bombs in Boston?

Boston marathon bombing happened on same day as'controlled explosion' drill by Boston bomb squad
Monday, April 15, 2013
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger Editorof NaturalNews.com

Bomb squad was running "controlled explosion" on the same day
What's not yet being reported by the mainstream media is that a"controlled explosion" was under way on the same day as the marathonexplosion.

As the Boston Globe tweeted today, "Officials: There will be acontrolled explosion opposite the library within one minute as part of bombsquad activities."

Some people believe this explosion might have been part of the demolitionof another bomb. It seems unlikely, however, that a bomb at the library, onemile away, could be so quickly located and rigged to be exploded by the bombsquad in less than one hour following the initial explosions at the marathon.

Furthermore, according to Local15TV.com, a University of Mobile's CrossCountry Coach said there were bomb-sniffing dogs at both the start and finishlines, long before any explosions went off. He said:

"They kept making announcements on the loud speaker that it was just adrill and there was nothing to worry about. It seemed like there was some sortof threat, but they kept telling us it was just a drill.


Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/039926_Bo...#ixzz2REDRfcrK

Naturalnews.com is one of the worst sites for fear-mongering and misinformation. One of my friends who has gone off the deep end on only organic, natural, chemical free stuff quotes them often, and it's unbelievable the crap that is on that site. And she's a biology major so she ought to know better.

Breaking news: Boston marathon bomb takes place same day as 7 billion human beings inhale oxygen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Enoch the Red

I'm sorry, I'm not seeing a whole lot of difference between Loki's speculation about it being related to Islamic extremism and your post linking it to domestic terrorism because of its proximity to Tax and Patriot day.

Except, of course, that his speculation was more accurate.

---

I also noted that April is a bad month for violent acts in the US, but that's not condemning the western calendar. :rolleyes:

"Terrorism" is a broad category, and a global problem. Intelligence/policing agencies created profiles of terrorists, to intervene and/or prevent violent acts. It's unfortunate that so many people are quick to blame "Arab Muslims" right off the bat....without seeing the distinction is Radical Extremism.

It was somewhat understandable that Americans got paranoid after 9/11, Bin Laden, AQ, Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Even though they're a tiny fraction of Muslims in the US (~2 million) and around the world (~ 1.5 billion). But it's turned racist and Islam-phobic when cities won't allow mosques or Muslim community centers to be built, or legislation to ban Sharia law has voter support. :rolleyes: Immigration reform is now being "re-evaluated" because some congressmen want to figure out how that family was given political asylum! ten years ago, and why the younger boy was allowed to become a naturalized citizen!.

It's Seriously Stupid to have this attitude, and let it fester and grow in our society. If we treated ALL domestic violence events --- aka terrorism, depending on how it's defined -- we would be just as paranoid about white male Christian cults (Waco), white male militia (Oklahoma City), white male teenaged malcontents (Columbine), white male schizophrenics (Tucson, Aurora, Sandy Hook). Plus any Evangelical Christians who bomb abortion clinics and murder doctors, the KKK, skinheads, Aryan Brotherhood, etc. who've been linked to organized hate crimes.

But we're not so paranoid about 'those people' if they're born and raised in the US, have a certain skin color, or practice Christianity, huh. We should realize "profiling" has limits, and should be based on observable behaviors. And we shouldn't be so quick to take an Us vs Them attitude.

We should know by now that radical indoctrination can happen over the internet, without much group interaction or association. But we're not gonna censor the internet, track every web site, or "profile" every male between the ages of 15-35. Are we? :bulb:

Nothing you have written there has any relation to what Enoch or anyone else on this thread said. Good job.

Sure it does. Our attitudes (and stereotypes) about "Terrorism and Terrorists" matters. It affects our policies on national security, defense, intelligence, international diplomacy, immigration/asylum....gun safety laws, weapons/ammunition and explosives regulations.

In the post 9/11 world, it matters how people are encouraged to decide who or what is suspicious or threatening. Coming full circle, you were the first to say it'd suck to be a Muslim in the US right now. Gee, no wonder....when the first reactions were it's an Arab Muslim jihadist!!. :donkey:

It was a Muslim jihadist.

Come on, it was obviously a CIA plant, in order to get public support to invade Chechnya.

:picard:

The bombers were young men. One was a US citizen. Both were educated in the US and assimilated to US culture. The mainstream Muslim community (and Boston Islamic Society) has denounced them. No jihadist group has claimed them.

They are either sociopaths or psychopaths, or some hybrid. RADICAL EXTREMISM isn't something limited to Muslims, and terrorist acts aren't limited to Islamic jihadists.

Nobody here's said it is. These guys were though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

:picard:

The bombers were young men. One was a US citizen. Both were educated in the US and assimilated to US culture. The mainstream Muslim community (and Boston Islamic Society) has denounced them. No jihadist group has claimed them.

They are either sociopaths or psychopaths, or some hybrid. RADICAL EXTREMISM isn't something limited to Muslims, and terrorist acts aren't limited to Islamic jihadists.

---

And islamic extremism isn't linked to organizations, lone nuts exist in any form.

Yep, and lone nuts can cause just as much damage and death. And instill fear into any community. :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

Nobody here's said it is. These guys were though.

---

Muslims might say neither of them acted in accordance with traditional Islamic tenets. Since you've posted about bombings during your youth, it's surprising you can't see the difference between an entire religion and its radical extremist elements fringe.

:confused:

..I might be wrong but I'm pretty sure that's not what he's saying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Muslims might say neither of them acted in accordance with traditional Islamic tenets. Since you've posted about bombings during your youth, it's surprising you can't see the difference between an entire religion and its radical extremist elements fringe.

:confused:

---

Stop putting words in my mouth. Never said that. These were Islamic extremist jihadists. If we thought they represented all Muslims they wouldn't get called radicals or extremists.

Flixy you're not wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

Stop putting words in my mouth. Never said that. These were Islamic extremist jihadists. If we thought they represented all Muslims they wouldn't get called radicals or extremists.

---

Then why use the term "Islamic" when referencing extremists?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Then why use the term "Islamic" when referencing extremists?

---

Why not?

Because radical, militant, violent extremism isn't limited to Muslims or Islam.

edit: This isn't much different from rape, sexual or domestic violence debates. Those crimes have less to do with sex, sexuality, or gender.... than broader concepts about dominance and power.

Why use the word "extremist"? Extremism isn't limited to politics. :noob: Since your reading comprehension skills are at an all time low, I'll spell out exactly what I said/implied:

1. The terrorists are likely Muslims.
2. A large part of the public will blame all Muslims for this attack.
3. This is bad.
4. This is why I wouldn't want to be a Muslim in the US right now.

:bored:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Because radical, militant, violent extremism isn't limited to Muslims or Islam.

---

So? Lets be honest, if we're too PC to be honest we'll never fix it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Why use the word "extremist"? Extremism isn't limited to politics. :noob: Since your reading comprehension skills are at an all time low, I'll spell out exactly what I said/implied:

1. The terrorists are likely Muslims.
2. A large part of the public will blame all Muslims for this attack.
3. This is bad.
4. This is why I wouldn't want to be a Muslim in the US right now.

:bored:

---

My reading skills are fine. Your first comment was blaming Arab Muslims, and yes that's 'bad'. You wouldn't want to be a Muslim in the US because of your own attitudes. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

So? Lets be honest, if we're too PC to be honest we'll never fix it.

---

You think this is about being "politically correct"? No, no, I'm saying knee-jerk reactions (like #1 above) are not the way to "fix" things. That diverts attention from other extremists/radicals/militants who pose just as much risk....but happen to have lighter skin tones, or practice other religions, or do heinous things for political reasons, or have delusional mental illnesses.

That also perpetuates a suspicion of Muslims, taking it to irrational levels -- Anne Coulter suggests CCTVs in every Mosque, some congressmen think we shouldn't give any Muslim political asylum or admit them in our universities, others want a moratorium on building new mosques, etc. That's a crazy way to address violence or terrorism, and won't do much to keep us 'safe', either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

My reading skills are fine. Your first comment was blaming Arab Muslims, and yes that's 'bad'. You wouldn't want to be a Muslim in the US because of your own attitudes. :rolleyes:

---

No that's not at all what he said - it's what you think he said but everyone else has understood it correctly. Re-read points 2 & 3. And again. Now read them a third time please. Now do you get why he doesn't want to?

Quote:

---

You think this is about being "politically correct"? No, no, I'm saying knee-jerk reactions (like #1 above) are not the way to "fix" things. That diverts attention from other extremists/radicals/militants who pose just as much risk....but happen to have lighter skin tones, or practice other religions, or do heinous things for political reasons, or have delusional mental illnesses.

That also perpetuates a suspicion of Muslims, taking it to irrational levels -- Anne Coulter suggests CCTVs in every Mosque, some congressmen think we shouldn't give any Muslim political asylum or admit them in our universities, others want a moratorium on building new mosques, etc. That's a crazy way to address violence or terrorism, and won't do much to keep us 'safe', either.

---

None of us are Anne Coulter so why don't you take your ire out on her rather than putting words in our mouths? There's a difference between blaming nobody (you), blaming radical Islamists (us) and blaming all Muslims (Coulter).

Quote:

---

Elmirza Khozhugov, 26, the ex-husband of Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s younger sister, Ailina, said that Tamerlan Tsarnaev had been enamored of conspiracy theories, and that he was also concerned by the wars in the Middle East.

