The Evidence of a Wider Plot in the Tsarnaev Trial

As the Dzhokhar Tsarnaev trial barrels ahead, in the third day already unveiling the prosecution’s surveillance video and the mystery witness “Danny,” whose name turns out to be Dun Meng, many questions still remain which point to the existence of a third party, or a third party organization.

The most tantalizing indicator, of course, is that we now know someone, a woman, was with Tamerlan when he bought five pressure cookers at Macy’s in Boston.  The pair were captured in a Macy’s store surveillance video.  Law enforcement is trying to determine if the woman is Katherine Russell, Tamerlan’s widow, who is now under active investigation. 

ABC News:

The widow of one of the Boston Marathon bombing suspects is under active investigation and could face potential criminal charges related to the deadly blast, law enforcement officials told ABC News.

Ms. Russell, remember, is coincidentally a granddaughter of Skull and Bones, her father being the son of Richard W. Russell, listed in Eric Samuelson’s Skull and Bones membership list. And not just Skull and Bones, but possibly a descendant of William Huntington Russell (1809 – 1885), a co-founder of Skull and Bones, the famous feeder club for the CIA. Skull and Bones – CIA alumni include Charles S. Whitehouse, US Ambassador to Laos, George H.W. Bush, William Sloane Coffin, and William F. Buckley.

That is on top of Tamerlan’s uncle Ruslan just happening to be the son-in-law of CIA, Iran-Contra scoundrel Graham Fuller, yes, that Graham Fuller, and Ruslan himself a USAID cover for CIA. USAID in Chechnya does not hire social workers.

How many crazy coincidences can you have in one crime? Remember the Tsarnaev brothers were pretty much just working class kids.  Regardless of whether or not the woman in the Macy’s video is Russell, the mere exposure of the fact that someone was with Tamerlan, not his brother, leaves a gaping hole in the two-lone-perpetrators theory.  Even if it was not Russell, who was it? Will the defense even call attention to the video, and suggest that the brothers were not acting alone?  If not we’ll know it’s a kangaroo court.

It stands to reason: if the defense’s main argument is that Dzhokhar was under the influence of his older brother, it is a small step to ask the next question.  Under whose influence, perhaps, was Tamerlan?

The video surveillance compilation presented by the prosecution splices still images into various pieces of surveillance video along a timeline, starting from when the suspects round the corner at the Whiskey Steakhouse, to them fleeing down Boylston Street.  But it conveniently omits the video segment of a man with an earpiece apparently tracking the brothers around the corner at the Whiskey (at minute 3:20 in this video.) If the man is simply a bystander who happens to make a communication as soon as the brothers pass, why did the FBI digitally mask his face before releasing the video to CNN? The faces of no other bystanders are masked, and in images released by the FBI the faces of thousands of people are splashed across the Internet.

The promised scene of Dzhokhar setting down his backpack is believable enough, but what is less believable is that the backpack weighs 30 pounds. Dzhokhar handles the backpack as if it contains notebooks and a sandwich, not two 15 pound barbells worth of steel and gunpowder.

Much was made of a still photo allegedly captured by Marathon runner David Green, in which Dzhokhar can be seeing fleeing with the crowd.  Green’s capture of an image of the suspect was heralded as a stroke of good fortune.  Green’s oft-told story is that he, a marathon runner finished with the race, caught the shot in a moment of luck after the second bomb went off. But in the video- still photo compilation which is shown to the jury, a photo emerges which is much like Green’s but cannot be Green’s, because the angle is slightly different. Green never mentioned anything about taking two photos, and in fact told the New York Daily News: “It was one shot and it was the shot that counted”.

Was someone else taking the photos besides Green? The original Green photo was ridiculed as being a Photoshop job, hiding the backpack, although in the moving video it is clear neither of the brothers have their backpacks. Dzhokhar is in front of a brick wall in the original Green photo, but in the prosecution’s current version he is in front of a wooden door.

Detail of David Green photo showing Dzhokhar fleeing bombing, past the wooden door
David-Green-boston-marathon-bombing-suspect

Photo shown to jury in surveillance video, Dzhokhar flush with wooden door
juryvid

Video shown to jury by the prosecution

Even if we lay those issues to rest, and grant the prosecution’s assertion that the brothers had backpacks and put them down, so did other men, never adequately explained by the police, nor what they were doing running away without their backpacks. Then the stubborn fact that neither of the brothers’ backpacks match the one released by police in a photo, showing a square logo on the top flap. The brothers’ backpacks were also a different color from the one shown by police.

From Reddit discussion uncovering paramilitary men missing backpacks Where does this go? A well-known journalist who distrusts the official story told me that the brothers almost certainly were involved on some level. Riding with police and reporters who were there, he said it is just too unlikely that so many police could be collaborating on the basic events of the night, and he opined they were truthful. There was shooting going on back and forth with the brothers, although the officer hit was possibly hit by friendly fire.

Was the plan for the brothers to participate in a drill, and put the backpacks down at a certain time and place? When they saw the jaws of the trap snap shut, did they decide to make a run then go down shooting? It is intriguing that authorities were conducting what was announced as an exercise that morning at the starting line, involving bomb-sniffing dogs and rooftop snipers.

There is a cryptic note presented by the prosecution from Dzhokhar, which said: “They will spend their money and they will regret it and then they will be defeated.”

