Explosion at Boston Marathon

Page 19 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
hiero2 said:
I have BEEN on the ground - with my leg in two pieces. I have seen my own bones exposed. I LIVED through the incident. I worked with a man who had a VERY similar injury - except he was out in the middle of the desert, on a motorcycle. He had to drive himself back to where he could be met by medical personnel. With his own bones protruding from his leg as he drove the 20-30 minute trip to where he could get medical assistance.
To be fair, there is a huge difference between a compound fracture, which may not involve any severance of major blood vessels, and where there is only a small hole in the skin, and having all of the soft tissue of your lower leg destroyed, in which major arteries are severed, and are completely exposed. I will leave it to others who know far more about trauma than I do--including some who replied to that blog--to argue that massive bleeding does not necessarily occur in these circumstances.

But there is another major problem with this staged bombing theory. All the doctors who supposedly treated the victims would have to be in on the ruse. I saw an interview with a couple of these doctors, a day or two after the bombing, in which they provided a very general update on the conditions of the patients. If this theory is right, these doctors were either lying--apparently because of being bribed, threatened or paid off by the government--or were actors. If the latter, surely someone at the hospital would have figured this out by now. After all, they were identified by names and positions. Someone falsely claiming to be a doctor working in a certain department at a certain hospital is interviewed on a program watched world-wide, by hundreds of millions of people, and no one catches this?

In fact, a large number of people working at several Boston area hospitals would have to be involved in this conspiracy. And what about the reported three people who died, and their relatives and friends? If these pretend-victims were real people, as named, they would have to disappear for the rest of their lives, to maintain the secret. If they were make-believe, all the people who claimed to know them would have to be lying. Including people in China who reacted to the death of the young Chinese student. All of these people were part of a gigantic lie--for what reason?
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,773
2
0
hiero2 said:
O. M. F. G.

Do you REALLY think, this guy "just-a-believer-or-do-you-think" has ANY connection to reality? If you do, we have nothing to discuss.

I have BEEN on the ground - with my leg in two pieces. I have seen my own bones exposed. I LIVED through the incident. I worked with a man who had a VERY similar injury - except he was out in the middle of the desert, on a motorcycle. He had to drive himself back to where he could be met by medical personnel. With his own bones protruding from his leg as he drove the 20-30 minute trip to where he could get medical assistance.

Whoever posted this complete idiocy has more going on in his mind than truth. This guy probably believes what he says, but he/she has a poor connection to reality. What this guy posts is not just idiocy, it is COMPLETELY disrespectful, and dismissive, of people who suffered REAL injuries on that day. This is utter, and complete, wing nut nonsense. What this person says, that they have knowledge because they have training? Somehow, in this case, that training has no meaning. To this person, there is a political/religious meaning that has greater importance than simple truth. It makes me sick.
Lately I have not agreed with you much. On this 100% agree with your post!



Now we have MI telling us the difference between compound fractures and bomb trauma...WHY? WTF this bombing did happen and there is no reason to spin it into something else.

There are not enough details even with the media to know everything that happened. I hope we get them but sometimes the info takes time to come out.
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,773
2
0
hiero2 said:
O. M. F. G.

Do you REALLY think, this guy "just-a-believer-or-do-you-think" has ANY connection to reality? If you do, we have nothing to discuss.

I have BEEN on the ground - with my leg in two pieces. I have seen my own bones exposed. I LIVED through the incident. I worked with a man who had a VERY similar injury - except he was out in the middle of the desert, on a motorcycle. He had to drive himself back to where he could be met by medical personnel. With his own bones protruding from his leg as he drove the 20-30 minute trip to where he could get medical assistance.

Whoever posted this complete idiocy has more going on in his mind than truth. This guy probably believes what he says, but he/she has a poor connection to reality. What this guy posts is not just idiocy, it is COMPLETELY disrespectful, and dismissive, of people who suffered REAL injuries on that day. This is utter, and complete, wing nut nonsense. What this person says, that they have knowledge because they have training? Somehow, in this case, that training has no meaning. To this person, there is a political/religious meaning that has greater importance than simple truth. It makes me sick.
Lately I have not agreed with you much. On this 100% agree with your post!



Now we have MI telling us the difference between compound fractures and bomb trauma...WHY? WTF this bombing did happen and there is no reason to spin it into something else.

