Previous Update: September 3 - 9

Updates Index

(if there are any to speak of)
September 10 - 16, 2013

Bauman Look-Alike Pasted in Marathon Injury Scene

Boston Marathon; continued from new-to-me-images from last update

About a week ago, I found this butt-on-stain image of the blonde injured woman, who is clearly a fake deserving of jail time. Two updates ago, I had been wondering what scenes the long-haired cameraman in yellow vest had been taking. The following in italics was added to that update late in the week:

Thanks to the Silva video, we see, at 1:08, two cameramen beside one another taping (not likely snapping) the scene where [the blonde woman] sits. If you study the 1:11 point, you can make out that the cameraman in yellow vest is the one taking the image of the blonde presented above...meaning the blonde was taped at, or just before, the 1:11 point (the cameraman arrived to the spot at 1:07). As you can see, that image reads, "Boston Globe via Getty Image" (the founder of Getty Images is a son of Paul Getty). The Boston Globe owns, the provider of the Silva video.

I quickly concluded that the blonde image above (there are three of them at least) was taken at 1:11, five seconds before the Jeff-invisible scene, though there is now a question as to whether I was correct in pegging the Jeff-invisible scene at 1:16. In fact, I'm now sure I was wrong to make that conclusion. For one, the man in burgundy coat, at 1:16, is not turned around looking at the man in white t-shirt, as he must be to fulfill the Jeff-invisible scene, but what follows, thanks to the blonde image above, shows yet another reason for not timing it at 1:16. The significance of this discussion is the direction of shifting that the blonde does with her body, from clean sidewalk into a blood stain, unexpected and unnatural in a real event. I had to correct a tentative conclusion after assuming that the blonde was naturally getting her butt off the stain.

With a new investigation, and thanks to a third blonde image that was found last week, it turns out that the Jeff-invisible image came first (I'm now pegging it at 1:07), whereas I had it last in the sequence. In other words, the blonde is not at first on the blood stain, but then she sits smack upon the blood stain for the image in the link above. Would you do that? Yet this is not a natural person, but a criminal in the act of deceiving the nation along with a large cast of criminals.

Do you see blood on her upper right leg? None. Yet, later in this update, you will see her in a stretcher with her entire upper right leg wrapped in white cloth, implying a wound at that location of her leg to explain the blood stain under her butt, you see. She was directed to sit on the blood stain because she was to feign an upper leg injury. In the scene with Negro-on-stretcher, someone had already wrapped her upper right leg with a yellow piece of clothing.

The relevant difference between the Jeff-invisible image and the butt-on-stain image is a matter of a shift of her left hand by a distance of one patio slab away from the street, and her right foot by one patio slab away from Lenscrafters. The angles of the cameras taking the two images were not the same, and, lucky for me, the white plastic bag in the foreground of the Jeff-invisible image is also in the foreground of the butt-on-stain image. It turns out that while the cameraman in yellow vest took the latter image, the camerawoman seen beside him took the Jeff-invisible image. You can see her camera pointed in the right direction at 1:08. Neither he nor she was at that spot at 1:06, meaning that the Jeff-invisible picture could not have been taken before 1:06 if either of these two cameramen took the shot.

The white bag is essentially down the center -- straight ahead from the camera -- in the Jeff-invisible image. At 1:06, the camerawoman is not quite at the white bag (visible from 1:05 beneath the red-and-gold flag), and moreover a line from her camera through the white bag does not strike the blonde woman at any time during 1:06. At 1:08, her camera is in a near-perfect line with all three: the white bag, the blonde (her red sleeve visible on the sidewalk), and the man in t-shirt. It's not as perfect a line in the Jeff-invisible image, which can be explained if it came at 1:07. Fortunately, with patience, we can capture, during 1:07, a frame of the man in t-shirt that is almost exactly his position in the Jeff-invisible scene.

Therefore, I changed my position from timing the image at 1:16 to 1:07. It's an important change because the butt-on-stain image occurs definitely at 1:11, between those two times. It clinches the direction of the blonde's movements, into the stain, not away from it.

If you play the video and pause at 1:11, you can see the male cameraman in yellow vest shooting all three: the bag, the blonde (sleeve visible at his hip), and the man in t-shirt. In the butt-on-stain image, these three are almost in a line, except that the white t-shirt is a little to the left, as is the case in a frame at 1:11 (the white bag can be seen as the cameraman steps away).

A third, related scene with the blonde is in the image below. The white bag does not appear at this time, and so it may be tentatively assumed that the cameraman with yellow vest took this one too, albeit "Boston Globe via Getty Images" does not appear on it. Judging by the heavy-set woman in brown (at the Lenscrafters window), the man in yellow cap, and the young bald man, it appears that there is just a two-step difference (about a second) between the image below and the Jeff-invisible image. The two are not taken at the same angle; one is at about 45 degrees to the street curb, and the other only about could be expected if the two shots came from two cameramen beside one another. The cowboy is in this image, which I'll call the cowboy-on-fence image:

So, where the Jeff-invisible image was at 1:07, the cowboy-on-fence image is predicted to be at about 1:06, and indeed the cameraman with yellow vest has his camera coming up at that time, pointing in the right direction for the scene. He can be seen arriving to the scaffolding from the lower-left corner at 1:06, meaning he was not able to take these scenes at a much-earlier time. He raises his camera high above his head at 1:07 for what must be the Jeff-invisible scene.

Here is now the strong evidence that the butt-on-stain image was at 1:11. There is no one beside the t-shirt at 1:06, and we're looking for two people beside him to fulfill the butt-on-stain image. One of the two people looks like he wears a fireman's outfit, and the other looks like a woman in jeans and white shoes (she proves to be wearing a blue coat at 1:17). We see two people fitting this description at 1:11 right where they should be. By 1:12, the cameraman is no longer taking pictures, meaning that the blonde in her butt-on-stain image was at the 1:11 mark of the Silva video.

In fact, with a little patience, I was able to find a frame during 1:11 with the white shoe of the woman at the knee of the man in white t-shirt, even as that shoe is on his knee in the butt-on-stain image. In this same frame, the little jog that the t-shirt takes (in the image) from the back of the man to his front is found exactly. To find the frame, keep double-clicking on the pause button until the elbow of the cameraman is on the very right edge of the white t-shirt. If the elbow fills most of the shirt, you haven't clicked far enough; if the elbow passes the shirt, you've gone too far. Back up and do it again and again, until you get this frame as your proof that the butt-on-stain image took place at 1:11.

As "Boston Globe via Getty Images" is on this image, it tends to prove solidly that the cameraman in yellow vest works for the Globe. He walks away at 1:12. Where did he go? Why did he go? He had access to the injury zone here, though the ground-zero spot was to his left. It was smoking at the time. Why, then, did he turn and walk the other way??? This is not a natural expectation, but if he was on a script to take certain pictures at certain locations, it explains why he turned. He spoke briefly, if only with body language, with the camerawoman as he went. They both stepped back from the scaffolding at the same instant. Why?

In one timeclock scene, taken 51 seconds after he left the spot above, he was near the door of Marathon Place, to the right end of the outdoor patio. What do we suppose he was commissioned to capture at that location? I happened to find another Boston Globe via Getty Images picture, taken from that area of the patio, in this image showing the short-sleeved medic with "Boston EMS" on his vest. The damning curiosity is that this scene was at about the time that Jeff was supposedly placed into his wheelchair, and yet the Boston Globe offers not one photo of that scene. Why not? The cowboy is slightly visible (only his butt at the extreme left) in the image above, and it is easily determined that he stands beside the spot where Jeff supposedly lay. Where are the pictures of the cowboy lifting Jeff into his chair??? The cameraman obviously had freedom to take shots at this time.

