Boston Bombing

arius

Anynama141 wrote: »

I don't really think you need another CT to explain the existence of ridiculous CTs. Some people just aren't very good at weighing evidence, and some people are predisposed to see false positives everywhere.

Some people have nothing better to do.

Killinator

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Haha, no worries. The only footage that has been released at the marathon by the FBI as far as I am aware is the cctv and a few stills of them in the crowd with one with the shorter guy moving away after the blasts like everyone else where it is unclear if he still has his backpack on. Nothing that indicates their guilt.

My point is that they have lots of other footage, cctv and the like.
I presume we haven't seen it as its to be used at trial, if they released that it would be impossible to get an unbiased jury, which in fairness is gonna be next on impossible as is.

Ash.J.Williams

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5lUlpMNr2Y

Brown Bomber

Killinator wrote: »

My point is that they have lots of other footage, cctv and the like.
I presume we haven't seen it as its to be used at trial, if they released that it would be impossible to get an unbiased jury, which in fairness is gonna be next on impossible as is.

There will be no jury, isn't that obvious? The teenager will be drugged up and get a plea deal or will find himself the victim of "suicide". How is footage of the suspects placing a bag down and walking away going to bias a jury anyway?

Are you aware that obama declared Bradley Manning guilty before trial?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfmtUpd4id0&feature=youtu.be

Killinator

Brown Bomber wrote: »

There will be no jury, isn't that obvious? The teenager will be drugged up and get a plea deal or will find himself the victim of "suicide". How is footage of the suspects placing a bag down and walking away going to bias a jury anyway?

Are you aware that obama declared Bradley Manning guilty before trial?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfmtUpd4id0&feature=youtu.be

Before he was caught people(ct'ers) said he would never be taken alive, that he would be mysteriously gunned down for certain to make sure he never spoke.
Now hes alive they're gonna drug him, why not kill him in the first place, most 'sheep' would have accepted him being gunned down in a final standoff.
For a government behind so many cover ups they make some amount of cock-ups,!

I don't know who Bradley manning is so I cant comment

Brown Bomber

Killinator wrote: »

Before he was caught people(ct'ers) said he would never be taken alive, that he would be mysteriously gunned down for certain to make sure he never spoke.
Now hes alive they're gonna drug him, why not kill him in the first place, most 'sheep' would have accepted him being gunned down in a final standoff.
For a government behind so many cover ups they make some amount of cock-ups,!

I don't know who Bradley manning is so I cant comment

Bradley Manning was a US solider who released files to Wikileaks exposing US war crimes. He is currently behind bars while the perpetrators of the war crimes are free. Justice US style.

Doesn't matter who he is though, Obama, The Commander-in-Chief declared him guilty before he could stand before a jury of his peers. Not surprising as Obama personally orders the death-penalty for American citizens without their day in court.

I can't answer for what anyone else has said. I never said he would be killed. He may have been the bomber but I will remain sceptical like any other rational person should be until convincing evidence is put forward. Not even unconvincing evidence has been put forward up to now.

Brown Bomber

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5lUlpMNr2Y

I just been browsing his tweets. Putting what he has been accused of to one side he seems like a regular, normal chap.

https://twitter.com/J_tsar/status/267147343269335040

Killinator

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Bradley Manning was a US solider who released files to Wikileaks exposing US war crimes. He is currently behind bars while the perpetrators of the war crimes are free. Justice US style.

Doesn't matter who he is though, Obama, The Commander-in-Chief declared him guilty before he could stand before a jury of his peers. Not surprising as Obama personally orders the death-penalty for American citizens without their day in court.

I can't answer for what anyone else has said. I never said he would be killed. He may have been the bomber but I will remain sceptical like any other rational person should be until convincing evidence is put forward. Not even unconvincing evidence has been put forward up to now.

Obama declared him guilty, thats wrong obviously.
The FBI haven't declared the
suspected bomber guilty, this is right.

You have your point of view and I am in no position to say you're wrong but I'm on the other side, I'll go along with the official story until I see hard evidence that contradicts that it was these two suspects doing it under their own free will.

DUBLINHITMAN

With all the talk of amputee actors here's some more info

NSFW - http://www.zengardner.com/amputee-actors-used-for-shock-effect-in-military/

seanmacc

Killinator wrote: »

Before he was caught people(ct'ers) said he would never be taken alive, that he would be mysteriously gunned down for certain to make sure he never spoke.
Now hes alive they're gonna drug him, why not kill him in the first place, most 'sheep' would have accepted him being gunned down in a final standoff.
For a government behind so many cover ups they make some amount of cock-ups,!

I don't know who Bradley manning is so I cant comment

In George Orwell's Nineteeneightyfour the government didn't kill Winston and Julia until they had broken them and crushed every single ounce of individuality out of them. One way or another the government has to be right and more importantly has to have power
"The Party seeks Power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power" Orwell 217.

The powers that be have decided that this man is guilty. They will find him guilty and they will make him admit he is guilty. The facts are irrelevant.

