The Wrong Colored Backpack

Except they didn't have black backpacks. And there is a picture of a "Craft" guy running without a backpack. Not to mention the backpack the "Craft" guy had has the DISTINCT WHITE SQUARE that the exploded backpack has.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, you're right. The Tsarnaevs were probably the only people in the greater Boston area with black backpacks.

Considering that "Craft International" guy had his backpack on after the bombs went off, there's no chance it's the same backpack per the image that OP posted.
One was white.

ts1_mm_bing_net_th_d46c54efc3d511c11b089f6abc3a0804._.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I repeat


Content from external source
7. The IEDs that exploded at the Marathon were
constructed from pressure cookers, low explosive powder,
shrapnel, adhesive, and other materials. They were concealed
inside black backpacks.



And what do you say about the quote from the official charges?

If you were a jury member or defense attorney would you simply ignore this?
 
Except they didn't have black backpacks. And there is a picture of a "Craft" guy running without a backpack.

Where is the picture of him running? And where is the proof that he had a backpack on before?

I cannot find the bigger resolution picture, but here is the photo of the "Craft" guy you had in your first post.

willyloman.files.wordpress.com_2013_04_boston_24.jpg


I'll try to find the bigger resolution. Also, there is no proof that they were affiliated with Craft Intl. in any way. There is however more evidence that they were National Guard CST. Even InfoWars acknowledges that fact.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The backpack is both black and white. Tamerlan's was clearly black. Funny how you're not even touching that one.
That is ridiculous... 'both bomb backpacks were officially described as black', are you suggesting the backpack pictured is black or not? How do you explain the disparity?
 
That is ridiculous... 'both bomb backpacks were officially described as black', are you suggesting the backpack pictured is black or not? How do you explain the disparity?

But both are black. They're not just one color. The larger question remains - how do you know that exploded backpack was one of the bombs that went off?


This doesn't even matter because there is evidence of him wearing his backpack after both bombs had already gone off. You lose. Sorry.

Again, how do you know that exploded backpack was one of the ones that contained the bomb? Even if you wanted to say it was, how do you know the black part you're looking at isn't the underbelly of it?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
But both are black. They're not just one color.

Wow... "both are black"... that is amazing. Talk about cognitive dissonance. Carry on, you simply show how amazingly colour blind or biased you really are.

BTW, you say, (Re the Craft guy without his backpack)
This doesn't even matter because there is evidence of him wearing his backpack after both bombs had already gone off. You lose. Sorry.

Please present the visual evidence whilst you are at it, rather than us have to take your highly suspect word for it, (given your previous assertion).
 
Last edited:
Wow... "both are black"... that is amazing. Talk about cognitive dissonance. Carry on, you simply show how amazingly colour blind or biased you really are.

So there is absolutely no black in Jahar's backpack? None at all? Also, how do you know the exploded backpack belonged to the brothers? Or are you going to edit that out of my quote, too?
 
But both are black. They're not just one color. The larger question remains - how do you know that exploded backpack was one of the bombs that went off?

This doesn't even matter because there is evidence of him wearing his backpack after both bombs had already gone off. You lose. Sorry.

Again, how do you know that exploded backpack was one of the ones that contained the bomb?
Because that's the picture of the EXPLODED BACKPACK?

Where is evidence of him wearing the backpack AFTER the bombs? Don't show me the picture of the dark-skinned guy. They're not the same person. The one in the picture above and then running is WHITE.
 
Because that's the picture of the EXPLODED BACKPACK?

Where is evidence of him wearing the backpack AFTER the bombs? Don't show me the picture of the dark-skinned guy. They're not the same person. This one is WHITE.

White? You mean the guy in the picture you posted, which says he's "Israeli-looking?"
 
White? You mean the guy in the picture you posted, which says he's "Israeli-looking?"
Yup the "Israeli-looking".. his skin is white just like the guy that's running without the backpack. The guy that you're talking about in the picture with a backpack after the bombs went off is dark skinned.
 
So there is absolutely no black in Jahar's backpack? None at all? Also, how do you know the exploded backpack belonged to the brothers? Or are you going to edit that out of my quote, too?
So exactly what percentage of black needs to be on a white backpack for it to be called officially a 'black backpack'... 5%, 10%, what?

