Debunked: Movie producer Nathan Folks claims bombing false flag, Voice of Russia says blood too red

MikeC

Closed Account
The Tweet from Boston Globe is just the crack that started the downfall of this event.

[off topic material removed]

Perhaps you could address why tweet did not mention exactly the same location as the explosion as you suggested it did.

That is a pretty central and easily verifiable claim - all the evidence above says you are wrong about it. If you maintain you are correct then which of the evidence above is wrong?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
And for clarity. This is the tweet:
It was one hour after the bombings, and refers to a controlled explosion of a suspicious device outside the library across the road from the first bomb.

Do you disagree with that assessment. If so, then why? If not, then what's the tweet evidence of?
 

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
I never stated the blood was too red. Maybe listen to my interview again. That would be an obvious weak argument. I know actual crisis actors in the event. I know how they produced the event to seem real. It was a Homeland Security drill produced by several production companies. Boston Globe even tweeted the event was a drill. Then retracted later. How can it not be more obvious to the people on this site? I can prove the deception to the American Public on due course.
You make no sense at all Nathan. If it was a super-secret false-flag drill then why on earth would the Boston Globe tweet that it was a drill?

[off topic material removed]
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Let's keep on the topic of the tweet please. Nathan claims this is key evidence. So Nathan, if you wish to continue here, please back up your claims. Why not start with the simplest point. When was the tweet? What is the significance of this time?
 

Nathan Folks

New Member
Please change title about blood to red. This is inaccurate. There actually wasn't blood at all until added by production designer and later added with special effects. Make-up artist will be exposed as well. I am finished discussing claims at this point. Will all have to just wait until the class action suit begins in Feb 2015. Thank you for your patience.
 

MikeC

Closed Account
@Nathan - any actors/financier/etc should certainly be tried for fraud, as should anyone else who was fraudulently involved - but you haven't actually addressed the tweet at all - so can you have a look at that please?
 

Nathan Folks

New Member
And for clarity. This is the tweet:
It was one hour after the bombings, and refers to a controlled explosion of a suspicious device outside the library across the road from the first bomb.

Do you disagree with that assessment. If so, then why? If not, then what's the tweet evidence of?

The Tweet was sent before any bombs went off. I am not sure why now it is stated an hour after the event unless they have manipulated the Tweet.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Please change title about blood to red. This is inaccurate. There actually wasn't blood at all until added by production designer and later added with special effects. Make-up artist will be exposed as well. I am finished discussing claims at this point. Will all have to just wait until the class action suit begins in Feb 2015. Thank you for your patience.

The title has been changed to clarify who made the claim.
 

NoParty

Senior Member.
The Tweet was sent before any bombs went off. I am not sure why now it is stated an hour after the event unless they have manipulated the Tweet.
That would contradict everything known at this time.

Are you saying that you have new evidence that places the tweet before the bombs went off?

That would be huge! Why has that never been made public?
 

MikeC

Closed Account
Soo...er.......was it at exactly the same spot or not?? That was the central pint of your post highlighting it to us and yo haven't addressed the evidence that contradicts that.

Saying there was a DHS drill that went live is another claim - obviously potentially related, but it will have other evidence to support it - and I expect you're probably not going to supply that as it'll be part of your court case - so how about we just stick to the one that is fairly easy to check - the time and place of het tweet?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
So, you're saying that your entire theory hinges on the idea that the 12:53 pm tweet
actually happened an hour earlier than that...but where is your evidence of the new timing?

Times of the tweets are Pacific (at least for me), so 12:53 pacific is 3:53 Eastern, the bombing was at 2:50 Eastern, so these tweets are about an hour after the bombing

Here's an embedded tweet, and a screen grab of that tweet, is there a difference for anyone?
 

