Two explosions at Boston marathon finish line

[Hunter]

Its takes the total to drive totalitarianism.

That means people have to acquiesce to authority without questioning it.

Even if what happened in Boston was no threat to anyone's liberty except the young alleged bomber, the questions people are asking about it, even the hysterical voices, are a healthier thing than the complete absence of them.

Its better to have even someone like alex jones questioning the exercise of state power than to have no one at all questioning it.

Very, very, very well said, Joe. I couldnt have said that better myself and it is exactly what I think.

[compared2what?]

[
It doesn't even have to be severe or long and drawn out. It wasn't with me. it was just the fact that there I was, helpless, and there they all were so sure of themselves that they thought it was okay to hurt me - physically and mentally - and to actually HEAR them SAY "fuck you no, you cannot call a lawyer." I mean it really makes a person's blood run cold. I had done NOTHING. Wrong place, wrong time. That's it.

It's traumatic. So a little bit goes a long way.

I'm really sorry that happened.

But I guess this is the natural course of things, isn't it? We do NOT learn from history, that's patently obvious.

I say that too. And might easily have said it about the very same thing, as a matter of fact. I believe it's possible for people to learn from history, though. Don't you? But maybe that really is optimism. Or faith. Whatever. There's not always that much of a difference.

[justdrew]

I havent done that, the envelope was pushed though, feel free to disagree, there is no need to make this personal with tongue lashings and snark and name calling, I said what I said and you are free to accept it or reject it.

You could have just said you disagree with me, no real need to suggest I am paranoid, delusional and not free thinking.

The envelope was pushed though.

ok but... but why would they care about pushing some envelope in regard to militarized policing? It only makes sense within the context of the fantasy that the NWO troops are going to come through and seize all the guns and Christians. Which is a right wing long standing motivational fantasy.

Also, if we were to see further economic troubles here, we're getting really close to millions homeless, desperate, hungry people on the streets. They'll wish they had fema camps to go to. and you know it'll suck, because we're human, merely human, and visible policing will be needed and called for. but if that comes to pass, it won't be at the will of "our government" it'll be at the will of those who control capital, the 0.1% who seem to be engaged in a plan to choke this country out. It can only be assumed a substantial part of that 0.1% ARE the puppetmasters behind the multiple anti-government movements.

All of that anti-government stuff is directly disabling to any agenda of progressive reform, no better friend could the 0.1% have.

[Hunter]

Drew we are thinking about two different kinds of totalitarianism it seems, I am thinking in terms of Nazi Germany (im a Jew so yea thats drivin in to my DNA) and you are thinking about Sir Thomas Moore's utopia. The problem is Nazi Germany happened, Utopia is but a dream.

I want what you want, a govt that helps those in need, I am a progressive, I am not some Alex Jones blowhard I dont even read that shit, but sometimes the stuff that I see with my own eyes and experience in the courtroom concerns me greatly about the world we are leaving for our children and it doesnt seem to be headed in the direction youre speaking of.

In any case, I value your opinion, im not really here to convince anyone that I am right and everyone else is wrong, I see this as a place for all of us to share our opinions and learn from each other, as stupid as that may sound that is really the only reason I am here, I really like to hear what others think about things and to be able to share what I think once in a while.

[Hunter]

Do you honestly not see the progression that is taking place wrt loss of civil liberties, privacy etc, and if you do what do you think is the point of that? Honest question.


I dont believe in the NWO BS and I honestly dont know what the ultimate objectives of these fuckers are besides more money in their pocket and more control over people to make making that money easier for them.


But things are changing and I dont see it for the better but I am willing to concede that I may be at that age in life where I am looking back and saying "oh the good old days..." maybe that is my problem, a yearning for those days when I was an innocent child without worry.

[compared2what?]

Drew we are thinking about two different kinds of totalitarianism it seems, I am thinking in terms of Nazi Germany (im a Jew so yea thats drivin in to my DNA) and you are thinking about Sir Thomas Moore's utopia. The problem is Nazi Germany happened,

Didn't originate in the government, though, did it?

It's not exact. But we're more Weimar Republic than Third Reich, I'd say.

Food for thought.

Do you honestly not see the progression that is taking place wrt loss of civil liberties, privacy etc,

That stuff's mostly been at the same low-point for six or seven years now, except that second-amendment-related rights got stronger.

...

I can't think of anything else. Voting rights are getting weaker, I guess. But they haven't taken a direct hit yet. And the assault on them is extra-governmental anyway.

Despite which, I don't think there's been a less progressive era in modern American politics than the present. It's so much more like the run-up to WWI than WWII that if there were a Sacco and Vanzetti, it'd practically be 1900 - 1920 all over again.

Anyway. The state's a problem.. It's just not the problem.

[Simulist]

It only makes sense within the context of the fantasy that the NWO troops are going to come through and seize all the guns and Christians.

