A pair of explosions rocks the finish line at the Boston Marathon, injuring at least a half-dozen people.

  On 4/16/2013 at 3:10 AM, jules said:

 

  On 4/16/2013 at 2:55 AM, LimpyLoo said:

 

  On 4/16/2013 at 2:54 AM, John Ehrlichman said:

before anybody screams 'false flag', an interesting story has come out that one of the coaches, from New Zealand said that it 'appeared to him there was an active threat before the bomb went off'. He witnessed bomb sniffing dogs and announcements being made about a 'training exercise' before the bombing happened.

 

http://www.local15tv.com/news/local/story/UM-Coach-Bomb-Sniffing-Dogs-Spotters-on-Roofs/BrirjAzFPUKKN8z6eSDJEA.cspx

this could mean many things, but still a meaningful part of the timeline.

It's hard not to wonder about a possible connection.

every major sporting event has shit tons of security these days. seen and unseen.

 

maybe they had a hint something may have been going on, but how often do they get wind of things that never materialize? how often are threats made but not carried out? so they make the choice to not say something, make it seem like a training exercise, assuming nothing will happen. because nothing usually does.

  On 4/16/2013 at 3:14 AM, LimpyLoo said:

 

  On 4/16/2013 at 3:10 AM, jules said:

 

 

  On 4/16/2013 at 2:55 AM, LimpyLoo said:

 

  On 4/16/2013 at 2:54 AM, John Ehrlichman said:

before anybody screams 'false flag', an interesting story has come out that one of the coaches, from New Zealand said that it 'appeared to him there was an active threat before the bomb went off'. He witnessed bomb sniffing dogs and announcements being made about a 'training exercise' before the bombing happened.

 

http://www.local15tv.com/news/local/story/UM-Coach-Bomb-Sniffing-Dogs-Spotters-on-Roofs/BrirjAzFPUKKN8z6eSDJEA.cspx

this could mean many things, but still a meaningful part of the timeline.

It's hard not to wonder about a possible connection.

every major sporting event has shit tons of security these days. seen and unseen.

Are bomb-sniffing dogs common fare for events like the Boston Marathon?

definitely.

  On 4/16/2013 at 2:35 AM, John Ehrlichman said:

 

  On 4/16/2013 at 2:03 AM, Milky said:

i doubt this is a terrorist thing

 

more likely some white male sociopath in his 20s

what if its a Saudi national sociopath in his 20s? would that make it ' a terrorist thing' ?

 

if he claimed it was for Saudi nationalist interests, wouldn't that qualify as terrorism? I'm just trying to gauge what you refer to as the classical definition of terrorism.

sorry if I'm being annoying, I am more trying to explore the psychology behind when the phrase is used and when it isn't. If it is a sociopathic white guy who had 'political' motivations by definition that would make it terrorism too, but if he's Saudi it automatically connects it to the larger framework of the 'war on terror' by association simply because of his ethnicity or religious background. And i think it would connect to this larger framework even if he had absolutely no stated political motivations, the (assumed) fact that he is muslim will be enough to connect it.

ah i got ya. yes, wouldn't be surprised if bells went off in certain peoples' heads about motive and "al qaeda" connections, etc.

Fox News was trying hard as shit reaching and making loose connections to the larger framework. Repeatedly using the phrase IED, bringing up IEDs in Afghanistan and Iraq and chastising the president for not openly saying it was a terrorist attack. Clearly Fox News REALLY BADLY wants this to be related to 'al qaeda'

my prediction ( i hope i'm wrong): Bloomberg's 'stop and frisk' policy will move to Boston, and then possibly start happening in other major cities in the United States. the 7/7 tube bombings directly lead to 'shoot to kill' and stop and frisk in subways and busses, not sure if that still exists today maybe a UK citizen can chime in on that.

  On 4/15/2013 at 10:43 PM, azatoth said:

http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2013/04/photos-of-the-boston-marathon-bombing/100495/

 

The last one is pretty grim. But the M&M in picture 2 made me chuckle. I am horrible.

