It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by captiva
Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
I really don’t get it OP, are you saying there wasn’t an explosion or are you just saying look at the nice chairs that didn’t get hit by the blast because that’s what I am hearing form your OP
If you read the second comment on the thread you will see what Im saying. Its always valuable to read the whole thread before commenting.
Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by captiva
Then how about you humour me
Do you believe that at the Boston Marathon last week there were 2 explosions originating from bombs placed at the scene contained in backpacks?
A simple yes or no will suffice
I only ask so I can ascertain your views on this as it will make it easier to discuss.
Originally posted by captiva
The 2nd blast outside "The Forum" during the Boston Marathon, 1 of 2 blasts resulting in 3 deaths and 14 leg amputations did not damage any of the foam chairs, the legs of the chairs, and there are still salt and pepper jars and a plastic cup on the table........ Surely an explosion that ripped through leg tissue would have ripped through cushion foam on chairs, I think so....
edit on 22-4-2013 by captiva because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by captiva
I am not playing games I am asking a very simple question that you have yet to answer
Yes or no
Do you believe that there were two explosions last week at the Boston Marathon that originated from bombs concealed in backpacks?
I am asking for clarity because this is the second thread you have created that seems to question the existence of these explosions.
Originally posted by captiva
reply to post by Hefficide
I say impossible. You cant state that the explosion was powerfull enough to dismember people then say it was not powerfull enough to rip a foam chair or remove items from a table. We agree to disagree.
Originally posted by captiva
Originally posted by Hawking
Apparently you're not real familiar with shrapnel
Is shrapnel able to choose what it hits? no... your argument is illogical.
Originally posted by billy565
Maybe just maybe the chairs and tables were inside the bldg. and were moved outside after the blast? Also could it be the investigators were thirsty and set their cups on the table?
I know it sounds crazy but I'm just using a little common sense which is lacking in this thread.edit on 22-4-2013 by billy565 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by andy1972
If the bomb was meant to cause maximum death and desolation (which i suppose is what its meant to do under the circumstances that it was made for an act of terror) that still leaves a question open for me.
Apparantly, according to the FBI, the bomb was too sophisticated for the brothers too make by themselves, and by this, they deduced that there had to be more people involved.
If the people involved, those who made the explosive artifact, were actually skilled in what they were doing, then surely they would have known that the type of explosive (reloading powder, right?) they used was of of little power compared to semtex, C4 or dynamite, hence the need to use the pressure cooker to maximise it's effects.
If the above is true, then why did they leave the bombs outside in the street...
Why not -
Leave the bomb/s inside forum, let the blast bounce of the walls kill everyone inside and use the glass and metal from inside the bar as added shrapnel to triple the effect on those only meters away outside and kill and maim even more people.
After all thats what bombs are for...right!!
Leaving the bomb outside, knowing its scant explosive power would be even less deadly in a wide open space,makes no sense to me..
For me leaving the artifact outside served only two purposes -
1 - to be seen, to be grusome and loud, filled with fire and smoke and to be taped and photographed by the most people possible, making this a tremendously televised event for the worlds press to show the threat of terrorism still exists in the USA, meanwhile killing the minimum number of people possible, yet still leaving enough victims and wounded to enrage a terror filled nation.
2 - Leaving the bomb outside MAXIMISED the chances of cameras, security videos and witnesses to the act.
It almost guaranteed that the face of the two kids would be on camera, thus making the hunt quicker.
Anyone remember that when J.D. Tippet got shot, almost automatically a description fitting exactly that of Oswald was used as a BOLO by the Dallas P.D.
Even though the 3 o 4 witness to the act gave different stories.
This was the same thing..the suspects were already prepared.
edit on 22-4-2013 by andy1972 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by billy565
Maybe just maybe the chairs and tables were inside the bldg. and were moved outside after the blast? Also could it be the investigators were thirsty and set their cups on the table?
I know it sounds crazy but I'm just using a little common sense which is lacking in this thread.edit on 22-4-2013 by billy565 because: (no reason given)