RTE Coverage of the Boston Bombing Trial

omnithanos

I watched RTE News coverage of the Boston Bombing trial last night where they stated as fact that three people were killed and 264 people were injured in the bombings.

How can RTE state this as fact without verifying their story or giving corroborating evidence when research shows there is a very high likelihood that the Boston Bombing was yet another setup?

The US Government or the US media cannot be considered reliable sources as they have continued to cover up of their obvious role in the 911 tragedy. Do the Irish media have an agenda to simply go along with the US official story or are they too lazy to check out a few videos on YouTube?

The first video link I provide shows some mildly graphic scenes immediately after the bomb exploded near the finish line.
Note the position of the lady with the red jacket and blue circle on her top positioned to the left in the last two photos.
In the second last photo (after 1 minute) we can see the guy lying behind her with both legs (apparently prosthetic), looking relaxed and wearing a hat and sunglasses to disguise his face.
In the gory last photo (after 2 minutes) we can see the same guy, slightly closer to the lady in the previous photo, minus his hat, glasses, and his regular prosthetic legs and holding a prosthetic limb designed to look like it has a bone sticking out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lU_ycItkYuY

In the second video link I provide you can see how multiple references made in an episode of Family Guy entitled Turban Cowboy, which was aired only 19 days before the Boston bombing, prove that there was either definite evidence of prior knowledge to the event or that the shows creator, Seth McFarlane (who also conveniently missed one of the the flights which were allegedly hijacked on 911), is a clairvoyant.
Please be warned there are some graphic references to Robin Williams' alleged suicide in this video and there may also be some language that people find offensive.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1X289sq1pLk

Before I am advised to move this thread to conspiracy theories I do not see the necessity of doing so as the word theory indicates something unproven and I feel I have presented enough evidence here to support my claim that the official story should not be accepted without proper investigation.

adrian522

Maybe post here?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=576

omnithanos

I thought my last sentence would save me from re-direction?

I just thought I might get a more balanced response if I posted that here as Conspiracy Theorists aren't uniformly embraced and besides I didn't present a theory I presented evidence.

goldenhoarde

omnithanos wrote: »

I thought my last sentence would save me from re-direction?

I just thought I might get a more balanced response if I posted that here as Conspiracy Theorists aren't uniformly embraced and besides I didn't present a theory I presented evidence.

While some might say interesting, i don't see any actual evidence especially in the Family Guy stuff that would make a court room which is where RTE are reporting from, and doing their job reporting the news, they don't get to make it

omnithanos

I would be happier if RTE were to say that it had been reported that so many had died and so many were injured instead of stating it as if it were fact when it has never been proven that such number were killed or injured.

We are fed far too much disinformation.

adrian522

omnithanos wrote: »

I thought my last sentence would save me from re-direction?

I just thought I might get a more balanced response if I posted that here as Conspiracy Theorists aren't uniformly embraced and besides I didn't present a theory I presented evidence.

It's still a theory. Also why single out RTE? Every reputable news organisation in the world reported the tragic loss of life at the Boston Marathon and they will all report the court proceedings. Conspiracy theories notwithstanding.

omnithanos

If RTE are collecting my licence fee then I expect them report facts not hearsay.

I wouldn't call any news organisation reputable who doesn't at least do this. And a little bit of research into the anomalies wouldn't go amiss.

There's enough video evidence online showing the same fake kid dummy hanging out of two different ladies, guys passing out blood packets to squirt on the alleged injured victims, people running pushing injured people in wheelchairs but stopping when they think they are out of camera shot, that same dude in the video I posted sitting up in a wheelchair fully conscious after both his legs were allegedly blown off, a little girl who later had her leg amputated standing on two legs (one being a prosthetic hidden under her jeans) after the bomb went off etc. for it to at least look a bit dodgy.

All the guy on trial appears to me to be guilty of is being a patsy for the CIA but that's just my opinion. Video evidence shows him leaving the scene with his backpack shouldn't that have been dumped if it contained the bomb? Also how is he going to get a fair trial if the court house is full of crisis actors?

adrian522

Exactly, what they reported were facts, I'd be pretty concerned if they started reporting these conspiracy theories as facts to be honest. Because let's be honest, the stuff you've posted above proves absolutely nothing other than the fact that there are some pretty paranoid and deluded people in the world.

vicwatson

RTE will run and run with this for months to keep their Washington correspondant busy

witchgirl26

What exactly are you disputing here? The amount of people who were injured? The amount of people who died?

