But, why the marathon?
I expect they targeted the finish line of the marathon because they knew
that it would be televised and that lots of spectators would congregate
near that finish line.
Luckily, one of the three bombs that were planted didn't go off and will
hopefully provide the evidence needed to track down who did this.
A fire in the John F. Kennedy library in Boston occurred at about the
same time, but has since been determined to be completely unrelated.
That was just a coincidence.
I kinda doubt this would be an international terrorist attack. Even
international terrorists would be asking themselves "But, why the
marathon?" since there's absolutely no political, economic or military
significance associated with it. It's just an easy target because it
stretches along a 26 mile route, and so it's not plausible to guard all
26 miles. Still, the finish line should have been recognized as a
potential target because of the television cameras that would be located
So your military-surveilence complex can sell more
- body scanners
- biometrics monitors/software
- metal detectors
So they can be employed at more
- public events / gatherings
- your front door
So they can mine, store, record, analyze
- more of your electronic data
- more of your purchases
- more of your travel by any means (foot, car, plane, train, etc)
So they can enact
- more laws that strip away any sense that you could conduct
any form of communication, travel or commerce with anonymity
For the real purpose
- as make-work projects, to hire people to perform mindless jobs
- to provide data to the IRS so they can discover unrepored income
Very possible. White Americans seem to take delight in being who they
are not. Look at all the wht Americans that are hellbent on being
Afro-American. "Yo dat, brah!" Dolts. Sounds like it jes might be
another case of a homegrown whitey goin' "Allah akbar" on us. White
guilt taken to the extreme. Maybe not. We shall see.
One thing's for sure. This near burnt out cinder jes can't support
nine billion ppl. Basic high school sociology. Higher population
density precipitates more eratic behavior. Short of a catastrophic
plague or natural disaster seriously reducing the World's population,
it damn sure isn't gonna get any better. I'm suddenly reminded of
Alvin Toffler's book, Future Shock. FS, along with higher pop, has
now given us something even worse, namely mankind's meltdown.
But why the marathon?
There isn't any "political, economic or military significance"
with many targets of international terrorists. When they blow up a
hotel that foreigners tend to stay at, for example, how is that any
than what happened yesterday? Or when they leave a car bomb
at a crowded market? Or when they blow up a subway or train? The
intent is to kill as many as possible in a dramatic way. We don't
did it, but to say it doesn't fit the pattern of international
terrorists is to
deny or cover up the obvious.
Terror. It's about instilling terror into ordinary daily activities.
Not difficult to do in contemporary American society considering that
Americans are now terrified of riding their bicycles without a helmet or
living in a house that may have some radon in the basement.
You know, I must be starting to slip up. I kind of swallowed the
"international terrorist" label. The more accurate label is "muslim
terrorists", because that is what they actually are in the vast
majority of cases. And their terrorist acts
more often than not don't span borders. In other words,
they spend more time blowing up their fellow citizens than they do
killing outside the country. So, why would you call them
Right. Obama didn't refer to it as a terrorist attack in his 6 PM
little speech. He called it a "tragedy". I mean whether it's purely
domestic and unconnected to radical Islam, or Al-Qaeda, it was
still an obvious terrorist attack. What other possibility is there?
Spontaneous bombs that assembled themselves? A husband
trying to kill his wife, but figured they would do it that way?
I also found it interesting that TV stations had an official
White House photo of Obama in the oval office on the phone
talking to the FBI director, trying to look presidential
in time for the 6:30PM news. The thing
happens at 3PM and instantly the WH calls in the official
photographer to snap a photo?
LOL, how's that working so far? The latest dumb move was
just yesterday, with Kerry now saying the US will have one
on one talks with the little runt in North Korea, as long as
he shuts up for a while and doesn't test any more nukes.
Another mistake, as the little runt sees that concession of the
US agreeing to one on one talks as a direct result of what he
McCain had it right. He said we've been doing this for
decades. North Korea acts up, makes threats, we respond
with more negotiation and aid out of false hope that it
will change them. Meanwhile they continue
lying and building nukes. It's a cycle and every damn
fool, except of course the Sec of State, the president
and mabye Jimmy Carter, can see that it's not only
not working, but getting exponentially worse.
On Tuesday, April 16, 2013 2:54:10 PM UTC-4, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
The official photographer is probably just on the other side of the nearest door
anywhere the President happens to be. It's been like that since there have been
You can't tell me your beloved "Dubbya" didn't love to pose for pictures to make
himself look "Presidential." They're all media hogs.
On Apr 17, 12:29 pm, email@example.com wrote:
re have been cameras.
No, I don;t recall Bush41 doing a staged photo shoot
with the WH photographer in the oval office within a couple of hours
a terrorist attack. In fact, I recall the libs making a big
to do over him continuing to read to those school children
when first informed that a plane had hit the WTC. You
mean presidential like that?
Did you hear the questions posed to the Boston Chief of Police? From
memory, one was along the line of, "...Is this another false attack
instrumented by Homeland Security in order to remove our guns?" What
caught my attention was the phrase 'another' There were some others
but missed them due to sound having too much voice over and clutter.
While the CNN announcer kept saying the smoke indicated this was more
likely a crude bomb, not containing C4; I kept thinking great made
with gunpowder so another way to take all the ammunition away. We'll
see if it was a 'dirty' bomb, laced with C4 for effect.
Trigger mechanism? CNN said they're checking the cell phone towers,
Uh, surprised they didn't jam the network in that area. Oh, maybe they
did [after the fact] and that's why some didn't go off.
You might want to check on that. My understanding is that
was just another story that was wrong and in fact, the
cell phone service might have been overloaded because
of what happenedn, it was *not* shut down on purpose,
at the direction of police, etc.
Why can't you libs get anything right?
On 4/16/2013 10:14 AM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
The P.L.L.C.F. have a "switch" on their wish list for all activity in
the country. They want a "switch" to turn off The Internet, they want
a "switch" to turn off your money, they want a "switch" to turn off all
travel, they want a "switch" to turn off all news dissemination and with
all the ammunition, guns and military vehicles they've been purchasing
lately, it's obvious they want a "switch" to turn off the citizenry. o_O
Oh yea, P.L.L.C.F., Progressive Liberal Leftists Commiecrat Freaks. The
acronym saves a lot of typing. ^_^
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.