27 votes

To all those spouting defamatory nonsense about Boston Bombing victim Jeff Bauman:

Here is a photo of Mr. Bauman standing in the crowd, 8 minutes before the first explosion.

If he is supposedly an actor without legs as some of you are claiming, then how is it that he is standing?

(Click for full size)

This poor guy just survived a horrific event, and will be marred by it for the rest of his life.

LEAVE HIM ALONE!




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Bump for those 'just asking

Bump for those 'just asking questions'.

I know the guy who tied Jeff's stump off

He lost both legs. He is Carlos Arredondo, father of a fallen Iraq vet and a committed peace activist. They interviewed him on Boston TV. He was white as a sheet and could hardly speak. end thread.

Release the Sandy Hook video.

I wish that would shut them up.

But odds are they will ignore it and you will probably be called a liar/troll.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

This picture has no more

This picture has no more proof than everyone's proof you intend to oppose. Did you take this photo? Can you attest to it not being photo shopped? This photo doesn't prove what he is standing on ie; Could be feet, could be medical device, or even a box.

Don't take me wrong I don't claim to have any answers or actual knowledge and am not pushing facts when I don't have first hand knowledge. Photos from the internet wouldn't be allowed in court unless they could be validated.

Way to many armchair detectives stating "facts" when they have unverified or circumstantial evidence. Nothing wrong with questioning the official story. If you are going to do so publicly without first hand verified knowledge keep in mind your actions have Consequences. In other words what if this was you, your son, your father, or family member and people are preaching they have proof that he is a traitor?

Critical Thinking

It logically follows that if prosthetic limbs or any other medical device cannot be seen in the aftermath of the explosion , and that it would be impossible for him to inconspicuously hide prosthetic limbs or any other medical devices after the explosion, and he can be seen standing before the explosion, that he is not using the aid of prosthetics or any other device to stand.

I think it's pretty damn clear that this man had legs before he blast and lost them in the blast.

I have no photographic proof that you are a human being, would it be rational for me to assume that you aren't?

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

Can you even prove these are

Can you even prove these are genuine unedited photos? My point isn't about the Boston Bombing. I was not there and I don't know any of these people involved. I'm more concerned with the low levels of so called proof many are willing to accept. Just because it was in the Sunday paper or on the internet doesn't make it true.

For the record: I doubt "Actors" would ever be used after all human life is simply collateral damage.

Burden of proof

The burden of proof is on those claiming the photos are doctored, to prove they are doctored.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

Sure you seen it on the

Sure you seen it on the internet it must be!

The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.

If someone is claiming the photos are fakes,then they must prove they are fakes.

Do you have any evidence that the photos are faked?

How do I know you aren't a 10 foot tall transvestite with an affinity for clown wigs?

Wouldn't I need proof if I were to make that claim, or is blind assumption good enough to make a conclusion?

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

okay so I can photo shop a

okay so I can photo shop a photo to oppose your opinion and that makes it so if it can't be proven to be shopped?

Alex Jones shows all kinds of photos with stories attached does that make it true? Fox news shows photos does that make everything true? Two people can look at the same photo and see two different things. Alex could look at the above photo and say the people on either side are holding him up! One person see's someone as relaxed another sees them in shock.

We had photos of WMD in Iraq, we had people in high offices telling us we had to stop them. Did it make it true?

To a point you are defending those you oppose by requiring such a low "burden of proof". As long as they have a photo it is gospel. The internet is full of good information and has dangerously bad information along side of it. It's best to keep from forming an iron clad opinion unless you have first hand knowledge. Leave a little room for the unexpected.

I am not making the claim that photoshop does not exist.

If you are making the claim that the Boston Marathon Bombing photos are faked.

Either produce evidence that they are faked, or stop wasting my time.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

I never claimed the photo was

I never claimed the photo was a fake or genuine. I wouldn't stake my life on it either way would you?

My life is not at stake...

and I have no contrary evidence against the veracity of the photos.

If you want to ask everyone you meet for an ID, before accepting their name to be their truthful name, then go right ahead.

If evidence ever emerges that the photos are faked, I will reconsider their veracity.

But at this time, no evidence to the contrary exists.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

It really was a simple

It really was a simple question..

PS I have owned and operated Rental Car Agencies... I would never hand over the keys without ID. You would be surprised how many attempted to use forged.

Bottom line both sides of this argument need to demand higher standards of evidence. Just because a photo or story pops up on the internet isn't iron clad proof.

Your premise...

that photographs can never be trusted because it is possible to manipulate photos is absurd.

Just because photographs can be edited, does not mean you should assume every photograph IS edited.

It's the equivalent of saying, It's possible that someone could poison my water or food, so I will assume that it is poisoned and not eat or drink.

If no evidence that my food is poisoned exists, it's pretty safe to presume I can eat it safely.

If a photo is supposedly faked, then let evidence be presented to support that contention.

Until evidence is presented proving a photograph has been faked, it is not proven to be faked.

I'm done arguing with you over this silliness.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

Does this same standard apply

Does this same standard apply to all the photos on infowars?

Yes.

If I were going to make a claim that a photograph is faked, I would need to give evidence to support that conclusion.

I couldn't just say, "well since it is possible to to fake photos, I'll assume that these photos must be fake".

That does not constitute proof that a photo is fake.

If someone is going to make a claim that photos are fake, they had damn well better provide evidence to support their claims.

Furthermore, I done arguing with you, if you want to treat every photo ever created as if they were false, then go right ahead.

Good Bye.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

So this was all staged as

So this was all staged as Alex Claims? He has photos in the story..

It only applies

to something that fits his agenda.

I kinda figured that.

I kinda figured that.

I'd like to point out that

I'd like to point out that there are certain accounts on here that have been deleted. These certain deleted accounts have been arguing for the theory that Jeff was an actor. Were they trolls?

Not trolls, just well

Not trolls, just well intentioned but stupid.

I just counted. Without going

I just counted. Without going brought the entire thread, there are at least 8 accounts that I found on this thread alone that have been deleted.

Why were their accounts

Why were their accounts deleted?

Michael Nystrom addressed this here:

http://www.dailypaul.com/282940/cispa-protest-or-dp-censorsh...

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

Oh thank god there is an

Oh thank god there is an explanation. I was beginning to think I was losing my head. Did the government get them? Aliens? Rapture? Nope...it was just Michael Nystrom putting a little sense back into the DP. Thanks for helping. And thank you Michael Nystrom!

I think their insensitivity

I think their insensitivity and ignorance in context of the Jeff Baumann issue was the straw that broke the camels back. Others have been keeping off that particular issue, which we can all be grateful for.

They'll hang around, read, Downvote but thankfully they are too scared to comment and post what they really think.

I have to agree on his

I have to agree on his decision to do so. It was getting crazy around here for a while. It was embarrassing!

I posted in one of the threads that it was an insult and I'd hope that none of the victims would wind up on the DP. My post got down voted a gazillion times.

"We're all mad here"
- Cheshire Cat

deacon's picture

why ask the here?

ask at the mod box or send them an email,if one of them wants to explain they will,if not guess you are out of luck
deacon

setting your expectations to high,can cause depression

Without going through the

Without going through the entire thread, I've counted at least 8 accounts that were deleted on this thread alone. Guess what...they were all arguing that Jeff is an actor.