Where are the shots of the cowboy lifting Jeff into his chair, Boston Globe? Out with them, Boston Globe, if you have them. But you don't have them, and therefore the Globe is complicit with this scam. Yes, an entire media organization of a major American city was complicit with this crime. A deluded satanist cannot just walk up to the Boston Globe and ask it to be involved in a hoax of this magnitude unless it was known beforehand that the owners of the Globe are fellow Masons / Illuminatists / call-them-what-you-will.

[I will re-visit the image above later in the update, when I unexpectedly find three images of the woman who wheeled Jeff Bauman away smack beside the short-sleeved medic in his position in the image above. She even has the wheelchair in the three images.]

In the last update, the short-sleeved medic was shown at the finishing line with another medic. This was first noted at the :35 second point of the Silva video, where the SS medic was spotted under the timeclock that reads 4:10:12 hours after the start of the marathon (I have a version of the video that doesn't black out at the :35-37 point; it shows the short-sleeved medic with certainty). When showing this, I had been wondering what the medics were doing at that spot, but since then I found the image below showing FOUR medics (three of them in the same vests) huddled at that location at 4:10:10. One of them is the Negro with short sleeves (see close-up of short-sleeve badge with "EMT", instead of "EMS", on it). Another of the four is a blonde female medic that is shown in at least four images only from her back, as she is in this image. I have never seen her from the front, and she is always walking or standing, not helping anyone.

There is something on wheels beside the four medics, and upon that something there is what could be construed as an orange bag. I'm wondering whether this image was fed to the world to cover for the mistake of letting the Silva video go out showing the orange bag already inside the injury sight by the time that these medics are seen standing there. [Later in this update, a CNN video will be featured filming the location of the orange bag, but the video is too blurry to show it, begging the question of whether the Silva video made a mistake by showing it clear enough to make out the orange color.] The image above may have what could be legally construed as an orange bag pasted in to give the impression that there could have been another orange bag that a medic carried over to the SS medic (see him grab the bag from someone else at the 1:30 point).

The four-medics image shows the camerawoman mentioned above, on her knee at the finish line taking pictures/video. [The CNN cameraman is the chunky man directly behind her, and later you will see his video taking a shot of this camerawoman as she kneels right there.]

The Silva video shows only one of the huddled medics (the SS medic) walking to the injury site; at :52, he turns and signals with his hand in the direction of where he was huddled with the others, and yet, as I expect, there are no other medics there when the camera points in that direction at :59. I say that he was signalling only as part of the script, to give the public the impression that he was signalling for the orange bag that would, in a few seconds, look like it belongs to him. At 1:01, this SS medic is hopping the scaffolding, and by 1:05 he is walking past, to the left of, both cameramen (one a woman). He is clearly in view to the left of the two cameramen between 1:06 and 1:11, when all three images of the blonde were taken, and yet the SS medic does NOT appear in the Jeff-invisible image (taken at 1:07). Why not? Was he doing something at the time that we shouldn't see?

As I said that the cowboy was pasted into the Jeff-invisible scene because his hat is too round at the sides as compared to other images, so I can now conclude that the man in dark-blue coat and jeans was pasted in. While all three -- the man in yellow cap, the young bald man, and the heavy-set woman -- are just one or two steps further along as compared to their positions in the cowboy-on-fence image, the man in dark blue is several steps away between his positions in the two images. In the cowboy-on-fence image, he's several feet further from the camera than the young bald man, and moreover is walking away from the street, while in the Jeff-invisible image he's closer to the camera than the bald man, and walking toward the street. It's a problem. Note how the face of bald man seems oblivious to (looks not toward) Jeff who is supposedly lying to his immediate front-right.

The cowboy-on-fence image, which must come BEFORE the Jeff-invisible image, could not have been taken at any other time than about 1:06 of Silva's video, for it's then that the cameraman first starts to lift his camera in that direction. But, as you can see in the video (you should always have the video on a separate browser for this discussion, and while you're at it, put all images on separate browsers), the SS medic (below red-and-gold flag) is in the center of his camera view at 1:06, and yet he is NOT in the cowboy-on-fence image (he can be seen throughout the six seconds between 1:06 and 1:12). He was therefore removed from the cowboy-on-fence image (because I don't think he was pasted into the video). (To get more browsers in Internet Explorer, press Control and 'T' together, or click the empty box at the right end of a menu bar; placing the mouse over that box brings up the message, "New Tab". Firefox browser has a similar feature.)

Similarly, someone with black pants and black above his belt was seemingly added into the butt-on-stain image; the SS medic does not have black above the waist.

It's important to time these images correctly in order to show inconsistencies. Insiders can fool us with all sorts of doctoring if we don't have the correct timing of the images, but, of course, doctoring can also lead to incorrect timing of images, or to chaos in trying to time images correctly. But inconsistency is bound to show up where much doctoring takes place.

The feet of the heavy-set woman are coming from the top of the image, and they are positioned near the corner of the patio, several feet from the Lenscrafters window. As she is shown closer to the window in the other two blonde images at 1:06 and 1:07, it's clear that the butt-on-stain image comes after 1:07, and indeed it is easily proven to be at 1:11. Having thus timed the cowboy-on-fence image at 1:06, how do we explain that, at the 1:11 point of the video, the wood fence is not yet down on the ground? The cowboy is walking on the wood fence, laid flat on the ground, in the cowboy-on-fence image. Big problem there. Someone could take these criminals to court and get them tossed into prison using these images, if only anyone had the courage.

The cowboy is stomping on the fence directly in front of the man with hood, and beside the red-headed woman. This woman can be seen through the wood slats to the left of the cowboy's hips, and yet the wood fence is UPON her. That is, as the cowboy stomps on the fence, he's pressing it against her! That can't be right.

LOOK! The Jeff-invisible image, taken just a second after the cowboy-on-fence image, has the fence erect! Even if I'm somehow wrong at pegging the Jeff-invisible image at 1:07, it must be placed AFTER the cowboy-on-fence image for yet another reason: the hooded man is on his way down to a flat-on-back position in the cowboy-on-fence image, and is flat on his back in the Jeff-invisible image. Unless the video of this scene shows the hooded man going up and down, the Jeff-invisible image must be AFTER the cowboy-on-fence image. So, please, where are the videos of this scene? Surely, CNN and other major media people at the scene were carrying video camera's, not snapshot-only cameras.

PLUS, as we now know that the blonde was moving from her position in the Jeff-invisible image to her butt-on-stain position, that movement involves her left hand in a direction further from the street. Of all her three images, with her left hand in a different position on the sidewalk, the hand is closest to the street in the cowboy-on-fence image, meaning that this latter image came before the other two. Everything in the cowboy-on-fence image screams BEFORE the other two.

The obvious way to know that her hand is closest to the street in the cowboy-on-fence image is by her hand being closest to the grey patio stone. Her fingers are within a finger-distance of that stone, but the same hand is more like a two hand breadths away in the Jeff-invisible image.

