May 10, 2015

Who are the Real Boston Marathon Bombers? Part 2

Who are the Real Boston Marathon Bombers? Part 1

Warning: Graphic images below.

Woody Box's coverage of surveillance video from the Forum restaurant, the location of the second bomb (the second bomb blew up directly in front of the restaurant; it had been placed near the corner of the patio's railing), proves that Dzhokhar's backpack was not the second bomb (as does the FBI's statement that the backpacks were black).

- Begin Woody Box's Comments -

The government released the video (see below), which was supposed to show Dzhokhar dropping and leaving his bag on the sidewalk in front of the Forum restaurant. A version of the video was played to the jury (the actual Forum video clip starts at 3:35 and ends with the explosion).

Video of Tsarnaev Brother Around Boylston Street on Day of Boston Marathon Bombings

The video clip doesn't match FBI agent Daniel Genck's report in the criminal complaint:

So what does the video show?

1. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is not standing "near the metal barriers." He's standing directly behind the tree, and it is beyond comprehension how anyone watching the video, let alone a trained FBI specialist, would take the metal barriers, which are not visible in the video, as a reference point — instead of the tree — to pinpoint Dzhokhar's location [note that the FBI removed the tree even though it was not submitted as evidence at trial].

The diagram illustrates the situation:

2. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev can not be seen slipping his knapsack onto the ground. At 3:45 in the video (corresponding to 14:45:47) he seems to make something with his left hand. But to slip the knapsack to the ground, he didn't need his left hand, all the more because he had still his cellphone in it. Additionally, he's still walking and has not reached his final position at this point — this is two seconds later. But according to Genck, he slips the bag to the ground after he can be seen standing among numerous spectators. Afterwards, no "apparent slipping" can be observed either. Genck's narrative fundamentally differs from the video.

3. A photograph taken from the opposite side of the street would not show his feet and the knapsack beside them on the ground. The view would have been blocked by the people in front of him, the barriers and the tree. The photos inserted in the video clip (which are of dubious origin and authenticity, by the way) show that it's impossible to catch a view of the knapsack — given that it is placed behind the tree.

- Pause Woody Box's Quote -

The three men in the image below — the large black man and the two men in black (one white, one black, wearing identical clothing, most likely FBI agents) — are standing on the patio where the backpack would have been placed. This image was captured shortly before the bombs exploded. Surveillance video from Lord & Taylor showed a dark-skinned male planting a black backpack on the patio of the Forum restaurant, but this video "disappeared" and was not presented at trial. Dzhokhar can been seen talking on his cell phone, then standing behind the tree, and then walking away from the area.

The first image below was photoshopped by the government. They removed the white FBI agent and put the large black man in his place. Based on the video compiled by the FBI and entered into evidence at the trial, the large black man, who never left the patio, stood behind the two FBI agents dressed in matching black jackets the entire time Dzhokhar was at the Forum restaurant. The government left the black agent in the image. In the second image below from the government's compiled video, the large black man is on the patio and the black agent is on the sidewalk; the white agent has been removed from the image by the government.

The image below also was photoshopped by the government. Both FBI agents standing by the large black man were removed from the image.

The video made by the FBI for Tsarnaev's trial shows that the white agent and black agent had been standing with the large black man on the patio when Dzhokhar first arrived at the Forum; they later moved to the sidewalk area in front of the large planter separating the Forum from the Atlantic Fish Co. The video shows the agents chatting with the large black man, who may be the Forum's bouncer, when Tamerlan passes by and when Dzhokhar arrives a few minutes later, and it shows the agents clearly watching Dzhokhar during the four minutes he stands in front of the restaurant's patio. The agents did not leave the area before Dzhokhar left, which means they did not know that the scheduled bomb drill was a lure to entrap and frame the Tsarnaevs for real bombs about to be detonated.

A month after the Boston Marathon bombings, two agents died in a training accident. The image of the white FBI agent standing in front of the Forum restaurant looks similar to one of the agents who died (there are more details on the accident near the end of this blog post).

