'Free Jahar:' Boston bomb suspect's cult following

Originally posted by ThinkingHuman

Originally posted by buddhasystem
...and so you insist on being on the same level? That much is obvious. Outrageous claims with zero evidence. Great. Note to self: mark as "meh".

When I talk to kids, I talk like a kid.

Are you a sheep? Is that the language you understand?

Is that what you call "substance"? Newsbreak: it's not.

You made an absolutely fantastical claim, and didn't bother to prove an iota of it. All you could produce was an ad hom. Nice.

Originally posted by iunlimited491
This is when we'll see all the Anti-Govt. renegades coming out of the woodwork.
Claiming their hatred for the Establishment and our New world Overlords.

*sigh*

"FreeJahar"?????

(slams head on desk)

edit on 22-4-2013 by iunlimited491 because: (no reason given)

That has being only created by our media Free Jahar?

Is that something very close as to Free Syrian Army?

ATTENTION PLEASE

The Topic of this thread is

'Free Jahar:' Boston bomb suspect's cult following,

NOT

Other Members
Foul Language
Or other nonsense

PLEASE Leave the Moderating to Staff

Semper

Oh, it was just getting good.

We were debating. I want to know why they are taking a stance of defending the bomber? It is applicable to the thread.

Sometimes it is hard for someone to chastise you and then say something like...

When I talk to kids, I talk like a kid. Are you a sheep? Is that the language you understand?

Now thinkinghuman, since this thread is about Free Jahar, do you think they should Free Jahar and do you agree?

It makes me sick seeing his muslim supporters saying allah is with you Jahar! His little rapper friend is getting a good amount of publicity because he's supporting his friend but it will come back and bite him in the butt. I don't know about anyone else but when I read his supporters tweets my blood boils.

Originally posted by esdad71

 

Oh, it was just getting good.

We were debating. I want to know why they are taking a stance of defending the bomber? It is applicable to the thread.

Sometimes it is hard for someone to chastise you and then say something like...

Now thinkinghuman, since this thread is about Free Jahar, do you think they should Free Jahar and do you agree?

To answer your question, No they should not set him free.

But that is not what the thread is about, it is about why he has such a cult following. The reason for that is not anything about him, it is about what the government has done and is not doing in the aftermath. Whether they are right or not, people do not trust the government because the government seems to be lieing.

Originally posted by SloAnPainful
Well he admitted he did it and his brother was the driving force behind the attack.

Says who?
Trust that do you?
The problem is this young lad was shot full of holes and they now admit he was unarmed in that boat. Could be nothing other than the gungo ho American thing we have come to know and love but it's bound to create doubt - along with the other claims which were disproved.
Frankly I don't think we will ever know the truth. The guy is toast whatever. Even if innocent he will be pressured to admit guilt/plea bargain (another quaint old American custom) and he might as well go down as an Islamic hero.

reply to post by ThinkingHuman


So you are saying that those who are following him are using this as a rallying cry, not for him but for government injustice in America. I can see that point but to be honest, I think they should look into Ruby Ridge and support that govt suppression then backing a kid who we have on video placing bombs and then killing and injuring 100's of people.

I mean, honestly, I can almost guarantee that any Free Jahar website and twitter feed route back to somewhere in VA.

Originally posted by ThinkingHuman

Originally posted by esdad71

 

Oh, it was just getting good.

We were debating. I want to know why they are taking a stance of defending the bomber? It is applicable to the thread.

Sometimes it is hard for someone to chastise you and then say something like...

Now thinkinghuman, since this thread is about Free Jahar, do you think they should Free Jahar and do you agree?

To answer your question, No they should not set him free.

But that is not what the thread is about, it is about why he has such a cult following. The reason for that is not anything about him, it is about what the government has done and is not doing in the aftermath. Whether they are right or not, people do not trust the government because the government seems to be lieing.

What is this thread about? We can always peruse the link in the original post. In it, we'll see some pretty moronic arguments coming from these "cultists".

There is very little doubt that the two brothers engaged the police in a firefight. Unless it was all a hologram. There is a large probability that they did gun down that cop at MIT. That whole thing "free Jokhar"... Do you typically release and let go cop-killer suspects?

reply to post by esdad71


I doubt that they'll be tracerouted back to the U.S. Intelligence agencies (LOL).
The ‘agencies’ which you implied want you to be watching and believing CNN, trust me.

You'll have to excuse me, but the level of naïveté which you and others seem to go out your way to gleefully demonstrate, is quite frankly disconcerting.

You can begin to envisage rudimentary disinformation techniques, and even seem to consider that, yes, such dishonest methods could potentially be highly beneficial for the government.
Unfortunately however, you do not see how the same dishonest tactics are at work in your own sources of information, with a pervasiveness which is frightening.

Your entire worldview appears to be predicated upon fallacious reasoning.
Meaning: you assume that the programs which are beamed into the 42" HD talking box in the center of your living-room, are informing you of reality.

They do not.
What they do is merely paint for you a semi-consistent picture. Using “unnamed ‘official’ sources” and “anonymous experts”, the stories seem to automagically verify themselves … and so you believe.

Why is this?
Why do you believe the ‘unnamed official sources’, sans any evidence or proof whatsoever?