You are amazing. I would love to see your statement if you were a witness... "Yes they both had black backpacks on officer... I'll swear to that in a court of law"

I do not need to know whether the black exploded backpack belongs to the brothers. It clearly states in the official charges that 'both backpacks containing the bombs were black'. Not a 'black one and a white one with a small amount of black on it'. Both black.
 
Yup the "Israeli-looking".. his skin is white just like the guy that's running without the backpack. The guy that you're talking about in the picture with a backpack after the bombs went off is dark skinned.

They're clearly the same person, as evidence by the fact that "they" are both seen with the man wearing the Craft International hat (which doesn't necessarily mean he's a Craft International member.) It's fun to research even this very site! - https://www.metabunk.org/threads/boston-navy-seals.1411/

You are amazing. I would love to see your statement if you were a witness... "Yes they both had black backpacks on officer... I'll swear to that in a court of law"

Newsflash, friend: I was a witness. I was at the Marathon when the bombing happened. I've been going on and off since I was a kid. Any questions you have regarding the event, I can happily answer.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
They're clearly the same person, as evidence by the fact that "they" are both seen with the man wearing the Craft International hat (which doesn't necessarily mean he's a Craft International member.)



Newsflash, friend: I was a witness. I was at the Marathon when the bombing happened. I've been going on and off since I was a kid. Any questions you have regarding the event, I can happily answer.
Great... what colour was Dzhokar's backpack?
 
They're clearly the same person, as evidence by the fact that "they" are both seen with the man wearing the Craft International hat (which doesn't necessarily mean he's a Craft International member.) It's fun to research even this very site! - https://www.metabunk.org/threads/boston-navy-seals.1411/
That's a different person.. zoom in really close and you'll see. Completely different skin color and complexion. But then again you thought (or still think) Dzhokar's backpack was black so I can understand why you think they're the same person.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
His backpack is black and white.
Anyone can see it is mostly white with a small amount of black.

So why do you think it would be officially listed as black on a court document in a case that carries a life sentence, probably even a death penalty?
 
Last edited:
Then why would it be officially listed as black on a court document in a case that carries a life sentence, probably even a death penalty?

Unlike a conspiracy theorist, I don't pretend to have all the answers and creating court documents is hardly my speciality. Why not consult an expert?
 
Unlike a conspiracy theorist, I don't pretend to have all the answers and creating court documents is hardly my speciality. Why not consult an expert?
And yet you are quite happy to speculate and distort facts to suit yourself, (by describing a predominantly white bag as black) on a board discussing such matters, even when your error has been repeatedly pointed out to you.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: qed
Because that's the picture of the EXPLODED BACKPACK?
What makes you come to this conclusion?
There is no official report that this is a back pack that contained a bomb. We have the news media reporting it as that.

Forget what color it is, forget what color the brothers backpacks were. What do we have? A picture of a shredded backpack on the ground. Are you suggesting that the only way for a backpack to be shredded in an explosion is if a bomb inside? Could a backpack an innocent bystander is wearing be shredded in this manor? Could this be a picture of one of the controlled detonations of suspicious backpack in front of the Boston Library?

You use the mantra of 'believing the official story or anything the media says as gospel yet it seems you have ignored the fact there is no official story for this picture. You have also latched onto something the media has reported and used it to suit your predefined outcome.

Can you produce anything official saying this is one of the backpacks that contained a bomb?
 
I would not call the backpack he is wearing as "black" though it does have black parts. This still doesn't make the backpack in the picture officially one of the backpacks that contained a bomb.
 
What makes you come to this conclusion?
There is no official report that this is a back pack that contained a bomb. We have the news media reporting it as that.

Forget what color it is, forget what color the brothers backpacks were. What do we have? A picture of a shredded backpack on the ground. Are you suggesting that the only way for a backpack to be shredded in an explosion is if a bomb inside? Could a backpack an innocent bystander is wearing be shredded in this manor? Could this be a picture of one of the controlled detonations of suspicious backpack in front of the Boston Library?

You use the mantra of 'believing the official story or anything the media says as gospel yet it seems you have ignored the fact there is no official story for this picture. You have also latched onto something the media has reported and used it to suit your predefined outcome.

