DHS Admits Boston Training Drill Involving Backpack Explosives Planned Months Before Marathon

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow

Rather than looking into them and forgetting it, my guess would be that they started pulling their old trick of the FBI posing as radicals and radicalizing these guys, in their communications they probably even dropped the inside knowledge of the bombing drill at the marathon. However rather than radicalizing and then handing over a fake explosive device i think the brothers cut all communication and made their own, very real bombs, and then targeted the place where they knew a lot of officials and police and people would be drill at the Boston Marathon (seemingly inconsequential inside information leaked by an operative while posing as a radical working on these guys).

What do you guys think about that as a possibility?

I think zero possibility. If they were radicalizing them in a means to entrap them in something, they wouldn't cut ties or surveillance of them. I see that is highly, highly unlikely.

reply to post by Bob Sholtz

oh, really? forgetting the hijacked car, and the dead terrorist body left as a "clue"?

hmm...

i wonder what the DHS thinks about coincidence? if i drew up hypothetical plans for a similar scenario that happened in boston, would that be considered "coincidence"?

The premise of the Boston one was that they would be called to a bomb threat and nothing would happen. The responders would be called in and would be watched. Unless there was a call a week or a few weeks before the marathon, it's a completely different premise than the marathon. (Besides involving a bomb.)

Or did you gloss over that info?

Originally posted by tombangelta
reply to post by wasaka

 

WHY IS THIS ALWAYS THE CASE.

911 , 7/7 london , boston etc etc.

I despise this world sometimes.

www.secretsofthefed.com...

Considering drills are held on a weekly basis (given how big the US is) it's pretty damn likely a drill is going to be held close to the date of anything happening.

9.11 I would raise questions about. 7.7 I would ask what threats were present and what exactly did the intelligence community know leading up to the event.

Boston, it does not seem anything is up more than mere coincidence. Still worth looking into what intelligence was available to the spook community leading up to it, (did they warn people or deem anything gathered as not an immediate threat, etc?)

But for all intents and purposes, I don't see any revelations in this drill.

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly
reply to post by Sankari

 

That's their bloody job!

Not really. Their job is preventing, not gathering intelligence and than do nothing about it.

The intelligence community hears a lot of chatter. If you read books on the subject you will see how silly some of it all really is. There are a lot of hotheads on either side as well so determining what is an actual threat, and what is just hot air, is a difficult process that is handled rather well when you think about it.

Most people go about their days without a thought about threats to the security to the country and its people.

Now, consider the Bush years when war drums were being pounded and the government was looking for reasons to go overseas. There was the "Terror Color Chart" ...beyond ridiculous.

Oh it's a Green level today I don't have to bring my duct tape and rad suit to protect myself from a dirty bomb!



If the alphabet agencies made public statements every time there were threats you'd be in constant panic. Or you have overzealous people in power who want to warn and sound trumpets every time someone takes a piss. Consider how scary some people make the world out to be when it isn't. Put one of those people in power and you have those things like, "Watch your neighbour to see if he's acting funny!" campaigns. Perhaps their motives are just to make you paranoid and their intentions are to gain more power rather than be a nation-level over-bearing-mother persona...(I wouldn't rule that out either.)


In any case, beyond keeping tabs on people, it is their job to be prepared, which involves drills. Simple as that.

If they didn't do it you'd be complaining about that.

Originally posted by wasaka

DHS Admits Boston Training Drill Involving Backpack Explosives Planned Months Before Marathon

www.storyleak.com

the agents were planning on conducting training exercises centered around a fictitious terrorist group called ‘Free America Citizens’.”

Read more: www.storyleak.com...

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.bostonglobe.com

The most interesting thing to me is that the "terrorist group" is called "Free America Citizens". Does that sound like a branch of al qaeda to anyone? Since they're supposed to be such an enormous threat to us, shouldn't they be preparing for attacks from them?

Originally posted by AntiNWO
The most interesting thing to me is that the "terrorist group" is called "Free America Citizens". Does that sound like a branch of al qaeda to anyone? Since they're supposed to be such an enormous threat to us, shouldn't they be preparing for attacks from them?

What, and be accused of racism and profiling by the politically correct chuckleheads out there?

Who cares what the "terrorist group" is called? It's a fictitious name used in a planned drill that never happened and has nothing to do with what is being prepared for.

If nothing else, it's further evidence that there's no conspiracy associated with this particular drill, or they'd have used a different name than one that would attract conspiracy theorists just by its mention.

reply to post by whatsecret

What a coincidence, another training exercise during an attack carried about by "terrorists".

I guess we should ignore witnesses as well? "They kept making announcements to the participants do not worry, it's just a training exercise,"...

Originally posted by gladtobehere
reply to post by whatsecret

 

What a coincidence, another training exercise during an attack carried about by "terrorists".

I guess we should ignore witnesses as well? "They kept making announcements to the participants do not worry, it's just a training exercise,"...

edit on 12-6-2013 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)

Yet another person who didn't read the OP article.

