Boston ISN'T a Farce at all...

Originally posted by Zarniwoop
reply to post by OutonaLimb

 

Can you point out the specific "damning" part? It's like 25 pages.

too much trouble to go through to put your brain straight?

try this post
so and see if you can refute it.
it is amazing what they can do with computer generated graphics these days.
(much more capable than what is offered us up here for consumption!)

Originally posted by defcon5
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE

 

An important thing that folks tend to forget is that, “Your rights end when they interfere with another persons rights”. If there is a situation that requires you to cooperate with the police because something is putting others in danger, your right to freedom does not exceed others rights to be free from harm. In essence its not the police who are violating your rights, it's the “bad guy” who is violating them and the police are trying to stop them.

edit on 4/20/2013 by defcon5 because: (no reason given)

Wow Defcon!

My right to freedom exceeds EVERYONE'S Rights!

So do yours, your mom's, your children's, every single member of ATS etc!

i think it was a farce, a little embarassing.
but it was entertaining, with all the rolling news.
i think the americans liked it.

reply to post by ColoradoJens

Always have to take everything to the extreme eh?
Actually it happens all the time, it just doesn't make the big media. I've personally seen it done locally for a kidnapping, a bank robbery, and an armed robbery. The law supports them restricting rights in areas for periods due to various events. These events include disasters, crimes, and other things that they did not cause and are beyond their control. In these cases they are not the ones who caused the issue, they are the ones dealing with it and trying to restore your rights as quickly as possible.

reply to post by YapTalk


That is not true...
Tell me what happens when two people's equal rights conflict with each others?

Originally posted by WanderingThe3rd
no offance but i didn't think this site was to discuss how much you believe the real story

edit on 20-4-2013 by WanderingThe3rd because: (no reason given)

Why not? I thought this site was to discuss all.
It is exactly comments like these alternative theorist, either conspiracy related or not, are called nuts.

Be a rebel for a cause, as long as the cause is not 'to be a rebel'.

reply to post by OutonaLimb

too much trouble to go through to put your brain straight?

No. But, it was apparently too much trouble for you to back up your claim with nothing more than a link.

Different cameras and different angles... or holograms. You decide.

Originally posted by WanderingThe3rd
no offance but i didn't think this site was to discuss how much you believe the real story

edit on 20-4-2013 by WanderingThe3rd because: (no reason given)

I didn't realize the site had any specific purpose for choosing one side of a story over another by default? What if the "real story" happens to be the truth on an event? Perhaps that's a rare thing these days and perhaps it's not. It may be more likely that truth comes in shades of gray on major events that take weeks or more to get washed out for a clear picture.

However, what I find disturbing above all lately is what your note suggests. That discussion must somehow be limited to only the anti-establishment version of theories, regardless and sometimes in contradiction to what available facts seem to suggest?

Originally posted by YapTalk
Wow Defcon!

My right to freedom exceeds EVERYONE'S Rights!

So do yours, your mom's, your children's, every single member of ATS etc!

Sorry I had someone at the door.

Anyway, one persons rights conflicting with another's is the BASIS of law, specifically criminal law.

Your right to be noisy vs my rights to quite = Disturbing the peace...
Your right to go where you want vs my right to not allow you on my property = Trespassing...
Your right to carry a gun vs my right not to be threatened by it = Brandishing...
Your right to touch me vs my right to not be touched by you = Battery...
Your right to make a threatening remark vs my right not to be threatened = Assault...

Shall I keep on going?

Police have the right to suspend another citizens rights based on certain criteria.
That is what a terry stop, detainment, and arrest are.

Leave it to America to milk this for everything it's worth. I wonder does America know that there are other countries with far more deaths and devastation's happening daily?

reply to post by NoJoker13


It is what it is.

S&F

I was getting sick of reading imagined ties to police and supposed false flag blah blah blah...

Originally posted by Zarniwoop
reply to post by OutonaLimb

 

too much trouble to go through to put your brain straight?

No. But, it was apparently too much trouble for you to back up your claim with nothing more than a link.

Different cameras and different angles... or holograms. You decide.

typical.

you have many fans grasshopper, with all your stars.

as i say, i am coming to believe that we deserve exactly what we get, we are
behaving so stupidly.

Originally posted by defcon5
reply to post by YapTalk

 

That is not true...
Tell me what happens when two people's equal rights conflict with each others?

What happens? FREEDOM trumps anything.

