Manhunt Going On In Watertown, Massachusetts Right Now

@JTT,

I'm avoiding the messenger and his methods not his view of reality.

I'm making a suggestion to the messenger so he might get a more receptive audience and discussion going about his view of reality he posts about.

I have no desire to put any effort into responding to your posts when all that comes back is more of the same in-your-face taunting.

You're the one who wants more people to listen to you. If you want me to be one of them, you'll have to change your methods. I choose not to participate in their current state.

That's all I have to say about it.

1 Reply

@Butrflynet,

Another possible casualty of the bombings.

Quote:

The body of a man found in a Rhode Island river may be a student mistakenly identified as one of the Boston bombers, authorities say.

The state medical examiner's office is trying to determine whether the dead man is Sunil Tripathi, 22, who has been missing since March.

Members of a university rowing team found the body on Tuesday evening.

Mr Tripathi has been described as the other victim of the bombings after he was wrongly identified a suspect.

Police Lieutenant Joseph Donnelly told the Boston Globe it was "very possible" that the body is Mr Tripathi.

Brown University's rowing coach called police after spotting the body floating in the Providence River.

Mr Tripathi, a former Brown University student, was last seen in his apartment in Providence on 16 March.

On Monday social media website Reddit issued a public apology for its coverage of the Boston bombings after it wrongly named specific people as suspects.

Those mistakenly identified as suspects included Mr Tripathi.

Mr Tripathi's sister, Sangeeta, told the BBC of her family's anxiety at how fast "completely unsubstantiated claims were spreading".

She described how media surrounded their family home after her brother was wrongly named.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22278224

2 Replies

@izzythepush,

Suicide is always the fault of the dead one....so no.

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

Wait,

He's been missing since March 16th and they think he may have committed suicide over being falsely accused of the Boston bombings? How long has he been in the river?

2 Replies

@JPB,

He was said to be depressed in one article I read. I highly doubt that if it was suicide it was about the false accusations; more like terribly sad for the family. Could be wrong of course, though I took it i.d. is hard because of whatever time in the water. I didn't save the article link (my desk top is bulging with links).

0 Replies

So he was missing for a month when the bombing took place. A more germane question ought to be what he had been up to for that month, and why anyone would have considered him a suspect.

0 Replies

@JPB,

Note I used the word possible, they've not even positively identified the body yet. There's still lots of questions to be answered, but the strain of being outed as a terrorist when you're innocent must put incredible strain on you.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

I'm sure it does, but not if he'd already been in the river for a month.

0 Replies

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/officials-boston-suspect-had-no-firearm-when-barrage-of-bullets-hit-hiding-place/2013/04/24/376fc8a0-ad18-11e2-a8b9-2a63d75b5459_story.html

I muttered a question about this on one of our threads - that this bleeding out guy caused all that gunfire.
That he didn't have a gun is a real **** kicker.

I mentioned wherever I posted it, that Lola had heard gunfire (wherever she was listening) and another poster was telling us what the FBI was saying about holding fire, do not return fire.

My word was internecine, and I'll hold to that.

3 Replies

@ossobuco,

Quote:

That he didn't have a gun is a real **** kicker

that those at the scene say that he was fading in and out of consciousness should perk your ears as well.

0 Replies

@ossobuco,

Quote:

Law enforcement officials described the 30 minutes before the arrest of Tsarnaev as chaotic. One characterized it as “the fog of war” and said that in a highly charged atmosphere, one accidental shot could have caused what police call “contagious fire.”

The "fog of war", oh yeah. That's always been a good excuse, hasn't it, Osso, for US troops, pentagon planners for mowing down hundreds of innocents with guns or bombs.

Nixon wanted anything that would fly into the air to bomb poor Cambodians into oblivion. It's the extremely poor sense of judgment from your highest leaders that turn those below into raving maniacs.

Was A2K able to get some super hot advertising going as this debacle played out?

1 Reply

@JTT,

So it was all just cops shooting at cops, at the end? While the FBI were yelling "Don't shoot, we need him alive"? And was not fully or continuously conscious? So the use of even tear gas would have been excessive? The stun grenades (several) wouldn't have helped much then, either.

And some people are still trying to take credit for this.

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

ossobuco wrote:

. . . I muttered a question about this on one of our threads - that this
bleeding out guy caused all that gunfire.
That he didn't have a gun is a real **** kicker.

I mentioned wherever I posted it, that Lola had heard gunfire (wherever
she was listening) and another poster was telling us what the FBI was
saying about holding fire, do not return fire.

From interviews I've seen here, this what I'm piecing together.
The first cops on the scene were Transit Police (kind of an uh-oh right
there). They say they saw hand hold something emerge from the
tarpaulin. Assuming it could be a gun or a bomb, they opened fire.
More Transit Police artived as the first group opened fire. Assuming
there was a gunfight in progress, they also opened fire. Then they
got word to stop firing and they stopped.

How accurate this is, I have no idea. I get the feeling it won't be
cited as an example of proper procedure in any future police
manuals.

0 Replies

@McTag,

McTag wrote:

So it was all just cops shooting at cops, at the end? While the FBI were yelling "Don't shoot, we need him alive"? And was not fully or continuously conscious? So the use of even tear gas would have been excessive? The stun grenades (several) wouldn't have helped much then, either.

And some people are still trying to take credit for this.

Well, McTag, what is the point of your criticism? Would UK law enforcement have done better?

2 Replies

@wandeljw,

Quote:

Well, McTag, what is the point of your criticism? Would UK law enforcement have done better?

How so typically adult of you, JW.

US law enforcement has itself done better, much better, numerous times. It's called negotiating and there are actually some people in the US who do this.

Did not an armored vehicle pull off the tarp. An armored vehicle, JW. If an armored vehicle was sitting next to a fella without any gun, lying bleeding from numerous gunshot wounds, how much negotiating do you think it might take to get him to surrender?

Being an adult means that one thinks, not just responds with a reptilian brain jerk reaction.

0 Replies

@wandeljw,

wandeljw wrote:

Well, McTag, what is the point of your criticism? Would UK law enforcement have done better?

I don't know of any case where UK officers shot at each other.

Quote:

Police use of firearms 2010-11
:Authorised in 17,209 operations, says Home Office figures for England and Wales - a decrease of 1,347 (7%) on previous year
:6,653 authorised firearms officers - (5% decrease)
:13,346 operations involving armed response vehicles (6% decrease)
:Three incidents in which police discharged a conventional firearm (down from six incidents)

That's right, three incidents where a weapon was fired for the whole period.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19641398

2 Replies

@izzythepush,

You unpatriotic Brits! How do you propose to support the ammunition makers? Do you want their children to starve?

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

wandeljw wrote:
Well, McTag, what is the point of your criticism? Would UK law enforcement have done better?

I don't know of any case where UK officers shot at each other.

Quote:
Police use of firearms 2010-11
:Authorised in 17,209 operations, says Home Office figures for England and Wales - a decrease of 1,347 (7%) on previous year
:6,653 authorised firearms officers - (5% decrease)
:13,346 operations involving armed response vehicles (6% decrease)
:Three incidents in which police discharged a conventional firearm (down from six incidents)

That's right, three incidents where a weapon was fired for the whole period.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19641398

In response to a bombing attack, law enforcement sometimes makes mistakes during tense situations. In the days after the 2005 London bombings, weren't mistakes made by the London metropolitan police special units?

4 Replies

@wandeljw,

Quote:

In response to a bombing attack, law enforcement sometimes makes mistakes due to tension. In the days aster the 2005 London bombings, weren't mistakes made by the London metropolitan police special units?

Please please please please tell me that someone else is as incompetent as those that govern and us and keep us shittin' our pants.

0 Replies

@wandeljw,

Our police shot a Brazilian guy in the Underground, mistaken information, big panic, causing much embarrassment, regret and soul-searching.

But nobody congratulated anybody. It was plainly a major ****-up.

1 Reply

Manhunt Going On In Watertown, Massachusetts Right Now

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know