Jump to content
The Education Forum


Recommended Posts



or Syria's ASSAD .....


Boston marathon bombing happened on same day as 'controlled explosion' drill by Boston bomb squad

Monday, April 15, 2013

by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger

Editor of NaturalNews.com (See all articles...)

(NaturalNews) Two bombs have rocked the streets of Boston and reportedly injured 22 marathon runners (two have reportedly died). It's too early to know the cause of these explosions, but you can rest assured both the state and federal government will try to use this tragic event to blame whatever convenient enemies are most advantageous for the government.

No one has yet stepped forward to claim responsibility for the bombs, and the fact that no firearms were used in the attack may indicate this was NOT part of a false flag effort by the government to try to blame gun owners. (But it's still way too early to tell...)

Here at Natural News, we are horrified at this loss of innocent life, and we are praying for the victims of this bombing as well as their families.

Bomb squad was running "controlled explosion" on the same day

What's not yet being reported by the mainstream media is that a "controlled explosion" was under way on the same day as the marathon explosion.

As the Boston Globe tweeted today, "Officials: There will be a controlled explosion opposite the library within one minute as part of bomb squad activities."

Some people believe this explosion might have been part of the demolition of another bomb. It seems unlikely, however, that a bomb at the library, one mile away, could be so quickly located and rigged to be exploded by the bomb squad in less than one hour following the initial explosions at the marathon.

Bloomberg news is now saying, "This is very likely a terrorist attack."

The question is: Who are the terrorists? 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.

Also read

FBI 'entrapment' tactics questioned in web of phony terror plots and paid informants.

Keep in mind I am in no way blaming the FBI for this. Most men and women who work with the FBI are upstanding citizens who would be appalled at such acts. But it is theoretically possible that one of the FBI's many "terror plots" went too far and turned into a live bomb instead of a dud followed by an arrest for "domestic terrorism."

For the record, the explosions seemed relatively small for a false flag, and most false flags target children in order to maximize the emotional leverage after the event. That these explosions did not target children is yet more evidence that it may not have been a false flag at all.

Either way, terrorism always works in the favor of the state. It makes presidents look presidential, and it gives the government an excuse to crack down on civil liberties all across the country.

Be wary of who ultimately gets blamed for this, especially if it's a veteran or patriot.

Additional information:


Learn more: http://www.naturalne...l#ixzz2QYIcKijf

Learn more: http://www.naturalne...l#ixzz2QYIVRY8F

Edited by Steven Gaal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

SEQUESTER CUTS counter terrorism

CNO: Defense cuts hurt counter-terror efforts



Napolitano on sequestration: Cuts make anti-terrorism efforts 'awfully tough'


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once again Gaal COLBY replies in minutes. He seems to monitor the forum very closely.

COLBY in red Gaal


GEE I COULD LEAN TO ASSAD IDEA .....he doubled back Salifi operative ...yup sounds good to DOD. :sun



US-supported Salafi terrorists tarnish image of true Islam: Analyst


An American peace activist tells Press TV that the US-backed Salafi terrorist groups operating inside Syria represent an anti-social and anti-human interpretation of Islam.

The leader of the foreign-backed al-Nusra militant group fighting against the Syrian government has pledged allegiance to the al-Qaeda chief, Ayman al-Zawahiri. Meanwhile, former leader of Syria’s opposition National Coalition Ahmed Moaz al-Khatib tried to distance the bloc from the al-Qaeda-linked al-Nusra Front following Baghdadi's statement, saying, “There has never been and there will never be a decision at the command level to coordinate with al-Nusra.” The foreign-sponsored unrest in Syria began in March 2011, and many people, including large numbers of soldiers and security personnel, have been killed in the violence.

Press TV has conducted an interview with Randy Short, with Dignity, Human Rights and Peace Organization from Washington D.C. He is joined by Anjem Choudary, with the Shairah Court of UK from London. What follows is a rough transcription of the interview.

Press TV: Randy Short you just heard Anjam Choudary, saying that this is going to be a global phenomenon now. Please give us your reaction to the statements?

Short: Well, he is clearly on to something; it is a global phenomenon. Where I take issue with him is, this global phenomenon has been supported by the very states that prop up Israel.

So I am curious as to if they are successful in achieving their first end how are they are going to get to the second if, in fact, they are armed by the very forces that have empowered Israel with nuclear weapons and have backed them for over 60 years. It is not clear.

So it seems as if, to me, that you have people who have an end to achieve but they are getting support from the very same people they are going to have to fight.

