It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Yet another video showing inexplicable behavior at Boston Bombing

page: 8
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 28 2013 @ 09:55 PM
reply to post by winofiend

Another bot warning.

posted on Apr, 28 2013 @ 10:01 PM

Originally posted by manmental
reply to post by Eterne

you are a sick person.

why post that?

what link to the thread?

are you just trying to get a reaction?

or guage reactions?

I was hoping to have a civil discussion on this thread
insulting someone without adding content really detracts from what ever point you may think you are trying to make...

posted on Apr, 28 2013 @ 10:07 PM

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Danbones

There is a bunch of debris around. I didn't see anything that appeared to me to look like a drill. It looks like both civilians and first responders trying to help a wounded guy, and the narration is done by a clearly Russian woman.

The Responder is holding a blanket and throws it over the victim. Then later they show them hovering over the guy on the street and you can see the edge of the blanket at his feet.

edit on 28-4-2013 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

that certainly sums up the nothing happening here side very well
star that

posted on Apr, 28 2013 @ 10:08 PM
reply to post by Danbones

this is my point...

people on ATS, maybe you, said this showed an 'actor' after the bombing.
this clip proves its a HERO trying to help

rather than dealing with the elephant in your room they/you seem to try and show that innocent people are somehow implicated in something their/your evil imaginations come up with

edit on 28-4-2013 by manmental because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 01:39 AM

Originally posted by Danbones
An observant person noticed that in this video there is someone doing a Drill type action

what do you make of this ATS?

What I think of it? nothing its maybe dust used to sock up the blood, oh there was no blood right. Come on. All this paranoid dark thinking it going over board. Why don't you call the FBI and ask what that bag was used for and then let us know.

posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 06:43 AM
Good Lord, what on Earth is coming to the world when something clearly out-of-place and weird (breaking a bag to cause dust to settle over victims of an atrocity..) is being explained away in ridiculously unbelievable terms of it having been a 'hospital blanket' being unfurled.

Here's a few points to mull over:

a) Why 'hospital blanket'..? Why not simply 'blanket'..? Is it in order to appeal to the subconscious emotions of those you are trying to convince?

b) Who on earth believes that you open a blanket by hitting it very hard, as though you were, I dunno, trying to burst a bag which is hermetically sealed, containing powder that proceeds to explode outwards due to the laws of physics in operation - when a pressurised bag is burst (think of an inflated paper bag exploding when hit between the palms of your hands) the release of pressure would cause a scattergun dispersion of any particulate in the bag.

If you believe that a blanket, hospital or otherwise, can be unfurled by hitting a big red panic button on the side of it, causing it to unfurl itself as though it were one of those auto-inflating rubber dinghies, then you are flawed in your capacity to think properly. Either that, or you want to pretend that the bag - which contains a beige-colored dust and which is being burst over the victims - is in fact not a bag, but rather a 'hit in an emergency' blanket with technical wizardry way beyond the needs of a blanket, hospital or otherwise, for nefarious reasons (in order to further dupe the world that there was nothing suspicious about the Boston bombings..)

c) Why have the debunkers devolved to the point of calling persons who question a very suspicious incident as 'evil', IE the person who said that conspiracy theorists have 'evil imaginations'..? Is this the last-ditch emergency debunking tool in the handbook? Anyone who doesn't buy the half-baked and feeble explanations covering for those perpetrating an (actually evil) false flag terror incident, somehow has an 'evil imagination' for refusing to buy the BS..? Seriously? You guys are from another planet, I swear. I thought people on this forum had a sense of common decency & humanity. I must have been wrong.

So remember guys - in an emergency, hit the big red panic button on your readily available hospital blanket. Be warned though, that you are likely to cover yourselves in Bull&%@t in the process. If you don't believe me, you have an evil imagination..!!!

posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 07:13 AM
This is strange indeed, what possible excuse did that guy have to throw all that dust substance around.

posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 08:43 AM
reply to post by wlasikiewicz

I dont see dust. I see a blanket, which would be on hand. Ive run many marathons, and they always have these space blankets to keep you warm after the race ends. Its not dust, but just a space blanket.

Also the space blankets would be readily available at the finish line!

edit on 29-4-2013 by Ender58 because: Added comment

posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 12:30 PM
Crappy I know, but here's a gif showing that amazing auto-unfurling 'hospital' blanket...(by which, of course, I mean the action by which one might burst a bag full of particulate which you intend to shower all over people in front of you...)

And here's a gif showing how you would actually unfurl a blanket in real life...

