Good analysis. Again, nothing definitive here, just as many of us suspected.

The length of time it's taken to release this footage, the position of the left arm in the post-drop photos, certainly lends credibility to the idea that alteration was possible.

More importantly, the backpack that D. Tsarnaev is wearing does not even closely resemble the backpack in which the bomb exploded.

Which begs the question, is forgetting to grab your bag in the heat of the moment, evidence to incriminate you as the bomber?

Furthermore, a question I've never seen addressed, let alone answered is how did they detonate the bombs? There is no evidence of D. Tsarnaev making any movements to indicate that he is detonating a bomb.

Thanks. For me, the biggest question (in relation to my post) is why are we being shown cherry-picked angles and shots that would beg a viewer to assume, without solid evidence, that he was without a backpack?

If that is really all that the government can come up with, then the lack of evidence would make one think they are intentionally holding back the majority of shots and footage. And why would they do that if they were actually interested in finding the truth?

I mean, we are the JURY level at this point and the only thing they can throw together is this half-assed slide-show/footage which cannot even seem to show the guy from the other side. The side that would be holding onto the backpack.

Every captured second of body movement (while he "flees") is awkward and can be directly related to a person running with a backpack on their right shoulder.

the biggest question (in relation to my post) is why are we being shown cherry-picked angles and shots that would beg a viewer to assume, without solid evidence, that he was without a backpack?

Exactly. A single camera angle? This is a highly trafficked commercial street, there would have been literally dozens of stores catch this guy on camera. The only images we see are ones in which the alleged backpack isn't even visible.

From /u/JamesColesPardon:

What you are seeing is the actual, live-action embodiment of them constructing reality right in front of your face, except you no longer have their Matrix filter on and you can see.

*\ _

Yeah I really can't wrap my head around the detonation aspect. It doesn't appear he opened the backpack at all, so was there some kind of radio transmitted detonator? If not then it was on a timer. When did he set that timer?

(Repost of a comment I made on another thread this morning):

Totally agree. I personally have never bought into the 'smoke bomb' theory, or the 'crisis actor' theory (though I can't explain how Jeff Bauman didn't bleed out). Real bombs went off, and real people were injured. But I am absolutely certain that what we have been told and what actually happened are two totally different stories. There were Craft International operatives on site, plain as day; that tells me that this event was an 'op' without needing any further evidence. I'm really surprised that so many people here are basically saying, "Case closed." Remember, CNN announced that an arrest had been made, and later retracted the announcement. Look, the FBI likely had every surveillance video within a mile radius in their possession within the hour. They've had two years to construct their narrative. Two years to sell this kid as the culprit. The kid's lawyer even said he did it (the logic behind this is so ridiculous it merits its own discussion). At this point, all they had to do was put this kid within a block of the explosion and he's guilty. The video does not show him dropping the backpack, as everyone is claiming. The video does not show the explosion go off right where the kid was standing, as everyone is claiming. If you watch the video a few times, the flash clearly comes from the left of the screen, out of frame. Ask yourself this question: If you have just planted a bomb, are you going to remain standing within 5 five feet of it up until 5 seconds of it detonating? Fuck no, you're going to drop that bag and get the fuck out of Dodge. Also, note that the video stops just as the blast goes off, obfuscating the precise spot in which it detonated. If that video ran another 10 seconds it would be plain as day that the explosion happened out of frame. Watch the video again, and then mentally edit out the circles that highlight the 'suspects'. In that context, all you have is a kid watching a race. As soon as you circle them, everything they do becomes suspect; people's minds are primed to accept that, 'THIS IS THE GUY'. There are too many inconsistencies in the story for these kids to be anything other than patsies.

EDIT: To further speak to one of OPs main points, it would have been exceptionally easy for this video to be edited, especially given the two-year window.

If you have just planted a bomb, are you going to remain standing within 5 five feet of it up until 5 seconds of it detonating?

that was exactly my thought man!

Also, remember this pic? doesnt look like his backpack at all. And they still havent explained the Boston Globe Tweet or the enhanced security and verbal warnings over the loudspeaker

thats not the bomb.. it wasn't on that side of the fence. something was highlighted incorrectly. Please do not use this as evidence.

