This makes me wonder: are they wondering how bat guano Islamist jihadis could do crazy things, or are they going conspiracy theory
(Mother Jones) Dzhokhar and Tamerlan’s motive—or motives—is still unclear (um, no: they were motivated by “religious fervor“, ie, the Religion of Peace.) But that’s not the only unknown. Many of the Tsarnaevs’ actions last week seem baffling in retrospect. Here are some of the most confounding things they did:
- Wear a backwards hat and no sunglasses.
- Not react to the explosions.
- Leave the car in the shop.
- Stay in Boston.
- Kill an MIT police officer.
- Run out of cash.
- Not understand how ATMs work.
- Confess to the hostage.
- Stop for snacks.
- Keep the hostage’s phone.
- Bring a BB gun.
Most of those “mystifying things” revolve around stupidity, and we all know just how smart Islamists are, right? Some were for bragging rights. Some because radical Islam isn’t particularly peaceful, and killing the infidel is super awesome! Was this a case of “hey, y’all, watch this” or “it seemed like a good idea at the time”?
Reading the full article, I can’t decide whether Mother Jones, which usually tried to shoot down, gently, 9/11 Trutherism, is attempting to “just wonder” whether the two Tsarnaev brothers did it and were idiots or are being set up by The Government.
But, these questions are small change. There are much bigger ones, like
- Was it linked to a bigger Islamist group (so far Dzhokhar has said no)
- What’s the deal with the Saudi?
- Why did the FBI ignore the Russian warning?
- Were there more people involved
- Does this mean The Government (and I’m referring to Dems and Republicans here) will push for more draconian and overbearing surveillance of the public?
I’m sure you can come up with a few more.
Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.
I have more questions:
1) Why was a man forcibly stripped naked in public and held prior to determining who exactly the bombers were?
2) What is his status? Is he being held against his will?
3) What about the unconstitutional home invasions by the police, swat, atf, national guard without warrants?
4) What about the forcible removal of homeowners by the police, swat, atf, national guard without warrants?
5) Why did the police cordon get pulled back\disband before the 2nd suspect was found?
6) Why weren’t search dogs used to track the suspect?
7) Why was the 2nd suspect allowed to run over his brother (if true) despite that brother being under police control at the time?
8) Why were the national guard called in when they are not called in for any other murders, explosions, mass attacks?
and
9) Will no one ask why an Islamist decided to attack a gun-limited city opposed to a gun-loving city?
Good questions guys, very good. I doubt we will ever hear the asnwers to all of them though- the media will never do their job in the case of Islamic terrorism and the government won’t do it either.
That leaves us back where we are with Benghazi, and Republican representatives who keep dropping the ball on important, downright crucial information that’s being withheld.
The least transparent administration ever.
Gumball,
With all due respect, let’s not go overboard here.
I have seen some stories about this but the stories are mostly from people who were not involved, so they don’t know what was said or going on.
For example, there is a 13 minute video going around where a bunch of people were pulled from a home and searched. I have seen people screaming that this is the type of tactic the police used but there are several problems. The home from which the video was shot was not searched and neither were any other homes on the street. Secondly, it turns out the people in the home had called the police saying there was a noise in the basement which could be the suspect. At that point in time, the police don’t need a warrant as the search of a home under those circumstances is not “unreasonable.”
Other homes may have been searched without cause, but I have yet to read of them from the homeowners. (Doesn’t mean they aren’t out there, but I have yet to see one from the source.)
Because the police assumed that the suspect was still in the cordoned off area and not outside of it. It was a bad assumption.
Dogs were used in the searches.
The National Guard is often used in times like this. The Guard was used to maintain the lockdown or martial law in the city while the police, ATF and FBI performed law enforcement duties. I did see one instance where there appeared to be a Guard member participating in a search, and that should not happen, so I agree there are questions there on the use of the NG.
I think we have to be cautious and not rush to judgement here. There are a lot of questions but we seem to have taken a course of “it is always something wrong” or “it is the government doing something” in cases like this. The fact of the matter is that the people in the police departments, ATF, and FBI are, for the most part, as honorable as you and I are. But they are also human and make mistakes.
Hindsight is 20 – 20 and a rush to judgement makes things worse, not better.
I am not saying the questions don’t have merit, but there is still a lot of investigating going on. In that we have had cases such as the Duke Lacrosse case where everyone rushed to proclaim a bunch of people guilty, I think we should just let this play out a little until the investigations are done, or at least nearly done.
That’s my opinion though.
They went house to house pulling people out of their homes. They forced people up against cars and garages while they searched them. They then searched the homes.
Examples:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=FQ1-ZUN3Li0 at 1:15 specifically.
National Guard used for police action
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2313249/Boston-bomber-search-Moment-SWAT-teams-ordered-innocent-neighbors-houses-GUNPOINT.html
If scent dogs were used to track him after he fled the scene of the shootout, and abandoned his vehicle later, then the dogs should have led the police to where he was hiding.
Why did the police lose him after the firefight? Where were the helicopters?
I have never heard of the national guard called out on police actions. I’ve never heard of the national guard called out when a bomb is sighted or goes off?
Now, there could be a tie in with the declaration of martial law, but again, I don’t recall any instances outside of natural disasters where martial law is declared and the national guard are called in. Not saying there hasn’t been one… where a mayor or gov declares martial law due to a bad guy and then calls out the national guard.
But, again, why? It was not a natural disaster. It was a police action. Calling out soldiers for a police action?
“House to house” implies they went to EVERY house. They did not and the report says that. They went to specific areas where they thought the suspect was and made searches.
Not in that picture. There are no National Guardsman holding someone or going into a home.
The Daily Mail article is of the house I mentioned. The people requested the police to come to the home because they heard a noise in the basement.
I am not an expert on dogs Gumball, but I know there are restrictions on their capabilities in an setting with so many people transiting the area. We have a dog in our police force and when I see the handler, I’ll ask about his capabilities. (I know that police dogs are trained more to smell specific substances and not necessarily people.)
I wondered that too. The police helicopter is not perfect and you can flee from it if it looks in the wrong direction. Also apparently at the critical moment, the FLIR on the helicopter broke. Ugh.
The National Guard has been called out for riots and things like that but I accept your point. For example the Guard was called out for the 1999 WTO protests in Seattle. (And I would like to know who called out the National Guard. The mayor cannot, but in a change in the law in 2009, the PRESIDENT can call out the Guard even against the wishes of the governor. I would love to know who made that call.)
I think you have to realize that there were two things going on at the same time. The police were searching for the BAS (bomber / asswipe / suspect.) The police have powers that are given to them but not to the military due to the Posse Comitatus Act. The Guard was called in to maintain the martial law (everyone in their homes) while the police went searching. Allowing the National Guard to take care of the martial law freed up the police to search for the BAS.
I think that more will need to come out as to the decision making process in calling out the Guard, but I believe that is why they did it. The police could concentrate on searching for the guy while the Guard did its thing.
I agree with you that there are questions, but I am not thrilled with the rush to judgement on everything that happened.
BWWAAAHHAHAHAHAA
Well, they did in the videos. And, if I heard something in my basement, I’d leave before calling police. Why would you wait in the house?
And, can’t seem to find it now, but I seem to recall that the “police” were searching houses within the cordone area.
Even so, I find their actions pushing legal authority in searches. I am very unfamiliar with the legal standing of people within martial law, but can the 14th be put aside?
As for the WTO protests, and the like when the NG was called out, would you agree that those are Large area disruptions? Mass number of people causing mayhem? Compare and contrast to the search for one man in one part of Boston.
Thanks for the discussion GC, I look forward to any info that you can glean from your police-friend dog handler.