The Manchester Bombing Story is Becoming Absolutely Ridiculous – The Redacted Photos Prove… He Wasn’t There

by Scott Creighton

UPDATE: Salman’s body is now the property of the local coroner’s office, says local authorities. They will determine what happens to it. Gee, I wonder if he’ll be given a burial at sea like bin Laden. The justification for this is his family is in Libya. Somehow or another that means local authorities get to do whatever they want with his remains.

UPDATE: Please see important update at end of article

UPDATE: Check out Shawn Helton’s work on the subject of the Manchester attack. He published it right as they released the images.

Yesterday, upon the stair,
I met a man who wasn’t there
He wasn’t there again today
I wish, I wish he’d go away..

Hughes Mearns

I took a close look at the photos released by authorities that claim to show Abedi in the elevator on his way up to bomb the arena. What I found was amazing.

But first…

Jonathan Turley, who used to be the kind of journalist who didn’t simply regurgitate ridiculous propaganda without question, reports suspected bomber Salman Abedi’s sister, Jomana Abedi, says her brother attacked random people in Manchester because he wanted “revenge” for all the folks the U.S. and Britain have bombed in the Middle East. He concludes that Salman is akin to al Qaeda and probably wanted 72 virgins in the afterlife or something. He never ONCE mentions the FACT that Abedi and his brothers and his father have been sent to places like Libya and Syria to terrorize civilian populations for the regime change the U.S. and Britain desperately wanted. It never once occurs to Turley to ask why this contractor would suddenly turn on his paymasters and demonize the entire Libyan community in his hometown while his daddy is reaping the benefits of Britain’s regime change operation in Libya.

I guess “they hate us for our freedom” is good enough for Mr. Turley’s “journalism” these days. It’s a shame isn’t it?

British authorities are quickly rounding up people associated with Salman Abedi. They justify this act by saying they are a “cell” and probably planned the attack along with him. More likely, they are also contractors who came back from Libya after terrorizing the people of that country into regime change and since they have first-hand knowledge of Salman’s previous work experience (including details like WHO he was working for), knowledge that would ultimately confuse the general population were it to get out, they decided to round them up and keep they away from prying media types.

“We are following up on the network, rolling it up, trying to contain it. As you’ve seen from the number of arrests, we are on the right track to try to contain it,” UK Security Minister Ben Wallace told CNN in Manchester on Friday. “In the end, you get to the bottom of a network.” CNN

Salman’s brothers and his father, who all worked for the regime change project in Libya, have been arrested. At first his father was allowed to appear on TV interviews until he said in one of them that his son did not do it. Then he was immediately arrested by our puppet regime in Libya along with Salman’s brothers. Gotta make sure they get their minds right before letting them walk the streets I guess. Ironically, it was the same puppet government in Libya that daddy helped install via his support of violent terrorist regime change.

Looks like Salman’s sister figured it out pretty quickly and got with the program before daddy did.

In the past few days, three photographs have emerged supposedly proving Salman Abedi was the Manchester bomber. One shows him on the side of the road with blue suitcase. The other two, heavily redacted, supposedly show him in an elevator going up to the scene of the attack but it does not. In fact, it shows him still on the side of the road apparently waiting for something, maybe a ride to the airport with his suitcase, on his way to see his brother whom he spoke with the day before.

I will show them to you now. They are amazing in what they inadvertently tell us about the Manchester bombing.

This is reportedly Salman Abedi sometime on May 22nd, the same day as the attack.

Salman Abedi carrying a distinctive blue suitcase in Manchester city centre before he carried out the Manchester Arena terror attack

Notice he is wearing $300 sneakers and sporting a blue suitcase along with his backpack.

Here he is, supposedly, on an elevator (called a “lift” in Britain) heading up one flight of stairs to the arena where he is alleged to have detonated a bomb in his backpack.

“BOMBER Salman Abedi looks relaxed in a lift — minutes before detonating the home-made dev­ice which killed 22 people at Manchester Arena.” The Sun

Image result for Salman Abedi

And another from the same place.

Abedi wore dark clothes and carried a rucksack into the arena on Monday night

Notice anything?

Why would they blackout the entire background? Why is the shading so close to his left leg?

Is it because he’s clearly NOT in the elevator where they claim the CCTV footage comes from?

The Sun put together this graphic showing his route to his final destination and they included an interior photo of that elevator.

Suicide bomber Salman Abedi's final route

If you look for a picture of him in that elevator car what you find is that altered image. Nothing else. Can’t find one with him in the elevator without the background blacked out. Why is that? What are they trying to hide. Why the hell would they do that and more importantly, why wont somebody notice it and wonder what they hell they are trying to hide.

I took a close look at the photos released by authorities that claim to show Abedi in the elevator on his way up to bomb the arena. What I found was amazing.

Look at the image of Salman on the street above. He’s standing on the edge of the sidewalk which looks like it was skimcoated with concrete or the curb was extended. Either way, it’s solid grey. Right behind him is the cobblestone roadway with the two worn white lines that are almost in the exact same perspective relative to his leg as the white paint you can see in the photo they blacked out supposedly of him in the elevator.

Again, why the hell would they black out the background in that photo? It’s ridiculous. Don’t you think they would WANT people too clearly see he was actually in that elevator?

This is bizarre. It would appear they simply took a still from the streetside CCTV video and blacked out the background so they could claim it came from the elevator. But why would they do that?

The venue is heavily covered with security cameras. From the subway all the way to the location of the detonation, there has to be multiple cameras that would have covered his approach. The one in the elevator being the most obvious.

Had they released nothing, it would have been suspicious. Plus, his association with MI-5 which is well known at this point, has generated a great deal of suspicion especially when you consider how the attack has been used to assist Theresa May’s campaign in the upcoming election. Her opponent is being portrayed as being “soft on terror” and wants to get Britain out of the Syrian regime change business while May has been a backer of it since the beginning.

Last night Theresa May’s candidacy took another major hit as she “debated” Corbyn and social media took off with Brits mocking her brutally. As she goes, so goes the militarist ambitions of the elite ruling class in the UK. And things seem to be getting worse and worse for her and this was the situation last week right before the attack.

This week, they needed something they could point to as concrete proof that Salman Abedi was the perpetrator of this attack and this is what they came up with: a couple photos of him on the elevator leading up to ground zero minutes before detonation.