The drill was scheduled for two months after the marathon, and most importantly, if your link suggesting dogs were being used to look for bombs, that would only imply (possibly) officials were looking for a threat but were trying not to scare the public, or (b) it's a common practice to run dogs over the area of big events.




However, the claim is still:

Stevenson said. "I think they must have had some sort of threat or suspicion called in."

CNN reports a state government official said there were no credible threats before the race.

Seems like dogs might be a standard protocol though: (A commenter)

I've worked at 'large public gatherings' in the past, and bomb sniffers are not uncommon. most people just don't notice them, as the security forces don't make it obvious how they are securing the area, but they aren't hiding it either
1 •Reply•

www.thegatewaypundit.com...

This proves nothing. They have been telling us for 15 years now to watch for backpacks left unattended anywhere. I am assuming it's an easy and inconspicuous way of transporting explosives, and of course any staged training is going to include this aspect. So really the only coincidence is the location, Boston, which really isn't much of a coincidence at all. Again, this proves nothing and if it did they wouldn't have told you about it.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by Tribunal
just accept that other evidence shows that there was a drill going on and that there was foreknowledge of an explosion.

What 'foreknowledge of an explosion'?? Where did you get that from?

A drill is just that ... a drill. They happen all the time, and obviously for good reason.

I was refering to the tweet, but it seems it was tweeted after the explosions. The controlled explsion was at the exact same spot of the attack though.

And the reports of officials announcing a drill at the scene just a few minutes before an actual explosion took place seems a bit weird.

Your reasoning doesn´t quite cut it.

Originally posted by boncho

Originally posted by gladtobehere
reply to post by whatsecret

 

What a coincidence, another training exercise during an attack carried about by "terrorists".

I guess we should ignore witnesses as well? "They kept making announcements to the participants do not worry, it's just a training exercise,"...

edit on 12-6-2013 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)

Yet another person who didn't read the OP article.

The poster you replied to was refering to witness reports of anouncements of a drill, at the scene, just before the attacks. It has nothing to do with the claims in the OP.

reply to post by boncho

Considering drills are held on a weekly basis (given how big the US is) it's pretty damn likely a drill is going to be held close to the date of anything happening.

Was there a dril in boston 3 weeks before the marathon? Or two weeks before? One week before? The day before? The day after? A week after? No?

But there was a drill going on at the exact moment the attacks happened, and I'm not basing this on the OP article, but on witness reports from that day.

Originally posted by Tribunal

And the reports of officials announcing a drill at the scene just a few minutes before an actual explosion took place seems a bit weird.

edit on 12-6-2013 by Tribunal because: (no reason given)

What he saw was at the start of the race. That would have been hours before, not minutes.

"At the starting line this morning, they had bomb sniffing dogs and the bomb squad out there," he said. "They kept announcing to runners not to be alarmed, that they were running a training exercise."

blog.al.com

This sounds a lot like the "using planes as weapons" drills they were running on 9/11.

Even though "no one had ever thought of a terrorist doing such a thing" before 9/11.

Can anyone tell me where I have heard this before?

reply to post by OneisOne


There are various reports, it doesn't really matter if a witness heard them announce it an hour or just minutes before.

The point is that a drill was going on.

Originally posted by OneisOne
...What he saw was at the start of the race. That would have been hours before, not minutes.
...

There were numerous other "witnesses" who reported such announcements of "don't be alarmed" throughout the course of the race.
Likewise, within the day following the bombing/s, "officials" reported that - not only did they "sweep" the course shortly before the start of the race/marathon, but also approximately an hour prior to the explosions.
They further implied (in the course of this revelation) that "this is normal operating procedure"...

reply to post by Tribunal

Are you aware of when & where the actual "controlled explosion opposite the library" took place?
Were there witnesses...? Was it photographed/video-taped?
One would think that "this" would have been videoed......
Likewise, I do not "tweet", nor do I know much about the whole twittering universe...but - are you aware of the proof/verification of the evidence that is purported to debunk the tweeted announcement (that there would be a controlled explosion...etc...)?
Thanks.

ETA: My point is - in most large cities (that I've been to), an entire city block (at least) is devoted to the main branch of the "Public Library". If that is the case (or anything similar)...is it possible that the controlled explosion might have taken place "opposite the library"...but on another street (not on Boylston)...?

Originally posted by WanDash
There were numerous other "witnesses" who reported such announcements of "don't be alarmed" throughout the course of the race.

Honestly I've looked for others that have stated that, but can't find anything. Do you have a link?

reply to post by WanDash


I have the exact same questions myself, but no answer at this point.

Originally posted by OneisOne
...Honestly I've looked for others that have stated that, but can't find anything. Do you have a link?

Will see if I can find one... It's been a while.
I hate not having them handy when referring to them. Yesterday, I was looking for one that had been given in late April (on another aspect)...found the thread...found the link (Washington Post)...followed the link to "404".
Hope I can get this one.