So, the evidence is of course, pretty fucking conclusive that the Boston marathon bombing was an inside job and largely a hoax
The question I want to explore here is something I posted about a few days back
The government finished its presentation by showing jurors the grisly autopsy photos of bombing victims Lingzi Lu, Krystle Campbell, and Martin Richard. The images, which moved some jurors to tears, were accompanied by chilling testimony by the medical examiners who performed the autopsies on the deceased.
Pieces of bloody shrapnel were held up in court as the examiners told the jury that the twisted metal had been recovered from the bodies during the autopsies.
Jurors winced at learning that Krystle Campbell and Lingzi Lu may have lived in agonizing pain for more than a minute after their bodies were torn apart by the blasts.
Some jurors were moved to sobs as Boston’s chief medical examiner, Dr. Henry Nields, described the 6-by-6-inch hole blown into the side of Martin Richard’s torso.
A very ironic picture of Martin Richard taken from the mainstream media:
So, I alluded to this in the post, but didn't really go into it. What the hell is with these pictures?
I think there are three basic possibilities and several sub-possibilities:
1) the photos represent real injuries of real people killed in the bombing
2) the photos are some kind of fakery
3) the photos don't even exist and the article is lying
We can't completely rule out #1 but it seems somewhat unlikely based on the overall fakery of the bombing scenario and particularly the lack of fresh blood immediately afterward.
#3 is possible but takes the lying to a whole new and unnecessary level. Let's rule it out as least likely. Plus, we know there were some dead victims already reported, with identities and faces in the media. So something needed to be said about them at the trial.
So let's lean towards #2. What kind of fakery then?
2a) real injuries of those named people but the injuries occurred somewhere else
-- possibly easiest to pull off, only relies on minimal lies from from real people (friends and family)-- or some real evil shit involving human experimentation or sacrifice
2b) real injuries of some other people that occurred somewhere else and the faces obscured
-- involves either completely fake victim personas or a lot of lies from real people (friends and family)
2c) real injuries of some other people with photo fakery to add the "right" faces
-- again involves either completely fake victim personas or a lot of lies from real people (friends and family)
2d) photoshopped injuries onto bodies of the real victims
-- similar to 2a, probably doesn't involve too many lies from from real people (friends and family)
2e) complete photo fakery with fake dead victims
-- involves a LOT of actors and acting and lies
I have always disliked the pure fake personas for dead victims scenario, even though we can be pretty confident there were actors in this incident. I just really have trouble with the whole idea that a whole network of friends and family needs to be created to lie about this fake person dying.
That being said, assuming there were amputee actors who faked being injured in the bombing, there apparently were a ton of friends and family who were in on the lie and who had to lie. Unless the people got specifically amputated for the event, which is too horrifying to think about really. I suppose there are people who would give up a limb or two for a lot of money, but I just don't want to think about it.
Really, anyway you cut this, it's too weird (like so many other events) and mind-bending.
The official story is too strange and unlikely. The pure fakery scenario is too disturbing-- to think that the PTB can pull off something with so many actors (though maybe it's not as many as say 9/11). The part fake and part real scenario maybe somewhat more easy to accept, but still involves so many official lies and maybe is just impractical.