Surely if it was all a big set up by the authorities or whoever, they would have reported the death toll as a lot higher?

What does what you posted prove? That a smaller number were injured? Maybe there was but currently the official figures state that 264 people were injured and 3 killed so until there is any type of real evidence to disprove this, then I'm going to agree that what RTE is reporting is fact.

omnithanos

adrian522 wrote: »

Exactly, what they reported were facts, I'd be pretty concerned if they started reporting these conspiracy theories as facts to be honest. Because let's be honest, the stuff you've posted above proves absolutely nothing other than the fact that there are some pretty paranoid and deluded people in the world.

How do you know it is a fact that that many people were killed and injured?
Because the media told you so?

Where is your proof?

adrian522

Give me a second to me Google some you tube videos, preferably of some mediocre cartoon and present that as fact.

omnithanos

witchgirl26 wrote: »

What exactly are you disputing here? The amount of people who were injured? The amount of people who died?

Surely if it was all a big set up by the authorities or whoever, they would have reported the death toll as a lot higher?

What does what you posted prove? That a smaller number were injured? Maybe there was but currently the official figures state that 264 people were injured and 3 killed so until there is any type of real evidence to disprove this, then I'm going to agree that what RTE is reporting is fact.

Where is the evidence to prove that anybody was actually injured?

Watch the videos and it's obvious the whole this was a complete set up. I doubt anybody was injured.

omnithanos

adrian522 wrote: »

Give me a second to me Google some you tube videos, preferably of some mediocre cartoon and present that as fact.

The cartoon I posted predicts the events of Boston 19 days before they happened which suggests it was all planned.

You could try posting some cartoon planes to prove what happened on 911 if you like.

adrian522

Which is exactly why this should be in CT forum and not news and media.

Where is your proof? There are plenty of you tube videos of the explosions and of people with missing limbs, people who have lost loved ones. If you tube is deemed enough as "proof" there are plenty of such videos around.

I find your whole attitude pretty disgusting to be honest.

omnithanos

adrian522 wrote: »

Which is exactly why this should be in CT forum and not news and media.

Where is your proof? There are plenty of you tube videos of the explosions and of people with missing limbs, people who have lost loved ones. If you tube is deemed enough as "proof" there are plenty of such videos around.

I find your whole attitude pretty disgusting to be honest.

They are all videos of fake injuries and they aren't real bombs. If you search properly you can see people getting fake prosthetic limbs attached and there is no blood on the ground immediately after the explosion, it's put there after. I wouldn't be suggesting any of this if I wasn't convinced that any of it was real.

adrian522

omnithanos wrote: »

The cartoon I posted predicts the events of Boston 19 days before they happened which suggests it was all planned.

You could try posting some cartoon planes to prove what happened on 911 if you like.

Suggests not proves. Again, where is your proof?

adrian522

omnithanos wrote: »

They are all videos of fake injuries and they aren't real bombs. If you search properly you can see people getting fake prosthetic limbs attached and there is no blood on the ground immediately after the explosion, it's put there after. I wouldn't be suggesting any of this if I wasn't convinced that any of it was real.

So all the videos of the bombing are fake? And all the crackpot conspiracy theory videos are all genuine?

That's your theory? And this doesn't belong in CT forum why exactly?

crusier

omnithanos wrote: »

I watched RTE News coverage of the Boston Bombing trial last night where they stated as fact that three people were killed and 264 people were injured in the bombings.

How can RTE state this as fact without verifying their story or giving corroborating evidence when research shows there is a very high likelihood that the Boston Bombing was yet another setup?

The US Government or the US media cannot be considered reliable sources as they have continued to cover up of their obvious role in the 911 tragedy. Do the Irish media have an agenda to simply go along with the US official story or are they too lazy to check out a few videos on YouTube?