Could this have meant the brothers were being paid by handlers? It is important to remember Tamerlan was an alien and had possible deportation at any time to use as a club against him, never to see his daughter again.

The carjack victim, now unmasked as Dun Meng, was convincing enough as a man thinking someone was trying to kill him. Nevertheless it is curious that he has told conflicting stories of his escape from Tamerlan, in one version Tamerlan being in the car, in the driver’s seat, when Meng makes a break out the passenger door, in the other Tamerlan being outside the car pumping gas. One would think one would remember a detail like that when you think you are about to die.

Surveillance video: Dun Meng escape

As well, the defense, if you can call it that, would be remiss to not, at the very least, subpoena cellphone records just to confirm that it was Tamerlan that Dzhokhar was talking to four minutes before the first bomb went off, as shown in the prosecutor’s surveillance montage.

That video montage, notably, does not support a repeated contention to the media, by the FBI and Massachusetts Governor Duval Patrick, that Dzhokhar did not “react” when the first explosion went off, as he clearly suddenly looked in the direction of the blast like everyone else, then fled. Massachusetts Governor Duval Patrick said on Meet the Press in 2013:

“The videotape is not something I’ve seen, it’s been described to me, in my briefings, but It does seem to be pretty clear that this suspect took the backpack off, put it down, did not react when the first explosion went off and then moved away from the backpack in time for the second explosion. It’s pretty clear about his involvement and pretty chilling, frankly, as it was described to me.”

There also remain the facts that:

– The brothers at one point were apparently trying to surrender, but the police were having none of it, as they yelled “We didn’t do it!” from behind their vehicle in the dark in Watertown.

– That the existence of the incriminating note in the boat Dzhokhar was hiding in was announced a full month after the capture, even as the media reported every other incriminating detail. On this score it is only a matter of time before a true handwriting sample from Dzhokhar surfaces and Internet sleuths will compare the handwriting.

– Then there is the strange video which cannot be ignored of a naked man looking very much like Tamerlan in custody, and identified by his aunt as him. A woman who may have changed the man’s diapers said without hesitancy: “That’s Tamerlan.”

– Oh yes, and let’s not forget that poor chap in Florida, Todashev, Tamerlan’s friend, who caught three bullets in the back while unarmed and so now will never be able to tell anything he knew.

It is the FBI’s own prevarications and this murderous behavior which is most damning. The FBI claimed that it did not know the brothers before April 15, 2013, when in fact it had interviewed them numerous times, along with the family.

Not only did it know them, it let Tamerlan slip to Chechnya in 2012, even as he was on at least two terror watch lists. The FBI attributed the error to a name misspelling somewhere along the line, as if an Edward Snowden could elude Homeland Security and leave the country just by misspelling his name on a document.

The FBI undoubtedly knew Tamerlan was in Chechnya, becoming increasingly radicalized, because the Department of Homeland Security report on the Marathon bombing tells us that the Moscow office of the FBI had intercepted “electronic communication” between Tamerlan and William Plotnikov, the Canadian jihadi who was killed in a gun battle with Russian security forces two days before Tamerlan departed the region (page 15 of report, “The Road to Boston: Counterterrorism Challenges and Lessons from the Marathon Bombings.”)

The FBI’s own behavior, as well as other factors like the clear attempt to kill Dzhokhar and never let him see trial, points to the brothers being involved as patsies of some sort, perhaps playing secret agent, and being told to be at certain places at certain times. Some have pointed out that the bombs were fairly sophisticated, in their power and destructiveness, and were likely beyond the reach of an amateur bomb-maker.

Police attempt to kill defendant while hiding in boat

The murder of Sean Collier is not cleared up much by the video presented by the prosecution, which shows two men, who are not identifiable in the video because of the dark and great distance, approaching Collier’s patrol car and killing him. An MIT student witness, Nathan Harman, in his testimony alternately switched from the pronoun “he” to “they,” according to CNN. Coaching? Nevertheless Harman at this point seems credible enough. He identified Dzhokhar directly as a man with a “big nose.” There is no reason to think he is lying. But could a look-alike team of assassins easily be found to do this job? Remember, we already know the FBI lied about at least one thing.

An inconvenient moment of candor took place when MIT police Sargent Clarence Henniger, who was the first on the scene of the Collier shooting, revealed in an interview with Boston’s WBUR radio that FBI agents were already watching the house in which Tamerlan lived in Cambridge even before he was identified Thursday night, four days after the bombing.  Four days had elapsed before the Bureau released the first surveillance photos of the suspects and asked the public for help in identifying them. Henniger said:

“The word was out regarding the suspects. We knew that his house was under surveillance, and the feds were all over the city of Cambridge.”

The FBI found this admission alarming enough to issue an official denial of Henniger’s claim, saying, “No one was surveilling the Tsarnaevs and they were not identified until after the shootout. Any claims to the contrary are false.” But when pressed, Henniger stuck to his story, saying “to some degree I’m sure [the FBI] knew.”

The brothers’ mother and father have both steadfastly maintained that the brothers were “set-up”: The mother told Russia Today, as reported by Reuters:

“He (Tamerlan) was ‘controlled’ by the FBI, like, for three to five years…They knew what my son was doing. They knew what sites on the internet he was going to.”