“He was looking for connections between the wars in the Middle East and oppression of Muslim population around the globe,” Mr. Khozhugov said in an e-mail. “It was very hard to argue with him on themes somehow connected to religion. On the other hand, he did not hate Christians. He respected their faith. Never said anything bad about other religions. But he was angry that the world pictures Islam as a violent religion.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/24/us...elopments.html

---

Bombing civilians in the name of Islam is the best way to make people recognize that Islam is not a violent religion. :bored:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

No that's not at all what he said - it's what you think he said but everyone else has understood it correctly. Re-read points 2 & 3. And again. Now read them a third time please. Now do you get why he doesn't want to?
None of us are Anne Coulter so why don't you take your ire out on her rather than putting words in our mouths? There's a difference between blaming nobody (you), blaming radical Islamists (us) and blaming all Muslims (Coulter).

---

Because assigning "blame" to entire groups (by nationality, ethnicity, or religion) isn't going to "fix" problems related to violent crimes. Because it's time we re-evaluate "The War on Terrorism", and defining "terrorism and terrorists" has room for improvement.

There wasn't much difference between Oklahoma City, Columbine, and Boston bombers. They killed and maimed innocents, using legal items to make bombs (aka WMD) based on their twisted and radical ideas. Not much different from those who shoot up post offices, burger joints, malls, movie theatres, schools.

Our reactions are different, though....and I think we should consider that in the debate/discussion! McVeigh was "just" as a white extremist, inspired by conspiracy theorist groups, and radical militants on the web. White men who go on shooting rampages are "just" loners, misfits, mentally ill, inspired by watching violent video games in their basement, or weird stuff on the web.

But any time a sniper/shooter or bomber has religious or ethnic ties (no matter how loose) to Islam....they're a threat to the Homeland and national security, and are part of a global Islamic jihad conspiracy? Not only that, they're a threat to Traditional Judeo-Christian American Values? :rolleyes:

Who said any of that?

Besides the bomber perhaps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

Who said any of that?

Besides the bomber perhaps.

---

:picard:

Yes, a large part of the public will blame all Muslims for this attack, and yes, this is bad. Fact is, millions of people (and posters on this forum) began by speculating the bombers were Muslims! That quickly jumped to their ethnicity, heritage, citizenship and...wait for it....Islamic jihad! :rolleyes:

Congress held a hearing last week on whether Chechan Muslims pose a threat to Homeland Security. Seriously. They've also held hearings on whether 'radicalization in the US Muslim community' is responsible for domestic terrorism, or 'home-grown terrorists'. They don't hold hearings on other radical or extremist minority groups that incite 'terrorism', or individuals who carry out acts of terrorizing violence using legal weaponry, or home-made bombs.

Instead, they refuse to pass bills that limit access to military weapons, or regulate ammunitions (including gun powder or black powder found in fireworks), by citing the 2nd Amendment....and state's rights. Even more disturbing and absurd is how some "news outlets" have treated this, by asking maybe Muslim students shouldn't be allowed to take Nuclear Physics in our universities?. Or trying to connect their use of 'welfare' -- or academic scholarships -- to their twisted mindsets.

RADICAL ISLAM IS ON THE MARCH AND WE NEED TO UP OUR GAME! That's a direct quote from Lindsey Graham, (R) senior senator from South Carolina.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

began by speculating the bombers were Muslims!

---

The bombers were Muslims!

So are you trying to imply the speculation was correct and well-founded?

Apparently the only valid speculation is the wrong kind (i.e. GGT claiming these people were Tea Partyers). :noob:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Congress held a hearing last week on whether Chechan Muslims pose a threat to Homeland Security. Seriously. They've also held hearings on whether 'radicalization in the US Muslim community' is responsible for domestic terrorism, or 'home-grown terrorists'. They don't hold hearings on other radical or extremist minority groups that incite 'terrorism', or individuals who carry out acts of terrorizing violence using legal weaponry, or home-made bombs.

---

That's just plain ahistorical. Inaccurate. Completely and totally Wrong. Congress held hearings about militias after Ruby Ridge and after Oklahoma City. They held hearings about cults after Jonestown and after Waco. They held hearings after the anthrax mailings as well. The Unabomber prompted Congressional attention and it wouldn't surprise me if whoever it was at the Atlanta Olympics did as well. And school shootings have generated all sorts of hearings, reports, commissions, and legislation. I realize you run on emotion and alarmism but do put at least a smidge of effort into remembering reality and not just your hysteria.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

The bombers were Muslims!

---

I have to wonder, though: was this Islamic terrorism in any meaningful sense? Let's not forget that the bombers were, apparently, also losers.