Static Pages
LogoPhere Index of topics
  

Posts and Resources on Syrian Conflict & ISIS

Posts on 2014 Michael Brown killing in Ferguson, Mo.

Chevaline Murders Posts

Israeli Acts of Apartheid

Fukushima Resources 

US Military Massacres

News Jews

Sectarian Muslims Table


Archives
2013

Jan
~ Feb ~ Mar ~ Apr ~ May ~ Jun ~ Jul ~ Aug ~ Sep ~ Oct ~ Nov ~ Dec
2014
Jan ~ Feb
Apr ~ May ~   Jun ~ Jul  Aug ~ Sep ~   Oct ~ Nov ~ Dec
2015
Jan ~
Feb ~ May Jun ~ JulAug ~ Sep ~ Oct 

Searchable LogoPhere Posts 2007- present via WordPress


Road Trips
2013

2015a

2015c


Artists' Corner

LogoPhere Home
LogoPhere Blog

 

LogoPhere 
"--takin' the BS outa' the BlogoSphere (and MSM) one shovel-full at a time "

 

 

 

US Politics & Events

#561
Apr18.2013 
A few edgy thoughts about Boston

Like most of America I have been watching the MSM coverage of the Boston bombings in a state of dazed incredulity – dazed at yet another heinous attack on innocent civilians, incredulous at how inane the reporting has been. 

As one small example of the latter, two CNN reporters came on the screen just a while ago. One of them said, "Hello, I am Erin Burnett reporting from Boston." That seemed like a completely innocuous and precise statement of fact, assuming she was, in fact, in Boston. But then her side-kick standing right next to her flashed his single digit IQ when he said: "And I’m Jake Tapper, also in Boston." No doubt this was a preview of what’s sure to come today from these MSM simian shit-slingers because simian shit is  pretty much what they gave us yesterday. But I’m getting ahead of this post – here is a collection of random thoughts I recorded while watching MSNBC, CNN, and FOX much of the day yesterday.

Thought #1: This is not about Boston

All of the MSM and politicians are on the same rampage with respect to one point: this attack is about Boston. Boston is strong, they all tell us with their hackneyed babble. One well known Bostonian author titled his editorial in the NYT something about they messed with the wrong town when they bombed Boston. Boston will rise above this attack, we are assured, and bounce back strong. Boston, Boston, Boston.

But we need to get one thing straight: there is absolutely no reason to believe at this point that this attack was about Boston. Every act of terrorism has to take place somewhere, and the place where an attack takes place is not necessarily what that attack is about. 

When US drones attacked a house in Sararogha in South Waziristan, Afghanistan and killed 5 people inside it yesterday (Link), that attack was not about Sararogha. It was about killing Afghans – doesn’t matter where they are.

When McVeigh and Nichols blew up a federal building in Oklahoma City, that was not about Oklahoma City, it was pay-back for Wacco, TX and Ruby Ridge, ID.  In fact, given that the FBI massacre at Wacco was 10 years ago almost to the day, Monday’s attack may well turn out to be pay-back for Wacco, too.  But Monday's attack was almost certainly not about Boston, so let’s get off of this Boston-will-survive-and-be-stronger crap.  And that goes for the politicians as well as the press.

Thought #2: Now Boston has an idea of what a drone attack would feel like.

Speaking of US terrorism via drone attacks, I was thinking as I watched those explosions going off 13 seconds apart: "That looks like a drone or artillery attack." 

It wasn’t, of course, and I knew that, but I’ve seen a lot of artillery rounds go off and that was my first reaction. That’s what Boylston St. looked like – a target zone for hellcat missiles or 105mm artillery shells. Which led me to this point:

For each one of the three innocent people murdered on Boylston St. on Monday, thousands of innocent people, including children, have been murdered by US drones, rockets, and missiles – which is to say in essentially the same gruesome way – over the last decade.  

Innocent victims are considered targets to terrorists.  They are considered "collateral damage" to Obama and his military ghouls flying the drones and ordering the attacks. But to the shredded kids and their families it probably doesn’t make much difference what you call it.

