Previous Update: April 23 - 29

Updates Index

(if there are any to speak of)
April 30 - May 6, 2013

Marathon Bombing's New Images, New Clues
Female Bombing Suspects Ignored by Media
The Framing of the Younger Brother to Protect the Women Bombers

In the last update, it came out, thanks to a Russian media, that the older Russian brother (Tamerlan Tsarnaev) looked more like a CIA operative than a Chechen terrorist. You may have read the strango accusation from the uncle, where he was adamant concerning Tamerlan's guilt for the Boston bombing. It suggested right off that the uncle was an insider, an agent of the Americans involved in the bombing. Now we find what the uncle's all about, making sense: "The uncle of the two suspected Boston bombers in last week's attack, Ruslan Tsarni, was married to the daughter of former top CIA official Graham Fuller" Full story:

FULLER??? That's a Rockefeller line, right?

This uncle, I have read, took charge of the body of the murdered brother. How convenient and expected.

In the last update, it came out that there was a carjacked man whose youth didn't suggest an owner of Mercedes SUV, but rather the Honda. I concluded that the initial FBI plan was to have armed undercover cops act like the Russian brothers, hijack the young man's Honda at gunpoint with the owner in the car, make him believe that they were the marathon bombers, then let him go at a gas station where he could call the police to report the crime, thus giving the police an excuse to concoct a car chase and shootout in Watertown. Early last week, the following article (April 29) was found where the official FBI affidavit (= an illegal, criminal document with police lies for the purpose of jailing the younger brother) failed to mention the Honda at the scene of the Watertown shoot-out. Read the entire article here, keeping in mind that the undercover cops drove the Honda to the shoot-out:

Either I was wrong for assuming that the young victim, a foreigner, of the carjacking was too young to own a Mercedes, or we're being lied to by the FBI and its witness. I've just found out that the Mercedes was a 2013 model, making it even less likely that the young man would own it. But look at the story below, suggesting otherwise: The Mercedes is owned by a 26-year-old Chinese entrepreneur, who told the harrowing story of his abduction and escape to the Boston Globe.

Believe it or not. I don't. Okay, anyone can be an entrepreneur, but that doesn't necessarily one successful enough at 26 to own top-of-the-line vehicle. How convenient that the FBI doesn't need to reveal the man's name at this point. The more I learn about this case, the more I see the FBI getting away with brutal murder making New York gangsters look like angels. The Beforeitsnews article above showed that the FBI and the carjacking victim at the disposal of the FBI were lying. Why should we believe the entrepreneur story???

I've read bloggers seeking to authenticate Jeff Bauman, saying that men of war have had their leg(s) detached by bombs, and yet they survived just fine. Yes, but the arguments against Jeff's survival is that his legs were not properly looked after in time. That's aside from the suspicious and inconsistent nature of the "photos" at the explosion site. Can you imagine under the circumstances that he did not receive an ambulance at the bomb location? Instead, we are to believe that the best choice made by the authorities was to wheel him away, with useless ties around his legs to halt blood flow, some 200 feet to an ambulance. This picture is so conducive to a fake job that I doubt very much he was taken away by a legitimate ambulance.

That's not reality. In reality, the police would have called in: "Marathon victim, both legs gone. Repeat, both legs blown off at the knees. Priority, need appropriate medical team with on-the-spot fix. Rush." In the meantime, police clear the way on the road -- right in front of the bomb site -- for the arrival of Jeff's ambulance. Instead, the fact that ambulances were not as a rule brought to the injury site reveals that even the city of Boston was complicit with the Jeff hoax. And if Boston was complicit with Jeff, then Boston was involved with the entire sham. There was never any doubt in my mind about Boston's part in this sham bombing. The direction of the nation's leaders is therefore abysmal.

What happens to a legislator / politician who believes, to the point of speaking out, that the government framed the Russian bombers? Find out:

Jeff Bauman's supposed Facebook page has been cited for proving that he's authentic. yet, he appears with fine hair in a younger setting at his Facebook photo, though in his wheelchair photo he's got the epitome of coarse hair. I mentioned the Facebook photo in the last update where I showed that the man has no ear lobe whereas, the "Jeff Bauman" at the marathon event looks to have an ear lobe. There is only one way that authorities can attempt to get away with this sort of sham: it's being going on long enough that they've had a lot of practice.

It is starting to appear that the insiders had planned from the start to falsely link the marathon Jeff Bauman to the Facebook Jeff Bauman. In order for this trick to work, the Facebook Jeff Bauman needs to be shown at some verifiable event with his legs shortly before the bombing. It's not enough that bloggers are claiming to have known him, saying that he definitely had legs before the bombing. That would be an expected part of the sham.

How slim are the chances that one of my own readers knows Jeff Bauman (a "nobody")? Well, I received an email, within days of publishing the first marathon update, from a supposed long-time reader who knows Jeff Bauman. The email said that Jeff is authentic. Therefore, the insider team, with much money to use, is working hard to save the FBI trolls from the disaster that is Jeff Bauman. Chances are he's not a long-time reader; chances are, I'm on an insider list for those that need to be silenced. Can you understand from these things that Christians are going to be framed? They framed Jesus.

There was a third Jeff Bauman shown in the last update (search "ear lobe" to find the spot), who may or may not be the Facebook Jeff Bauman. There was a fourth Jeff Bauman in a hospital bed that was definitely not the marathon nor the Facebook Jeff Bauman. One would think that, by now, Jeff himself would have posted a dozen photos of himself prior to the bombing. One would think that Jeff, more than his blogger friends, would like to dispel any doubts that we may have. When the marathon Jeff Bauman shows us a recent picture of himself with legs, then I'll become a believer.

If you read through the last update, you may have noted that one single piece of wood slat, from a wood-slat fence right beside the explosion, fell to the patio stones and had some significant blood on it. Yet, just a few wood slats on the fence itself had any blood, As this blood upon the wood was only at the supposed explosion location, I deem either the fence or the bomb to have been falsified. An explosion sends blood far off. In an explosion strong enough to blow Jeff's legs away, shouldn't there be some blood on that fence more than two feet away from the explosion? Yes, and that's why, when they laid the fence down on the ground, they pushed it over toward the injury site, i.e. with the inside of the fence laying no one would be able to see that it had no blood.

But an argument like the above seems useless, even though it's huge in itself, in the face of media reports that limbs were torn off. Something like a dozen limbs went missing at the marathon, according to media reports, which tends to make anyone like me look ludicrous for suggesting otherwise. The insiders are banking on your believing the press over some nobody like me. However, the insiders made a mistake in releasing images, for many nobodies have done thorough investigations. Some of mine (not infallible) were reported in the last update, and there was found NOT ONE limb missing in all the photos available thus far from the injury site. Hello?

The scaffolding was removed immediately (see image below) after the explosion. Pause. Why would they send their scaffold-removing teams to completely take away the scaffolding in the heat of that moment? Couldn't scaffold-removal wait a few hours, or until the next day? It would have been enough to move the scaffolding over temporarily until all injury victims were taken out of the site. Yet, when the timeclock reads two minutes into the explosion, there are men in brown shirts, with orange stripes on their shoulders, removing the scaffolding. Clearly, these are uniformed men ordered to remove the scaffolding from the site immediately. What were they doing at the marathon so early after the blast? Whose uniforms were they wearing?

There wasn't blood on the scaffolding, was there? People would have noticed. Look at the tree, no blood. Look at the flags, no blood. That the expected blood spatters are not there is everyone's complaint except for the Obama lovers and others who have problems conceiving a government operation here. Don't you think that when a limb is torn off by flying metal simultaneous with explosive force through the air, a lot of blood would be blown off to make spatters somewhere? The report of more than a dozen limbs torn at least partially off requires at least 12 spatter events in random directions, to be expected on the clothes and body parts of the people nearest the explosion.

Can one pressure cooker pot have enough material inside it to tear that many limbs to the point of requiring at least 12 amputations? No, absolutely not. But even if it can, where were these limbs? They couldn't have been too far off. Where were the people missing them? Shouldn't their limbs have hit the fence, or other people, or the walls of the buildings, only to fall to the ground at some point? Shouldn't some of the body parts have ricocheted onto other things to make more spatters and streaks there??? Hello? Is there any sign of intelligent life in the brain of the Obama lover? Can love for Obama and Democrat politics blind people this much? Indeed.

There are scenes with what look like pellet / ball-bearing injuries, but these are not to be mistaken for blood spattering. If you ignore the scenes with what appear to be pellet injuries, as for example on the legs of the elderly woman in red and black, or on the legs of the blonde in red and black, the expected spattering is simply not there. I'm not exaggerating. I've looked at everything closely due to the importance of what this event spells for the future world: "NIGHTMARE".

Thankfully, the explosion was not as deadly as I imagined at first. Jeff is a testimony to the weakness of the explosion, for had it be truly strong, many people would have been severely maimed, sufficient to not require a faked injury victim. Jeff, or whoever he is, was used to make the people agree that America needs to act hard against the perpetrators of the bombing. If Americans allow this faked act to work, there will be others. Don't you understand? And when they can no longer fake the injuries, they will explode real strong bombs and allow the toll to be real.

I didn't think at first that staged injuries on-site, due to the difficulties, could have taken place. It would have required that virtually everyone at the scene was an insider. There were even people across the street in the bleachers looking face-on. But then again, there may have been little more than 200 people involved, which is not a great number to secure, for staged events, by something as wealthy as the U.S. government. Two or three hundred fakes is peanuts for big government. The difficulty would have been keeping non-insiders from the bombing area. I've not read of anyone being turned away from walking to the finish line for this or that reason.

Therefore, I tended to offer the explanation that, instead of real actors on-site, the public was provided with faked video images. This idea is not catching on at the blogging sites. Am I missing something? Is there any reason why faked video images are an impossibility? Shouldn't we expect faked imagery in fakes events? I think that the conspiracy believers are taking a big hit by suggesting actors on-site. People are laughing at that idea. But a combination of on-site actors and pasted images is probably the truth.

The more that the Russian brothers appear framed, the more that Jeff looks faked, because Jeff's claim, where he saw the bomber eye to eye, has been touted as evidence for the FBI's case against the brothers. We can reverse that argument, and say that, because Jeff is proven a fake my multiple arguments, the Russian brothers were framed. That's the importance of proving that Jeff is a fake. Much hangs off of this issue.

There were a few things that were not mentioned in the last two updates that can be enlarged upon here. I own a white cowboy hat of the same basic kind worn by Arredondo. I know what it looks like from above and below. I know what shape it makes. Fortunately, they took a photo of Arredondo wearing his white cowboy hat. Note how the sides of the hat curls up drastically so that, a view from above the hat requires a drastic oval shape, not nearly as wide as the hat is long.

Now scroll down at the page below (shows many gory scenes that were faked, including "Jeff" in full view) until you see Arredondo's cowboy hat in his hand. The hat is not curled as is the one in the photo, and is nearly round. There is barely no curl at all at the side, and the curls have been placed on the wrong parts of the hat, near the back. Plus, the body type of the two Arredondo's is clearly not the same. The one holding the hat looks like a slouch, heavier, not robust enough. If you're just honest about this, and please be, join the throngs who know that these images ate faked. "Arredondo" was clearly pasted into this scene as an artist's bad drawing of the real Arredondo.