Nathan Folks

New Member
You haven't actually said anything at all except "you should believe me"....:/

I am sorry you feel that way. I don't need to prove it here. It really only counts if I can prove it in court. I think you will agree that if I give everything away here they will have a chance to combat it before it is in court.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I am sorry you feel that way. I don't need to prove it here. It really only counts if I can prove it in court. I think you will agree that if I give everything away here they will have a chance to combat it before it is in court.

You should be able to address the tweet. You brought it up, you said it was the prime bit of evidence that we should debunk.

Would you agree it is debunked, as you have no evidence it was from before the bombing?
 

Nathan Folks

New Member
Times of the tweets are Pacific (at least for me), so 12:53 pacific is 3:53 Eastern, the bombing was at 2:50 Eastern, so these tweets are about an hour after the bombing

Here's an embedded tweet, and a screen grab of that tweet, is there a difference for anyone?
I have a better question. Why would the Boston Globe report this an hour after? If the news was already out about a terrorist attack?
 

MikeC

Closed Account
I am sorry you feel that way. I don't need to prove it here. It really only counts if I can prove it in court. I think you will agree that if I give everything away here they will have a chance to combat it before it is in court.

I am only talking about the tweet - you have intimated that your case has more than just that, so why not just confine yourself to it's time and content?
 

Nathan Folks

New Member
Wouldn't a better tweet be, There was a bomb explosion injuring many on 600 Block on Boylston Street.

This was before the bomb and they must have changed the time stamp on Twitter.

Twitter has been known to change time stamps I have noticed if asked by the right people.
 

NoParty

Senior Member.
Why would the Boston Globe report this an hour after? If the news was already out about a terrorist attack?
Well, as Post #36 says: (http://www.snopes.com/politics/conspiracy/boston.asp#globe)

"However, this tweet was issued about an hour after the bomb blasts and referenced a controlled detonation of a suspicious device near the central branch of the Boston Public Library, which is on the stretch of Boylston Street where the initial explosions occurred. Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/conspiracy/boston.asp#ilbQzVCApE04xF7D.99"

It obviously is not about a drill of any kind...


...and if you're accusing Twitter of changing the time, proving that would be easy:
merely point out any cyber acknowledgment of that tweet an hour earlier.
As of now, your entire case hinges on a timeline that is off...
so you now imply that it was manipulated...and still, with no evidence whatsoever.

Seriously, if y'all plan to go to court with this kind of "evidence," you're in for a long, unhappy day.
 
Last edited:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I have a better question. Why would the Boston Globe report this an hour after? If the news was already out about a terrorist attack?

Didn't you read the explanation?

It was a controlled explosion outside the library. A suspicious bag. Their next tweet, less than a minute later, said:
 

Nathan Folks

New Member
Because another explosion an hour after a terrorist attack would be big news!!

Why would they have a bomb drill after a terror attack? This was a prearranged tweet. It was sent before the bombs went off. Then quickly changed time stamp. There is metadata that will prove my point on how the event unfolded and the times 911 dispatchers were called off the scene.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Why would they have a bomb drill after a terror attack? This was a prearranged tweet. It was sent before the bombs went off. Then quickly changed time stamp. There is metadata that will prove my point on how the event unfolded and the times 911 dispatchers were called off the scene.

Read the next tweet.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Controlled explosion means DRILL
No, it does not. Just Google It.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_explosion
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Bomb Squad activities. Drill?? Are people really this ignorant? This is hurting my brain having to keep reiterating this point.
So it looks like you've got a tweet sent an hour after the bombing, and it refers to a controlled explosion, which is what is used to disable a suspect explosive device.

Do you have any evidence at all that this is not the case.
 

MikeC

Closed Account
Why would they have a bomb drill after a terror attack?

I see nothing identifying it as a drill - the public information says it was a suspicious bag, and AFAIK blowing such things up is normal practice.

This was a prearranged tweet.

in what way prearranged?

It was sent before the bombs went off. Then quickly changed time stamp.

Well then that should be able to be established with some good evidence - what is it?

There is metadata that will prove my point on how the event unfolded and the times 911 dispatchers were called off the scene.

I look forward to seeing it.
 

MikeC

Closed Account
Bomb Squad activities. Drill?? Are people really this ignorant? This is hurting my brain having to keep reiterating this point.

Possibly because there's no actual evidence to support your contention - and so the pain comes from trying to maintain something that is obviously not defensible!

I suggest that reviewing the evidence - such as the tweet timeline posted by Mick immediately above - and grasping that this tweet was sent exactly when it says it was might help your discomfort.
 

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
I have a better question. Why would the Boston Globe report this an hour after? If the news was already out about a terrorist attack?
Most likely to allay people's fears if they hear another loud bang!

Controlled explosions after an attack or terror alert are common practice, especially in a chaotic situation when people will have fled and dropped their bags etc.



You are trying to conflate "controlled explosion" with a drill. That is just totally false. I have lived in and around London all my life. Terror alerts have been a fact of life for most of that time, from the IRA in the 1980s through to more recent threats.

"Controlled explosion" means exactly what it sounds like. A suspicious item is being blown up in a controlled manner. Spend a few months on public transport in London and you will soon hear the phrase!

An example culled at random from the press:

upload_2014-12-8_0-36-55.png
 
Last edited:

NoParty

Senior Member.
...My claim will focus on the One Boston Fund.
I gotta say, this is a little weird.

I mean, the only reason anyone was listening to Nathan Folks, re. the Boston tragedy,
was that a "Hollywood Producer" was using his insider knowledge of film to make a
gigantic claim that the Boston Marathon bombings were an elaborate Hollywood-style hoax.

I must say, at first, that movie-maker credibility got my attention, as well.

But now you say that you are not focusing on the Hollywood angle, but rather the more
prosaic accounting side of a fund set up to help victims of the bombing? Odd.
Unless you're planning on spending weeks in the courtroom (not with the Globe tweet, I hope) :p
proving that everything was actually all an illusion...and then attacking the help fund.

