Two explosions at Boston marathon finish line

[compared2what?]

C2W:

Wtf are you talking about? Everything has changed. Where you been since 2001, locked up in Gitmo or something? Comments like that make me wonder if you're really that ignorant or forgetful, or just bored and looking for a fight?

Patriot Act, NDAA, blah blah blah. This kid, if they dont just kill him while in custody (because he messed with the coolest city in the world, allegedly) is probably gonna get disappeared as an "enemy combatant" and all of that shit, and it could happen to anybody.

I don't think they're going to take him extra-judicial. But you're right that they could.

It could start happening to any of us because of what we write here, and you don't give a shit about it and blithely proclaim that "nothing has changed"?

You lost me. I wasn't saying that. And I wasn't being blithe. I just didn't grasp that you were talking about stuff that happened 12 years ago when you said the last few days had been sickening.

Sorry.

Bye. I may be back or i might not be. This isn't the place i used to frequent. Y'all have taken the emoti-bait. Nice to see.

Emoti-bait? People got blown up. I find that upsetting wherever it happens, without prejudice.

[Spiro C. Thiery]

Wtf are you talking about? Everything had changed. Where you been since 2001, locked up in Gitmo or something? Comments like that make me wonder if you're really that ignorant or forgetful, or just bored and looking for a fight?

Patriot Act, NDAA, blah blah blah. Rhis kid, if they dont just kill him while in custody (because he messed with the coolest city in the world, allegedly) is probably gonna get disappeared as an "enemy combatant" and all of that shit, and it could happen to anybody. It could start happening to any of us because of what we write here, and you don't give a shit about it and blithely proclaim that "nothing has changed"?

Please point us to the....

Oh fuck it. /underreactionoff You are a despicable human being. Quite a few of you, I see.
I'd put up to 10 of you on ignore, but I don't think missing your garbage input would be useful.

Bye. I may be back or i might not be. This isn't the place i used to frequent. Y'all have taken the emoti-bait. Nice to see.

Don't tease. Just leave. Get the fuck out of here, douche. Begone.
It won't be the same place. It'll be better without you. Without several of you, for that matter.
If you don't leave, I might. Start a new board. I'd try to take the best two dozen people with me.
Jeff won't mind, I think. Uh...where is Jeff, anyhow? Jeff?

Anyway, you or me. Who do you think best members here would choose?
If you said you, I think you'd be wrong. If you wouldn't be wrong, then I'm outta here.

I would not vote on such matters, but the very fact that you bother to put it out there for consideration might lead a certainly minded person to say that Nordic wins this one hands down. Even if I were to more explicitly state my opinion, I doubt I would be considered a "best member" by a long shot, whatever that is.

You have been passive-aggressively contradicting yourself all over this thread. First you warn people against the lockdown scare-porn, accusing them of buying the press narrative, then you state in no uncertain terms (ie, in HUGE BLOCK LETTERS) that this was the biggest manhunt of all time and Boston wins.

Truly bizarre. Plus, replace all of your recent Bostonian exceptionalism with American exceptionalism and what's the diff?

[Spiro C. Thiery]

I don't have any political objections to people voluntarily allowing cops into their houses when they reasonably believe it's in their interests.

I imagine your interpretation of "voluntary" is a bit broader than mine.

I doubt it. I forgot to put a qualifier in there. But the "afaik" was in the first post to indicate that as far as I know, nobody got fucked with -- ie, I wouldn't be surprised to learn otherwise. But I also wouldn't be surprised if people let them in voluntarily. They had a reason to believe it was in their interests.

And they can do that if they feel like it, in a free country. As I understand it. Might not be my choice. But that doesn't mean suddenly nobody in the whole country now has one, ever.

It's the same fucked-up it was before.

So, as far as you know, nobody got fucked with? As far as you know, everybody voluntarily let the police in, because they "reasonably believe it's in their interests" and not because they'd be scared not to.

And if they didn't believe it was in their interest--found the very idea unreasonable at its core? What would have happened to anyone who said, "You know what... No. You cannot search my house." I mean, as far as you know?

This latest massive action in the middle of a major urban center is precedent setting, notwithstanding the degree to which elements of it were not.

[82_28]

82_28 is verging on it, walking a tightrope between douche and non-douche.