The only problem is… it appears they altered them.

Well, it doesn’t “appear” they altered them, they DEFINITELY altered them. The only question is why?

Officially, they claim they did that to “protect identities of those with him”

And in both pictures, the police have blacked out the background, suggesting they wished to protect the identities of people standing next to him at the time. ” Daily Mail

These would just be random people in the elevator heading up to the arena, perhaps to pick up kids at the concert. Why “protect” their identities? From what?

That’s a ridiculous excuse and a closer examination of the images shows he wasn’t in a “lift”… he was most likely on the side of the street waiting for a ride to pick him up and take him to the airport.

The day before the attack, Salman was shopping in a little store near where he lived. There is a security camera video of that but apparently NOT one from the inside of the arena where the attack took place. Hmmm

He is believed to have bought food and cleaning products, including almonds, tuna, scouring pads and air fresheners, at a convenience store near Granby Road, which is where he assembled the bomb” Telegraph

Air fresheners? Cleaning supplies? He’s about to blow himself up and he cares about how his apartment smells?

Air fresheners are often used inside suitcases to keep from getting that musty “suitcase smell”. Young men will also toss one into their travel case because they had to pack clothes they hadn’t washed yet. Don’t want to show up at a friend or family member’s house and open your suitcase and stink up the place.

It really looks to me that Salman had either contacted his brother or been contacted by him the day before and made plans to travel back to Libya. That explains him being seen that day with the suitcase. He was probably waiting to be picked up by his handler to go to the airport. There are flights out of Manchester to Tripoli everyday, the latest I saw was at 7:30pm local time.

They say he called his brother “15 minutes before the operation began”

Operation to do what? Arrange to be met at the airport in Tripoli?

Of course, they have arrested his brother and other family members and they are now being “questioned” by our brutal regime in Libya. I am sure full confessions are soon to follow.

But that leaves us with those photos and the questions about why they crudely blacked them out the way they did.

Those photos prove nothing and in fact, this whole thing about the “blue suitcase” leaves me even more convinced than ever that Salman Abedi was not involved in this mass casualty event. He was a patsy who’s travel back and forth to Libya and his family’s longstanding connection to our regime change terrorists in that country made him a perfect candidate for the patsy they needed when Theresa May started seriously slipping in the polls. They set him up, told him he had to go back to Libya for some kind of project they were running, gave him a plane ticket and let him make arrangements with his brother and then simply picked him up to take him to the airport and took him someplace else instead.

If they altered photos of him on the street in order to put him at the scene, that means he wasn’t at the scene and they damn well know it. That means they are covering for whomever actually planted that device at the scene and they are doing so acting as an accessory after the fact.

By altering that photo and claiming it is one thing when it probably isn’t, they doing something just as bad as if they photoshopped an image of him at the location. By doing it overtly, letting people know they tampered with the image, they hope to avoid the appearance of deceit. But in reality, they make it obvious.

As I wrote, there is no valid reason to black out the entire background of the image. Even if they did want to conceal the identities of people in that elevator, they could easily have done so by simply blacking out or blurring the image of their faces and other distinguishing characteristics.

The fact that they went through the trouble to black out the entire background tells you it wasn’t someone’s face they were trying to conceal but rather, the location where the image was taken.

As I have shown above, it looks to me like the image was of Salman Abedi standing on the street waiting for a ride to the airport. And that’s why they had to black out the whole image.

Because Salman Abedi wasn’t there.

Yesterday, upon the stair,
I met a man who wasn’t there
He wasn’t there again today
I wish, I wish he’d go away..

Hughes Mearns

UPDATE: Some observant readers brought my attention to something rather odd in terms of those two photos of Salman supposedly taking a 15 second ride up one floor in the elevator. Apparently Salman is some kind of magician. I hadn’t even noticed it at first. I put together the image below after I read the comments. Nice catch folks.

UPDATE: I have now had two readers inform me that they have taken the image into Photoshop and altered the hue and intensity and contrast and done whatever and seen the corners of the interior of the elevator and thus, it proves, he’s in AN elevator. Not necessarily THE elevator.

So, not owning Photoshop, I went to TechCrunch and downloaded what they consider to be the best free photo processing software out there which appears to be something called Gimp 2.8.

I certainly not a Photoshop professional nor do I claim to be one, but I have desaturated the image, dropped shadows, adjusted the contrast and brightness and these two screenshots are what I have come up with thus far. I included the entire screenshot so you could see what I have done thus far.

As you can see… I don’t see lines defining the interior of the elevator as these two commenters suggest.

You guys can see my desktop there, you can see what I am working with in the program. Please feel free to inform me, walk me through the process of adjusting this image so I can see what you see. But for now, I don’t see what you are talking about. If you wish to walk me through the process, I would be glad to do it. thanks

UPDATE: Ok. So, one of these two readers told me to turn shadows all the way up, but I can’t find anywhere on Gimp2.8 to do that, so if anyone knows what he’s talking about, please let me know.

Now, that said, he posted his two images that he claims shows Salman Abedin on an elevator or in a corner of some type which means he’s probably not on the street like I originally thought.

And here are his photos;

It looks like he is standing in the corner of something. Could be an elevator. Does it match the one above? No it does not. Notice the two parallel brushed metal bands on the bottom right near what would be the floor. I don’t see that in the picture of the lift interior above. It could be an elevator he is in or it could be the corner of a room. Or he could be standing on the subway for we can tell.

I don’t see how someone can definitively say from this he’s in that specific lift or any lift for that matter.

I have not been able to reproduce this person’s work on my own system, so I cannot verify it’s authenticity one way or another. But it seems to me he might not be on the street as I originally thought. Still, these images certainly are a long way from placing him at the scene so my original thesis stands. Plus, they blacked out the background for a reason and it wasn’t to protect someone’s identity, even his handlers (since everyone knows you can blur images of faces so they can’t be identified while keeping the background intact that places him at the scene. If they blacked out the whole thing, it was because he probably wasn’t where they said he was)

UPDATE: The other reader who was questioning my theory has offered his evaluation of the images as well. I include it for your consideration.

Advertisements

100 Responses

  1. Not only was this guy not involved in this “event” I don’t believe there was a detonation(at least not the type they are claiming). I’ve always wondered why if these “terrorists” wanted to inflict maximum damage at these events they don’t explode the things in the middle of the largest crowds.Not only for the required shock and awe it would cause but also obviously for the chance to inflict the most death and destruction.Out of sight,out of mind,so to speak….