The reason that I timed the Jeff-invisible image at 1:16 previously is due to its man in yellow jacket and white pants, who has not yet entered into the scaffolding at 1:14 (of the video), and, yet, at 1:16, he is at the other side of (as well as inside of) the scaffolding, just as he's positioned in the Jeff-invisible image. It was very convincing. However, the 1:16 point in the video has a man in dark clothes at the white t-shirt whereas this man does not appear in the Jeff-invisible image. The only way to rectify these inconsistencies is by assuming paste jobs and/or deletions of persons. In the Jeff-invisible image, two women on either side of the young bald man appear who do not appear in the cowboy-on-fence scene. It creates chaos, perhaps the very intent of the insiders for legal purposes in case they need it. On the other hand, a judge could view this chaos as evidence of tampering.

[In case you get fooled into timing the 1:07 image at :53, as per the other man in yellow at the scaffolding, see the 5th update of October.]

The situation seems to be that, having realized their mistake by showing a fence on the ground before it was supposed to be on the ground, they pasted the man in yellow and white inside the scaffolding, in the Jeff-invisible image, to give the impression that the image should be timed at 1:16 so as not to be related to the cowboy-on-fence image. In this way, one could be led to believe that the cowboy-on-fence image was NOT at 1:06, meaning that it could be taken for a time after 1:16, thus apparently solving the problem of the fence shown down on the sidewalk too early.

This image (just seconds from the Wikipedia image) shows the initial approach of the man in white t-shirt, the man in yellow cap, and the heavy-set woman. This image was several seconds before the three blonde images. Arredondo has not yet entered the picture. He claimed that he jumped the scaffolding, and so we can assume that he was pasted into the cowboy-on-fence image in order to give the impression of his jumping the scaffolding. But, if that's correct, the one who pasted him in created contradictions, you see, by having the fence down too early.

The fence in the Jeff-invisible scene is completely erect, and to the back of Arredondo (he's inside the injury zone in this shot), suggesting that the Jeff-invisible image came first. However, if Arredondo is initially jumping into at the injury zone at the cowboy-on-fence image, how is he standing inside the injury zone at an earlier time??? Again, the positions of at least four people in the cowboy-on-fence image imply that it came first.

From 1:06 on through to 1:11, the wood fence, at the spot where the cowboy stands next to it in the Jeff-invisible scene, is on a slight slant, and yet the latter image has a fully-erect fence, no slant at all. I would attribute the erect fence as part of the tampering that pasted him into this scene.

Notice that the fence is open in the Jeff-invisible scene. The opening is not obvious, but it can be made out, where the two fence sections do not join. The open fence shows at the 1:18 point of the video just as it shows in the Jeff-invisible scene. The fence is open (at 1:18) under the red-and-white flag. The bald fireman (under the same flag) therefore blocks our view of the open fence at 1:11. We never get to see who opened the fence. One can see that it's open between the man in burgundy and the Jeff spot, directly in front of the lamp post, wherefore let's not mistaken it for where the bomb ripped through the fence (see bomb-spot image), for that was some feet further down from the lamp post. The fence was opened behind the heavy-set woman (in the bomb-spot image above) standing directly in front of the lamp post.

Apparently, the fence was provided with an opening, before the bomb went off, right down the center between Lenscrafters and the Marathon Place, which is logical as per the needs of the producers of this "movie" when setting up.

Note, in the faked bomb-spot image above (red-haired woman appears), how we don't get to see a clear shot of the smoke source. Although cameraman were all over this site for several minutes from the beginning, we never see a centered, close-up of the smoke source. How can that be under normal circumstances? A journalist would want to get some shots of the very spot where the bomb exploded, especially if it was still smoking. Yet the Boston Globe has not offered us one. Why not??? What was it that was smoldering for over a minute?

The cowboy does not appear in the Silva video until 1:19, at which time the fence that he was stomping on, supposedly 13 seconds earlier, is still erect. It's very bad news for the criminally-insane who conducted this plot. If the insiders try to argue that the cowboy-on-fence image was taken after 1:19, it can be proved impossible because the man in white t-shirt never again stands to the right of the man in burgundy coat after 1:18. Both his feet and a touch of his hand can be seen to the right of the burgundy coat in the cowboy-on-fence image, and besides, he's to the right of the burgundy coat in the other two blonde images. Worse yet, the man in the t-shirt walks away at 1:32, and does not return. He does not appear in any image that I've seen after that point.

So, while the insider must argue that the cowboy-on-fence image is after the Jeff-invisible scene at 1:16, he has no choice but to admit that the cowboy-on-fence image must be before 1:18. Go ahead and study the two images and see if you can convince yourself that the cowboy-on-fence image is one or two seconds after the Jeff-invisible image. It won't work, and a judge / jury would say the same.

There seems to be no insider purpose for the presence of the man in white t-shirt, aside from, perhaps, acting like a walker-by. There are two things suggesting that he may not have been an insider: 1) the man in burgundy looks to be rebuking him or backing him off in the Jeff-invisible image; 2) a man in black seems to be escorting him away from the man in burgundy (in the video). It's possible that the man in t-shirt was an outsider asking the wrong question. Within 13 seconds of his walking away, the young bald man is seen standing in front of the burgundy coat (see oOverhead image), possibly to guard against the man in white t-shirt returning to press his case further.

Just because the injuries were faked does not mean that this was not a huge crime. To feed false information into the minds of the people is not a small crime. People are made weak by false information. Your view of reality suffers. When people don't have the correct view of reality, it can be technically labeled, "insane." The more that false imagery changes your view of reality, the riper the insiders are for Armageddon.

Jeff Bauman Look-Alike in the Jeff-Spot Location

In all of the new images that I've downloaded in the past two weeks, I have yet to see the medic, or the woman who wheeled Jeff away. The two appear in no other images that I've seen, as though they showed up solely to pose for the wheel-Jeff-away scenes. I suppose it's too late for the insiders to provide images now, as that would seem suspicious. But, expecting the insiders to be criminally insane, it's not possible to know what they will do to cover their tracks. To the left of the black t-shirt in this shirtless-man image, there is one who looks like the medic who wheeled Jeff away, but he has SQUARE black patches on his yellow shoulders while the medic with Jeff is not shown with square patches in this wheel-Jeff-away image.

In the image below, we can know which of the two lamp posts it is by the orange bag next to it. The bag has black straps like the orange bag under discussion earlier:

The timing of the scene above can be determined to be after the Is-that-Jeff image which was itself after four minutes into the explosion. In the Is-that-Jeff image, the orange bag is where the SS medic had dropped it, but is now right beside the lamp post, as if its use has been fulfilled. There is now a slew of people wearing "BAA Physician" vests, for which reason I'll call it the BAA image.

The Jeff spot is in the middle of the BAA image, in what looks to be a clearing where people are not standing. Two military uniforms appear that reflect the two military men discussed in the last update who were stooping to the Jeff spot in two other images, and, in this case also, neither of the two faces of the military men show. The blonde medic (extreme left) is, once again, with back to the camera (we may assume that some insiders insisted on not showing their faces). By far, the majority of people (over 50 of them) in the BAA image show no face.

I have only just now, this minute, found a new image (below) showing that a man in a wheelchair, who looks like Jeff but not quite. This Jeff-look-alike is definitely shown otherwise in the Is-that-Jeff? image. In that latter image, by what coincidence does this man appear exactly at the Jeff-spot i.e. where Jeff was pasted in with his white t-shirt and long grey sleeves. See the grey sleeves in the Jeff-all-alone image because this Jeff-look-alike does not have the grey sleeves on his white t-shirt. I THINK THIS IS HUGE; make sure you follow along and understand the problem. Take your time.