Edit: Again.. that was NOT the bomb.. the bomb was BEHIND the fence.. like you guys are making yourself look stupid

Spot on! And as far as I am concerned, everything that happened after the fact (police chase, etc...) absolutely does not immediately point to guilt.

Imagine if you came home after attending the Boston marathon and the entire world was calling you a terrorist who just killed men, women, and children.

Most sane people would NOT turn themselves in after realizing that the US government has decided you were guilty, they would try to run because they would realize that nothing they could say or do would change that.

If I turned on the TV right now and saw my face all over it and the narrative of me being a terrorist already manufactured, I would immediately head to Mexico or Canada by car.

I would THEN, when in a semi-safe place, begin to work out how I could prove my innocence. But going directly to the police, or calling anyone, or trying to clear my name while half of Boston wanted to skin me.... no way. Innocent or not.

And I totally agree with you points about how disturbing it is that millions of people somehow believe the video shows him "planting the bomb" or the backpack exploding in the place where he put it down. It all has very much to do with psychological suggestions: like putting the guys in a bright circle and saying "just look at these guys".

I can remember how crazy it was, on reddit, hours after the explosion. The US government suddenly said "hey everyone, these guys did it" and the only proof at the time was a picture of two guys (with a circle around them) attending the marathon.

And that was enough for 90% of reddit to go "YES IT WAS THEM OMG!"

I was arguing with people about it, literally in real time as that was happening. I was asking what happened to make everyone suddenly believe they were guilty and I was not given a single rational answer, just downvotes by the hundreds.

Nobody could explain what changed between not knowing who did it, and a picture of two guys with a circle around them.

Would you really run though? Is that really what you think most people would do? If you were legitimately innocent, then what would you have to run from? Just turn yourself in and clear your name. I'm sure that most people would agree that running just makes someone look guilty. I honestly think that most people would just turn themselves in and try to clear their name, especially if it was the FBI after you.

The only argument I am making for running is that it is very easy for the average person to say "I wouldn't have run if I was innocent". But that is about as accurate as someone who says something like "If that bully picked on me then I would have just roundhouse kicked him in the face".

There is a huge difference between imagining yourself in a position and actually being there. And it is human nature to simplify things and then jump to the conclusion that you would do the "correct" thing logically.

Lets think about it for a moment, *really think about it.

For the sake of this argument, you have to assume that you are actually innocent:

1) You spend your day at the Boston Marathon and you are close enough to the explosion that it is still fresh in your mind. You saw blood and body parts. You are traumatized, it has been a REALLY bad day. You just want to be somewhere safe (like your house).

2) You turn on the TV, you are still shaking from the experience. You get up to make some tea and you hear your name. You think you are imagining this. You then look at the TV and you see your face on it. You see your brothers face too. The TV is telling you that YOU committed mass murder. The TV is telling you that YOU are a terrorist and there is a man-hunt to find you.

3) Suddenly the doorbell rings and you are FUCKING panicking. This cannot be real. This must be a horrible nightmare. You are afraid to even answer the door. You look out the window and see your brother.

4) He enters and you are both panicking. He says that both of your names and mugshots are all over the TV and internet.

5) Maybe you think about turning yourself in. Then your brother says "Dude, this is BIG deal. We were both there. We both had backpacks on. Think about it. We are both Muslim. We were not born in this country. The FBI is after us"

6) So you say "But listen, we are innocent. We have nothing to worry about, lets just go turn ourselves in to the police."

7) Then you begin to think about it. Do you walk to the police station? Your mugshot is everywhere. Do you drive there? What happens when you enter the station? The minute you show your face outside of the house, people are going to start screaming bloody murder. The minute you step into a police station, guns are going to be drawn and since you are terrorist murderers who killed women and children, the chances of not getting the shit kicked out of you in custody are small.

8) In addition to everything else. You have to realize that you have WAY bigger questions to ask. Why did the most powerful government in the world say that you did it? At that point, they have no proof. Did they just pick your names from a hat? Did they just say "Hey these two guys fit the bill"? What led them to pick you? Something much bigger must be going on. How do you turn yourselves into the same government that just literally FRAMED you for murder?

A government willing to frame you for murder must be willing to do just about anything. Will they kill you in custody? Are they already working on fake evidence? Once again, how do you reason with a government willing to lie to 350 million people?

Or maybe they are just wrong, they made a mistake. So the question is: are they going to admit their mistake? Are they going to go on TV and say "Hey American, oops. We picked out the wrong guys. Sorry. The real terrorist are still out there. Anyways, have a good one"? No, probably not.

You are in some seriously deep shit right now. Probably the deepest shit that anyone can be in, EVER. And now the question comes down to basic human instinct. FIGHT or FLIGHT.

Do you try to fight the charges. Something that you will probably get the chance to do after rotting in prison for 2 years while waiting for a court date? Or do you run? The Canadian border is starting to look really good right now. The clock is ticking though. The difference between one hour and the next could literally change your entire life.

WHAT DO YOU DO????

/end

Honestly, I don't think it is an obvious decision. Life is just more complicated than that.

I just think most people would turn themselves in. I understand that it's speculative, but if they were two random guys like you and me who happened to be framed, why would they think they could outrun the FBI and the Boston P.D? I wouldn't have the resources to do anything of that, and I'm assuming most people don't either. I just think running like that is a lot more incriminating than turning yourself in.

Also, if they were framed, how could the government had guaranteed that they'd be at the marathon and both have backpacks? The general consensus seems to be that this was all a false flag operation, but what was it a false flag for? I can understand 9/11 being a false flag, but what would be the government's motivation for the Boston attack?

OK you want a how/why? They were contacted by DHS/FBI/who knows and told they would get paid to be part of a drill. They had to put 2 books in a backpack and go to the marathon and follow the yellow balloon lady. The guy in the door who puts an earpiece in confirms to the GO team they are on scene... you can imagine the rest.

Motivation? Hmm... more power? Less objection to war? Money? Something we can't even begin to understand?

Fucking spot on.

What does everyone think Dzhokhar was doing on the phone in those stills right before? He was confirming location. Either to Tamerlan the Terrorist or their FBI/CIA/DHS handler.

why would they think they could outrun the FBI and the Boston P.D? I wouldn't have the resources to do anything of that, and I'm assuming most people don't either.

You would only need two resources:

1) a car initially

2) the resolve to never contact anyone in your family/life ever again

Thousands of people are fugitives from the government and a good percentage get away with it. Thats a fact.

Right, but being a fugitive is a lot different than actively being the suspect of what would become a nationwide manhunt if they weren't initially caught. You also didn't respond to any of my other questions.

I cannot answer those other questions because I don't think I have the necessary information to understand how and why the government does anything.

So I would consider those questions invalid and impossible for us plebes to answer.

I don't think they're invalid questions. A lot of people are convinced that the brothers were set up, but I think that theory falls flat when really simple speculative questions can poke a hole in it.

Ok before captain reddit seizes the day with his impenetrable logic. The Tsarnaev brothers were already intimately involved with the FBI as double agents. This is a standard operating procedure, going back to Lee Harvey Oswald (which was botched actually). Nowadays the neatest way to end the operation is to have the patsies run and then you kill them, then America goes back to sleep. Working out the patsy is the most important part of the whole operation. The major clue lies in the fact that the Tsarnaevs were already connected to the CIA as double agents long before - just like Oswald, just like Bin Laden. From their it's simple for a handler to give them some sort of information (true or false) that would induce them to run. Nothing fancy, nothing new, just standard operating procedure. But then, does this make sense to you? Doubtful..

Are you mad that I'm asking questions or something? A lot of people in this sub become overly defensive when someone questions what they already believe in. Isn't that somewhat hypocritical since this sub kind of focuses on questioning things? Yes I understand, I have reading comprehension skills, I'm just asking questions. No need to be a dick about it. Does that make sense to you? Doubtful.....

I don't get the response - people here don't seem to be hounding you too much. What do you need answered? It's obvious they had the Tsarnaev's set up as patsies. Their assignment was to be at the marathon. That day at that time, and that was that.

Then shit goes down, they GTFO of dodge, stop and get some local Whole Foods, and head back home to eventually fins out they be the terrorists, and it's time to get out of dodge.

But the Troopers botched their end and now we have to deal with this Kangaroo Court, and it now infiltrates all Boston Radio. Maybe I should start reporting on that?

I'm mainly questioning what the motivation is. I'm not even saying that they weren't set up. I'm just questioning the narrative that everyone is positive is correct. I understand that the consensus is that they were patsies, what I'm asking is, in this specific instance, what is the motivation for the government using them as patsies? What is the purpose of this particular false flag? There were several motivations for the CIA to kill JFk, there were several reasons why the 9/11 attack aided the bush administration's foreign policy, but I'm not really sure what would have been gained by this particular false flag. That's what I'm asking.

I'm mainly questioning what the motivation is.

I fell into this trap for awhile dude (no offense meant in the slightest). Stop thinking about the motivation/qui bono/etc. It's fun to think about, sure. But the main focus should be comparing

what the official version is

And

what evidence had been presented

Who gives a shit about motives. Just start above and see where you end up.

I'm not even saying that they weren't set up. I'm just questioning the narrative that everyone is positive is correct. I understand that the consensus is that they were patsies, what I'm asking is, in this specific instance, what is the motivation for the government using them as patsies?

My response is "who cares," besides to scare the American public, slowly integrate Islam with lone wolves and Chechnya (that's close to Russia, Right?) and you're all set.

What is the purpose of this particular false flag? There were several motivations for the CIA to kill JFk, there were several reasons why the 9/11 attack aided the bush administration's foreign policy, but I'm not really sure what would have been gained by this particular false flag. That's what I'm asking.

It's a solid question, but not something that needs to be answered to disprove the Official Version ™.

Quit your crying and do some fucking research for yourself.

Someone was thought to be guilty and walked into a police station and gave an alibi

Have you gone and checked out archive.org /r/findthebombers pages?

lol.. you know that EXACT thing happened right? With someone reddit falsely spotted. Wanna know what they did? They walked into a police station and said it wasn't them. Police saw the kid had an alibi and told him to have a good day.

Do you not see a difference between

• reddit falsely accusing you

and

• the US government falsely accusing you

You know this is the same guy that was on a magazine cover right?

So they just can't do the same thing? Why do you want this to be a conspiracy so bad?

This. You, sir, are clear-minded.

add one aspect of trickery or premeditation, or something not spontaneous, then the whole thing is suspect.

What is illogical about the kids lawyer saying he did it?

Well done OP.

And now - you will notice - that this lawyer's decision to open with he did it was actually a planned attempt at implanting a thought in everybody's mind prior to this video leak.

Think about it. Through the discovery process she has to have seen this video, and know their would be public demand for it. So she opens the case with

of course he did it

Because her main job is to fight against the death penalty. Did you know she was the defense attorney for Zaccarias Moussaui, Jared Loughner, Ted Kaczasinski (the Unabomber), etc.

But now because we know he did it according to his fucking lawyer, of course you're going to see him doing it.

It's actually creepy, predictive programming if you think about it.

Laugh all you want about mind control shenanigans - but MKUltra happened. And what color was that dress again? Did the media, over a course of a day, show you it could be white/gold or black/blue?

Because they just convinced everyone who's asleep that this video is proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

It is really scary that people have reached a point where they just blindly accept the word of authority as the word of God and to hell with logic or what your eyes see/don't see, etc...

Step 1: Cultivate sense of authority through honest crowd sourced users

Step 2: Get the Question Everything idea to propagate so you can crowd source and fact check this new medium/link aggregator

Step 3: ??

Step 4: I have no idea.

You have to give these diabolical fucks credit: These psyops are absolutely brilliant, and impossible to disprove. I just imagine these guys lounging around smoking cigars, drinking $10,000 wine, and being blown by 5 year olds:

"We'll get the lawyer to tell the jury he did it! It'll be fucking hilarious!"

