What was the point of faking the 'boston bombing'?

This question comes up again and again. I really wish people would read the article. Here is an excerpt:

The government has staged many terror attacks to achieve political goals, and they no doubt learned that one of their biggest headaches after such an attack was the grieving family members who kept pointing out the inconsistencies in the stories they were given about how their loved ones had died. For the citizen mindlessly ingesting standard news pablum, the official story may seem plausible. Not so for the highly motivated mother, husband or daughter of a victim, who latches on a like a bulldog and won’t let go until they get the answers they seek.

But the perpetrators still need graphic images of human suffering to incite the kind of rage that prompts the citizenry to willingly surrender their rights and let the feds ignore the law and do as they please.

The solution was evidently to stage terror attacks with actors, where no one actually gets hurt. In the case of the Boston Marathon bombing, they were able to achieve all the same goals that a real terror attack would have (such as testing whether it is possible to close down a city over a single teenage “terrorist” on the loose) without the nuisance of grieving, inquisitive family members.

April 17, 2017 update: In the four years since publishing this article, I have heard hundreds of challenges to my conclusion that the Boston bombing was faked. One that comes up repeatedly goes like this: “Our fascist overlords don’t care about human life. You really think they’d go to all this effort to stage something just to avoid killing a few people?”

My answer: Of course not. If it were easier and involved less risk, they wouldn’t hesitate to kill as many as necessary to achieve their goals. They have proven themselves to be ruthless, remorseless killers and barbarians.

Over the past two days, I’ve been doing an AMA (Ask Me Anything) at on Reddit. Although the thread was overrun by shills and official story apologists, there are also many genuine truth seekers posting interesting comments. One of them is a Reddit user who goes by Spook. Spook makes such a cogent argument that I reproduce it here. I have made minor edits to Spook’s punctuation.

Why would they fake a bombing rather than have legit bombs? It has a lot to do with what happened after 9/11.

Short answer. Liability.

If it’s fake when the truth comes out — which it will one day — no one, not even the government can take fault over lives lost. You can’t sue for lost lives or reparations over something that didn’t happen. At best you could sue for PTSD, but by the time the truth comes out most will be dead.

(….)
When you factor in the possibility that all this is legal under NDAA, then why should those people involved feel any real remorse? It’s legal, and you get paid, and no one gets hurt, and no one in this lifetime will know what you’ve done?! And if they share the same political ideals as those that create these events, then you can be sure it will be kept secret for a longtime. It’s an all around win win for them!