Explosions at Boston marathon - split thread

[Jeffrey]

[ Mod-edit: The first 25 posts in this thread began life as posts on one of the following two threads:

• Possible Boston Marathon Bombing Cover-Up Scenario
• Explosions at Boston marathon

These posts became more involved with negative or defensive comments amongst themselves than with commentary on the events at the Boston marathon. The split was not a clean one. Some excellent analysis appears below. But hopefully this split will improve the quality of the two threads above.

- Paul. ]

===

Posted by witchy1 (here)
I am not saying noone got hurt. But there is something very wrong with all this.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=CBqhfRY99OE

Watch the cowboy and the guy in the jeans and the hoodie in the different pics among other things. Amazing how the injured move around and change so much isn't it? Why did they have a fence and metal staging set up against the road with signage covering it? Between that and the flags, how could anyone standing in that zone even see anything? Or was it meant for people not to see them?

As for the bloodless double amputee, it is faked and clearly someone faked it for a reason. I have tracked and tracked him...he is not on any video - he just appears in photos.
Attachment 21183

This is not real.

There was little thought applied in the "analysis" of the video. The location of smoke isn't confined to the small area where the actual blast occurred. It is reasonable to think that a piece of the bomb, a piece of the bag it was in, or a piece of something that was near to it got flung a few feet away and it was smoking. I mean, a bomb went off.

The blood spatter doesn't add up? Really? What spatter? People had there limbs blown off and they are bleeding out where they got flung to from the blast or where they managed to crawl to before they realized they were missing a leg (or a piece of their intestines were hanging outside of their body). They are in shock.

You've tracked the double amputee, and you couldn't find him? That's your evidence? I have to be candid, I don't trust your judgement.

Very weak arguments, and very weak "investigative" work going on here. Just a whole lotta poor speculation. This is Avalon, I thought we were better than this.

Step it up.

[Dennis Leahy]

Posted by Vivek (here)
...Just like the events of 9/11 were "allowed" to take place by ignoring the files supporting the evidence of high-jackers training to fly planes into buildings. Prior knowledge: negligence, incompetence, complicity? I don't know.

Why should the gov't avert a crisis, when it can be used to their advantage somehow, to further their agenda?

In these kinds of cases, there's a fine line between incompetence and complicity.

...

Hi Vivek,

That was either just a really bad example, or you lost your conspiracy theory merit badge if you believe what you wrote. Not to go too far into 9/11, but 3 buildings were pre-wired for destruction, a major haul of gold was stolen, a missile or bomb in the Pentagon, NORAD paralyzed, and half a dozen military drills going on (and the most difficult one to come to grips with - video fakery - no jets, just bombs) ... says with utter certainty that LIHOP (let it happen on purpose) is utterly absurd.

[Boston - my analysis so far]
The crew in Boston with the khaki pants and shoes and black jackets almost ALL have backpacks. Huge, bulging backpacks - much bigger than a daypack.That's not likely their picnic baskets. I have NEVER seen a security guy with a backpack, and theses guys almost ALL have backpacks. These are NOT normal security guys. With so many similar-looking backpacks, they were all covering for others that has nasty things in backpacks. The track coach from Mobile said they announced it was a drill, and not to worry about the guys with backpacks (or is that one a rumor - I thought I actually heard the coach say that in the interview.)

Everyone with khaki pants and shoes and black jackets (most with backpacks) was in on it. Misdirection in some cases, but supporting the event. I would say there is a possibility that some of those guys (especially the ones that were most obviously acting like security), may have indeed been hired security forces, unaware of why they were told to walk around with backpacks while they were working the event. But whoever HANDED OUT all the backpacks certainly knew there would be bombs in backpacks and obfuscated the scene as much as possible. Also, the crowd members would be less suspicious if they saw 20 guys with backpacks - if they just saw 1 or 2, they would stick out more. So, the multiple backpacks "conditioned" the crowd not to be concerned about backpacks.

I am not 100% sure of this but, how many men with khaki pants and shoes and black jackets (with or without backpacks) were injured in the blasts? None. They all cleared-out in advance of the explosions, though they had been in that area, "observing." Does it make sense that they would all be as lucky as Lucky Larry Silverstein and just happen to all clear out of that blast area before the blasts?