If the page above disappears, see the round cowboy hat here:

Jeff is supposed to be behind the Negro woman, but he's clearly not there. That's more reason to realize that this image was a production. So pause. Just pause. If the hat is a fake, and therefore the entire scene has been tampered with, isn't that enough to alert of criminal people behind this event? It's not been tampered with as a fun-and-games practical joke on America; it's been tampered with to fake a bombing. Think of it.

Below is a scene with the same man's cowboy hat (top-right corner) showing side curls more properly, and with zero curl at the back of the hat. This is the image with Jeff lying there (mid-left) more than two minutes in, and yet no one is helping him to that point. That's one way to know that he was pasted in.

Ignoring the metal parts, the explosive force of a typical bomb, and its noise, knocks people unconscious. In earlier scenes, the woman standing in a white top (pinkish tinge) and dark sleeves was located right beside the hole in the fence, and therefore right in the path of the bomb's explosive force. Yet there are people even closer to the bomb than she who, like her, are not knocked unconscious. Being that close to an explosion with power to rip peoples' limbs off would not have allowed her to be on her feet seconds after the explosion. Not once is she seen with hands to her head for the pounding that the force and noise of a strong bomb would have provided.

Expect insiders to come out at blogging sites to feign things such as: "I have worked with bomb squads for 13 years and can verify that the marathon scene is authentic." Insiders always feign being experts to make you believe their opinions.

With multiple images acting as evidence against the insiders, their only good strategy is to convince us that a Jeff Bauman really did have legs until the morning of April 15th. That could be the easy part. The hard part is proving that the individual they cite with legs is also the one who had no legs as of 2:49 pm on the 15th. They wouldn't be able to prove that in a court of law, and yet who's going to take anyone to court on this matter? We wish. On the Internet, many "friends" of Jeff Bauman can testify that he had legs and now he doesn't, but we don't know who these "friends" are. In a court of law, they wouldn't get away with faking friends because the man they are using for one Jeff, or the other, is a fake. Hospital records might be able to expose the fake, but hospital records are a closed book to the public until the discovery process of a court case begins.

By now, if you've been studying the scenes yourself, you've asked yourself about the broken glass at the LensCrafters store. Two entire panes were blown out, which you can see in the image above with the faked cowboy hat. Some are suggesting that actors came out from that store. I don't have an opinion on that idea. In the timeclock image showing a time of 4:11 (bomb went off at 4:09 hours after race began), note that the glass is in a heap on the outside of the window, whereas the explosion should have sent the glass into the store. Yes, some glass may be expected on the outside too, but look at how far the heap is from the window frame: my estimation, about 15 feet. That's not reality, is it? A bomb is not going to bring glass ten feet TOWARD it, is it?

Just imagine the first half-second of the explosive force pushing it's way through the glass. You can see the glass pushing into the store and breaking up at the same time. That glass is not suddenly going to start moving in the opposite direction. However, in being honest, I can propose that the bomb was barely able to push the glass inward, and that on the rebound the glass came streetward and dropped on the outside of the store; upon hitting the ground, the glass scattered. Not likely, but possible. However, in the official reports, this glass supposedly flew into people's skin. That I cannot believe...unless there was an explosive / pressure device inside the LensCrafters store (not likely or there would be evidence inside). The Fox news report below (on the day of the bombing) claims that there were two bombs at the first-explosion site:

Two explosive devices were detonated in front of a Lens Crafters on Boylston Street across from the Boston Library...An incendiary device was also found at JFK Presidential Library at the University of Massachusetts.

In total, there were four different devices with a third device having been detonated by police bomb squad officers. The explosions [plural] struck across from the Boston Library and sent glass shrapnel flying. The reported injuries were horrific with multiple amputations caused by flying glass [not just pieces of glass in skin, but AMPUTATIONS. How could glass merely falling onto the sidewalk bounce off the ground and cause amputations?].

According to the Police Commissioner [i.e. not just someone on the streets], there were three explosions. The first [assumes two bombs for making one explosion] happened right by the Lens Crafters across from the Boston Public Library on Boylston Street. The second happened about 100 feet down the street. The third occurred at the JFK Library.

...Reports are that a Saudi national has been brought up as a suspect. The JFK Library is disputing [i.e. inconsistency with the official report] that the fire was related claiming that it occurred in a section of the mechanism that runs the library.

I get it. There wasn't enough pressure-cooker-pot material to explain the number of injuries that they wanted, and so they claimed that flying glass caused "multiple amputations." But where are these victims at the glass site that were affected by the glass? The pictures don't show blood on or amid the glass (see aerial view at link below). And how could glass fly streetward (to hit anyone) if the explosion carried energy away from the street? While the police commissioner claimed just one explosion at LensCrafters, someone else must have told Fox that there were two. This is very troublesome.

Below is an image from Wikipedia showing the glass in the midst of some scattered black material that I cannot identify. It looks like pieces of the back side of mirrors mixed in with the scattered glass. If the image is showing clear for you when you expand it, note: no blood in the glass pieces. Why has no photo come out showing the impact location??? People have cameras in their cell phones; surely they would have taken photos of that blast site if they were there. Where are the photos??? You won't see one because the bomb did not make a hole in the ground. Here's one view:

Expand that image as large as you can to find the hole in the ground. You won't find it. Who ever heard of a strong bomb that doesn't make some sort of damage on the ground? The bomb should have made impact into the patio stones (3-inches thick maximum) sufficient to throw stones out of whack, to crack and chip the stones, and probably to throw up some gravel from below the stones. However, there are concrete slabs at the bomb site (probably six-inches thick), and it just so happens that the bomb can be gleaned to have been set off on a concrete slab. This may have been done intentionally to provide an explanation for the lack of patio-stone destruction.

There appears to be a thin film of black residue on the concrete where the bomb was located (seen in the aerial view too). The black residue is very visible in the "video" segment below, but the concrete has no blood spatter. The main direction of the explosion, according to the striations made in the residue, was on an angle toward the patio railing.

The "video" production was treated in the last update, where I concluded (for the time-being) that there seemed no logical explanation as to why insiders (i.e. the real bombers) would want for us to see pouches filled with objects visible at the :10 point. As it seemed that blood capsules are to be expected in the pouches for to fake blood on the ground, and because it seems inexplicable / unexpected / unbelievable that insiders would release this "footage" pointing the finger on themselves, I was strongly urged to suggest to readers that this "moving" (it's not really moving) picture was produced by conspiracy believers...trying to make us believe that the entire sets of related images are fakes. However, I concluded that this was not a production of conspiracy believers even though I had no other explanation for the loaded pouches.

If the video above disappears, search "Crisis Actor Caught During Explosion," or see it here if it's still there:

This "video" and the problem that it carries to us probably holds an important key for assessing the purposes of the faked images. The pouches must be to send us a message, not for creating the blood on the ground, but for something else. The man with pouches may have been created to act as one of the bombers to justify an arrest that never came as part of plan A.

Note in the "video" that the hooded man is located down the middle of the red patio stones. The woman who will end up lying flat on her back (treated in the last update) can be seen sitting at the top-left corner near the end of the production, and then, at the end of the production, in the last scene, she is seen going down with her head located in the middle of the red patio stones. Jeff's hip is seen on the red stones, and there is no sign of the hooded man for two feet into the red stones, proving that the hooded man was, at this point, significantly away from the border between the red stones and the concrete slab. Yet, in the Wikipedia image, just a couple of seconds later, the hooded man's elbow is virtually on the border. Look at the same scene in the images at the link below, where Jeff's pointed leg bone is like a weapon to the hooded man's face. Do you think the hooded man would have been careless enough to come to rest with his elbow that close to Jeff's bone moving about in unpredictable ways??? No, but then it was the paste job that was careless.

By the way: in the third-last image of the "video," the pouch man's white sock is superimposed on the running shoe of a woman, and the same occurs in the Wikipedia image...revealing how close the two scenes were in time.

The image below shows a bare spot on the concrete in the residue field (the bare spot may be explained by the bottom of the bag taking the brunt of the residue). There are striations toward the building on one side of the bare spot, and darker-black stains on the street-side of the bare spot, suggesting that the bomb went off at the bare spot. If that's the case, it would be evidence that Jeff's story -- where he said he was right beside the bomb -- was coordinated with the artist of this scene.

Whatever direction the bomb energy was flowing, that's where Jeff's legs should have gone. Jeff is shown lying on the concrete in the right direction, away from the bare spot, and with his legs further away from the bare spot than his upper half. We never see Jeff on his belly for causing the forehead scrape he has in the wheelchair. That scrape, along with the rips in his shirt, suggest that he was facing the bomb to some extent, predicting that he went down on his face rather than on the back of his head. The strap of flesh (about a foot long below the knee) that supposedly remained on the back of his leg STRONGLY suggests that he was facing the bomb. In his wheelchair, he is even given a pellet wound on the front of his knee. But can you imagine how hard his body would have hit the concrete with a "metallic wind" blowing past his legs hard enough to blow his flesh off. He should perhaps have a massive head injury from the force of the explosion sweeping him off his feet and onto his head. Yet there he is, fully conscious and not looking like he's in the last throes of life, just seconds after the blast.

I apologize for creating this horrific scene in you mind, but every detail is worth a potential breakthrough for others having information that I may have missed. In the past, I disputed that the bomb should be right beside Jeff, for the size of the hole in the fence is wrong with a bomb going off that far away. The energy would have been a larger-diameter circle (than the hole in the fence) after eight or nine feet of travel from the bare spot. I'm not saying that the bomb didn't go off at the bare spot, but that the fence was "painted" in wrong.

Where the bomb went off in the bare spot, Jeff's lower legs, bones included, would have hit the fence. The heavy-set woman standing there would have seen the parts flying by. Go to the educate-yourself page above (or click here) to see that there is no blood on the fence or on the ground in the direction that Jeff's legs are expected to fly. Realistic?

The explosion force would have gone the direction as dictated by the position of lid of the pot in the black bag, though I don't think a pressure-cooked pot was used. The pot lid was said to be found on a roof in the direction that Jeff is shown in relation to the bare spot, meaning that the lid was planted in a direction jibing with the pre-planned scheme. It tells me that they had Jeff drawn in as we see him in the images before the day of the bombing. This is important, because, in the last update, I was conscious of no evidence either way to suggest WHEN, in relation to the explosion, the artwork had been created. There was some argument in favor of quick artwork done after the explosion, but now, I would suggest that it was created weeks before the explosion.

I didn't know in the last update that Jeff claimed to see a "leather sweatshirt" on the one who left the bomb-bag at his feet. I've just checked to find that several major media have reported this claim, and yet, while the Russian brother who supposedly dropped the bag was wearing a white V-neck, the media has not made an vital story of this leather-shirt claim. For the media to be an accomplice in crime with the FBI is pathetic.

If true that the "video" was a real video, or if the other images were from other videos, then the FBI must have the scene where someone found the remnants of the shredded black bag. Where was that bag remnant found, I wonder? The bottom of the bag couldn't have gone far with the explosion force forcing it toward the ground. Bag material is light so as to lose momentum quickly in air.

The following story (round brackets not mine), which I won't quote in full, seems to reveal new information not known before, as if the one telling the story has inside information:

The following story came in to Beforeitsnews from a very concerned American, quite possibly within the law enforcement community...

...14:37 [pm, 12 minutes before explosion] Both brothers can be seen (time stamped security footage) coming onto Boylston Street from Gloucester Street...

they stop (about 125 feet after making the corner) in front of the Steak House (address 867 can be seen on the photos not cropped by the FBI) and loiter there until at least 14:45 according to the FBI.

...they talked to one another...the younger on the left (west) of the older a couple feet east of him [east is toward the 1st bomb site].