There are not enough details even with the media to know everything that happened. I hope we get them but sometimes the info takes time to come out.
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
0
0
i am still wondering why the fbi review following what appears at least 2 separate tip offs, cleared the older brother :confused: my interest is not to join the yelling voices, plenty of those already, rather, to understand the terribly costly reasons, be they political, procedural, operational or a simple incompetence

in search of an answer i found the following links.

In this one a former fbi agent sees 2 reasons - i) the system is clogged with too much irrelevant data on innocent people ii) the american politicians' habit on splitting terrorists into ‘ours and theirs’. that is, the chechens were considered a russian problem. she also blames american neoconservatives (with several examples) of were direct tip-off went unheeded due to their cold war ideology.

In this piece, The telegraph unearthed that the fbi was informed of tamerlan’s 6 visits to a well known militant while in Dagestan and that his fbi file was not cross-referenced to his photo even 3 days after the explosions. it also refereed to legal complexities in applying close surveillance in some cases.

in this article,
according to rep. mike rogers, the fbi shifted the blame to the those who alerted them after a ‘foreign intelligence service failed to cooperate with the agency’s investigation’ :rolleyes: this one seems to show lack cooperation or the fbi‘s arrogance.. perhaps the fbi wanted the alerters to divulge their sources which is a well-known no-no in the spy world. by the same token, the fbi blaming aeroflot’s clerk for not knowing that tamerlan traveled to russia for 6 months, sounds like another attempt to shift the blame or justify the inaction - every competent IT pro knows that searching/filtering on one variable only is likely to bring along lots of irrelevant and false data. a national security profession should know that.

I am going to omit certain outlandish sources that basically put the blame on cia for the boston bombings (the inference was based on a verifiable but irrelevant fact that the cia indeed sponsored such chechen militants like shamil basayev and al khattab when they fought russia)
 
Jul 10, 2010
2,906
1
0
python said:
i am still wondering why the fbi review following what appears at least 2 separate tip offs, cleared the older brother :confused: my interest is not to join the yelling voices, plenty of those already, rather, to understand the terribly costly reasons, be they political, procedural, operational or a simple incompetence

in search of an answer i found the following links.

In this one a former fbi agent sees 2 reasons - i) the system is clogged with too much irrelevant data on innocent people ii) the american politicians' habit on splitting terrorists into ‘ours and theirs’. that is, the chechens were considered a russian problem. she also blames american neoconservatives (with several examples) of were direct tip-off went unheeded due to their cold war ideology.

In this piece, The telegraph unearthed that the fbi was informed of tamerlan’s 6 visits to a well known militant while in Dagestan and that his fbi file was not cross-referenced to his photo even 3 days after the explosions. it also refereed to legal complexities in applying close surveillance in some cases.

in this article,
according to rep. mike rogers, the fbi shifted the blame to the those who alerted them after a ‘foreign intelligence service failed to cooperate with the agency’s investigation’ :rolleyes: this one seems to show lack cooperation or the fbi‘s arrogance.. perhaps the fbi wanted the alerters to divulge their sources which is a well-known no-no in the spy world. by the same token, the fbi blaming aeroflot’s clerk for not knowing that tamerlan traveled to russia for 6 months, sounds like another attempt to shift the blame or justify the inaction - every competent IT pro knows that searching/filtering on one variable only is likely to bring along lots of irrelevant and false data. a national security profession should know that.

I am going to omit certain outlandish sources that basically put the blame on cia for the boston bombings (the inference was based on a verifiable but irrelevant fact that the cia indeed sponsored such chechen militants like shamil basayev and al khattab when they fought russia)
Your FBI reasons above ("i" and "ii") are so highly probable, and the simple fact of human fallacy (a lot of competent people miss the needle in the haystack at their work, every day), are why I can't see getting in a bother because "the FBI missed something". If they had enough power to do that, manpower, money, whatever it took, we WOULD then be living in a police state with overarching surveillance of the individual, of the sort that some people often like to say we border on today.

It was a terrible, awful thing. We've seen how intrusive the TSA presence is after 9/11. And THAT, is in a VERY limited, VERY controllable public space. We can't ever prevent all such tragedies. Liege-Bastogne-Liege, the Tour, Paris-Nice - would have to be closed to spectators. Who's gonna pay for that much police presence? On the other hand, I am glad we CAN have people trained to respond to such events. Rapid first aid/medical response saved lives that day, without question. The actual police work done to sift through all the evidence, and the amount of time it was done in, was nothing short of miraculous.

