Boston -staged pictures theory- busted.

page: 1
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 1 2013 @ 06:15 PM
link   
So this keeps getting brought up in the forum, commonly referencing the thread on cluesforum.info, graphic pictures at link -warning-, and the idea here is that people have uncovered the "evil government's" attempt to fake the Boston bombing by staging the whole things, using CGI and actors, etc.

I am only going to address one item in this thread, and to be honest, I don't think I would have the free time to tackle every asinine theory that came up in the threads on the forum that keep getting transplanted to ATS.

So first I will post here the current "Nutter Theory"

The pictures from when the IEDs went off must be fake, because they don't match up. So the only explanation is that the government staged the pictures and/or used photoshop.

The theory states that the three following pictures are impossible, especially when compared to the video, because the angles are not possible, and they don't match up to the video, so the scene must have been reenacted later or earlier (whichever one, not sure, doesn't matter) to get what we have out of it.







So compare pic 2 and 3 here that are full size. Obviously this shows that there was a photographer on the street with a wide angle lens, and one in the background, possibly on the raised railing near the finish line with a zoom lens.

The video this is compared to is found here:



Now, looking at the pictures it's clear they were taken only mere seconds or split seconds from one another. In the video during the time the pictures are taken, the videographer waves his camera around and honestly doesn't give us much to corroborate the scenes with.

That is of course until you slow the video down and go frame by frame. I'm doing this quick, so I didn't go into a video editor. I simply click stop and go on the YT video. But I was able to get the 7 officers caps at the top frames of the video.

Something the purveyors of this conspiracy claim isn't possible because the photo images are clearly faked to them. In fact, that's not the case, it's entirely normal, and just because a couple photos were taken mere seconds apart, that does not infer anything suspicious because an explosion just happened and everyone in the vicinity with any journalistic instinct is going to snap the hell out of the scene.

Sorry, but that ain't so strange.

The set up for this scene that was snapped by the still photographers begins at around 0.15 into the video and ends around 0.25

Some comments from the CT nuts are:





It's called a wide angled lens. Yes, those angles can be achieved. A fish eye lens can get even more from the peripheral if that was your intent. That's how wide angled lenses work. Sorry to burst the bubble.

Oddly enough the same evidence they are using to justify, prove, whatever, that this is some staged event. Is the same that ultimately debunks their assertions.

18:



19:



19:



20:



20:



20:



20:



20:








21:



Unmarked Times:







You can see all the people that are in the still pictures, in the moving video. I think except for the one guy in yellow to the right. This makes total sense as the video camera was not even aim in the direction of anyone in the stills, and only catches the tops of the police officers and the one gentleman in blue at the very early part of the sequence.

As soon as the 10 seconds or so that it took to get the still shots was over, people dissipated from their positions. In the other place online where people were accusing this to be staged, someone made a comment on the old man on the ground and "wouldn't his elbow get sore" just sitting there, or something along those lines. However, the sequence of the events is just 10 seconds long. Surely not long enough for someone to get tired or sore in that position.

As far as the angles on the lenses, in the stills taken, yes, nothing is out of the ordinary. The zoom lens from far away has a mildly different perspective on some things in the photo, the wide-angle up close, many things look slightly out of place because it is indeed a wide-angled lens and they stretch the perspective on everything.

The video was supposedly iron clad evidence that this course of events never took place but if you look through the stills I took from the video, you will see the heads or hats of all the officers in the still images. Even the black officer, (Who I figured would surely not be visible given where the video camera was pointing during the 10 second scene.)

So that's it.

Pretty simple, and pretty simple to explain. You can look over the evidence yourself.

1 down and 999 more nonsensical BS to go....
edit on 1-5-2013 by boncho because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 1 2013 @ 06:22 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


Hey Boncho check out this BS.

Stupid ole EMT.
edit on 1-5-2013 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 06:22 PM
link   
Good job, but you will never alter the mindset of these people who believe this false flag/staged bs.

Ive personally given up trying




posted on May, 1 2013 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by boncho
 


Hey Boncho check out this Bonhco BS.