Tips For Teens: If One Fund Boston truly is the focus of your big lawsuit,
you'll definitely want to get the name right. Judges like that sort of attention to detail. :)
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Staffan Debunked: Wikileaks releases unused footage of moon landing (Capricorn One movie scenes) Conspiracy Theories 2
T AiG Debunked: Fossils Fail to Find Major Transition From Dinosaurs to Birds Science and Pseudoscience 5
Rory Debunked: UK undertaker's claim that Covid vaccine is responsible for spike in deaths Coronavirus COVID-19 0
Marc Powell Debunked: 9/11 truth experts are knowledgeable professionals and their judgments are to be trusted 9/11 195
Marc Powell Debunked: Explosions preparatory to demolition of the WTC North Tower are visible as Flight 175 crashes into the South Tower 9/11 7
Mick West Debunked: Pfizer Developing a Twice-Per-Day COVID Pill, Taken Alongside Vaccines Coronavirus COVID-19 0
Marc Powell Debunked: Demolition “squib” is visible at top of WTC North Tower before Flight 11 crash 9/11 67
Marc Powell Debunked: Construction worker Philip Morelli experienced an explosion in the sub-basement of the North Tower 9/11 0
Marc Powell Debunked: ABC News correspondent George Stephanopoulos reported an explosion in the subway 9/11 1
Marc Powell Debunked: Debris from twin towers was projected upward by explosives 9/11 13
Marc Powell Debunked: Government officials revealed having foreknowledge of Building 7’s collapse 9/11 58
Marc Powell Debunked: NIST computer simulation of Building 7 collapse is inaccurate 9/11 22
Marc Powell Debunked: FEMA reported finding evidence that steel had melted. 9/11 47
Marc Powell Debunked: VP Dick Cheney ordered a standdown of jet fighters on 9/11 9/11 16
Oystein Debunked: Claim that Bobby McIlvaine's injuries ("lacerations") are best explained as result of glass shards and debris from bombs 9/11 22
Marc Powell Debunked: World Trade Center should not have collapsed due to 9/11 fires 9/11 3
Marc Powell Debunked: Firefighter reports of secondary explosions 9/11 3
Marc Powell Debunked: Steel was hurled hundreds of feet by explosives 9/11 4
Marc Powell Debunked: Demolition Explosion Before Collapse of South Tower 9/11 8
Marc Powell Debunked: Explosion in South Tower Lobby 9/11 7
Marc Powell Debunked: Mysterious Explosion Before the Flight 11 Crash 9/11 48
J.d.K Debunked: Marx: "The classes and the races too weak to master the new conditions must give way... They must perish in the revolutionary Holocaust" Quotes Debunked 0
dimebag2 Poll : Which DOD Navy video do you consider debunked ? UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 74
Mick West Debunked: Diving Triangle UFO Photos from Reddit [Fake] UFOs and Aliens 37
Theferäl [Debunked] Object Seen From Airplane Above Canberra: 04 Apr 2012 Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 5
TEEJ Debunked: Claim that Joe Biden's hand passes through microphone during White House press gaggle, 16th March 2021 Election 2020 8
bird_up Debunked: "Interdimensional being" caught on CCTV in Neza, Mexico Ghosts, Monsters, and the Paranormal 6
M Debunked: Atmospheric pressure on Mars is 9 PSI, not 0.09 PSI as claimed by NASA Science and Pseudoscience 76
Patrick Gonzalez Debunked: missing cable on Perseverance landing footage proves it is fake. General Discussion 3
TEEJ Debunked: Biden's Oval Office "Coming Apart at the Seams" [It's a Door] Election 2020 19
derrick06 Debunked: UFO over California Highway (TMZ) UFOs and Aliens 1
P Debunked: 7 Alleged photos of aliens UFOs and Aliens 9
Mick West Debunked: Biden signing "Blank" Executive Orders Election 2020 5
Mick West Debunked: Biden in "Fake" Oval Office Election 2020 27
P Debunked: UN hidden camera: the first UFO contact happened [Deep Fake] UFOs and Aliens 3
Mick West Debunked: 94% of Fulton County Ballots Manually Adjudicated [It's a Process all Batches go Through] Election 2020 0
Mick West Debunked: "Missile Strike" caused Nashville Explosion General Discussion 3
Mick West Debunked: Nashville Explosion was "Across the Street" from the RV General Discussion 0
Mick West Debunked: "Error rate of 68.5% Allowable is .0008%" [Neither is True] Election 2020 4
Mick West Debunked: Claim that the Electoral College Count On Jan 6 will Change the Election Election 2020 136
Rory Debunked: Einstein wrote "blind belief in authority is the greatest enemy of truth" Quotes Debunked 12
Mick West Debunked: Navid Keshavarz-Nia's Claims of "A Sudden Rise in Slope" as Election Fraud Evidence Election 2020 5
Mick West Debunked: Trump's Claim of "1,126,940 votes created out of thin air" in PA Election 2020 9
Mick West Debunked: Crowder's "Fraud Week" Title Graphic (and Why it Matters) Election 2020 1
JFDee Debunked: Democratic senators complained about 'vote switching' by Dominion voting machines in 2019 Election 2020 2
Mendel Debunked: The Democrats are trying to take away freedom of religion Election 2020 6
H Debunked: Dr. Shiva's Scatterplot Analysis of Michigan Precincts Election 2020 43
Mick West Debunked: Suspicious "Biden Only" Ballots in Georgia Election 2020 3
Mick West Debunked: "Nancy Pelosi's long time Chief of Staff is a key executive at Dominion Voting" Election 2020 0
Mick West Debunked: Wisconsin Turnout 89% Impossible High [Actually 72%] Election 2020 1
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top