So it so going to be a very interesting transition, how do they turn on the people that are arming and empowering them.

Press TV: Randy Short your reaction to that [the Facebook comment of one of the viewers]?

Short: Well, I would agree with that comment and further to respond to the gentleman in London, I am far from superficial. The superficiality is to presuppose that somehow under the banner of Islam that everyone is going to come together when we look at Libya and for that matter if we look at Saudi Arabia, where you have this pure Islam you have conflict.

When you put the guns and this divided opposition together if you were to have a fall in a matter of the days for the Assad regime it is going to be a bloodbath.

It would not be anything that anyone would want and so no one was talking about America’s foreign interest, when I was speaking I am thinking about the people on the ground that live in Syria.

It is very interesting that the perspective of the gentleman ignores the self-determination or human rights of the people within Syria.

What about minorities? And what about the hatred against different groups like Christians and Shias? How are they going to be treated and does this new shariah pure Islam state that he proposes, is it going to be like Libya is now? Or Afghanistan and that is where they will get enough help to destroy a state from the West but not enough help to create even the pure Islamic state that they want and so I am far from superficial. I think that his ideology drives him to look at it in a very, very pristine way that it will be achieved but I am not so certain because they rarely happen that way.

There is always fallout after a revolution or change in power.

[in response to Anjam Choudary]: Iran is not a secular regime and Iran is...

Press TV: Randy short go ahead.

Short: Well, he is acting as if the Shias do not have a right to practice Islam as they understand it and to dismiss this is the highpoint of sectarian bigotry.

Who runs Iran? Who is the leading power? And it is an Islamic republic. To deny that is it because that they are Shia? Is that the kind of change that they are going to come [bring about]? So they are going to attack the Shias and they are going to have Muslims fight each other?

This plays right into the hands of the same people who are providing the humanitarian assistance to al-Nusrah, the people that you are saying, help. This is Western supply; these people do not have food and books, so this is coming from America, the same country that you said have a superficial policy.

You are coming to them and from Britain and France, to get humanitarian aid to make it seem as if the folks have a compassion for the folks, when in reality they can provide nothing right at this moment and the infrastructure of the state and that aside in particular Syria has been destroyed.

So maybe the people want the food because you have destroyed their capacity to feed themselves and to educate themselves.

I would take it too, if I was in a refugee camp but I would never forget who made me hungry, who destroyed my home, who ruined my society and I would be very suspicious of whether I would want them to be a government over me.

[in response to Anjam Choudary]: You reject human rights? I believe you [do].

They are not my colleagues in the White House, I beg to differ with you and you are the one that gives assistance..., your colleagues get the assistance from the White House.

As an African American nationalist my perspective is not supported by this “Anglo-American” government.

You are more likely to receive, from the very same people you keep criticizing, help than I will.

Because you are working for them even though you do not want to acknowledge it and you are hiding behind the same pure Islam but who is funding you?

Going all the way back to T.E Lawrence supporting the rebellion against the Ottoman Empire, that you have always been supported by Britain, France and the United States. There is no separation from the powers that be in the West, from your movement.

You have always gotten that help whether it is Afghanistan, whether it is Libya. You cannot divide it; you may want to but you cannot.

I never said that they [uS and Britain regimes] were not [the Muslims’ enemies]. You keep talking to me from a very sectarian bigoted view without recognizing my particularity, without understanding that.

So when you talk to me it is not if you talk to George Bush and we have got nothing alike but that shows your lack of understanding of the world and differences even within the United States.

Speaking of superficial, you are a textbook case. You do not understand and I am not here to argue the American foreign policy.

As a human rights advocate and a peace advocate I have been denouncing the American foreign policy at every chance I could.

I have a lot of respect for Islam, especially when it is peaceful and it follows the Prophet Mohammad’s, peace be upon him, and the Surahs but not the senseless killing, the mortars and the violation of humanity.

This does not sound like the Islam that I was taught about in school.

If you cared about Palestine why do not you do everything that you can, to help the Palestinians?

You said that you do not believe in the human rights, so you do not support the human rights. So why would people travel thousands of miles to kill and to hurt people?

Press TV: Randy short go ahead.

Short: He said earlier in the program that they did not support the human rights, so why not kill people wherever you could?

Why not? If you do not respect the sanctity of human life, why not kill people?

So, I mean, I would not just say that right here, I will not back off of that. That is exactly what is happening in Syria, that is exactly what people have done in Libya. That is a kind of anti-social, anti-human misrepresentation of Islam that some people are pushing.