Stupid ole EMT.


Unfortunately the femoral arteries are above the knee, not below it. If this is the standard "OMG the guy didn't lose his legs IRL cause there would be spurts of blood shooting out" than yeah, I'm not wasting my time. The majority of the case being made about him not being real is by internet sleuths who have trouble getting simple anatomy down.

If it isn't my apologies, I just scanned over it quick. It's time to get back to real work for me for a bit (The kind that pays the bills.)

Unlike the YT stars I don't get big bucks for dishing out bs online.



By the way Randy, Im not sure if you are supporting the link you posted, or condemning it. Please lemme know buddy. I appreciate your posts either/or.
edit on 1-5-2013 by boncho because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


Well the guys an EMT and you can't just gloss over it. You gots ta read.

Ya I was using sarcasm left over from RATS. I absolutely apologise to you
Bonch. You didn't even deserve that or have that coming.

HUMBLE and I do mean HUMBLE apologies.
edit on 1-5-2013 by randyvs because: (no reason given)
edit on 1-5-2013 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 06:45 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


Boncho, I am glad to see someone has taken up the fight to deny that these are actors and that people really did suffer horrific injuries, and some really did die.

Since April 15th I have seen more new accounts created and these new members have attacked veteran members that disagree with them. These new members have run roughshod over the "Deny Ignorance" motto here at ATS.

I find it disheartening that some of the forum staff have stood by while these new members attack those who don't see this as a false flag attack. This site has gone to $h!t over the past 16 days.

Keep up the good fight, Boncho.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 08:00 PM
link   


how can the shadow directions be reconciled here boncho?
(wait. let me guess. fish-arse lens?).

the thread is up to 50 pages now and what you have presented is a possible
plausible explanation but when all the other evidence gathered is assessed in
conjunction, the conclusions are inescapable.

why are you trying so hard here? you remind me of all the chemtrail
debunkers (you being one, of course).

boncho protesteth way too much, methinks!

edit on 1-5-2013 by OutonaLimb because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 09:11 PM
link   
I said it once before and I will say it again:

Why would "the government" take on the unnecessary complication of staging a bombing when they could just bomb people for real.

Why hire actors, photoshop photos, yadda yadda yadda when you could just detonate an actual bomb? To what end does STAGING a bombing yield better results???

I'm supposed to believe there's a government conspiracy surrounding this bombing and yet the conspiracy is so concerned for the welfare of people that a real bomb is out of the question?

Give me a break.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 10:34 PM
link   
So it happened. Doesn't mean that it's exactly like they say it is. Especially when the "bomber" and his uncle have proven family CIA ties with wives Katherine Russell and Samantha Fuller.


Boston Bombers’ Uncle Married Daughter of Top CIA Official

The uncle of the two suspected Boston bombers in last week’s attack, Ruslan Tsarni, was married to the daughter of former top CIA official Graham Fuller . Ruslan Tsarni married the daughter of former top CIA official Graham Fuller, who spent 20 years as operations officer in Turkey, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Afghanistan, and Hong Kong. In 1982 Fuller was appointed the National Intelligence Officer for Near East and South Asia at the CIA, and in 1986, under Ronald Reagan, he became the Vice-Chairman of the National Intelligence Council, with overall responsibility for national level strategic forecasting. ...


On a more ominous note, Graham Fuller was listed as one of the American Deep State rogues on Sibel Edmonds’ State Secrets Privilege Gallery,. Edmonds explained it featured subjects of FBI investigations she became aware of during her time as an FBI translator.

Criminal activities were being protected by claims of State Secrets, she asserted. After Attorney General John Ashcroft went all the way to the Supreme Court to muzzle her under a little-used doctrine of State Secrets, she put up twenty-one photos, with no names. One of them was Graham Fuller.


I presented CIA’s Graham Fuller as one of the top culprits in my State Secrets Privilege Case when the government invoked the State Secrets Privilege and several additional gag orders to cover up the FBI’s investigations and files pertaining to CIA-NATO terror operations in Central Asia & the Caucasus since the mid-1990s. Guess what? I provided this information to the US media long before it became public in 2008 via my website and this website.


www.boilingfrogspost.com...

Ok, so in case you missed it, the bombers uncles wifes father is a big CIA guy who was involved with "CIA Nato Terror Operations." Where? Central Asia and the Caucasus (that includes Chechnya) for the past 20 years.

And the older Tsarnaev brother with wife Katherine Russell...

From a Skull and Bones membership list:


Russell, Richard Warren 1951


www.biblebelievers.org.au...

That would be her grandfather. Funny that the Boston Bomber should be married to a family member of somebody that was in the same exclusive club as the Bush's and Cheneys. Nah, nothing to see there.


Tsarnaeva grew up with two younger sisters on a quiet cul-de-sac in North Kingstown, a rural, wooded town a 90-minute drive south from the apartment she would eventually share in Cambridge, Mass., with her husband and his family. Her father, Warren Russell, is an emergency doctor whose Facebook profile lists his high school alma mater as the elite New Hampshire boarding school Phillips Exeter Academy and college as Yale.


www.huffingtonpost.com...

From grandpa's obit to prove the family connection:


A graduate of Phillips Exeter Academy, Yale University and a graduate student at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology...He is survived by Katherine Wehmann Russell, his wife of 56 years; his children Dr. Warren King Russell II, Elizabeth Suzanne Russell, Margaret Warburg and Richard Andrew Russell


hosting-24281.tributes.com...

Hmmm...there's a Warburg family name in that obit too. Interesting.

And you know what? I didn't even need to site conspiracy websites to prove that connection.

So, like I said, big deal, so it really happened and did not include staged pictures, but ignore the man behind the curtain.
edit on 2-5-2013 by coyotepoet because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by otherpotato
I said it once before and I will say it again:

Why would "the government" take on the unnecessary complication of staging a bombing when they could just bomb people for real.

Why hire actors, photoshop photos, yadda yadda yadda when you could just detonate an actual bomb? To what end does STAGING a bombing yield better results???

I'm supposed to believe there's a government conspiracy surrounding this bombing and yet the conspiracy is so concerned for the welfare of people that a real bomb is out of the question?

Give me a break.


people are intrinsically the same. cooperation can far easier be attained for a mass hoax
over a mass murder. simple as. i don't understand what is so hard to understand here.
participants in these hoaxes are human and have families themselves.

here is a partial list of some more recent and proven hoaxes (if you open your brain
to the overwhelming evidence collated):

boston marathon, sandy hook, christopher dorner, aurora, trayvon martin,oslo and utoya,
tucson, fort hood etc.

and earlier ones:

9/11, 7/7, madrid train bombings, bali bombings, mumbai shootings, columbine,
waco, oklamhoma etc.

it has been going down like this for so long, why fix what isn't broken.

computer generated imaging capabilities are not being adequately considered
when it comes to images/footage released pertaining to these (non) events.

remember all phone networks were shut down in the area for the boston event so
that only controlled images would be released, uncontradictable by any real evidence
recorded.

www.cluesforum.info

you just got to put in the time to understand.



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 11:17 AM
link   
Can anyone post anything without attacking the 'Crazy Conspiracy theorist' i mean does keywords like 'Nutter theory' make your post more believable?



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Darth_Prime
Can anyone post anything without attacking the 'Crazy Conspiracy theorist' i mean does keywords like 'Nutter theory' make your post more believable?


The only thing that I would call a person a complete nutjob for in all of this would be if they were trying to pass off the theory that there were no explosions and that the bombs and injuries were all faked. People can debate who or why, thats fine. But faked? No, far from it.



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by otherpotato
I said it once before and I will say it again:

Why would "the government" take on the unnecessary complication of staging a bombing when they could just bomb people for real.

Why hire actors, photoshop photos, yadda yadda yadda when you could just detonate an actual bomb? To what end does STAGING a bombing yield better results???

I'm supposed to believe there's a government conspiracy surrounding this bombing and yet the conspiracy is so concerned for the welfare of people that a real bomb is out of the question?

Give me a break.


Welcome to the reality that screws up every good hoax theory and turns them all into complete bunk. The fact is that people will do things in the easiest way possible. It's human nature not to needlessly over complicate anything. Yet those who believe something like Boston was a hoax must suspend reality to believe each time TPTB engages in one of these hoaxes, they go out of their way to make it the most complicated process they can come up with. Further (and after so many repeated hoaxes on us) TPTB must be complete screw ups every single time in how they execute their hoax so that it is obvious to "the enlightened" (complete bs) that the event was indeed a hoax.

Consider the poster below you, Out On A Limb, for example. This person has figured out that every tragic event in the last 15 years or so have all been incredibly complex hoaxes. I'm not sure whether this person believes what he or she sees when walking out the front door. Obviously, the abundance of evidence suggests none of these were hoaxes. You can certainly question the stories, but they did indeed occur. Logic has left the building if you think everything is a hoax.

Nobody would develop such complex plans to fake an event. Literally the entire city of Boston would have to be in on the plan for it to work. Likewise, the entire population of New York City would have to be in on a faked airplane impact to the WTC buildings.



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 08:15 PM
link   
reply to post by usernameconspiracy
 


Your post has redeemed my faith in this site. Hallelujah...



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 09:26 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


Most of that stuff has already been debunked. There is also no proof that the femoral artery was severed. The guys legs were shredded below the knees and not cut off, in order to sever it it would need to have been higher and actually cut which may not have happened. Do you believe everything you read?



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 10:01 PM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


You're asking me, If I believe everything I read ? Lets just put it this way. The EMTs account of whats going on
in those stills, is far more plausible then what you want to believe.
edit on 2-5-2013 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


SEE! There you go proving my point!



The EMTs account of whats going on in those stills, is far more plausible then what you want to believe.


What EMT? The guy from a random forum that said he was an EMT? That is just you believing everything you read. Other EMTs have debunked that post. That post has been shredded.

You are just choosing ignorance. You aren't even thinking about it either. It's not like there is a great case to be made and lots of smart folks are being fooled.. it really says something about you that you believe this garbage.

Someone who says they're an EMT on a body building forum says something and you take it as gospel. Christ.. this site is getting more and more ignorant by the month. Also nice that you completely ignored my post and used deflection rather than answering what I said that discredits your EMT. Would you like me to have my friends (one a P.A. and one a nurse) come on and tell you why you are a fool for believing this tripe?

Also you say the EMT's explanation is far more plausible than what I want to believe. That's not true, but I will give you the chance to prove it, tell everyone what it is that I believe happened and why it is less plausible than what you believe which is actually the most ridiculous scenario one could imagine (you believe fake bombs went off and actors attached prosthetic injuries from one second to the other and were in collusion with an entire cities worth of people, first responders, cops, and hospitals - AND that there is not ONE undeniable/verifiable instance of proof - yeah that's reasonable
)
edit on 3-5-2013 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


This was not fake! My best friend was right down the road and felt the explosions! She was eating and they made everyone leave.....She was right down the road and one of the most scariest moments of my life!! I was on the phone with her and talking her through all of this madness.....

People calling fake have no clue to what they are saying!! These are the people that the public points out and gives us conspiracy theorists a bad rap!! There may be (MAY) a conspiracy around why....But these events happened I assure you

Good job Boncho!



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 11:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


You're asking me, If I believe everything I read ? Lets just put it this way. The EMTs account of whats going on
in those stills, is far more plausible then what you want to believe.
edit on 2-5-2013 by randyvs because: (no reason given)


Do you not question an EMT that does not even know where the femoral artery is? To me that seems like the idea that he is an EMT is BS.
edit on 3-5-2013 by boncho because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 11:26 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


As courtesy I'm going to sleep Boncho.. Get with you tomorrow ! Of course I questioned it. And still made the post.
edit on 3-5-2013 by randyvs because: (no reason given)





new topics
 
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join