Sunday, April 21, 2013

UPDATE-3: Dangerous Precedents

It's always difficult for me to decide whether to comment on tragedies such as Boston or not. I am not one to publicize my grief, if I choose to comment it's because I feel a comment is necessary. I've had to think particularly hard on this Boston event, I pride myself on providing accurate information and I don't like to jump to conclusions. Throughout these last 5 days a continuous theme of confusion and misinformation has been on display for all to see and I do not wish to take part in that and as such only now do I feel confident to say at least something about it.

This whole thing stinks. There, I said it, call me a conspiracy theorist if you want but there are way more questions than there are answers and from the start the important questions have seemed to be ignored. In fact, before the media themselves begun questioning events they had already begun criticizing those who were questioning events. Now, just because this stinks doesn't automatically mean I think this is an inside job however, a lot of information is still coming out but based on information currently available there are just a few things one has to wonder. I've seen three predominant and sourced theories about the attack.
  1. Inside Job - Before It's News has put together several pieces on what they find interesting:
  2. Double-Agents - DEBKAfile's analysis has lead them to believe that the brothers were CIA assets turned double-agent.
  3. Iran - Reza Kahlili (not his real name), a former CIA spy in the Iranian regime believes Iran hired these attackers.
For this post I'm going to focus primarily on events before and after the attack, and not on the actual bombing itself as I find the surrounding events even more puzzling and crucial to question.

Why are local news reports of bomb sniffing dogs and spotters on rooftops for an apparent "drill" not being followed up with? The reports coming from NBC for god's sake, this is a reputable news agency. Why is this being ignored? Until the U.S. government can at least declare a motive, no evidence should be discarded and people should remain ever vigilant. Let's all remember this is a "suspect" and not a convicted felon, right? Is there even a difference anymore?

Back in December I caught a piece put out by Russia Today which described a complete lockdown of a small American town. I titled that article "Lockdown in U.S. appears imminent" and here we are just 4 months later and already a metropolis has been locked down. Sure, it was only for a day. Sure, there were "extreme circumstances". But it seems if anything over the last decade of the "war on terror" and "economic crisis" that extreme circumstances can quickly become the normal. It's the normalacy of abnormal.

This lockdown didn't just come out of the blue, this is happening already in smaller American towns and it's now built up to a major metropolis. What I find the most interesting about Friday's "lockdown" is that it didn't work, they didn't find the guy until "just minutes" after the lockdown order ended. The lockdown order ended when the police had completed their sweep 100%. What I'm getting at here is that if this were, say, a "dry run" as it's called then completing the search 100% would be paramount to the "mission". Before I continue, I just need you all to visualize the search process:






They're in backyards, houses, seems pretty thorough, right? Yet the suspect that they failed to find during their search and was found "just minutes" after the search was completed by a civilian was found here under a tarp in a boat that can be seen clearly from the road? It's been widely reported he was there the whole time "weakened by blood loss", how was a guy under a tarp missed by what was literally an entire army? Their helicopters have infrared, which was defeated by a tarp?



It causes me to wonder if finding the suspect was job #1, or if completing the "dry run" sweep was job #1.

I just want to leave you with one closing thought here. Now that this precedent has been set for a manhunt, what's next? Will it now go for all murders? Where do we draw the line of "this calls for a complete shutdown of everything"? Is it reactionary, or precautionary? If we expect trouble, do we shut it down now preemptively just as we arrest organizational leaders before major events (like the G20 in Toronto). All of this feels wrong, and unfortunately I think this is only a glimpse of events to come.

Update-1

While I was sleeping it occurred to me that there is another interesting piece of information one can gather from the available photos of the "search". What iconic manhunt police tool is missing?

Dogs. Where are the dogs? They had personal items from these people it seems to me that a dog would have easily detected the suspect in the boat. Where are the dogs? Again, it seems that the "manhunt" portion was secondary.

If you have pictures from the search Friday showing any dogs please submit them to ct-tips@openintellect.ca.

Update-2

 
There is what I believe is a police dog in this video, this video also shows how "thorough" they're being. Yet somehow, they missed him, seems they got just about everybody else though, doesn't it.


Update-3

"They didn't search the boat, not once" - 10:08



Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading. He currently works for CenturyLink

Nazayh Zanidean is a Project Coordinator for a mid-sized construction contractor in Calgary, Alberta. He enjoys writing as a hobby on topics that include foreign policy, international human rights, security and systemic media bias.

Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)