And it justifies and rationalizes the Islamophobia in the West where you yourself, your civil liberties and are at risk in Great Britain because of the behaviors of the people who think like this in other places in the world.

I am not talking about the caveman rights. In fact the people who are just like you..., the caveman rights are the murder of Libyans who happen to be black.

That is what they have gotten when folks have taken power talking about a pure Islam based on Shariah and it has been quite brutal and inhumane against people.

I am an advocate for rights for people in Guantanamo but because you, I saw ideologically blind to the fact that you do not recognize they are people who are just living in societies that are not in your teeny-tiny sectarian concept of the only way people can live.

So, you know, I have no apologies. I am against Guantanamo being in possession of the United States. Whether you know that or not and whether you try to outtalk or outyell me, which you will not do, it is very clear that your order that you want to push, to me, seems no more humane than the Western people that you denounce, who my folks have been fighting for our freedom for 500 years but obviously you do not know anything about black folks except for when you have them killed in Libya and in Mauritania.

I mean let us talk about the racism of this pure shariah that you Salafis have been pushing. The murder of people because of the color of their skin when the Prophet Mohammad, peace be upon him, said that there is no black, there is no white, there is one.

I mean you guys practice sectarianism and racism and you are calling that divine right? You must be crazy. Do not try to insult ...



Jordan extremist praises Boston bombing


AMMAN, JORDAN — The head of an extremist Jordanian Muslim Salafi group says he’s “happy to see the horror in America” after the explosions in Boston.

“American blood isn’t more precious than Muslim blood,” said Mohammad al-Chalabi, who was convicted in an al-Qaida-linked plot to attack U.S. and other Western diplomatic missions in Jordan in 2003.

“Let the Americans feel the pain we endured by their armies occupying Iraq and Afghanistan and killing our people there,” he said early Tuesday.

A Mideast counterterrorism official based in Jordan said the blasts “carry the hallmark of an organized terrorist group, like al-Qaida.” He did not give actual evidence.

A Jordanian official said security was beefed up around the U.S. Embassy in Amman.

Both officials insisted on anonymity, as they were not authorized to brief reporters.

Edited by Steven Gaal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A former director of Press-TV said it was nothing but a propaganda outlet.

The evidence seems to suggest it was just an amateur kook. The explosives were low powered, there was no shrapnel nor any 2ndary devices, the went off about 2 hours after the 1st runners crossed the finish line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • whatreallyhappened SITE
    32% (526 votes)
  • ===============
    51% (835 votes)
  • ===============
    2% (31 votes)
    10% (165 votes)
    6% (93 votes)
  • =================
  • Total votes: 1650

Edited by Steven Gaal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A former director of Press-TV said it was nothing but a propaganda outlet.

The evidence seems to suggest it was just an amateur kook. The explosives were low powered, there was no shrapnel nor any 2ndary devices, the went off about 2 hours after the 1st runners crossed the finish line.


OH !! BUT I WAITING FOR FBI HELPER 'friend ' to testify against the kook (useful idiot);

Effect gun control debate ?? yup....yup.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saudi Connection to the 9/11 Hijackers

The hijackers’ training records from several U.S. flight schools indicate that they were marginal pilots, at best, even in single-engine airplanes. In early 2000, three of the pilot/hijackers are heavily documented at a small flight school near Venice, Florida, while the fourth attended schools in Arizona and California. This would account for the basic flight training of the pilots but in no way can explain the expert level of airmanship required for the 911 hit.

Dozens of reports focused on the pilot/hijackers Mohamed Atta, Hani Hanjour, Ziad Jarrah and Marwan al-Shehhi. Flight instructors around the United States told similar stories of attempting to train them. All four had a very difficult time in their basic training on small, single-engine airplanes. The English-speaking instructors repeatedly cited the language barrier with the Arabic-speaking students as a major obstacle and said that they had encouraged the students to quit. Obviously, this language issue had found a solution by 911; the only logical solution is that Arabic-speaking flight instructors were used, more specifically, Arabic-speaking Boeing flight instructors.

By using small flight schools for basic flight training, the cell remained below the radar, while the pilots’ documented use of the schools could be counted on later to provide some sort of explanation (albeit a very weak one) as to how they learned to fly these complicated heavy jets, and might help keep investigators off the trail of the real training. But the leap from a small 4,000-pound single-engine propeller airplane to a 300,000-pound twin-engine jetliner needs a specific explanation. For instance, it took me 20 years, dozens of ground school courses and 15,000 hours between my first lesson and taking command of my first commercial airliner. Adding computer games and outdated simulators to their training was a helpful step, but until they actually felt the yoke and added the hours of experience it takes to understand the momentum of a heavy 767, they would be all over the sky and completely out of control. Not only were they under control, they flew above the average skills required to operate in an airline environment. This miraculous leap has only one explanation: expert and repeated training in the actual Boeing 757 or 767. And by all indications, this took place in the final months of preparation, during the spring and summer of 2001.