So what I’m suggesting is that maybe the Boston attack will help Americans to acquire a modicum of empathy for their own targets.  Unfortunately,  9/11 didn't teach Americans anything about empathy, it just made them more bloodthirsty than they already were, which some people believe was the point. But maybe by seeing these Boston bombs go off at street level, even though there were only 3 deaths, Americans will be able to equate those torn victims on Boylston street to the innocent people the US drone pilots have killed and are daily killing in far away places. After all, snuffing a child is snuffing a child no matter where it happens, or who does it, or who pays for it.

So from this empathy point of view, maybe Americans should just suck it up. You are getting back in a tiny proportion the pain you have caused other innocent people. These three lives lost on Monday are not worth a whit more than the innocent lives lost in Sararogha, Afghanistan or any one of a thousand other impoverished communities Obama -- like Bush before him -- asserts he has cart blanche to bomb.

Thought #3: Not everybody on Boylston St was a hero that day.

As the MSM ran and re-ran and re-ran ad nauseam the brief videos of the bombs going off while the focused runners checked their watches and kept going, maybe you were like me and you began picking out different individuals each time the vid ran and watched how they reacted.  You need to have a close look at that now iconic shot of 78 year old Bill Iffrig falling to the ground -- there’s a lot more there than Mr. Iffrig’s legs turning to jelly.

In spite of all the up-lifting talk about heroism, this footage of the detonation and the seconds afterward shows that there were a fair few unspoken cowards and idiots in the melee, as well as the heroes we are hearing about. 

Note that as Iffrig hits the ground there are two female marathon workers in bright yellow coats right next to him. He practically falls into them. Do they lift a hand to help the old man? No, not a hand. They tuck tail and run, almost stepping on him in their hurry to get away.

And then there is the idiot cop who immediately pulls her pistol as she stands over Iffrig. 

Not a frickin’ target in sight, but this is what hair-trigger cops do, not b/c they are trained to pull their sidearm when there is no target, but because they’re freaking scared shitless and they think their gun is going to protect them. They're not protecting the public; they're endangering the public by thinking they're protecting themselves.

Looking closely at that iconic picture of Mr. Iffrig you can see another Boston Barney Fife who has pulled out his piece. In another video clip this guy can be seen obviously not just without a target, but without any idea what is going on or what he should do. He runs toward the far side of Boylston St. from the bomb waving the gun around, puts the gun back in it’s holster, and then high-tails it out of the area with the runners passing through. 

I am not denigrating all of the brave men and women who ran right into the thick of it not knowing if or where another bomb would go off. I am emphasizing their bravery by denigrating the others.

A couple of the MSM experts on terrorism in praising these heroes rightly noted that it is common for terrorists to plant two bombs.  They detonate one and then wait for rescue folks to show up before detonating the other. Bastards!! No, not the experts . . . the terrorists. 

But what the experts weren’t telling the millions watching is that US drone pilots and helicopter jocks do exactly the same thing. They blow away a wedding party and then, as people rush to the area to help the wounded, the US ghouls blow away the rescuers and any children they might have missed with the first shot. The US absolutely perfected this "double tap" tactic in Iraq as shown clearly by the now famous "light ‘em up" video that put Bradley Manning in the brig.  (Link)

So, please, all you terrorism experts, don’t be giving us this holier than thou shit about horrible the tactics of terrorists use. If the same immoral tactics that the US uses on innocent civilians are now used on innocent Americans, well, . . . fuck it, man, Americans have no right to bitch.  Same goes for waterboarding and other torture techniques the American use. Goose/gander.

Thought #4: CNN apparently doesn't have a competent reporter on its staff.

John King took the lead yesterday for CNN.  That surprised me.  In fact it surprised me that the guy is still employed after his vicious attack on Newt Gingrich during the Jan2012 Republican candidates’ debate.  But King’s incompetence really got the better of him this week.

Not only did King, a Jew, get bitch-slapped all over Internet for his fallacious report that the FBI had arrested a suspect, he has also been rightly excoriated as the source of the racist opinion that the Boston bomber is probably a "dark-skinned male."  Here's King trying to defend himself against accusations of racism even as he spews his racist remarks:

"I'm making a personal judgment—forgive me, I think it's the right judgment—not to try to inflame tensions," King said. "They say it's a dark-skinned male."

