statement true or false?

It may be true, but Glenn has gone awfully quiet, hasn't he? And even if it is true, you don't know anything about that file or what's in it, so your conclusions are worthless.

So Glenn Beck hasn't demanded the resignation of Obama today. That means my

conclusions are worthless?

It appears you are surrounded by a reality distortion field.

The FBI investigation is proceeding. Our case is getting stronger everyday.

The FBI is looking for 3rd bomber. They say there must be a line-of-sight 3rd person.

Hmmmm......

I guess the FBI is part of your conspiracy.



Latest news for today:

Federal authorities are investigating up to 6 people associated with the Boston Marathon

Bombing.

The Lone Wolf Narrative is currently being thrown out the window.

It appears that we are at war with Violent Islamic Extremists.

Originally posted by JuniorDisco

Originally posted by TauCetixeta

You see, this is where my argument trumps your argument.

You already admitted that the Event File appears genuine.

Prior Event #1648067 can be clearly seen on the file.

You just can't wish it away.

edit on 29-4-2013 by TauCetixeta because: (no reason given)

I'm not saying the Prior Event isn't real. I'm saying that until you can describe what it is you can forget about this being proof of anything.

What is the prior event? Unless you can show that it is a significant occurrence from before the bombings that landed him on a watchlist your "evidence" is worth about as much as your claims that the guy's name is suspicious. Nothing.

So go ahead. Tell us what it is? And while you're at it, explain why, if it's so bad, Duncan hasn't bothered with it for nearly two weeks.

edit on 29-4-2013 by JuniorDisco because: (no reason given)

Think about it. If the Prior Event File was harmless then why is the Obama Administration

trying to destroy it?

BTW, they were wasting their time. Copies had already been made.

I think someone is going to prison.

We need a very strong case before we go before a Grand Jury.

reply to post by TauCetixeta


Where are you getting news that the FBI is looking for a 3rd bomber? Latest news I've heard is that they are wondering and trying to answer if more were involved. Five agents were entering the wife's home as of an hour ago.

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by TauCetixeta

 

Where are you getting news that the FBI is looking for a 3rd bomber? Latest news I've heard is that they are wondering and trying to answer if more were involved. Five agents were entering the wife's home as of an hour ago.

They covered the 3rd Bomber on Fox News:

reply to post by TauCetixeta


Anything besides a FOX news source?
Also, not having ruled out is not the same thing as saying actively looking for.

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by TauCetixeta

 

Anything besides a FOX news source?
Also, not having ruled out is not the same thing as saying actively looking for.

edit on 29-4-2013 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)

I wonder sometimes, when I see how many are so particular about what news group feeds them.

If you haven't verified information personally, how do you believe any of it?

reply to post by butcherguy


I tend to read many sources for news, I haven't come across "looking for 3rd suspect" in any articles I've read about the bombing which is why I asked... but as it turns out Tau misinterpreted what the report was actually saying, which was that investigators haven't ruled out the possibility that others are involved, that's what all sources I've read are saying as well. And my opinion of FOX is obvious and well documented here on ATS, they are a GOP mouthpiece which in this case means pushing the anti-islam agenda, they barely deny it, I'm not going to apologize for or defend my position on FOX.

reply to post by Kali74


No, I understand where you are coming from in the context of this discussion.

I just wonder how anyone can believe any media outlets when they all get it wrong, and they get it wrong a lot.

Whether it is all the wrong info that comes out in live reporting (as in Sandy Hook and the Boston Marathon), or when NBC news couldn't get a Chevy truck gas tank to explode so they rigged it with pyrotechnic devices to make it look like it blew up by itself.

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by Kali74

 

No, I understand where you are coming from in the context of this discussion.

I just wonder how anyone can believe any media outlets when they all get it wrong, and they get it wrong a lot.

Whether it is all the wrong info that comes out in live reporting (as in Sandy Hook and the Boston Marathon), or when NBC news couldn't get a Chevy truck gas tank to explode so they rigged it with pyrotechnic devices to make it look like it blew up by itself.

Well first off - during a crisis...ALWAYS bad reporting...I remember during 9-11 a couple of the outlets reported that the State Department was hit...Always bad reporting in the NOW of a situation.

The NBC rigging the truck thing? That was over 20 years ago and they fired everyone involved in that Dateline episode...from the Exec Producer on down...
en.wikipedia.org...

FOX News begins with a premise and bends or invents the facts to suit that theme.

And FOX News rewards thier reporters for that bias...others fire thier reporters for bias.