They did learn that when Djokar (the yout') abandoned the vehicle he used to run over his brother, Tamerlane, with.

Ah, but they did not know that he did not steal a vehicle or have access to another vehicle. In fact, they did not know the number of people they were dealing with at the time, right?

He had friends who destroyed his computer, they could have given him access to a vehicle

I can pretty much guarantee you that the cops did not say, don’t worry about checking any vehicles….he is definitely on foot.

Ya think?

This is America you fascist POS!

And he was a terrorist who had just killed Americans you libertarian bastard.

He was not innocent at all.

Missing Evidence of Prior FBI Relationship with Boston Bomber

Justice denied: Tsarnaev’s own lawyer ignores evidence he is innocent of Boston bombing

There were many conflicting reports about his whereabouts. That was after they had falsely accused several people online of being Boston Bombers. It was a real frenzy for the first 3-4 hours. Entirely innocent and unconnected people were falsely accused with some of it leaking on to cable news and big news sites.

The clearest evidence that they knew he was on foot and still in Boston was in how they chose to conduct the search and to deploy all of their manpower. They went door to door, they checked sheds and boats stored in backyards. You would only do that if you were quite certain that the suspect was on foot and had had no chance to get a fresh vehicle.

Those cops don't look like they're trying to stop a car with Djokhar in it.

And he was a terrorist who had just killed Americans you libertarian bastard.

Martial Law for an entire city to go after ONE single "terrorist"?

Yeah - that is typical for you.

Oh, BTW - he was a patsy.

False flag theater: Boston bombing involves clearly staged carnage

Boston Marathon bomber's wait on death row likely to be a long one

God, I hope not ...

Oh, BTW - he was a patsy.

Bullshit....you CT freak!

While there is significant evidence supporting the accused Boston bomber’s innocence, none of it made it into his trial, which just concluded with guilty verdicts on all 30 counts against him. It seems that law enforcement, the media, and especially Tsarnaev’s own lawyer, Judy Clarke, were focused on suppressing any evidence that could have undermined the official story of the bombing. The truth has been covered up just as effectively as it was the day Lee Harvey Oswald was shot by Jack Ruby.

Clarke insured Tsarnaev’s conviction when she opened the trial by admitting that he had carried out the bombing on April 15, 2013 with his brother, 26-year-old Tamerlan, who was killed in the aftermath. Clarke painted Tamerlan as the instigator in an apparent effort to spare Dzhokhar from execution, but that may happen anyway as the trial now enters the sentencing phase.

Clarke is known for her ability to keep her clients off death row (including Unabomber Ted Kaczyinski; alleged 9/11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui; and Jared Loughner, who was convicted of shooting Rep. Gabrielle Giffords), but given the weakness of the evidence against Tsarnaev, Clarke’s strategy amounted to throwing in the towel before the trial even started.

But what about making the prosecution prove guilt? To say that Clarke could have created reasonable doubt if she had wanted to is an understatement. In this article, we’ll look at the evidence that should have been introduced at Tsarnaev’s trial but wasn’t (Keep in mind that Dzhokhar had claimed his innocence, which conflicted with the supposed confession he wrote on the inside of the boat where he was captured on April 19, four days after the bombing).

...Boston Bomber

Maybe I shouldn't have brought it up.

We've gone far afield from the topic of this thread.

If we've run out of things to say on the article/topic of this thread, we should start another and not just chit-chat/spat away on this thread.

Some forums have a feature where mods can close a thread and lock it. LF would benefit from that, well, if Stone was willing to do that much moderation.

We might have reached that point.

CT freak!

Those looking for a quick and painless way to dismiss uncomfortable facts need look no further than any of thousands of pundits and news anchors who have already told you what to think about “conspiracy theorists.” You’ve heard that they start with a conclusion and make the evidence fit their preconceived notions, they find real life too boring so they invent elaborate stories to spice things up, or that the idea of random terror is so, well, terrifying that they need to have a “grand theory” to make the world seem safer and more manageable.