ODDLY, they are in the center of the original (uncropped) pictures left to right and top to bottom of the many pictures taken of them there (no one supposedly knew they were the future bombers at that time yet were across the street taking street level, not security camera, pictures of them?).

...14:45 -- the younger brother is photographed walking in front of the older and continues east on Boylston (headed east) in the direction of Fairfield Street (which he must cross to get to 755 Boylston, the FORUM (over 600 feet away). There are no pictures of them walking there together [this event was the "video" that the FBI released of the brothers walking considerably west of Fairfield, the point being that it was just four minutes before the bombing according to this writer. Jeff Bauman's (or whoever he was) testimony has the bomber dropping the bag about 14:47. The 2nd explosion was at the Forum, 550 feet from the 1st explosion site, and so the writer is saying that, two minutes before Jeff says the bag was dropped off, the older brother was some 600 + 550 feet (the writer rounds it off to 1200 below) from the 1st explosion site, a virtual impossibility under the circumstances for he to have been the bomber.]...

...there are no pictures of the older brother at the FORUM with the younger instead they communicate by phone [according to FBI] and just before the younger starts walking west (having placed his pack on the ground on the east side of the tree) less than a minute before the bomb detonates he is photographed looking west [away from the first bombing site] neck stretched to see over the crowd and is smiling (upon seeing his brother [writer's mere theory]) who never went any further east than that... that picture was taken at 14:49 [= the minute of 1st explosion].

the investigators cut down the tree (because the side that has damage is inconsistent with where the younger brother places his pack on the ground, the actual bomb was on the other side of the tree... [I do not agree here]...

there are no pictures of his [older] brother passing through what would be the site of the second bomb [very interesting observation], headed east to 699 Boylston (the address of the LensCrafters immediately behind the first bomb site)...nor are there any pictures of him headed west [excellent if correct] from the LensCrafters (before or after the second bomb exploded). That is until just before Fairfield Street (30 feet behind his brother in the iconic picture taken by David Green, and posted on his Facebook page, of the younger rounding the corner of Boylston and Fairfield 125 feet west of the second bomb sight.

...there is not enough time for the older brother to have left 867 Boylston, after his brother at 14:45 and negotiate the crowded sidewalk over 1200 feet (one way) to the site of the first bomb (that exploded prior to 14:50) and be photographed 30 feet from the corner of Boylston and Fairfield behind his brother at 14:51 after the bombs [this is in the David-Green photo, though not everyone agrees that the older brother is the one in beige pants beside the woman in the pink jacket. If so, the older brother is west of the 2nd explosion site, walking west, away from both explosion sites, even as the smoke is visible in the background behind his back].

...The NYTIMES did a diagram of the bomb sites and show the first bomb was (told to them by the FBI) placed mid way between the road and the LensCrafters building (which is consistent with the explosion's flash; but that doesn't jibe with the detonation/burn mark a couple feet from the building as far away from the door as possible in the debris photos (clearly nothing fell into that spot as it was the spot of detonation, no broken glass etc); and then after they hosed down the sidewalk there is a chalk "blast seat" drawn on the ground a couple feet from the road.

Oddly Paragraph #7 of the charging document issued by investigators and presented to the court and media state the first bomb was placed in front of 671 (the building next door to the LensCrafters at 699? Which begs the question, was there a forth bomb at the site of the first explosion (because they clearly have indicated there were three burn marks in front of the LensCrafters store...and how many pressure cooker bombs can you carry in a single back pack?

The webpage shows the street-level photo of the brothers BEFORE anyone was supposed to know that they were the bombers, yet they are centered in the photo both left-to-right and they were being framed by the one who took the photo. Right?

Closer Look at the Bags

The page also shows an excellent view of both bags strapped to the backs of the brothers. If there were a heavy pot in either bag, the body language of the men would tell us. Their bodies are not straining under any significant weight in the bag. The straps of the bags are not digging in tight to their coats. The straps don't look like they are stretching under the weight. The bags are not bulging / sagging at the bottom as though 30 pounds of metal were in there. The tops of the bags are not stretched as I think they should be. The Obama government lies. There has to be more than a handful of ball bearings to do the reported damage. The pot needs to be filled with metal. Steal weighs 15-20 pounds per quart, and two quarts of ball bearings should be more than 30 pounds. I have 30-pound barbells, and I've used them regularly since the start of my Rosicrucian / Templar investigations (otherwise this heavy computer work would kill my body). I know what 30 pounds is, in other words, and the top of either of those bags would be pulled tightly under that weight. 100% GUARANTEED: those brothers had no bombs in their packs.

Indeed, at the Beforeitsnews webpage above, spot the little white tag on the picture of the shredded black backpack released by the FBI. There is no similar tag on the older brother's backpack. A careful study of both tags on both packs shows they cannot be identical, and in fact it may not even be a tag, but a logo, on the brother's bag. Besides, whatever it is, it's on the grayish-colored fabric. His coat is black and easily distinguished in color from the top rim of the bag, clearly a grey tone. As the straps on his backpack are dark grey, not black, there is a good chance that the bag itself is charcoal grey. The tag/logo is on an even-lighter grey patch of cloth! Why didn't I notice this before? The tag/logo is even surrounded by a dark border. These things in themselves mean that the FBI / police machine-gunned to death the wrong man. Think of it. Here's the image from my files in case it disappears:

There is even the possibility that the tag on the brother's backpack was added by the FBI simply because images of the brothers came out after the FBI had committed to releasing its photo of a shredded backpack. In any case, the FBI now have no choice but to claim that a second person left a bomb at the same location to explain their black bag with tag that is clearly not the bag of their chief suspect. You watch; they will claim more than one bomb at the first-bomb site...if they haven't already.

In fact, they are apparently framing some friends of the brothers. A news report is that two friends of one of the brothers removed his bag at his university/college three days after the marathon. These friends are being portrayed as sympathizers with the bomber, taking the bag from his dorm in order to protect him from being caught. The FBI then claims laughably (if it were not so criminally sick) that this bag had fireworks with the explosive powder removed. It looks just like another FBI frame job. I mean, do you really think that the bomber would leave a bag like that at his school up until the third day after the bombing? No, but it was on that day when the FBI first came out with fangs upon the brothers.

If you closely inspect the tag of the shredded bag, two opposite corners are not square, but rounded, and yet the remaining third corner is perfectly square (the fourth corner is not visible). If you have a tag like that on your backpack, you may know what company produced the backpack used by the FBI. Let the world know. Send the young man's lawyer an email.

The Beforeitsnews webpage above has an image of the younger brother at the second bomb site, but of course many people at the marathon passed that spot that day. Yet, no guff, there is a white bag highlighted on the ground that is supposedly his, but at this point I don't know who took this image. Or do I? By what coincidence does virtually the entire bag show to the camera right through the legs of marathon onlookers, and right beside the brother?? Fat chance. It must be the FBI production that the FBI reported before the brothers were officially identified, and I have proof below that this image is faked. Besides, if you check the bag on the younger brother's back, it's about 90 percent white on the side that shows, while the side of the bag on the ground is more black than white.

You may recall that the FBI lied to the world when it pretended not to know who the man in the image above was. The FBI confessed to lying, and yet the world still believes the FBI story. As we now know that the FIB knew of the brothers before the bombing, we could expect that the FIB took photo's of them before the explosions.

The webpage also has an excellent view of the broken glass, with a black char stain at the right side of the glass-less window frame, and, like the writer said, there is no glass around that charred spot probably because the bomb energy resisted the fall of glass there. This char stain suggests a bomb force striking the glass largely an a sharp angle from the side, which could explain why broken glass fell outward. There may even be a bomb invention, with special frequency, made strictly for breaking glass, something Hollywood might use. There is yet another top view of the broken glass at the dailymail article below. It shows glass pieces to about 15 feet from the window frame, though most of it is piled at the base of the window frame, as if it simply fell to the ground.

The bag on the ground is too far away from the barricade rail to have caused the damage on one of them. I spoke (3rd update of last month) on the damaged rail shown at an image in the webpage below. Although the rail we see in the webpage above is gone at the page below, I opted not to believe that someone removed it from the scene because the damaged rail next to it is shown bent at nearly 90 degrees around the mailbox. The kind of force needed for that sort of bending can be expected to send the missing rail across the street, out of camera view. As the rail is wrapped around the mailbox while no chairs were forced to the ground, I was forced to imagine the explosive situated in contact with the missing rail beside. I had to conclude that the explosive material was on the right side of the missing rail rather than in the middle and especially not on the left side. If the rail wrapped around the mailbox is not a paste job, the only conclusion is that the force on one rail to send it streetward caused the adjacent one to wrap around the mailbox. But even that picture seems to be a stretch. It would take a massive force to bend directly upon the tubes to bend them like that.

Judging by where the brother's bag is situated, next to the chairs, it makes no sense to explain the wrap around the mailbox. Therefore, I refuse to believe that the image provided by the FBI is authentic. Besides, the chairs are only about four or five feet from the rail, and would therefore be smack next to spot where we see the bag on the ground. Unless the chairs were bolted to the ground, the FBI-provided image is a fake! Anyone can convince a jury or a judge of that sure thing just by pointing it out. If this photo ever gets to court, the FBI will be made to look ridiculous.

The FBI might hope to use the idea of pressure-cooker pots to argue for a one-way explosive force, but, no matter, if the lid and contents went street ward, the pot itself would have screeched toward the building and knocked over a table or chair. Yet no photo or even word of pot remnants at the building area was provided us. The FBI has already committed to a pressure-cooker at the second explosion site, and yet we read: "The second device was also housed in a metal container says the document, but so far there is not enough evidence to confirm for certain if a pressure cooker was also used."

The rail is made of round tubing that does not receive impact force very well, as would a flat surface. Round tubing deflects the force well; people with backs to the explosion don't. Twenty bullets of a machine gun striking the rail simultaneously wouldn't even loosen the rail from the neighboring rail. Are we to think that ball bearings and a cooking pot had the power to loosen one rail from the other and meanwhile wrap one rail around the mailbox??? You can't be that much of an ape to think so. The brother's lawyer will have no problem proving that the bag in the photo had NOT to do with the after-explosion long as it's true that the rail was wrapped around the mailbox. If it wasn't, then whoever provided that scene is guilty of framing someone.

Wouldn't most of the bearings have missed the rail parts if the bag was three or four feet away? Yes, to the tune of 90 percent, even if there were no people in the way. Clearly, the people in the way would have taken the brunt of impact so that the rail should have been spared most of it. Yet the rail wasn't in the after-explosion photo. If I were a judge or jury, I'd like to know every detail of that rail. Plus, if it was a one-way explosion (I've never read from anyone that it was so), we should expect only a few of the rail parts to have suffered impacts, and the type of impacts can tell some realities concerning the explosion. Shouldn't this rail be entered as court evidence for / against the surviving brother (Dzhokhar Tsarnaev)? If Boston trashed / hid that rail, isn't that suspicious? I say the brother's lawyer ought to file a counter suit against the state. The evidence points hard against the FBI with the Obama government in compliance.

Without blood on the ground at the 2nd explosion site, it begs the question of how the rail was wrapped around the mailbox without seriously injuring anyone. Look at how close the people at the rail are to the brother's bag? If the rail was wrapped around the mailbox by the explosive force of a bag three of four feet away, people there would have been pushed (putting it mildly) onto the street mercilessly. There is an argument to be made that body parts should have gone through the railing. Where is the blood?