  2. Are their ‘Photoshop’ skills that juvenile and sloppy or do they just take us for complete fools?

    Tuna? Scouring Pads? Eek, bought those last week, does that make me a terrorist?

    Look for England to mimic France’s phony, stolen election.

    • It’s actually getting worse for May over there. They trashed her last night on social media. She’s quickly becoming a laughing stock as info leaks on her plans to privatize the NHS and pretty much everything else. Corbyn, who will probably turn out to be as “socialist” as Hollande or Tspras, is starting to look like the Bernie Sanders of Great Britain. Since London is the home base of neoliberal globalization, I fear that’s not going to sit well with the masters of the universe… or the Deep State for that matter.

      • She also plans on allowing UK military forces to be part of the planned EU military forces which will be separate from NATO and under the command of the EU. This is not being publicized as it will be wildly unpopular.

      • With Corbyn promising to recognize Palestine if he can get past the voting fraud, Jeremy will be a target for a certain group of land thieves who like the characters in the “Blues Brothers,” think they are on a mission from God.

        If Corbyn does win and that’s a BIG if, look for a rash of False Flags, using Palestinians as the patsy.

  3. Your man Putin is playing along, vowing to fight terrorism with Britain, blah blah blah,
    You have the same credibility as Turley.

  4. If we accept the premise that there is some kind of battle royal going on within the DS at a global level, could it be that such sloppy work is a way for one of the “sides” to torpedo, or at least undermine, the other?

  5. Is it certain that these are original official photos? It looks to me like the modern function of the news “industry”, on all sides, has been to cast doubt on everything, everywhere, in order to give freedom of movement to the operators who have been trying to find a way to deal with the internet and the explosion of rapid information dissemination. They are taking a page from the playbook of the tobacco industry:

    http://www.who.int/tobacco/media/en/TobaccoExplained.pdf

    • yes. every place who reported on them that I have found so far says the Manchester police released them as part of their investigation and they released them redacted like this.

  6. Hi Scott. I did a bit of photoshopping’ on these “elevator” images. When you put an inverted high contrast on the images, you will notice that there are the beginnings of two converging horizon lines on both images, but more prominent in the one with his hand out of his pocket. On the left it is around knee level, and on the right it is right above the knee.

    On the right side of that same hand-out-of-pocket image, where the brushing in of the black mask is not as tight, you also notice something darker than its surrounding grey tone that runs parallel to the floor line.

    Since all of these available lines are very short, the margin of error is quite large. Nonetheless, when all of the available lines are extended to reconstruct the perspective, they are somewhat consistent with that elevator interior photo you include above, and seems like our man is standing on the corner, leaning on the wall in hands-in-pocket image, and beginning to move forward in the hands out-of-pocket image. Also, the two images seem to be cropped at different scales, since, when you align the horizon lines, the sizes are a mismatch by about 20%.

    I am not pointing this out to prove you wrong or anything, because the many photos floating around have many other problems with them. The most blatant one, which I assume you must have seen already, is the young salman on beach with friends image, where the opposite direction shadows give the manipulation away immediately. And, that someone made the effort to photoshop our dude into an image purportedly from his younger days and publish it worldwide, already indicates that a certain narrative is being built not only about salmon’s identity, but his past. As you laid it out so well in your previous article, the attempt seems to be to reconstruct a false and fake past, and avoid any real ones coming out. I am sure his Libyan beach buddies did not fake an old photo as a prank.

    Also, it seems like the 300 dollar shoes everyone is talking about has been introduced as a tying element to identify Salman in every “current” photo they use regardless its angle or image quality. Daily Mail, which seems to be the main outlet for releasing these photos, has for some reason chosen to post two cctv frames “moments before he blew himself up”in video format instead of stillss. In these frames, in the awful image quality we are accustomed to getting, the one and only recognizable thing seems to be his sneakers. And the bleach face in the second frame, which looks like a photoshop job to me, as if to say “Look, same sneakers and a baseball cap… How can you doubt it is the same person?” (Note that the only two clear and high quality cctv images we are shown are masked in photoshop by Mr. Sloppy Joe, while the rest are all 33rd generation mess of pixels that barely show anything… Hmmmm)

    But, regardless of all that I say above, which I admit is a little on the speculative side, there is very little doubt that the entire affair reeks of fakery wherever you look… whether photoshopped or not.

    • could be.. but also, could be the lines in the street, could it not? And how do you explain that whitish blob beside his right leg? I don’t need Photoshop to see that and there is no white paint in that elevator. Nor is there a cobblestone floor which you can clearly see behind him.

      Aside from all of that, you seem to miss the whole point here which is, why would they black out the whole thing if he’s actually in that same elevator? Is it a different elevator? Is it from the street? Why black it out to hide the faces of one or two people in there with him? That’s complete bullshit.

    • “many of the photos released of him have other problems”

      other problems? THEY BLACKED OUT THE ENTIRE BACKGROUND SO YOU CAN’T TELL WHERE THE FUCK HE IS… and you say some have “other problems”? That’s a big fucking problem David. And they did it to not one pic, but to two… which means they were determined you couldn’t tell where the fuck he was. That’s not a shadow in the wrong place or a fuzzy outline or some shit… they blacked out the entire background and said “look. there he is at the scene of the crime”

      problem? uh… that’s one way to put it.

      • The way I see it, the blacking out is so decidedly sloppy and so blatant that it could have been done for too many other reasons (casting doubt, hiding his handlers, hiding something that can put a timeframe to it, etc.)

        Sorry, but I don’t get the attitude in your reply… I already regret posting the comment.

        • I don’t mean to convey an attitude but I’m having a hard time understanding your comment since it completely ignored the most obvious aspect of the photos, which was blacking out the entire background. Yes, the image with the shadows going in two different directions is pretty obvious… but I tend to think showing a photo proving his being in that location that was completely blacked out might, just might, be a little more incriminating. don’t ya think?

          and you and I both know they can blur images of his handler’s face or black it out so he can’t be recognized, so that doesn’t work.

          and they can crop an image so you don’t see the time stamp… so that doesn’t work either.

          no, they had to remove everything from that photo, not just a face, not just a time stamp, and they didn’t do it for no reason.