These themes originated with the CIA 47 years ago, when they released a plan to stomp out alternative views about the JFK assassination. The plan includes a recommendation to “employ propaganda assets to [negate] and refute the attacks of the critics”

Our assets should point out, as applicable, that the critics are (I) wedded to theories adopted before the evidence was in, (II) politically interested, (III) financially interested, (IV) hasty and inaccurate in their research, or (V) infatuated with their own theories.

Although lacking any grounding in fact, these criticisms of researchers who question the government’s story have been repeated so often by both mainstream and alternative sources, that they are now believed by many gullible people.

Does the idea of the US government using actors to play the role of victims in fake terror attacks seem impossibly far-fetched?

An article from 2003 described the Department of Homeland Security running exercises with “make-believe victims seeking medical treatment. Volunteers and professional actors will play the roles of victims…”  Unfortunately the article is no longer online.

Consider this Actor Waiver Form for a Homeland Security Exercise.  I found this form on the Department of Homeland Security website but the page is now “currently unavailable due to system modifications.”  However it can be viewed here.

These going after him …

Or, these going after him …

If I were a cop that day, I rather be like those in the top piciture….but then, that’s just me.

You may have a preference for shot sleeves …

if Stone was willing to do that much moderation.

I haven't seen Stone around here for quite a while. His latest post was Tuesday.

I think he may be losing interest in the site.

“conspiracy theorists.”

Conspiracy theorists low life eat shit …

If I were a cop that day, I rather be like those in the top piciture….but then, that’s just me.

You're missing the point.

The entire city of Boston was under de facto Martial Law!

That you see nothing wrong with that is troubling.

I think he may be losing interest in the site.

How could that be with Gatlin around always adding valuable insights and provoking deep and introspective thought (cough).

Conspiracy theorists low life eat shit …

You sure got that CIA narrative down pat comrade.

Your refusal to consider anything but the "official" gooberment narrative on events like the Boston Bombing or 9/11 is quite pathetic actually.

How could that be with Gatlin around always adding valuable insights and provoking deep and introspective thought (cough).

He's really outed himself on this thread.

His fascist tendencies and hatred for the Constitution can no longer be denied.

he was a terrorist

You're a free-range global terrorist!

They knew that they were looking for one individual at the time….but they had not yet determined how many others were involved.

Am I right about that?

So, they really did not know what to expect.

If I were the Chief, I would say, “Go in with maximum protection.”

Like they were doing.

I still see nothing wrong in their tactic or improper use of resources.

He's really outed himself on this thread.

Nah, I’m the same.

I still don’t hate cops and I don’t love terrorists.

Why do you?

His fascist tendencies ...

Pot <> Kettle = Black.

Is rightwing libertarianism the new fascism?

Your refusal to consider anything but the "official" gooberment narrative on events like the Boston Bombing or 9/11 is quite pathetic actually.

No, but I will trust them more than I ever will you lying CT Freaks.

I haven't seen Stone around here for quite a while. His latest post was Tuesday.

I think he may be losing interest in the site.

He told us he barely has the time to check in here because he's been so busy at work this spring. He looks in but doesn't take the time to write posts.

They knew that they were looking for one individual at the time….but they had not yet determined how many others were involved.

Am I right about that?

I'm not sure what time of day that photo of jackboots riding an armored vehicle was taken so I can't say what they knew at the time of the photo.

However, due to their use of cameras on the crowd, the cops identified both Tamerlane and Djokar within several hours.

They knew early on that they were searching for a scared untrained 19yo pussyboy almost certainly on foot and still in Boston who had already run over his handler, his older brother Tamerlane.

Is rightwing libertarianism the new fascism?

You finally managed to tie it all to libertarians.

Nice work.

The entire city of Boston was under de facto Martial Law!
That you see nothing wrong with that is troubling.

No such thing as de facto martial law happened in Boston. Martial law were never declared.

The imposition of martial law accompanies curfews; the suspension of civil law, civil rights, and habeas corpus; and the application or extension of military law or military justice to civilians.