The first video link I provide shows some mildly graphic scenes immediately after the bomb exploded near the finish line.
Note the position of the lady with the red jacket and blue circle on her top positioned to the left in the last two photos.
In the second last photo (after 1 minute) we can see the guy lying behind her with both legs (apparently prosthetic), looking relaxed and wearing a hat and sunglasses to disguise his face.
In the gory last photo (after 2 minutes) we can see the same guy, slightly closer to the lady in the previous photo, minus his hat, glasses, and his regular prosthetic legs and holding a prosthetic limb designed to look like it has a bone sticking out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lU_ycItkYuY

In the second video link I provide you can see how multiple references made in an episode of Family Guy entitled Turban Cowboy, which was aired only 19 days before the Boston bombing, prove that there was either definite evidence of prior knowledge to the event or that the shows creator, Seth McFarlane (who also conveniently missed one of the the flights which were allegedly hijacked on 911), is a clairvoyant.
Please be warned there are some graphic references to Robin Williams' alleged suicide in this video and there may also be some language that people find offensive.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1X289sq1pLk

Before I am advised to move this thread to conspiracy theories I do not see the necessity of doing so as the word theory indicates something unproven and I feel I have presented enough evidence here to support my claim that the official story should not be accepted without proper investigation.

Reference No US/BB 425478

AndyBoBandy

I thought this thread was going to be about how terrible the RTÉ reporter over in Boston is!!

She can't seem to get a single report out without fluffing her lines, making mistakes, and just generally looking like she's never reported news ever in her life!.

omnithanos

adrian522 wrote: »

So all the videos of the bombing are fake? And all the crackpot conspiracy theory videos are all genuine?

That's your theory? And this doesn't belong in CT forum why exactly?

No the videos are the same except some are edited to look like it was a real bombing and the other videos attempt to disprove this by catching the crisis actors out, many of whom are amputee actors.

I'm not here to prove anything. I'm just making the comment that news agencies shouldn't just serve us up a story and expect us to accept it as the truth without verification.

AndyBoBandy

I have serious doubts about the official story peddled about 9/11,

but I really think your clutching at straws here chief..

omnithanos

Andybobandy wrote: »

I have serious doubts about the official story peddled about 9/11,

but I really think your clutching at straws here chief..

Fair enough. I've watched a ton of them at this stage so I'm convinced anyway.

I actually made an error with the first video I posted for which I apologise but it doesn't change my opinion. The guy without the legs is not the same as the guy with the sunglasses. The amputee is being shielded from view by the black lady on the ground in the second last picture. Other videos show the Sunglasses guy then moves over and attaches the fake injured looking leg to the amputee. Look it up if you like or don't look it up. No offence intended to anyone who actually suffered injuries, I think one guy got a bit of a redness on his face from the initial blast.

So why is it anyway that it is up to so called conspiracy theorists to prove these things when the likes of the US government actually go out of their way to cover things up. Shouldn't the onus of proof be on them also or are we all expected to swallow all their lies when things don't exactly add up.

AndyBoBandy

omnithanos wrote: »

Shouldn't the onus of proof be on them

I think thats the whole point of the trial?

witchgirl26

omnithanos wrote: »

Where is the evidence to prove that anybody was actually injured?

Watch the videos and it's obvious the whole this was a complete set up. I doubt anybody was injured.

Oh I don't know maybe the people in court with missing limbs?! Do you honestly think that that amount of people will lie & fake having missing limbs for something like this? Really? Coz that's worrying if you do.

And what about the people who lost someone?

How about hospital records, blood all over the ground, limbs being visible separated from people's bodies.

If it is a lie - then there would be a massive issue of it leaking out considering the number of people who'd have to be in on the lie in order to make it look real. And what's the benefit to them? Because people don't just do things for no benefit at all to them.

my friend

omnithanos wrote: »

I watched RTE News coverage of the Boston Bombing trial last night where they stated as fact that three people were killed and 264 people were injured in the bombings.

How can RTE state this as fact without verifying their story or giving corroborating evidence when research shows there is a very high likelihood that the Boston Bombing was yet another setup?

The US Government or the US media cannot be considered reliable sources as they have continued to cover up of their obvious role in the 911 tragedy. Do the Irish media have an agenda to simply go along with the US official story or are they too lazy to check out a few videos on YouTube?

