Many have visited this blog and others over the past week seeking truth. Some of you long ago crossed the Rubicon and will no longer believe anything without first verifying what is for yourself. Others just don't feel right about one aspect or another of the BMB story, maybe because the reporting of the Newtown/Sandy Hook story didn't entirely seem entirely convincing. Or maybe your doubts go back to 9/11 or 7/7. It matters not where you are on your journey for truth, but that you have dared to question authority, and dared to face truth not knowing how the truth will affect you personally. Most important, you are taking steps to think for yourself. If you are just beginning the journey there's a few things you should know:
Just as you cannot rely on MSM or governments or corporations to tell you what is true and what is false, you should also refrain from trusting any blogger on the Internet. It is not that we intentionally lie (the ones I know and I have listed in the blog roll to the right of these words - over there -> are some of the ones in which I have confidence - not that they are perfect in everything they write but rather that they are doing their best to get at the truth - and that's all you should expect as a reader), but rather that we are striving to find answers to some important questions, and the answers are not readily available. By disseminating questions to a wide audience, we, all together, are more apt to come up with the right answer. There are blogs written by liars. The more you read and learn for yourself, the more readily you'll be able to spot the miscreants. Quite often that type of blogger is paid for his or her work, though it might not be readily apparent if the blogger is on someone's payroll. I'd argue, were I forced to paint with a broad brush, that anyone who consistantly argues ANY government's point of view or who often takes the side of an oppressor or spreads fear should be viewed with a jaundiced eye.
That being said, from now until the day the internet is unplugged, people working for truth will ALWAYS attempt to ferret out the little nuggets of gold from the acres of crap that always seem to make for the 'official story' whenever there is a terror or other major 'shocking' news story. So many of us learned, thanks to 9/11, that the official story always contains falsehoods. And the BS has been layered on thick for some time now. Oswald did not murder John F. Kennedy with an old rifle while at the window of the Texas Book Depository. James Earl Ray did not murder M.L. King, Jr. from the boarding house across the street from the Lorraine Motel. There is more to the Sirhan Sirhan murder of Robert Kennedy (assuming Sirhan fired the shot at all). There may be more to the story of John Lennon's murder at the hand of Mark Chapman (assuming Chapman fired the shot at all). There is much more to the story of the Iran Contra affair than a President and a few 'bad apples' sneaking around the embargo of Iran in order to sell taxpayer purchased weapons for cash. And there's more, much more, to the 9/11 story than we've been told by the government and its fawning media. I'd argue Anyone who explores any of those stories with an open mind, and is willing to devote the time and effort to do so, will come to the same conclusion.
When I first wrote about the Bauman/Vogt similarities, I said: " "I hesitate to even insert this paragraph and the above photo array in this story as it is total conjecture."
Conjecture being that the 2 are in fact the same man. And, as I responded later to a commenter, I do not, in fact, believe they are the same individual. How did I arrive at that conclusion? Asking the question elicited more information. More information served to (in my mind at least) prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they are 2 distinctly different men. And that is one of the great services provided by my fellow bloggers and those who take the time to leave informed comments. One cannot be afraid to ask a question. For instance, some have recently written that they believe the fertilizer explosion in West, Texas, may have been set off by a missile. They have raised a question. Others have written about that possibility seeking to either prove or deny it. This is what it means to seek truth . Bloggers make such truth seeking easier as we're able to disseminate questions to a wide variety of folks worldwide. No question should be 'out of bounds'. It is hard for people to remember this all the time, but in the US the government survives strictly at the behest of the People. The People have (I'm speaking of a perfect world here) authority. The People have a right to ask any damn question they want, and it is incumbent upon the gov. to provide an honest and complete answer. Fear of questioning the State only serves to further empower evil forces within the State.
But some are angry that such questions would be asked in the first place. To paraphrase a comment I read at BuelahMan's excellent blog, 'I'd happily give up my first amendment rights if it meant that idiots like you weren't allowed to write this garbage any longer'.
That's an amazing comment. The person who wrote it takes her Natural Right to be able to speak and write and wants it taken away from everyone in order that she'll no longer stumble onto a blog that asks her to think for herself. A lot of people, I have no doubt, agree with her. She also added towards the end of her comment a 'this is America - love it or leave it!' canard. But she, the 'lover' of America, is the one who'd freely erode more rights in order to not be personally offended...
At the end of a week there are still a number of questions outstanding in regards to the BMB.
1) Video still has not been released of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev exiting the boat, although it clearly must exist. There's video released of a portion of the 'firefight', where police and agents were shooting at the boat which held Tsarnaev. That video, all of it that I've seen, shows Tsarnaev lying on his back or stomach onboard the boat, never moving, and on the far side of the boat from the police. How did he engage in a gun battle from this position? There is a still photo taken which is apparently of Tsarnaev exiting the boat after the 'shootout'. In that photo we see he is not cuffed and is coming out under his own power. Yet we are told that Tsarnaev either attempted suicide onboard or a police bullet went into his mouth and exited the back of his neck.
Why has the entire video, as taken on board a police helicopter, not been released? If he was mobile when he exited, what happened in the intervening moments between when he was taken into custody and apparently arrived at the hospital close to death?
2) We know there was at least 1 drill taking place at the time of the race. How many, in total, drills were there? Which agencies authorized the drill(s)? What was the purpose of said drill(s)?
3) Who exactly was to provide security for the race? Does the Boston Marathon contract with outside security services? If so, which ones? Who are the men who've been photographed who appear to be security contractors (or perhaps 'mercenaries' is a more descriptive word for them,depending upon your point of view) who were in the vicinity of both bombs just prior to detonation?
4) There are a host of questions that surround the accusations made by Tsarnaev's mother and father. Were one or both of their boys indeed recruited by Al Qaeda or another CIA front terror provider? Were they double agents as has been alleged in the Israeli press?
5) With the trillions of dollars spent since 9/11, the two wars fought and thousands of Americans and millions of Iraqi and Afghan lives lost, and the freedom and rights we've been told we must relinquish if we are to be safe from terrorists, how were 2 young men who had already been eyeballed by the FBI able to get away with such an act? Does this not serve to prove that palaces being built across this nation to house DHS offices are a gigantic waste of dollars?
5) What, if any, is the connection between the Saudi national and this attack? How is Israel involved?
6) The Dept. of Justice has already determined the guilt of Tsaraen. Therefore, it is judged by the DOJ (and seconded by some Republican members of Congress) that advising Tsaraen or any future 'terror suspect' of their rights against both self-incrimination and their right to representation need not be mentioned. This is a frontal assault on every American's 5th and 6th Amendment rights.
What other questions do you have?