          And no, I don’t buy that it is in an elevator. I can clearly see the white paint on the ground behind him as well as what appears to be cobblestones behind him. sorry, but your extrapolated lines dont convince me.

          sorry for the tude, but showing me a pic with contrasting shadows saying “here’s something to look at” while dismissing the OBVIOUS issues with these seems odd to me.

          • So, your premise is that when they released these blacked out images, they did not consider that this would look suspicious, and would raise some doubts and questions about what they are hiding, and that all those “everything is fake and no one died” folks would jump on it like hawks???? I don’t think so.

            You may be right that he is on the street. I already confessed that what I said was speculative, but also pointed out the available blacked out photos were not sufficient to rule out an actual elevator. Could it be “that” elevator, yes! Could it be another elevator? Yes!!! Could it be “that” elevator on another day? Yes to that as well. Could it be a street, a hallway, a basketball court, yes? Could it be the flight deck of the Enterprise? Yes to that as well.

            Scott… Both you and I know well that ALL of the images, ALL off the stories, the ENTIRE narrative, perhaps including the explosion itself are psyops used to propagandize the shitizens!!!! Whether real people died or not! And, of all the people who are able to analyze the crap out of such phony baloney stories and narratives just like you did in this excellent article you yourself wrote and published, I feel you do not need to fall prey to their well-poisoning tactics with an inconclusive photo analysis (mine included.) That’s all really.. Believe you me, that is literally ALL I was trying to point out.

            • “So, your premise is that when they released these blacked out images, they did not consider that this would look suspicious, and would raise some doubts and questions about what they are hiding, and that all those “everything is fake and no one died” folks would jump on it like hawks????”

              Like I said, they desperately needed to come up with some kind of image of him at the location since the place is probably littered with security cameras and they have released nothing. They don’t give a shit about the hoaxers. What do they care? They care about the 100% of corporate media who will publish these images as the gospel proof that he was there and the 60% or so of the public who will buy it without asking any questions. Alternative media is even reporting on these images as if there is no issue with the fact that they don’t actually show him anywhere that can be linked with the scene. Everybody else, they couldn’t care less about.

              Are you suggesting they did this as bait?

              You know, long time ago when I was heavily involved in the Truth movement and doing research and all that stuff, folks came along with the notion that we shouldn’t talk about or focus on the Pentagon because, as they said, the people who plotted the attack were holding the definitive videos of the plane hitting the Pentagon and they would release them after a time to crush the Truth movement once and for all. Here we are 16 years later and… nope. Still nothing. Guess they are playing the real long game.

              I counter propaganda. That’s kinda what I do. These photos are taking us to a whole new low in terms of what we will accept as a society when it comes to proof. And that is my point. Its ridiculous. Its almost comedy when you think about it. Who in their right mind would believe someone blacked out the entire background to hide the faces of one or two people in the elevator with him? Its nonsense.

              I understand my analysis is inconclusive… but again… that’s not the point. Do you understand? It looks like he’s standing on the side of the road with his blue suitcase next to him… it looks like a cobblestone road behind him… but you can’t be sure. One thing you can be sure of… is they didn’t want you to be able to see exactly where he was… that much is conclusive.

        • casting doubt … yes

        • This particular psyop is just a fucking game — not worth too much mental energy trying to figure it out. We’re going to see more of this as a tactic to occupy the internet researchers. Loose ends and bad evidence is being thrown out there intentionally to give people something to analyze, talk about, argue over, and be indefinitely distracted by.

    • I’ve just checked out the Daily Mail page you linked and am puzzled by the blacked out images. In one, there is logo on his cap and in the other photo the logo is missing. Completely bizarre, tampered images that the MSM are churning out.

  7. You know, long time ago when I was heavily involved in the Truth movement and doing research and all that stuff, folks came along with the notion that we shouldn’t talk about or focus on the Pentagon because, as they said, the people who plotted the attack were holding the definitive videos of the plane hitting the Pentagon and they would release them after a time to crush the Truth movement once and for all. Here we are 16 years later and… nope. Still nothing. Guess they are playing the real long game.

    I have used this same example to argue both sides of the coin many times in the past. So, I can easily say “you are right”… (that is unless you are suggesting that I am doing the same to you to prevent you from looking further into these photos… You are not, are you?)

    Even then, there is a contradiction within this reasoning. Because after 16 years, seems like putting out ridiculously obvious piece of highly obstructive information has worked splendidly for the deceivers even if you or I, or a couple million other people do not really fall for it. No one in their right minds would believe that there were only these 5 frames out of dozens of hi-tech surveillance cameras pointed in that direction. In fact, I’d say the absurdness of the notion of 5 frames matches quite well to the absurdness of painting black over irrespective of where this guy was standing and releasing out to the world. So, yes… Long game… Which, so far, has worked like a charm.

    • Seems like Ihit the wrong “Reply” button. My apologies. This was a reply to this comment.

    • to answer your question… no, I’m not saying that you are doing that. I am saying you might be buying into that thinking though.

      Here is an interesting factoid: the only reason they put out those 5 frames (which were still edited by the way) was BECAUSE people in the Truth movement were making noise about the missing videos. So they had to do… something.

      Now, you say this is similar… I agree. Those five frames were not released in order to do damage, they were released to stop the bleeding, so the corporate media could say “see? there it is. plain as day”

      Same thing in Manchester, right?

      Only difference is, what came out on the Pentagon was released after years of debate and consideration by multiple agencies i.e. the Pentagon, NSA and so forth.

      Those ridiculous images of the “elevator” were released by a little police department in Manchester… hardly PNAC with all their nefarious resources coming to bear.

      Have you ever considered the possibility that someone simply screwed up? Are they not capable of that?

      Have you ever considered the possibility that they don’t think we will ever question anything they tell us, no matter how obvious the fraud really is?

      could be anything. But here’s the thing… in the case of the release of the Pentagon pics and these… they really had no choice. They had to release something and yes… they had to alter the images.

  8. Reminds me of how they “killed” Bin Laden & gave him a burial at sea (trust us on this one!)

  9. Nice work, oh I definitely can see Abedin as a patsy… it’s becoming more and more obvious.

    BTW – Hope you are ok with this. I have linked this latest blog post of yours into my update on my own blog post of the Grande Deception. I’ve also posted some of your pics, I don’t get many readers so it probably won’t make much of a difference! It’s practically saying the same things as you are.