You gave an example of an IT professional above - and an IT professional knows that throwing bodies at a project is a sure way to get foobar. Anyway, in this case everybody was alert enough to talk to each other, and actually find these guys. I, personally, am sure that the very urgency of the event created a hyper-alert atmosphere, and we got way above average communication and behavior out of it. People can't, or don't, maintain such behavior/attention in the course of daily life. We were lucky, and more than a few people showed good sense and good training.

Btw - I haven't seen this on the national news, but it has been on the local. Remember the professional dancer who was begging the doc to save her leg? And the doc had to say "It's already gone"? That woman has ALREADY declared she will continue to teach dance, AND intends to run next year's marathon with a prosthetic. Pretty amazing. Bill Rogers, who apparently hasn't run in years, has declared he will run next year's Boston Marathon.
 
Jan 27, 2013
1,383
0
0
Wallace said:
Governments lie--that's what they do. That's what they've always done. The idea that this means there's some kind of plot going on is just asinine. Everything coming out shows that the Boston events were in the line of Sandy Hook, Columbine and Virginia Tech--insane people with weapons with no political or religious affiliations, except in their crazy heads.
As for the idea that those photos were faked: I'm from Boston and someone I've known all my life, a close friend of my father, was at the finish line when the bombs went off. Anyone who thinks there's anything fake about what happened there is a paranoid, delusional cretin, and probably armed and dangerous. In other words, to deny the human horror of these kinds of events (Sandy Hook, Boston) is to show that you're incapable of sympathy and so capable of the same kind of thing. Is that the side you want to be on?


Someone posted a photo and was questioning the contents, I knew where that was going as I'd come across it already a few times before. This is what some people are believing, who knows, you may even know a couple.

To the first bolded, that may be the case in the examples you've cited but there's ample evidence in many, many other instances that intelligence agencies are responsible for terrorist acts. I really hope this isn't news to you.
If you look at the bigger picture it's clear this is being used to set the stage for more of a police state and a wider war as military preparations are underway for the invasions of Syria and Iran.

I'm on the side that understands that, for example, Iraq didn't have WMD's - that was a lie- but now WMD's have been used in Iraq.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5x9_rvgjxI

I'm on the side that understands that the Syria and Iran invasions will draw in Russia and China as they've stated as much.

I'm on the side that's tired of of all this B.S. I'm on the side that's tired of, as was the case with 9-11, a few thousand American deaths leading to millions of deaths of others around the world in pre-planned invasions. I'm on the side that's tired of the hysterical, non questioning reactions of those whose aim is to protect their cognitive dissonance. I'm on the side that sees the police state, the oligarchy, the military machine, the faux media propaganda as all working to maintain a way of life that's unsustainable, and dying. I'm on the side that would like to see this madness end, not escalate.
 
Mar 18, 2009
775
0
0
RetroActive said:
[/B]

Someone posted a photo and was questioning the contents, I knew where that was going as I'd come across it already a few times before. This is what some people are believing, who knows, you may even know a couple.

To the first bolded, that may be the case in the examples you've cited but there's ample evidence in many, many other instances that intelligence agencies are responsible for terrorist acts. I really hope this isn't news to you.
If you look at the bigger picture it's clear this is being used to set the stage for more of a police state and a wider war as military preparations are underway for the invasions of Syria and Iran.

I'm on the side that understands that, for example, Iraq didn't have WMD's - that was a lie- but now WMD's have been used in Iraq.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5x9_rvgjxI

I'm on the side that understands that the Syria and Iran invasions will draw in Russia and China as they've stated as much.

I'm on the side that's tired of of all this B.S. I'm on the side that's tired of, as was the case with 9-11, a few thousand American deaths leading to millions of deaths of others around the world in pre-planned invasions. I'm on the side that's tired of the hysterical, non questioning reactions of those whose aim is to protect their cognitive dissonance. I'm on the side that sees the police state, the oligarchy, the military machine, the faux media propaganda as all working to maintain a way of life that's unsustainable, and dying. I'm on the side that would like to see this madness end, not escalate.
As long as you understand that the difference between being hugely frustrated with our government, or even completely furious at at, and planting bombs or even arming yourself to kill "jack-booted government thugs" (i.e. policemen) is absolute, then I really don't care which side you're on.