The curfew was entirely voluntary….TV and radio journalists were interviewing numerous people who were out and about doing what they normally do during the so called curfew. There was never a suspension of civil law, civil rights or habeas corpus. Was there? No. There was no military law placed in effect and no military justice was dispensed to a single civilian. Did I miss anything? Nope, I covered it all. I debunked your entire “de facto” allegation.

So, the response you label “police state tactics” once the suspect was located in a specific area was actually a tactical response that one would expect anytime in any city where the threat of further bombs or attacks could be made on the public or police. The authorities knew they were looking for one man at that time, they had no idea if others may be involved of if follow on attacks were planned and about to happen. The police had to be prepared to expect the unexpected. The police did and they did a fine job.

The fact that you always immediately mislabel everything any government official does or the action they take is what should be troubling to you. You need to step out of your panic mode, step back to look at things properly and in their correct perspective….before you always step forward into your own shit.

Doesn’t that get tiring to you….having to always clean you shoes off?

Is rightwing libertarianism the new fascism?

You finally managed to tie it all to libertarians.

Nice work.

I guess it did.

Deckard called a a fascist and the title of that article was an easy one for me to remember to look up and counter attack with.

However, due to their use of cameras on the crowd, the cops identified both Tamerlane and Djokar within several hours.

They knew early on that they were searching for a scared untrained 19yo pussyboy almost certainly on foot and still in Boston who had already run over his handler, his older brother Tamerlane.

I agree with the first part. I remember that well. I was glued to the TV, as were so many.

So I knew who they had identified and who they were actively seeking at the time….but they had never decided that the two were the only individuals solely responsible and no one else was involved or if there would be follow on bombings.

The way I saw it …

When the LEOs use the military vehicles and equipment for petty stuff like you said….then I agree it was wrong.

I have been thinking about Boston and trying to lean the way it looks to me like you are thinking.

I still can’t see their tactics and equipment as an overreaction….maybe it is still the military training in me after all these years. I can’t see it any differently. I would want full protection for my troops and I would use everything I had available to protect them.

Just a footnote, because I am still thinking about it …

Just busy. Last post didn't show up.

I have been thinking about Boston and trying to lean the way it looks to me like you are thinking.

I still can’t see their tactics and equipment as an overreaction….maybe it is still the military training in me after all these years. I can’t see it any differently. I would want full protection for my troops and I would use everything I had available to protect them.

I don't object if the cops are going in to arrest known and very violent felons and drug gangs like MS-13 or biker gangs with criminal gang connections like the ones that congregated and had that big shootout at that restaurant in Texas a few years ago. Yes, armored vehicles should be used in those circumstances.

So I can see them using these in gang hotbeds like Chicago or even L.A.

But for ordinary arrests? I don't think so.

Admittedly, there was a lot more use of these vehicles for ordinary arrests when they were brand-new shiny (and free) toys that local cops got for almost nothing from the feds. And the use of them has dropped off somewhat as they've faced the maintenance costs and public backlash from seeing them in use for day-to-day policing and even for simple serving of warrants. Even so, I think they still use them more than they need to.

We don't want militarized police agencies in this country. What we want are peace officers, trained and capable.

Well,to be fair,there are about 800,000 times as many cops as there are foreign terrorists running around in America,so it's only natural the cops would be killing more innocents.

This is not the fault of the individual policemen as much as it is a system that gives ABSOLUTE cover and protection for any and all cops caught operating out of limits.

If you want to see this stop,insist your local PD go after the criminals in uniform and give them stiffer sentences than the typical criminal caught committing the same crimes.

This sort of thing only continues because WE ALLOW it to continue. Police Chief is a political position. So is your local Mayor and/or the members of your local county board of commissioners,and the judges and DA's. Make them ALL aware that they put the cops on a reign or you will put them in the unemployment line,and things will change rapidly. Don't do this,and it only gets worse.

If I were the Chief, I would say, “Go in with maximum protection.”

Like they were doing.

I still see nothing wrong in their tactic or improper use of resources.