    🙂
    Marie

  10. I am no photo forensic person, but looking at the picture with the hat pin/logo there is something behind his left hand (out of pocket). Kind of like an elevator/lift emergency box or something and maybe a key above it.

    The lift in the picture is a double ended door so we don’t know what is on the opposite side of the photo marked ‘His final route’. I don’t want to start a David vs. Scott issue as it could be any elevator at any time, but that pic does not look like the street. Could be leaning on the elevator side or it could be a letter bin on the street…who know’s.

    Also curious as to why not take the stairs? I mean they are right there. Almost like ‘they’ needed the elevator/lift picture for the story to work.

    We all agree it’s a shoddy blackout job, but maybe they left enough in it to corroborate the elevator story. I have a copy of the image but not sure how to upload it.

    • i saw that box in the second photo, next to his leg, and I have no idea of what that is.

      and yes, a young man in good shape takes the elevator when he only has to go up one flight of stairs? Its almost as if they needed him in that elevator for the photo shoot. just as you said

      • Maybe he took the elevator because he had a heavy suitcase with him when the picture was taken?

    • The floor plan suggests that this is one of those elevators that open on both sides since the landing on the upper level is on the opposite side of the elevator, which would mean the opposite side is probably identical to what we see in the pict. However, on the two side walls of the elevator, there is a hand rail at waist level, and a similar cross bar around 8-12 inches off the ground running along the wall.

      If the guy is leaning on the side wall, the location and the angle of this visible “Box” is consistent with the detail that is off the floor.

      As I am sure we can agree, whether he is in that elevator or not has very little relevance. If he is an unwitting patsy, he might have been directed into any one of the building’s elevators (assuming they are identical) at any date, at any time… Perhaps even at an earlier concert or event…

      However, there is always the possibility that this character, from a family of Libyan “rebels” who helped the empire with their Libyan Spring overthrow and killing of Qaddafi, could be a willing actor in this deception.

      I have to say, when I allow myself a rare liberty of “theorizing” a bit, and consider the long chain of staged terror events where perpetrator/patsy has been the son (or nephews in the case of Boston) of some very shady, or very rich, or very CIA, or very prominent characters. (Scott, you have written about many of these fathers and uncles, and have also pointed out this phenomenon in the past… From Osama to the shoe bomber, and even Malala..).

      Either this type of thing (being psyop assets) is a family business and these “sons” do their job and get relocated…. Or there is a sacrificial-son-in-exchange-for power and/or riches thing going on…

      • “…the angle of this visible “Box” is consistent with the detail that is off the floor.”

        actually, the box looks like some kind of box, not the kick panel of the elevator. In case you forgot, I was an architectural draftsman and designer for several years before I got sick. Had my own company. I kinda got an eye for such things.

        “As I am sure we can agree, whether he is in that elevator or not has very little relevance.”

        Once again, wrong. If he’s not in the elevator, he definitely didn’t even participate in the operation and someone is trying to put him in the location when they know for a fact he wasn’t there. How is that POSSIBLY of “very little relevance”? Do you have any other hard evidence to show collusion and the police acting as an accessory after the fact to this mass casualty event? If so I would be interested in seeing it. Everyone who knows about his connections to MI-5 has some circumstantial evidence, but this is hard evidence provided by the Manchester police themselves. You got anything like that? Then I guess there is some relevance to it, isn’t there?

        Point is, once again, if he were a willing participant, there would be several cameras that caught him on that day or on other days, in that elevator, in that building, getting off that subway at that stop. The fact is, this is the ONLY photo they have offered at this time and it’s completely blacked out so you can’t tell where he is. That says a lot.

  11. I am inclined to think that they took his face, hands, hat and sneakers and possibly blue jeans from one photo and cut and pasted them into a photo of someone else entirely. Look at the black outlines around his neck and collar, his hands, his feet. He was wearing a dark blue loosely fitting jacket in the sidewalk shot, in the “elevator” shot he is wearing a black tightly fitting, shorter jacket. And his angle is awkward, not really the posture of someone leaning against a wall, nor someone standing up IMO. I think whoever did this very sloppy job darkened the area around him to distract from the fact his face, hands, etc., were photo shopped in. I feel badly for this boy, just as I do for the Boston boy and his brother who I think were patsies as well.

    • here’s the thing about that. As good as they are at altering photos today, even videos, the fact is, the work can always be detected and exposed by equally talented and skilled technicians. That’s why they don’t do that. That’s why they didn’t do that here or with the Pentagon images from 16 years ago. Because, when that kind of manipulation is detected, then you have a problem with becoming an accessory after the fact. That’s bad. And besides, they didn’t HAVE to do that. They just blacked out everything in the background instead so they could literally put him anywhere they wanted to put him… and no one seems to have a problem with that. Even readers here apparently. Which is fucking amazing to me.

  12. The only valid argument here is why they did not show a better photo that possible could implicate him more. One answer could be that they do not have more implicating photo because he was not there.

    If they wanted to implicate him more with this photo the backpack and its bulk should be in view. It is not. On the photo on the street the back pack is kind of slim. Also the pants seem to be not the same on street and elevator photos.

    • “The only valid argument here is why they did not show a better photo that possible could implicate him more. One answer could be that they do not have more implicating photo because he was not there.”

      If he’s in that elevator, then they should have refrained from blacking out the background so you could see he’s in the elevator. Or they could have shown a sequence of photos from the various cameras all along his path from the subway to the spot of detonation. Without blacking out the backgrounds. That would help as well. But they didn’t which leads me to the same conclusion. he simply wasn’t there.

  13. When has anyone seen an elevator security camera positioned only a foot or so above head level? Probably never because elevator cameras are always placed as high as can be so that the view is least likely to be blocked by people standing in the foreground or, worse yet, easily covered by some miscreant, being right within easy arm’s reach. So these photos are not from an elevator security camera; they appear to be from almost the exact same POV as the street camera which would be much further away and therefore higher to produce that POV angle.

    Also nobody seems to wonder why an elevator camera that is evidently not super-wide-angle, in addition to being unworkably low, would produce an image perspective where he is standing diagonally in the frame…by golly, almost exactly as he is in the street photo.

    There is no reason to kill him. He can be used again and again for different operations and so can dad and brother. They will no doubt be recycled as freedom fighters in some ridiculous future Matthew Van Dyke video or meeting with John McCain and Joe Lieberman. He’s may be kicking back in Benghazi in the former US consulate right now sipping mint tea and munching down a can of tuna.