Exactly, the sense of being untouchable must be like a drug.

I can only imagine that people on that level of power must increasingly see the human race as bunch of idiots, which would (in their minds) actually justify the way that they treat us.

"Hahahaha, what would these idiots do without us leading the way! The unwashed masses deserve to be robbed of everything they hold dear while we dangle this carrot in front of their face. Hahaha, look how stupid they are. They NEED us. We are doing them a favor by convincing them to go to war, thus thinning the herd."

Why is it that the people involved are often the same people? Do terror suspects get appointed the same lawyer? Same with the lead investigators.. Wasn't the lead investigators for a lot of the major terror attacks in the us headed up by thessamen group of people?

...has he admitted to it?

His lawyer has.

Case closed, right?

Did he tell his lawyer he did it? I like how you avoid my question .

Not avoiding - because everything I have read about it is he hasn't said a word, and when he does speak, his friends go outside of court and say it doesn't sound like him.

I haven't found any evidence that proves it yet. Wish I was on the jury. But I wasn't selected to deliver the verdict they want, of course.

Yes because if its a verdict you don't want that means its a conspiracy? How do you know he didn't admit it to his lawyer? His friends say it doesn't sound like him? Michael Brown's friends and family said the same thing and we have video of him choking out a bitch at a store. Just saying something to think about

Trust me, I've seen and thought enough about it. This video is proof of this guy at the bombing, and nothing more.

Well its a good thing they have other pieces of evidence than. Lets let a jury of his peers decide. Still avoid the question.

I'm sure days of emotional testimony for a crime he already admitted to (via his lawyer) are material to the case.

This is all a show, man. It's sad you can't enjoy it for what it is.

So it doesn't count if he tells his lawyer? Nice avoidance

Great analysis. I think it's telling that the footage stops when the second explosion occurs. There are no images anywhere of the immediate aftermath of the second explosion.

Exactly right. The way the footage is cherry-picked and edited is very telling. I wish more people had the ability to intelligently analyze what is not being shown in addition to what is being shown.

what is not being shown in addition to what is being shown.

On that note, why no video of Tamerlan? In terms of the prosecution's case, proving his co-involvement would help the Government in a lot of different ways. His bomb would have been the one planted at the finish line, and you're not going to convince me there wouldn't also be footage of him 'dropping his backpack'.

Yes, and it seems like they WANT to make that connection because they show him also "fleeing" without a backpack. So why not strengthen the case with more evidence, like him dropping his backpack.

Also, as a professional graphic designer, if I were given the job to photoshop out the backpacks, it would be a piece of cake. Every photo used as evidence has one of the brothers clearly framed against a solid backdrop (whether it is a brick wall or the smooth concrete of the road). Using the clone stamp against those back drops would be a cake-walk.

In contrast, had we seen one of the brothers framed against the crowd, it would have been MUCH more difficult to achieve the effect of making the backpack disappear. Because you would need to "recreate" actual body parts, and faces, colors/shadows, etc...

Of course, that can also be done. But it is just telling for me that we only see shots of them, without backpacks, against universal surfaces.

this, the lone photograph a dude from Florida took.

The light from the second explosion is shopped into the video.

Edit: also, the only photo I've ever seen after the second explosion is blurred out.

also, the only photo I've ever seen after the second explosion is blurred out.

Yes, and even the blurred out images are from scenes after the bystanders have fled the scene, and the smoke has dissipated. Leaving enough time for the amputee crisis actors to get into position.

I still find it odd that NO ONE has yet brought up, publically, the amazing amount of military-like Craft security people present and why the were there. Also, why they all had similar styled backpacks that appeared to be full of something...

I'm not going to say either way whether I think he did it or not, but I have to at least entertain the idea that if I was of a certain ethnicity, and saw a particularly popular form of terror happening while surrounded by a bunch of white patriots, I'd get the hell out of there faster than anyone else too.

Your video had no sound.

I guess it was shown to the jury without sound then. Which makes sense because the prosecutor would be talking over it.

Oh. That is the jury video. I gotcha. I thought u had one you voiced over.