The mother, Zubeidat Tsarnaeva, said:

“They were telling me that he was really an extremist leader and that they were afraid of him. They told me whatever information he is getting, he gets from these extremist sites. They were controlling him…I am, like, 100 percent sure, that this is a set-up,”

The brothers’ father, Anzor Tsarnaev, told Russia’s Channel One television:

“I do not believe that my sons could have planned and organized the terrorist act, because they knew U.S. national security services were keeping an eye on them…They (the security services) said ‘We know what you eat, what you read on the Internet.'”

Indeed, the Boston Globe reported in March of 2014 that Dzhokhar’s defense team had asserted that Tamerlan Tsarnaev “had been encouraged by the FBI to be an informant and to report on the Chechen and Muslim community…”  In a 23-page court filing, the attorneys requested records of any contacts between the FBI and Tsarnaev relating to this.

The overriding fact to all of this, of course, is that after two years in isolation and with God-knows-what being done to him, Dzhokhar is described by people who know him as being a shell of himself, and in newspaper accounts as all but comatose.  During one day’s proceedings the AP described the defendant as “slouched in his seat and [showing] little reaction as the case unfolded.”  A former high school wrestling teammate of Dzhokhar’s recently told the Boston Globe, of a recent court appearance by Tsarnaev, that he seemed like a “different guy” who had a different “body language.”  Is Dzhokhar doped up?

The public must insist that Dzhokhar take the stand, as he is doomed anyway, and will get the death penalty no matter what his lawyer does. If there were other plotters, there is only the hope that there is a braincell left somewhere deep which will blurt out the wrong thing for the prosecution. His initial plea was not guilty, after all.  The event marked a warp-speed increase in the demonization of Muslims in America, and the introduction of the first ever, voluntary, city-wide lock-down whenever a man with a gun is loose. A very convenient tool for dealing with pesky anti-wall Street-type protesters.

Dzhokhar must take the stand, as a dead man to clear his name. Whatever he did, he and his brother did not do alone, and America must know the truth.

Advertisements

9 thoughts on “The Evidence of a Wider Plot in the Tsarnaev Trial

  1. “In 2011, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev wrote an English assignment while attending UMass Dartmouth about the West Memphis Three, who many believe were wrongly accused.
    ‘In this case it would have been hard to protect or defend these young boys if the whole town exclaimed in happiness at the arrest. Also, to go against the authorities isn’t the easiest thing to do. Don’t get me wrong though, I am appalled at the situation but I think that the town was scared and desperate to blame someone. It’s because of stories like this and such occurrences that make a positive change in this world. I’m pretty sure there won’t be anymore similar tales like this. In any case, if they do, people won’t stand quiet, I hope. ‘ ”

    The reason the West Memphis Three got the opportunity to take an Alford plea is because, as time went on, it was increasingly obvious that the three then-teens had not committed the crime. The state of Arkansas was fearful they would win a new trial, be found not-guilty and then the state would be on the hook to pay compensatory damages for rushing this case to trial (and, in an ironic twist, allowing a judge to make up shit so he could side with the prosecution regarding evidence admissions).

    Allowing them to take the Alford plea means that, legally, they are still considered guilty, but the government could give them “time served” and allow them to get out of jail – and the three can’t sue for false imprisonment.

    ——-

    posted late Monday afternoon: 4-15-13:
    “Anonymous 04/15/13(Mon)18:42 No. 15795252
    WARNING: laws being written to screw you.

    I work on a security commission and I’ve just received word to start campaigning on a campaign we’ve been working on for the last two months and now it all makes sense.

    I’ll keep it as short as I can.

    They’re going to pin this even on a male late teens to early 20s and say he did it because he is unstable. They are going to find firearms and a NRA book in his home. They are going to say he used reloading powder for the explosion and that reloading powder shouldn’t be for sale to the public.

    —->”They are then going to say that because the powder in ammunition can be used for explosions that the number of rounds you can buy should be limited and taxed to help pay for these events.”<——

    I can’t do anything or I’ll lose my job and possibly face criminal charges. Please don’t let them get away with it. They won’t find the suspect till later this week and the raid is issued to occur on Friday. This was a staged event. The people hurt are real but the event was planned. Don’t let them hurt our rights.

    I’m at work so I used a copy of the picture from another thread. Also please don’t mention me. It will seriously hurt me."