The first video link I provide shows some mildly graphic scenes immediately after the bomb exploded near the finish line.
Note the position of the lady with the red jacket and blue circle on her top positioned to the left in the last two photos.
In the second last photo (after 1 minute) we can see the guy lying behind her with both legs (apparently prosthetic), looking relaxed and wearing a hat and sunglasses to disguise his face.
In the gory last photo (after 2 minutes) we can see the same guy, slightly closer to the lady in the previous photo, minus his hat, glasses, and his regular prosthetic legs and holding a prosthetic limb designed to look like it has a bone sticking out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lU_ycItkYuY

In the second video link I provide you can see how multiple references made in an episode of Family Guy entitled Turban Cowboy, which was aired only 19 days before the Boston bombing, prove that there was either definite evidence of prior knowledge to the event or that the shows creator, Seth McFarlane (who also conveniently missed one of the the flights which were allegedly hijacked on 911), is a clairvoyant.
Please be warned there are some graphic references to Robin Williams' alleged suicide in this video and there may also be some language that people find offensive.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1X289sq1pLk

Before I am advised to move this thread to conspiracy theories I do not see the necessity of doing so as the word theory indicates something unproven and I feel I have presented enough evidence here to support my claim that the official story should not be accepted without proper investigation.

How much skunk are you consuming?

omnithanos

witchgirl26 wrote: »

Oh I don't know maybe the people in court with missing limbs?! Do you honestly think that that amount of people will lie & fake having missing limbs for something like this? Really? Coz that's worrying if you do.

And what about the people who lost someone?

How about hospital records, blood all over the ground, limbs being visible separated from people's bodies.

If it is a lie - then there would be a massive issue of it leaking out considering the number of people who'd have to be in on the lie in order to make it look real. And what's the benefit to them? Because people don't just do things for no benefit at all to them.

The people in court with missing limbs can be identified as pre existing amputees.
There are websites where you can hire crisis actors and amputee actors.
Many of the same crisis actors have been identified in more than one government staged event of this nature such as 911, Boston, Sandy Creek etc.
Only three people were reported as being killed. Identities could have been altered as in 911. For example of the 19 supposed terrorists who hijacked the four planes on 911, 10 are still alive and no explanation for this was given by the US government.
The hospital could have been shut down by the government, fake records can be manufactured and the blood on the ground was obviously fake. Videos show that the blood wasn't there immediately after the bomb went off at the finish line.
Other videos show the organisers of this carrying bags of fake blood and victims can be seen with no blood on their face and limbs immediately after the explosion but they have blood all over their face and limbs when they are wheeled out afterwards.
There are dozens of videos on youtube exposing this fraud. I would suggest that people watch these before rejecting the possibility.
The benefit to the fraudsters is that they each have a charity webpage dedicated to them which has taken in millions of dollars from the charitable american public in donations.
The benefit to the US government was to establish martial law in Boston so that they could enter peoples homes and confiscate arms etc. in order to gauge the response of citizens when their constitutional rights are denied.

my friend

omnithanos wrote: »

The benefit to the US government was to establish martial law in Boston so that they could enter peoples homes and confiscate arms etc. in order to gauge the response of citizens when their constitutional rights are denied.

To what end?

omnithanos

my friend wrote: »

To what end?

That would be just speculation.
I'd like to encourage healthy logical investigation into events such as these in order to establish the true facts. If inconsistencies exist in official stories they should obviously be investigated and not covered up.

adrian522

omnithanos wrote: »

That would be just speculation.

That would be speculation? All the rest of it is factual is it?

witchgirl26

omnithanos wrote: »

The people in court with missing limbs can be identified as pre existing amputees.
There are websites where you can hire crisis actors and amputee actors.
Many of the same crisis actors have been identified in more than one government staged event of this nature such as 911, Boston, Sandy Creek etc.
Only three people were reported as being killed. Identities could have been altered as in 911. For example of the 19 supposed terrorists who hijacked the four planes on 911, 10 are still alive and no explanation for this was given by the US government.
The hospital could have been shut down by the government, fake records can be manufactured and the blood on the ground was obviously fake. Videos show that the blood wasn't there immediately after the bomb went off at the finish line.
Other videos show the organisers of this carrying bags of fake blood and victims can be seen with no blood on their face and limbs immediately after the explosion but they have blood all over their face and limbs when they are wheeled out afterwards.
There are dozens of videos on youtube exposing this fraud. I would suggest that people watch these before rejecting the possibility.
The benefit to the fraudsters is that they each have a charity webpage dedicated to them which has taken in millions of dollars from the charitable american public in donations.
The benefit to the US government was to establish martial law in Boston so that they could enter peoples homes and confiscate arms etc. in order to gauge the response of citizens when their constitutional rights are denied.

I'm sorry but I don't buy that. Money is a great motivator but it will not keep people silent for that long. And their families too? No it actually doesn't make sense what so ever.

I'm not bringing any other incidents into this as I do think there could be questions about some of them but I don't understand Boston as a target or why, if there was a fear to be struck, they wouldn't have put the death toll higher.

To me, any footage that I've seen, the blood looks pretty damn real. But why should I believe videos on youtube claiming it's not real but you won't entertain the notion that maybe, just maybe, someone did something terrible and set off bombs at the marathon? Why should I come round to your way of thinking on it?

And if you do any actual reading on it, you'd note that the "martial law" was actually just a request for people to stay indoors while the hunt for the suspects was ongoing. No one was forced to stay indoors at all. There were some public spaces locked down & closed but if a bombing had just occurred and the suspects were at large, then it makes a lot of sense to close off other potential target areas.

omnithanos wrote: »

That would be just speculation.
I'd like to encourage healthy logical investigation into events such as these in order to establish the true facts. If inconsistencies exist in official stories they should obviously be investigated and not covered up.

But would you honestly believe any investigation that happens? Who should investigate them? If that came back saying that what is being said, did indeed happen, would you accept that or would you then claim that the investigation you're calling for was a cover up? Where does it actually end?

ectoraige

OP, how do we know those videos you posted are from that day? They could have been made afterwards by somebody else, maybe the Russians, or Angela Merkel, to *look* like what happened in Boston. How do we even know Boston exists? I've never been there, have you? Has anybody?

AndyBoBandy

This ^^^^

omnithanos

OK guys we've now established that there definitely is a conspiracy and we have two theories on what that conspiracy is.

My contention is that there is a government cover up and the bombing was staged and fake.

The good people who discount this theory have put forward that the youtube videos which drove me to my conclusion have been faked which in itself exposes a conspiracy. The problem with this suggestion is that there doesn't seem to be any concerted effort to debunk the theory of faked youtube videos made to discredit the establishment.

The following video either exposes the boston bombing as a fake or proves that people are making fake videos to discredit the official story. This video can't exist unless either the bombings were faked or this video was faked.

Considering the overwhelming number of these such videos my question is which is the most logical conclusion?

The following video shows a little girl, who had her leg amputated, standing immediately after the bomb went off. Also notice how the others, what I call crisis actors, are getting ready to move into their assigned crisis positions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXpJWke2Zso

AndyBoBandy

omnithanos wrote: »

OK guys we've now established that there definitely is a conspiracy and we have two theories on what that conspiracy is.

My contention is that there is a government cover up and the bombing was staged and fake.

The good people who discount this theory have put forward that the youtube videos which drove me to my conclusion have been faked which in itself exposes a conspiracy. The problem with this suggestion is that there doesn't seem to be any concerted effort to debunk the theory of faked youtube videos made to discredit the establishment.

The following video either exposes the boston bombing as a fake or proves that people are making fake videos to discredit the official story. This video can't exist unless either the bombings were faked or this video was faked.

Considering the overwhelming number of these such videos my question is which is the most logical conclusion?

The following video shows a little girl, who had her leg amputated, standing immediately after the bomb went off. Also notice how the others, what I call crisis actors, are getting ready to move into their assigned crisis positions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXpJWke2Zso

That video is just a wack job clutching at the same straws your desperately trying to grab!

just let it go..

witchgirl26

omnithanos wrote: »

OK guys we've now established that there definitely is a conspiracy

No we really haven't. Definitively proving a conspiracy is quite difficult so if you have done such a thing, then fair play but I don't see any hard evidence to suggest that.

omnithanos wrote: »

My contention is that there is a government cover up and the bombing was staged and fake.

Why would they do this? Honestly why pick Boston? Why not the New York Marathon? Why have the death toll so low if they wanted to make people afraid?

omnithanos wrote: »

The good people who discount this theory have put forward that the youtube videos which drove me to my conclusion have been faked which in itself exposes a conspiracy. The problem with this suggestion is that there doesn't seem to be any concerted effort to debunk the theory of faked youtube videos made to discredit the establishment.

Why should there have to be a concerted effort to debunk something if you don't believe it to be real. I've seen some cat videos on youtube that are definitely faked, but you know what, I've better things to be doing than trying to get a concerted effort together to debunk them. Same here.

omnithanos wrote: »

The following video either exposes the boston bombing as a fake or proves that people are making fake videos to discredit the official story. This video can't exist unless either the bombings were faked or this video was faked.

Considering the overwhelming number of these such videos my question is which is the most logical conclusion?

The following video shows a little girl, who had her leg amputated, standing immediately after the bomb went off. Also notice how the others, what I call crisis actors, are getting ready to move into their assigned crisis positions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXpJWke2Zso

So the video either proves you wrong or everyone else. Which is it?

There can be hundreds of videos up claiming something but it doesn't make it true. It just means there are lots of videos. Also people can have many different youtube accounts so could be posting similar enough videos through them & thus leading to a large number of those videos being online. Again does not make them true.

Can't watch the video as not in work but you are not really giving anything here except conjecture.

Unless you have irrefutable proof that what RTE is reporting is not the truth as it is commonly accepted and can thus present that to the Broadcasting Authority, then really you can't say that they are deliberately misleading the public.

ectoraige

omnithanos wrote: »

OK guys we've now established that there definitely is a conspiracy and we have two theories on what that conspiracy is.

My contention is that there is a government cover up and the bombing was staged and fake.

The good people who discount this theory have put forward that the youtube videos which drove me to my conclusion have been faked which in itself exposes a conspiracy. The problem with this suggestion is that there doesn't seem to be any concerted effort to debunk the theory of faked youtube videos made to discredit the establishment.

Actually, those videos could have been faked by a single person who hired loads of people for a "movie" and then killed them all. Could have poisoned the catering food. No conspiracy, just a lone "gunman", so to speak.

Harry Palmr

How the hell is this thread still open?

omnithanos

Ok guys this video is fairly comprehensive but as most of you seem inclined to accept disinformation as fact I doubt you'll bother watching it since it's nearly half an hour long.

This one mainly discredits the boston bombing poster boy using real footage. You may disagree with the medical opinion which starts at about the 1 minute 50 second mark and think he's just a really tough dude.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-Vene1QNxc

ectoraige

omnithanos wrote: »

Ok guys this video is fairly comprehensive but as most of you seem inclined to accept disinformation as fact I doubt you'll bother watching it since it's nearly half an hour long.

This one mainly discredits the boston bombing poster boy using real footage. You may disagree with the medical opinion which starts at about the 1 minute 50 second mark and think he's just a really tough dude.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-Vene1QNxc

How do you know it's real footage?

omnithanos

ectoraige wrote: »

How do you know it's real footage?

It uses the same images that were broadcast by the mainstream media.

ectoraige

omnithanos wrote: »

It uses the same images that were broadcast by the mainstream media.

How do you know it's the same footage? It might be a very exacting re-enactment, or perhaps some CGI effects added to the original. Do you have the actual original images?

omnithanos

ectoraige wrote: »

How do you know it's the same footage? It might be a very exacting re-enactment, or perhaps some CGI effects added to the original. Do you have the actual original images?

https://www.google.ie/search?q=images+of+boston+bombing&es_sm=93&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=R7T-VNaJBMbm7gb5iYH4CQ&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1366&bih=667

ectoraige

omnithanos wrote: »

https://www.google.ie/search?q=images+of+boston+bombing&es_sm=93&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=R7T-VNaJBMbm7gb5iYH4CQ&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1366&bih=667

I don't know if I can trust Google - what if those are all fake pictures?

NewCorkLad

omnithanos wrote: »

Many of the same crisis actors have been identified in more than one government staged event of this nature such as 911, Boston, Sandy Creek etc..

Are you really saying that Sandy Creek was staged aswell.

Surely if these "crisis actors" have been identified at multiple staged events that would be easy to prove?

omnithanos

NewCorkLad wrote: »

Are you really saying that Sandy Creek was staged aswell.

Surely if these "crisis actors" have been identified at multiple staged events that would be easy to prove?

Should be but who's gonna listen?

This lady gets around
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmIrx9ey8u4

Annie Haddad Is Nancy Lanza
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvkOE_F-mc8

Sandy Hook, theatre shooting connection
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5rWBkd4JPk

And again
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYUbqd5gaPs

http://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2013/01/11/remarkable-resemblance-of-sandy-hook-victims-and-professional-crisis-actors/

flogen

I've gotten a tonne of reports for this post suggesting it be moved to Conspiracy Theories.

While I agree that the OP's claim is a conspiracy theory, I've decided to leave it here for a number of reasons.