Fuck you, prisoner. There is no "tight rope". What fucking tight rope could I haven chosen to cross? That was your current tightrope to cross and we were with you. Same with you, chief, You crossed the other one I chose the other. Fuck you for buying into the narrative and thinking that because you are in Boston that you being there means jack shit. What it means is something larger.

[FourthBase]

Wtf are you talking about? Everything had changed. Where you been since 2001, locked up in Gitmo or something? Comments like that make me wonder if you're really that ignorant or forgetful, or just bored and looking for a fight?

Patriot Act, NDAA, blah blah blah. Rhis kid, if they dont just kill him while in custody (because he messed with the coolest city in the world, allegedly) is probably gonna get disappeared as an "enemy combatant" and all of that shit, and it could happen to anybody. It could start happening to any of us because of what we write here, and you don't give a shit about it and blithely proclaim that "nothing has changed"?

Please point us to the....

Oh fuck it. /underreactionoff You are a despicable human being. Quite a few of you, I see.
I'd put up to 10 of you on ignore, but I don't think missing your garbage input would be useful.

Bye. I may be back or i might not be. This isn't the place i used to frequent. Y'all have taken the emoti-bait. Nice to see.

Don't tease. Just leave. Get the fuck out of here, douche. Begone.
It won't be the same place. It'll be better without you. Without several of you, for that matter.
If you don't leave, I might. Start a new board. I'd try to take the best two dozen people with me.
Jeff won't mind, I think. Uh...where is Jeff, anyhow? Jeff?

Anyway, you or me. Who do you think best members here would choose?
If you said you, I think you'd be wrong. If you wouldn't be wrong, then I'm outta here.

I would not vote on such matters, but the very fact that you bother to put it out there for consideration might lead a certainly minded person to say that Nordic wins this one hands down. Even if I were to more explicitly state my opinion, I doubt I would be considered a "best member" by a long shot, whatever that is.

You have been passive-aggressively contradicting yourself all over this thread. First you warn people against the lockdown scare-porn, accusing them of buying the press narrative, then you state in no uncertain terms (ie, in HUGE BLOCK LETTERS) that this was the biggest manhunt of all time and Boston wins.

Truly bizarre. Plus, replace all of your recent Bostonian exceptionalism with American exceptionalism and what's the diff?

Not bizarre. Completely consistent. Cogent. Measured. Ripshit when justified.
I posed a hypothetical choice, so I automatically lose? Ha, okay, whatever.

Because, see, a lot of people despise Nordic. People hate me, too. But in this thread, the people who can distinguish between the fright-show Conspiracy ARG in their own mind and actual reality which contains conspiracies, and who side with those who prioritize reality above all else, who would never in a million years spit callous bitter snark at those affected by reality (even a reality warped by government-staged irreality!)...those people would choose me, whether or not they would publicly ever make such an uncouth choice. Also, aside from moral character, there's the fact that despite Nordic's famously working in Hollywood media or whatever, compared to me he is an untalented twat. Actually, he might just be that anyway, I seriously doubt he's in the creative business. Probably a grip, or janitor. Meanwhile, if people were honest, they would admit that, yeah, I'm probably one of the top 5-10 writers on this board, and what I post here is without exception written extemporaneously, off the cuff, effortlessly in fact. That means what I think, too -- and disagree with me about everything as you wish, but no one can say I'm an unoriginal thinker. Is this all some big pat on my own back? No. It's me trying to sell you on picking me. Because now that I think about it, this really, truly is the choice. Nordic or FourthBase. One, or the other -- and Nordic is just shorthand for his type here. That cravenly, hopelessly cynical type that has zero empathy for even this event, and not even a single crumb of imagination to lead a way outside of the pathetically tiny box that is their mind. Me, or him. I'm better. Choose me. If he doesn't go, if he isn't shamed or forced out of here, I'm gone. And I'll try to take everyone good with me. Maybe that would mean 50 people, not just two dozen. Whatever. That's what this deeply important and long and painful thread has come to, for me.

[FourthBase]

82_28 is verging on it, walking a tightrope between douche and non-douche.

Fuck you, prisoner. There is no "tight rope". What fucking tight rope could I haven chosen to cross? That was your current tightrope to cross and we were with you. Same with you, chief, You crossed the other one I chose the other. Fuck you for buying into the narrative and thinking that because you are in Boston that you being there means jack shit. What it means is something larger.

And, you're out. "With me", my ass.