Well,if *I* were the bad guy,I'd be getting wood over how bunched up and out in the open they are. I could easily take 3 or 4 of them down before they even began to react.

NOTHING says "Smart" like lining up out in the open and above the heads of the crowd while riding on the outside of a armored car!

I sometimes wonder who the tactical geniuses are who come up with this crap,and how retarded the cops have to be to go along with it.

But,what the hell do I know. I'm just a "civilian".

So I knew who they had identified and who they were actively seeking at the time….but they had never decided that the two were the only individuals solely responsible and no one else was involved or if there would be follow on bombings.

They had no idea who and what they were dealing with. Even if they had intel telling them it was those two losers,they had no way of knowing the 2 losers weren't unknowingly being used as pawns to draw 1st responders and LEO's into an ambush.

NOTHING says "Smart" like lining up out in the open and above the heads of the crowd while riding on the outside of a armored car!

I sometimes wonder who the tactical geniuses are who come up with this crap,and how retarded the cops have to be to go along with it.

I recall others saying the same thing at the time of the Boston Massacre.

Apparently, Boston is one of the places where they have very few combat vets on the police force.

But for ordinary arrests? I don't think so.

We don't want militarized police agencies in this country. What we want are peace officers, trained and capable.

I have already agreed to the first point. I now agree to the second point.

Some say it is overkill when SWAT is used to raid a house and finds only one joint. That I disagree with. There was sufficient reason to believe something was going on to even send swat. The cops never know what to expect when they enter a place. We have read cases where the first cop in gets shot. It has been stated that the cops should have staked the place out for a couple weeks before the warrant was served. Cops do not have the man power to do that.

When cops enter the wrong address and bad things happen, then the cops should be admonished in some way an financial restitution should immediately be made. When cops enter the right address and do the wrong thing….the same. But when the cops enter the right address, follow procedures and the perp does the wrong thing….then I say fine, he had it coming. To what degree, would depend on the individual case. I don’t see where I am wrong about this. If it is intelligently, logically or lawfully pointed out that I am wrong, then I will change me way of thinking on it.

There are those who have the attitude that every time cops raid a home, their reason is always wrong and the cops do everything wrong. That I cannot understand and I categorically label that person as a cop-hater for his warped and illogical mindset.

I digress, but following the mental mindset I am discussing, something Deckard posted today just came to mind. When the mother of the 5-year-old girl in Fort Walton Beach was trying to calm the upset girl explained to her that police are here to serve the public, Deckard asked “why is that mother lying to the child.” What did he want that mother to do, nothing and let the kid live with the fear of police in trauma the rest of her life? Actually, I seriously believe he would. And to me, that is a sick way to think. I thought the school acted properly and the police reacted marvelously when the 2 officers went to the school, talked to the little girl, let he explore their cruiser and the little girl gave them a hug at the end. Now that was a great story to me.

Some say it is overkill when SWAT is used to raid a house and finds only one joint. That I disagree with. There was sufficient reason to believe something was going on to even send swat. The cops never know what to expect when they enter a place. We have read cases where the first cop in gets shot. It has been stated that the cops should have staked the place out for a couple weeks before the warrant was served. Cops do not have the man power to do that.

Just recall all the times these supposed highly-trained SWAT teams have raided the wrong house, sometimes shooting the residents and usually shooting any dog in the house. All because they couldn't find the right address before busting down doors with no-knock warrants in the middle of the night. Let's recall one example.

CNN, 2008: Mayor wants federal probe after SWAT raids house, kills dogs

I favor more effective policing and holding the police accountable.

So do you favor using SWAT, armored vehicles and a militarized police unit in masks when they can't even find the proper address? Would you excuse it if it was your home raided and your dog shot? No, you wouldn't.

When cops enter the wrong address and bad things happen, then the cops should be admonished in some way an financial restitution should immediately be made.

No. They should be prosecuted as home invaders to the full extent of the law. Only by holding them accountable will you ever stop these abuses. And it would only take a few well-publicized cases for all of them to get the message very clearly.