Yes, it's very possible that an insider took the rail away from camera view, or perhaps the photo people edited it out, because it should have been covered in blood (but wasn't). But they could not remove the ground from the view, and it was NOT covered in blood. Something is seriously wrong with the official reports as compared with these images. In another after-explosion photo at the dailymail page above, none of the chairs (white) look damaged whatsoever; not a drop of blood upon them is visible. There is no evidence whatsoever throughout the photo of damage to anything -- bushes, glass, lamps, tree, chairs, mailbox, signs, etc. -- caused by explosive force. What a farce.

There is even a photo of the bomb blast, as it plumes, at the dailymail article above, with orange color still visible through the puffing smoke. The orange area, which reveals the center of the explosion, is about eight feet in the from curb, which not only denies that the brother's bag was the bomb, but would place the bomb amongst the tables. Therefore, I can't trust this photo. It's yet another photo that can be easily proved to be a fake. EASY. You can't kill a person eight feet from a bomb at that location without knocking over the chairs.

Therefore, the bomb blast must be a paste job. This is easy to do today. For a joke, a friend of mine (way back some 10 years ago) took a photo of me on a horse, and put me on a Harley instead, then sent it to me by email. My entire body was in the Harley picture, the entire horse removed. There was no smudging nor other evidence that the picture had been fabricated (aside from the bike being too large). He didn't have expensive software to accomplish this. The FBI has access to the most-expensive photo-altering equipment.

Near the bottom of the dailymail article, the billowing smoke from both explosions is shown. In the one for the 2nd explosion, the people on the street are shown, but there are none on the ground due to being hit by the barricade rail. What happened to that rail??? If it didn't get blasted onto the street, how did the rail next to it get wrapped around the mailbox?

Not far below the billow photos, there is an image (see below) of the shredded-pants man on the ground in front of the patio railing. His legs are looking wounded, and yet far more blood (i.e. deeper wounds) is expected when pants are blown off by an explosion. There are even footprints in blood showing, something that should have been all over the other photos too. This is the first image ever wherein I've seen footprints in blood, and I am very glad that the insiders decided they had best get one or more images out with them, for it shows how expected it is to have them. In other words, these footprints and bloodied legs only serve to prove that fakers had provided the explosions because most of the images failed to show foot prints.

If the lack of footprints suggests DRY fake blood on the ground, it's probably closer to the truth that little blood was the reality, and that much blood was pasted in. The amount of blood on the ground around the shredded-pants man is way too much according to the injuries visible on his legs. He was the only injury victim at the location in which he is found. Here is the image from my files in case it disappears elsewhere:

Also, note the realistic blood at the mouth of a woman in the same image, for realistic things like this were not provided in the other images. I've studied the injury scenes closely but do not recall seeing this woman anywhere (she wears a black jacket with green sweater underneath, has dark blue jeans and light-brown hair). By the time this image was taken, the Negro woman was in a stretcher (because a man with white jacket is bending over the head of the blonde with one shoe, a scene also in the stretcher image).

It now becomes obvious which of the two shredded-pants man this is: the one who was running. Yet, in the images where he's running, he has no sleeve on his left arm, and so I showed an image of him (in the last update) with his arm fully sleeved in black. One can make out the black sleeve in the image above too. Clearly, this catches the fakers without hope of explanation. Plus, unlike the underwear goon (with loaded pouches), this man has shoes on both feet (meaning he's not the underwear goon).

Upon the legs of the shredded-pants man, the artist has drawn small streams of blood on the front of the lower though resulting from a couple of pellet shots. Therefore, we would assume that the shredded-pants man was facing the bomb when it went off, so that he could not have sustained pellet / shrapnel injuries to the back of his legs. Would I be right about that? Yet the artist also drew in some horizontal injuries (on his legs) suggesting that the pellets grazed his legs from an angle, a clear contradiction. He even has a wound on the back of the leg; impossible. He is seen running from an area where the glass of the window did not reach. Therefore, the legs of this man are pure artwork.

I hope you understand: pellets in a pot cannot blow your pants off on both pant legs simultaneously, and in the meantime miss the legs. It's the stuff of cartoons. And he wasn't the only one to get pants ripped off; several people had that job applied to them. That's why the fakers cannot now claim that the bomb was one-directional, for they clearly had the pellets going in multiple directions. This man, according to his location, as well as the other man in shredded pants, was in the opposite direction from the bomb as was Jeff. The only way for pellets to go east and west at the same time is for the pellets to penetrate the pot body. If all pellets went out the lid, we couldn't have both Jeff and the shredded-pants men with pellets. If the pot was penetrated by pellets, may we see it?

But wait. We were told that the lid was on a roof six stories high. There's no way that the lid can blow off if some other part of the pot was compromised first. If a tear develops in the pot before the lid blows off, the pressure on the lid will be decreased substantially. On the other hand, if the lid blows off before the pot is compromised elsewhere, the pellets will not go through the other parts of the pot. Does that make sense? Therefore, it is to be expected in a pressure-cooker situation that the explosive force should be largely one-directional.

The shredded-pant-man scene above is nearly in the one below (woman in blue is in both). You can see that there is no other injury victim in the area of the shredded-pants man, and even an online drawing (from a Beforeitsnews page presented above) of the locations of all victims has no one else in that area. Therefore, who made the blood patches shown between the shredded-pants man and the blonde (now lying on her back)??? The blonde has yet not moved from her basic location, and the shredded-pants man did not run a path through that bloodied area to where he collapsed. Those particular blood stains are simply inexplicable the more you become familiar with all the various perspectives and details related to this crime scene. As the cowboy hasn't yet rolled up the fence to the point where the timeclock shows two minutes after the explosion, the blood we see in this scene was supposedly very fresh.

Where did the woman in blue come from? She's not in the wide Wikipedia image even though the shredded-pants man is in his collapsed position. We are to believe that she walked into this scene thereafter, and knelt at the railing to help the injured woman (also in a blue top). She was still there LATER as per the timeclock image at two minutes in, at which time the injured woman in blue is NOT any longer at the corner post of the patio railing. This is a contradiction. If the timeclock photo above disappears, see it at from my files:

It's a little confusing but trust me if I lose you. I've been wrong before, but I've thought this through to assure no mistakes. There is a blue shirt barely visible in the timeclock image above, and it's where the injured woman in blue originated (a few feet from the corner post of the patio railing). You can see her in this shredded-pants scene where the man in shredded pants (highlighted) has not yet collapsed at his spot. We are being make to think that changed her location to the corner of the patio railing. The contradiction is, while the timeclock image shows her at the original position, an earlier image (Jeff-Invisible scene) has her at the corner of the railing. That's backward. Indeed, see her black pants at the corner of the railing in the Jeff-Invisible scene, while the smoke of the bomb yet lingers. They made a serious mistake because the Jeff-Invisible scene is earlier than the timeclock image (provable because one shows the fence up while the other shows the fence down).

So, please, take me to court, FBI, for claiming that you are involved in crime upon crime. Whoever it is that heads the FBI right now, he ought to be pitied as a man of no honor. And that's the best he can have, for he may be a ringleader, for all we know, in this sham. The FBI has more people pouring over these images than me alone, and therefore knows the contradictions. While I charge the FBI for crime upon crime, I am not the One to convict and sentence. That pleasure belongs to the Judge. Severe Punishment is justifiable for this crime upon crime.

Eric Holder is ultimately in charge of the FBI's director, Robert Mueller. Therein is the one responsible for justice in the land. He is to order his people to seek honest justice. Instead, his people pretend that they can't see the fakery in these crime-scene images. Or, if some of them pointed it out to him, Mueller turned them a deaf ear, or worse.

In the timeclock scene, there is a long, sharp object at the lower-leg of the uninjured woman in blue. It looks like they left something pasted in that doesn't belong. I cannot identify the object, somewhat like a screw driver.

You saw David Green's photo mentioned above; here it is from his iPhone; let's talk about it:,,20693337,00.html

The article says that Green snapped just one picture and it happened to be the one with the younger brother walking away from the explosion. And, they say, he has no bag. But that's very debatable because he had carried that bag on the part of his body that isn't visible in the photo. A little photo-doctoring to remove the strap from the front of his jacket is all that one needs to do to make him look guilty, but in fact the photo is such that even the strap might be naturally out of view behind the jacket's fold at the zipper. Actually, the man in the foreground, smiling, looks guilty (because he's not acting like everyone else), if you don't mind some sarcasm. Plus, he's carrying away the barricade, strapped to his back, to ditch the evidence (kidding).

Below is the same shot of the younger brother, from an FBI website, showing a higher-resolution picture. Note that the hat is slightly in front of the woman's hair, whereas this cannot be made out in the normal photo. Therefore, it appears that the FBI shot itself in the foot by giving out the high-resolution view. The woman is supposed to be in front of the brother, you see. It means that it's a paste job. You may argue that it's ridiculous for me to claim that the FBI could make that blunder, but then the one who released the paste may not have seen the high-resolution version until the image was already out to the public. It is not at all easy to see whether the normal image has the hat in front or behind the hair. Prior to seeing the high-resolution view, I tried to make that out, but could not decide one way or the other.

In case it disappears, here it is from my files:

Here's some negligent journalism that you can expect in this case:

...Twelve seconds later, another explosion, more screams, more panicked people running. This time, a little boy, Martin Richards, 8, lay on the sidewalk, fatally injured. His mother and sister also were seriously hurt. In the crowd, the man in the white cap strolled calmly and turned the corner onto Fairfield Street [actually, the photo doesn't show him going down Fairfield at all, but the way it's written above, you get the impression that he's fleeing].

Later, an official who asked not to be named told CNN [if he doesn't reveal his name, why would CNN quote him in this sensitive case?]: "When the bombs blow up, when most people are running away and victims were lying on the ground, the two suspects walk away pretty casually" [that's the same way that the FBI spoke on the same matter].

"They acted differently than everyone else."

Yet, the media and the FBI didn't point out that the man in the foreground is smiling. Isn't that different than everyone else??? If there were no highlight around the younger brother in the Green photo, you would NOT deem him a suspect just by looking at his demeanor. He looks normal enough. Like others, he's moving away from the explosion. It's mainly the women who are running, but seven men near the younger brother are standing, not running or even walking. And, keep in mind, he's still half a boy at 19, not expected to act, perhaps, like older men. There were reports that he engaged some pot.

I've finally found (article below) that at least one of the brothers had a car, very important for proving that they didn't need to be hijacking a car in Boston. But, also, the article (below), which claims the brothers to be the bombers, takes one on a tour of their apartment on Saturday morning, a day after the older one was murdered. It turns out they lived together in this Cambridge apartment. The article tells what was found in the apartment, and of course no bombs or anything of the like, though the FBI can claim that it took all such things from the place the night before. The point is, there is a heap shown within the apartment with white-and-black bag, the colors of the bag worn by the younger brother. The bag sits on a suitcase:

In case the article above disappears, see the heap with the bag here:

There are two metal zipper handles showing in the bag at their home. But beside the zipper (at the part of the bag closest to the floor), one can also see what could be a white strap with a black line running down the middle, just like the one at the marathon. The bulging part of the bag that shows on the brother's back looks to be flat against the suitcase. It's flat because it's empty.

The problem is, we would expect the FBI to clear the two bags worn that day out of the apartment.

Beforeitsnews has an article on the Green photo.