The man in wheelchair above (I'll call it the Jeff-look-alike image) wears the very same white shirt as the man who lies in the Jeff spot in the Is-that-Jeff? image. I will prove to you, if you can't see it already, that this other man in white shirt was originally several feet away from where he appears in the Is-that-Jeff? image. I don't think he changed positions; I think they pasted him into the Jeff-spot.

As you can see, the Jeff without grey sleeves has checkered sleeves (he wears a short-sleeved white shirt over a long-sleeved plaid shirt). We can now know that he's the man in the top-left corner of the Jeff-all-alone image (his head is visible in the bomb-spot image), but his white shirt is not on his body in that image. JUST BEHOLD how much this man looks like Jeff Bauman, or whatever his real name was. See Jeff's face at the image here:

Aside from some whiskers on the one, it's a NEAR PERFECT MATCH! Am I right? Look at the hairlines of both men, the type and color of hair, the nose, the mouth...everything but the ear is like a match! I'll call him checkered-shirt Bauman, as he may be a brother or twin brother or even Jeff himself with a pasted ear.

I have no idea at this time why some insider(s) would make such a blunder as to paste the checkered-shirt Bauman into the spot of the grey-sleeved Bauman. The insiders assured that the checkered sleeves were not visible by pasting people in on both sleeves, and yet they permitted the grey logo on the shirt to be seen...that is also seen in the Jeff-look-alike image. In the latter image, checkered-shirt Bauman is conspicuously shown with one healthy full leg, while the other leg, assumed to be badly injured (otherwise, why is he in a wheelchair?), is draped. Thus, I am taking the position that there was a Plan A Bauman and a Plan B Bauman.

Before getting to that, the first order of business is to prove that the checkered-shirt Bauman, in the Is-that-Jeff? scene, is NOT where he's supposed to be lying. Someone clearly pasted in the woman with dark-red hair beside him (covers his checkered right sleeve) to give the false impression that this was not Jeff Bauman, but was rather the man with checkered shirt. As a consequence, she, too, is NOT lying where she's supposed to be. Confused?

In other words, some insider(s) was commissioned to paste grey-sleeved Bauman into the Is-that-Jeff? image, but the wrong Bauman was pasted in, and released to some public domain. To protect from and "correct" for this blunder, other insiders pasted the woman and the military man into the image to cover his checkered sleeves, and then released that to the public domain, hoping that we would think that this was the grey-sleeved Bauman.

In the bomb-spot images (see two of them below), the woman with dark-red hair can be seen in relation to checkered-shirt Bauman, not in relation to grey-sleeved Bauman. The same positioning is evident in the Jeff-all-Alone scene, where her head is in front of, and touches the checkered shirt, as is the case in the Is-that-Jeff? image.

HOWEVER, the checkered-shirt Bauman was several feet down the street from the grey-sleeved Bauman, as far as the left edge of the red patio stones (see his blood stain in image below) is to the strip of grey patio stones (running between building and street), as seen in this skyview image.

Use all the images at your disposal to pin-point the original location of the checkered-shirt Bauman, and then, using the skyview image, draw a line from the lamp post through his spot. I am sure you will find that the checkered-shirt Bauman lay exactly where the top of the lamp post shows (in the skyview image). Therefore, what angle would a line be from the lamp post to the spot of the checkered-shirt Bauman? If the street were zero degrees, the line would be LESS than 45 degrees. However, the line from the lamp post through the checkered-shirt Bauman in the Is-that-Jeff? image is FAR MORE than 45 degrees (fortunately, the street curb is visible to indicate zero degrees), more like 75-80 degrees.

I'm sure that countless photo experts would be glad to offer their signatures toward this claim, for purposes in a court of law, if only a group of people (20 or more would make it safe) would take the insiders to court on account of this blunder.

The right edge of the red patio stones is visible, at the feet of the man in red-orange, to indicate a 90-degree line from the corner of the same patio stones at the street curb. A 90-degree line from the lamp post therefore goes through the spot where the man in white shirt is crouched. A line at 45 degrees goes through the woman in pinkish top. It's as simple as that.

To put this another way, the base of the lamp post is on the right side of the red-patio strip so that the checkered-shirt Bauman should be to the left of the lamp post. There is no way to rectify this problem: the checkered-shirt Bauman had been pasted in exactly where the grey-sleeved Bauman was pasted into other images.

Notice, in the Jeff-look-alike image, that there is something draped over the checkered-shirt Bauman's left leg as he sits in a wheelchair, which allows the possibility that the insiders were going to report him as one legless man. Where he appears in the Jeff-all-alone scene and in the bomb-spot scene, his legs are not visible, thus allowing for the same possibility. The possibility is that this man, who was truly at the bomb location, was slated to be Jeff Bauman, but then something happened that required a second Jeff Bauman to be pasted into the images. This in-turn required the abandonment of the checkered-shirt Bauman, as if he was Plan A while the grey-sleeved Bauman became Plan B. In order for this theory to be true, the insiders did not want the Jeff-look-alike image to be released.

With this new theory in mind, I'm re-visiting all the images. Note that the smoke of the explosion, in this bomb-spot image, is smack at the checkered-shirt Bauman. The hole on the fence is beside him. Do a close-up and see how his leg area looks roughly as though he lost his legs below the knee! I've never noticed it until now, but there are two stumps that look like knees. The stumps (if that's what they are intended to be) show no blood, however.

Back in April / May, I was of the opinion that the bomb-spot images (and the entire "video" below from where these images originate) could have been prepared before the explosion. I've never been decided on that concept. Both Baumans appear in the bomb-spot scene. Perhaps the grey-sleeved Bauman was pasted into the scene while the insiders cut out images of the checkered-shirt Bauman where his injuries were originally intended to be visible. Perhaps the center of attention of all the media-intended pictures was, initially, around the checkered-shirt Bauman, and yet we never see images of this man at the explosion spot aside from the two mentioned above. Perhaps they were not going to reveal the fake legs in full view from the checkered-shirt actor, while, in Plan B, they decided to release gory pictures via the grey-sleeved Bauman. Plan B simply caused the insiders to forego the release of images of the checkered-shirt Bauman.

To the contrary, a slew of pictures were released of the spot where the grey-sleeved Bauman would be pasted in. The two cameramen (one a woman) that took the three blonde images did NOT walk to the left to take shots of the checkered-shirt Bauman, suggesting that Plan B was decided upon by that time.

There is a large bloodstain (largest of all) beside the checkered-shirt location. The stain appears to have been started by a man with pouches on his hips who can be seen pulling strings behind his back to release the contents of the pouches. The contents appear to be balls the size of golf balls. This man is the one the lower-left of the bomb-spot images, but the image does not show the pouches, for obvious reason. He's pulling the strings in this image, and below the pouches, the blonde woman in the image has her legs spread (legs not visible in this image) to capture the contents of the bags, to assure the balls (or small jars?) don't roll away. She's smack beside checkered-shirt Bauman.