  14. Well I am an honest person and I must say it now looks like Scott and I were wrong – he’s apparently NOT in the street in the blacked out photos. David Hazan seems to have been essentially correct with his photo analysis.

    Take the “hand-out-of-pocket” photo into Photoshop, then go to Image/Adjustments/Shadows & Highlights and crank the shadows all the way up to 100, and it becomes clearly evident that he is almost certainly not in the street, at least certainly not in the same place the street photo is taken. No cobblestones. No white painted lines. The “box” item in the background just to the right of his hand becomes readily visible and appears to be a metallic rectangle mounted on a vertical, possibly metallic, wall behind him.

    We must be honest and concede that David Hazan is correct that there is a fairly evident floor/wall corner line just below his knee on the left which indeed looks most like there is a room-corner behind him. There is no way to tell for sure, but the size, shape, and rough color of the box structure next to his hand DO roughly of match the box-like structure in the lower left of the circular elevator photo, only without the black rectangle with two white dots shown in the blacked-out photo, but it could be the same elevator at the opposite corner. We would need complete photos of the interior of the elevator to determine it.

    It is not certain that he is in an elevator, and I still think it is very unusual to have an elevator camera so low, but when the photo’s shadows are pulled up all the way in the manner described above with Photoshop’s Shadows & Highlights tool, it DOES become plainly evident that he is not on cobblestones, and there is nothing resembling the white lines in the street. It looks like he is standing in the corner of a possibly metallic room, possibly an elevator.

    It is also evident that the wall and floor colors seem to be in the right ballpark, and the architectural structures also seem to be in the right ballpark compared to the elevator photo to say he may very well be in the elevator. But he may be some other place just as well, perhaps a different elevator of the same manufacture elsewhere in the stadium on his patsy-making route. We would need comprehensive photos of the inside bottom of the elevator to say for sure – to match the rectangular box seen in this blacked-out photo.

    Maybe a reader in Manchester can go take some pictures of the inside bottom of the elevator for comparison.

    • I am currently downloading Gimp 2.8. I’ll see what you are talking about in a minute or two.

    • Thank you for the corroboration, Observer. I appreciate it.

      The camera angle, and its proximity to the subject had initially struck me as improbable as well. I had considered this being a handheld phone camera or something, until I scaled the two shots to match the size of the feet and overlaid them to realize that the perspective lines in question (including the “box”) matched perfectly. Then I googled “elevator camera” pics of all kinds and realized that these could indeed be cropped security camera images where our man is on the far right of the frame.

      The idea that there might have been the blue suitcase in the pict, or other people, handlers, accomplices that they blacked out are very probable. However, there are also countless other possibilities… Even a total stranger who can identify himself could easily ruin the timeline if the timeline is fictional. A scratch, a scuff mark or any minor visible detail on elevator elements could identify the exact elevator he is in, if the elevator is not the one they say it is. I can go on and on…

      Scott, I will attempt, one more time, to explain myself when I say what is behind the black paint-job is not relevant:

      First and foremost; since the original photos will never be revealed, any suggestion or assumption as to what might been the blacked out areas remain, and will always remain a speculation, and nothing more. Yes, I admit that the absence of evidence does not and should not mean evidence of absence. Nonetheless, these images are what we have to go by.

      Secondly, when the entire event, from its inception to its execution, from its reporting and its presumed cover up, reeks of involvement of the British and possibly the other 5eyes intelligence agencies, it is conveniently timed, conveniently covered by the usual suspects of the media, and has all the watermarks of a staged or false flag terror event. So, although it would be f’n fantastic to discover the corner of a blue suitcase in these pictures, or Samantha May’s feet, or his brother, his father, etc (or anything at all really), there are way too many lies involved to cross check them with other lies and come to some conclusion. What if the blue suitcase image is fake for example?

      The same principle applies to the missing pin (or logo) on his cap… I know almost with certainty that the two elevator images are mere moments apart from each other. So, what would really cause the pin/no-pin discrepancy? Unlikely that he took it off between shots, or changed hats. Which leaves the only other possibility that it was photoshopped out. Why would they do that? Can’t think of a single reason except that they would be creating yet another misdirection and distraction from other things that they don’t want people to look at or investigate. Sort of like chaff that a fighter plane drops fool the heat-seeking investigators and sharp minds.

      On a side note:

      Here’s a video that shows The Queen visiting the hospital in Manchester this past week, where someone (a head nurse perhaps) replies to one of her questions saying that everything went like clockwork because “we had practiced actually a month ago”…

      • I make you the same offer I made Observer. I now have Gimp2.8 and stand ready for your assistance to walk me through the processing of the image so that I might see these lines like you did. I’m ready to go. But as you can see from my first attempt, I was not able to find them thus far.

      • “So, what would really cause the pin/no-pin discrepancy? Unlikely that he took it off between shots, or changed hats. Which leaves the only other possibility that it was photoshopped out. Why would they do that? Can’t think of a single reason except that they would be creating yet another misdirection and distraction from other things that they don’t want people to look at or investigate. Sort of like chaff that a fighter plane drops fool the heat-seeking investigators and sharp minds.”

        or… you couldn’t make out the pin in the first photo, but it was clear in the second… and they didn’t want folks to know who’s pin was on his hat. Maybe cus it’s something like these perhaps…

        https://www.google.com/search?q=special+operations+pins&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiRk8DFrZrUAhUBKCYKHSbxAg4QsAQIVg&biw=1920&bih=947

        or the British equivalent..

        https://www.google.com/search?q=special+operations+pins&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiRk8DFrZrUAhUBKCYKHSbxAg4QsAQIVg&biw=1920&bih=947#tbm=isch&q=british+special+operations+pins

        there are all sorts of reasons other than “its a trap so don’t talk about it”

        • “its a trap so don’t talk about it”

          I never said that. Was simply going down the equally possible and probable scenarios.

          I seem to have wrongly assumed that i could contribute to this page with additional analysis since Photoshop, image analysis and image reconstruction are within my area of expertise. But no matter what I say, the conversation seems to take a contentious tone.

          As for the gimp thing… I have never used it. But judging by the screenshots above, seems like it functions like photoshop.

