Deadly explosions hit US city of Boston

[Mustafa2012]

It is sad to see innocent lives being taken no matter what background or religion the victims are from.

The ignorant people that carry out these attacks in the name of religion probably don't realise that the average citizen has no control over foreign policy. That is decided by members of the government.

However I think what many on this thread have been saying is that the coverage that this and other events like this are getting are highly disproportionate compared to the coverage of bombings and attacks in other countries namely those in Muslim countries as these countries seem to be most affected by bombings by Western Powers or what is known as state sponsored terrorism including attacks by puppet dictators on their own people.

Some people on this thread seem to have a problem with a certain image of how attacks on Muslims around the world are ignored while an attack that leaves just 3 dead is given so much airtime.

You probably have a point there but if you're so concerned about political correctness then why do you always expect us to be all inclusive when your own media are so biased by default? Why don't you also ask them be more inclusive of other atrocities around the world just like they are so concerned about the atrocities in their own back yard?

Why hold us to such high standards when you don't hold your own people or media to the same standards?

It appears that Muslim blood has become much cheaper than that of a follower of any other religion or a citizen of a non Arab country.

 

[sister herb]

Salam alaykum

I wonder what even means a muslim blood. Is it something different than for example a Christian blood, Jew blood or Hindu blood?

^o)

 

[Iceee]

It appears that Muslim blood has become much cheaper than that of a follower of any other religion or a citizen of a non Arab country.

Exactly my thoughts.
But no, Muslims' blood is NOT cheap
We are tested in this world,but in the afterlife we will be grateful that we have been tested, InshaAllah

 

[LauraS]

Kufar are always cowards, they only attack when you are weak, or defenseless,

If you said that particular man was a coward then I would agree with you.

So what do you think about the western Zionist anti-Muslim lying media reporting this event? Suddenly they are a reputable source of information reporting the truth. As soon as they mention the Boston suspects they will be bad again.

 

[IAmZamzam]

Guys, when are you going to learn that the actual problem with the media around here is that it's a megacorporate, ultracapitalist entity? Run mainly by miserly, white stuffedshirts from primarily Christian backgrounds who probably don't even know the word "Zionist"? If you're going to demonize the western media, hey, I'm right behind you--but for heaven's sake do it for the right reasons!

Still don't believe me? Here's a recent tweet by Rupert Murdoch: Amazing UK High Court decision recognising rabbinical divorce law, now Sharia law certain next. What sort of society, if any, will emerge?

 

[islamica]

Guys, when are you going to learn that the actual problem with the media around here is that it's a megacorporate, ultracapitalist entity? Run mainly by miserly, white stuffedshirts from primarily Christian backgrounds who probably don't even know the word "Zionist"? If you're going to demonize the western media, hey, I'm right behind you--but for heaven's sake do it for the right reasons!

Still don't believe me? Here's a recent tweet by Rupert Murdoch: Amazing UK High Court decision recognising rabbinical divorce law, now Sharia law certain next. What sort of society, if any, will emerge?

[h=3]Six Jewish Companies Control 96% of the World's Media[/h]
There are plenty of other sources as well if you want to google them.

 

[islamica]

 

[IAmZamzam]

By permitting the Jews to control our news and entertainment media, we are doing more than merely giving them a decisive influence on our political system and virtual control of our government; we also are giving them control of the minds and souls of our children, whose attitudes and ideas are shaped more by Jewish television and Jewish films than by their parents, their schools, or any other influence.

Global Zionism and The New World Order

Good.

Gravy.

 

[abo mussaab]

 

[abo mussaab]

U.S. accuses Tsarnayevs brothers as 'terrorists' Boston -

BOSTON - The U.S. government has declared two brothers - Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnayevs - native Dagestan and Kirghizstan, ethnic Chechens, as "suspects" Boston Bomb blast, reports KC on Friday (04/19/2013).

Meanwhile, some experts suggest that the only factor that seems to have been considered as evidence by the American researcher simply because the young men carrying backpacks seen by CCTV cameras.

Clearly, Americans chose to perform continuous checks on people with backpacks on the Boston streets on the day of the incident.

Since then, several people were arrested, but later released. However, what's really going on Tsarnayev?

Tamerlan Tsarnaev (26) was shot dead by police in Boston, while his sister Dzhokar (19) at large, writes Interfax .