Then, at another Beforeitsnews page, there's a claim that the backpack was edited out from an earlier / original photo publicized by Green:

We are currently having the original [David Green] photos forensically analyzed, but for the purposes of disclosing our findings immediately to the public, we are submitting this photo and assess 99.99% probability that the FBI has presented a photoshopped image of Zarnaev.

The implications are enormous if in the original image Zarnaev is seen here with his backpack on. We have observed the photos under 500%+ zoom, as well as analyzed "lighting" variations and have established that someone may have photoshopped the area directly behind his elbow. The original photo taken by David Green [Jewish?] possesses anomalies that indicate that there was a "white-ish" backpack over the Patsy's shoulder.

Once again, we maintain that the FBI is a criminal enterprise...

Bottom line is, we absolutely fear no one at the FBI. Share this link with as many people as you can.

Pete Santilli

Them's some strong words recognizing no fear of court action from the FBI for calling it out in this way. See how low down his back the white bag is on the brother in the image below, so that we don't need to expect the bag to show in the Green photo. The brother's face in the Green photo is a near-copy of the face pasted into the bomb scene.

It's extremely important that the Alex Jones' of America are permitted to operate because they study all photos closely and in many other ways make things a lot harder for the government goons to try such things again.

Here's an online spiel:

"Among the pieces of evidence collected from Boylston Street during the past week was a tree that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev may have leaned against before the bombing, according to a source who receives regular intelligence briefings on the Boston bombings. The source said the tree -- located at the site of the second blast -- was removed along with the surrounding grate, where the explosive device's circuit board was found."

The tree was removed for collecting evidence because the brother MIGHT have leaned against it???? Ever heard of anything more ridiculous? The tree was obvious proof of the sort of bomb that was or was not used. Steel pellets are expected to imbed themselves in bark. The removal of the tree is evidence that the younger brother did not drop the bomb bag. The tree was able to incriminate the real bombers, the ones who ordered the tree away.

You need to be reminded of how terrible it is to be jailed on trumped charges for your entire life, starting at 19. But tens of millions of people are willing to allow this to happen because they love Obama or love the FBI or trust the Republicans or trust the media.

People at the FBI should land in jail over this (actually, they should be shot by a machine gun in the streets in the wee hours of the morning after being framed as bombers) because it claimed that the older brother walked to the first-bomb location, and yet there is no evidence that he was ever there. Instead of offering a view of the older brother walking between the two bomb sites, the best they could offer the public was his being out of those bounds.

However, there should be pictures of him walking back, and the times in the cameras should be after 2:49 pm. If these pictures existed, the FBI wouldn't be going to such extremes to fabricate his guilt by other methods. It's been non-stop; to this day the FBI and other insiders are working hard to produce more and more evidence in case the conspiracy believers win this Internet war with too many people. The many admissions of guilt lately by the younger brother are to be expected where they made him think they might machine-gun him down too, or worse, in another dark night if he didn't answer the questions properly.

The article above that showed their apartment made mention that the brothers left their plates half uneaten. The idea painted in your mind is that they were watching television, saw themselves on the news, and, never mind eating, they high-tailed it with a plan to rob a store, and get out of town. But there's another explanation: half way through the meal, there was a knock on the door, from the FBI / police, who took them away.

When I first saw the men walking a few feet away from one another, when I didn't yet know they were brothers, it seemed that the two had too much of one another and needed to be alone. Or, at least, one of them felt that way. Learning now that they lived together easily explains it. Two men living together, especially brothers, need their own space, and they have a mutual understanding about it.

FBI Misrepresentation of the 2nd Bomb

I came across an image (below) I had not seen before. It is of the injury scene at the 2nd explosion. Warning: for some people, this scene may be disturbing. The rail bent around the mailbox, and the lack of damage to the mailbox, is conveniently hidden by a police officer, suggesting that he's pasted in. But if he's pasted in, the rail wrap-around could be a faked too. The barricade rail is gone, and smoke yet lingers in front of the mailbox. None of the victims are moved past the line where the barricade once stood. Again, the energy of the blast would be many times more impacting on human bodies than on small-diameter tubing so that the explosion should have forced people against the rail, not blown the rail across the street while leaving people at the same spot.

Again, a bomb that can wrap the rail around the mailbox suggests a force strong enough to draw much blood. We don't see that. Therefore, the scene could have pasted injury victims that marathon runners could not verify one way or the other due to being skirted quickly out of the area. Indeed, not one marathon runner is seen at this scene. Not one hero who took the effort to be of help. Do you believe that there wasn't one who wanted to help? Why isn't he/she there?

In the other images, I was unable to see the sign damage seen here (i.e. at least one sign suffered some damage after all). You can see another case of ripped pants with clean, non-bloodied leg. The scum isn't good enough to talk to the injured person beside him because there was no such person there. Isn't that right? If the injured person is really there, the man looks like he's giving him a kick, "Get out of my way." Or, as he's not running from the scene like everyone else, he must be the bomber.

In fact, look at that other man just standing there with a calm look. He must be the bomber. I mean, if that was a good enough argument of the FBI and the media for the younger brother, 100-200 feet away, it's an excellent argument for the man five feet from the explosion. Why wasn't he a suspect?

Although the foreground shows what might be an upset table, it was not necessarily knocked over by the blast, for the barricade falling on it looks responsible. Note that there is a bottle and drinking glasses still standing on a table directly behind the victims. That tends to prove that the bomb did NOT bend the barricade around the mailbox. More and more, it appears that altered, pre-planned images were released to tell a story that did not take place.

Here's the same scene at the dailymail picture.

Where we are willing to believe that the rail was not wrapped around the mailbox, we can entertain the white bag in front of the rail (not on the people-side) as a bomb bag after all. Below are two images with the same two woman beside the mailbox. In the left photo, a white plastic bag looks to be on the people-side of the rail. Moreover, there is a woman with her purse hanging half way down the non-people side of the rail. The purse is the same brown color as the unidentifiable object(s) in a white plastic bag on the non-people side of the rail. If it's a purse in that bag, then, surely, these women were the bombers. It doesn't look like a purse to me, and of course it would be very risky, and even difficult, to drop a purse into a flimsy plastic bag pushed under the rail with the feet.

But then we don't know that the bag was pushed under the rail with the feet. The two may have worked together to drop the purse into the white bag on their side of the rail, then dropped the whole lot on the other side. Yes, for in the photo on the right, the same woman no longer seems to have her purse in her hand! Both her hands appear visible without the same purse! She is now holding what looks like a greenish bag, and she's not holding it by the handles on the brown purse. What happened to her brown purse?

In the earlier photo on the left, there is something of a brown mass on the ground in front of the white bag at the feet of the woman in beige coat. In the later photo on the right, neither of the two objects are at the feet of the same woman! What a break! I have not seen this image until this point in this update. It comes from a webpage (below) where the writer is fingering Israelis. I'm not sure I agree, but then I'm open to the evidence for that position. I have grave doubts that the FBI / Obama would permit am Israeli operation in Boston. If I'm wrong, then there's a lot I don't know.

I think I'm going to take the position that my common sense is telling me: the "bomb" at the second bomb site was merely a smoke and noise device that killed no one. Actors, perhaps the two women included, fell to the ground in the smoke, feigned injuries (photos not released of course), and then the authorities gave the media the image with the younger brother pasted in, and moreover the injury scenes shown above were faked too. Much more than that for this bombing location was not needed, except perhaps the apparent explosion-in-process image (definitely faked) where the bomb location was not at the mailbox, which could have the purpose of pointing the finger away from this white grocery bag and the three women there.

In the image above with the two women and the purse, there is an elderly man in beige/grey cap and a black jacket standing behind them, who gives the impression of one of the security people under the microscope in the last update. In fact, there was an elderly man in a beige/grey cap at the huddle scene. In both cases, the man is very tall. Both men have a jacket collar of the same type, not folded flat on the jacket, but up around the neck. The more I compare the two, the more I have the sense that they are the same man. What an amazing breakthrough. Does the FBI know about this? Should we alert the FBI? Yes, the FBI must know about this, and no, there is no use alerting the FBI.

Anyone releasing this information is in immediate danger. Take precautions. These two photos with the woman, if indeed that's the security man at the huddle, may explain why the FBI needed to finger others rapidly. These two photos were NOT part of the plot. Some people had camera that they were not supposed to use directly across the street from the mailbox.

Can you imagine the concept of the Israelis feigning bombings in their country to frame Arabs either individually or collectively? I can. But why would the Obama government want such a thing to take place in Boston?

Judging from the shadows, the image of the two women and their bags was roughly an hour before the after-explosion scenes.

The original storyline was that both bombs were in black bags. One could understand that, where the photo of the white plastic bag came out to the surprise of the FBI, it would have been advantageous to lie by claiming a black bag. Then, perhaps, seeing the white bag of the younger Russian brother, and the black bag of the older one, they thought it could be more advantageous to frame them (yet, under the circumstances of much evidence for pasted scenes, I'm not even sure that these brothers were at the marathon). That is, they may have thought that, as word got around concerning the white plastic bag, it would be good to show the bomber with a white bag too, and in the meantime downplay the original story of a black bag.

During the early period of the bombing, when the FBI started to weave its tale concerning the brothers they claimed not to know, the FBI did NOT commit to telling us the color the younger brother's bag. No sooner did they release the "video" of his black-and-white bag (helps to explain why the bag was originally reported black) the next day that they also murdered one and framed the other so badly that the nation was immediately convinced of their guilt. I wouldn't want such citizens to be the jury at my trial. I wouldn't want a judge in my trial who views the word of the FBI as the word of God.

The FBI has, along with the photo of the younger brother and his bag at the explosion site, a video. Here is from the official FBI indictment to be used in court, we hope:

At approximately 2:45 p.m., Bomber Two [younger brother] can be seen detaching himself from the crowd and walking east on Boylston Street toward the Marathon finishing line. He appears to have the thumb of his right hand hooked under the strap of his knapsack and a cell phone in his left hand. Approximately 15 seconds later, he can be seen stopping directly in front of the Forum Restaurant and standing near the metal [barricade] among numerous spectators, with his back to the camera, facing the runners. He then can be seen apparently slipping his knapsack onto the ground. A photograph taken from the opposite side of the street shows the knapsack on the ground at Bomber Two's feet.

The Forum Restaurant video shows that Bomber Two remained in the same spot for approximately four minutes, occasionally looking at his cell phone [my sons at the same age did that all the time, even when they were not planning to explode bombs]...Approximately 30 seconds before the first explosion, he lifts his phone to his ear as if he is speaking on his cell phone, and keeps it there for approximately 18 seconds. A few seconds after he finishes the call, the large crowd of people around him can be seen reacting to the first explosion. Virtually every head turns to the east (towards the finish line) and stares in that direction in apparent bewilderment and alarm. Bomber Two, virtually alone among the individuals in front of the restaurant, appears calm [so did other men, possibly]. He glances to the east [the same direction as everyone else] and then calmly [that dirty word again] but rapidly begins moving to the west [others were running west, why isn't that part mentioned? Wouldn't you start walking away fast too?], away from the direction of the finish line. He walks away without his knapsack [so, show us the video, and that will be great], having left it on the ground [so show us the video, and that will be great] where he had been standing. Approximately 10 seconds later, an explosion occurs in the location where Bomber Two had placed his knapsack [so show us the video and that will be great].

The problem is, as was said above, there is a bombing scene in progress that has the explosion NOT where we see the boy's bag on the ground in a photo...that pasted he and his bag in. The video was incapable of showing the dropping of his bag (or the indictment would have said so), so that they created a photo seemingly showing it. The other problem is that the FBI has proven untrustworthy in many regards so that this indictment text should be treated as so much smoke until we can see and analyze the video for ourselves.