Firstly, the best way to put these theories to the test is to open them to scrutiny - that's not something they tend to get in forums specifically designed to host and encourage them but rather in places used to proper debate and discussion.

Secondly, there is already a thread in that forum on this topic - so the options are either to keep it going here or just close it completely.

Thirdly, and to a lesser extent, I'd hate to give this - or any other - conspiracy theorist the easy ammunition of claiming they were "censored" by "deh man".*

It's up to everyone else to decide if they want to keep engaging on the topic to try and convince the other side of their point of view, or to stop (and let the thread die) if they feel as though they're wasting their time.

* Though I'll happily run that risk of the thread crosses any of the usual lines - i.e. spamming, abuse etc.

omnithanos

flogen wrote: »

I've gotten a tonne of reports for this post suggesting it be moved to Conspiracy Theories.

While I agree that the OP's claim is a conspiracy theory, I've decided to leave it here for a number of reasons.

Firstly, the best way to put these theories to the test is to open them to scrutiny - that's not something they tend to get in forums specifically designed to host and encourage them but rather in places used to proper debate and discussion.

Secondly, there is already a thread in that forum on this topic - so the options are either to keep it going here or just close it completely.

Thirdly, and to a lesser extent, I'd hate to give this - or any other - conspiracy theorist the easy ammunition of claiming they were "censored" by "deh man".*

It's up to everyone else to decide if they want to keep engaging on the topic to try and convince the other side of their point of view, or to stop (and let the thread die) if they feel as though they're wasting their time.

* Though I'll happily run that risk of the thread crosses any of the usual lines - i.e. spamming, abuse etc.

I have put forward the notion that the boston bombing itself is the actual theory.
I have also posted a link to this forum on the boston bombing thread of the conspiracy theory board with a brief summary of the reaction to this thread suggesting that it is not being debated in a logical or constructive manner.

AndyBoBandy

omnithanos wrote: »

the reaction to this thread suggesting that it is not being debated in a logical or constructive manner.

people are being logical and constructive though, you are simply replying with youtube videos, stating them as fact with a "they must be real" attitude.

If I make a youtube video about how the Irish financial crisis was in fact created by a secret order of gay bishops disillusioned at how the catholic church was being portrayed in sci-fi movies set in outer space 700 years from now, it does not mean that any of it is true. But If I was a good enough film maker, I'm sure some people would believe it.

If you want logical & constructive debate, how about forgetting all the youtube videos that are simply pushing 1 persons thoughts on a particular subject.

It appears you are not here for debate, as it's clear your mind is already made up.

omnithanos

Andybobandy wrote: »

people are being logical and constructive though, you are simply replying with youtube videos, stating them as fact with a "they must be real" attitude.

If I make a youtube video about how the Irish financial crisis was in fact created by a secret order of gay bishops disillusioned at how the catholic church was being portrayed in sci-fi movies set in outer space 700 years from now, it does not mean that any of it is true. But If I was a good enough film maker, I'm sure some people would believe it.

If you want logical & constructive debate, how about forgetting all the youtube videos that are simply pushing 1 persons thoughts on a particular subject.

It appears you are not here for debate, as it's clear your mind is already made up.

You can't prove anything with debate alone. I'm using said videos to support my opinions not prove them. There are plenty of other videos out there if people are interested in doing some research.
The naysayers offer no supporting evidence whatsoever apart from following the official story line. Just because a government says something happened doesn't mean it is true either and based on the evidence of 9/11 we know that the US Government have lied in the past.
And just because somebody is convicted in a court of law doesn't mean their crime has been proven, remember the Guilford four and the Birmingham six.
Real debate involves having an open mind as to the possibilities put forward and not rubbishing them out of hand and then by logical deduction forming a conclusion based on the most realistic and logical critical analysis.
Based on all the evidence I have seen I think it is more realistic to assume that there was no bomb.
If you think all the references to the Boston bombing made in the episode of Family guy were complete coincidence that's your prerogative and you are entitled to your opinion as am I. If you think all the videos showing the actors faking the bombing are fake how do you explain that photos showing the same people in the same situations were used by the mainstream media?
Can we discuss how cowboy hat man pushing the man who had just lost his legs could have been faked when they were all over the news in america and do you reject the medical analysis put forward in the video?

ectoraige

Okay, I'll take this seriously. First, what are the ground rules? The pictures and videos are real, but not everything in them was real? Was there an explosion? That would seem to be a pretty basic assumption.