flowwolf Posted 22 April 2013 Share Posted 22 April 2013 Look at the breaking news... What is it ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vacamion Posted 22 April 2013 Share Posted 22 April 2013 Alleged Islamists arrested for a plot in Canada. It was kind of a propos when I read your post saying: It is going to happen again and again not just in the U.S and Britain but all over the West. Kind of bang on. Unless this, too, is part of the global conspiracy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flowwolf Posted 22 April 2013 Share Posted 22 April 2013 Alleged Islamists arrested for a plot in Canada. It was kind of a propos when I read your post saying: Kind of bang on. Unless this, too, is part of the global conspiracy It's not I am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoneDog Posted 23 April 2013 Share Posted 23 April 2013 Any of you come to your senses yet? Official story - http://www.dailymail...spotlight.html# - "Hero boat owner"? Bullshit merchant more like. Said he looked in the boat and saw 'a pool of blood' so crept away to alert authorities. Lad climbing out of boat hasn't got a drop of blood on him, and yet had been on the run for 12 or more hours with no food, had injuries and whatnot. Yet is totally clean when he extricated himself from the boat. Innocent patsy climbing out of boat. I suppose the saying is true, and it must be easier to believe a lie than to believe the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoneDog Posted 23 April 2013 Share Posted 23 April 2013 Innocent patsy on day out. Chillin - not even attempting to disguise himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
21st Century Fox Posted 23 April 2013 Share Posted 23 April 2013 METAPHOR A figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable. A thing regarded as representative or symbolic of something else, esp. something abstract. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPChFKZ6f9w Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan Posted 23 April 2013 Share Posted 23 April 2013 Any of you come to your senses yet? Official story - http://www.dailymail...spotlight.html# - "Hero boat owner"? Bullshit merchant more like. Said he looked in the boat and saw 'a pool of blood' so crept away to alert authorities. Lad climbing out of boat hasn't got a drop of blood on him, and yet had been on the run for 12 or more hours with no food, had injuries and whatnot. Yet is totally clean when he extricated himself from the boat. Innocent patsy climbing out of boat. I suppose the saying is true, and it must be easier to believe a lie than to believe the truth. How can you possibly discern from that photo that there is no blood around? More moon landing thread-style photo analysis ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
breadandcheese Posted 23 April 2013 Share Posted 23 April 2013 Innocent patsy on day out. Chillin - not even attempting to disguise himself. Just out of interest, how should a terrorist look and act to not arouse suspicion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 23 April 2013 Share Posted 23 April 2013 Thought it was only his brother that was on the FBI list? I'm pretty sure anyway every single person that is on a list of a government isn't going to be watched 24/7, that would be absolutely impossible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoneDog Posted 23 April 2013 Share Posted 23 April 2013 How can you possibly discern from that photo that there is no blood around? Because I'm not blind perhaps. Are you deliberately missing the other point? The narrative goes "he was shot numerous times and had to be pulled from the boat by so and so". Here, he is clearly seen climbing out of the boat himself. Just out of interest, how should a terrorist look and act to not arouse suspicion? Erm, wear the hat forward with glasses. Walk into the scene, drop the bag and get the hell out of there perhaps. But no, you're wanting me to believe that he hung around for a long, long time chilling out before committing the act. And then, after knowing that he is definitely on lots of video (none of which we've seen) and lots of pictures all over the world because he hung around for so, so long - then he goes back to his college to chill some more. I don't think so. You might want to pretend to be that stupid, but not me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haydos Posted 23 April 2013 Share Posted 23 April 2013 Because I'm not blind perhaps. Are you deliberately missing the other point? The narrative goes "he was shot numerous times and had to be pulled from the boat by so and so". Here, he is clearly seen climbing out of the boat himself. Erm, wear the hat forward with glasses. Walk into the scene, drop the bag and get the hell out of there perhaps. But no, you're wanting me to believe that he hung around for a long, long time chilling out before committing the act. And then, after knowing that he is definitely on lots of video (none of which we've seen) and lots of pictures all over the world because he hung around for so, so long - then he goes back to his college to chill some more. I don't think so. You might want to pretend to be that stupid, but not me. A) How do you know he's not climbing into the boat? B) How can you determine he's 'chilling'. He's just...there. That is literally all you get from those two photos. I'm not being funny but you're just as biased with these types of things. If you're going to do it at least put forward some material that isn't a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 23 April 2013 