Tsarnayev reports that two brothers attacked a police car, and hostage-taking as well as doing many other things, and instead keep and wait for the situation subsides after the explosion, it seems very strange.

The two brothers were not living in Chechnya, and the youngest was born in Kyrgyzstan. From there, they emigrated to the United States. Reporting from the page on the Russian social network " Vkontakte ", Dzhokhar Tsarnayev (19) is very far from the picture of an" Islamic terrorists ". As the main credo, he wants his professional career success.

On the website of Cambridge Rindge & Latin School, where Tsarnayev study, noted that in February 2011, he was given the title of Athlete of the Month .

As for her brother, Tamerlan Tsarnayev (26), it turns out he was professionally trained as a boxer and was preparing to join the U.S. Olympic team.

According to his own statement, because Chechnya is not an independent country, he played for the United States, not to Russia. The information contained on the central organization profile Wai Kru Mixed Martial Arts, where she received training in boxing.

It is also reviewed in the photo gallery Tsarnayev training. There is mentioned, he would rather play for the United States than for the Russian team. The boxer also added that he could not get into the team because he does not have American citizenship, but he hopes to get it later.

In a conversation with a photographer, the athlete also said that he is ready to play for Chechen independence only if Chechnya.

Tamerlan Tsarnayev lived in the U.S. since 2002 or 2003. He studied engineering at Bunker Hill Community College in Boston.(Banan / arrahmah.com )

 

[abo mussaab]

"A vitally important and thoroughly documented new report on the impact of Obama's drone campaign has just been released by researchers at NYU School of Law and Stanford University Law School. Entitled "Living Under Drones: Death, Injury and Trauma to Civilians From US Drone Practices in Pakistan", the report details the terrorizing effects of Obama's drone assaults as well as the numerous, highly misleading public statements from administration officials about that campaign. The study's purpose was to conduct an "independent investigations into whether, and to what extent, drone strikes in Pakistan conformed to international law and caused harm and/or injury to civilians".

The report is "based on over 130 detailed interviews with victims and witnesses of drone activity, their family members, current and former Pakistani government officials, representatives from five major Pakistani political parties, subject matter experts, lawyers, medical professionals, development and humanitarian workers, members of civil society, academics, and journalists." Witnesses "provided first-hand accounts of drone strikes, and provided testimony about a range of issues, including the missile strikes themselves, the strike sites, the victims' bodies, or a family member or members killed or injured in the strike"."

"It is a campaign of terror - highly effective terror - regardless of what noble progressive sentiments one wishes to believe reside in the heart of the leader ordering it. And that's precisely why the report, to its great credit, uses that term to describe the Obama policy: the drone campaign "terrorizes men, women, and children".

Along the same lines, note that the report confirms what had already been previously documented: the Obama campaign's despicable (and likely criminal) targeting of rescuers who arrive to provide aid to the victims of the original strike. Noting that even funerals of drone victims have been targeted under Obama, the report documents that the US has "made family members afraid to attend funerals"."

"In the hierarchy of war crimes, deliberately targeting rescuers and funerals - so that aid workers are petrified to treat the wounded and family members are intimidated out of mourning their loved ones - ranks rather high, to put that mildly. Indeed, the US itself has long maintained that such "secondary strikes" are a prime hallmark of some of the world's most despised terrorist groups."

"A one-day attack on US soil eleven years ago unleashed a never-ending campaign of violence around the world from the target and its allies. Is it really a challenge to understand that continuous bombings and civilian-killing assaults over many years, in many Muslim countries, will generate the same desire for aggression and vengeance against the US?"

http://tinyurl.com/bsbcays

"A UN committee has expressed "alarm" over reports that hundreds of children have been killed by US military forces in Afghanistan in the past five years.

US forces in Afghanistan (USFOR-A), which leads the NATO fight against Taliban insurgents, dismissed the committee's concerns as "categorically unfounded".

The Geneva-based Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) said the deaths were "due notably to reported lack of precautionary measures and indiscriminate use of force". It gave no precise statistics.

NATO forces had reduced civilian casualties by 49 percent in 2012 compared with 2011 and the number of children killed or wounded in air strikes had dropped by nearly 40 percent in the same period, said a statement from USFOR-A.

A UN report in April last year said 110 children were killed and 68 wounded in air strikes conducted by US-led NATO and Afghan forces in 2011.