Because you have been conditioned to have Faith.

You have such strong Faith, that you will log onto a web site, where the oft-tossed-about and lofty motto of “Deny Ignorance”, is proclaimed frequently, and you will REPEAT precisely what the talking box TOLD you –not SHOWN you– has occurred, as if these things were witnessed by your own two eyes.

The only existent evidence which you have access to with respect to the Boston bombings is the FBI's criminal complaint aginst the surviving suspect, and (to a lesser degree) the testimony of any eyewitnesses who you can see or hear.
None of that evidence supports anything of what you've commented about the case.
Go download the PDF of the FBI agent's sworn affidavit and read it. And then, upon critical reflection, notice just how little is in alignment with the stories from the “unnamed ‘official’ sources familiar with the investigation”.

Reminds me of the scene in 1984, where the people, who are being shown video footage of their supposed archenemy, Emmanual Goldstein, begin screaming, stomping and cheering with ferocious rage, throwing their shoes, spitting at the screen, hurling death threats at the image of a man, who in reality may have never even existed as anything more than a useful tool of Party propaganda.
But such images formed such an integral part of these people's paradigm, that merely displaying them, whilst a familiar Party voice recounts their crimes, was able to induce in the people -- actual, visceral hate.



–Along with being one of the greatest books ever written, it is also a reminder that shortly following the invention of the television, a very insightful human being could envision how ‘media’ would in the future be used to control people while simultaneously implanting the believe that they are not being controlled.

Originally posted by 3mperorConstantinE
reply to post by esdad71


Thank you so much for the enlightenment, it...I can't...Your doubt is your weakness.

I think I understand your worldview from your post but please understand one thing about me. I trust no one. I do not listen to one point of view. I have no favorites that are my go to's for information. I have an open mind and like to leave anything open to possibility until it can be ruled out. Otherwise, a closed view of the real world with full trust in everything I hear would be frightening. Quite. However, this is how most of the country exists.

So, if I told you I did not have a TV, what can you say then? Am I still naive because I do not have a talking box?I mean, your entire diatribe is out the window at that point.

I live by a motto that is better than deny ignorance. Believe half of what you see, none of what you hear and always follow your first thought. When you are wrong, admit it, learn from it and move on. I always have to when someone will log onto a web site, where the oft-tossed around and lofty motto of “Deny Ignorance”, is proclaimed both frequently,and tell me my worldview.

Confidence in ones own beliefs can also be quite a bumpy ride so take care. (1984-great book btw)

Now, is there anything you would actually like to add to the thread itself? It is about supporting a terrorist through social media? the boys at Langley are getting bored....

Originally posted by esdad71
reply to post by brandiwine14

 

After 9/11 it was 100 dollar flags on eBay. 5 minutes after Boston, it was a meme. Where do we go from here?

Memes, matrices, Liberace and reality television. Isn't it obvious how such things could be curbed? I believe you might have a clue, I believe you might be looking at it right now. So whether it be by fault or design is immaterial in the end, now, isn't it? The result will be the same. This is my hypothesis. The chemical reaction has taken place and now, to prove or disprove the theorem, we must scrutinise the results.

Originally posted by 3mperorConstantinE
Your entire worldview appears to be predicated upon fallacious reasoning.
Meaning: you assume that the programs which are beamed into the 42" HD talking box in the center of your living-room, are informing you of reality.

But that's what YOU assume. Not everyone takes the streaming news for "reality". That would be a pretty stupid things to do. For some reason, you assume that. You also assume that 42" HD is the pinnacle of technology. It's not. You are 12 years behind.

Great idea.How about we free him to the people of Boston for justice?And do innocents usually run around with multiple weapons and explosives?

reply to post by esdad71

Of course.
So, half of what you see and none of what you hear, eh?
Btw, disbelieving lies is ipso facto an asset. Maybe not an asset when it comes to communicating with automatons, but I'll manage..
The irony of you thinking that 1984 was a "great book", while simultaneously authoring the quotes below, speaks volumes.

Enough metaphysical bs, I like a good debate...

You made an incorrect assumption which is common on here. Let me try this again...If my face was planted on the TV for the bombings of Boston would I

a) Kill a cop with my brother to get a gun and have a gun battle in the streets

No proof. Video evidence supports LEO shooting at them, not vice-versa. Eyewitness sees police SUV run over brother. Criminal complaint mentions nothing about this; says that brother was killed during shootout.

b) Light IED's and throw them at police

Weren't thrown at police. Eyewitnesses see no explosions. No explosions captured on video.
Criminal complaint says in plain English "later found in car"…

c) I'm on a boat!

Happy for you, and also a great song. Unfortunately any point you could possibly have about boats is N/A to anything being discussed.

d) attempt to kill myself.

Except that was wrong too. He was unarmed. The talking box, (which you don't have) lied.

e) retain Eric Holder as my defense attorney

Eric Holder is the corrupt head of the DOJ. If your non-existent TV told you that ... It lied.

I give at least 10 volunteer hours a week, yes, a week to kids programs that my children are involved in and not. Mentoring so they do not find jihad on the web.

// ^funniest thing that I've read all day
If you're kidding, good one; Poe's law is a bitch.
If you're serious ….