April 17, 2013
The bombings at the Boston marathon on Monday were yet another atrocity in a nation that has seen considerable bloodshed in recent months. 2012 was a record year for mass shootings in the US, and just like many of those events the Boston bombings have immediately been subject to scepticism, suspicion and in many cases outright speculation as to who was responsible.
However, the noisiest and most dogmatic voices in the conversation are, for once, not the government and the mainstream media, but instead have been the corporate ‘alternative’ media, predictably led by Infowars and echoed by their various followers and affiliates. The same handful of stories and arguments that, so say Infowars and many ‘truthers’, point conclusively to a US state-sponsored false flag event have been recycled endlessly across the web in a farcical display of near-complete idiocy.
The most oft-recycled story is an interview from the local TV news with one of the runners in the marathon, Alastair Stevenson, talking about seeing bomb-sniffing dogs and being told that they were there because of a drill or training exercise, prior to the explosions. Infowars picked up on the story and, likening it to 7/7, claimed that this was evidence that the government staged the bombings.
Where and When?
There are numerous problems with this, not least of which is that you don’t put sniffer dogs near bombs that you’re trying to keep secret. The idea that doing this would somehow help possible false flag state agents is absurd. Needless to say, the story about the sniffer dogs has gone viral without anyone (apart from myself and a handful of colleagues and friends) noticing this rather fundamental flaw in Infowars’ reasoning. So much for the ‘alternative’ media being any more capable of applying simple critical faculties than the mainstream.
Furthermore, Stevenson said that he saw the dogs and heard the announcement that it was an exercise prior to the race beginning. Ths not only means it must have been hours before the explosions, it also means that it was many miles away from the bombings, which were near the finish line. In a followup interview with Anthony Gucciardi, Stevenson reiterated several times how he saw the dogs at the athletes village, near the start of the race, which was (predictably) 26 miles from the finish of the marathon.
How holding a bomb-sniffer dog exercise 26 miles away from a place you intend to bomb a few hours later helps you mask those bombings and thus create a false flag event is beyond me.
Was there an exercise?
Furthermore, was this even a training exercise? Other suspicions have been raised about ‘mystery men’ on rooftops along the course of the race, and Stevenson himself referred to ‘spotters’ and how there was a much bigger security presence at the event that he had seen in other marathons. Was the announcement that the dogs were at the athletes village an excuse, a cover story for the increased security theatre?
There is an intellectual hypocrisy here that is truly shameful for a ‘truth movement’ and demonstrates the dogma and prejudice in the minds of many who identify themselves as part of that movement. As Keelan Balderson of WideShut explained, ‘The presence of various types of security at a high profile event like the Boston Marathon is not peculiar in fact many of the alternative news outlets that are insinuating that it’s odd to have bomb sniffer dogs and security dotted around, are the same outlets that scream about the police state getting out of control. So which is it? Is the police and security state out of control or is it an anomaly to have them at the Boston Marathon?’
It is a fair question. There does seem to have been more security than we usually see at a marathon, though the Olympic games in London last year also saw much more overt, hands-on security than previous Olympics. The trajectory of increased physical security, of people not being allowed to gather in public without the presence of armed police, is clear. To cite this as suspicious in a single event is misleading, it is the pattern of increased security over many different kinds of events that should be of most concern to the public. Of course, that doesn’t drive internet traffic and therefore potential subscribers to your website, so the vast majority of the ‘alternative’ media have ignored this completely.
Instead, they have conflated the details of what Stevenson has said, drawn spurious and tenuous parallels with previous terrorist attacks, and even outright lied. For example, IntelliHub claimed that there were ‘Military Drills Running at Boston Marathon’, when at best there was one drill and it wasn’t being run by the military. Likewise Hang the Bankers turned Stevenson’s report of what was going at the athletes village miles away and hours before the bombing into, ‘law enforcement telling the crowd, “Its just a drill” immediately after the explosions.’ This isn’t journalism, it’s just attention-seeking bullshit.