For my treatment on this, see the sub-heading, The Underwear Goon and His Bulging Pouches, in the last update of April. The beforeitsnews "video" below obviously misses many frames, though some might say that it's not a video, but rather a series of snapshots taken about a second apart. The "video" shows the pouches and the woman spreading her legs to capture the contents:

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

The point is: why was the largest bloodstain of all made in relation to checkered-shirt Bauman? In this skyview, see how much larger the blood stain is where the man in pouches operated as compared to the stain on the red patio stones where the grey-sleeved Bauman was pasted in. The part of the stain closest to the building is where the man with pouches operated. If I'm correct to suggest that the SS medic and the other stooping / crouching man were making the blood stain larger at grey-sleeved Bauman, it highlights what a problem it seemed to be (to the insiders) for such a comparatively small stain at that location. Plan B may therefore have been a very late development that required the SS medic to go in and make the blood stain larger.

I have always been on the look-out for medic jackets like the one worn by the medic who wheeled Jeff away. I had never found one while keeping a look-out (though I wasn't always looking) until now. The is-that-Jeff? image was just checked for the same jacket style, and lo and behold, one is worn by the bald fireman. I didn't notice this before. These vests have a rounded end on the black shoulder patches; both have half-yellow and half-black sleeves. Like the one who wheeled Bauman away, the bald firemen has his collar up, and this collar too is yellow on the back. You can see "Boston Fire" on the back of his vest at the :46 point of the Silva video. Therefore, it now appears that the "medic" who wheeled Jeff away was with the Boston fire department. Indeed, that explains why the man with the same jacket, standing beside the checkered-shirt Bauman in a wheelchair, wears an orange helmet. Thus, high-level people at the Boston fire department are suspect as major players in this hoax.

I ask you: why would a man with the fire department, and a man with a cowboy hat, wheel Jeff away rather than a team of the most expert medics / physicians? Who but a man with no legs below the knees deserved such experts? But as this was a faked operation, it explains all such queer-ities.

Clinching the Relative Timing of Images

[After writing several paragraphs below as to the timing of a half dozen images in relation to one another, I went to town, to a place where I could download images and videos quickly, and zowie, I found an image where the woman who wheeled grey-sleeved Bauman away was with her wheelchair smack beside the Jeff-spot. I definitely want to comment on that, but first, let me include what was already written. The reason I went to town was to get more pictures that could help with the timing of the checkered-shirt Bauman images, and/or discover images that could throw a monkey wrench into the timing of any / all images. I apologize in advance for the hard-to-follow timing discussion below, but I want to record the timing for future use either by me or one who reads it.]

I haven't a clue as to the relative timing of the image with checkered-shirt Bauman in his wheelchair. The van in the Jeff-look-alike image is the ambulance in the image below, where we see two more yellow-and-black jackets identical in style to the one worn by the man who escorted Bauman on his wheelchair ride. Why should people who work for the Boston fire department be around the EMS ambulance?

Why were there not an entire row of ambulances at the injury site? Why were the ambulances on another street altogether while this one was permitted to the injury site? Was the checkered-sleeve Bauman the important reason for the appearance of this ambulance to the injury site?

Below is roughly the same scene as the ambulance image above, but from further back. It's now easily deciphered that the image is from high up, likely from the pressbox. It means that the image may not have been taken and released by insiders. In both images, it's the same woman is on the stretcher, in the same position, having red sleeves and a black top; she looks like the blonde with her long sleeve rolled ups. She was still lying on the sidewalk during the action-scene video, at which time this ambulance was not yet on the street. Therefore, the timing shows no monkey wrench for the insiders, so far as I can now see. There are more firemen in this ambulance scene.

The man in red-orange shirt (with black logo) in the is-that-Jeff? scene, and in the Graphic video First moments after Boston Marathon blasts">action-scene video, is now walking down the street above/beyond the ambulance, suggesting that this ambulance image was definitely beyond the action-scene images. The logo on his back looks similar to the marathon logo on the same spot on several yellow jackets at this ambulance scene.

The woman on the stretcher has her hand over her belly, just like the person on the same stretcher behind checkered-shirt Bauman in the Jeff-look-alike image. Both wrists have watches. While this times checkered-shirt Bauman at the ambulance after the action scene, it doesn't tell us whether he was put into that ambulance with the blonde. The blonde is shown with a white cloth around her upper right leg, and yet, in the blonde images, there was no apparent injury to her upper right leg.

Neither of the two people pushing / attending checkered-shirt Bauman in his wheelchair can be seen in the is-that-Jeff? scene, nor in the later BAA physician scene. Aside from the man in red/orange standing in roughly the same spot in both images, I can only find one other person (young man in red cap and grey hoodie) common to both pictures. How odd and unexpected. It must mean that the two images were of significant time apart, likely more than a minute. The red/orange shirt has black stripes so that it has the color scheme exactly of the orange bag. That bag appears in both images, but is at the lamp post in the BAA image, telling us that it was taken after the is-that-Jeff? scene.

I had guessed that the Negro woman was still at her spot on the sidewalk in the is-that-Jeff? image, but wondered whether she's still there in the BAA physician image. She is not shown in either image upon her stretcher, which stretcher would be visible in both images if indeed she was on it at the time. [Below, I fall upon evidence that she was gone from the injury scene by the time of the is-that-Jeff? image.]

In the BAA image, immediately behind the lamp post, is the blue coat of the woman who is in the bomb-spot image. However, there is a woman in blue top and jeans (and black bag) beside this blue coat who was not an injury victim. Earlier, she was at the railing of the outdoor patio, as for example she's in the overhead view and, later, in this shredded pants image. The latter image has a woman walking away with hair of the color tone, style, and fineness, as well as hair parted in the same place, as the woman seen lying beside checkered-shirt Bauman in the is-that-Jeff? image. She is shown with green around the collar area. A close up of the woman in the is-that-Jeff? image shows some green under both sides of her chin, indicating that these are the same woman (though only one shows with a vivid streak of blood down her face). This forces us (and the insiders) to time the shredded pants image AFTER the is-that-Jeff? scene. The sequence thus far:

action video scenes
shirtless man
Shredded pants
BAA physician

If inconsistencies crop up as to relative timing, it creates problems for the insiders. It is important for the insiders to be able to prove that the Negro woman is not at her spot when the shredded pants image was taken, for the woman in dark-red hair is still on the sidewalk when the Negro woman in shown gone in the Jeff-all-alone image. It's thereby made a certainty that the Jeff-all-alone image was taken before the shredded pants image, which forces the is-that-Jeff? image to be timed before the shredded pants image. We could eliminate all this guess work if the insiders would just release the full videos of this event, but, of course, they have too much to hide. You always need to keep it in mind: the insiders are deemed guilty by their not releasing the entire videos. Only by court proceedings will they be forced to give up the videos. Somebody out there with money, be a hero.

In the image with Negro woman on her stretcher, the blonde still lies on the sidewalk (the blonde has a yellow wrap around her upper leg to jibe with the white one seen when she's on her stretcher). Therefore, as she is not yet at her ambulance as per the Jeff-look-alike image, it's now clear that the Negro on her stretcher was taken before the Jeff-look-alike image.

It means that the Negro woman, the blonde, and the checkered-shirt Bauman with his leg intact, were all wheeled away BEFORE poor grey-sleeved Bauman without legs below the knees. You would really need to be a distorted soul to believe this picture. I'm not bucking against the timing of the images here, but am reminding you that grey-sleeved Bauman was NOT at the injury site, explaining why others were seemingly taken away before he was. In the 411 timeclock scene, two minutes after the explosion, the Negro medic with his stretcher -- having a pink mattress -- is seen in front of the injury scene. He would tend to the Negro woman on this stretcher with pink mattress, meaning that we are to conclude only one thing: no one at the injury site thought it was important that poor Jeff gets the first crack at the stretcher. So, why was the Negro-on-stretcher image released at all if it exposes this fault?

In the Jeff-look-alike scene, we can see (top-right), in roughly the same spot (at the street curb), the woman in blue top and black bag. She appears in the patio area, not only in the shredded-pants image, but the overhead image (1:44 of the Silva video, 1:38 after the explosion), wherefore, this indicates well enough that her positions at the street curb were AFTER the shredded pants image. This is why I've placed the shredded pants image before the look-alike and BAA images.

It all means that the woman in dark-red hair got up, and, leaving her scripted spot on the sidewalk, walked alone past the patio before the timing of the two images at the ambulance. As you can see that she was hardly injured at all, it begs the question of why she was still lying on the sidewalk as per the is-that-Jeff? scene more than four / five minutes after the explosion. One needs to be a deceived soul to think that she would just lie there all that time if all she had was a scratch to her face (though, even this scratch is not evident in the Jeff-all-alone scene). The only reason you would believe such a thing is because you can't bring yourself to believing that this event, and/or the images, were faked. You have a certain trust in governments and media, and you can't believe that these people could work together to pull of a stunt such as this. I understand. To a point. But when one explains all the inconsistencies, it's time to put your trust away, and to get smart.

The Negro-on-stretcher and shredded pants images show a marathon employee in white jacket on his knees to the sidewalk, at the same spot, in the same basic position, tending to the blonde woman. It suggests nearness of the two images. As the Negro woman is gone in the Jeff-all-alone scene while the woman with dark-red hair is still there, it tells that the Negro-on-stretcher image came before the shredded pants image. This same marathon man in white is at the same spot, in the same position, at the :23 second point of the action-scene video, taken before the woman in dark-red hair walks past the man in shredded pants. It can be determined that the :23 point, thanks to the appearance of the man in red-orange shirt in the same video, is BEFORE the is-that-Jeff? scene...where the woman in dark-red hair is still lying on the sidewalk, wherefore she has not yet walked past the patio during the action-scene video. The woman in blue top and black bag is late in that video tending to the shredded-pants man.

The military man with green shirt, mentioned in the last update as stooping in the shirtless-man image, is tending to the shredded pants man late in the shredded-pants image). Surprise: his face is visible here. As the man without a shirt is the one who takes off his shirt in the action-scene video, while that video was at a time before the shredded-pants image, and partly during the is-that-Jeff? image, we are to assume that this military man in green shirt went from the shredded pants man to the area where the checkered-shirt Bauman was lying (he's pasted, remember, into the spot of the grey-sleeved Bauman).

After concluding the sequence of events above, I went to town to search for new-to-me images that could help, or not help, this sequence of events. For one, there was a video named, "What's this thing being brought over to Jeff Bauman." Ignoring the purpose or question of this video, see the first of four images that it offers. This image can be determined to be a mere few seconds before the shirtless-man image, for not only does the shirtless man appear stooped over (as he is in the shirtless-man image), but there are four other people to his left who are to his left in the shirtless-man image: 1) the SS medic; 2) the white sweater with red bag upon it; 3) the man in white with yellow vest; 4) the cowboy.

I was astounded to see that the woman who pushed grey-sleeved Bauman away was in this scene. I would like to know how quickly, or not quickly, this image was released to the public.

In Jeff's wheel-away scene, there is no ambulance on the street. We are left to solve whether the ambulance mentioned above had already arrived and left, or whether it was yet to arrive. The video above tends to conclude for us that grey-sleeved Bauman was taken away before the ambulance arrived, for the shirtless-man image was immediately after the action-scene video while the ambulance was definitely not yet on the street at the action-scene video.

But wait. Grey-sleeved Bauman was not at the injury site. Never forget that. It's of little matter that they released a shot of the woman who pushed him away; the big matter is that they did not release a shot of Jeff at that same scene.

Look who's missing in the image at the video above. Although it is seconds apart from the shirtless-man image, the two military men in the latter are not anywhere within the image at the video. The same military man in green shirt is, in the is-that-Jeff? image, bending over checkered-sleeve Bauman as he is pasted into the grey-sleeved Bauman's spot. It's as though the insiders screwed this part of media effort royally.

Still in the video above, the woman in blue can be seen with her hair above the word, "Cowboy." She had gone from stooping over the shredded-pants man (in the action-scene video) to her position in the image under discussion, which I'll call the what's-this-thing? image. While she came from the shredded pants man to this spot, the military man in green shirt went exactly the other way, from this spot to the shredded-pants man. It seems too illogical for the military man to leave a man without legs below the knees to tend to a man with mere scratches. The same military man will return to the Jeff-spot momentarily. What do you think that was all about?

Which comes first, the what's-this-thing? or the is-that-Jeff? image? At first, it appears that the insiders would be forced to time the what's-this-thing? image first...because the two military men have not yet arrived to that scene. But it turns out that the one military man visible in the is-that-Jeff? image must leave the Jeff-spot to tend to the shredded-pants man, and then return to the Jeff-spot. If ever we get a video released of the entire affair while this back-and-forth doesn't happen with this military man, it'll be proof of doctoring the military man, for he appears with the woman in dark-red hair at both the shredded-pants image and the is-that-Jeff image, but without question the is-that-Jeff? image must be timed first. Therefore, both this military man and the woman in dark-red hair left their locations near the Jeff-spot to be found at the place where the shredded-pants man lay.

The people in the is-that-Jeff? image are, by and large, not the people in the what's-this-thing? image; it tends to force many seconds between the two images.

Let's now go on to the second of four images shown in the What's-this-thing-being-brought-over-to-Jeff-Bauman video. See it at the :46 point. This image is few seconds after the what's-this-thing? image, and there at the bottom of the screen is a man in beige pants and black belt, seen in the shirtless-man image, which is why the what's-this-image must come before the shirtless-man image. Let's call this the what's-this-thing2 image, wherein the SS medic starts to walk away. In what's-this-thing3, the SS medic is walking further away, now toward the street.

We must therefore assume that the SS medic left his position beside the Jeff-spot to walk near the street with something in his hand as per the is-that-Jeff? image. He then returned to fulfill the what's-this-thing? image. He then left and walked toward the street again but returned yet again to fulfill the shirtless-man image. From what we can gather in both latter images, we can determine that he was crouching to nothing in the shirtless-man image, for there is no injury victim in front of him; rather, the man in white with yellow vest is in front of him. So why was the SS medic stooping/crouching at that spot??? Was he carrying things away that shouldn't be left behind? Just after he walks away, as seen in the what's-this-thing3, the Negro firemen is dangling a blue thing, which he may have received from the medic throwing it to him. In any case, it is clear in both what's-this-thing2 and what's-this-thing3 that there was no injury victim where the SS medic would be stooping in a few seconds.

Jeff Bauman, we are left to assume, is close to being wheeled away, for the woman who will soon wheel him away is, in the what's-this-thing2 and what's-this-thing3 images, with the wheelchair smack at the Jeff-spot. The Negro fireman, who I suspected to be in charge of guarding the orange bag, is in all three what's-this-thing? images.