Bradley Manning is a prime example of this. Manning was a miltiary whistle blower against torture and murder by the US. Manning is more than likely going to have to plea bargain whilst all the people who Manning blew the whistle on who murdered, kidnapped and tortured will never be even identified let alone stand trial.

Penn

Jonny7 wrote: »

Again, appears to be a case of grasping for the conspiracy, any conspiracy rather than objectively trying to reach the less interesting or appealing truth

Jonny7 wrote: »

They are shills paid by the government to go online, produce over-the-top videos and claims to make genuine open-minded conspiracy theorists look .. well, crazy

Anynama141 wrote: »

Perhaps you have worked in intelligence BB, having these insights?

Anynama141 wrote: »

I don't really think you need another CT to explain the existence of ridiculous CTs. Some people just aren't very good at weighing evidence, and some people are predisposed to see false positives everywhere.

Jonny7 and Anynama141, your repeated sly digs at other users on this forum are unacceptable. Rather than infracting or banning, I'm issuing a thread-ban. Do not post in this thread again. If you have any issues with this, PM me.

whatstherush

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Haha, no worries. The only footage that has been released at the marathon by the FBI as far as I am aware is the cctv and a few stills of them in the crowd with one with the shorter guy moving away after the blasts like everyone else where it is unclear if he still has his backpack on. Nothing that indicates their guilt.

What about this image BB.


It indicates Suspect 2's guilt to me for the following reasons:
1: Its the scene of the second bombing, indicated by the trash can.
2: Its close to the time of denotation because of the proximity of the dead child.
3: Two women leaning against the railing have there feet point down towards the direction of the oncoming runner leaving a space between them which shows an item in the background that resembles a back pack
3: A man with a reversed white baseball cap, with hair showing out the side of the hat is standing beside the item mentioned in the above point.
4: I believe this man to be person shown in the initial FBI video wearing a white baseball cap reversed with hair showing out the side.
5: I also believe he is the same person currently in custody, who by "media reports" has admitted to the bombing.

So leaving out whether they were FBI Patsies etc.. which is another argument, what flaws have I made in assigning guilt to suspect 2 of planting bomb number 2.

Brown Bomber

I'll check when I have time. In the meantime can anyone notice something remarkable about these series of photos?

Dave!

^
No

Jonny7

<snip>

Penn

I'm going to cut you a break and assume you didn't see this post by me:

Jonny7 and Anynama141, your repeated sly digs at other users on this forum are unacceptable. Rather than infracting or banning, I'm issuing a thread-ban. Do not post in this thread again. If you have any issues with this, PM me.

Another post on this thread results in a ban.

Dave!

I don't know the particulars of the shootout, but didn't the suspects have long guns (which they shot at the police), and explosives? Yet they're innocent?

Penn

Jonny7 banned for ignoring mod instruction

darced

This post has been deleted.

Brown Bomber

Dave! wrote: »

^
No

Well watch the FBI's footage from their press conference and take a look again.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_m0AJlUaFeQ

Brown Bomber

whatstherush wrote: »

What about this image BB.


It indicates Suspect 2's guilt to me for the following reasons:
1: Its the scene of the second bombing, indicated by the trash can.
2: Its close to the time of denotation because of the proximity of the dead child.
3: Two women leaning against the railing have there feet point down towards the direction of the oncoming runner leaving a space between them which shows an item in the background that resembles a back pack
3: A man with a reversed white baseball cap, with hair showing out the side of the hat is standing beside the item mentioned in the above point.
4: I believe this man to be person shown in the initial FBI video wearing a white baseball cap reversed with hair showing out the side.
5: I also believe he is the same person currently in custody, who by "media reports" has admitted to the bombing.

So leaving out whether they were FBI Patsies etc.. which is another argument, what flaws have I made in assigning guilt to suspect 2 of planting bomb number 2.

Assuming that the photo is legit it's a photo of a guy holding his bag amongst many others at a spectator event. It doesn't indicate anything unless you add an incredible amount of supposition - an extremely weak "CT" if you like.

whatstherush

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Assuming that the photo is legit it's a photo of a guy holding his bag amongst many others at a spectator event. It doesn't indicate anything unless you add an incredible amount of supposition - an extremely weak "CT" if you like.

Re the photo all we can do is assume its as legit as every other photo posted on this thread, whether they support a CT or not.

A "guy" that bears a striking resemblance to the person noted in the FBI video, who now is in custody and has admitted to planting the bomb. Can you detail the "incredible amount of supposition", I used in my initial points?

Ash.J.Williams

The immigrant siblings left something else behind — stunned and scared neighbors

ha who wrote this article Brasseye???

stuar

Now it seems an un-named law enforcement agency had prior knowledge of the Boston bombings.................but didn't share it.
Does that not seem a little strange?, why would any agency withold information that there was a bomb threat?

A US senator made this remarkable revelation last night.

Chambliss: Law enforcement agency may have known about Boston bombing in advance

WASHINGTON —
Georgia Sen. Saxby Chambliss told Channel 2 Action News late Tuesday afternoon that a law enforcement agency may have had information in advance of the Boston bombings that wasn't properly shared.

"There now appears that may have been some evidence that was obtained by one of the law enforcement agencies that did not get shared in a way that it could have been. If that turns out to be the case, then we have to determine whether or not that would have made a difference," Chambliss said.

Though Chambliss would not get into specifics on the information or whether or not the bombing could have been prevented, he told Channel 2 Action News that they will find out if someone dropped the ball.

"Information sharing between agencies is critical. And we created the Department of Homeland Security to supervise that. We created the National Counter Terrorism Center to be the collection point for all of this information, and we're going to get to the bottom of whether or not somebody along the way dropped the ball on some information and did not share it in a way that it should have been shared."

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/chambliss-law-enforcement-agency-may-have-known-ab/nXT7x/

stuar

Accused Boston Marathon bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev was a fan of Infowars, the conspiracy-theory website operated by Texas radio host Alex Jones, the AP reports.
:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
http://gawker.com/accused-marathon-bomber-influenced-by-infowars-478641825

Sibel Edmonds: US government needs to keep the fear factor alive

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZ4qqe84u50

'Confusion and inconsistencies': How US plans to distract public from real truth about Boston

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wZoCIydCgg

Dave!

stuar wrote: »

Now it seems an un-named law enforcement agency had prior knowledge of the Boston bombings.................but didn't share it.
Does that not seem a little strange?, why would any agency withold information that there was a bomb threat?

A US senator made this remarkable revelation last night.

Chambliss: Law enforcement agency may have known about Boston bombing in advance

WASHINGTON —
Georgia Sen. Saxby Chambliss told Channel 2 Action News late Tuesday afternoon that a law enforcement agency may have had information in advance of the Boston bombings that wasn't properly shared.

"There now appears that may have been some evidence that was obtained by one of the law enforcement agencies that did not get shared in a way that it could have been. If that turns out to be the case, then we have to determine whether or not that would have made a difference," Chambliss said.

Though Chambliss would not get into specifics on the information or whether or not the bombing could have been prevented, he told Channel 2 Action News that they will find out if someone dropped the ball.

"Information sharing between agencies is critical. And we created the Department of Homeland Security to supervise that. We created the National Counter Terrorism Center to be the collection point for all of this information, and we're going to get to the bottom of whether or not somebody along the way dropped the ball on some information and did not share it in a way that it should have been shared."

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/chambliss-law-enforcement-agency-may-have-known-ab/nXT7x/

I see he hasn't substantiated his claim, yet you're reciting it as fact. Interesting. Perhaps you've got an agenda of your own?

But even if he does - law enforcement agencies hear of threats all the time, they have to determine which are pranks, which are viable, which they should pursue, which should be shared with other agencies, etc. You don't know what information they did or did not receive, so you cannot comment on whether they should or should not have passed it on.

Even if they should have - people make mistakes in not passing on information, and people who receive the information don't always act on it. We've seen this plenty of times before.

Sacksian

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Assuming that the photo is legit it's a photo of a guy holding his bag amongst many others at a spectator event. It doesn't indicate anything unless you add an incredible amount of supposition - an extremely weak "CT" if you like.

This is a CT that I am interested in exploring, even if it is a little weak.

My theory is that two brothers conspired to detonate bombs at a major public event in Boston - one of whom is the guy in that photograph.

Are there any questions I should explore?

Do we have any clues why the brothers might have done this?

Were they linked to any particular ideology which would be consistent with this type of action or intent?

If anyone has any evidence to support this theory, please post it.

Penn

Dave! wrote: »

I see he hasn't substantiated his claim, yet you're reciting it as fact. Interesting. Perhaps you've got an agenda of your own?

Unnecessary. Please refrain from posting inflammatory comments such as this in future.

stuar

Dave! wrote: »

I see he hasn't substantiated his claim, yet you're reciting it as fact. Interesting. Perhaps you've got an agenda of your own?

But even if he does - law enforcement agencies hear of threats all the time, they have to determine which are pranks, which are viable, which they should pursue, which should be shared with other agencies, etc. You don't know what information they did or did not receive, so you cannot comment on whether they should or should not have passed it on.

Even if they should have - people make mistakes in not passing on information, and people who receive the information don't always act on it. We've seen this plenty of times before.

What agenda would that be now?, the rest of your post is to-ing and frowing and doesn't really make a whole lot of sense to be honest.

"Even if they should have - people make mistakes"...........Oh theres a bomb threat..................I'll just finish this crossword before I tell anybody..:rolleyes:

Now back to reality.

This CNN crew were at the scene of the "shootout", yet if you listen at 0:37 you'll notice "autorities SAID he put up a fight engaging them with gunfire", how did the CNN crew not report that they had seen or heard gunfire coming from the boat?, surely they would have reported it instead of giving second hand information that the autorities told them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Jxx2OKNHKI

Brown Bomber

Dave,

Did you take another look at the photos of the brother's apartment yet after watching the FBI footage?