The committee's report also expressed concern that troops responsible for the killing of children had not always been held accountable and that family grievances had not been redressed.

The US forces statement said that in each case in which civilians are killed, "military officials make every effort to meet with the families of those we have harmed and to express our condolences personally".

The CRC's comments came after a five-yearly review of US compliance with an international treaty on the involvement of children in armed conflict.

It said it was "alarmed at reports of the death of hundreds of children as a result of attacks and air strikes by the US military forces in Afghanistan over the reporting period".

"The committee expresses grave concern that in fact the number of casualties of children doubled from 2010 to 2011."

"The US can and should do more to protect children affected by armed conflict," said Jo Becker, children's rights advocacy director at Human Rights Watch, a watchdog based in New York."

http://tinyurl.com/cmqsh9t

"In 2005, President George W. Bush placed the number of civilians killed since the U.S.-led 2003 Iraq invasion at "30,000 Iraqis, more or less".

The following year, Bush was asked at a news conference about a peer-reviewed study released at the time by The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and Al Mustansiriya University in Baghdad which claimed that 655,000 Iraqis had been killed since the conflict began.

Although Bush dismissed the report due to "discredited" methodology, academics and researchers at the time felt the methods used were "tried and true"; "sound"; and "solid"."

http://tinyurl.com/cw23w99

"Dramatic increases in infant mortality, cancer and leukaemia in the Iraqi city of Fallujah, which was bombarded by US Marines in 2004, exceed those reported by survivors of the atomic bombs that were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, according to a new study.

Iraqi doctors in Fallujah have complained since 2005 of being overwhelmed by the number of babies with serious birth defects, ranging from a girl born with two heads to paralysis of the lower limbs. They said they were also seeing far more cancers than they did before the battle for Fallujah between US troops and insurgents.

Their claims have been supported by a survey showing a four-fold increase in all cancers and a 12-fold increase in childhood cancer in under-14s. Infant mortality in the city is more than four times higher than in neighbouring Jordan and eight times higher than in Kuwait."

http://tinyurl.com/2cqbnkk

"The war on terrorism looks set to surpass the costs the Korean and Vietnam wars combined, topped only by World War II's price tag of $3.5 trillion.

The cost of sending a single soldier to fight for a year in Afghanistan or Iraq is about $775,000 — three times more than in other recent wars, says a new report from the private but authoritative Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA). A large chunk of the increase is a result of the Administration's cramming new military hardware into the emergency budget bills it has been using to pay for the wars. (See pictures of U.S. troops in Iraq.)

These costs, of course, pale alongside the price paid by the nearly 5,000 U.S. troops who have lost their lives in the conflicts — not to mention the wounded — and the families of all the casualties. And President Bush insists that their sacrifice and the expenditure on the wars have helped prevent a repeat of 9/11. "We could not afford to wait for the terrorists to attack again," he said last week at the Army War College. "So we launched a global campaign to take the fight to the terrorists abroad, to dismantle their networks, to dry up their financing and find their leaders and bring them to justice."

But many Americans may suffer a moment of sticker shock from the conclusions of the CSBA report and similar assessments from the Government Accounting Office (GAO) and Congressional Research Service (CRS), which make clear that the nearly $1 trillion already spent is only a down payment on the war's long-term costs. The trillion-dollare figure does not, for example, include long-term health care for veterans, thousands of whom have suffered crippling wounds, or the interest payments on the money borrowed by the Federal Government to fund the war. The bottom lines of the three assessments vary: the CSBA study says $904 billion has been spent so far, while the GAO says the Pentagon alone has spent $808 billion through last September. The CRS study says the wars have cost $864 billion, but CRS didn't factor inflation into its calculations.

Sifting through Pentagon data, the CSBA study breaks down the total costs of the war on terrorism as $687 billion for Iraq, $184 billion for Afghanistan and $33 billion for homeland security. By 2018, depending on how many U.S. troops remain in Afghanistan and Iraq, the total cost is projected to likely be between $1.3 trillion and $1.7 trillion. On the safe assumption that the wars are being waged with borrowed money, interest payments raise the cost by an additional $600 billion through 2018."

http://tinyurl.com/6subg5

"The U.S., in other words, is probably in less danger from external enemies than at any moment in the last century. There is no other imperial power on the planet capable of, or desirous of, taking on American power directly, including China. It’s true that, on September 11, 2001, 19 hijackers with box cutters produced a remarkable, apocalyptic, and devastating TV show in which almost 3,000 people died. When those giant towers in downtown New York collapsed, it certainly had the look of nuclear disaster (and in those first days, the media was filled was nuclear-style references), but it wasn’t actually an apocalyptic event.