Can you produce anything official saying this is one of the backpacks that contained a bomb?
So rather than looking at the evidence you have from eyewitnesses who were there you'd rather go by whatever the "officials claim"? [...]
 
Yep don't worry about that, we'll just skip over any little inconvenience like that and concentrate on a red herring.
Don't try and twist what I was getting at. For the context of what I was saying the color of the backpack in the picture doesn't matter because we don't have an official story for the picture so we can't officially say who it belong to.
 
So rather than looking at the evidence you have from eyewitnesses who were there you'd rather go by whatever the "officials claim"? The same officials who told you that they found a paper passport of a hijacker which survived in pristine condition a fireball ball blast that disintegrated titanium black boxes?
Show the "official claim" that this is one of the backpacks that the bombers used.
 
I would not call the backpack he is wearing as "black" though it does have black parts. This still doesn't make the backpack in the picture officially one of the backpacks that contained a bomb.
We are talking about Dzarnov's backpack colour... that is the issue at the moment. It is predominantly white as can clearly be seen. I am 'twisting nothing'... it is officially listed as black... why do you think that is?
 
We are talking about Dzarnov's backpack colour... that is the issue at the moment. It is predominantly white as can clearly be seen. I am 'twisting nothing'... it is officially listed as black... why do you think that is?
I have no idea why it says both backpacks were black. That stil doesn't make the backpack in the picture officially one of the backpacks that contained a bomb. It was only reported as a leaked photo. Nothing official yet. Unless you can provide an official report on it or an official saying this is one of the backpacks.

Both you and Al keep implying the picture of the backpack is official yet it is not. There is no official story for that picture so I have not made a determination of whose backpack I think it is. Right now it could be anyone's.
 
I have no idea why it says both backpacks were black. That stil doesn't make the backpack in the picture officially one of the backpacks that contained a bomb. It was only reported as a leaked photo. Nothing official yet. Unless you can provide an official report on it or an official saying this is one of the backpacks.

Both you and Al keep implying the picture of the backpack is official yet it is not. There is no official story for that picture so I have not made a determination of whose backpack I think it is. Right now it could be anyone's.
I have never said anything of the sort about the exploded backpack.

Like I said, repeatedly, we are are discussing the white bag which Dzarnov was repeatedly photographed wearing and which is apparently described as black in the court documents. It is you that keeps wanting to run away from that fact in search of a red herring.
 
I have never said anything of the sort about the exploded backpack.

Like I said, repeatedly, we are are discussing the white bag which Dzarnov was repeatedly photographed wearing and which is apparently described as black in the court documents. It is you that keeps wanting to run away from that fact in search of a red herring.
The backpack being called black in the indictment is not correct, it is also not incorrect. Have you read the criminal complaint?
http://www.scribd.com/doc/137389667/Criminal-Complaint-against-Dzhokhar-A-Tsarnaev
External Quote:
14. The Forum Restaurant video shows that Bomber Two remained in the same spot for approximately four minutes, occasionally looking at his phone, which is held at approximately waist level, and may be manipulating the phone. Approximately 30 seconds before the first explosion, he lifts his phone to his ear as if he is speaking on his cell phone, and keeps it there for approximately 18 seconds. A few seconds after he finishes the call, the large crowd of people around him can be seen reacting to the first explosion. Virtually every head turns to the east (towards the finish line) and stares in that direction in apparent bewilderment and alarm. bomber Two, virtually alone among the individuals in front of the restaurant, appears calm. He glances to the east and then comely but rapidly begins moving to the west, away from the direction of the finish line. He walks away without his knapsack, having left it on the ground where he had been standing. Approximately 10 seconds later, an explosion occurs in the location where the Bomber Two had placed his knapsack.

15. I have observed video and photographic footage of the location where the second explosion occurred from a number of different viewpoints and angles, including from directly across the street. I can discern nothing in that location in the period before the explosion that might have caused that explosion, other than Bomber Two's knapsack.
Maybe we should all wait for this video and photographic evidence to come out before we reach a conclusion.
 