Once the explosions happened, look at the photos and see how many men with khaki pants and shoes and black jackets you find (with or without backpacks) aiding the wounded, or even just observing the people. None. They all fled the scene. Would real security guys flee the scene?

Dennis

[Jeffrey]

Ha! Considering the 9/11 comment, it was made to further a point. Two planes struck the WTC, and certain documents came to light that envisioned that scenario prior to the attacks. I've seen no conclusive evidence that a plane hit the Pentagon.

The point of the comment was to illustrate the prospect of prior knowledge. I may go back and clean it up, but first I'm going to bed good sir.

Goodnight.

PS - I'm very aware of the rigged explosive/controlled demolition theory. It is backed by strong evidence.

[witchy1]

You've tracked the double amputee, and you couldn't find him? That's your evidence? I have to be candid, I don't trust your judgement.
Very weak arguments, and very weak "investigative" work going on here. Just a whole lotta poor speculation. This is Avalon, I thought we were better than this.
Step it up.

I did not say I was providing "Evidence" Vivek and I dont care if you dont trust my judgement. At least be a little polite in your critisims and dont make personal attacks.
All I (and the rest of us) are doing is bringing information out to be discussed. I am not sure who you think you are to sit and cast judgement upon others. I find you comments vile and disrespectful. I thought better of you. You are on a conspiracy site...its what happens - get used to it.

By the way I am a RN - this is NOT blood nor is that a real traumatic amputation!

[Jeffrey]

Posted by witchy1 (here)

You've tracked the double amputee, and you couldn't find him? That's your evidence? I have to be candid, I don't trust your judgement.
Very weak arguments, and very weak "investigative" work going on here. Just a whole lotta poor speculation. This is Avalon, I thought we were better than this.
Step it up.

I did not say I was providing "Evidence" Vivek and I dont care if you dont trust my judgement. At least be a little polite in your critisims and dont make personal attacks.
All I (and the rest of us) are doing is bringing information out to be discussed. I am not sure who you think you are to sit and cast judgement upon others. I find you comments vile and disrespectful. I thought better of you. You are on a conspiracy site...its what happens - get used to it.

By the way I am a RN - this is NOT blood nor is that a real traumatic amputation!

I've offended you? You think my comments are vile and disrespectful? It's shameful that you would try to throw the weight of such a respectable title (RN) behind such irresponsible assertions. I should get used to it? Hell no! I don't have to put up with such foolishness and I won't. This is my last post to you. After this I'm clicking the ignore button on your profile. So you're wrong there too, I don't have to get used to such idiocy. I can speak out against it, then ignore it. Bye.

Why don't you try and explain your theories to these people.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=myfivKMhqyg

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

The above pictures are rather graphic. In fact very graphic, and large. I'm sure people would appreciate an advisory before scrolling down. I know I would have.

Thanks

[Jeffrey]

Posted by Referee (here)
Great Video IMO Here it is

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=bjocGidSLJw

The man who made this video did zero research. He's speculating, that's it.

The younger brothers backpack wasn't black. Also, the Craft man he's singled out is still wearing his backpack after the blast and he's still at the scene.

This video is a joke. No offense.

[gigha]

Posted by Star Mariner (here)
The above pictures are rather graphic. In fact very graphic, and large. I'm sure people would appreciate an advisory before scrolling down. I know I would have.

Thanks

I also would have thought that just a warning of graphic content might of been in order. Not personally offended but i think that some on the forum are sensitive to such images.

gigha

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Vivek (here)
The man who made this video did zero research. He's speculating, that's it.

The younger brothers backpack wasn't black. Also, the Craft man he's singled out is still wearing his backpack after the blast and he's still at the scene.

You lost me there, Vivek.

I see research, I see images, I see the Craft man running out without his backpack, I see the patsy running out still with his backpack, I see a better match between the bomb destroyed backpack and the one the Craft guy was wearing, with the white square ... but you tell me there is zero research, just speculation, and its the wrong Craft guy.

On what basis do you make those assertions?

[Jeffrey]

Posted by Paul (here)

Posted by Vivek (here)
The man who made this video did zero research. He's speculating, that's it.

The younger brothers backpack wasn't black. Also, the Craft man he's singled out is still wearing his backpack after the blast and he's still at the scene.

You lost me there, Vivek.

I see research, I see images, I see the Craft man running out without his backpack, I see the patsy running out still with his backpack, I see a better match between the bomb destroyed backpack and the one the Craft guy was wearing, with the white square ... but you tell me there is zero research, just speculation, and its the wrong Craft guy.

On what basis do you make those assertions?

I've laid out the analysis here: https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...l=1#post664308

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Vivek (here)
On the left, you can see what looks like the number eleven written in the white square, or some parallel stitching there. Yet, it's not on the square of the mangled bag.

That's not even the main, glaring inconsistency with the video though. See the right side of the photo? It's the same guy with the backpack and you can see the whitish square piece on the top of the backpack (it's either tape or it's some kind of fabric stitched on the handle). The image on the right was taken after the bomb went off.

While the mangled bag is laying near the aftermath of the explosion, this man still has his backpack.

...

As for the younger brother's backpack (the alleged suspect) -- it wasn't black. Not according to this image.

...

The man in the video claims that he's still wearing a backpack, which would have to be much darker than the one in the image above. It really looks like his elbow to me.

...

Okay, I've zoomed into this picture above on a large, high definition screen. What that man claims is the kid's backpack -- it isn't. It's definitely his elbow. These are my observations and they are objective.

...

In this case, he didn't do his research and he's recklessly speculating to support whatever scenario he wants to believe in.

Ok - I had not read this follow up post of yours when I made my previous post just above.

Whether the alleged kid running away after the bombing still has his backpack on or not, I can't tell from your image. Perhaps his elbow is hiding the backpack. Though I can see where you have good reason to figure it's just his elbow.

Whether the Craft guy was without a backpack briefly just after the bombing in the image of supposedly him running away, and he got another one, or whether these are different Craft guys, I don't know.

It still seems to me you're overstating your case when you accuse him of not doing his research and recklessly speculating .

[Jeffrey]

Posted by Paul (here)
Whether the Craft guy was without a backpack briefly just after the bombing in the image of supposedly him running away, and he got another one, or whether these are different Craft guys, I don't know.

Paul, this is the only image that I've found of him without his backpack. It's after both explosions.



He could have not had it for any number of reasons, but it doesn't matter. He had his backpack on after both explosions happened. A little while later, he doesn't have one. It's not important anymore considering the "proof" that YouTube user was trying to pass off. Where'd his backpack go? It's anyones guess, but it wasn't involved in any bombing.

Posted by Paul (here)
It still seems to me you're overstating your case when you accuse him of not doing his research and recklessly speculating .

I guess we have different perspectives on what research entails. That's alright, but I hold myself to higher investigative standards than the person who published that video.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Vivek (here)
He could have not had it for any number of reasons, but it doesn't matter. He had his backpack on after both explosions happened. A little while later, he doesn't have one. It's not important anymore considering the "proof" that YouTube user was trying to pass off. Where'd his backpack go? It's anyones guess, but it wasn't involved in any bombing.

I have not done the work to determine when and in what sequence these various images of this Craft man were taken.

I take it from what you say that you have done that work, and the one image of him without a backpack occurs after some other image of him still having the backpack after the two bombings?

How did you determine this sequence (or perhaps that's above and I missed it) ?

Posted by Vivek (here)

Posted by Paul (here)
It still seems to me you're overstating your case when you accuse him of not doing his research and recklessly speculating .

I guess we have different perspectives on what research entails. That's alright, but I hold myself to higher investigative standards than the person who published that video.

Higher standards are good.

That doesn't mean the other guy is all reckless speculation with no standards and no research .

Sometimes we just notice different things, and overlook different things.

[Jeffrey]

Posted by Paul (here)
Ah - one more thing - we have to be careful of basing conclusions on a few images uploaded to Youtube.

We know (those of us who have studied the JFK assassination, in particular) that doctoring what images the public sees was routine business, even back a half century ago now.

How trivial it would be to doctor up a few videos and upload them to Youtube as if from some random bystanders iPhone, showing ... damn near anything they wanted to show.

I would not convict any of the people that any of us has suspected of so much as a parking ticket based on these videos, if I were on the jury. The chain of custody of evidence, and the trustworthiness and competence of each person in that chain, is critical. There is no such chain for what we have been viewing above.

Paul, I have to be completely honest here. How come you didn't point this out before my criticism of the man's video? You were saying you saw the research and the images in the video. You were wondering why I said his analysis was bogus. You hinted towards a credence of the man's claims. No mention of doctored photos.

Then, after I laid out my criticism -- step by step -- you decided to bring to our attention the possibility of the photos being doctored?

Sure, it's good to keep in mind. Although your timing would indicate a wariness of my analysis in favor of propping up the conclusions of the man's video regardless of the photographic evidence and the obvious logical flaws.

What is this about? What we want to believe? Are we just going to selectively explain away logic and reason when it's convenient?

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Vivek (here)

Posted by Paul (here)
Ah - one more thing - we have to be careful of basing conclusions on a few images uploaded to Youtube.

Paul, I have to be completely honest here. How come you didn't point this out before my criticism of the man's video? You were saying you saw the research and the images in the video. You were wondering why I said his analysis was bogus. You hinted towards a credence of the man's claims. No mention of doctored photos.

I had had that concern (of doctored photos) a few times in the last few days, and just happened to recall it again, when I was near my keyboard.

You are correct that the sequencing of my replies is suspect. First I try to make a case based on uploaded images, then when you make an alternative case also based on uploaded images, I say "oh - by the way - uploaded images are all suspect!"

I will continue to play both sides of the street in regards to uploaded images ... keeping in mind that the bastards (whoever they are) can fake us out with them, and keeping in mind that they can be a key mechanism for exposing what really happened.

[Anchor]

Posted by Vivek (here)

Posted by Paul (here)
Ah - one more thing - we have to be careful of basing conclusions on a few images uploaded to Youtube.

We know (those of us who have studied the JFK assassination, in particular) that doctoring what images the public sees was routine business, even back a half century ago now.

How trivial it would be to doctor up a few videos and upload them to Youtube as if from some random bystanders iPhone, showing ... damn near anything they wanted to show.

I would not convict any of the people that any of us has suspected of so much as a parking ticket based on these videos, if I were on the jury. The chain of custody of evidence, and the trustworthiness and competence of each person in that chain, is critical. There is no such chain for what we have been viewing above.

Paul, I have to be completely honest here. How come you didn't point this out before my criticism of the man's video? You were saying you saw the research and the images in the video. You were wondering why I said his analysis was bogus. You hinted towards a credence of the man's claims. No mention of doctored photos.

Then, after I laid out my criticism -- step by step -- you decided to bring to our attention the possibility of the photos being doctored?

Sure, it's good to keep in mind. Although your timing would indicate a wariness of my analysis in favor of propping up the conclusions of the man's video regardless of the photographic evidence and the obvious logical flaws.

What is this about? What we want to believe? Are we just going to selectively explain away logic and reason when it's convenient?

Vivek,

Its not a competition. No one is trying to bait you.

You are doing a sterling job - you have obviously put in a lot of time to what you are doing, and its all well presented.

Images are illusion. Unless we know that there has been no tampering with them, we dont know that they accurately capture the optical reality of the situation at that point in time. People have even been arguing over the color of blood.

The best that can be done is identify inconsistencies.

My suspicion is that to cover up the cover up a lot of disinformation has been released.

Anyway - you have a lot of silent readers, and a lot of respect (from me anyway). Paul is doing equally well with the counterpoints and they have been good to read as well.

A..