Hmm. You know, whenever I see Wayne LaPierre or Tony Perkins on television, it does actually make a small degree of sense that some people might fantasize about something like that.

(For approximately 3.22 seconds.)

[8bitagent]

Third, I think conspiracy theories can be dangerous (not all of them, obviously; some of them can actually turn out to be true) — Alex Jones' conspiracy-theory industry most especially. He's long on hyperventilation, and frequently short on substance, linking together all sorts of tenuous threads into grand tapestries that often go nowhere. Not only is that dangerous to the truth, but it can also be debilitating to the cognitive function of people who take in a steady diet of it. And Tamerlan Tsarnaev may have been one such person.



[Edited 2 times for tone and substance.]

Eep yeah I musta parsed it wrong. That should also read Fuck You Alternet/Salon. And yes, I realized Mcveigh and Hitler weaved conspiracy theories.

[compared2what?]

Its better to have even someone like alex jones questioning the exercise of state power than to have no one at all questioning it.

Depends on context. (What exercise of which powers by what part of the state apparatus, questioned how.)

I'd non-negotiably rather have more voices speaking about the state than any silenced by it for doing that, though.

[Joe Hillshoist]

Its better to have even someone like alex jones questioning the exercise of state power than to have no one at all questioning it.

Depends on context. (What exercise of which powers by what part of the state apparatus, questioned how.)

I'd non-negotiably rather have more voices speaking about the state than any silenced by it for doing that, though.

Its definitely better to have a culture of dissent than a culture that doesn't dissent, even if people disagree about the validity of each others complaints, cos (imo) people are my likely to speak up if other people also speak up. Thats my experience anyway.

Disagreement over the reaction in Boston should be a chance to debate, but not a chance to shout people down. Sometimes it feels this discussion is skirting a fine line wrt to that.

[8bitagent]

Guiliani: No way these brothers acted alone.
http://video.foxnews.com/v/2321398168001/

It's kind of interesting seeing the right wing take up the questioning role. In some ways I kind of agree with the questions; tho they then try and shoe-horn this extra judicial patriot act nonsense.

The news is saying phone/internet shows no evidence of an accomplice and the kid says they acted alone
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04 ... -says?lite

Hard to believe. The behavior alone is just odd.

[justdrew]

Guiliani: No way these brothers acted alone.
http://video.foxnews.com/v/2321398168001/

It's kind of interesting seeing the right wing take up the questioning role. In some ways I kind of agree with the questions; tho they then try and shoe-horn this extra judicial patriot act nonsense.

The news is saying phone/internet shows no evidence of an accomplice and the kid says they acted alone
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04 ... -says?lite

Hard to believe. The behavior alone is just odd.

why is it so hard to believe? I think it's totally plausible they acted more or less alone, though there is talk of some svengali that leg the elder brother into radicalization. FFS, what help would they have needed? None.

the questioners want it both ways. No police state! Why didn't you Spy on those guys more!

and as for the guy who radicalized and more or less mind controlled the elder brother..? Does it ever occur that the Party most interested in hyping the threat of domestic islamic terrorism could VERY WELL have been the one that sent that agent?

Misha was on the Koch bros payroll, Murdock was paying Misha.
Makes more sense than anything else I've seen in the last week

[Simulist]

Guiliani: No way these brothers acted alone.
http://video.foxnews.com/v/2321398168001/

If Rudy "911, 911, 911" Guiliani says there's "no way these brothers acted alone," then they probably did.

[Joe Hillshoist]

Guiliani: No way these brothers acted alone.
http://video.foxnews.com/v/2321398168001/

If Rudy "911, 911, 911" Guiliani says there's "no way these brothers acted alone," then they probably did.

That is exactly what i was thinking actually.

[Canadian_watcher]

And to those arguing that it wasnt martial law in Boston, fine ill concede your point, it wasnt martial law, but, really, that is just semantics, the point is a PRECEDENT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED, if you understand the legal power of precedent and what it means then you should be concerned, very concerned, about the precedent that was set in Boston last week.

WHY? Very concerned about what? Your reaction is overwrought if you ask me, appearing locked into a paranoid verging on delusional cooked and crooked info stream and it is radically biasing your perceptions. Consider that possibility. Exercise some freedom of thought. Did you even read the post showing how minimally troublesome the search was? Do you not see OVER AND OVER AGAIN Lying hysterical voices overstating everything, turning the police response wildly into something it was not?

it's okay Drew. If you don't see it as alarming and dangerous, then so be it. You are willing to be the next innocent person who gets accused, spied on, locked down, shamed, arrested, spit on, scrutinized, dragged through the mud, disappeared, held without charge, etc as long as you know it's all for the "greater good". If you're okay with that then great.
In the meantime, though, there are people who don't want any of that to happen to themselves or to you, for that matter, and those people are just trying to discuss that in front of you
Is that okay?