There are two different worlds in aviation — the general single-engine airplane world with a service ceiling of 10,000 feet and a top speed of around 200 miles per hour, and the commercial swept-wing jetliner world at 40,000 feet and Mach numbers for speed calculations. Little within that first world prepares the pilot for the second, high-altitude world.

So began my search for Middle Eastern operators of Boeing airliners. Because the hijackers were mostly Saudi Arabian, the firm of Dallah Avco, a Saudi operator of multiple private Boeing airliners, soon stood out as a focal point. To my amazement, I immediately discovered that Congressional investigators had already linked Dallah Avco with the actual hijackers. Omar Bayoumi, a Dallah employee and operative within the Saudi Ministry of Aviation, had provided housing and basic support for three hijackers: Nawaf al-Hazmi, Khalid al-Mihdhar and the pilot/hijacker of American 77, Hani Hanjour.

FBI evidence of the cell would confirm that the hijacking team of American 77 had formed and operated separately with direct financial support from top-level members of the Saudi government, bitter enemies of al Qaeda. The picture was beginning to clear.

From this point in the research, the guilt needle began pointing steadily toward Saudi Arabia, in part because 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis. With every new piece of evidence, that needle does not fluctuate. As the focus narrowed on San Diego, the footprints of a large Saudi contingent began to appear. Congressional investigators had found, within buried FBI files, evidence that United States Senators would later call “undeniable” that top Saudi officials had known that terrorists were entering the U.S. beginning in 2000 in preparation for some sort of attack. These same officials are among those who work with American oil companies and regulate the flow of crude oil to the United States, the same Saudi officials that regulate the price that has gone from $30 per barrel to over $140 post 911.

One Saudi official in particular, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, Saudi Ambassador to the United States from 1983 to 2005, was quickly traced to direct funding of the hijackers, through cashier’s checks, not from him he would say, but from his wife. Alabama Senator Richard Shelby, Maine Senator Susan Collins and Florida Senator Bob Graham learned that Saudi officials had directed agents in the United States to assist the future hijackers. These senators would quietly back out of the investigation after the White House threatened them with “leaking classified information” and a criminal probe. Senator Graham was told in no uncertain terms to back off and shut up in telephone calls from Vice President Cheney. This evidence alone on the Saudis provided more plausibility than two chapters of KSM’s ramblings. Here was opportunity to provide airplanes and instructors for hijackers who were solidly linked to Saudi operatives working for Prince Bandar.


From False Flag 9/11 by Philip Marshall- Chapter 16

It takes a close reading of an innocuous-looking statement within the 911 Commission’s report to realize that a huge entourage of the longtime Saudi Intelligence Minister, Prince Turki al Faisal, was in Las Vegas on September 11, 2001. Tucked in the back of the report was an account of three separate chartered airliners carrying dozens of Saudis, departing from Las Vegas on midnight transatlantic flights beginning on September 19th.

We now know that this group, including Prince Turki, with deep connections to Saudi Arabia’s secret police, was in Las Vegas during the time that the 911 Commission could not explain why all the hijackers had made trips to Las Vegas. The roster of Saudi officials in the United States on September 11 includes the Defense Minister, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Minister of Aviation and the head of Dallah Avco Group, in addition to Prince Turki and of course Prince Bandar, Saudi ambassador to the U.S. In addition, the head of two of Saudi Arabia’s holiest mosques stayed at the same hotel as the all-Saudi hijackers of AA77 — at the Marriott Residence Inn in Herndon, Virginia — on the night of September 10th. In the week after the attack, there were a dozen chartered flights with high-ranking Saudi officials that left from Las Vegas, Newark, Boston and Washington, all cities, by the way, with direct links to the hijackings. By September 24, 2001, they had all returned home.

