Boston Marathon Bombs

[Gwenllian]

From the point of view of the average person in the street, or rather, the average person in the street for whom there is still a chance that they can be pulled out of the fire, to say that the Boston bombings or the SH shooting were "staged" by "actors", is precisely the same as saying that Barney the purple dinosaur was responsible. Basically, they simply CANNOT believe it, and will view anyone suggesting that as a complete loon.

Well yeah, but to be blunt those same people would probably think the same thing about anyone who used a Ouija board? I've not spent much of my life paying any attention to those people, basically because they're not paying attention to what's actually going on.

That message is to learn to discern between truth and lies and to use your critical thinking capacities at a time in history when being able to do so may mean the difference between life and death, not just for you, but for millions.

Exactly. So how do we do that without looking at the evidence? I'm not going to stop digging for facts because someone might think I'm a nut. The only evidence we have at this point is the frames taken from the first video that was posted, then removed. The fact that they were taken from a video, frame by frame, makes it highly unlikely they were photo-shopped yet.

I did a lot of reading before I even brought this up, because I knew what the emotional, knee jerk reaction would be. I blew each frame up and looked for any singeing on the pants that would indicate enough heat to cauterize BOTH femoral arteries. There was none. I looked at WAY too many pictures of actual traumatic amputations (mostly Palestinian :() Not ONE without massive blood loss.

The wheelchair guy is waving his stumps around in the air, and there is NO blood on his thighs yet. If his legs had been blown off, at LEAST the remnants of the bottom parts of his legs should have splattered on his thighs and pants? I'm not going to ignore that simply because someone who isn't looking so closely might call me a "loon"

So now what I think I'm seeing is that the government can slip in a plant, who may well become their poster child for the "War on Terror" and they aren't going to get called on it because of the PRIOR disinfo about crisis actors? How convenient.

Also I don't think people who are simply researching should be locked up. We all have researched many of theories on other events, why is this one different?

For me, I'm not promoting these ideas of actors, I'm watching and learning (as I've been taught here), thus when evidence comes in, it's easy for me to research and 'change my mind,' according to evidence.

I know for a fact that I have been very gullible up till now and I need this network and SOTT to help me rearrange my thoughts and ditch the garbage that was planted in my head.
That said, I did wonder about the blood, but didn't want to mention any doubts out of fear.

Out of fear for what, exactly?

:) Thanks for asking, Aragorn.

Fear of stepping out of line, fear of being a misfit and fear of being just plain wrong. That is conditioning for you. :( And I fear punishment.

 

[Atuya]

Personally, I am not inclined to use the actors in any discussion about the Boston affair. The bigger picture is that yet another false flag terrorism event has pushed the population into accepting greater amounts of state/military power and forfeiting what little common sense and critical thinking there might have been previously. The images of the bombing, the manhunt, the 'firefight', the 'celebrations' have been presented to manipulate the hearts and minds and reinforce/augment the incredibly precarious weakness of the american civilization.

However, the link to Dave's analysis did raise some interesting questions for me, including the cointelpro aspect of such a theory. Other questions I have concern the authenticity of Wheelchair guy and the absolutely perfect emotional effect of those photos. Real or fake, the propaganda value is indisputable.

IMO, Kniall and Perceval were quite quick to discount this aspect of the charade, and perhaps a bit emotional in their denunciations. Okay by me, I've always put great value on their analyses and experience. But Guardian's first-hand experience and skepticism are interesting and noteworthy in connection with the photos available. No footprints, lack of blood, dude standing there as if guarding the mortally wounded... As this point I am quietly keeping the position that Wheelchair guy is incredible, and if someone were to present the actors as proof, I would only point out that the whole affair is full of contradictions which create confusion and put the mind to sleep.

 

[Joe]

Also I don't think people who are simply researching should be locked up. We all have researched many of theories on other events, why is this one different? .

Because it should be obvious to everyone here that the "actors" idea is a deliberate effort by the perpetrators of the bombing to make anyone publicly stating that the bombing was a govt. operation look like a complete idiot.

 

[Joe]

Guardian, it sounds to me like you're pretty invested the actors theory and trying a bit too hard to prove that it's not only plausible, but in fact correct. I myself was about 50/50 on the issue until I read Psyche's comments, it's now about 20/80, or even 10/90. Why? Because for her this kind of thing is much closer to an "everyday experience" to reference from for her than it is for me, as well as that that opinion can be trusted based on the demonstration of her knowledge in the field, which is generally recognized by the forum.

Anyone, and I mean, ANYONE, could easily look up information from reliable sources on several of the points of alleged "evidence" of "actors" and come to the conclusion that the allegations are most likely hysterical hyperbole. I've already mentioned the color of blood twice, yet internet pundits carry on exclaiming that blood can NEVER be that color. The hard and fast statements by these same pundits about there being NO WAY that a person can survive such a double amputation, and that there would be blood EVERYWHERE is also fairly easily proven to NOT be the case. If people were actually interested in the truth, they could easily look at images of victims from other similar bombings, where no one has claimed there are any "actors", and see bright red blood and almost NO BLOOD from people with limbs amputated.

 

[Niall]

IEDs go off all the time all over the world, particularly in countries occupied by Western militaries or infiltrated by Western agents.

I wonder if Americans have latched on to the notion that their bombing was somehow different, more speshul, and more sophisticated because it happened in America, and not 'some Third World country'.

Alternatively, maybe they simply can't go there and accept that their government would really kill their own people, even though that very same government is always accusing other governments of killing their own people, which is usually propaganda written by the U.S. and other Western governments and which Americans readily accept without question.

Yes, Americans can accept that their government would scare people and stage a bombing... but actually go through with it? No, they would never do that!

 

[Joe]

IMO, Kniall and Perceval were quite quick to discount this aspect of the charade, and perhaps a bit emotional in their denunciations. Okay by me, I've always put great value on their analyses and experience. But Guardian's first-hand experience and skepticism are interesting and noteworthy in connection with the photos available. No footprints, lack of blood, dude standing there as if guarding the mortally wounded... As this point I am quietly keeping the position that Wheelchair guy is incredible, and if someone were to present the actors as proof, I would only point out that the whole affair is full of contradictions which create confusion and put the mind to sleep.

Well, when you see people that you value as comrades in a battle getting sucked in to a disinformation campaign, a person might get a little worked up. Then again, you might confuse someone deliberately trying to shock another person awake as them being "emotional".

 

[Gwenllian]

Guardian, it sounds to me like you're pretty invested the actors theory and trying a bit too hard to prove that it's not only plausible, but in fact correct. I myself was about 50/50 on the issue until I read Psyche's comments, it's now about 20/80, or even 10/90. Why? Because for her this kind of thing is much closer to an "everyday experience" to reference from for her than it is for me, as well as that that opinion can be trusted based on the demonstration of her knowledge in the field, which is generally recognized by the forum.

Anyone, and I mean, ANYONE, could easily look up information from reliable sources on several of the points of alleged "evidence" of "actors" and come to the conclusion that the allegations are most likely hysterical hyperbole. I've already mentioned the color of blood twice, yet internet pundits carry on exclaiming that blood can NEVER be that color. The hard and fast statements by these same pundits about there being NO WAY that a person can survive such a double amputation, and that there would be blood EVERYWHERE is also fairly easily proven to NOT be the case. If people were actually interested in the truth, they could easily look at images of victims from other similar bombings, where no one has claimed there are any "actors", and see bright red blood and almost NO BLOOD from people with limbs amputated.

You are right. Point taken.
The lesson that I have learnt today is that I still get confused and sucked in. Not for very long though, but still. I also project my own experiences and I should be aware of that. And I should research more before I express my opinion.

 

[Guardian]

Well, when you see people that you value as comrades in a battle getting sucked in to a disinformation campaign, a person might get a little worked up. Then again, you might confuse someone deliberately trying to shock another person awake as them being "emotional".

Interesting, because when you counter factual observations with insults and veiled threats, it has the exact opposite effect, at least for me. To me, it looks like you've just made up your mind about an idea, before this particular bombing even occurred, and now you're so invested in being "right" you don't even want to look at any evidence that suggests you aren't. Your responses sound like a person trying to bully someone into agreeing with them, even if that means ignoring the hard evidence that directly contradicts your OPINION. Insults, threats and other fear tactics have never stopped me from looking for the TRUTH, and I hope they never will.

Now I would have totally agreed with you about the "crisis actor" theory being disinfo BEFORE this latest bombing, but now I'm not at all sure that these particular Boston Bombing victims weren't plants. Just because the prior claims regarding Crisis Actors were disinfo, DOES NOT mean they didn't use Crisis Actors this time. In fact, they could have used Crisis Actors this time specifically because the idea had been completely debunked before this incident.

There is a good reason for the ptb to plant a victim or two...they need a Poster Child, kinda like how they rolled Brady around to promote the Brady bill. They certainly have the opportunity since they can do anything they want, and they have the personnel (_CrisisActors.org)

The fact is that there is visual evidence that directly contradicts my personal experience with a traumatic amputation. It's not just me either, there are experienced EMT's all over the web saying that what those pictures depict is simply not possible. A violent, double amputation is going to result in blood loss, and there are several pictures showing NO blood, not to mention no gore or any evidence of splatter, on the upper legs of the "victim" No amount of name calling is going to change this.

This was not a amputated finger or hand, which could result in very little blood, this was both legs, and in a few of those first frames, the stumps and the exposed tibia were completely dry. There has to be a reason for this.

NO offense to Psyche, but she's a surgeon and it sounds like she's never seen this type of injury until the person was brought to the hospital? The reality of rescue is that if bleeding is not immediately controlled in the field, the person is not likely to make it to a hospital. There are also quite a few drugs the medics have to help control bleeding on the scene and in the ambulance, long before the victim arrives at the hospital.

I've not made any mention of the color of the alleged "blood" because these are still frames taken from a video and the camera rendering, lighting, etc. can change the colors in an image. That is not reliable evidence, whereas the complete lack of blood in a double amputation is. The lack of foot prints in the fresh "blood" is also what I consider evidence that something is not right.

In a couple hours I'm going to call a friend of mine who has 30+ years experience as a Military Medic and civilian EMT to get a second opinion. He won't be biased simply because he doesn't even own a computer.

I've already done a web search looking for any EMT, First Responder, Field Medic, etc. who has ever seen a bloodless traumatic, double amputation and come up empty. What I have seen, over and over again, is that wheelchair guy should have at least puked and passed out if he went that long without someone controlling the bleeding.

The fact that he is presented as conscious, alert, and relatively clean appears to be actually "waking up" some experienced medical personnel who've never even considered the "False Flag" scenario before....which I find very interesting.

Again, I'm looking for facts, and so far hon, all you are (very rudely) telling me is your very emotional sounding opinion... based on what, I do not know? I THINK the "logic" you're presenting here is that because the prior claims of Crisis Actors being used were total disinfo, that this case involving wheelchair guy must be too? That doesn't make any sense to me, but I think that's what I'm hearing you say?

Directly dealing with psychopaths for 30+ years has taught me that they are VERY tricky. They reinvent themselves and their "game" over and over again. What they did or said yesterday might not, and often is not, what they will do or say today. What was disinfo at Sandy Hook could EASILY be the truth in Boston if the psychos want to create an iconic spokesman for their evil cause.

So far, that is the best theory I've heard that explains a man who's had both his legs blown off, but doesn't have any blood on the stumps, or himself, or his rescuer until he's wheeled out for the perfect photo op...and even then, there's just a few smudges.

 

[Guardian]

Anyone, and I mean, ANYONE, could easily look up information from reliable sources on several of the points of alleged "evidence" of "actors" and come to the conclusion that the allegations are most likely hysterical hyperbole.

Absolutely, which would make it the perfect time to plant their Poster Boy.

 

[Joe]

I'm not sure where you getting the "rudeness" and "threats and veiled insults" from Guardian, I wasn't insulting anyone here if you read what I wrote without prejudice.

All of my points are directed at the morass of internet pundits, and just about every other "alt news" site that have taken up the "actors" claim and proclaimed that there is clear evidence of fakery etc. My point has been that this is NOT the case. I am not the one making these exceptional claims, I am simply pointing out that to make these claims as if they are hard fact is bogus.

You say that the wheelchair guy "went that long without someone controlling the bleeding" but I can find no evidence that he went any significant length of time in that state. There is the image of him lying among other people in what appears to be the immediate aftermath of the bombing, i.e. within maybe thirty seconds. The cowboy hat guy is there looking at him. Then cowboy hat guy is seen climbing over the barrier. Then he is seen in the "iconic" image being wheeled up the street in the wheelchair with the "tourniquet" on his leg. As I mentioned, there were very likely wheelchairs at the finish line, very close to where the bomb went off, and "first aid" personnel.

Considering the info I included a few posts ago about the way the body reacts to amputation, and the fact that the body can, by itself, prevent blood-loss, coupled with some impromptu first aid, my point is that for anyone to declare that there is no way that this guy could be alive like that in the wheelchair does not hold up.

Then there's this:

http://www.today.com/id/26834245/ns/today-today_news/t/man-cut-nearly-two-train-life-good/#.UYRFwcoTb0X

For man cut nearly in two by train, ‘life is good’

For more than two years after he was cut in half by a train, Truman Duncan avoided media requests for interviews as he recovered from his injuries and went back to a full and productive life. Now, he’s speaking out to let others, including soldiers who have suffered traumatic injuries like his, know that life is still very much worth living.

The 38-year-old from Cleburne, Texas, pronounced this from a wheelchair, the stub of his right thigh showing from his pants leg.

Duncan is breaking his media silence now, he said, “just to let people know how I’m doing. I had so many people inquiring. And to help soldiers who are having a little bit of trouble — they’ve lost their limbs — and let them know life is good, goes on, you know.”

‘I think I’m cut in two’

A video had just aired that recounted the horrific June 2006 accident that took the rest of Duncan’s right leg as well as his left leg, pelvis and kidney. The railroad switchman fell off a moving train car at the Gunderson Southwest rail yard in Cleburne.

For some 20 seconds, Duncan hung onto the car, trying to run backward to escape being run over. But he fell underneath the car, got caught in the undercarriage, and was run over by steel wheels supporting 20,000 pounds of dead weight.

Remarkably, he remained conscious and had the presence of mind to call 911 on his cell phone. On the 911 tape, he sounds out of breath but remarkably calm.

“I need 911. I think I'm cut in two,” Duncan says on the tape.

“Someone got run over?” the operator asks.

“It was me,” Duncan responds. “I guess I'm going into shock. Hurry up, ma'am, because I'm about to pass out.”

It took 45 minutes for responders to arrive and extricate Duncan from under the train. Despite massive blood loss, he stayed conscious and even managed to call his family while he was waiting to be rescued.

Again, what I find frustrating, is to see people declaring that something is virtually impossible and then making theories based on that, when it seems that there is hard evidence that it is not impossible, and therefore the theories are flawed.

 

[Joe]

I suppose there's maybe a difference between the way I approach an alleged "conspiracy" and the way others do. My approach is to look at the theory for "conspiracy" and first try and disprove it by looking for any and all non-conspiratorial explanation. What I'm left with after that that cannot be explained in that way is what I figure I have to work with.

 

[Guardian]

I'm not sure where you getting the "rudeness" and "threats and veiled insults" from Guardian, I wasn't insulting anyone here if you read what I wrote without prejudice.

Well, you're calling anyone who disagrees with you a "loon" and an "idiot" and saying they should be "locked up" ...and I don't agree with you.

In my experience, when someone resorts to name calling, it's usually because they don't have any real evidence.

Considering the info I included a few posts ago about the way the body reacts to amputation, and the fact that the body can, by itself, prevent blood-loss, coupled with some impromptu first aid,

None of those posts dealt with both femoral arteries being severed, which is COMPLETELY different from losing a finger, or even a hand.

Then there's this:

http://www.today.com/id/26834245/ns/today-today_news/t/man-cut-nearly-two-train-life-good/#.UYRFwcoTb0X
For man cut nearly in two by train, ‘life is good’

"and was run over by steel wheels supporting 20,000 pounds of dead weight."

I'm aware of this case, and several like it. This was a crushing injury, where the weight of the train crushed his body, which would have stopped the worst of the blood flow.
So far, you're comparing apples to oranges.

Again, what I find frustrating, is to see people declaring that something is virtually impossible and then making theories based on that, when it seems that there is hard evidence that it is not impossible, and therefore the theories are seriously flawed.

What hard evidence that it is not impossible? So far, you've provided links to descriptions of lost finger and hands, and one guy who was CRUSHED by a train, which would pinch off the femoral arteries.

I'm still looking for even ONE photo of someone who's had their legs blown off without getting a drop of blood on the remaining stumps?

 

[Guardian]

I suppose there's maybe a difference between the way I approach an alleged "conspiracy" and the way others do. My approach is to look at the theory for "conspiracy" and first try and disprove it by looking for any and all non-conspiratorial explanation. What I'm left with after that that cannot be explained in that way is what I figure I have to work with.

Me too, and so far, I have not found any other explanation for how a man can have both legs blown off and not get any blood on the stumps, or the protruding bone, or his pants, or his hands, etc.

 

[Joe]

Well, you're calling anyone who disagrees with you a "loon" and an "idiot" and saying they should be "locked up" ...and I don't agree with you.

In my experience, when someone resorts to name calling, it's usually because they don't have any real evidence.

That was in reference to the morass of internet pundits who have basically cornered the market on the Boston bombings. While I respect your experience, I think you're being a bit disengenous here, because I have provided evidence for my case that their sure-fire conviction is unfounded.

None of those posts dealt with both femoral arteries being severed, which is COMPLETELY different from losing a finger, or even a hand.

Then there's this:

http://www.today.com/id/26834245/ns/today-today_news/t/man-cut-nearly-two-train-life-good/#.UYRFwcoTb0X
For man cut nearly in two by train, ‘life is good’

"and was run over by steel wheels supporting 20,000 pounds of dead weight."

I'm aware of this case, and several like it. This was a crushing injury, where the weight of the train crushed his body, which would have stopped the worst of the blood flow.
So far, you're comparing apples to oranges.

The articles states that he had "massive blood loss". "actors" proponents have stated that there is no way that wheelchair man could have survived that long because he would have bled to death in a "matter of minutes".

Again, what I find frustrating, is to see people declaring that something is virtually impossible and then making theories based on that, when it seems that there is hard evidence that it is not impossible, and therefore the theories are flawed.

What hard evidence that it is not impossible? So far, you've provided links to descriptions of lost finger and hands, and one guy who was CRUSHED by a train, which would pinch off the femoral arteries.

The hard evidence that it is not impossible to have massive blood loss, both legs amputated, and survive to tell the story. Also, the links I provided did not mention specifically fingers and hands, they refer to "complete amputation" of a "body part" and say that "cut blood vessels may spasm, pull back into the injured part, and shrink. This slows or stops the bleeding."

I think you're still missing my point Guardian, that the surety with which certain internet pundits proclaim that wheelchair man is definitely an actor because of A, B and C is unjustified.

 

[Joe]

If the bomb exploded at ground level and was designed to inflict damage outwards rather than upwards, then it seems that this guy's legs were literally blown off, including all of the skin and flesh around the bone that was left sticking out. There's plenty of blood in this image.