Share Posted 23 April 2013 B) How can you determine he's 'chilling'. He's just...there. Very good point. To some he's chilling, to others he isn't. Personally I think he looks like he's shitting himself in that picture, looks drained, scared and pale as a ghost. Certainly not wearing the smile of the average punter going to watch the fun run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanSP Posted 23 April 2013 Share Posted 23 April 2013 I don't think that still picture of Dzhokar (?) says anything at all - you can't judge anything from a still photo. When was the photo taken? How long before the bomb went off? Just cos he's not even attempting to disguise himself shouldn't mean he is totally innocent. That's jumping the gun to warrant your own conclusion which only you want to believe. Not every terrorist will act dark and mysterious. If anything they will blend in, surely, so as to not create suspicion? What do you make of Jeff Bauman (the guy whose legs got obliterated) saying he saw him plant the bag down, looked him square in the eyes, and then saw him walk off. 2 and a half minutes later his legs are gone and there's carnage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoneDog Posted 23 April 2013 Share Posted 23 April 2013 A) How do you know he's not climbing into the boat? Who took the photo of him climbing into the boat then? I thought the boat owner hero found him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoneDog Posted 23 April 2013 Share Posted 23 April 2013 B) How can you determine he's 'chilling'. He's just...there. Take a good look at the 'photo'. It's probably a still from a video, but we'll call it a photo. He is obviously standing there with no worries whatsoever about trying to cover up his identity. I wasn't offering a 'joke' as you say, I was pointing out the fact that he wasn't trying to hide his identity and also wasn't trying to run away from authority because he went back to his college afterwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoneDog Posted 23 April 2013 Share Posted 23 April 2013 Not every terrorist will act dark and mysterious. If anything they will blend in, surely, so as to not create suspicion? He would have blended in very well with his cap forward and shades on. There were lots of people there wearing various hat and shade combos. The young lad isn't even trying to hide anything. The older brother, who has contact with FBI, is however, well covered. What do you make of Jeff Bauman (the guy whose legs got obliterated) saying he saw him plant the bag down, looked him square in the eyes, and then saw him walk off. 2 and a half minutes later his legs are gone and there's carnage. Bauman didn't mention the young lad. He mentioned somebody with dark glasses, supposedly the older brother. And he was extremely drugged up at the time, yet the first thing he does is an ID. A miracle really as I know from experience of seeing people come round heavily drugged after major operations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoneDog Posted 23 April 2013 Share Posted 23 April 2013 Thought it was only his brother that was on the FBI list? This is a very important point. The older brother who was known to have had contact with FBI agents was dressed as if he was maybe trying to cover up his face, maybe on some sort of a drill. The younger brother who wasn't in contact with FBI is totally uncovered. The reason I think they could have been on a drill is because if they were there to cause havoc, I think that the older brother would have advised his younger brother to stop showing his face to the world. There is a glaring difference between the two brothers appearance in the crowd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marko Posted 23 April 2013 Share Posted 23 April 2013 Take a good look at the 'photo'. It's probably a still from a video, but we'll call it a photo. He is obviously standing there with no worries whatsoever about trying to cover up his identity. I wasn't offering a 'joke' as you say, I was pointing out the fact that he wasn't trying to hide his identity and also wasn't trying to run away from authority because he went back to his college afterwards. What and bring unwanted attention to himself by looking suspicious. Not exactly a master plan. And I'm not how you can surmise he was "chilling" out from one still photo. Although what did you expect him to do, run in, throw the bag and leg it? At lest by acting normally he wouldn't arouse suspicion and increase his chances of getting away with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoneDog Posted 23 April 2013 Share Posted 23 April 2013 I must say this again being as how it doesn't seem important enough yet. OFFICAL STORY: - Tsarnaev was pulled from the boat after two hour stand-off - He sustained gunshot wounds to head, neck, legs and hand - Boat owner found him in a pool of blood cowering in boat. Nobody saw him, or photo'd him, climbing in the boat Tsarnaev climbing out of boat, probably exhausted after 12 hours or so terrified on the run with no food, supposedly shot in the head, face, legs and hand. Any answers? I'd like to be convinced and believe the official story. It'd be alot 'nicer' than the one I can see at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haydos Posted 23 April 2013 Share Posted 23 April 2013 Take a good look at the 'photo'. It's probably a still from a video, but we'll call it a photo. He is obviously standing there with no worries whatsoever about trying to cover up his identity. I wasn't offering a 'joke' as you say, I was pointing out