The enemy was still nearly nonexistent. The act cost bin Laden only an estimated $400,000-$500,000, though it would lead to a series of trillion-dollar wars. It was a nightmarish event that had a malign Wizard of Oz quality to it: a tiny man producing giant effects. It in no way endangered the state. In fact, it would actually strengthen many of its powers. It put a hit on the economy, but a passing one. It was a spectacular and spectacularly gruesome act of terror by a small, murderous organization then capable of mounting a major operation somewhere on Earth only once every couple of years. It was meant to spread fear, but nothing more.

When the towers came down and you could suddenly see to the horizon, it was still, in historical terms, remarkably enemy-less. And yet 9/11 was experienced here as a Pearl Harbor moment — a sneak attack by a terrifying enemy meant to disable the country. The next day, newspaper headlines were filled with variations on “A Pearl Harbor of the Twenty-First Century.” If it was a repeat of December 7, 1941, however, it lacked an imperial Japan or any other state to declare war on, although one of the weakest partial states on the planet, the Taliban’s Afghanistan, would end up filling the bill adequately enough for Americans.

To put this in perspective, consider two obvious major dangers in U.S. life: suicide by gun and death by car. In 2010, more than 19,000 Americans killed themselves using guns. (In the same year, there were “only” 11,000 homicides nationwide.) In 2011, 32,000 Americans died in traffic accidents (the lowest figure in 60 years, though it was again on the rise in the first six months of 2012). In other words, Americans accept without blinking the equivalent yearly of more than six 9/11s in suicides-by-gun and more than 10 when it comes to vehicular deaths. Similarly, had the underwear bomber, to take one post-9/11 example of terrorism, succeeded in downing Flight 253 and murdering its 290 passengers, it would have been a horrific act of terror; but he and his compatriots would have had to bring down 65 planes to reach the annual level of weaponized suicides and more than 110 planes for vehicular deaths.

And yet no one has declared war on either the car or the gun (or the companies that make them or the people who sell them). No one has built a massive,nearly trillion-dollar car-and-gun-security-complex to deal with them. In the case of guns, quite the opposite is true, as the post-Newtown debate over gun control has made all too clear. On both scores, Americans have decided to live with perfectly real dangers and the staggering carnage that accompanies them, constraining them on occasion or sometimes not at all.

Despite the carnage of 9/11, terrorism has been a small-scale American danger in the years since, worse than shark attacks, but not much else. Like a wizard, however, what Osama bin Laden and his suicide bombers did that day was create an instant sense of an enemy so big, so powerful, that Americans found “war” a reasonable response; big enough for those who wanted an international police action against al-Qaeda to be laughed out of the room; big enough to launch an invasion of revenge against Iraq, a country unrelated to al-Qaeda; big enough, in fact, to essentially declare war on the world. It took next to no time for top administration officials to begin talking about targeting 60 countries, and as journalist Ron Suskind has reported, within six days of the attack, the CIA had topped that figure, presenting President Bush with a “Worldwide Attack Matrix,” a plan that targeted terrorists in 80 countries.

What’s remarkable is how little the disjuncture between the scope and scale of the global war that was almost instantly launched and the actual enemy at hand was ever noted here. You could certainly make a reasonable argument that, in these years, Washington has largely fought no one — and lost. Everywhere it went, it created enemies who had, previously, hardly existed and the process is ongoing. Had you been able to time-travel back to the Cold War era to inform Americans that, in the future, our major enemies would be in Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, Mali, Libya, and so on, they would surely have thought you mad (or lucky indeed)."

http://tinyurl.com/bu5sfwm

 

[abo mussaab]

 

[KAding]

This week in an Iraq cafe 32 (Not 3) were killed in a suicide bombing. 65 were wounded. Who cares right?

A sad truth. I cannot even remember the last time I've seen a post in the World Affairs section about a car bombing in Iraq, Afghanistan or Pakistan. It does not appear garner much interest anywhere, not even among Muslims.

 

[glo]

A sad truth. I cannot even remember the last time I've seen a post in the World Affairs section about a car bombing in Iraq, Afghanistan or Pakistan. It does not appear garner much interest anywhere, not even among Muslims.