          In the layers palette on the upper right corner, there would be a pop-up menu that allows you to create “adjustment layers”. Find the one that says “Curve” and create one, and make sure it is above the image layer.

          When you click on the line connecting the two corners, you create “control points”. Try to give it the shape seen in this photo

          You will notice that the image will take an x-rayish look, but will reveal many details previously invisible to naked eye. Try pulling and pushing these control point up[ and down until the detail you are interested in becomes visible. Hope this helps.

  15. Maybe they blacked out the photo because his co-conspirators were in the elevator with him.

  16. The floor perspective lines that David Hazan pointed out are also clearly visible in the other photo too, again indicating he is standing in a corner.

  17. Or maybe they blacked out the photos because he had his blue suitcase with him in the elevator yet it wasn’t found at the scene, so they had to get rid of the image of it – this might be a better theory.

    • that’s all possible. as I said before, they may have had to black out the entire photo to get rid of the suitcase sitting next to him. if that case is not found at the bombsite and the elevator is supposedly taking him up there, then either someone stole the case, which is ridiculous, or he wasn’t going there and the elevator ride was something, somewhere, else. all that aside, I don’t have photoshop and I can only go by what I see in the small space between his image and the blacked out part of the photo and to me, it still looks like cobblestones behind him

      either way, the blacking out of the background proves my point. whether he is on the street or whether he is standing there with his suitcase on his way to the airport, he isn’t the bomber and whoever altered that photo did so in order to conceal that fact.

      • I don’t see any way to upload photos – if that’s possible I can upload them.

        • well, take a look at the update on this article and feel free to walk me through the process myself. You can see my desktop and what Gimp2.8 has in it’s tool bar, right? You should be able to get me to the point where I see what you see on my own, right?

          • I haven’t used Gimp for years and don’t have it right now, but it is a good photo editor so it probably has a “Shadows & Highlights” tool or function – the “Shadows” control lightens the shadows while leaving the highlights pretty much unchanged – use this to do what I did to these photos – as I said, I cranked the shadows all the way up to maximum. (the “Highlights” control darkens the highlights without darkening the dark areas – not useful for this case).

            • the only option in the menu dealing with shadows is the option to drop shadows. unless you know of a way, it doesn’t offer me a chance to turn shadows up to the maximum. my assumption is, they are already all the way up. perhaps you could download the free program and show me what I am missing.

            • Oh, I didn’t see that you put your Gimp pix above –

              so all I did was brighten the image using only the Shadows tool in PS. Yours looks all gray so maybe you took the shadows darker? I’m not sure – Gimp’s Shadows tool may work differently than PS.

              Try this: forget the Shadows tool and just brighten the whole image and at some brightness you should see the background bits that aren’t blacked out become visible.

              It would be better if you could figure out how to do it with exposure curves or parametric controls so you only lighten the darks and not the highlights –

              there are often two or three different tools that will do this in slightly different ways: they may be called Exposure, Brightness, Curves (where you adjust/change the white to gray to black relationship).

              Sorry I can’t be of much help with Gimp because I forget all its commands.

              • I see what you are talking about in your photos but I tell you, the interior of that lift in their photo does not match what is visible in yours. As I said in the extended update above, it does look like he is inside something. Could be an elevator. Could be a subway (if he’s standing in a back corner) I don’t know. But, it looks like he is not actually still on the street and I made that correction in my article. But again, it does not match the image they give of the elevator from that specific area. I will check using Curves (there is a drop down menu for that in Gimp, I just didn’t know what it was) but I have already upped the brightness and then played with contrast too see what I can see and it simply doesn’t do much to improve the darkened areas. Probably because it’s only two layers meaning they doctored the photo and then took a screenshot of the final product so there wouldn’t be any layers folks could play with.

                • That’s fine – to further explain: I was looking at the lower left edge quadrant of the circular elevator photo, and noticing a rectangular object just above the floor on the side wall – I thought that might POSSIBLY be the architectural feature we see next to his hand IF THE ELEVATOR PHOTO WAS TAKEN FROM THE OTHER DOOR’S POV LOOKING BACK TOWARD US, so the feature I’m describing would then not be on the left of the photo, it would be on the RIGHT of the photo, as we maybe are seeing in the “hand-out-of-pocket” photo. I don’t care about this at all, just trying to clarify what I meant so you can see how I was thinking it MIGHT be possible that he was in an elevator similar to the one in the circular photo, but not by any means for sure.

                  • understood. and I agree having taken a look at the photos you provided. But I can tell you right now, the side walls of whatever he is leaning against do not, in fact, match that photo from what they claim is the lift in that area. it just doesn’t. he may be in an elevator, as I wrote in the update… or he may be inside something else. I appreciate you and David taking the time to leave comments and discuss this as we have, but I have to disagree with David on this one… and I also should note, he seems determined, with both this issue and the missing hat pin issue, to suggest we should abandon talking about them because, as he has stated himself, he feels its them using “well-poisoning tactics” and I’m just falling for it I guess.

        • imagr

          facebook

          twitter

          there are all sorts of ways to upload an image and then leave a link to it in a comment, right? But honestly, I want to find it myself in the photo I download myself. If I am going to post a retraction or an update to my article, I’m going to know its accurate. no offense.

    • Or maybe they blacked out the image so everyone will spin trying to figure out why they blacked out the image.

      • yes, but uh… have you seen anyone else asking why they blacked out the image? anyone? aside from me? you think the Manchester police department that well skilled in the arts of counter-intelligence? i don’t.

        • No, I haven’t. You could have a point there.

          • to be honest, I am simply shocked… nobody seems to notice or care that the only image they released that supposedly puts this guy at the scene is completely blacked out so you can’t tell if he’s at the scene. that’s just… wow…

  18. …because he split with the suitcase, that is, and caught the next MI6 charter for Tripoli.

  19. Uh, Scott, please edit that again – if you were referring to me I MOST CERTAINLY DID NOT SAY NOR EVEN REMOTELY IMPLY that anything was “proof positive that not only is Salman Abedin on an elevator, but he’s on that specific elevator”, and I’m pretty sure David didn’t either. I think we both said it was POSSIBLE he was in AN elevator NOT necessarily “the” elevator, but we both said or implied that it is not even possible to be even cursorily determined without comprehensive photos of the elevator, and even if we had those one could never be sure if he was not merely in some similar elevator somewhere else. We love you, but what you wrote grossly misrepresents what we were being VERY careful to accurately express.