Holy shit... my friend, or someone who looks just like him, is actually in one of those pictures. Doesn't look like he's hurt, just a concerned bystander. But damn...

goddam that one photo looks like that scene in Dead Alive (or Braindead for our international posters) where the drunk guy tries to climb through the hole in the door and comes out the other side with skeleton legs

  On 4/16/2013 at 3:24 AM, John Ehrlichman said:

sorry if I'm being annoying, I am more trying to explore the psychology behind when the phrase is used and when it isn't. If it is a sociopathic white guy who had 'political' motivations by definition that would make it terrorism too, but if he's Saudi it automatically connects it to the larger framework of the 'war on terror' by association simply because of his ethnicity or religious background. And i think it would connect to this larger framework even if he had absolutely no stated political motivations, the (assumed) fact that he is muslim will be enough to connect it.

i was attempting to say this in the greenwald/compson clusterfuck. the word "terrorist" has an immediate association, both within the media and within the culture, with islam and arabs. it seems to be beaten in. and yet, i remember the oklahoma city bombing. no one called it an act of terrorism, and no one even thought about militant islam. it's pretty clear that the news media has built up that association over the years. and then, as you're saying, if you are muslim, there are assumed ties to terror networks. some of this makes sense logically, at least in terms of profiling, but then if you look at the fbi database and find that only 6% of terrorist attacks on us soil are perpetrated by muslims, and probably even less by anyone involved in a "terror network", the whole assumption just falls apart. it is funny to watch these news organizations tip toe around the issue.

  On 4/16/2013 at 3:43 AM, John Ehrlichman said:

goddam that one photo looks like that scene in Dead Alive (or Braindead for our international posters) where the drunk guy tries to climb through the hole in the door and comes out the other side with skeleton legs

oh damn. now I def don't want to look.

I completely understand why anyone would by skeptical of the media and the U.S. Government. But Islam in the Middle East is not a religion. It is a doctrine (Sharia Law) and it demands submission (not peace). Ever since the "wonderful" Arab Spring "revolution" got under swing, the Muslim Brotherhood/Islamofascists have seized the opportunity with Sharia-Law to cleanse Christians and Non-Muslims (Genocide).

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jul/5/sweeping-religious-persecution-under-the-rug/

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3135/muslim-persecution-of-christians-may-2012

http://en.aswatmasriya.com/news/view.aspx?id=e1b039f3-6a4a-47a4-9d6e-41b93a2a9b93

http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/world-news/detail/articolo/siria-syria-15868/

http://www.lfpress.com/comment/columnists/salim_mansur/2010/11/05/15992756.html

How is this going on without a peep from the UN or the media?...

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/dec/12/opinion/la-oe-turley-blasphemy-20111210

  Quote

The State Department recently released its annual reports on human rights violations around the world. In an unprecedented move, it conspicuously omitted any mention of religious persecution, oppression of religious minorities or violations of religious freedom. Instead, the State Department referred readers to the most recent U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom reports, which cover 2010 but not 2011, and the 2010 International Religious Freedom Report, which is obviously two years outdated.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jul/5/sweeping-religious-persecution-under-the-rug/#ixzz2QaWMmJxd

 

International Human Rights can no longer account for any of these atrocities because by law it is religious deformation to criticize Islam (oh yes, that is how fucked this is).

http://watchingamerica.com/News/165056/barack-obamas-popularity-in-decline-in-muslim-countries/

http://dailycaller.com/2012/06/14/poll-finds-obamas-approval-among-muslims-reaches-new-lows/

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/dec/12/opinion/la-oe-turley-blasphemy-20111210

http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/middle-class-guy/2012/feb/15/islamic-religious-persecution-goes-unnoticed-video/

omg, Fox news is literally playing what looks like a looping animated gif of the explosion happening in rapid succession like a 3 second loop, jesus christ

ffs, could someone please hint to awepittance (im on his ignore list) that his "clever and subversive" analysis of media and propaganda is mostly just his own wishful thinking and projections that got extremely irritating by now (surely im not the only one ? )

you did a pretty good job of doing that, no hints necessary.

  On 4/16/2013 at 4:32 AM, John Ehrlichman said:

you did a pretty good job of doing that, no hints necessary.

Eugene is on Awe's ignore list so he needs someone else to do it for him.

Fox News has already cut together a retrospective of today's events into a musical montage. MY god

  Quote

Approximately 50 percent of the world’s population lives under religiously oppressive regimes. Virtually all of the member states of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), the largest Islamic organization in the world, are among them.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jul/5/sweeping-religious-persecution-under-the-rug/#ixzz2Qae7CsB4

  On 4/15/2013 at 11:28 PM, joshuatx said:

 

Patton Oswalt with some wise words:

 

  Quote

 

Boston. Fucking horrible.

 

I remember, when 9/11 went down, my reaction was, "Well, I've had it with humanity."

 

But I was wrong. I don't know what's going to be revealed to be behind all of this mayhem. One human insect or a poisonous mass of broken sociopaths.

 

But here's what I DO know. If it's one person or a HUNDRED people, that number is not even a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a percent of the population on this planet. You watch the videos of the carnage and there are people running TOWARDS the destruction to help out. (Thanks FAKE Gallery founder and owner Paul Kozlowski for pointing this out to me). This is a giant planet and we're lucky to live on it but there are prices and penalties incurred for the daily miracle of existence. One of them is, every once in awhile, the wiring of a tiny sliver of the species gets snarled and they're pointed towards darkness.

 

But the vast majority stands against that darkness and, like white blood cells attacking a virus, they dilute and weaken and eventually wash away the evil doers and, more importantly, the damage they wreak. This is beyond religion or creed or nation. We would not be here if humanity were inherently evil. We'd have eaten ourselves alive long ago.

 

So when you spot violence, or bigotry, or intolerance or fear or just garden-variety misogyny, hatred or ignorance, just look it in the eye and think, "The good outnumber you, and we always will."

 

 

That is great.

https://www.facebook.com/pattonoswalt/posts/10151440800582655

  On 4/16/2013 at 2:55 AM, Candiru said:

My cousin ran the marathon today, so I watched her run by several miles away from the finish line. My aunt and uncle were closer to the blast, and said it was fucking horrible, people picking up their kids, screaming, running away. Everyone in my family is okay, but it makes me sick to think of all the people I saw run by who had limbs blown off just a couple of hours later.

I'm sorry man. Glad you are safe.

Everything is so well packaged it's surreal. The media reaction is 10000x more terrifying than the actual explosion.

  On 4/16/2013 at 4:40 AM, compson said:

 

  Quote

Approximately 50 percent of the world’s population lives under religiously oppressive regimes. Virtually all of the member states of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), the largest Islamic organization in the world, are among them.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jul/5/sweeping-religious-persecution-under-the-rug/#ixzz2Qae7CsB4

It's all there clear as crystal black and white...

You can either believe your corrupt multi-cultural mainstream corporate/communist liberal media or you can research the material yourself and come to your own conclusion. Only through understanding the problem, can we the people maintain control over our future.

Peace.

 

I am officially worried about you.

I wouldn't be officially worried until he posts a Clint Black album in the upcoming releases forum

  On 4/16/2013 at 4:03 AM, zaphod said:

 

  On 4/16/2013 at 3:24 AM, John Ehrlichman said:

sorry if I'm being annoying, I am more trying to explore the psychology behind when the phrase is used and when it isn't. If it is a sociopathic white guy who had 'political' motivations by definition that would make it terrorism too, but if he's Saudi it automatically connects it to the larger framework of the 'war on terror' by association simply because of his ethnicity or religious background. And i think it would connect to this larger framework even if he had absolutely no stated political motivations, the (assumed) fact that he is muslim will be enough to connect it.

 

i was attempting to say this in the greenwald/compson clusterfuck. the word "terrorist" has an immediate association, both within the media and within the culture, with islam and arabs. it seems to be beaten in. and yet, i remember the oklahoma city bombing. no one called it an act of terrorism, and no one even thought about militant islam. it's pretty clear that the news media has built up that association over the years. and then, as you're saying, if you are muslim, there are assumed ties to terror networks. some of this makes sense logically, at least in terms of profiling, but then if you look at the fbi database and find that only 6% of terrorist attacks on us soil are perpetrated by muslims, and probably even less by anyone involved in a "terror network", the whole assumption just falls apart. it is funny to watch these news organizations tip toe around the issue.

 

it's the global situation that helps build this association.

by global situation do you mean a campaign of fear mongering and sabre rattling? surely you don't mean the global situation in the factual or statistical sense

no, i mean globally islamic terrorism is dominant