If I am not convicted of a crime nor have committed a crime there is no way in hell I'll give up my freedom.

To you, the state, aliens etc.

None of you have ANY RIGHT to take my freedom away because you are scared.

Originally posted by defcon5
reply to post by ColoradoJens

 

Always have to take everything to the extreme eh?
Actually it happens all the time, it just doesn't make the big media. I've personally seen it done locally for a kidnapping, a bank robbery, and an armed robbery. The law supports them restricting rights in areas for periods due to various events. These events include disasters, crimes, and other things that they did not cause and are beyond their control. In these cases they are not the ones who caused the issue, they are the ones dealing with it and trying to restore your rights as quickly as possible.

Always in the extreme? Ah, ok.

No, shutting down a major metropolitan city with millions of people is extreme. Warning a certain neighborhood to stay indoors because a dangerous criminal is on the loose in that neighborhood is not.



CJ

reply to post by YapTalk
Let me guess, your into the sovereign movement, right?
Its too bad that is nothing more then a scam that some folks have used to sell books and lectures. Most people who have tired it, and the majority of the ring leaders, have ended up in prison.

There is tons of case law that disprove all aspects of the sovereign movement.

reply to post by ColoradoJens

Was the entire city shut down, or just the public transport in that city?
You know they wanted to contain the guy so he could not get out of the area, there were rumors that he was trying to head to New York. They also had to make sure that they didn't run around planting devices all over the place. So even if they did shut down the whole city, under those circumstances a court would find that it was justified and in the public’s best interest.

reply to post by WanderingThe3rd

no offance but i didn't think this site was to discuss how much you believe the real story

So what happens if it all turns out to be true?

The whole false flag thing that is...

reply to post by defcon5


Boston was shut down.

By order of the state, a public transit system that serves more than 1.3 million riders a day was padlocked. Amtrak trains were suspended between Boston and New York. Businesses, offices and some of the world’s greatest universities were shut. Taxis were ordered off the streets for part of the day. Residents were instructed to stay inside.

John Fox, the official historian of the FBI, said that the shutdown of such a major city was virtually unprecedented in recent U.S. history. He said the aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001, attacks was far bigger, knocking New York and Washington on their heels and clearing the airspace over the entire United States.

The Oklahoma City bombing in 1995 (which happened on April 19, Friday’s date) was far deadlier and devastated the city center. But the government didn’t order a far-reaching lockdown.

shutdown nearly unprecedented

CJ

I'm sure there's a possibility it is a farce. But in my opinion, I think the event is legit.

But even if it is indeed a farce or not, you better believe the Obama administration is going to scapegoat the living hell out of it. Since the Sandy Hook fiasco is starting to die down, this will get them babbling about security again for awhile, at least until something else ends up happening. And they may even try to propose some ridiculous legislation because of it.

Farce or not, their going to use this event and skate on it for awhile, trying to guilt people into submitting into their agenda.

There is no disputing the evidence in this case. It's clear cut and for once doesn't seem to have any holes involved.

Anyone who can say this line, believe this line, and simply agree with what you say has simply not done their own investigation.

You see, there is more to a conspiracy then simply "false flag or not". It seems people have forgotten that. Disaster capitalism is real. Governments take advantage of disasters to promote agendas. Governments sway results of events in order to promote agendas. Governments sway the media in order to promote agendas. These are all facts and all of these have taken place during this past week.

But to say there are no holes in the narrative is a ridiculous statement. Suspects were named and lost for no reason on 2 separate occasions. Drills were announced beforehand as proclaimed by many eyewitnesses yet the government still denies it. Enhanced security was on hand, the likes greater than any usual event. The inconsistencies in the "injured" are ridiculous. And last but not least the military contractors were there - there is no denying it yet they still do. They were there for a reason and they left after the bombs went off.

Those are the holes in the event itself. Don't even get me started on the holes in the motives and reasoning behind the alleged suspects and handling of crime scenes that has been unprofessional since the beginning.

No holes? The only way that there is no holes is if you are filling them in with your own imagination - or allowed the main stream narrative to fill them in for you.

This is a conspiracy web site and you can be damn sure that there are mysteries surrounding this situation that more than warrant the label of conspiracy. There is no proof whatsoever that this was a legitimate event any more than the moments after it happened. There is simply people getting tired of questioning and choosing to accept whatever answer they are given.

I will choose to keep asking questions until ALL the questions are answered. The rest of you who see "no holes", well you go ahead and believe what you want to believe.