There are those who have the attitude that every time cops raid a home, their reason is always wrong and the cops do everything wrong. That I cannot understand and I categorically label that person as a cop-hater for his warped and illogical mindset.

I agree. But that doesn't excuse rampant police abuse and gross incompetence when it does occur with defined regularity.

Admittedly, there has been some decline in these kinds of cases over the years because of so many lawsuits and hard feelings from the public toward the police over bad raids. The cops know they've really screwed the pooch and the police chiefs know how bad such a false raid looks on their resume and that they'll get it thrown into their faces over and over as long as they are on the force. And they should have to answer for their gross carelessness and mistakes, just like anyone else.

I’ll have to take these one point at a time….I am between morning tasks.

Just recall all the times these supposed highly-trained SWAT teams have raided the wrong house, sometimes shooting the residents and usually shooting any dog in the house. All because they couldn't find the right address before busting down doors with no-knock warrants in the middle of the night.

Let's recall one example.

For you to say “all the times” is too favorable use of an adjective phrase, as if trying to influence opinion and control reaction. I would need to see the percentage wrong address raids happened to agree with your premise and intended conclusion. If you sit down and key in 4 different number over a period of years, I’ll bet even you, the perfectionist you seem to be, will at one key in the wrong number. No task or mission is always completed 100% as planned, a “go wrong” risk factor of different types must always prevalent.

Furthermore, since we are delving deeply into the nitty gritty here, then “one” example does not a point make….while percentage of total can.

I guess that's about the best you can do to defend these dumbass cops who can't even find the correct house number on a warrant, bust down the door, throw everyone to the floor while pointing guns at little kids and then shoot their dogs.

Fortunately, you are in a very tiny minority of those who will defend such abuses or try to offer mealymouthed excuses for their gross incompetence.

Don't expect me to do your homework for you. These cases are pretty well known. I just offered up the worst one I can recall offhand but there are many many more. LP used to have regular articles on it, posted by some guy called Infowarrior.

"WATCH: Cops Raid Innocent Marine Vet’s Home as He Slept, Beat Him in Bed"

Did the cops raid his home because he was innocent? Or because he was a Marine? Or a veteran? Or because he was sleeping? Did they beat him because he was in bed?

If the answers to these questions is "no" (which it is), then there is no reason to mention them -- especially in the headline.

So do you favor using SWAT, armored vehicles and a militarized police unit in masks when they can't even find the proper address?

Before we address this, we need to established how big a problem finding the proper address is. To say one time is too many times would be illogical. Nothing, almost nothing I can relate to, is ever 100 percent correct at all times. In any large scale operations, they must be consideration given for possible errors….for there always will be.

An armored vehicle and SWAT team [I denounce the use of “militarized police” units as I believe the wording is used to intentionally paint a prejudicial picture] should be used when the Police Chief or Sheriff deems ansolutely necessary. If they are not doing their job properly and using the equipment and personnel improperly or excessively. then it is up to the public to see the Police Chief and Sheriff are replaced. And through the loud mouth of social media this day and time, the public has absolute control of doing that.

Would you excuse it if it was your home raided and your dog shot? No, you wouldn't.

Excuse it, or would I understand that tragic mistakes can be made, and are, when dealing with the thousands and thousands of LE actions daily? Yea, probably. I flew with the pilot whose crew accidentally dropped the nuclear bomb on South Carolina. To quote Forrest Gump…,”shit happens.” And when it does, each yime must be looked at carefully to prevent it from happening again for the same wrong reason.

They should be prosecuted as home invaders to the full extent of the law. Only by holding them accountable will you ever stop these abuses. And it would only take a few well-publicized cases for all of them to get the message very clearly.

An underpaid and inefficient clerk at City Hall keys in the wrong address and the SWAT team “should be prosecuted as home invaders to the full extent of the law” for a mistake some clerk made? Come on, Deckard….get real for me.

…. that doesn't excuse rampant police abuse and gross incompetence when it does occur with defined regularity.

Of course not.