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Reporters, read the last sentence CAREFULLY:
    “known facts from this latest case seem to fit well within a now-familiar FBI pattern whereby the agency does not disrupt planned domestic terror attacks but rather creates them, then publicly praises itself for stopping its own plots.
    First, they target a Muslim: not due to any evidence of intent or capability to engage in terrorism, but rather for the “radical” political views he expresses. In most cases, the Muslim targeted by the FBI is a very young (late teens, early 20s), adrift, unemployed loner who has shown no signs of mastering basic life functions, let alone carrying out a serious terror attack, and has no known involvement with actual terrorist groups.
    They then find another Muslim who is highly motivated to help disrupt a “terror plot”: either because they’re being paid substantial sums of money by the FBI or because (as appears to be the case here) they are charged with some unrelated crime and are desperate to please the FBI in exchange for leniency (or both). The FBI then gives the informant a detailed attack plan, and sometimes even the money and other instruments to carry it out, and the informant then shares all of that with the target. Typically, the informant also induces, lures, cajoles, and persuades the target to agree to carry out the FBI-designed plot. In some instances where the target refuses to go along, they have their informant offer huge cash inducements to the impoverished target.
    Once they finally get the target to agree, the FBI swoops in at the last minute, arrests the target, issues a press release praising themselves for disrupting a dangerous attack (which it conceived of, funded, and recruited the operatives for), and the DOJ and federal judges send their target to prison for years or even decades (where they are kept in special GITMO-like units). Subservient U.S. courts uphold the charges by applying such a broad and permissive interpretation of “entrapment” that it could almost never be successfully invoked. As AP noted last night, ‘defense arguments have repeatedly failed with judges, and the stings have led to many convictions.’…
    ….allowing the FBI to manufacture terror plots: in the process keeping fear levels about terrorism completely inflated, along with its own surveillance powers and budget….Something has to be done to justify all that terrorism spending. For all those law enforcement agents with little to do, why not sit around and manufacture plots to justify those expenditures, giving a boost to their pro-surveillance ideology to boot? Media outlets have a responsibility to investigate the FBI’s claims, not mindlessly repeat them while parading their alarmed faces and scary graphics.”

    https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/01/16/latest-fbi-boast-disrupting-terror-u-s-plot-deserves-scrutiny-skepticism/

    https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/02/26/fbi-manufacture-plots-terrorism-isis-grave-threats/

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Former FBI assistant director Thomas Fuentes:
    “If you’re submitting budget proposals for a law enforcement agency, for an intelligence agency, you’re not going to submit the proposal that ‘We won the war on terror and everything’s great,’ cuz the first thing that’s gonna happen is your budget’s gonna be cut in half. You know, it’s my opposite of Jesse Jackson’s ‘Keep Hope Alive’—it’s ‘Keep Fear Alive.’ Keep it alive.”

    https://privacysos.org/node/1660

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Good questions raised here but this article is repeating the myth that the University of Mobile coach head an announcement of a drill at the finish line. He is explicit that the announcement was at the starting line, 26 miles away and hours before the blasts in Boston.

    Like

  5. The proof is in the actual “evidence” the prosecution/defense continues to feed the jury. The video of “Meng” getting away from the car-jacking is one such piece of “evidence”. Watch how the back door continues to stay in view and NOBODY gets out of the back door. Proof Jahar was sitting in the front and Meng could not have been in the front also. The “boys” from the lab have obviously used high tech imaging tools to impose Meng running off:

    Like

  6. The wife Russell may be filing a lawsuit against ABC for saying she is with Tamerlan buying 5 pressure cookers. Of course, ABC won’t tell you that. Has anyone seen the surveillance video of Tamerlan buying pressure cookers? These boys have been framed, right down to the Mercedes SUV.

    Like

  7. Now is the time to go wide, not just among ourselves!! I know Furtive tried to use the Boston Globe (or Boston.com?). I sent this to the Globe today. This is a great page, by the way!!

    “Whatever else he did … , Dzhoktar Tsarnaev is an American citizen: like Obama and Deval Patrick,like the victims, like Tom Brady and like Aaron Hernadez, like me and like us…”

    This week in the Marathon trial, THE ESSENTIAL POINT IS THAT THE DEFENSE IS NOT DOING ALL IT CAN TO CREATE “REASONABLE DOUBT.” THE DEFENSE MUST BE RECEPTIVE TO WHOMEVER STEPS FORWARD, PERSONALLY OR THROUGH ANY MEDIA, TO OFFER ALTERNATIVES TO THE GOVERNMENT’S CASE.

    Reasonable people can conclude that whatever potential evidence amateur researchers have generated in analyzing video and audio from this event and in subsequent discussion should be presented to the jury, even if the presentations on Youtube and other places can sound amateur(ish) or even if some parts of these presentations are inaccurate, self-conflicting or conflicting with other interpretations, or some portions not credible, or even marred by obscenity, bias or even racial/religious views that are an anathema to us. THE DEFENSE DOESN’T OWE THE PUBLIC AN EDITING OR A SIFTING THROUGH OF THIS MATERIAL UNLESS TO PRESENT IT MORE SUCCINTLY AND ACCURATELY– IT OWES ITS CLIENT THE RESPONSIBILITY TO TAKE ALL EVEN SLIGHTLY CREDIBLE EVIDENCE AND ** PRESENT IT TO THE JURY**. IT OWES TSNARHEV ITS RESPONSIBILTY TO SHOW THE JURY AT EVERY OPPORTUNITY THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE ANY PORTION OF PROSECUTION’S VERSION OF THE EVENTS IS NOT ENTIRELY ACCURATE OR COMPLETE.

    The evidence presented by these researchers, called “conspiracy theorists” by persons interested in dismissing or silencing them, is not evidence the general public has seen unless they are following alternate interpretations of the case: and a tremendously high percentage of this evidence is compelling, even shocking, and often entirely contradicts the governments version of the events. Photographs and video of the events have been online for two years, even if the public hasn’t yet been interested enough yet to look at them. The public and the jury must look at them now, to prevent this one man from taking 100% of the blame for an action he may have not participated in, not fully understood his role in the events, or participated in only partly.

    No matter how involved Dzhokhar was or not, huge portions of evidence exist that he was part of a bigger action: it may have been a a larger plot he was deceived into, or coerced into. One can speculate he may have thought he was playing a role in the drill that was scheduled, which would explain many of his actions that day, including his calm demeanor when he returned to his dorm, or his clear pleas on audio from Watertown “We didn’t do it!!” If there was a lethal bomb at the either site, and he was filmed putting it down, or putting something down he though was a mere “pyrotechnic device,” as seems to have been placed at the first site, then he is now a patsy.

    There was, beyond any reasonable doubt, a drill planned for that day and executed. and a large amount of photographs and testimony that prove it. The films of the first bomb site indicate strongly those actions to be a drill. Boston Globe tweets, oral testimony, audio evidence, and an admission that a drill of remarkable similarity was planned for later that summer published in the Globe on also point directly to that fact. In addition, we have photographs proving the presence of persons acting in seemingly official capacities or with seeming pre-knowledge as well as tremendous numbers of Inconsistencies of witness and victim narratives, not only in testimony but contradictory to photographs, many of whom may or seem to be participating in a script

    The defense has not yet brought forward any of this forward. At this time, it does not seem to me they plan on doing so.

    If the jury is not informed of the strong possibility that a drill was enacted that day, the defense is lying by omission. If the defense withholds any evidence that might benefit its client, they are immoral, unethical,and illegal.

    No matter what you believe about the Boston Marathon Bombing, in the interest of law and the Constitution, insist the defense present everything it can get is hands on. Neither this boy or the Constitution itself are served by anything less.

    I invite anyone with alternative evidence of these events — I mean, researchers, believers,and even the simply inquisitive — to publicize your evidence at this time directly to the general public, through comments and to local papers or website, with whatever links and photographs you can attach to them. New England media is carrying daily updates, so one might start there, in Boston, Worcester, Springfield, Hartford, Providence, BUT WE ONLY HAVE A FEW DAYS, WHILE THE TRIAL IS STILL GOING ON, to insist that the defense USE WHATEVER WE HAVE to defend its client.

    For this short window, ** our evidence doesn’t have to be perfect or entire accurate (though we would like it to be…). *** We just have to cast whatever doubts we can on the government’s case, and we CERTAINLY have the capacity to do that, in 1000 different ways, with all the video, audio, photographs, and writing
    To see it more lightly but maybe more clearly: as in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, or even Miracle on 34th Street, we have the LEGAL RIGHT, AT THIS TIME, to dump everything we have on the “desk” of the defense (and to the eyes of that portion of the public who understands the defense’s duty) and to DEMAND that the defense look at it on our behalf and present ANYTHING WE HAVE given them in order to create “reasonable doubt”

    In doing so, we might get to the truth of the case. Failing that, at least we have held our legal system to its own standards of providing a full defense and assuming innocence until proven guilty

    I WOULD ONLY URGE RESEARCHERS TO not make the mistake of “preaching to the converted.” Therefore, I would include brief clarifying previews or sentences to help the viewer rather than mere titles. Don’t expect every video to be watched just because it is posted. For example, in the video below, you will see:
    What you will see:
    1- We will see someone later identified as Michael Gross ( I believe) holding something that flashes in his hands and receiving burn marks on his scalp. You also see:
    2- a woman approach the scene with * tourniquets already around her legs* and attempt to be sit down,only to be ordered away and placed in another spot.
    3- You will see a man carrying an object away from the scene that seems to be the launching tube of a pyrotechnic device.
    4- The device is hidden in a bag before it is taken away.
    4-You will see stage blood pouring from a womans purse.
    5- You will see a healthy, composed man with torn pants and what seems to be fake blood on his legs, talking to someone who appears to be instructing him. Later, the man will appear in the street receiving a neck brace.
    6- And in what is for me the most CONVINCING PART OF ANY VIDEO I HAVE SEEN SO FAR, YOU SEE FAKE BLOOD, PROVEN TO BE FAKE BLOOD, AS IT SEPARATES INTO ITS WATERY COMPONENT AND ITS SOLID COMPONENT ON A NEON FLAG.

    I would also urge researchers to see that this is not a time to debate among ourselves, but to put out to the public our evidence that shows “something isn’t at all right!!” with the prosecution’s narrative.

    To repeat two principles: Dzhokar Tsarnev is an American citizen: like Obama and Deval Patrick,like the victims, like Tom Brady and like Aaron Hernadez (on trial currently for murder), like me and like us…”
    From the Catechism of the Catholic Church: paragraph 1753

    ” A good intention (for example, that of helping one’s neighbor) does not make behavior that is intrinsically disordered, such as lying and calumny, good or just. The end does not justify the means. Thus the condemnation of an innocent person cannot be justified as a legitimate means of saving the nation. ”

    If you’re curious: my own personal view AT THIS time is that there was a lethal bomb near where the 2nd bomb site was, simultaneous to the 2nd one, one we would hope not foreseen by public officials, but planted for darker purposes, propaganda purposes, by other parties. They somehow involved the defendant in a way he didn’t comprehend and then set him up to be convicted. I believe many of the injuries are fake, but feel that many may be real, including the death of Martin Richard — but of none of it am I completely convinced. Except those ambulances that didn’t get there….