Either that or those threads are not approved.

 

[Muhammad]

World Affairs is not as active as it used to be, so it's hardly a measure of which news items Muslims are interested in. In general, the threads started on a forum should not be taken to represent Muslims as a whole, especially when only a handful of people frequent it.

 

[M.I.A.]

forget terrorism for a moment.

could any of you see yourselves living under the governments of those you feel apathy for? ...if they were finally established.


?

what sort of rights would you have?

what sort of rights would your niegbour have?

what sort of rights would your children have?



i live under a western government that some would have hate for.


and i can say the law treats most people equally.

if you keep clean, you will stay clean.



in terms of government and its role in foriegn policy.



who would you choose to intervene on behalf of muslims in need?


how have they done so far?



and finally how about iraq?

a long history of violence and segregation that can no longer be blamed on the countries leader.




....the people feel no apathy.

if they did they would have found a better way.

a better leader.


as is they explode at the littlest provacation?



to me it sounds like it was a test of religion all along.

at what point do people stop and think twice for the sake of allah swt.

or do you want to see the perpetual circle of violence continue.



are dead isrealy kids and palestinian kids any different?

until there parents make them.

until there niegbours make them.

 

[Perseveranze]

Asalaamu Alaikum,

“The believer reserves judgement until the matter is proven.” - Al-Hasan al-Basri

“This means, it is a bad way to reach one’s objective, by saying, ‘they say…’. Saying ‘they say…’ is akin to conjecture, i.e., the worst habit of a man is to use the phrase ‘they say’ to serve his purposes, so he tells of something, merely repeating what others have said without verifying it, and thus he transmits lies … this was the view of al-Manaawi.” - Al-‘Azeemabaadi

 

[جوري]

 

[MustafaMc]

This article raises some interesting questions regarding the possibility of Craft International (Blackwater-style) personnel on site. This article is either mis-information or a slippage of truth that got through the mainstream approved media. If it was really Craft International personnel at the finish line, then why were they so dumb as to wear clothing that would obviously identify them as such?

"On April 17, Anthony Gucciardi headlined “Craft International Private Military Forces at Boston Marathon?”

Images showed two men “with earpieces and military-esque gear….(T)hey may likely be employees of the Blackwater-style private military/security firm Craft International.”

Their attire was later “revealed to be standard issue Craft International clothing.” The skull logo on one man’s cap identifies Craft.

Why were both men and others with them in Boston? Images show around 10 wearing similar attire. Nearly all had on black backpacks. They resembled those alleged to contain pressure cooker bombs.

Investigators said they contained explosives, nails and ball bearings. They detonated moments apart.

Four or more Craft operatives wore tan combat boots, tan BDUs (battle dress uniforms), black jackets, and had tactical communications gear. At least one had an “inspector radiation alert.” It’s used to detect dirty bomb or nuclear attack emissions.

Why were they near the marathon’s finish line? Perhaps their mission was a black ops. They’re experts in these type operations.

Why did FBI operatives join them? Images show them talking. An FBI truck was visible. Why were FBI agents searching for one bombing suspect before the incident took place?

These and related questions demand answers. Coverup and denial reflect official policy. Vital facts are suppressed. What’s most important isn’t reported.


http://www.globalresearch.ca/boston-black-ops-manufacturing-terror/5332223

 

[Naeema]

As someone who gets her news from the Boston-based news media, I'd just like to point out that while we did not get details about the deaths from bombings in Iraq this week, neither did we get much news about the fertilizer factory explosion in Texas (est 20 dead, 200 injured), the earthquake in China (an absolute horror), the devastation in Pakistan from that area's quake, the massive flooding on the Mississippi River, or any other news. Any other week, the coffee shop bomb in Bagdhad would have been one of the first three stories on the news. Any other week, the quakes, fertilizer factory, or the flooding would have been extensively covered (2+ stories in an hour). The Boston bombing absolutely took control of the news here, unlike anything I've seen since the Red Sox won the pennant after 86 years.

As to the sister attacked in Malden, the officials are taking it quite seriously. The police response was rapid. The police chief and mayor have been in contact with her and her family, as well as the Muslim community in the area. After Jummah, the chief of police visited the masjid there and spoke with the brothers in the community. I beleve they really do want to catch that guy and that they do not want the attack repeated.