    • I was referring to David. Ad no, I did not grossly misrepresent what he said, or, more importantly, implied. In several comments he’s made it very clear he thinks these “enhanced” images prove Salman is in THAT elevator. I don’t think he is and the photos, at least yours, certainly don’t prove it. I agree with you that it seems he is not on the street, but he could be in anything. He could be standing in a corner on another street for that matter. Or he could be in a subway like I said before. But no, David made his implications very clear

      • Wow, Scott… i don’t mean to carry on and on with this, but where did I say this?

        • you didn’t say what you found with your enhancements matched the image of Salman and the image of the lift from the daily mail article? you didn’t write that?

          • I feel I must defend David again. Saying he said something appears to match is EXTREMELY different than saying “he posted his two images that he claims are proof positive that not only is Salman Abedin on an elevator, but he’s on that specific elevator.” Not only did he not say or imply that they were proof positive or anything of the sort nor that he was on that specific elevator, the photos you attribute to him are mine, not David’s. We have not seen David’s photos. You have been quite unfair to David. But we still love you and all your tireless work.

            • first of all, this is the first thing I said when I mentioned your questions, yours and Davids:

              “I have now had two readers inform me that they have taken the image into Photoshop and altered the hue and intensity and contrast and done whatever and seen the corners of the interior of the elevator and thus, it proves, he’s in AN elevator. Not necessarily THE elevator.

              I think that is absolutely a fair assessment of this discussion.

              And yes, the line you mention does seem a bit out of place with regard to your opinion, your comments and the photos you provided. So I have edited the update so it reads like this:

              “Now, that said, he posted his two images that he claims shows Salman Abedin on an elevator or in a corner of some type which means he’s probably not on the street like I originally thought.

              And here are his photos;”

              Better?

              • Yes, that’s fine.

              • But still, we did not claim it proves he’s in anything. We didn’t claim it proves anything, so it’s still not so accurate, but it’s ok. We basically said it could be consistent with being in “an” or “the” elevator but that there is no way to determine this without better information. We did strongly suggest that it appears to prove he’s not in the street.

                • I’m not even sure they prove that. Neither your’s nor his shows anything conclusive either way. and yes, you both implied that conclusion multiple times, over and over again… and you still are. well, there are the photos. people can judge for themselves.

  20. His hair looks wrong.
    In the suitcase photo he has neat hair.
    In the lift/elevator photo he seems to have an ‘afro’ sticking out the back.

    • That is most likely a misleading artifact of the Photoshop exposure increase combined with the black-out “inking” border and the jpeg compression or some pattern behind him – his hair probably doesn’t actually do that – if we saw a clean original photograph it would probably look correct – these photos are low-resolution to begin with and then have been heavily manipulated in some program like Photoshop.

  21. The only thing we said that even came close to a positive assertion was that he appears to be standing in a corner, and even that is not assured, but rather merely an appearance based on very scant image evidence.

    • david wrote that what he saw after bringing it into photoshop matched the image of the interior of the lift from the article. specifically, that’s what he wrote.

      “The floor plan suggests that this is one of those elevators that open on both sides since the landing on the upper level is on the opposite side of the elevator, which would mean the opposite side is probably identical to what we see in the pict. However, on the two side walls of the elevator, there is a hand rail at waist level, and a similar cross bar around 8-12 inches off the ground running along the wall.

      If the guy is leaning on the side wall, the location and the angle of this visible “Box” is consistent with the detail that is off the floor.

      As I am sure we can agree, whether he is in that elevator or not has very little relevance.”

      asdf

      • I have said repeatedly it was “consistent” or “somewhat consistent” with the elevator details, or at least with the amount of detail that was available to us in the elevator shot included in your article.

        In fact, here are my actual words:

        Since all of these available lines are very short, the margin of error is quite large. Nonetheless, when all of the available lines are extended to reconstruct the perspective, they are somewhat consistent with that elevator interior photo you include above, and seems like our man is standing on the corner, leaning on the wall in hands-in-pocket image, and beginning to move forward in the hands out-of-pocket image.

        And, in every comment I posted, I made an effort to acknowledge that none of what i was saying was conclusive, and used qualifiers like “might” “could” or whatever, emphasizing that he could be just about anywhere, any time, with any who….

        • yet you also said it was of little relevance whether or not he was in that elevator, when in fact, if he wasn’t and they covered it up, it’s of extreme relevance. You also seem to think we are being baited with some kind of “well poisoning tactic” which means he is in fact in that elevator and they are just waiting to spring their trap. Also, you have implied on multiple occasions that the image is from that elevator. You say you have an enhanced photo which leads you to believe that. Observer shared his. perhaps you would be so kind as to do the same. I would like too see this image that is “somewhat consistent” with the image of the lift in the article above. that would be helpful.

          • I have emailed you a layered file that you should be able to open in GIMP.

            As for the rest, we seem to be going in circles, so I will bow out and let my words above in this thread stand for themselves.

            (Observer… Thank you again. You are a kind person for coming to my defense here. I appreciate it)

        • That’s correct – I noted David’s proper qualifiers every step of the way. It was unambiguous that he was making no definite assertion of conclusion.

          • with or without qualifiers, he is making a definite assertion about the conclusion, especially when he starts talking about me falling for poisoned wells and all that.

        • Besides, this is futile nit-picking. There could be any number of scenarios that fit the suspect narrative the spooks are spewing. As always, turning the guns inward is extremely counter-productive and without merit. Hanging up on individual words that someone writes quickly in a long thread is unfair.

          • That particular elevator is only going up one floor…… why in the world would he take time to lean against the wall ? It probably takes one minute to go up… if that long….
            so if he is on an elevator (and I doubt it) it would not be the very short ride of the one in this article.
            The point is…. the picture of him has been put for a purpose….
            and the blacking out of his surroundings is done so you will not know who or what he is with or doing…. they want you to think he is on his way to drop a bomb..

  22. Where did you get the photo of him with the blue suitcase ?
    Please supply link.

    Reason:
    You have said it is from the same day as the alleged bombing. However the media are now saying they have just released a set of photos from cctv around manchester showing him pulling that case, and they now claim it was two days before. despite no photos having a time stamps on their cctv images. Please confirm the source and where it says it was from the same day.

    Regards

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: