Monday, April 22, 2013

The Patriot Day Bombing

April ad2013

During the running of the Boston Marathon this year at least two devices were detonated near the finish line.
Three people were killed instantly, and 200 more injured; some very seriously.
Arms and legs were torn off. Nails, bearings, and shrapnel cut deep into the organs, heads, and soft flesh of the victims.
The city was shaken. Terrified. Locked down.
In an alarmingly efficient fashion, the new engine of the state swept into action.
The DHS, the new central C&C for all US agencies and security organizations with a a paramilitary mandate – unlike anything in previous US history – flooded it's resources into the Boston area like nothing seen in the States since the second World War.
Armoured troops carriers, heavily armoured vehicles, helicopters, FLIR drones, and dozens of militarized troops – some agents, some police – poured into the city.
While the bombers ran, and apparently fought with authorities perusing them - authorities that clearly knew the who and where of the situation - the residents of suburban Boston were treated to house to house searches.
Dozens of people were arrested on 'unrelated charges' and heavily armed units stormed their homes. Videos surfaced online of people being ordered from their homes by teams of heavily armed men in combat fatigues.
The truest irony was that when the lock-down ended, and the people were allowed to leave their homes, is exactly when the second suspect was discovered by a citizen who went out to check on his property.
So, to compound the misery of the images of innocent people (children, two of them) torn to pieces on the streets of Boston; we now are subjected to the 'solution'.
The solution, it seems, is draconian disregard for ptocess and privacy – in the name of 'security' .
This might be a valid debate if the trade was a real one.
I would still, no doubt, side with privacy and due process – but at least there would be a case to be made for the counter. There is none.
Consider what has already happened in Boston.
This in a city with over two billion dollars worth of cameras (now the mayor wants more!), in a city that was crawling with 'event' security. There have even been conflicting reports from authorities about a 'drill' for exactly this kind of event taking place at the very time of the bombing.
(The alphabet people have since retracted and denied this, but it is pretty clear from the imagery that there was some sort of heightened presence at the race.)
There was uniformed Guardsmen, tactical police, and even obvious 'help' in the crowds and all are clearly visible in dozens of pictures and video clips.
So drill or alert – whatever the name or deignation for the deployment - there were people there.
There were dogs. There was equipment.
There was a warning about one of the bombers forwarded from Russian intelligence to US services. The older brother was even interviewed by the FBI!
All that security was in place.
All the intel was being shared.
All the rights of innocent citizens all ready to be stomped on courtesy of a decade of Orwellian legislations.... and still these young butchers walked right up and placed two devices in the middle of it ALL.
The trade of liberty for security is a scam.
There is no trade.
You can give up your freedoms, that much is true. But 'they' will not keep you safe.
'They' could not if the wanted to, and 'they' just don't care about you or people like you.

So, good are probably left wondering:
“What does this guy think about the bombers?
What does he think about the motive?
What does he think about the potential for more attacks?
He hasn't said much about that at all. WTF?”
Fair enough. I will state for the record:
I think the bombers are twisted, selfish, cowards who were used by much more cynical minds.
I think the motive was apparent: Terror. I think it was effective and worked perfectly for the people who planned it, if probably not as much death as they had hoped for.
I think, unfortunately, that the number of attacks will continue and grow so long as there are elements within our own power structures who profit immensley from the blowback of these attacks and who promote false 'cures' and misdirected preventative measures for these kind of attacks.
No, that does not mean I believe this was a 'false flag'. I don't think Mr Obama (or Bush) planned this.
No, that does not mean I believe that there is no Muslim Jihad. I do think (know, actually) there are real ideological enemies out there.
What it means is that I believe the solution to these attacks is far more complex than what we are being sold, and that some of the corrections that need to be made are at home.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.