Now, this is a really telling comment for at least two reasons.  First of all, at the time he made it, Wednesday, the FBI had not identified any suspects, dark-skinned or otherwise, so we don't know who "they" is.  IOW, for all we know King was making this up.  If King had an official source in the FBI whom he could cite as saying the suspect is dark-skinned, then there would be no grounds for calling King racist.  But because there was no such source, the racism buck stops at King.

Secondly, before becoming a Jew, King was an Irish Catholic from Dorchester, which was one of the most racist neighborhoods in Boston, and one of those swept into the desegregation school bussing conflagration while King was a youngster, although I doubt that he, personally, was bussed.  But all the world knows from that ugly, ugly history that Irish Catholics from Dorchester, Southie, Roxbury etc. consider it a compliment to be called a racist

But King going on air yesterday and announcing his personal judgment that the bomber is "dark-skinned" is really ironic, euphemism notwithstanding, because my personal judgment yesterday was that the Boston bomber is probably a Jew, maybe even Justin Beiber looking for yet more publicity.  Now, durn, maybe my personal judgment will be viewed as being as racist as King's, but at least my opinion is consistent with yesterday's CBS report that the cops are looking for a white guy.  It is also consistent with the videos the FBI published today of two main suspects, both of which are white and sure look like Jews to me – probably Mossad-fucks traveling on Australian passports, as they are wont to do when committing violent crimes in other people's countries.  Just an opinion, mind you.

Jews or blacks?  Ask John King.

But I don’t want to pick on King, perchance you think I’m being anti-Semitic. There has been plenty of incompetence and stupidity to go around with the CNN crew, even the rare ones that are not Jewish.  I gagged watching King, Anderson Cooper, Chris Cuomo, and some babbling idiot named Juliette Kayyem standing around for hours, interrupting each other, gazing into their cell phones while on air, laying down an unending line of complete non-sense about anything that seemed to come to mind.  Even King’s ex-wife Dana Bash checked in now and then with her own worthless, egotistical opinions. 

But don’t take my word on how bad this performance was. Buzzfeed has a far more entertaining description of this group of MSM monkeys on the loose than I could possibly provide. 

Thought #5: AP reporters Denise Lavoie and Rodrique Ngowi of AP should be busted for obstruction of justice, along with every other reporter w/ cops on their payroll leaking information.

It is really confusing, all these wild MSM allegations polluting what once was called journalism and turning the whole thing into a circus, but AP is said to be the source of yesterday’s false report that the FBI had arrested someone. What idiots. Of course, as always, this crap always comes from sources that cannot be identified and we always get the line that AP’s Lavoie and Ngowi used in a later article: 

"A law enforcement official who spoke to AP on condition of anonymity and was not authorized to discuss the case publicly confirmed only that . . ."

In my opinion, the solicitation, receipt, or publication of leaks from law enforcement officials or employees should be criminal, as should the act of leaking information itself. The authorities are trying their best to control their investigation, but you’ve always got a few moron cops or secretaries or whomever on the take who are willing to leak information for a buck. The UK is still working its way through a huge debacle resulting from reporters having cops in their pockets.  It is no different in the US. Ask Lavoie and Ngowi.

As a result of the "unconfirmed" reports like Lavoie’s flying all over the place yesterday, the FBI had to throw cold water on these reporters in heat. Here's the FBI's shot-over-the-bow:

"Contrary to widespread reporting, no arrest has been made in connection with the Boston Marathon attack. Over the past day and a half, there have been a number of press reports based on information from unofficial sources that has been inaccurate. Since these stories often have unintended consequences, we ask the media, particularly at this early stage of the investigation, to exercise caution and attempt to verify information through appropriate official channels before reporting." 

Of course free speech is free speech. But when free speech includes information leaked by dishonest cops to moron reporters, the transfer and receipt of that information should be punished as a felony, even if the speech itself cannot be.

 

Copyright, Denis O'Brien, 2005-2015 ~ ~ All rights reserved.