Freedom4um

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

National News
See other National News Articles

Title: Early Evidence Indicates Boston Bombing Was a False Flag
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://www.activistpost.com/2013/04 ... rathon-bombing-false-flag.html
Published: Apr 15, 2013
Author: Brandon Turbeville
Post Date: 2013-04-15 23:27:09 by christine
Keywords: None
Views: 3671
Comments: 27

Only hours after two bombs were detonated near the finish line of a Boston marathon, evidence is beginning to emerge suggesting that the act may have been a false flag attack.

While reports continue to emerge from the scene, a number of facts point toward the typical setup used to devise, control, and execute such an attack as took place around the 9/11, 7/7, and OKC bombings as well as the Aurora and Sandy Hook shootings.

One of the hallmark signals of a false flag attack, as Webster Tarpley has expertly demonstrated in his book, 9/11 Synthetic Terror, is the use of drills acting as a cover for sinister plans and mechanizations within the halls of the shadow government itself which ultimately manifest as false flag terror attacks. Much like the aforementioned attacks, the Boston Bombing also carried the trademark “coincidence” of a drill scheduled to take place at almost exactly the same time that the bombs were being detonated at the marathon.

For instance, earlier in the morning of April 15, 2013, the Boston Globe tweeted “Officials: There will be a controlled explosion opposite the library within one minute as part of bomb squad activities.”

In addition, it was reported by Business Insider in the article “2 More Explosive Devices Found At Boston Marathon,”[1] that a police scanner “said police were going to do a third, controlled explosion on the 600 Block of Boylston Street.”

Yet, despite the fact that the police had scheduled a highly “coincidental” explosion at the JFK Library, much of the mainstream reports regarding the device have presented it as another part of the Boston Bombing itself.

In fact, the New York Post reported almost the polar opposite of the Boston Globe in regards to the second device. It said, “Police confirmed a third explosion at JFK Library in Boston. Boston fire officials confirmed during a press conference that the third explosion was linked to the ones that occurred at the Marathon. There were no injuries reported from the third bombing.”

Andrew Katz of TIME tweeted that “police were investigating reports of bombs in other parts of the city,” and "Citing a police scanner, Katz tweeted that there was an ‘incendiary device’ possible at JFK Library as well as ‘another device’ in front of Boston’s luxury Mandarin Hotel."

Business Insider also reported that, around 3 p.m., there was a fire inside the JFK Library but states that it was not related to the “terrorist bombings.” This, as I mentioned, is in direct contradiction to the later reports that the “fire” was actually an explosion related to the terror bombing.

Thus, we have a device planted inside the library by the police and confirmation that an explosion at the library was connected to the Boston Bombing. This fact alone should be enough to raise questions regarding the individuals responsible for the bombing. If the police had planted a device inside the Library and the explosion was related to the Boston Bombing, should there not be an immediate investigation of the police?

It should also be noted that Chris Faraone of the Boston Phoenix also tweeted that a police officer near the finish line stated, “There are secondary devices that have been found and are unexploded.”

Also interesting, however, is the fact that the University of Mobile’s Cross Country Coach, Ali Stevenson, stated that bomb sniffing dogs were present at both the start and finish lines.

Speaking to Local 15, the local Boston news station, Stevenson stated, “They kept making announcements on the loud speaker that it was just a drill and there was nothing to worry about. It seemed like there was some sort of threat, but they kept telling us it was just a drill.”

At this time, law enforcement officials state that they have identified a suspect, a Saudi national currently in the hospital for shrapnel wounds. One must also wonder if this individual is nothing more than a mere patsy in yet another government-sponsored false flag. It is highly dubious that an individual (with the exception of a suicide bomber which this individual’s survival excludes him from) setting off such powerful bombs would stand so close to them as to be injured by shrapnel.

Ali Stevenson also stated that there was no doubt in his mind that the bombings were intentional and this much is quite clear.

The question, however, is who was behind them?

As Mike Adams of Natural News writes, “It’s far too early to take an informed guess on all this. However, it is indisputable that the FBI is actively engaged in carrying out bomb plots in the United States, then halting them at the last minute to “catch the terrorists.” This fact has been covered by the New York Times, among other publications.”

Indeed. And the track record of the FBI, as well as other elements of the governmental establishment, should be reason enough for us to continue watching these developments and the subsequent claims made by these agencies and individuals.

Notes: [1] This article could not be retrieved by the writer at 6:45 pm.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 5.

#5. To: christine, 911, All (#0)

Already sounds like a 'stuck' record (33 RPM, that is).

It's a bit difficult to be 100% sure (I don't know the area), but the day's videos (to the best of my perception) show a third plume of smoke approximately 4-5 blocks to the ‘rear’ of the first & presumed second blasts.

The catch - time-wise - being that the plume appears to be right on top of the supposed ‘first’ event. If that’s supposed to be the ‘water cannon’ detonation (supposedly effected upon on one of the purported ‘discovered’ devices), the ‘good’ bad guys would need to have already been on top of it, before the ‘first’ blast.

For clarity, as you look at the news videos, pay attention to the one which presents the 'first' blast on the left-hand side of the TV screen; beyond, can be seen the 'third' plume.

Uh-huh, yeah, sure, you betcha! We’ve seen this before:


911 vs. "Patriot Day" (Anybody remember the pre-written "Patriot Act?")
FEMA drill vs. police drill
"America attacked" - again
Limited damage - again (however terrible)
No immediate claim of responsibility - again
Blanketed media coverage with the same "emotional" presentations - again
No warnings - again
"Official Story" not immediately making good sense - again
Over-stated casualties - again (144 - the last I heard)

However, if the world was so intensely gullible about 9-11; why change the proven methodology, right? Herman Goering said it at the Nuremberg Trials; "It works the same in any country. Tell the people that they’re being attacked, etc."

Hmmmm! Yeah, I almost forgot - just in time for the "Gun Bill" vote; coincidence? Funny that the news media was so quick to 'passionately' link Sandy Hook to the Boston events. (I'm not ready to buy the "official story" of Sandy Hook, yet. The gunman was too precise and cool for any 'psychotic break,' that I've ever heard of. I'm pondering whether or not Sandy Hook was another "Manchurian Patsy" operation.)

Okay, here’s the obvious rub, will it be Iran, North Korea – or both? My money is on Iran.


SKYDRIFTER  posted on  2013-04-16   2:58:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 5.

#14. To: SKYDRIFTER (#5)

did not congress pass a comprehensive crime bill that had been stalled for months within four days of the OKC bombing?

IRTorqued  posted on  2013-04-16 11:42:35 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 5.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest