Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

RTE Coverage of the Boston Bombing Trial

24

Comments

  • #32
    ectoraige
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,105 ✭✭✭ectoraige


    OP, how do we know those videos you posted are from that day? They could have been made afterwards by somebody else, maybe the Russians, or Angela Merkel, to *look* like what happened in Boston. How do we even know Boston exists? I've never been there, have you? Has anybody?


  • #33
    AndyBoBandy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,159 ✭✭✭✭AndyBoBandy


    This ^^^^


  • #34
    omnithanos
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 710 ✭✭✭omnithanos


    OK guys we've now established that there definitely is a conspiracy and we have two theories on what that conspiracy is.

    My contention is that there is a government cover up and the bombing was staged and fake.

    The good people who discount this theory have put forward that the youtube videos which drove me to my conclusion have been faked which in itself exposes a conspiracy. The problem with this suggestion is that there doesn't seem to be any concerted effort to debunk the theory of faked youtube videos made to discredit the establishment.

    The following video either exposes the boston bombing as a fake or proves that people are making fake videos to discredit the official story. This video can't exist unless either the bombings were faked or this video was faked.

    Considering the overwhelming number of these such videos my question is which is the most logical conclusion?

    The following video shows a little girl, who had her leg amputated, standing immediately after the bomb went off. Also notice how the others, what I call crisis actors, are getting ready to move into their assigned crisis positions.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXpJWke2Zso


  • #35
    AndyBoBandy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,159 ✭✭✭✭AndyBoBandy


    omnithanos wrote: »
    OK guys we've now established that there definitely is a conspiracy and we have two theories on what that conspiracy is.

    My contention is that there is a government cover up and the bombing was staged and fake.

    The good people who discount this theory have put forward that the youtube videos which drove me to my conclusion have been faked which in itself exposes a conspiracy. The problem with this suggestion is that there doesn't seem to be any concerted effort to debunk the theory of faked youtube videos made to discredit the establishment.

    The following video either exposes the boston bombing as a fake or proves that people are making fake videos to discredit the official story. This video can't exist unless either the bombings were faked or this video was faked.

    Considering the overwhelming number of these such videos my question is which is the most logical conclusion?

    The following video shows a little girl, who had her leg amputated, standing immediately after the bomb went off. Also notice how the others, what I call crisis actors, are getting ready to move into their assigned crisis positions.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXpJWke2Zso


    That video is just a wack job clutching at the same straws your desperately trying to grab!

    just let it go..


  • #36
    witchgirl26
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,337 ✭✭✭witchgirl26


    omnithanos wrote: »
    OK guys we've now established that there definitely is a conspiracy

    No we really haven't. Definitively proving a conspiracy is quite difficult so if you have done such a thing, then fair play but I don't see any hard evidence to suggest that.
    omnithanos wrote: »
    My contention is that there is a government cover up and the bombing was staged and fake.

    Why would they do this? Honestly why pick Boston? Why not the New York Marathon? Why have the death toll so low if they wanted to make people afraid?
    omnithanos wrote: »
    The good people who discount this theory have put forward that the youtube videos which drove me to my conclusion have been faked which in itself exposes a conspiracy. The problem with this suggestion is that there doesn't seem to be any concerted effort to debunk the theory of faked youtube videos made to discredit the establishment.

    Why should there have to be a concerted effort to debunk something if you don't believe it to be real. I've seen some cat videos on youtube that are definitely faked, but you know what, I've better things to be doing than trying to get a concerted effort together to debunk them. Same here.
    omnithanos wrote: »
    The following video either exposes the boston bombing as a fake or proves that people are making fake videos to discredit the official story. This video can't exist unless either the bombings were faked or this video was faked.

    Considering the overwhelming number of these such videos my question is which is the most logical conclusion?

    The following video shows a little girl, who had her leg amputated, standing immediately after the bomb went off. Also notice how the others, what I call crisis actors, are getting ready to move into their assigned crisis positions.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXpJWke2Zso

    So the video either proves you wrong or everyone else. Which is it?

    There can be hundreds of videos up claiming something but it doesn't make it true. It just means there are lots of videos. Also people can have many different youtube accounts so could be posting similar enough videos through them & thus leading to a large number of those videos being online. Again does not make them true.

    Can't watch the video as not in work but you are not really giving anything here except conjecture.

    Unless you have irrefutable proof that what RTE is reporting is not the truth as it is commonly accepted and can thus present that to the Broadcasting Authority, then really you can't say that they are deliberately misleading the public.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    ectoraige
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,105 ✭✭✭ectoraige


    omnithanos wrote: »
    OK guys we've now established that there definitely is a conspiracy and we have two theories on what that conspiracy is.

    My contention is that there is a government cover up and the bombing was staged and fake.

    The good people who discount this theory have put forward that the youtube videos which drove me to my conclusion have been faked which in itself exposes a conspiracy. The problem with this suggestion is that there doesn't seem to be any concerted effort to debunk the theory of faked youtube videos made to discredit the establishment.

    Actually, those videos could have been faked by a single person who hired loads of people for a "movie" and then killed them all. Could have poisoned the catering food. No conspiracy, just a lone "gunman", so to speak.


  • #38
    Harry Palmr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 40,061 ✭✭✭✭Harry Palmr


    How the hell is this thread still open?


  • #39
    omnithanos
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 710 ✭✭✭omnithanos


    Ok guys this video is fairly comprehensive but as most of you seem inclined to accept disinformation as fact I doubt you'll bother watching it since it's nearly half an hour long.

    This one mainly discredits the boston bombing poster boy using real footage. You may disagree with the medical opinion which starts at about the 1 minute 50 second mark and think he's just a really tough dude.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-Vene1QNxc


  • #40
    ectoraige
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,105 ✭✭✭ectoraige


    omnithanos wrote: »
    Ok guys this video is fairly comprehensive but as most of you seem inclined to accept disinformation as fact I doubt you'll bother watching it since it's nearly half an hour long.

    This one mainly discredits the boston bombing poster boy using real footage. You may disagree with the medical opinion which starts at about the 1 minute 50 second mark and think he's just a really tough dude.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-Vene1QNxc

    How do you know it's real footage?


  • #41
    omnithanos
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 710 ✭✭✭omnithanos


    ectoraige wrote: »
    How do you know it's real footage?

    It uses the same images that were broadcast by the mainstream media.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    ectoraige
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,105 ✭✭✭ectoraige


    omnithanos wrote: »
    It uses the same images that were broadcast by the mainstream media.

    How do you know it's the same footage? It might be a very exacting re-enactment, or perhaps some CGI effects added to the original. Do you have the actual original images?


  • #43
    omnithanos
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 710 ✭✭✭omnithanos


    ectoraige wrote: »
    How do you know it's the same footage? It might be a very exacting re-enactment, or perhaps some CGI effects added to the original. Do you have the actual original images?

    https://www.google.ie/search?q=images+of+boston+bombing&es_sm=93&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=R7T-VNaJBMbm7gb5iYH4CQ&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1366&bih=667


  • #44
    ectoraige
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,105 ✭✭✭ectoraige


    omnithanos wrote: »
    https://www.google.ie/search?q=images+of+boston+bombing&es_sm=93&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=R7T-VNaJBMbm7gb5iYH4CQ&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1366&bih=667

    I don't know if I can trust Google - what if those are all fake pictures?


  • #45
    NewCorkLad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 962 ✭✭✭NewCorkLad


    omnithanos wrote: »
    Many of the same crisis actors have been identified in more than one government staged event of this nature such as 911, Boston, Sandy Creek etc..

    Are you really saying that Sandy Creek was staged aswell.

    Surely if these "crisis actors" have been identified at multiple staged events that would be easy to prove?


  • #46
    omnithanos
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 710 ✭✭✭omnithanos


    NewCorkLad wrote: »
    Are you really saying that Sandy Creek was staged aswell.

    Surely if these "crisis actors" have been identified at multiple staged events that would be easy to prove?

    Should be but who's gonna listen?

    This lady gets around
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmIrx9ey8u4

    Annie Haddad Is Nancy Lanza
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvkOE_F-mc8

    Sandy Hook, theatre shooting connection
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5rWBkd4JPk

    And again
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYUbqd5gaPs

    http://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2013/01/11/remarkable-resemblance-of-sandy-hook-victims-and-professional-crisis-actors/


  • #47
    flogen
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 10,247 Mod ✭✭✭✭flogen


    I've gotten a tonne of reports for this post suggesting it be moved to Conspiracy Theories.

    While I agree that the OP's claim is a conspiracy theory, I've decided to leave it here for a number of reasons.

    Firstly, the best way to put these theories to the test is to open them to scrutiny - that's not something they tend to get in forums specifically designed to host and encourage them but rather in places used to proper debate and discussion.

    Secondly, there is already a thread in that forum on this topic - so the options are either to keep it going here or just close it completely.

    Thirdly, and to a lesser extent, I'd hate to give this - or any other - conspiracy theorist the easy ammunition of claiming they were "censored" by "deh man".*

    It's up to everyone else to decide if they want to keep engaging on the topic to try and convince the other side of their point of view, or to stop (and let the thread die) if they feel as though they're wasting their time.

    * Though I'll happily run that risk of the thread crosses any of the usual lines - i.e. spamming, abuse etc.


  • #48
    omnithanos
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 710 ✭✭✭omnithanos


    flogen wrote: »
    I've gotten a tonne of reports for this post suggesting it be moved to Conspiracy Theories.

    While I agree that the OP's claim is a conspiracy theory, I've decided to leave it here for a number of reasons.

    Firstly, the best way to put these theories to the test is to open them to scrutiny - that's not something they tend to get in forums specifically designed to host and encourage them but rather in places used to proper debate and discussion.

    Secondly, there is already a thread in that forum on this topic - so the options are either to keep it going here or just close it completely.

    Thirdly, and to a lesser extent, I'd hate to give this - or any other - conspiracy theorist the easy ammunition of claiming they were "censored" by "deh man".*

    It's up to everyone else to decide if they want to keep engaging on the topic to try and convince the other side of their point of view, or to stop (and let the thread die) if they feel as though they're wasting their time.

    * Though I'll happily run that risk of the thread crosses any of the usual lines - i.e. spamming, abuse etc.
    I have put forward the notion that the boston bombing itself is the actual theory.
    I have also posted a link to this forum on the boston bombing thread of the conspiracy theory board with a brief summary of the reaction to this thread suggesting that it is not being debated in a logical or constructive manner.


  • #49
    AndyBoBandy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,159 ✭✭✭✭AndyBoBandy


    omnithanos wrote: »
    the reaction to this thread suggesting that it is not being debated in a logical or constructive manner.

    people are being logical and constructive though, you are simply replying with youtube videos, stating them as fact with a "they must be real" attitude.

    If I make a youtube video about how the Irish financial crisis was in fact created by a secret order of gay bishops disillusioned at how the catholic church was being portrayed in sci-fi movies set in outer space 700 years from now, it does not mean that any of it is true. But If I was a good enough film maker, I'm sure some people would believe it.

    If you want logical & constructive debate, how about forgetting all the youtube videos that are simply pushing 1 persons thoughts on a particular subject.

    It appears you are not here for debate, as it's clear your mind is already made up.


  • #50
    omnithanos
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 710 ✭✭✭omnithanos


    Andybobandy wrote: »
    people are being logical and constructive though, you are simply replying with youtube videos, stating them as fact with a "they must be real" attitude.

    If I make a youtube video about how the Irish financial crisis was in fact created by a secret order of gay bishops disillusioned at how the catholic church was being portrayed in sci-fi movies set in outer space 700 years from now, it does not mean that any of it is true. But If I was a good enough film maker, I'm sure some people would believe it.

    If you want logical & constructive debate, how about forgetting all the youtube videos that are simply pushing 1 persons thoughts on a particular subject.

    It appears you are not here for debate, as it's clear your mind is already made up.

    You can't prove anything with debate alone. I'm using said videos to support my opinions not prove them. There are plenty of other videos out there if people are interested in doing some research.
    The naysayers offer no supporting evidence whatsoever apart from following the official story line. Just because a government says something happened doesn't mean it is true either and based on the evidence of 9/11 we know that the US Government have lied in the past.
    And just because somebody is convicted in a court of law doesn't mean their crime has been proven, remember the Guilford four and the Birmingham six.
    Real debate involves having an open mind as to the possibilities put forward and not rubbishing them out of hand and then by logical deduction forming a conclusion based on the most realistic and logical critical analysis.
    Based on all the evidence I have seen I think it is more realistic to assume that there was no bomb.
    If you think all the references to the Boston bombing made in the episode of Family guy were complete coincidence that's your prerogative and you are entitled to your opinion as am I. If you think all the videos showing the actors faking the bombing are fake how do you explain that photos showing the same people in the same situations were used by the mainstream media?
    Can we discuss how cowboy hat man pushing the man who had just lost his legs could have been faked when they were all over the news in america and do you reject the medical analysis put forward in the video?


  • #51
    ectoraige
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,105 ✭✭✭ectoraige


    Okay, I'll take this seriously. First, what are the ground rules? The pictures and videos are real, but not everything in them was real? Was there an explosion? That would seem to be a pretty basic assumption.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    omnithanos
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 710 ✭✭✭omnithanos


    ectoraige wrote: »
    Okay, I'll take this seriously. First, what are the ground rules? The pictures and videos are real, but not everything in them was real? Was there an explosion? That would seem to be a pretty basic assumption.

    Everybody agrees there were two explosions. Those who believe the bombs were fake think that they were relatively harmless smoke bombs which appeared as if they were actual bombs when they exploded. According to a press conference afterwards spectators were apparently told to remain calm before the explosions happened.