Plus, when you read above that "He glances to the east and then calmly but rapidly begins moving to the west, away from the direction of the finish line," the FBI page itself has a link on that sentence sending one to the photo of David Green. In other words, the video did not catch him moving away to the west!!! That is huge. The only evidence they have of his moving "rapidly" to the west, if I'm understanding this properly, is the Green photo, but as you can see, there is no way to tell that he's moving rapidly...or like a rat trying to get away from a crime. The FBI even paints pictures with its choice of words. On top of this, the photo looks fabricated.

It should prove to be laughable if we could see the damning video. We must insist on seeing that video if only to prove once and for all that the FBI is America's enemy, too itchy to kill or render people to long jail terms on behalf of fiendish plots. From now on, we must not be calm at a party, as the younger brother was on Wednesday night at a get-together. Being calm is now capable of landing you in the iron grip of the FBI. Don't be calm, but rather look frightened, or the FBI might label you, "calm." Dire. If he looked frightened, he was guilty; if he looked concerned he was guilty; if he looked calm, he was guilty, and the media stooges have all repeated how calm he was, and therefore how guilty. He might even have been walking away rapidly from an explosion; how suspicious. Walking rapidly and calm are contradictions, aren't they? Well which was it, then? Make up your mind FBI, whatever's left of it. You're tripping over your stupidity, and looking foolish.

The indictment continues: "I [Daniel R. Genck '] have observed video and photographic footage of the location where the second explosion occurred from a number of different viewpoints and angles, including from directly across the street. I can discern nothing [that's for sure] in that location in the period before the explosion might have caused that explosion, other than Bomber Two's knapsack." But wait? What about that white plastic bag seen from across the street?????????? What about that purse in the hands of one woman that was not in her hands afterward???????? Why did the FBI ignore that part? I know the answer. Don't you?

The indictment also has the official story on the carjacking, and while I'm not a lawyer, one would think that the name of the car owner should be entered without question. The name is not entered. The indictment commits to a pressure cooker at each location. We also read that the FBI has video images of the brothers at an ATM machine, and/or at the gas station. To make this story more fabulous than ever, the indictment claims that the brothers were throwing pressure-cooker bombs out the window of the Mercedes SUV. Can you believe that? I can only suppose that the insiders had a couple of pressure-cooker bombs left over that were not used up at the marathon, and so they decided to use them at the "shoot-out." Now I understand, more than ever.

AMAZING. The indictment makes no mention of the 7-11 robbery, nor the killing of the MIT officer, nor the previously-reported injury to one of the police officers in the car chase. These three things would be of prime importance in an FBI case made for arresting of the surviving brother, but apparently, the FBI is reserving the option not to use them in court. The indictment says he was shot in the head as well as in the neck, meaning that they likely did not expect him to survive. I doubt very much that he was shot in the boat. I say he was shot outside the boat, then placed in the boat to die. By God's kindness this boy will survive and tell the truth via his lawyer.

The FBI agent who gave this testimony joined the FBI in 2009, the year that Obama took Office. Obama has always been suspect in my mind as a special friend of the FBI.

To help prove further that Plan A was aborted on the Arab in favor of framing the Russians:

The Triggering Mechanism: The government's story has changed 3 times on this crucial issue. First, investigators told the media that a sophisticated [bomb] triggering mechanism was involved leading them to suspect they were part of a larger terrorist cell with "up to a dozen members." How they could report that one day and then claim [the brothers] acted alone the next, I don't understand.

Then, the story changed to the use of common "hobby fuses." These are green in color and used on everything from hobby rocket booster motors to large fire crackers.

Now government investigators tell Congressmen who are part of the intelligence committee (only reliable yes-men are allowed on this committee) that the triggering mechanism was from a radio controlled remote used for toy cars. Let's analyze this:

...No one observed the boys holding a remote control at the time of the explosions.

What the government accusation does claim is that the boys were holding a cell phone to their ear, 18 seconds in one case, until the bomb goes off. That's a problem too, because all you have to do to trigger a cell phone activator is call the number. You don't have to be listening to anything. The government seems reluctant to go for the cell phone trigger argument, because that clearly requires expertise in bomb making, but that's what they are leaving us with. If they want us to believe that the boys coupled a cell phone call to a cell phone trigger that was, in turn, linked to a radio remote control unit which actually triggered the bomb, they are asking us to believe even more -- all of this could only be done by a real expert.

...The Watertown police said the suspects set off grenades to try to stop police pursuit and that the stolen vehicle was later found to contain other explosive devices. Much of this information was false and fed to the media by Watertown Police Chief Edward Deveau as he did an on-camera interview with Wolf Blitzer of CNN.

In the battle the Chief claims the boys throw another explosive device at them and that they had various pipe bombs of "improved explosive devices," making this seem like an Iraqi style terror event...

...As a former combat trained Marine, I find it impossible to believe this version of events.

...It is hard to try to piece together everything that happened that night. So far it seems that the older brother was alive and in the custody of police -- and somehow was put back on the street and killed by police in this bizarre and conflicting shootout [my belief exactly]. Worse, when it was all over the police had to admit, that there was only one semi-auto pistol between both suspects and that was wielded by the older brother. -- Some raging gun battle! [where was the rifle that they were framed with?]

...The official story is that the younger brother exits the boat after being surrounded by police and tries to commit suicide by shooting himself in the mouth but only doing damage to his throat -- keeping him from being able to speak. The live video feed of his capture, however, shows him emerging from the boat on his own power quite alive, and UNARMED. If he tried to commit suicide, where did he get the gun? Why now instead of in the boat? The whole story doesn't make sense.

The article is well written and thought out (author Danny Weil), probably the best I've read yet. It includes this claim: "However, a couple of days after the [bombing] event, the mother said that the younger brother told her the FBI called them accusing them of the bombing and that they feared for their lives." The mother could be lying to protect her son, or she could be telling the truth. This continues with an excellent point:

Why didn't the FBI just show up and arrest them as they do with all other criminals? Why call the suspect and alert him that you are coming to arrest him unless you are trying to spook them into running?

Is that not an excellent set of questions? The FBI calls Wednesday, telling the boys they are coming to get them, and when the boys don't make a run for it, because they know it would make them look guilty, the FBI drops in, Thursday night, to take them away, creating a story in which it looks like the boys were running.

GD wrote in to say that it was a mistake to identify the security people at the marathon as Craft. The day after reading that email, I came across the article under discussion, which adds:

We have finally found out the identity of the private contractors in Khaki pants and dark jackets with backpacks. It turns out these guys are members of the Massachusetts National Guard Civilian Security Team (CST), which is trained to handle Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Explosive bomb analysis.

The others who first claimed that the men were with Craft were very convincing. If I'm not mistaken, it was infowars that broke that story by finding Craft men dressed in the same way. I recall taking a look at the Craft website, and besides, there was great confidence amongst "everyone" that Craft had been rightly pegged. Craft itself did not come out with concern for any mistaken identity, so far as I read. Here's why the National Guard is now being pegged:

According to this article from the Air National Guard site: "The Massachusetts team was on duty during the running of the Boston marathon, augmented by similar civil support teams from the New York and Rhode Island National Guards.

..."A Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Team (WMD-CST or CST) advises civilian responders in the event of a suspected weapon of mass destruction attack. CSTs are federally funded National Guard units established under Presidential Decision Directive 39. There are 57 fulltime teams: one in every U.S. state..."

This is not in itself conclusive evidence that Craft was not at the marathon, but you are welcome to read the rest of the evidence at the page above, which is compelling for the presence of the Nation Guard's weapons-of-mass-destruction teams. Just keep in mind the possibility that a strategy may have been devised to take heat off of Craft and re-direct it to the National Guard (both organizations may be required to wear similar outfits if they are involved in bomb-related tasks). If there is truth in this new identification for ALL the security men, then infowars and the like will tend to go with it after some investigation. But if the National Guard is responsible for those men at the huddle around the Escalade, and if the elderly man there was also at the second-explosion site, the guilty finger will point to the National Guard as the real marathon bombers. What five-letter O-word does that spell?

Having a drill or exercise is a convenient cover for bringing in these specialized federal personnel. It is also strange that the government never made any effort to answer the public's questions about them swirling all over the net. They [the government] could have easily done so, but never did. This is additional evidence that they don't want the public knowing about these special teams -- lest people come to a conclusion about prior knowledge.

Jeff's Wheelchair Drag Race a Disgrace to the Nation

The last update treated the wheelchair video of Jeff, where he is being wheeled out from the injury scene, and yet there was shown evidence that this scene was pasted in, meaning that he was wheeled out starting at some other location...because he was NOT at the bomb site. At that time, I spoke on a grey area that showed under the visor of the red cap worn by the woman who pushed Jeff's chair. Here's that image:

At the time, I hadn't yet investigated whether that grey area was the dark blue Adidas advertisement that appears in this timeclock image. It did not look like the blue of the Adidas ad, and yet it was definitely not the light blue color of the panels as seen when the ads were ripped off, as you can see here:

It was therefore momentarily perplexing that a mottled grey should appear on that bleacher panel at the very end of the bleachers, until I realized the grey color of flooring inside the bleachers. That made sense because, along with the grey under her visor, one can also see the backs of some white chairs. However, the top of the grey line is exactly where one expects the top of the pane; because in both the scene under her visor and in the a timeclock scene, the line is between the 4th and 5th rows of white decoration from the top of what I'll call the "wallpaper." It lends an argument to anyone viewing this grey area as the Adidas ad.

Another argument in favor of that idea is that the security men start ripping up the advertisements on the bleachers walls just as Jeff's chair is to go out of view under the press box (see video at link below). One might argue that, because they start tearing it down at the other end of the bleachers, we should expect the Adidas ad at the other end to still be up. They start tearing while the EMT guy is bending over at Jeff's wheelchair, and by the time that none of Jeff's crew is visible under the press box, there are three security men working the bleacher walls, and the advertisements can be clearly seen in a crumpled state (the video ends there). For me, that's an inconsistency. (For the coming discussion, load the video onto a separate browser; with Firefox, hit the + sign in the top menu bar to get a new browser.)

[I apologize if the video doesn't seem available any longer at the webpage above. It is, as of September, partly shown in a Youtube video called, "Boston Bomb Fake Prothetic Falls Off -- New Footage":]

If the providers could give us the videos (from different networks) lasting longer, and if they would give them to us at real speed, we might have no need to be suspicious. The fact that it's five to ten times real speed is already a suspicious decision on their part, and has the capability of hiding what it was that fell from the chair. Moreover, if you inspect the video under a magnifying glass, the EMT guy is not visible in his yellow color until the chair gets to the marathon's finishing line, at which time he pops up from directly behind Arredondo.

Other people in yellow are clearly visible who are further from the camera than the wheelchair, and so why shouldn't the EMT guy appear in yellow too? There is a man in bright yellow right beside the wheelchair as it first becomes noticeable, and so why didn't the yellow parts of the jacket of the EMT guy show even half as yellow? He was never there, was he? No, and I never see him in the several injury-area scenes.

While it may be reality for the EMT guy to pop up from directly behind Arredondo, it can also be deemed that he was pasted into the scene. There is zero evidence that anyone walking past the wheelchair, or standing in its path, has seen this unusual scene of man with both legs hideously missing. No one can be seen turning a head or body in astonishment. That's why we need to have the scene at real speed, in order to verify this, and thus pronounce the providers of this video fakes.