We must conclude that everything Arredondo claimed he said and did at the Jeff-spot was said and done after the shirtless-man image. We have nothing to go by. We never see him pick Jeff up, or set him down on the wheelchair, or speak to him, or bandage him up. Why would these scenes be omitted by those who took all these images??? Why were we provided the scene with the woman and her wheelchair smack beside the Jeff-spot, and yet we don't get to see the most-important parts? Clearly, there was no Jeff Bauman at that spot, and, likely, the cowboy and the woman with wheelchair were either pasted into these scenes, or were directed to be there for making it look like they had handled Jeff. The complicit media would do the rest by fooling the public when airing the story of the cowboy and of Jeff himself.

The fourth and final image in the What's-this-thing-being-brought-over-to-Jeff-Bauman video is a much-wider picture of what I've been showing as the wheel-Jeff-away scene. In the wider image, the shirtless man has drawn back inside the outdoor patio. Whereas he seemed to want to be of great help, he's now in an area with no injury victims. Could we conclude that his role had played out at the Jeff-spot so that he was directed to draw back out of sight afterward? The man who came into the scene carrying the what's-this-thing? object has also drawn back to where he started, at the corner of the patio railing. The man in white shirt and belt, who had spent considerable time stooping at the Jeff-spot, up until the is-that-Jeff? scene, is now standing between the lamp posts on the street curb, where there were no injury victims.

The fourth image comes from the very camera that previously took the 411 timeclock scene, meaning that this camera would very likely have taken the scene as Jeff was lifted into his wheelchair. The same camera looks to be the one taking the other three what's-this-thing? images, and yet we are not offered a shot of Jeff from this camera...because he was not there. If ever the insiders release such an image in the future, it's far too late to trust it. If such an image existed from the start, it would have been a priority to release during the time that Arredondo and Bauman were speaking with media. They could not have screwed up much more royally, and yet no one is taking this thing to court.

The video below that uses a CNN feature, also new to me as of now, has an image (see :22, and again at 1:20 for a wider shot) of the woman and wheelchair that is timed between the first and second what's-this-thing? images. She has circled around and is now headed straight for the woman in blue top, who is now the only person between the wheelchair and the Jeff-spot. This video is entitled, "Man in cowboy hat helps injured in Boston," which is a complete lie (shame, shame CNN) as he is never seen helping one person. It's not that CNN did not do its homework when studying these images with cowboy doing nothing; it's that CNN is complicit with this faked operation.

Assuming that the woman and her wheelchair were actually there at the scene as described by these images, I must assume that her chair picked up checkered-shirt Bauman instead. He might have been the guy acting like the legless Bauman, or may even have been the legless Bauman himself, in which case, as part of Plan B, the insiders pasted a healthy right leg on him, as well as someone else's ear. Just a thought for now.

At the 1:20 point of the video featuring the CNN video, the scene is just seconds before the shirtless-man image, as many of the people are in a position to fulfill it. For example, the three people in a row: woman with pinkish top, man in white (probably the one who had his hand and finger up at the end of the Silva video), and the man in yellow. The man in beige pants and black belt (stooping in the shirtless-man image) is standing up and further back (black t-shirt above policeman on right side of tree). The man who carried the what's-this-thing object can be seen at the far right.

The image in the CNN video has "Bloomberg/Getty Images" upon it, and appears to be from taken from high enough for being from the press box. To the far right, there is what looks like the long-haired cameraman in yellow vest, who was suspect earlier as the one taking the Boston Globe via Getty Images. It just so happens that he's standing roughly where we could expect one to be when taking the shirtless-man image , which has "Boston Globe via Getty Images" stamped upon it.

There is no sign of military men in this image offered by CNN. The Negro fireman is standing there, never helping anyone, as always, only this time he's holding a white cloth in his hand, though the SS medic will be standing straight up and walking away in just a few seconds, afterwhich the same fireman holds a blue piece of cloth(ing) in the same hand.

The creator of the video who presented the CNN feature is seemingly doing a bad job making cases. I don't tend to agree with the points made. At 2:02 of the video, the is-that-Jeff? scene is shown from the opposite direction...from the same camera, I assume, as what shot the what's-this-thing? images. Yet, once again, the camera fails to show us the Jeff-spot.

In the is-that-Jeff? image, the cowboy has something long (about ten inches) passing through his left hand, yet in the 2:02 image we only see a couple inches of it. Perhaps its his little flag pole with little flag rolled up around it; perhaps not.

Based on ear differences, the checkered-shirt Bauman may not have been the same man as grey-sleeved Bauman. However, as ears are like fingerprints, it would not be surprising to see doctored images change ear designs. In the video below, where grey-sleeved Bauman appears on a news show, he turns his head and reveals the shape of his ear and his nose. He has a very unusual curve/bump in the middle of his nose.

[In the next update, I discovered an image showing the left leg of checkered-shirt Bauman, below the knee, gone:]

In the video below, disregarding the theory being presented, note how Jeff is shown at various stages of his life with straight hair, and yet in his wheelchair image, he has stiff hair, just like checkered-shirt Bauman. Why would they have changed grey-sleeved Bauman's hair to be a fair (not exact) match with that of checkered-shirt Bauman's hair?

Here are both sides of Jeff's face:

Best View of Injury Site at the Explosion Period

The following discussion concerns what I deemed to be, back in April, a series of "paintings" of the injury scene. However, I'm going to re-visit the scene and re-make conclusions now with all the extra information in my possession. For this purpose, let's call the series of shots the "non-smooth video," even though it may prove to be a series of snapshots a second or so apart.

In the video below, there is reason to understand why they would present a video with missing frames, as the creator of the video makes an excellent case that one woman reached into her pocket for a capsule of fake blood, smeared her face with it, then put the capsule back into her pocket; if the video were smooth, this act would have been even more obvious. If correct that she took out a capsule of fake blood, then I would be proven wrong to call this a series of computer-animated "paintings." I would instead need to deem these as real shots that have been severely crippled to keep realities from our notice. I would also need to abandon the idea that these sets of images were created before the explosion.

Let's begin by finding the runner (a man) in salmon shirt running across the finish line at the 2:24 point of the video. He can be seen at the top-center edge; he's smaller than a flag. Behind him I am able to make out a runner with green outfit. These two can be seen in the Silva video:,AAAAAA6piHY~,DqRT40XOAr-TnXMtiTj9PVhpaUVs3LGp&bctid=2303076923001

The man in salmon shirt is crossing the finish line at about the :12 point of the Silva video, five/six seconds after the explosion (the woman in green can be seen behind him). This means that the 2:24 point of the non-smooth video is five to six seconds after the explosion. Notice that the flags are not waving between the lamp post and the finish line; they wave only on the other side of the lamp post; the Silva video shows the same.

From the 2:27 point on, more than six seconds after the explosion, there are a few people with hands over their ears due to the loudness. Is that reality? The noise was gone after one second, and to show that it's not expected to have hands over the ears after that long, the majority of people don't. Therefore, were the people holding their ears "painted" into the scene? If so, why? I would suggest that there were far less people in this faked event at the moment of explosion, and that many others had to be added in to make it look good, for we might expect a packed audience at the finish line.

While the flags are waving streetward supposedly due to the "wind" caused by the explosion, the natural wind is pushing the smoke down the street away from the camera. Shouldn't the smoke be moving into the flags if indeed there is an air current in that direction caused by the explosion??? It was suggested in the last update that the flags in this case were outfitted with their own compressed-air canisters (hidden between sewn flags) for to make flags wave without wind or man-made air currents; the situation under discussion here truly seems to require such a mechanical method for waving flags simply because smoke is not flowing across the flags. In other words, there was not a massive air movement across the flags, but only a micro movement of air that was incapable of affecting the air that held the smoke.