I'll make a bet with you: on the day China or Russia becomes militarily involved in the Middle East I'll buy you a new set of wheels (not carbon fiber--let's not go overboard). If in the next year no major foreign powers have sent their militaries into the region, I'm thinking about DT hubs (Campy) laced to Ambrosio rims. Sound fair?
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,991
0
0
RetroActive said:
[/B]

Someone posted a photo and was questioning the contents, I knew where that was going as I'd come across it already a few times before. This is what some people are believing, who knows, you may even know a couple.

To the first bolded, that may be the case in the examples you've cited but there's ample evidence in many, many other instances that intelligence agencies are responsible for terrorist acts. I really hope this isn't news to you.
If you look at the bigger picture it's clear this is being used to set the stage for more of a police state and a wider war as military preparations are underway for the invasions of Syria and Iran.

I'm on the side that understands that, for example, Iraq didn't have WMD's - that was a lie- but now WMD's have been used in Iraq.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5x9_rvgjxI

I'm on the side that understands that the Syria and Iran invasions will draw in Russia and China as they've stated as much.

I'm on the side that's tired of of all this B.S. I'm on the side that's tired of, as was the case with 9-11, a few thousand American deaths leading to millions of deaths of others around the world in pre-planned invasions. I'm on the side that's tired of the hysterical, non questioning reactions of those whose aim is to protect their cognitive dissonance. I'm on the side that sees the police state, the oligarchy, the military machine, the faux media propaganda as all working to maintain a way of life that's unsustainable, and dying. I'm on the side that would like to see this madness end, not escalate.
I can go some way with you, but I honestly think that the bolded above is baseless scare-mongering.

The US has sent 200 men to Jordan to help and train the locals for increased border protection. I can see no way that the US will get involved on the ground in Syria. Where is your evidence that " military preparations are underway for the invasions of Syria and Iran"?

As for Iran, only people who know and understand nothing about the realities on the ground there could ever contemplate "an invasion". Iran is vast, and has a huge number of men under arms. The worst (bad enough in my book) that I can see happening there is that we shoot off some cruise missiles at nuclear targets, presumably to preempt the Israelis, or in (covert) collusion with them.

To return on topic, my view of 'the Boston bombings' is that much still needs to be clarified and explained, there are plenty of questions that should be addressed. Since I'm not by nature a believer of conspiracies (though I'm also not naive enough to completely rule out the possibility of shady tricks,) I do not subscribe to any of the whackjob theories currently floating around, and will make up my mind in due course when the best possible, most credible, evidence has been presented to the public.
 
Mar 10, 2009
7,269
1
0
At least this case confirms that we can rule out evil doing "name" inflation.

Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev has been charged with using a weapon of mass destruction against persons and property at the Boston Marathon
As per 18 USC § 2332a - Use of weapons of mass destruction

2) the term “weapon of mass destruction” means—
(A) any destructive device as defined in section 921 of this title;
(B) any weapon that is designed or intended to cause death or serious bodily injury through the release, dissemination, or impact of toxic or poisonous chemicals, or their precursors;
(C) any weapon involving a biological agent, toxin, or vector (as those terms are defined in section 178 of this title); or
(D) any weapon that is designed to release radiation or radioactivity at a level dangerous to human life; and
921 of this title
(4) The term “destructive device” means—
(A) any explosive, incendiary, or poison gas—
(i) bomb,
(ii) grenade,
(iii) rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces,
(iv) missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce,
(v) mine, or
(vi) device similar to any of the devices described in the preceding clauses;
(B) any type of weapon (other than a shotgun or a shotgun shell which the Attorney General finds is generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes) by whatever name known which will, or which may be readily converted to, expel a projectile by the action of an explosive or other propellant, and which has any barrel with a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter; and
(C) any combination of parts either designed or intended for use in converting any device into any destructive device described in subparagraph (A) or (B) and from which a destructive device may be readily assembled.
But not:

The term “destructive device” shall not include any device which is neither designed nor redesigned for use as a weapon; any device, although originally designed for use as a weapon, which is redesigned for use as a signaling, pyrotechnic, line throwing, safety, or similar device; surplus ordnance sold, loaned, or given by the Secretary of the Army pursuant to the provisions of section 4684 (2), 4685, or 4686 of title 10; or any other device which the Attorney General finds is not likely to be used as a weapon, is an antique, or is a rifle which the owner intends to use solely for sporting, recreational or cultural purposes.
Makes it easier to justify future invasions too; every nation has a couple of mines, grenades, or rockets lying around...

Nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons are basically the same as assault rifles, bombs, grenades, and IEDs.
 
Jul 10, 2010
2,906
1
0
Since y'all suggested it - I moved a few of the recent posts into the politics thread. I agree that this was advisable, and thank you for the attention you've given it.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
So it appears the DOJ filed a criminal complaint almost immediately after little brother was captured. FBI was just 16 hours into their non-mirandized questioning when a magistrate and assistant US attorney appeared at the hospital and shut down the questioning.

It's reported the kid was "singing like a canary" and that the FBI was under the impression they would have 48 hours to question little brother.

It would appear that Eric Holder has struck again although this story is just breaking now so who knows as to it's accuracy.
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,991
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
So it appears the DOJ filed a criminal complaint almost immediately after little brother was captured. FBI was just 16 hours into their non-mirandized questioning when a magistrate and assistant US attorney appeared at the hospital and shut down the questioning.

It's reported the kid was "singing like a canary" and that the FBI was under the impression they would have 48 hours to question little brother.

It would appear that Eric Holder has struck again although this story is just breaking now so who knows as to it's accuracy.
Singing? We were officially told that he was intubated, that he could nod yes or no, and that he was able to write on a pad. I await confirmation that this was not the case.

Are we complaining that the DOJ is following the law?

Totally on topic here, in case anyone missed it, here is Jon Stewart's brilliant destruction last night of the liberties taken with the Bill of Rights by various people on Faux news, specifically with regard to this event.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/04/25/jon-stewart-destroys-fox-news-for-jettisoning-the-bill-of-rights-after-boston-bombing/
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
Amsterhammer said:
Singing? We were officially told that he was intubated, that he could nod yes or no, and that he was able to write on a pad. I await confirmation that this was not the case.

Are we complaining that the DOJ is following the law?

Totally on topic here, in case anyone missed it, here is Jon Stewart's brilliant destruction last night of the liberties taken with the Bill of Rights by various people on Faux news, specifically with regard to this event.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/04/25/jon-stewart-destroys-fox-news-for-jettisoning-the-bill-of-rights-after-boston-bombing/
Further reporting is saying the FBI filed the criminal complaint, not the DOJ. So the FBI put in motion what they are now upset about.

As to "singing"... those were not my words.

The $64 question. In this circumstance, do we postpone mirandizing this terrorist so as to try and ascertain if there are more bombs and if these two were part of a broader network, or do we treat them just like any other common criminal?
 
Scott SoCal said:
The $64 question. In this circumstance, do we postpone mirandizing this terrorist so as to try and ascertain if there are more bombs and if these two were part of a broader network, or do we treat them just like any other common criminal?
The accused was never an American citizen? Oh, that's right he's a Chechen from the Czech Republic.:rolleyes:

Ship him of to Guantanamo maybe without being charged? I think so. We don't need that messy Constitution, all the laws that followed, the judicial branch or law enforcement to get in the way of American righteousness. We've got a number of Executive Office directives to ship the accused, no wait guilty, guy off forever.

The last time I looked "common criminals" do not recieve the attention and budget to prosecute their cases.

Overall, nothing like a couple of false choices to improve the situation.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
DirtyWorks said:
The accused was never an American citizen? Oh, that's right he's a Chechen from the Czech Republic.:rolleyes:

Ship him of to Guantanamo maybe without being charged? I think so. We don't need that messy Constitution, all the laws that followed, the judicial branch or law enforcement to get in the way of American righteousness. We've got a number of Executive Office directives to ship the accused, no wait guilty, guy off forever.

The last time I looked "common criminals" do not recieve the attention and budget to prosecute their cases.

Overall, nothing like a couple of false choices to improve the situation.
So home grown terrorists are common criminals. Okay. Got it.

Btw, he was always going to be mirandized, the only question was wether th FBI was going to get 48 hours.

Feel free to calm down with your vitriol.

I found it interesting that the FBI is po'd about him being mirandized when he was. If you don't find that interesting that's ok but don't assign positions to me I don't hold.
 
BroDeal said:
As if Boston has not suffered enough, Mark Wahlberg is threatening to bring back the Funky Bunch. Can we nip this thing in the bud quickly by declaring him an enemy combatant?
:D
10 characters of which one is most definitely BroDeal!
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY