Picture of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Leaving Scene of Bombing Photoshopped?

reply to post by wazzman


Problem is none of these arm-chair geniuses realize that a blown up back pack could be inside out.

Did you geniuses think of that? Or are you too busy defending the criminals?

Give your heads a shake.
(spits)

reply to post by canucks555


I think you could be a little more specific about whom you are referring to before you insult everyone in a thread you happen to disagree with.

Penny

reply to post by canucks555


As I've said before, this thread is solely about the pictures. We can discuss implications such as if his backpack is off what does it mean? as well as If his backpack is still on what does it mean? but id like to keep it as much as we can about the photographic evidence we have.

Those who have already made up there minds about this case are doing so based on a couple of things I'm not ready to believe are infallible just yet. 1, the carjacking victim they so conveniently confessed to then let live. 2, the FBI and their limited photographic evidence they've made public (no video of suspects in police chase/shootout/them dropping backpacks). And 3, an eyewitness who was in the middle of the bombs going off.

I think the OKC bombing is relevant to put this into perspective. Was Timothy McVeigh guilty of driving a truck to the Murrah Federal building in 1995 and blowing it up? Yes, he was as far as I can tell. But that doesn't explain many other inconsistencies concerning the case, including the complicity of the FBI, evidence suggesting McVeigh was still in the US Army and had possibly been undercover at some point, and experts - including one who spent his whole career analyzing bomb blasts and destruction for the US military - who stated that the material in McVeighs truck alone could never have caused the severity of the damage at the scene, insisting that additional explosives must have been placed on beams in the building.

Things are usually not as black and white in life despite how neat and tighty some of you want things to be. Life is usually messy, confusing, there's usually a large gray area, and it takes work to sift through the BS and find the truth. If you think the truth is just handed to you, honestly I feel sorry for you. I personally do not wish for any sort of comfort through a basic comprehension of important events.

Once again, this thread is only about the photo. I do not know if these boys are guilty or not. From what I can tell, they are guilty of something, but I'm not quite sure what just yet. And just because I believe them to possibly be guilty of something does not stop me from questioning all available evidence. That surely does not imply I am "defending criminals." Everyone deserves a fair trial and as a person who follows the path of light, not darkness, I'd hate to think we hastily condemned an innocent person based on lies, half truths, and emotional based reasoning. I'm more of a rational type of guy.

We all know what they say about suckers and how often they're born, I prefer to keep myself skeptical of all information until I can prove it's validity.

reply to post by PatriotGames2


I can agree with much of that. While I don't think that the backpack has been photoshopped out, (more like the camera couldn't resolve the darker brick textures properly) But there is no way now of really knowing, the picture is second-hand, digital crap, the full picture is second hand digital crap. The full picture has been manipulated on the right side why, I don't know. It might be obvious to say that someone's face was obscured to protect an identity, but that makes no sense, the features would not be clear in that section, but it has been manipulated, just as one victims picture was. This the thing, we are caught by the short and curly's, and can take nothing at face value any more.
We may learn more in the coming days, although I think the longer it takes to get missing pieces of information out, the more time there is to sanitize those pieces.

I am starting to find this whole story really very interesting but not form the perspective of believing there is some grand cover up and that these two have been framed for some kind of false flag that was carried out by CRAFT (as the contemporary conspiracy theory would suggest). No I am finding this interesting from the perspective of observing how a conspiracy theory forms and its really quite fascinating.

I took part in the threads when this story broke and for the most part it was people discussing the events with very little in the way of a conspiracy theory. Then slowly I started to notice the “something doesn’t seem right about this” posts, this obviously and quite righty spurs people on to investigate further. An interesting trade in the psychology of conspiracy theorists is that once they believe one it becomes easier to believe another and eventually a world view is formed. So if you believe that JFK was assassinated by the CIA then it becomes easier to believe that they if they could do that than they could also do 9/11 and if they could do that they (whoever “they” really are) could also have been responsible for the Boston bombings. It creates a world view that seeks to find a deeper darker conspiracy behind all major world events and to enforce this a conformation bias creeps into their psyche that seeks out the evidence that the Boston bombings were another of their conspiracies.

So this confirmation bias starts a search for evidence that the Boston bombings were a false flag. First we have a picture that shows a couple of guys standing with backpacks, one of whom has a punisher hat on. This hat is scrutinised first because it looks like something on a SEAL cap badge and then because it is very similar to the CRAFT logo. Now despite these men having to have turned out to actually be National Guard (it was reported on Alex Jones) people stick with the CRAFT angle. This is because PMCs are not to be trusted and because National Guard can be explained as being normal for such a event. As such the conspiracy theorists confirmation bias dictates that these two men were CRAFT.

Next I see a video on YouTube, in which it is claimed that these two CRAFT guys (actually National Guard) were responsible for the bombing. The video shows them before the bombing with backpacks and then shows a picture of them after the bombing saying they don’t have their backpacks on despite the fact that they do. Furthermore the video shows a picture of the accused bomber running from the scene and the narrator of the video says that it shows he has a backpack on. Further and more in-depth analysis of the photo shows that he didn’t actually have the backpack on one would think that debunks the video.

But no!

Now we have a youtube video about how they photoshoped the video, there is actually zero proof in the video it is photoshoped but it fits in whit the original conspiracy so what the hell, let’s all say its photoshopped with zero evidence.

Really if you guys sit back and observe how this conspiracy is evolving you can start to spot some petting big holes in the logic of the conspiracy theories.

Originally posted by tommyjo

Originally posted by Char-Lee
This does not seem right either, he actually looks posed and maybe dead.

If this was him "climbing into the boat" filmed by a security camera why is the boat cover so torn?

The confusion is because the Daily Mail newspaper have captioned the image incorrectly. He is not climbing into the boat but climbing out as he surrenders. The boat cover is torn due to the remote arm of the vehicle tearing it open. See video where you can see Dzhokhar Tsarnaev moving inside the boat.

yes that is what i figured, so information of a security camera showing him climb in is way of and weird, do they just start making stuff up.

So he is climbing out, stunned from the flash bombs and then at What Point did he blow a hole IN His Own Throat?

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


I can understand what you are saying, but this was a conspiracy. Maybe just two guys so far, but still a conspiracy. And they used the old one-two method of detonating the explosives. The FBI are already in the brown stuff for not using the information given them, and keeping tabs. People are still waiting for the unshown video/pictures of the brothers as identified leaving their bags in the bomb areas, while they did show them walking around one behind the other, which was suspicious looking, but no doubt in my mind that all the relevant stuff should have been released at the same time.
As for the 4CHAN/AJ pictures, there was no one in those pictures that fitted the description given by the FBI the day before, which included the hoodies, and also a green and brown bag was mentioned, all that came from the FBI review of CCTV and pictures, which was correct on their part, but also limited.
The glass blown across the pavement to the middle of the pavement or near edge of the road does not fit the bill of explosives detonated on the pavement, most of the glass should have been blown into the building in that case, but it looks more like the blast was from inside the building and blew the glass out, I just don't see the glass being sucked out by what was a relatively small device, in fact one video of the runners at the time of the explosion, (where one fell down) on MSM shows bigger parts going up in the air and not even that high up.
The thing is, can you not see why people should be wary?

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


Ironically, it works both ways.

You see anything "conspiracy" related as rubbish and summarily dismiss it, defending your bias with zest.

Nothing will change your mind I imagine, including facts (and I'm not saying these pictures are facts), cause your mind is made up.

Fascinating, indeed.

The safety glass just shattered and dropped, flying in 2 directions.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


It is pretty interesting, what's also interesting is how a lot of false evidence of a conspiracy never dies out, like a ton of the 9/11 "evidence", I bet in 5 years they'll still be saying those guys were CRAFT

reply to post by kenpachi7


Yup of course they will its already been reported guys were not “CRAFT” but for conspiracy theorist the idea of these two guys being CRAFT fits in very nicely with their conspiracy word view.