[FourthBase]

I don't have any political objections to people voluntarily allowing cops into their houses when they reasonably believe it's in their interests.

I imagine your interpretation of "voluntary" is a bit broader than mine.

I doubt it. I forgot to put a qualifier in there. But the "afaik" was in the first post to indicate that as far as I know, nobody got fucked with -- ie, I wouldn't be surprised to learn otherwise. But I also wouldn't be surprised if people let them in voluntarily. They had a reason to believe it was in their interests.

And they can do that if they feel like it, in a free country. As I understand it. Might not be my choice. But that doesn't mean suddenly nobody in the whole country now has one, ever.

It's the same fucked-up it was before.

So, as far as you know, nobody got fucked with? As far as you know, everybody voluntarily let the police in, because they "reasonably believe it's in their interests" and not because they'd be scared not to.

And if they didn't believe it was in their interest--found the very idea unreasonable at its core? What would have happened to anyone who said, "You know what... No. You cannot search my house." I mean, as far as you know?

This latest massive action in the middle of a major urban center is precedent setting, notwithstanding the degree to which elements of it were not.

Please describe for me the person who would refuse such a search in the context of what was reported about #2 yesterday if the police informed the person that #2 was lurking in the neighborhood. Describe this person, in detail, not as some idealist abstraction.

[82_28]

4th, you're being way too defensive. I can tell people to fuck off all day long and it is my job to do so. It is also my job in life to be a friend. Chill the fuck out and look at it from the standpoint of not-being-you, Just chill.

[FourthBase]

4th, you're being way too defensive. I can tell people to fuck off all day long and it is my job to do so. It is also my job in life to be a friend. Chill the fuck out and look at it from the standpoint of not-being-you, Just chill.

Oh, like you've done? "What is it like being FourthBase, in Boston right now? Let's listen."
You tried, I admit. And then seemed to decide it was too much effort. So, you fail. Wanna try again?

[compared2what?]

I don't have any political objections to people voluntarily allowing cops into their houses when they reasonably believe it's in their interests.

I imagine your interpretation of "voluntary" is a bit broader than mine.

I doubt it. I forgot to put a qualifier in there. But the "afaik" was in the first post to indicate that as far as I know, nobody got fucked with -- ie, I wouldn't be surprised to learn otherwise. But I also wouldn't be surprised if people let them in voluntarily. They had a reason to believe it was in their interests.

And they can do that if they feel like it, in a free country. As I understand it. Might not be my choice. But that doesn't mean suddenly nobody in the whole country now has one, ever.

It's the same fucked-up it was before.

So, as far as you know, nobody got fucked with? As far as you know, everybody voluntarily let the police in, because they "reasonably believe it's in their interests" and not because they'd be scared not to.

Yes. Because:

(a) It's reasonable to have a lot of fear that more children, maybe including yours, will be blown up when you've just watched that happen on television and the suspect's thought to be still at large in your neighborhood.

(b) It's also reasonable not to have a lot of fear that the cops are looking for (or care about) you when they've publicly announced to the whole world (which is watching) that they're looking for two other guys, who they're under enormous pressure to apprehend asap.***

For most people.
.

And if they didn't believe it was in their interest--found the very idea unreasonable at its core? What would have happened to anyone who said, "You know what... No. You cannot search my house." I mean, as far as you know?

I already said: There's been an exigent-circumstances exception since the 1970s. So what would happen is that the cops would search their homes anyway. But unless there was child pornography lying around in plain view right in the middle of the meth labs in those homes, I actually wouldn't expect there to be further legal repercussions than that, in this particular instance.

This latest massive action in the middle of a major urban center is precedent setting, notwithstanding the degree to which elements of it were not.

They've done it all before. Shelter in place. House-to-house searches. It's SOP for emergencies and disasters. They just don't happen that often or resemble each other when they do.

And again: There was no rollback of rights after Oklahoma City. So it's not like that's an inevitable state response to terrorism, either. Or like there's a state need for one, atm. The last one wasn't that long ago, they're still getting good mileage out of it.

***ON EDIT: I'm under the impression that the house-to-house didn't start until after the pictures were made public/the MIT cop was shot -- ie, until after residents had a reason to think there was a desperate armed killer on the loose in the neighborhood. But if that's wrong, correct me.