Actually, the video is probably playing at real speed, but with frames removed so as to give the impression of increased speed. In that case, you can't have the whole scene at real speed just by slowing the video. There must be parts of the video missing by design. Why? Why did they risk making people like me suspicious? Because, I must assume, they had no choice unless they wanted to be caught in falsifying this scene.

When a camera is positioned high, a person standing further from the camera can look taller (their head can be closer to the top of the picture) than a person standing closer to the camera. That's why, during the 49th second, the head of the EMT guy is seen above Arredondo's cowboy hat. But in the earlier part of the 49th second, the head of the EMT guy is not there.

In my guestimate that Jeff actually came out from under the bleachers (after the advertisements were ripped away from a doorway to the underside of the bleachers), it makes sense that the EMT guy was NOT following behind the wheelchair, especially not prior to it reaching the finishing line. That explains why they had to paste him in coming from behind the wheelchair, as he was never in the real scene that way.

At 52 seconds, the EMT guy starts to bend down. At first, prior to investigating closely, I thought that he was picking something off the ground. Then, when it was noted that the wheelchair continues to move some four feet while he's stooped over, and that his hand does not reach to the ground in the meantime, it was realized that he was fixing something at Jeff's right leg. One can assume that something was not correct for the planned photo. Either the tied white cloth around the leg had popped off, or the fake leg itself had slid out of position. The EMT guy is yet holding the leg in the still photo, and appears to be pushing the leg backward, as much as is possible, toward Jeff''s body. Very suspicious under the circumstance that we saw him stooping to that leg just seconds earlier.

During the 52-55 stretch that the leg is being tended, there is a man in yellow in the foreground totally though the wheelchair was never there. The man turns to face the oncoming direction of the chair while it's eight to ten feet in front of him, but as it passes to his left just six feet away, the man's head does not turn one iota to the left. Instead, he turns the other way just as it's passing him.

In the timeclock image above, the Adidas ads can be seen wrapped around the tops of the bleachers wall. In the scene (link below) showing the Craft huddle around the Escalade, the ads can be seen wrapped over about half of the tops of the bleacher wall (there is a straight line going all the way down the tops of the wall that indicates advertisements on the right side, and panel cloth on the left side). This means that the huddle took place before the wheelchair video shows a second wheelchair arriving to the Escalade, and for proof we can see that the white electric cart (shown in the wheelchair video) is not yet parked in front of the Escalade. The woman in blue in the huddle scene is also in the wheelchair video standing at roughly the same spot, all suggesting that the two scenes are not far apart in time.

In the timestamp scene (with the clock showing three minutes after the explosion), the white chair closest to the left of the photo-finish camera is right up against the wall and facing the street. In the huddle scene, the same chair can be seen in the same position. The legs of the chair are right up tight against the bleacher wall, but in the wheelchair video, this chair is about one chair width back from the wall. The chair verifies what can be gleaned in other ways, that the scene in the wheelchair video was AFTER the huddle at the Escalade.

If one can hammer down how long the huddle was after the explosion, the wheelchair scene can be deemed a fake by yet another argument: Jeff is being wheeled away late enough to be a sham...because by that time we expect an ambulance to be taking him away rather than a wheelchair. Between the three-minute mark and the huddle, the timeclock and it's cord have been taken down. During the writing of this update, a new image was found (below) showing two timeclocks in the arms of the men on the ground, with the time showing, 4:14:26, less than five minutes after the bombing.

There is a question: why would the marathon people order the removal of the timeclock in the thick of this emergency??? It's ridiculous, right? It's inexplicable to think they would be concerned with the clock at such an early time of the management of bomb victims. It's not like Boston gets bombed every week; the timeclock could wait...unless someone didn't want viewers to know what time it was for some particular event. Jeff is the only thing coming to mind when I think of "someone didn't want viewers to know what time it was". He was wheeled away after the clock was removed, but of course they would like us to believe that he was wheeled away as soon as possible after the clock was removed.

After all the above was written, the following image was found showing Jeff's wheelchair ride from the back. You would be correct in being suspicious when asking why it took so long for this image to become available. It was found at Beforeitsnews:

In case it disappears, here it is from my files:

You can see that the Adidas ad is still up. If Jeff's chair is pasted in, we might need to believe that the other wheelchair crew was pasted in too (though not necessarily), the one near the Adidas ad. This other wheelchair crew was treated with suspicion in the last update because it appeared that the "injury" victim came out of the SUV. The reason that I think this crew may have been pasted in at this scene is that the three of that crew are the ones appearing under the woman's visor in Jeff's still photo, wherefore they are to be expected at that spot as Jeff is being wheeled out. It's perhaps important to note in the image above that there is a bunch of people in front of Jeff's wheelchair that is not visible in this wider shot of Jeff's still photo:

It's also important to note that one of the wheelchair crew is located in front of the last panel of the bleachers, hiding most of it from our view. Again, in an expanded view of that panel, it does NOT have a crisp dark blue of the Adidas ad. In fact, that ad looks almost black in other images. Yet the area that is visible under her visor is a medium grey. The wider image above is not the same shot as the one below. The one below allows a slightly larger view, and a clearer view, of that panel. It is not likely a coincidence that the two images released both have that panel blocked largely by the man in red cap, and moreover the woman's cap hides all panels from the timeclock on to the last pane.

If it can be determined that the last panel has no Adidas ad, the insiders will thereby be proven to have pasted the wheelchair scene as well as the back view of Jeff's wheelchair ride. The fact that her cap blocks all panels from the timeclock on down suggests to me that Jeff was photographed after all the panels had been ripped away.

The top line of the grey area is very close to the expected height of the panels, suggesting that the top of the grey line is the top of the panel; it's an argument in favor of those who see the grey as a washed-out version of the Adidas ad. But I'm not convinced, for I can see the metal chair frames (of two or three white chairs) coming down into the grey area. That is, the metal frames come down lower than the top line that, but if indeed it's the top line of the panels, the chair frames should be rendered non-visible. Therefore, the grey is the carpeting inside the bleacher walls.

In the image below, imagine a gently rising line from the camera position (five to six feet high) through the area where the last panel is ripped away, and that line could rise over the panels (not visible behind the visor) as they have been laid down, capturing a view of the grey carpeting instead. The blue ABOVE her visor is the side wall (rises to the top of the bleacher), visible in-part in the image below, at the other end of the bleacher.

If it doesn't strike us as feasible to get a wheelchair out from the little doorway beside the SUV, then perhaps Jeff was wheeled out from the other end of the bleachers, where they dismantled the panels. It would require all people there to be insiders, whereas some of them seem to young. On the other hand, the young ones may have been asked to go somewhere else just before Jeff made his exit. In any case, no sooner is the advertisement pulled off, in the image below (same image showing the Jeff crew that wasn't in the image originally), that there is a security man squatting and looking / speaking into that small doorway. I did not have this image until very recently, as I write here. I did not have this image when it was suggested in the last update that the advertisement was pulled off exactly to make that door available to the security men around the mystery SUV.

In an expanded view, I think I can see the edge of the open door on its hinges. The object that crosses from one corner to the other of the doorway is in a different position in another related image, meaning that someone moved it. It could be noted that the advertising appears to be used as a drape to hide the scene while Jeff comes out that doorway. The SUV is used as another drape. The white electric cart was probably parked there to assure that no one walk in front of the SUV to the doorway area. The doorway looks barely large enough for a wheelchair to fit through with Jeff bent down.

If you expand this Jeff scene, note that two or three security men are working the bleachers beyond the finish line (that line is barely visible before the SUV). Why are they working that part of the bleachers at this time, AFTER the advertisements were already ripped off. In later scenes, we don't see the panels removed from that particular area. Are we therefore seeing the men replace a panel temporarily removed to let Jeff out? I am not at all sure when and where exactly Jeff was let out; I'm keeping all options open.

In order to catch the insiders pasting in the back view of Jeff's wheelchair ride, we need to examine closely whether they pasted the crew at the perfect timing: when the positions of the rest of the people match their positions in the wheelchair video. There are two good scenes available for this examination: 1) the man in blue jacket on his cell phone; 2) the woman in white (black shorts) speaking to the policeman pushing the stretcher. The obvious place to start is to check where the man is in relation to the black strip across the road. In the still image, his left foot can be seen about one foot behind the black strip of tar. The next step is to pause the video (at :56 seconds) just as the woman is a foot from the police officer, as she's seen in the still image. Here's the video:

[I apologize if the video doesn't seem available any longer at the webpage above. It is, as of September, partly shown in a Youtube video called, "Boston Bomb Fake Prothetic Falls Off -- New Footage":]

The man's left foot has now crossed the black strip. Besides, the first thing one notices is that the black strip seems to be brushed out of the video picture right under that man, as if the insiders may have noticed that they didn't get their timing quite right; but instead of re-pasting the crew into the still image, they just brushed out the black strip. However, they left enough in there to allow us to make it out.

In the first part of the 56th second, one can pause the video with the man's left shoe one foot off the black strip. His right foot is all the way back in his stride, meaning that he will be upon the black strip in his very next step. However, at this time, one can see the man in yellow, who has come from the underside of the press box. In the video, he his directly beside the wheelchair, and yet in the still image he is at least two steps past the wheelchair, showing once again that the video versus the still image is about one step out of perfect timing. It's not much, but it's enough. It's recorded and out there, and can be used against the insiders to convict of fraud on a national and high-level-governmental scale.

By the way, the piece of white "scrap" behind the wheelchair crew was not there before the wheelchair came by, suggesting that it was dropped on the ground when the EMT guy was working with Jeff's leg. This piece of cloth (or whatever it is) may have dropped in the original wheelchair-video scene, or it may have been pasted in to both images to give the wheelchair video an authentic appearance.

If you give the video a quick double-click from the :56 second point above, the man has gone one more step, and has his left foot in the air precisely in the position its at in the still image. There are now two problems in the video: 1) the woman is still two feet from the police officer; 2) the man in yellow has not yet reached the tip of the white traffic stripe on the road, where he is positioned in the still image.

If you give it one more double-click, you're still in the 56th second. The man in yellow is still not quite at the white stripe in the road, the woman is still not quite a foot from the police officer, and yet the man in blue has crossed the black strip. From this information, I glean that the man in blue was pasted into both the video and into the still image to remove his identity.

If one double-clicks again to the start of the 57th second, the left leg of the man in yellow has not yet reached the white traffic stripe so as to be in the position of the still image. The police officer's right foot is at his traffic stripe just as in the still image, and woman has reached her position about a foot from the officer. The man in blue cutting across the security man (National Guard suspect) has essentially reached his position too. Yet, the feet of the woman pushing Jeff can be gleaned to be some five or six feet past the white "scrap" on the road, whereas the still image has her feet only about three feet past the scrap. Or, in the video, her feet are about twice the distance from the scrap as compared to the distance between the same scrap and the tip of the white stripe, while in the still image her feet are about the same distance from the scrap as the scrap is from the white stripe.

I would therefore conclude that Jeff's wheelchair crew was not pasted in at the right time, meaning that it was pasted in, and moreover there is reason to expect something wrong with the man on his cell. Reminder: there is no scaffolding visible at the injury scene in the video, so that it's doubtful this video scene is less than 10 minutes after the explosion. Yet, as the wheelchair is pasted in, how much later than 10 minutes in did they wheel Jeff away?