But who gets to define “rampant police abuse, gross incompetence and regularity?” I really hope you wouldn’t use Deckard as an authority for doing this.

Do you have evidence to show that “rampant police abuse , gross incompetence are happing regularly?” I don’t, I see isolated cases happening from time to time. That’s all, nothing rampant….using an assumed definition of rampant.

And they should have to answer for their gross carelessness and mistakes, just like anyone else.

Don’t they? If they don’t….then the citizens of the community should get off their lazy fat asses and make them. It has happened, ya know. If then, why not now?

Come on, Deckard….get real for me.

I'm not Deckard.

Sadly, that was closer to accurate than most of your meandering excuses for police incompetence.

After a certain number of cases across the country, it isn't "just a mistake". It is incompetence with deliberate malice to the well-being and safety of the public.

I guess that's about the best you can do to defend these dumbass cops who can't even find the correct house number on a warrant, bust down the door, throw everyone to the floor while pointing guns at little kids and then shoot their dogs.

“I guess” the better thing I could do would be [if I possibly could and I always try to] to find out “why” these cops didn’t go to the correct house number on a warrant….before I called them “dumbasses.” I guess that would be the intelligent thing to do. Ya think? I guess I don’t jump in and make dumb assed assumptions and improperly place blame out of anger or illogical thinking by not finding the root cause of the problem.

Fortunately, you are in a very tiny minority of those who will defend such abuses or try to offer mealymouthed excuses for their gross incompetence.

Unfortunately, I seem to be in the very tiny minority of those who demand that all factual evidence and considerations be made before any condemnation….while some mealymouthed assholes look only for reasons to condemn cops.

Don't expect me to do your homework for you. These cases are pretty well known. I just offered up the worst one I can recall offhand but there are many many more. LP used to have regular articles on it, posted by some guy called Infowarrior.

I expect you to intelligently evaluate each condition and not lump everything together as a catch all condemnation. Am I expecting too much of you?

Sure, some cases are pretty well known. “Many many” should be considered relative to the number of the many many many many actions executes. One in ten is many many….one in ten thousand should not, and can not, be considered many many.

Some asshole called Infowarrior posting regular article at LP justified or proved exactly….what?

Come on, Deckard….get real for me.

I'm not Deckard.

You were really starting to sound like him.

I regret you find that offensive …

Some asshole called Infowarrior posting regular article at LP justified or proved exactly….what?

You don't know? Now that's actually pretty funny.

I didn't LOL but I did give a toothy grin reading that.

After a certain number of cases across the country …

“After a certain number….there you go again with this relative number shit.

A number out of how many numbers? One in ten….one in ten thousand?

… It is incompetence with deliberate malice to the well-being and safety of the public.

Oh, geeeze.

Let’s now go to YouTube to find the sympathetic soft violin music playing in the background …

You can spend all day defending the rights of masked SWAT teams in combat gear with assault weapons breaking down doors in the middle of the night, threatening to shoot (or shooting) the adults, pointing guns at the kids and terrifying them and then shooting their dogs before they finally realize they invaded the wrong house. Then they say, "Sorry.".

By all means, defend it until you are blue in the face.

Good luck with all that.

I'm done here.

Some asshole called Infowarrior posting regular article at LP justified or proved exactly….what?

You don't know? Now that's actually pretty funny.

I didn't LOL but I did give a toothy grin reading that.

Of course, I know.

I assumed that you didn’t know, I though you were serious when you posted it.

We both now gave a toothy grin …

You can spend all day defending the rights of masked SWAT teams in combat gear with assault weapons breaking down doors in the middle of the night, threatening to shoot (or shooting) the adults, pointing guns at the kids and terrifying them and then shooting their dogs before they finally realize they invaded the wrong house. Then they say, "Sorry.".

By all means, defend it until you are blue in the face.

Good luck with all that.

I'm done here.

I am only defending objectivity and truthfulness and I will definitely spend each and every day doing that.

Have a nice day….meant sincerely, and not tongue in cheek.

Catch you on another thread …