[deleted]

Not saying whether you are right or wrong, but all of this is outside the realm of my post.

My biggest concern is that the evidence (or lack of evidence), and the strange way the younger brother moves, hints at the fact that he did leave the event with a backpack. If he did leave with a backpack, then we are seeing cherry-picked angles and shots to make us assume that he didn't, without any real evidence.

I find it concerning that after all of the videos and cameras that were shooting that day, we are NEVER offered a shot of the younger brother's right side (logically the side which holds his backpack).

Isn't that a little too convenient?

The biggest and most well funded government in the world cannot show THE JURY stronger evidence? To me, that reeks of foul play.

[deleted]

What is with all the Northrop Grumman shilling going on in here lately? It's like you guys are getting paid to mention that name in every post you make.

It's just one user who does it over and over. I started to notice the same thing and when I paid attention it was just one person. Although I think they've changed usernames at least once.

I don't believe they were directly involved, but if I were to concede they had a hand in it, this would be a very plausible explanation.

You had me until NG, and a google map showing the proximity ain't gonna work.

[deleted]

No, just predictability.

Makes me think it could be as corrupt as what happened on prison break

Why would they need to alter all of the video when they could just drug and mind control two dudes into placing a bomb?

Sorry guys. I don't buy it. It's clear as day to me that he sets the bomb down. Maybe before or after he is texting his brother because his brother has the bomber timer set to a watch. Tsarnev knew he had about 5 seconds to get out of the blast radius. It was an obvious bomb plant. Tsarnev had no reason to be there.he literally runs right before the bomb exploded. How could he possibly have known an improvised pressure cooker bomb was at his feet a mere couple of seconds before it exploded? Do you see where I'm going with this. The fact that he is clearly running away from the backpack that he planted on the ground and him texting his obvious clues to anybody with half a brain that they were extremely suspicious. Both wearing dark trench coats and hats attempting to obscure their faces on purpose. It's getting to be pretty funny how y'all are attempting to say it's a government setup. I don't see it like that at all. You don't think fbi harrassment can cause somebody to snap and plant a bomb? These guys are Chechen radicals. Why would the government edit out a backpack? Do you really think they would risk everything by photoshopping it? seriously? Photoshopping out a backpack? He ran from the scene of the crime. He ran away from the bomb blast because he knew the bomb was about to explode. Pasty don't run before bombs explode. They don't blend in when they run. Craft international and countless other agencies were holding drills anticipating and scouting out the crowds. There's a really good chance the fbi was anticipating a bomb blast. The craft international run the air and test for bomb blasts. The high level of activity was specificly for the drill. You really can't stop these type of homegrown terrorism without a large undercover police force like the dhs. At public events you should be prone to more government surveilance after this terrorist attack. This video has proved my opinion further that he is guilty along with his brother. Shows them at the scene of the crime. Shows them texting one another anticipating the timing of the bomb. And it also shows tsarnev running away from the bomb blast far more then "miliseconds" as the op claims but a very good 4-5 seconds of running threw people to escape the blast. Again op I commend your effort for trying to portray conspiracy theorist in a negative light on purpose. The more people who think the Boston marathon bombing was set up and the tsarnevs are just pastys are literally painting us as crazy people. You cannot deny the evidence this video has shown proves without a doubt that tsarnev antcipated an explosion. He wasn't running to the finish line people he was running because he planted a bomb.

It's clear as day to me that he sets the bomb down.

You spelled backpack wrong. Most people set down their backpacks when standing in a crowd. It is not a strange thing to do, at all.

Why would the government edit out a backpack?

Obviously to support the narrative that he left it. Which further supports the narrative that it was a bomb.

And it also shows tsarnev running away from the bomb blast far more then "miliseconds" as the op claims but a very good 4-5 seconds of running threw people to escape the blast.

Sorry but you are just inventing a new reality at this point. Click on the video. Use the pause button. There is not even a full 1 second between him running and everyone else running.

What the heck is a Montessori school? Anything funky or NWO-related about Montessori?

Edit: Quick search http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1954201-real-genius http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constance_Cumbey http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/03/us/north-carolina-alleged-beheading-plot/