Boston Bomber had "Far Right Papers"... (about 9/11 Conspiracies!)

page: 2
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by LarryLove
 


yeah i also found that interesting and I dont think it really provides much that was new.

based on what i was reading about this in the press today i was expecting it to be some big game changer arguing that the brothers were not radical Islamic terrorists but right wing extremists.




posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


I guess we should know better when the BBC plugs its own shows! I am sure there is a lot more to this story but as the whole thing is still under judgement we will have to wait.



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 03:10 PM
link   
I am old enough to remember when the USA invaded Panama most recently (1989) in order to smear Manuel Noriega (Bush 41's coc aine supplier during his CIA stint)...

They raided his personal apartment "Live! on TV!" a la Geraldo Rivera. Some time afterward, they brought in the camera crews. They found "Hitler Paraphernalia" in his bedroom closet!

I'll never forget the headline: "HE HAD A HITLER IN THE CLOSET" while they brought out a purportedly autographed portrait

Some schticks never get old.



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by LarryLove
 


I think that's a fair comment,

the stuff about his interest in conspiracies and in particular 9/11 is interesting nonetheless but other than that, there isn't really much new in the documentary.



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


Of course he had 'right' papers.

One doesn't think the puppet masters would select him, wind him up

and turn him loose with globalist Commie papers, does one?



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


Their mother seems like quite a piece of work. They eluded to her having some influence over the elder brother's radicalism. The full Chechnya story must have some bearing on the turn of events also.



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by LarryLove
 


I think she probably did play some role in her son's radicalization, I always have though even before this documentary.

she does seem like a interesting lady....



posted on Aug, 5 2013 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by intrptr
 


I think its fair to say if they had literature regarding 9/11 conspiracies then they would also have visited conspiracy websites and as ATS is the largest conspiracy forum about I think once could reasonably speculate based on this that they or one of them did visit ATS and may have even had an account.

Again that is just speculation but all the same i think its quite possible.

I will be watching the show tonight to find out more.


Quite possible. But if they posted in the 9/11 conspiracies forum, it's just as likely they got banned like so many others, LOL. I'll take a look at people who last visited around that time, and see if any have names like BeantownBomber1990.



posted on Aug, 6 2013 @ 01:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


As much as the history channel ran the subject to the point of beating the horse UNDERGROUND for almost a full year quite some time back? I have to say, their stuff is quite educational for the original source nature of most of it. It sure was for World War II.

Be careful about those shows, Lot of them show file footage as background taken out of context. That burns me up because it "mish mashes" the history. People get confused. WWII is the most documented war in history. Especially on film and documents.

I agree about the dry history of ancient civilizations. They didn't have cameras back then either. Everything is a remake or dramatization. WWII is film.



posted on Aug, 7 2013 @ 08:22 AM
link   
reply to post by intrptr
 


You wouldn't think I take single source information of anything of importance do you? lol.... History Channel is extensive and it's very ..umm... obsessive is the word...when they get on a programming kick for a certain topic. Years ago I think they really did spend months to the better part of a year running that nearly non-stop it seemed.

Of course film they use varies for context. It's war footage not today's 100% made for TV. Nothing was made for context of anything but getting a record. So everything is watched with that in mind for the historic footage. Of course, it also helps to have known and had the chance to talk to vets of World War II on some of the questions. So few are left now with living memory of what actually happened in many aspects of that war.





new topics
top topics
 
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join