Yes, the quality of my three-drawing-per-gif animation is awful; however, the salient points are as follows:

a) In real life, unfurling the blanket from a folded (or even crumpled) state would involve having both hands together in front of the body, around waist level, before throwing both hands up simultaneously, still together, then lowering both hands down simultaneously, still together, in order for the momentum to unfurl the blanket, as per the second linked gif.

b) With regards to the first linked gif, which is representative of the actions of the man in the video which this thread is all about: In no way whatsoever, by any stretch of the imagination*, would unfurling a blanket entail having both hands raised to chest height, reaching in opposite directions away from the chest on each side of the torso (making a crucifix pose), with one blanket in one hand and another item in the other hand, before violently hitting your two hands together with the full force of the inward swing from both outstretched arms at point of connection, in front of your sternum (as though you were bursting an inflated paper bag..) In all truth, such an action would most certainly not 'unfurl a blanket' - it would result in the blanket falling limply to the floor in front of you (if you were lucky, you might achieve the insulation of your own feet - but you'd be no damn good to the injured person lying on the floor a few steps away from where you're standing...)

* unless you lived in a parallel universe where the laws of physics were different...

Hopefully my point is clear. That man in the video is not 'unfurling a hospital blanket' - he is in fact bursting a bag full of beige-colored dusty particulate, which proceeds to shower all over the victims and first responders in his immediate vicinity. Why he would do this, is simply unfathomable according to the ordinary terms of engagement with victims in an emergency first aid situation.


Why would you throw a shedload of dust all over injured people?

The only reason I can conceive is that the addition of dust made for a more shocking 'warzone' impression in the photographs & video footage taken soon after the blasts went off. As stated before, the bombs themselves were 'clean' and no masonry was destroyed by their detonation. Therefore, where did all the dust come from, which covered from head to toe the victims being wheeled away - of whom video footage & pictures were being taken for news reports & newspapers?

It came from people bursting bags full of that dust, immediately after the blasts, when the chaos and confusion of horrendous injuries, abundant blood spatter & adrenaline-fuelled first responders led to a situation in which the bags could be burst without anyone really noticing the action which led to the dust raining down. The persons injured wouldn't know what had happened; the first responders would be too attentive to treating the injured. It would be assumed that the dust was a by product of the explosion, even though it appeared after the event.

posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 12:32 PM
Jesus, I can't believe people are still claiming dust was thrown.

I posted a complete scientific breakdown of the video and why people are mistaking it for dust, add to that pictures of the scene with plenty of blood TOWELS and other stuff but ZERO dust.

I'm in shock at this mentality of wanting so much to see a false flag that every thing is ripped up.

Elements of this disaster are odd but I would be an idiot to just look for every little movement as a proof of a false flag.

It just makes me wonder how so many people can claim to be critical thinkers when so clearly blinkered that you refuse total PROOF that it was a guy who had towels in his hand 1 sec before the apparent powder incident, he's seen throwing a large white object but as its poor quality and by the look of it digitally zoomed in on which in itself destroys the quality of the picture, I then proved that the powder effect was actually just a repeat of the towel but in even lower res.

But no, its powder because you want it to be...

Worse still, you have convinced yourself to accept that lie therefore making whatever argument you have totally flawed.

Fact: he throws a solid object.
Fact: The video is poor quality and is cut before the towel goes out of sight.
95% Sure: That the video is digitally fully zoomed in thus rendering it full of artifacts created by the camera ie noise pixels which could look a litle like animated dust BUTwe have to discard that because they are all over the picture.

Fact The side bars are small sections of the same video that are running in time to the video.
Fact: The towel in the video seems to merge / flow into the side bar that is blurred.
Fact: It only seems to merge as we know for a fact that its merely the towel hitting the edge of the screen in both the side bar and the video, they are side by side.

Fact: If you cover the side bar the impression of powder goes away.

But sod all that fact and say its powder...

There many villages missing a certain character...Sorry, not trying to be rude but leaving your mind so far open the brain falls out is daft.
edit on 29-4-2013 by Mclaneinc because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 01:31 PM
reply to post by Mclaneinc

You know what, you are being rude, and it is deliberate. You're appealing to a pseudo authority (you) as having posted an excellent 'scientific' breakdown, and yet you quite clearly haven't addressed the way in which his actual movements don't correlate to the action of unfurling a blanket.

The fact is, your 'facts' do not explain the positions/motions of his hands when he 'unfurls' the magic blanket.

The point regarding him 'holding towels' in the moments prior to the dust shower, doesn't actually change a damn thing about the dynamic actions carried out, which would not 'unfurl a blanket' (except now it's apparently towels, not a blanket...)
No, his actions would not unfurl a blanket, they would actually cause a blanket (or towels, whatever) to fall limply to his own feet.

Now what towels might achieve, conversely, is a convenient and sensible means by which he might conceal a bag of dust held in his hand.

On striking his hands together, the bag of dust explodes, causing an ejection of the particulate. In no way does anything shown in the video suggest that he is unfurling a blanket (sorry, was it a towel? Wait - you said plural towels, right..?) No, the action of bringing hands together violently from outstretched 'crucifix pose' at a point in front of your sternum would not unfurl anything, be it towel, towels, or the original suggestion of a hospital blanket. I'm assuming 'space blanket' has been dropped already because we'd have seen the metallic glint, right?

If you look at the creepy gifs I posted above, you will see the actions required to either:

a) Burst a bag of particulate (concealed with towels in hand, so it would seem...)


b) Unfurl a 'blanket', a ''towel', or plural 'towels'. By the way, if the guy's actions were supposed to have unfurled plural towels, he'd have quite possibly ended up looking like he was juggling the damn things rather than making himself useful.

Seriously. Why so many people jumped onto this thread SO heavy-handed in their efforts to debunk what is quite clearly dust, I cannot possibly guess.

Oh - with regards to the '95% sure' BS claim regarding the way the camera is 'totally zoomed in thus eliminating any detail' [paraphrased] - why can I see the smallest facial features of every single person in the frame, if the resolution is so crappy? Why is it that the only area, the only aspect of the image which is (allegedly, according to Debunker Number 32) blurred, is the supposed 'miracle red panic button self-inflating hospital blanket/ space blanket/ towel/ towels'...???

In actual fact, based on the readily available features of many other aspects of the video (facial features, patterns on clothing, hair length, etc) what appears for all the world as an explosion of dust, simply looks dusty - it doesn't look like a 'blurred unfurling..[insert favourite nonsense 'sheet-type item' here]...'

You know, some people just want to be able to believe everything the TV tells them. So sad, but true. Even when you can prove that someone, possibly not the government, but someone, had a hand in manipulating a terror incident in ways that demonstrate tremendous foresight, even down to the finer details (such as those which we might expect Hollywood Special FX insiders to comment upon, perhaps if they were consulted at any secret meetings, being asked regarding the prospect of pulling off a 'wag the dog' sort of arrangement on the back of a relatively minor pair of explosions) - even the finest of details - such as whether we would be more shocked if the injured people looked like they had been pulled out of a very dusty exploded building, perhaps even reminiscent of the fateful date of... 9/11.

Yup. Lot of dust around then, wasn't there?

And so, if anything would cause the subconscious of Americans to reel in terror, scaling up the fear factor, the outrage factor, and the 'something must be done' factor, it would be anything that harked back to the imagery of 9/11.

Such as victims who were bloodied, dazed, and covered in dust.

Yes, explosions happened in Boston. Yes, people were injured. Yes, the overall thing was stage-managed & carefully presented to the media & watching world with myriad subconscious triggers, including shedloads of dust on the victims. After the event, the story touted to the press was rewritten a number of times, and there were a bunch of inconsistencies. That's because the scriptwriters were responding in real-time to the civilian evidence which was making its way onto the web. Even after the story was finalised, bits and pieces of new evidence was being uploaded & then analysed online. Perpetual case management required? As per 9/11.

As they say, the devil is in the DETAIL. Any good TV/ Film producer will tell you that details make or break the believability of a production.

posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 01:44 PM
reply to post by FlyInTheOintment

I realised that in my above post I had not mentioned the people who died. I do have the utmost sympathy for anyone who was affected by the explosions in Boston, and similarly for all those who were injured/ who died or went missing on 9/11.

Please do not take my condemnation of pseudo-skeptic debunkers to be some sort of indictment that I have no decency or sense of empathy for humanity. In fact, it is because I am passionate about the truth, and about the resistance of tyranny, and about the original rights of Man, that I won't accept half-baked excuses or BS spin, or appeals to authority, or appeals to whatever, whenever those appeals do not have the utmost truth as their core raison d'etre.

I fear that we have seen the birth, or the coming of age, of a new wave of 'in it for the long haul' pseudo-debunkers, who were installed on ATS prior to the attacks, and who will specifically root for the absence of conspiracy in any and all topics connected to Boston. In the same way that we had less subtle debunkers on the 9/11 forum, we will likely see the mature version of the cyber-warfare unit; persons who appeaer suddenly, with great avatars, and catchy signatures, who seem to fit in straight away and make loads of respected chums within a few weeks of being here. They spend those few weeks commenting in humorous but non-aggressive ways in regards to various subjects, spreading themselves quite evenly across a subject range, appearing disparate from one another, seemingly uninvolved with anyone's agenda..

Then Boston happens, and they all get to work. And they will stay hard at it for a long time yet.

NB - I do not necessarily claim that the people I have interacted with on this thread are acting in such a manner - it's just something that perhaps we at ATS should be aware of... Notice anyone who matches that description? I've seen several.

posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 02:24 PM
reply to post by lee anoma

When you shoot someone first how does that work.


Everything starts here.
edit on 29-4-2013 by Char-Lee because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 05:30 PM

Originally posted by winofiend
reply to post by Mr Mask

The problem I see with all of this is that it's based on faulty premises. One after the other they are piled on top and despite the first one being pulled out and proven wrong, they continue.

So what is the point of this? There is absolutely no way to know if he was simply trying to remove debris from something to be used to apply to a wound or any number of things. Ever thrown a lot of dust into the air in front of you, it tends to go everywhere. You don't often expect a mouth full of dust. We have no context to know what he was doing, what he was seeing or what he was saying.

Yet people here are grabbing hold of it and saying it's odd, inexplicable 'drill' behaviour. Adding yet MORE rubbish to the pile. There is no reason to look at this and ask questions unless you're looking for an answer, and as yet there is no damn question.

Everything so far has been proven wrong. Yet they ignore this, and continue to stack up their evidence and no matter how tedious and stupid the evidence is, it's twisted to make something bigger.

There is no mystery other than why the two maniacs did this. Yet people are accusing people of being intimately involved in this as part of a conspiracy to... something. And they're all in on it. "Why did he do it, did he not read the script?" ffs.

So forgive me if I have a short wick when this sort of thing seems to have such a huge fan base, who continually drag up proven wrong accusations, or claim expertise on things such as "that brick looks photoshooped. I know I can see pixels".

It's proving to me that the people I once read around here, are less than mentally capable of determining reality.

This is worse than a cult. It's trying to drag any innocent person looking for answers in a mucked up world, down with them, as they drown in their own insanity.

You should be banned for that imo,

You are attacking and name calling the core audience of this website.

You use every blatant shill technique to attempt to convince any readers that people who ask questions( what this board is for) are insane.

Sure there are extremists who believe anything, but I would say from reading the posts in this forum, 90% of the non shills, who are actually here to discuss theories, keep an open mind and don't "sign on" to random theories.

The only posts I ever see you make are simply to berate, and insult people who would investigate current events.

posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 05:42 PM
It is a marathon and runners do collapse close to the end of the run. So those two could have collapsed. But usually they wrap the runners in aluminum sheets and give them fluids. If anyone has crashed out, I'm sure the last thing they want is the shock from some nutter throwing buckets of talc (to absorb perspiration) or water up into the air.

posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 06:33 PM
I have just one question. Why does it seem like anything that can identify what agency or agencies are working at this scene has been blurred out?

I can't tell if this is Boston PD, LAPD, or even NYPD. Any identifying words on their vests seem to be obscured for some reason.

No way to tell if this is even the Boston bombing.

posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 06:49 PM
It's obviously some type of powder substance.

The shillery is strong in this thread....

posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 07:02 PM

Originally posted by Eterne
reply to post by manmental


Why are you reacting so aggressively ?
Calm down
Your rude and disgusting words do not deter us
We are here for the truth
My video above proves Actors are used by the government sponsored MSM to fool the citizens
Wake Up , you sheep . . . .

Just watched your vid.

No it doesn't "prove" actors were used.

It doesn't PROVE anything.

But yknow, new members trolling for ha-ha's at the expense of dead and wounded people.


posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 07:16 PM
Probably 'Quick Clot', a powder used to seal wounds quickly...
Come on folks, there are real mysteries out How Obama stays in office, or why professional welfare cheats can vote...oh yea, that is why he is still in office...

posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 07:35 PM
I watched this video over and over. There is no powder. The man is tossing sheets or blankets to someone. Whatever he carries up there he tosses to someone.

And I love ove how she states the gentleman kneeling turns away to avoid the dust. He turns to talk to someone behind him.

Wow. Clearly grasping for straws here. There is abolutely no conspiracy whatsoever related to this video.
edit on 29-4-2013 by IamAbeliever because: (no reason given)

<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in