    Flash Mob Fools the World
    *****1080p HD***** Repost, Mirror, Download, Cut Paste, re-edit, make it yours! “FAIR USE LAW” – EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES – -Sara Valverde – Fat Black/Pink Shirt…
    YOUTUBE.COM
    Like · · Share
    1 share

    Delta Rodgers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUU7SXPHyWo

    Boston Ambulances Strangely Allergic to Bomb Scenes
    Why do we only see 1 ambulance in the whole time…
    YOUTUBE.COM
    43 mins · Like · Remove Preview

    Delta Rodgers Except having a real bomb there would not explain the complete absence of ambulances.
    8 mins · Like

    Like

  8. Great last few paragraphs. The other effect(s) are to let us know that “it could happen here!!” and that anyone who is a 9/11 researcher, as the older brother was, is to be suspected of being dangerous.

    Like

  9. I am trying very hard to get as much on to bostonglobe.com and boston.com as I can today. They are leaving it up. Anyone want to help out, get even a few people to read what they’ve not seen yet?

    sample (sorry it’s so long…)
    This workd and links are on Boston.com and bostonglobe.com

    For example, this guy has worked very hard. I don’t like the “look” of his page, and he thinks ALL the wounds are real (I don’t), but he’s looked very well at several other areas, including some tricks with photographs.

    https://sites.google.com/site/thefactsofthebbostonbombing/black-ops-did-it

    And again, my point: you don’t have to care about any of this. But the defense is required by law to pursue everything. If you want to be an informed American citizen, doing what citizens are supposed to do in a democracy, you might want to look at some of it.

    E

    deltatd203/16/15 02:41 PM
    Quite frankly, Riley, and others, if the Globe starts to take these posts down, we will know that they, or someone else, is getting uncomfortable with them. Some your writer on Boston.com complained about listening to the “silly conspiracy theorists..” but when I asked he whether she, as a journalist, might feel any need at all to ASK these people why they feel the way they feel or to gather more information, she didn’t reply. But it’s a pretty good rhetorical question, don’t you think? Jon Stewart is funny about it. The second and third, not as much.

    http://www.upworthy.com/jon-stewart-rips-into-cnn-for-lying-about-the-boston-marathon

    Maybe the defense to talk to this woman who called into a sports show the following morning. She’s not repeating the “run over his brother” story.


    deltatd203/16/15 12:45 PM
    Okay, tell me this doesn’t suggest the plans were for a drill, rather than whatever and/or, why DON”T the ambulances ever get there? Watch THIS one and tell me?

    Rileysdad03/16/15 12:52 PM
    What is your angle? What’s the underlying theme? It’s fine to have an alternate theory about an event but it has to be based on an ideal. I’m genuinely curious.


    Rileysdad03/16/15 12:44 PM
    To the author of that conspiracy theory post above which has now been removed…… wow, just plain “wow”. I wish the moderators didn’t take it down so quickly. I would have loved to read some of the replies you were bound to get.

    deltatd203/16/15 02:27 PM
    Riley,
    If you ARE curious, the simple point is that mainstream media no longer investigates stories. They simply repeat what the “authorities” tell them. No one would listen to Woodward and Bernstein today. That said, the viewers, writers, and other people who mock “Youtubers” or say sarcastically: “hey, if it’s on the internet, it must be true, right??”, one must admit the fact is that these people do their analyses and post their information with little help, amateurish equipment, not-so-great voices, etc. But they do their best to get it out there, as well as they can. They disagree, and they dissent. Courageously, in public. If you are curious, just go on Youtube for “Boston Bomb Hoax”. Hours and hours of good material — sometimes it’s crap, sometimes its old, sometimes people think they have to put music with everything they do, but a lot of it is just head-shaking, amazing. I am always amazed at how few of my fairly intelligent friends have heard any of it. As I say in my very long post, I am coming to believe that lots of people got hurt that day, though there were also some fakes but the story is 1000 times more complex than two kids wanted to act like terrorists on behalf of Mother Russia and Islam and do something horrible. And I don’t think the government or the Boston Globe want to look at how complex it is. I would hope the defense would — but Judy Clarke has specialized in getting famous criminals quietly put away for life in swift trials where little emerges. That’s how she got to Boston.


    deltatd203/16/15 12:09 PM
    This is the one for people capable of reading an entire page of text.

    “Whatever else he did … , Dzhoktar Tsarnaev is an American citizen: like Obama and Deval Patrick,like the victims, like Tom Brady and like Aaron
    Hernadez, like me and like us…”

    This week in the Marathon trial, THE ESSENTIAL POINT IS THAT THE DEFENSE IS NOT DOING ALL IT CAN TO CREATE “REASONABLE DOUBT.” THE DEFENSE MUST BE RECEPTIVE TO WHOMEVER STEPS FORWARD, PERSONALLY OR THROUGH ANY MEDIA, TO OFFER ALTERNATIVES TO THE GOVERNMENT’S CASE.