The security man (face included) standing beside the SUV is the one who (seconds earlier) took a bag from the SUV (discussed in the last update) and handed it to a man in light-grey shirt with dark sleeves. He is identifiable as the one who had the radiation detection device. He is in a close up of the image below of the three security men rushing. I did not come across the image below until now. It was difficult to ascertain, in the close up, where the three security men were in relation to the finish line, and I had wrongly pegged them on the other side of the finish line, because it made sense that they should be rushing toward the explosion. Yet, as we now see, they are rushing while the mystery truck is parked at the finish line, a significant time AFTER the explosion. Jeff may not yet be out at this time. (This is the only scene I know -- perhaps they thought it was the only one they needed for press purposes -- with an ambulance at the injury site, but it seems too little too late for anyone seriously injured).

Why are the three men rushing after they take the bleachers apart? What story are we supposed to come away with this? They are even taping the bleachers to keep people from going under. Are they trying to make it appear as though they are justified for ripping the bleachers apart? I have no inclination whatsoever to believe that they ripped things apart due to a report of a bomb under them. Why didn't they rip all the rest apart too, if that was the case? Why didn't they get people away from the area? It again stinks of a staged production by a sick government that thinks it owns the people, to feed the people a false sense of reality. Isn't that what Jeff was all about?

If Jeff was under the bleachers, for how long? Wouldn't he need to be slipped under there at night, before people arrived the next day? Did they set up a little kitchen and couch to make him feel comfortable? If so, wouldn't they need to get rid of those things before the bleacher people come get their bleachers? Of course. How will they sneak those things out from under the bleachers in broad daylight? You're looking at part of it. The mystery truck may be a part of that effort. Look at how the vehicles are parked for sneaking things into that truck. After the three men feign a danger, it allows them to clear the area for to sneak those items into the truck.

In the image of the three men rushing, there are two security men wearing beige caps. In the image below, a security man in a same-colored cap is stooped to his bag on the ground at the front door of the LensCrafters store...the store missing its glass. He appears nestled in a hiding spot. It's only seconds / minutes after the explosion (here's another view); how did this man get there? Is he checking for radiation? Why? Who alerted this organization / National Guard that a chemical attack might take place at the marathon? If he's interested in taking radiation measurements, he wouldn't be nestled in a small enclosure, would he? He is apparently NOT one of the two security men (one with skull-logo cap) standing outside on their cell phones. How close to the bomb site was he at the explosion? Did he come from within the store?

There is yet an injury victim (woman) visible at the front of the broken glass (not there in the image two minutes after the explosion). I doubt very much that an injury victim would walk to that spot to sit in the heaviest pile of the glass, leaving only two alternatives: 1) the glass fell on her; 2) she was not injured but sat there as part of an on-site actor crew. Does she look like one on whom heavy glass just fell, glass that, according to reports, caused several people to lose limbs? No, she does not. As she's completely gone by two minutes in (I can't find her anywhere in the scene), we must assume she walked away on her own. How that happen if she was standing right in front of the glass when it came down? A miracle, or a fake job?

Again, now that we have the security man in the front-door enclosure pegged there before the two minute mark, why is he at that particular spot. If we assume he came from the street, why would he choose that spot to go through his bag? Why not in the open air near the street?

Look at how bad things are:

Twenty-nine percent of registered voters think that an armed revolution might be necessary in the next few years in order to protect liberties, according to a Public Mind poll by Fairleigh Dickinson University.

...Results of the poll show that those who believe a revolution might be necessary differ greatly along party lines:

18 percent of Democrats
27 percent of Independents
44 percent of Republicans

There has been over 46,000 daily gun purchases (about 17 million annually) on average under the Obama administration. It would probably be a delight for Obama to see Americans killing one another in a civil war. Naturally, he'll use the military on his side to kill Republicans. Obama has already turned the military against Christians. How expected is the following at this time:

The disturbed Texas man who was arrested [April 28] after illegally driving through a security gate at Dallas Love Field airport repeated a five-letter word beginning with 'J' several times before he was forcibly taken into custody.

Dallas cops say it was "Jihad."

FBI agents say it was "Jesus"...

The framing against Christians looks well under way. Obama knows he can't fight Middle America with his military, because half the military would defect. But he may think to fight Christians knowing most won't fight back. We shall need to wait and see if anything serious develops. Keep watch.

Soldiers telling other soldiers about God, what has the world come to:

The Pentagon has released a statement confirming that soldiers could be prosecuted for promoting their faith: "Religious proselytization is not permitted within the Department of Defense...Court martials and non-judicial punishments are decided on a case-by-case basis..."

The statement, released to Fox News, follows a Breitbart News report on Obama administration Pentagon appointees meeting with anti-Christian extremist Mikey Weinstein to develop court-martial procedures to punish Christians in the military who express or share their faith.

For a story on how the Republican party has treated a fellow Christian member of the party for speaking her mind on Jeff Bauman and the rancid methods of the police, here you go:

She is being treated harshly, and receiving death threats, in effort to minimize the number of other Republicans who come out to speak their mind in this way. The Democrats are banking on Republicans having no spine, and placing self before righteousness. Righteousness in this case is to speak your mind if you think the federal government is involved in a deceptive, murderous campaign against the people in general, or even one sector of the people.

Recently, I read that Obama has cut short military abroad to reinforce military within the country. Imagine this lunatic turning the military on his own people. As the military is way out-gunned by the population, the only way to win a civil war using police and military is to heavily protect the men with armor. However, the more intimidating the military looks with its armor inside the country, as the young brainwashed men are sent into communities, the more such an attempt at martial law would turn the people against them. We'll need to wait to see what the next act of the Obama animals will be. It won't be coincidental if something is soon staged to point the finger at militia groups.

The way to solve the growing militia problem is to get rid of the reason it exists: the current government. Obama should have no problem stepping down if a large sector of the nation demands it, for he himself has been in favor of the stepping down of Assad, Qaddafi and Mubarak due to the people standing opposed. And if Obama kills his own people to retain power when the people arise against him, he will be an Assad in your face, the hypocrite that I've always known him to be. The reason that Obama is not supporting the Syrian rebels against Assad may be due to his wanting to use the money in a fight inside his own country. But it's not his country, for he's an imposter. May he be a hammer to his own Democrat scum, and may they suffer the most for electing him, when his agendas have caused the nation to suffer.

There is a possibility that he will be assassinated if he keeps on the road he's on now. If Obama acts like the lame duck that he is, his term will come to an end without further complications, but if he is determined to utilize power to the point of acting dictatorially, he had best stay indoors, and in the meantime spy on his own body guards lest one of them give him a terrible sudden end that doesn't allow him to say good bye to his family.

To control the masses, spy heavily on their communications. Just pretend that the Muslims are attacking the Internet:

Middle East- and North Africa-based criminal hackers are preparing cyberattacks this week against the websites of high-profile U.S. government agencies, banks and other companies, according to the Department of Homeland Security.

The attacks, dubbed #OpUSA, for Operation USA, will begin [May 7]...

...This collaboration may "signal an emerging trend [of course]

When websites go missing of those who oppose the Obama people, they can just blame it on the Muslims. And of course these phantom Muslims will be un-catchable completely so that the faked threat will be forever if possible. Unfortunately for the fakes, forever belongs to God, and He is a very mean God when it comes to retribution.

Hopefully, the following backlash will put a good dent into Obama's national-implosion machine, Hopefully, the marathon scam has had the effect of causing betrayals against Obama in many ways:

On the night of Sept. 11, as the Obama administration scrambled to respond to the Benghazi terror attacks, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and a key aide effectively tried to cut the department's own counterterrorism bureau out of the chain of reporting and decision-making, according to a "whistle-blower" witness from that bureau who will soon testify to the charge before Congress, Fox News has learned.

That witness is Mark I. Thompson, a former Marine and now the deputy coordinator for operations in the agency's counterterrorism bureau. Sources tell Fox News Thompson will level the allegation against Clinton during testimony on Wednesday [May 8] before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, chaired by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif.

Fox News has also learned that another official from the counterterrorism bureau -- independently of Thompson -- voiced the same complaint about Clinton and Under Secretary for Management Patrick Kennedy to trusted national security colleagues back in October.

Thompson considers himself a whistle-blower whose account was suppressed by the official investigative panel that Clinton convened to review the episode, the Accountability Review Board (ARB). Thompson's lawyer, Joseph diGenova, a former U.S. attorney, has further alleged that his client has been subjected to threats and intimidation by as-yet-unnamed superiors at State, in advance of his cooperation with Congress.

...Also appearing before the oversight committee on Wednesday will be Gregory N. Hicks, the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Libya at the time of the Benghazi terrorist attacks. Like Thompson, Hicks is a career State Department official who considers himself a Benghazi whistle-blower. His attorney, Victoria Toensing, a former chief counsel to the Senate Intelligence Committee, has charged that Hicks, too, has faced threats of reprisal from unnamed superiors at State...

...Hicks told the committee that he and his colleagues on the ground in Libya that night knew instantly that Benghazi was a terrorist attack, and that he was astonished that no one drafting the administration's talking points consulted with him before finalizing them, or before U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice delivered them on the Sunday talk shows of Sept. 16.

The time has come, we pray, for a great number of heroes, a number too large for the O-trolls to control. Send the other western nations a message before they too go down the same paths. See also the below as part of the current discussion on Obama's secret powers:

The real capabilities and behavior of the US surveillance state are almost entirely unknown to the American public because, like most things of significance done by the US government, it operates behind an impenetrable wall of secrecy. But a seemingly spontaneous admission this week by a former FBI counterterrorism agent provides a rather startling acknowledgment of just how vast and invasive these surveillance activities are.

"All of that stuff" - meaning every telephone conversation Americans have with one another on US soil, with or without a search warrant - "is being captured [by the FBI] as we speak".

Yes, that the same FBI whom vulnerable people like me oppose. We cannot listen in on their conversations, but they can plug into ours. What is Obama doing about it? Protecting the FBI, what else, and abusing the people. Praise God for the good people who will vehemently turn his evil upon him, by proper methods not using guns. There is a better way to fight than by using guns, by showing the people the truth. See also:

Obama tells people not to be concerned about how the right is portraying him, and yet:

The Department of Homeland Security has released a market survey asking companies if they are able to provide 2 million rounds of ammunition within a short time period, increasing concerns that the federal agency is continuing its arms build up in preparation for domestic unrest.

With the DHS already having committed to purchasing over 1.6 billion bullets over the course of the last year, a “request for information” on “reduced hazard training ammunition” posted on the FedBizOpps website quizzes bullet manufacturers on how fast they can supply large quantities of ammo;

- Are you capable of producing large quantity orders of any training caliber specified with a short turnaround time of 30-60 days?

Since when was it the job of Homeland Security to defend the nation with bullets? I say it's ever since Obama knew that half the military would defect, in his national-implosion program, if it ever came to civil war. Don't be frightened, because they want you to be that way.

I'll comment on the Syrian accusation against Israel in the next update.


Especially for new or confused readers
shows where I'm coming from.

For serious investigators:
How to Work with Bloodline Topics

Here's what I did when I had spare time on my hands:
Ladon Gog and the Hebrew Rose

On this page, you will find evidence enough that NASA did not put men on the moon.
Starting at this paragraph, there is a single piece of evidence -- the almost-invisible dot that no one on the outside was supposed to find -- that is enough in itself to prove the hoax.
End-times false signs and wonders may have to do with staged productions like the lunar landing.

The rest of the Gog-in-Iraq story is in PART 2 of the
Table of Contents

web site analytic