At the 2:25 point, the smoke can easily be seen through, yet the Silva smoke is very thick by comparison. At the 2:30 point, there is barely any smoke left at ground zero, yet the Silva video seems to have much more smoke? Why?

At the 2:32 point, a female runner in black (pink shoes) is just about to reach the finish line, which matches the Silva video at :14/15. To verify, the same female runner gets to the same position (just before she falls) at the 4:36 point of the video below (shows CNN video taken from ground level), while the timeclock reads 4:09:52, nine seconds after the explosion.

Therefore, as 2:24 was the :12 point in the Silva video, while 2:32 is the :15 point (i.e. three-second difference in real time), it's becoming clear that there are multiple images per second presented in the non-smooth video. I've counted nine images in the non-smooth video between 2:24 and 2:33, over a period of about three seconds in real time, suggesting about three images per second. If a non-video camera cannot snap more than two shots per second, then I would conclude that we are seeing a non-smooth video because many frames were cut out from our view. It is possible that the insiders made the video production look like a series of snapshots in order to explain why it's so ragged.

At 2:36 (about :16), there is no smoke left, for we can clearly see all the people at ground zero and beyond, yet the Silva video will not permit us to see through the smoke? Why not?

However, the flags on the other side of the lamp post (not waving at 2:32) are waving streetward by 2:36, and then, between 2:36 and 2:40, one can see the smoke moving fast from building to street. By 2:45, smoke fills the air above ground zero. How could this take place from air currents caused by the bomb? Impossible, for the smoke begins to move streetward more than eight seconds after the explosion. Rather, it appears that man-made wind is being produced out the broken windows, or perhaps out some open windows. I even get the impression that smoky air is being blown out the windows (from compressed smoky air through pipes / hoses, I would assume). The scene ends at 2:45, unfortunately, when ground zero is far more smoke-filled than only four seconds after the blast. What's wrong with this picture? Satanists, whom have ganged up on the nation for to produce wicked deeds, that's what's wrong. We are viewing an ominous "movie" filled with satanists.

At 2:33, the first flag not yet waving, which is to the right of the tree trunk, is the Swiss flag. In the Silva video, it starts to fly at :15 but isn't high until :17. In the series of pictures, it doesn't start to wave until 2:36, but isn't flying high until 2:39, suggesting that 2:39 is about eleven seconds after the explosion.

In the Silva video, there is no rush of wind streetward until :15. That's when streetward air current noticeably begins, which corresponds to about the 2:34 point of the non-smooth video (I haven't studied these things for more than a couple of hours and am not extremely precise, but trying my best).

I've just seen something new at the CNN video above. The SS medic crosses the finish line (see 4:40) just as the woman in black ("NYPD" on her shirt) falls there, but then the medic turns around and goes back the other way, to a huddle with other medics, for he is no longer on the finish line at 4:50.

The CNN cameraman is behind the man in Martian-green coat at 4:55, which I've worked out to be 28 seconds after the blast, when the timeclock reads 4:10:11, exactly as it reads at the :34 point of the Silva video when it shows the man in Martian-green coat with a blue-capped cameraman behind him. This cameraman (black jacket, no yellow vest) is not the one taping the CNN video, however, for the one taping gets a shot of him standing behind the Martian-green coat at 4:52.

Then, as the blue-capped cameraman and the green jacket start to walk toward the injury scene, as shown in the Silva video, another man in blue cap and black jacket emerges (at :38) to the left of the first blue-capped cameraman, only this one wears a yellow vest. He cannot be the CNN cameraman because he (man in blue cap) shows at the 4:50 and 4:53 points. Besides, at 4:55, the CNN cameraman walks around to the right of both the Martian-green jacket and the blue-capped cameraman. As he goes to the right, he first shoots the camerawoman mentioned in previous discussions; she's visible on her knee at 4:50. [I had not yet realized while writing here that the CNN cameraman is shown just about shooting the kneeling camerawoman in the image above showing the medic huddle.]

The CNN cameraman then walks toward the injury site, suggesting that he's one of the two men seen at the :39-40 point of the Silva video. It turns out that he's the chunkier guy (not the one in sunglasses) who can be seen behind the green jacket at :33. He carries a camera that can be shoulder-mounted, as seen at 1:03 (when he's alone). However, at :46 (alone again), as he shoots the orange-bag area, it's not on his shoulder. The video above ceases to feature the CNN video at 5:18, a few seconds after he captures the finger signal of the SS medic.

As he's seen with ear phones at :39-40, he must be the cameraman in the lower-right corner of the 4:11:40 timeclock scene.

Unless the one who featured the CNN video gave it to the world very blurry, CNN must have provided the blurriness, deliberately, I'll assume, to keep the world from knowing everything it could to attack this fake job.

At 8:35 of the same video, there is an aerial shot of the aftermath on the same day. The Escalade vehicle of some suspicious security people is still parked where is had been since about three minutes after the explosion, right in front of a little door under the bleachers. The door was too short for a man to walk through, but just right to wheel Jeff Bauman out from. The advertising draping on the bleachers that covered that little door had been removed, as you can see in this wheel-Jeff-away image. As the Escalade was parked right in front of the door, the vehicle blocked much of the view as they wheeled Jeff out; that was my theory back in April, and of course they would use the advertising drapes as added cover, sort of like a hocus-pocus scene where the trick (i.e. Jeff) appears from behind the magicians' veil.

They then video-taped Jeff getting wheeled away, but pasted that scene into some other image to make us think that he was wheeled away from the injury scene. It was a theory, but others are plausible too. I would assume that, if Jeff had stayed the night under those bleachers, they would have fixed him up comfortably, wherefore there would be some things in there that had to be driven away before the bleacher-takedown / cleanup crew came. To remove those items may have been the task of the ones in the Escalade, though also note that the FBI truck is parked (8:35 of the aerial image) behind the Escalade.

Another problem for the insiders, if only the good people would put them to the fire, has to do with the man in burgundy coat. He is never seen helping anyone. He crouches for quite a while, at least four minutes, over a woman in black. She could be the only person to create the large blood stain at her leg, and yet that blood stain is not to be expected. First of all, see the video below, which takes two images of the same leg location, one showing a large wound, and the other showing no wound, on that leg:

Unfortunately, the video doesn't tell which images the two leg scenes are expanded from. But a different view of the large-wound version can be seen in the Negro-on-stretcher image. I ask you: is the man in burgundy coat helping anyone? I answer: no one. Although he crouched over this woman for three to four minutes by the time of this stretcher image, and although she shows no sign of injury anywhere else, the man who would convince us that he cares for her has yet to tie anything around her leg, or deal with the injury in any other way. For example, how about lifting her leg off the blood stain, or moving her leg off the stain, or just protecting it from bacteria in any other way? Instead, the wound is being left visible for the media to shoot. Such a farce. The man in burgundy is merely making it look good by pretending to do something over some other part of her body, but her leg is always unattended, so far as the images I've seen. Such a wicked farce, this man ought to be jailed. This is not to laugh at; these people should go to jail.

By the way, as with the Jeff-look-alike image, I have found many new images at the Washington Times webpage below, where 41 images are offered:


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