    Reasonable people can conclude that whatever potential evidence amateur researchers have generated in analyzing video and audio from this event and in subsequent discussion should be presented to the jury, even if the presentations on Youtube and other places can sound amateur(ish) or even if some parts of these presentations are inaccurate, self-conflicting or conflicting with other interpretations, or some portions not credible, or even marred by obscenity, bias or even racial/religious views that are an anathema to us. THE DEFENSE DOESN’T OWE THE PUBLIC AN EDITING OR A SIFTING THROUGH OF THIS MATERIAL UNLESS TO PRESENT IT MORE SUCCINTLY AND ACCURATELY– IT OWES ITS CLIENT THE RESPONSIBILITY TO TAKE ALL EVEN SLIGHTLY CREDIBLE EVIDENCE AND ** PRESENT IT TO THE JURY**. IT OWES TSNARHEV ITS RESPONSIBILTY TO SHOW THE JURY AT EVERY OPPORTUNITY THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE ANY PORTION OF PROSECUTION’S VERSION OF THE EVENTS IS NOT ENTIRELY ACCURATE OR COMPLETE.

    The evidence presented by these researchers, called “conspiracy theorists” by persons interested in dismissing or silencing them, is not evidence the general public has seen unless they are following alternate interpretations of the case: and a tremendously high percentage of this evidence is compelling, even shocking, and often entirely contradicts the governments version of the events. Photographs and video of the events have been online for two years, even if the public hasn’t yet been interested enough yet to look at them. The public and the jury must look at them now, to prevent this one man from taking 100% of the blame for an action he may have not participated in, not fully understood his role in the events, or participated in only partly.

    No matter how involved Dzhokhar was or not, huge portions of evidence exist that he was part of a bigger action: it may have been a a larger plot he was deceived into, or coerced into. One can speculate he may have thought he was playing a role in the drill that was scheduled, which would explain many of his actions that day, including his calm demeanor when he returned to his dorm, or his clear pleas on audio from Watertown “We didn’t do it!!” If there was a lethal bomb at the either site, and he was filmed putting it down, or putting something down he though was a mere “pyrotechnic device,” as seems to have been placed at the first site, then he is now a patsy.
    There was, beyond any reasonable doubt, a drill planned for that day and executed. and a large amount of photographs and testimony that prove it. The films of the first bomb site indicate strongly those actions to be a drill. Boston Globe tweets, oral testimony, audio evidence, and an admission that a drill of remarkable similarity was planned for later that summer published in the Globe on also point directly to that fact. In addition, we have photographs proving the presence of persons acting in seemingly official capacities or with seeming pre-knowledge as well as tremendous numbers of Inconsistencies of witness and victim narratives, not only in testimony but contradictory to photographs, many of whom may or seem to be participating in a script
    The defense has not yet brought forward any of this forward. At this time, it does not seem to me they plan on doing so.

    If the jury is not informed of the strong possibility that a drill was enacted that day, the defense is lying by omission. If the defense withholds any evidence that might benefit its client, they are immoral, unethical,and illegal.
    No matter what you believe about the Boston Marathon Bombing, in the interest of law and the Constitution, insist the defense present everything it can get is hands on. Neither this boy or the Constitution itself are served by anything less.

    I invite anyone with alternative evidence of these events — I mean, researchers, believers,and even the simply inquisitive — to publicize your evidence at this time directly to the general public, through comments and to local papers or website, with whatever links and photographs you can attach to them. New England media is carrying daily updates, so one might start there, in Boston, Worcester, Springfield, Hartford, Providence, BUT WE ONLY HAVE A FEW DAYS, WHILE THE TRIAL IS STILL GOING ON, to insist that the defense USE WHATEVER WE HAVE to defend its client.
    For this short window, ** our evidence doesn’t have to be perfect or entire accurate (though we would like it to be…). *** We just have to cast whatever doubts we can on the government’s case, and we CERTAINLY have the capacity to do that, in 1000 different ways, with all the video, audio, photographs, and writing

    To see it more lightly but maybe more clearly: as in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, or even Miracle on 34th Street, we have the LEGAL RIGHT, AT THIS TIME, to dump everything we have on the “desk” of the defense (and to the eyes of that portion of the public who understands the defense’s duty) and to DEMAND that the defense look at it on our behalf and present ANYTHING WE HAVE given them in order to create “reasonable doubt”
    In doing so, we might get to the truth of the case. Failing that, at least we have held our legal system to its own standards of providing a full defense and assuming innocence until proven guilty

    I WOULD ONLY URGE RESEARCHERS TO not make the mistake of “preaching to the converted.” Therefore, I would include brief clarifying previews or sentences to help the viewer rather than mere titles. Don’t expect every video to be watched just because it is posted.
    For example, in the video below, you will see:
    What you will see:
    1- We will see someone later identified as Michael Gross ( I believe) holding something that flashes in his hands and receiving burn marks on his scalp. You also see:
    2- a woman approach the scene with * tourniquets already around her legs* and attempt to be sit down,only to be ordered away and placed in another spot.
    3- You will see a man carrying an object away from the scene that seems to be the launching tube of a pyrotechnic device. The device is hidden in a bag before it is taken away.
    4-You will see stage blood pouring from a woman’s purse.
    5- You will see a healthy, composed man with torn pants and what seems to be fake blood on his legs, talking to someone who appears to be instructing him. Later, the man will appear in the street receiving a neck brace.
    6- And in what is for me the most CONVINCING PART OF ANY VIDEO I HAVE SEEN SO FAR, YOU SEE FAKE BLOOD, PROVEN TO BE FAKE BLOOD, AS IT SEPARATES INTO ITS WATERY COMPONENT AND ITS SOLID COMPONENT ON A NEON FLAG.

    I would also urge researchers to see that this is not a time to debate among ourselves, but to put out to the public our evidence that shows “something isn’t at all right!!” with the prosecution’s narrative.

    To repeat two principles: Dzhokar Tsarnev is an American citizen: like Obama and Deval Patrick,like the victims, like Tom Brady and like Aaron Hernadez (on trial currently for murder), like me and like us…”

    From the Catechism of the Catholic Church: paragraph 1753
    ” A good intention (for example, that of helping one’s neighbor) does not make behavior that is intrinsically disordered, such as lying and calumny, good or just. The end does not justify the means. Thus the condemnation of an innocent person cannot be justified as a legitimate means of saving the nation. ”

    If you’re curious: my own personal view AT THIS time is that there was a lethal bomb near where the 2nd bomb site was, simultaneous to the 2nd one, one we would hope not foreseen by public officials, but planted for darker purposes, propaganda purposes, by other parties. They somehow involved the defendant in a way he didn’t comprehend and then set him up to be convicted. I believe many of the injuries are fake, but feel that many may be real, including the death of Martin Richard — but of none of it am I completely convinced, one way or the other. But again, I ask: what about the ambulances? Please respond to either video if you choose.

    Flash Mob Fools the World
    *****1080p HD***** Repost, Mirror, Download, Cut Paste, re-edit, make it yours! “FAIR USE LAW” – EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES – -Sara Valverde – Fat Black/Pink Shirt…
    YOUTUBE.COM
    Like • • Share
    1 share

    Delta Rodgers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUU7SXPHyWo

    Boston Ambulances Strangely Allergic to Bomb Scenes
    Why do we only see 1 ambulance in the whole time…
    YOUTUBE.COM
    43 mins • Like • Remove Preview

    Delta Rodgers Except having a real bomb there would not explain the complete absence of ambulances.
    8 mins • Like
    O REP

    middleground03/16/15 12:07 PM
    The fictitious Ferguson “Hands up don’t shoot” was way overboard.

    But so with the various gun battles by the over the top Boston area cops in this case. Way over the top.
    OE

    deltatd203/16/15 12:05 PM
    Also hard to believe the bullets peppered his Leonardo quality note, written in the dark, with a pen/pencil he had not much reason to carry, written while terrified, and written so cool-headedly and clear as to his true motivations (?) and yet not a single bullet hit him, and he was arrested unarmed?

    If reading a few paragraphs of writing is hard for you, let’s go straight to the video. What you will see:
    1- We will see someone later identified as Michael Gross ( I believe) holding something that flashes in his hands and receiving burn marks on his scalp. You also see:
    2- a woman approach the scene with * tourniquets already around her legs* and attempt to be sit down,only to be ordered away and placed in another spot.
    3- You will see a man carrying an object away from the scene that seems to be the launching tube of a pyrotechnic device.
    4- The device is hidden in a bag before it is taken away.
    4-You will see stage blood pouring from a womans purse.
    5- You will see a healthy, composed man with torn pants and what seems to be fake blood on his legs, talking to someone who appears to be instructing him. Later, the man will appear in the street receiving a neck brace.
    6- And in what is for me the most CONVINCING PART OF ANY VIDEO I HAVE SEEN SO FAR, YOU SEE FAKE BLOOD, PROVEN TO BE FAKE BLOOD, AS IT SEPARATES INTO ITS WATERY COMPONENT AND ITS SOLID COMPONENT ON A NEON FLAG.
    I would also urge researchers to see that this is not a time to debate among ourselves, but to put out to the public our evidence that shows “something isn’t at all right!!” with the prosecution’s narrative. Especially, in my mind, the first bomb site.

    You can look at this or not look at it. The Defense, however, has to. It owes it to its client to look at it, show it to the jury, and interrogate the video and anyone in it.. If there was a drill that day — sure seems like one– doesn’t the Defense need to bring it up? Doesn’t it complicate the case? Doesn’t everything? Shouldn’t it? That’s the defense’s job. The prosecution tries to keep it simple. The defense tries to go deeper. Will they? (btw, he never admitted he did it…” His lawyer did, in a stunning opening statement. He pled not guilty 6 separate times.)
    O REPLY
    O LIKE (0)
    O DISLIKE (2)
    O REPORT ABUSE
    o
    Tunabuns03/16/15 12:27 PM
    you are one sick puppy
     LIKE (0)
     DISLIKE (0)
     REPORT ABUSE
    o
    middleground03/16/15 12:24 PM
    OK, I watched your video.
    You are a certified wacko. Get help.
     LIKE (0)
     DISLIKE (0)
     REPORT ABUSE
    Show more replies (1)

    Rileysdad03/16/15 11:53 AM
    Some of the holes in that boat were pretty amazing when you see how tightly grouped they were. I suppose some of it could be coincidental overlay but when you see groups of three in <2 inches, that makes for an interesting review.

    I've always wondered how it was that no one was struck from a "through and through". Fiberglass hulls will essentially (almost) stop a frangible round but from the looks of things, those weren't frangible rounds. Amazing.
    O REPLY
    O LIKE (2)
    O DISLIKE (0)
    O REPORT ABUSE

    B

    Like

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