[82_28]

I haven't failed at all (in fact, I have beaten you). It's that I am not backing down from you. I don't even have a problem with you, but you are looking for one -- a problem. It has been presented. We are currently discussing it. "Boston Wins" is bullshit after this morass. Because, you did not win in this matter. None of us did and it's a game we do not want to win in the first place because it is a game not worth playing.

[Spiro C. Thiery]

I don't have any political objections to people voluntarily allowing cops into their houses when they reasonably believe it's in their interests.

I imagine your interpretation of "voluntary" is a bit broader than mine.

I doubt it. I forgot to put a qualifier in there. But the "afaik" was in the first post to indicate that as far as I know, nobody got fucked with -- ie, I wouldn't be surprised to learn otherwise. But I also wouldn't be surprised if people let them in voluntarily. They had a reason to believe it was in their interests.

And they can do that if they feel like it, in a free country. As I understand it. Might not be my choice. But that doesn't mean suddenly nobody in the whole country now has one, ever.

It's the same fucked-up it was before.

So, as far as you know, nobody got fucked with? As far as you know, everybody voluntarily let the police in, because they "reasonably believe it's in their interests" and not because they'd be scared not to.

And if they didn't believe it was in their interest--found the very idea unreasonable at its core? What would have happened to anyone who said, "You know what... No. You cannot search my house." I mean, as far as you know?

This latest massive action in the middle of a major urban center is precedent setting, notwithstanding the degree to which elements of it were not.

Please describe for me the person who would refuse such a search in the context of what was reported about #2 yesterday if the police informed the person that #2 was lurking in the neighborhood. Describe this person, in detail, not as some idealist abstraction.

It is a person who insists on his right not to submit to unlawful search and or seizure just because of "what was reported about #2 yesterday".
Perhaps it should be incumbent upon you--Mister "I'm friggin great today because I stand on the shoulders of Paul Revere"-- to describe in great detail all of the contexts within which we should all just forfeit our rights.

[compared2what?]

It is a person who insists on his right not to submit to unlawful search and or seizure just because of "what was reported about #2 yesterday".
Perhaps it should be incumbent upon you--Mister "I'm friggin great today because I stand on the shoulders of Paul Revere"-- to describe in great detail all of the contexts within which we should all just forfeit our rights.

Is searching for a known child-killer who's a threat to the lives of others a legitimate police action, as you see it?

Also, ON EDIT, for the Nth time:

They've been allowed to do that for decades when lives are at risk without it becoming an everyday event in the lives of all Americans. They just abuse it predictably along class/race lines, as per usual. So if the cops haven't been regularly entering your home to search and seize for most of your life already, you haven't forfeited anything that wasn't already gone and utterly unrelated to the topic.

[Spiro C. Thiery]

It is a person who insists on his right not to submit to unlawful search and or seizure just because of "what was reported about #2 yesterday".
Perhaps it should be incumbent upon you--Mister "I'm friggin great today because I stand on the shoulders of Paul Revere"-- to describe in great detail all of the contexts within which we should all just forfeit our rights.

Is searching for a known child-killer who's a threat to the lives of others a legitimate police action, as you see it?

Also, ON EDIT, for the Nth time:

They've been allowed to do that for decades when lives are at risk without it becoming an everyday event in the lives of all Americans. They just abuse it predictably along class/race lines, as per usual. So if the cops haven't been regularly entering your home to search and seize for most of your life already, you haven't forfeited anything that wasn't already gone and utterly unrelated to the topic.

It simply does not warrant the action, as I see it.
And, again, this action was different in scale, regardless of whether or not it is in fact codified in law. The difference between this "child-killer" who "was a threat to others"--which, by the way, is yet to be established (which is kind of the point)--and anyone else they decide to send out the commandos for is gray, at best.

[8bitagent]

I been thinking about it. At first I winced and was a little upset the Alex Jones/youtube conspiracy mongers were crying "false flag" the moment this happened...
but after looking more into it, chewing on it...

- The chechen militant angle and the history of Chechen fighters
- the 4/19 week date(which seems to be a very dark spiritual time for events in the US)
- the absolutely unprecedented history making response and real time HD psyop
- the news the FBI was aware of these two in 2011 as well as foreign intel
- the family believing these kids were brainwashed by unknown security services
- the craft intl guys teaming around the finish line before the blast

This feels like a black op through and through. The chechen thing clinched it for me. I no longer believe this to be an independently motivated attack.

And for shits and giggles, I made this.