The backpack being called black in the indictment is not correct, it is also not incorrect. Have you read the criminal complaint?
http://www.scribd.com/doc/137389667/Criminal-Complaint-against-Dzhokhar-A-Tsarnaev
External Quote:
14. The Forum Restaurant video shows that Bomber Two remained in the same spot for approximately four minutes, occasionally looking at his phone, which is held at approximately waist level, and may be manipulating the phone. Approximately 30 seconds before the first explosion, he lifts his phone to his ear as if he is speaking on his cell phone, and keeps it there for approximately 18 seconds. A few seconds after he finishes the call, the large crowd of people around him can be seen reacting to the first explosion. Virtually every head turns to the east (towards the finish line) and stares in that direction in apparent bewilderment and alarm. bomber Two, virtually alone among the individuals in front of the restaurant, appears calm. He glances to the east and then comely but rapidly begins moving to the west, away from the direction of the finish line. He walks away without his knapsack, having left it on the ground where he had been standing. Approximately 10 seconds later, an explosion occurs in the location where the Bomber Two had placed his knapsack.

15. I have observed video and photographic footage of the location where the second explosion occurred from a number of different viewpoints and angles, including from directly across the street. I can discern nothing in that location in the period before the explosion that might have caused that explosion, other than Bomber Two's knapsack.
Maybe we should all wait for this video and photographic evidence to come out before we reach a conclusion.
Well quite but I was simply referring to the anomaly of the official court documents listing both devices as being concealed in black backpacks and noting that Dzarnov had an ostensibly white one. That was it really. No conjecture, simply an observation.
 
Last edited:
Well quite but I was simply referring to the anomaly of the official court documents listing both devices as being concealed in black backpacks and noting that Dzarnov had an ostensibly white one. That was it really. No conjecture, simply an observation.
Okay, it seems I was misinterpreting your goal of bringing up the indictment. I do agree that most people, me included, would not call his backpack black.

I'm not sure why they didn't make the distinction in the indictment between the two backpacks being two different colors or why they even say a color. It is just the indictment and only used to bring up charges not as evidence in court. I'm sure there will be (at least one would hope) a better presentation of the actual evidence in court.

The error in the indictment doesn't invalidate the rest of the evidence they used to bring up those 30 charges.
 
Okay, it seems I was misinterpreting your goal of bringing up the indictment. I do agree that most people, me included, would not call his backpack black.

I'm not sure why they didn't make the distinction in the indictment between the two backpacks being two different colors or why they even say a color. It is just the indictment and only used to bring up charges not as evidence in court. I'm sure there will be (at least one would hope) a better presentation of the actual evidence in court.

The error in the indictment doesn't invalidate the rest of the evidence they used to bring up those 30 charges.

Did you see any pigs :)

But seriously, I do agree mostly with your post but I do see it as a major error, especially in such a high profile and serious case. If that is wrong what else is in there?

Also I was disturbed by the level of endevour put into making 'white into black' on a forum which is supposed to be about debunking.

I like debunking, I will debunk ct's or the os, it makes no difference to me... the truth is key AFAIAC.
 
Did you see any pigs :)

But seriously, I do agree mostly with your post but I do see it as a major error, especially in such a high profile and serious case. If that is wrong what else is in there?

Also I was disturbed by the level of endevour put into making 'white into black' on a forum which is supposed to be about debunking.

I like debunking, I will debunk ct's or the os, it makes no difference to me... the truth is key AFAIAC.
No, just chemtrails. :)

I don't think the indictment is based on the color of the backpacks though and more on the video, photographic, electronic and physical evidence. All that will be gone into, in much more detail in court. I have a hard time believing they will continue to call his backpack black in court.
 
There exists an ALTERNATIVE copy of David Green's photo that captured the younger brother escaping. The photo is very poor quality because it's a photo of him holding his iPhone with the photo on it. Anyways when you zoom in and compare side-by-side to the official FBI photo you can clearly see that younger brother DID IN FACT have his backpack on as he left the scene. It's shown as a blurry but very bright white smear as is every other white object in the photo so it's not a camera artifact. The FBI Photoshopped OUT the backpack in their official version to give creedence (false evidence) to their story that the younger brother's backpack was one of the ones dropped and exploded and that he left the scene SANS backpack. This alternative copy (easily found online) has been emailed to his defense team so hopefully they know the FBI has manipulated evidence.
Suspect-compare.jpg
 
Back
Top