the fact that he wasn't trying to hide his identity and also wasn't trying to run away from authority because he went back to his college afterwards. Right. This is why I can't take you seriously. First you say he "does nothing to hide his identity".... then you go on to suggest that he should not go back to college after the incident, something that most certainly draw attention to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoneDog Posted 23 April 2013 Share Posted 23 April 2013 What and bring unwanted attention to himself by looking suspicious? Already answered that. He'd have blended in perfectly with shades and hat facing forward. Plenty of people there had hats and shades. Even his brother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoneDog Posted 23 April 2013 Share Posted 23 April 2013 Right. This is why I can't take you seriously. First you say he "does nothing to hide his identity".... then you go on to suggest that he should not go back to college after the incident, something that most certainly draw attention to him. Take a look in the mirror. You're not sounding very serious to me. Listen carefully. IF he was going back to his college afterwards, and was planning to set off a bomb at a marathon in full view of everybody, he WOULD NOT want his face to be all over the news. He WOULD (if you want to use reason and logic) hope that he had not been caught in the act. Therefore he would at least wear a pair of pissing shades like the hundreds upon hundreds of other people were doing in the crowd. I'm also pretty sure he might have thought 'you know what, I think I might turn my cap around so as to cover part of my face'. How on earth do you think that if he wore some shades and a forward facing cap he would have drawn attention to himself and messed up? His brother was wearing shades and cap and didn't draw attention apparently. Hundreds were wearing them. Can you not see that simple point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haydos Posted 23 April 2013 Share Posted 23 April 2013 I must say this again being as how it doesn't seem important enough yet. OFFICAL STORY: - Tsarnaev was pulled from the boat after two hour stand-off - He sustained gunshot wounds to head, neck, legs and hand - Boat owner found him in a pool of blood cowering in boat. Nobody saw him, or photo'd him, climbing in the boat Tsarnaev climbing out of boat, probably exhausted after 12 hours or so terrified on the run with no food, supposedly shot in the head, face, legs and hand. Any answers? I'd like to be convinced and believe the official story. It'd be alot 'nicer' than the one I can see at the moment. 1) Gunshot wounds aren't always fatal. (Even 66% of gunshot wounds to the head ended in survival source: http://journals.lww.com/neurosurgery/pages/articleviewer.aspx?year=1995&issue=12000&article=00010&type=abstract (I'm looking for sources on overall gunshot wound fatality percentage but can't find any currently). 2) Does anything say he wasn't shot after he left the boat? 3) You're arguing over semantics. Again I've not scoured the subject but could the word pulled just be wrong? Could they not be using it in terms of just 'him being removed from the boat'. Supermarket products get 'pulled' from the shelf, but they're not literally pulled. This is a crap comparison I know, but my point is it's a word. Where is it from? Could you link to the official report? Because I do not see WHY they would say he was 'pulled' when he wasn't. There's no reason for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haydos Posted 23 April 2013 Share Posted 23 April 2013 Take a look in the mirror. You're not sounding very serious to me. Listen carefully. IF he was going back to his college afterwards, and was planning to set off a bomb at a marathon in full view of everybody, he WOULD NOT want his face to be all over the news. He WOULD (if you want to use reason and logic) hope that he had not been caught in the act. Therefore he would at least wear a pair of pissing shades like the hundreds upon hundreds of other people were doing in the crowd. I'm also pretty sure he might have thought 'you know what, I think I might turn my cap around so as to cover part of my face'. How on earth do you think that if he wore some shades and a forward facing cap he would have drawn attention to himself and messed up? His brother was wearing shades and cap and didn't draw attention apparently. Hundreds were wearing them. Can you not see that simple point? I'm not saying that. I'm just discussing. What if.....he forgot. He's nervous, he's shitting himself because he's going to bomb a national event. It has already been determined this was fairly amateur work as far as bombings go. I wouldn't make any assumptions about this guys preparation tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 23 April 2013 Share Posted 23 April 2013 I'm not saying that. I'm just discussing. What if.....he forgot. He's nervous, he's shitting himself because he's going to bomb a national event. It has already been determined this was fairly amateur work as far as bombings go. I wouldn't make any assumptions about this guys preparation tbh. That's pretty much my opinion on it. I like the odd consipracy theory (JFK shooting fascinates me) but this just looks like a couple of cowboys who have bombed a marathon. If the US really wanted another bogeyman or some all out war with the Chechnyans I'm sure the ones who are in charge of that would come up with a better effort than this. Will be forgotton about in 6 weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.