The British Observer reported that the widely feared Prince Turki al Faisal had a long, mutually hostile relationship with Osama bin Laden. Turki, with American connections (he would become Saudi Ambassador to the U.S. after Prince Bandar), was funding bin Laden’s mujahedeen against the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980s, but the partnership with bin Laden ended soon after. More recently, the entire Saudi royal family had become the prime target of al-Qaeda for their relationship with American oil companies. Of great interest is the Observer’s reporting that pilot/hijacker Mohamed Atta left Hamburg soon after making contact with Prince Turki’s intelligence agents in early 2000. Atta’s destination, after a brief stop in Pakistan, was Huffman Aviation, the small school in Florida where he began basic flight training. He was soon joined by Jarrah and al Shehhi. They told people in Venice that they were bodyguards with the Saudi government and needed to learn to fly airplanes.

The prince’s entourage entailed a perfect opportunity for the Raiders to get the needed Saudi Boeing flight instructors into the country, and exit after the attacks without anyone interviewing them. The chartered departures from Las Vegas were a four-engine DC-8 for Geneva on September 19, 2001 with 69 passengers, including 46 Saudis; a Boeing 727 for England with 18 Saudis on September 20; and on September 23, a jumbo Lockheed L-1011 for Paris. Only 34 passengers were listed on that plane, which has a capacity of nearly 400. On that flight was Prince Turki.

No one in the government will say just who cleared these flights to leave without interviewing even one of the passengers. Prince Bandar said on Meet the Press in September 2001 that the FBI cleared the flights. The FBI said that they did not clear the flights.

Prince Turki and Prince Bandar have more connections to Arabic-speaking Boeing flight instructors than anyone else in the world. The means and opportunity to slip the hijackers into Pinal Airpark or other facilities for training were theirs. The motive was a world-changing event. The Saudis would benefit greatly not only from the targeting of al-Qaeda but from an American invasion of Iraq, one that they had begged for after the first Gulf War. Dick Cheney would guarantee Prince Bandar that America was going to invade Iraq months before anyone informed the United States Congress.

In November 2001, Prince Turki expressed his public support for the U.S. operation in Afghanistan, referring to al-Qaeda as an “evil cult.” By calling out bin Laden for complicity in the attacks, he would be helping to “sic” the world against his greatest enemy, an enemy that has made several assassination attempts against the Saudi royal family. In the winter of 1998, three buried suitcases had been found in Saudi Arabia containing nine antitank Sagger missiles. The Saudis learned that al-Qaeda was intending them for use against the royal family. Former FBI Director Louis Freeh told The New Yorker, “From where I sat and from what I knew … Al Qaeda was more a threat to Saudi Arabia than to the U.S. and bin Laden’s whole focus was on toppling the royal family and getting the U.S. forces out of Saudi Arabia.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was not a false flag operation and for anyone to even suggested it was does a disgrace to the people that was injured and those killed.

How can you look at yourself in the mirror after saying thiings like that???

Link to comment
Share on other sites


The argument that those questioning the official story of any of these events, where there is loss of life, somehow are being disrespectful by doing so is misguided, imho. On the contrary, trying to actually investigate these incidents honestly, honors their memories far more than exploiting the victims and preying on the emotions of the public does.

Considering recent history, and the distrust so many Americans now feel in their leaders, it would be extremely naive not to be skeptical about these tragedies, which garner so much attention from the msm and political figures. As John points out, so many of them happen around this time of year. The fact this occurred on April 15, the day when Federal Income tax returns are due, certainly raises some eyebrows. If an anti-government group is subsequently blamed for the bombing, certainly the date chosen will be duly noted by the authorities, and probably considered part of the motivation behind it. With the dull state of too many citizens' critical thinking skills, it could also easily be used as "evidence" against them.

I haven't studied this case much yet, but certainly the fact bomb sniffing dogs were at the start and finish lines before the bombs went off, as well as testimony indicating officials were publicly telling people not to panic prior to the bombs exploding, certainly provides food for thought. Also, there was apparently a scheduled "drill" that day, as there was on 9/11, 7/7 and Sandy Hook, among others. At this point, it's hard not to automatically discount the official story for any of these events.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don if you think it's suspicious that there were bomb sniffing dogs at a major event I have to wonder which planet you've been living on for the last several decades. And no there is no real evidence of a "drill" that day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A former director of Press-TV said it was nothing but a propaganda outlet.

The evidence seems to suggest it was just an amateur kook. The explosives were low powered, there was no shrapnel nor any 2ndary devices, the went off about 2 hours after the 1st runners crossed the finish line.


OH !! BUT I WAITING FOR FBI HELPER 'friend ' to testify against the kook (useful idiot);

Effect gun control debate ?? yup....yup.....

A bombing incident might "Effect gun control debate ??" You have forever forfeited the right to question anyone else's intellectual capacity (not that you had any right to before)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in

Sign In Now

  • Create New...