  • #53
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,881 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    omnithanos wrote: »
    You can't prove anything with debate alone. I'm using said videos to support my opinions not prove them. There are plenty of other videos out there if people are interested in doing some research.
    The naysayers offer no supporting evidence whatsoever apart from following the official story line. Just because a government says something happened doesn't mean it is true either and based on the evidence of 9/11 we know that the US Government have lied in the past.
    And just because somebody is convicted in a court of law doesn't mean their crime has been proven, remember the Guilford four and the Birmingham six.
    Real debate involves having an open mind as to the possibilities put forward and not rubbishing them out of hand and then by logical deduction forming a conclusion based on the most realistic and logical critical analysis.
    Based on all the evidence I have seen I think it is more realistic to assume that there was no bomb.
    If you think all the references to the Boston bombing made in the episode of Family guy were complete coincidence that's your prerogative and you are entitled to your opinion as am I. If you think all the videos showing the actors faking the bombing are fake how do you explain that photos showing the same people in the same situations were used by the mainstream media?
    Can we discuss how cowboy hat man pushing the man who had just lost his legs could have been faked when they were all over the news in america and do you reject the medical analysis put forward in the video?

    You have come here and made extraordinary claims. The naysayers as you call them are under no obligation to disprove those claims. it is up to YOU to provide evidence that supports those claims. rambling youtube videos do not count as evidence. If you have some evidence that supports your position then provide it. and provide it clearly. Be prepared to defend what you say. this is not the CT forum where any old nonsense can be posted with discussion.


  • #54
    omnithanos
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 710 ✭✭✭omnithanos


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    You have come here and made extraordinary claims. The naysayers as you call them are under no obligation to disprove those claims. it is up to YOU to provide evidence that supports those claims. rambling youtube videos do not count as evidence. If you have some evidence that supports your position then provide it. and provide it clearly. Be prepared to defend what you say. this is not the CT forum where any old nonsense can be posted with discussion.

    Not everything reported by mainstream media is fact.


  • #55
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,881 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    omnithanos wrote: »
    Not everything reported by mainstream media is fact.

    Is that the best you can do? so no actual evidence then?


  • #56
    Valetta
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,611 ✭✭✭Valetta


    omnithanos wrote: »
    Should be but who's gonna listen?

    This lady gets around
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmIrx9ey8u4

    Annie Haddad Is Nancy Lanza
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvkOE_F-mc8

    Sandy Hook, theatre shooting connection
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5rWBkd4JPk

    And again
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYUbqd5gaPs

    http://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2013/01/11/remarkable-resemblance-of-sandy-hook-victims-and-professional-crisis-actors/

    How do we know all those videos are not fake?


  • #57
    evilivor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,612 ✭✭✭evilivor


    omnithanos wrote: »
    Not everything reported by mainstream media is fact.

    But everything reported by the alternative/non-mainstream media is?


  • #58
    omnithanos
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 710 ✭✭✭omnithanos


    evilivor wrote: »
    But everything reported by the alternative/non-media is?

    No but lets have a bit of balance and don't put the onus on me to prove everything.

    I have posted a video of a girl standing independently who is clearly in no discomfort immediately after the blast and who was later reported as having her leg amputated. Fact was she was a pre-existing amputee.


  • #59
    omnithanos
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 710 ✭✭✭omnithanos


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    Is that the best you can do? so no actual evidence then?

    Ten reasons why I believe the Boston Bombing was faked

    1. the photo with the girl standing comfortably after her leg was allegedly shredded and all the people in the background who look like they are ready to get into position.
    2. The video showing a man in red putting a fake leg on the little girl.
    3. I still think Mr. Bauman is putting on a fake leg in a 16 second clip.
    4. All the videos showing people passing out packets of fake blood.
    5. The lady with no obvious injuries apart from a little scratch wheeled off covered in blood.
    6. The demeanor of the injured people immediately after the bombing.
    7. The demeanor of the authorities in the press conferences, don't answer why people were warned to stay calm before the bomb etc.
    8. The appearance of the three sandy hook first responders at the bomb site wearing the same backpacks as our two bombers.
    9. All the hand signals, girls kissing right before the bomb etc.
    10.The two different ladies running around with the same fake kid dummy.

    I have already posted evidence of all these and can post any of them again if requested.


  • #60
    omnithanos
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 710 ✭✭✭omnithanos


    Valetta wrote: »
    How do we know all those videos are not fake?

    There are tonnes of videos out there putting forward these theories, we can only common sense to help us decide that.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,881 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    omnithanos wrote: »
    No but lets have a bit of balance and don't put the onus on me to prove everything.

    I have posted a video of a girl standing independently who is clearly in no discomfort immediately after the blast and who was later reported as having her leg amputated. Fact was she was a pre-existing amputee.

    you are the one making extraordinary claims. the onus is on YOU to back them up.


Advertisement