Officials: Boston suspect had no firearm when barrage of bullets hit hiding place

[JakeStarkey]

Early innings yet, so let's see what comes out at the end.

That you would take the side of the bomber says much about you. Only in the novels is all explained. In these things, the entire story is never absolutely clear.

What part of "Which if the account of the bomber being unarmed is true" did you not understand?

I guess early innings means they have not got there story straight yet. Fairly cut and dry, he either had one or not.

Qualified whether the LEO knew or not if he had or had not one. Early innings, kiddies.

 

[g5000]

How could the officers know he was unarmed?
He had just killed a police officer.

someone had killed a police officer

During the shootout at MIT, they had shot at the police, killing one, and thrown multiple bombs.

Multiple bombs.

So when they found the kid in the boat, they had no way of knowing what weapons or bombs he had on him.

They are not psychic.

The owner of the boat who found the kid said the kid was bleeding when he found him. That was BEFORE the police showed up there.

 

[g5000]

yes i just read that

that is an interesting bit of news

to say the least

It's been out there for a few days now .
Just one more factor exposing what was a clumsy False Flag operation .

There are several witnesses who saw these two men place the bombs. Got that?

And there is video evidence. Got that?

So when you make asshole comments about a "False Flag operation", you are making the epitome of dishonorable insults to those who died and those who were injured. Get that through your sick little mind, you fucking credulous twerp.

 

[Politico]

What's the 'official's' name, rank and 'official' report?

 

[jon_berzerk]

We are having a discussion not a condemnation or any police action.

If he had a gun what was the trying to throw a pressure cooker at the police all about? And who goes on the run and car jacks a car with a pressure cooker?

The MIT policeman apparently was killed in a hail of bullets so they must have had guns. Assuming the brothers did that shooting. I guess they got them on video doing the shooting.

the only possible gun

was from the guy that got car jacked

he said the older brother had a pistol

they tried to still a pistol off of a cop they killed

but could not figure out how to get it out of the holster

however the question remains

why is the media silent on what type

how many and where the firearms came from

that is not par for the course

Something in the whole story simply does not ring true. Why did they shoot the police officer? Why, if they already had a gun did they need to steal his. How do we know what they did that night since he was just captured?

possibly because they only had one

they (the cops) knew that someone attempted to remove

the cops pistol from his holster

but they could not figure out the three way locking system

 

[jon_berzerk]

Early innings yet, so let's see what comes out at the end.

That you would take the side of the bomber says much about you. Only in the novels is all explained. In these things, the entire story is never absolutely clear.

What part of "Which if the account of the bomber being unarmed is true" did you not understand?

I guess early innings means they have not got there story straight yet. Fairly cut and dry, he either had one or not.

one would think so

this is why i am curious

on the silence of what type and how many firearms they had

in these sorts of things that is usually

some of the first information out

 

[jon_berzerk]

How could the officers know he was unarmed?
He had just killed a police officer.

someone had killed a police officer

During the shootout at MIT, they had shot at the police, killing one, and thrown multiple bombs.

Multiple bombs.

So when they found the kid in the boat, they had no way of knowing what weapons or bombs he had on him.

They are not psychic.

The owner of the boat who found the kid said the kid was bleeding when he found him. That was BEFORE the police showed up there.

yes they also killed a cop prior to this

this is the cop that someone tried to take his pistol

and failed

 

[JakeStarkey]

One true thing about conspiracy nutters: they are nuts, and will find connections where there are none.

 

[Gadawg73]

How could the officers know he was unarmed?
He had just killed a police officer.

How did they know it was HIM in the boat?

LOL, a heat read on a person in a boat covered in an area where there is a complete lock down of the entire area for every human to stay inside.

And you ask that dumb ass question.

Try again.

 

[Gadawg73]

One true thing about conspiracy nutters: they are nuts, and will find connections where there are none.

I would have put a bullet in the head of that dude.

 

[Agit8r]

Yeah, they should have totally frisked him

 

[Brain357]

someone had killed a police officer

During the shootout at MIT, they had shot at the police, killing one, and thrown multiple bombs.

Multiple bombs.

So when they found the kid in the boat, they had no way of knowing what weapons or bombs he had on him.

They are not psychic.

The owner of the boat who found the kid said the kid was bleeding when he found him. That was BEFORE the police showed up there.

yes they also killed a cop prior to this

this is the cop that someone tried to take his pistol

and failed

Yes I heard they killed the cop because they wanted a second gun. Makes it sound like it's not so easy for criminals to get guns on the black market like I keep hearing.

 

[Freewill]

How could the officers know he was unarmed?
He had just killed a police officer.

someone had killed a police officer

During the shootout at MIT, they had shot at the police, killing one, and thrown multiple bombs.

Multiple bombs.

So when they found the kid in the boat, they had no way of knowing what weapons or bombs he had on him.

They are not psychic.

The owner of the boat who found the kid said the kid was bleeding when he found him. That was BEFORE the police showed up there.

They threw multiple bombs yet not one report of any of them going off. They threw something out the window, maybe.

How did they know they found the kid in the boat?

 

[Freewill]

How could the officers know he was unarmed?
He had just killed a police officer.

How did they know it was HIM in the boat?

LOL, a heat read on a person in a boat covered in an area where there is a complete lock down of the entire area for every human to stay inside.

And you ask that dumb ass question.

Try again.

Can't people just discuss something other then Bush being a war criminal? I am not saying that the police did anything wrong I am just asking questions. If I am out deer hunting the primary focus before I shoot is to identify my target. By the accounts I read they shot through the boat and the man was unarmed. If the police were worried about a bomb I don't see how shooting the guy changes the risk.

 

[jon_berzerk]

How did they know it was HIM in the boat?

LOL, a heat read on a person in a boat covered in an area where there is a complete lock down of the entire area for every human to stay inside.

And you ask that dumb ass question.

Try again.

Can't people just discuss something other then Bush being a war criminal? I am not saying that the police did anything wrong I am just asking questions. If I am out deer hunting the primary focus before I shoot is to identify my target. By the accounts I read they shot through the boat and the man was unarmed. If the police were worried about a bomb I don't see how shooting the guy changes the risk.

i am not sure but i do not believe they shot first without

figuring out this is the guy they had been looking for

unlike those cops in LA that unloaded on a truck

that turned out to be a couple of ladies on a paper route

 

[editec]

Who fired the shot heard round the world?

to this day nobody is sure.