Even if they were CRAFT (and they’re not) that wouldn’t prove anything only that a couple of guys who work for a PMC were present.

I was closed and referred to this thread. There is a number of inconsistencies not fully addressed, although at this point, we can argue the picture all we want. The fact is there is suspicious problems around Dzokhar in particular, whether they are indicative of tampering is apparently going to be a matter of personal opinion. This is a result of most of the inconsistent areas having no confirmed explanation, despite a large number of faith-based statements purported as "fact" on both sides. So chalk that up to agree to disagree. What about David Green? I read that this picture was found by someone on Reddit on a running forum? How long after was it posted? What did Green do that day? Some of these are probably unanswerable, but these are the questions that will lead to truly identifying it's legitimacy.

Edit: With Green's name and a little background on him, I found this article on New York Times:

Debunk

So, things still don't settle right with me, but they settle better. Now I know this wasn't taken or manufactured by a government entity or third party organization. That still leaves Mr. Green, who's a CEO and entrepreneur. As someone had mentioned in my earlier thread, it is more likely this was doctored or modified slightly in order to capitalize somehow. Now it makes a little more sense if so. Kudos to him for the picture either way, lucky snap for a single phone camera shot when walking away from just charging your phone.

Needless to say, I investigated this because something about the incident never settled right with me from day one, so I'll continue to investigate myself, and post a new thread if I find anything else on this subject. All the best to all the injured and families affected, a tragedy no matter how it happened.

I remember seeing this image pop up, but can't find anymore locations just yet...




Supposedly it shows a picture of the suspect's bag after the Boston bombing in the suspect's room.

Edit: Here's another.



I will note that was after googling Jahar's bookbag, still trying to find an original Daily News link.

Here's one article (shows multiple pictures):

______beforeitsnews/alternative/2013/04/no-bombs-found-in-tsarnaev-brothers-home-media-lies-photos-2627004.html

Not sure if anyone here has saw this hope i can do it its another photo from the bombing that will make you go hmmm not sure who did this but here it is www.liveleak.com... hope it works more altered photos

reply to post by canucks555


I never said i think they didnt do it all i am trying to do is show that some photos have been photoshoped for what reason i dont know but deep down i know they had something to do with it like you stated why the shootout if innocent and carjacking i beleive they did it just dont understand the reason to alter photos thats all i was trying to implicate. PEACE

Seems to me this image is consistent throughout and I see no signs of Photoshopping.

Original Cropped
Someone remarked about trace evidence that demonstrates that his hand was 'lassoed' - therefore moved in Photoshop. What I see as the 'shadow hand' is actually the woman's hair extended outwards towards him.

Originally posted by CasaVigilante
Seems to me this image is consistent throughout and I see no signs of Photoshopping.

Original

Cropped

Someone remarked about trace evidence that demonstrates that his hand was 'lassoed' - therefore moved in Photoshop. What I see as the 'shadow hand' is actually the woman's hair extended outwards towards him.

edit on 27-4-2013 by CasaVigilante because: (no reason given)

Found the original, clearly a photoshop job......

Originally posted by Drunkenparrot
Found the original, clearly a photoshop job......

Given your version has adobe photoshop written all over it, and the original has iphone written on it ... imma go with tasteless joke.

Originally posted by Pinke

Originally posted by Drunkenparrot
Found the original, clearly a photoshop job......

Given your version has adobe photoshop written all over it, and the original has iphone written on it ... imma go with tasteless joke.

You absolutely missed the point.

I toyed momentarily with the idea of editing the metadata but decided against it as it would have taken longer than the 5 minutes total spent finding the original and altering the image.

That is 5 minutes start to finish to produce a finished result with none of the flaws pointed to by some as evidence of something untoward.

I have no real photo editing skills and haven't opened photoshop in months.

Understand yet or should I draw you a picture and add some red arrows in MS paint to highlight the point I was making?

i think its like the photos where the supect is seen wearing the bag slung down under his other arm