There area a lot, too many ways that the mainstream media have failed miserably for the most part, to discuss what happened in Boston. They're doing a predictable job covering the story of the bomber suspects, as they have been portrayed by the police, the FBI and politicians.
But the MSM is failing miserably at discussing what actually happened before and after the bombs went off. They're doing a dismal job asking questions. They are shirking their responsibilities to look at the whole, big picture.
Here are some of the questions they should be asking:
What precedents will be set by locking down a whole metropolitan area of almost five million citizens?
The only times such large scale lockdowns have occurred have been during major, mass riots. It is being argued that this metro-lockdown approach made it easier for the police to do their job. That is not an acceptable reason. This is a slippery slope.
This time the lockdown was used to search for a fugitive bomber. Maybe the next time a lockdown will be used to search for a cop-killer on the run. And the next time it will be used to search for thieves who stole $100 in art. Before we know it we could be seeing city-wide lockdowns for bank thefts or rapes-- this is a slipper slope we need to discuss whether we should go down it. I say absolutely not. And anyway, the lockdown didn't work. The fugitive was found after and BECAUSE the lockdown was lifted.
What security was in effect at the Boston Marathon-- and why were The Craft, private militia members there?
Some alternative media sites have observed that the Craft
International militia people, or at least people wearing their skull logo and khaki pants were at the Boston Marathon finish line. Who put them there? What was their role? Was there heightened security there because of warnings or threats? It's reasonable to have security at such a big event, but why these paramilitary types?
What are the details of the FBI's and CIA's previous connections and relations with the Tsarnaev brothers?
They were in contact for several years. When the bombings happened, did the Tsarnaev brothers show up as suspects simply because they'd been under watch? DEBKA files suggests
that once the Russians identified them, the US attempted to make them double agents. There's no sourcing of evidence that this is true, and that's the pattern with these kinds of claims-- but then again, it's not like the CIA or FBI would be providing documenting links.
Were there any other suspects? It is not that uncommon for the police and investigators to drop any investigation of other suspects once a prominent potential suspect is on the radar.
Did they really learn bomb-making on the internet?
Some have suggested that the suspects may have been "played" by the FBI, just like close to 20 other FBI operations. Could this have been an FBI project that spun out of control? Did the FBI or any other government agencies, directly or indirectly. Explaining their ability to make bombs by citing the internet makes for a nice, neat and tidy wrap up of the narrative that's been offered.
Who said what about a drill. One person, from South Carolina, has said that someone, at the time of the bombing, said, "this is a drill." That doesn't make sense to me nor others, who have suggested this is evidence of a false flag event. Frankly, using Occam's razor, seeking the simplest explanation, I'll go with the one person reporting it mis-hearing someone say "this is NOT a drill." That makes a lot more sense and takes the wind out of the sails of people like Alex Jones, who, by the way, news sources report, the older Tsarnaev brother was a fan of.
I am not saying, as many conspiracy sites have, that there was a false flag operation. I'm saying there are a lot of unasked and unanswered questions that deserve a lot more attention and exposure. I have not seen enough evidence yet to convince me that there was a false flag act. But I distrust the CIA, the FBI, the military and people within the government enough to keep an open mind and be suspicious of the official narrative explaining any event like this.
What are some more questions that should be on CNN and MSNBC and the other "news" networks?
|The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.