[Jeffrey]

Now I know your not reading my posts carefully. I know your not going through the links. I know your not fact checking yourself. I've seen the other mindless post you've recently made in the other thread -- it's pure speculation. You've done no research at all. Did you bother to search for pictures of Jeff Bauman when he had his legs? Did you notice that Carlos was holding what looked to be a major blood vessel? Did you even know his name was Carlos? Do you have any idea what I'm talking about? I could go on, but the point is you've chosen the path of least resistance when it comes to researching your speculations before you post them. It's irresponsible. It's just going to add to the hock of confusion and fuel speculation. I haven't seen you bring anything viable to the table other than hearsay. There's a better outlet for nonsensical theories, maybe try something like GLP. Avalon isn't the place for it. Heck, maybe I'm in the wrong place.

You're cutting all kinds of corners in your head. You haven't considered lending credence to any other alternatives even though they are more reasonable than the dribble you've managed to resolve for yourself. This isn't a debate, you've brought nothing to the table but speculation and you've still failed to properly address my points.

The remnants of the black backpack that carried the bomb -- many are saying it matches the operative's bag with the white square. It doesn't. Any other operative's backpacks in the pictures are still being worn after the explosion. You've continued to ignore that as well because it doesn't fit in whatever deluded fantasy you've chosen to live in. I've already laid out an analysis of this point. You've either chosen to ignore it or you completely missed it. Either case is likely considering that you've demonstrated an inability to think critically, be observant, investigate, and use reason. It's a package. Believe what you want to. Your facilities for discernment are stagnating. I'm sure your a good person, good character, deep heart. Yet, I can't be around such vacuousness. I don't have the patience and I've got too much to learn.

It ain't gonna be from you. I'm done.

You're what I call a Saint Maker. It's too bad I failed this test, maybe next time.

Peace. Good luck with life.

[Poly Hedra]

Posted by Vivek (here)
Now I know your not reading my posts carefully. I know your not going through the links. I know your not fact checking yourself. I've seen the other mindless post you've recently made in the other thread --

-----

Your facilities for discernment are stagnating. I'm sure your a good person, good character, deep heart. Yet, I can't be around such vacuousness.

Getting a bit insulting and personal don't ya think?
Chill. There is no place for it here.

[Dennis Leahy]

You have supplied no data, only your speculation. You believe your theories. You are sure you are correct so your guesses should be considered as data? What DATA have you supplied? If the "data" is what is "probably" in the backpacks, I have already said it doesn't matter. No one could approach a live bomb with whatever would fit in one of those backpacks. Now, THAT is data.

Don't attack me personally, attack my theories. If you let fly with emotion, logic will get overruled.

"The remnants of the black backpack that carried the bomb -- many are saying it matches the operative's bag with the white square. It doesn't. Any other operative's backpacks in the pictures are still being worn after the explosion. You've continued to ignore that as well because it doesn't fit in whatever deluded fantasy you've chosen to live in."

Pay attention: I'm not sure what "many are saying", but I said, and I'll repeat, I don't think the Craft/CST guys did anything. They were stagehands. Stooges. And they probably did not know it. I don't think one of their backpacks blew up (and I never said it did.) I think they were contingency-patsies. I think whoever ordered those guys to wear those backpacks knew in advance that a backpack that looks like theirs would be the bomb backpack. I do believe/speculate/theorize that whoever ordered the security/surveillance guys to wear those black backpacks is a co-conspirator. I could be wrong, but there are too many coincidences. Are you now saying you don't think their backpacks even looks like the bomb backpack?

From the images shown of the 2 brothers and their backpacks, neither of the brothers' backpacks matches the bomb backpack in color.

Simple question: other than the fact that you have theorized that there is a cover-up of ineptitude (that there was a bomb threat and someone who should have called off the race did not), do you pretty much agree with the official narrative?

Dennis

[Jeffrey]

Posted by conec (here)
Getting a bit insulting and personal don't ya think?
Chill. There is no place for it here.

Yes, it was a bit personal. I reacted. I've responded, responded, responded, and then I reacted. I could've just ignored it and moved on, but I had to get in the last word and take the last stab. Very immature. I know, but I chose to do it anyways because I felt like it had to be said. It was selfish of me. I may feel sorry about it later, but I don't right now. He's now on my ignore list because I can't handle my own emotions.



I do apologize though, you're right, there is no place for it here.