When the video was played for the jury on March 9, 2015, Anthony Imel, a digital evidence analyst for the FBI, testified that the video is a "condensed compilation of video and still images of Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev that he spotted in 70 of 655 video and still photo submissions he spent months reviewing." The press called it "stunningly vivid surveillance footage, much of it seen by the public for the first time today."

The government should have submitted into evidence the "70 videos and still photos" UNALTERED rather than compiling what they wanted the jury to see into a nine minute presentation, which contained edited surveillance footage and photoshopped images.

The following are screen shots from the video, "Tsarnaev Brothers Around Boylston Street On Day Of Boston Marathon Bombing," a government exhibit shown to the jury [based on trial testimony, the video shown to the jury was of greater clarity than the video released to the public, which means the government doesn't want the public to see the footage in great detail].

The following is a screen shot from the video of Tamerlan passing Forum before Dzhokhar arrives and stops near the tree.

This video compilation entered as evidence by the government at Dzhokhar's trial was the first time since the marathon two years earlier that any surveillance surfaced of Tamerlan AFTER the bombings.  The images below from the video compilation show Tamerlan without his backpack running from Boylston onto Exeter Street after the first bomb exploded. The video compilation includes an image of Tamerlan BEFORE the bombs exploded, perhaps captured by the surveillance camera at the corner of Boylston and Exeter, but it's cropped like it's a cell phone photo.

- Resume Woody Box's Quote -

It is incomprehensible how FBI agent Daniel Genck arrived at his description. He must have seen a different video. The defense should have summoned him as a witness.

Suspiciously, there are no photos or videos from the crime scene immediately before the explosion available to the public.

There are three videos about the Forum blast which help determine the exact time of the photo shootings. It is possible to synchronize them:

The Fred Land video begins at 1:00 minutes prior to the blast.

The David Green video with Matt Patterson is unfortunately available in redacted form only. However, by matching it with the Fred Land video it can be determined that it begins 1:08 after the blast (2:08 in the Fred Land video) and ends 1:38 after the blast.

The Daniel Robert video begins at 2:39 minutes after the blast (3:39 in the Fred Land video). At 0:56, you hear a fire truck honking; the same honk can be heard at 4:35 in the Fred Land video, thus enabling a synchronization of the two videos.

Mike Chase and his friend Dan Marshall were standing at a high-top table in front of the Atlantic Fish Co. on Boylston Street, the restaurant next door to the Forum restaurant where the second bomb exploded. Chase described the blast from the first bomb as taking place about 75 yards to their left. Seconds later came the second blast, a white flash, then a bang, which Chase described as a loud, high-pitched scream followed by silence. He was blown back. He said he was lucky to be standing next to a 2 1/2-foot-tall planter that separated the two restaurants. “That’s the only reason my legs didn’t get blown off,” Chase said. Chase later helped an off-duty firefighter carry severely-injured Jane Richard, whose left leg was blown off below the knee, to an ambulance. Chase took off his belt and used it as a tourniquet on the her leg. Chase headed back to where the second blast had occurred. That’s where he found Marshall, who had removed his shirt and was working with others on an injured boy, who Chase later found out was 8-year-old Martin Richard. Marshall tended to Martin. Chase moved some metal barricades so the injured could be brought to the ambulances, and he passed some backboards forward. When it became clear there were enough “professionals” there, they moved away. Chase later learned he had a ruptured eardrum and a concussion but otherwise he and Marshall were okay.

The day of the bombings, Heather Abbott and a half-dozen friends took in the traditional Patriots' Day Red Sox game at Fenway Park. They left early and headed to Forum at 755 Boylston Street, where a friend tends bar and where former New England Patriots were gathered to raise money for offensive guard Joe Andruzzi's cancer foundation. She was waiting at the back of a line with friends as bouncers checked ID's when the first bomb down the street went off [she was standing near the patio's corner railing where the bomb had been placed]. She scrambled to get off the patio when the force of a second bomb blew her through the restaurant doorway and shattered the restaurant's glass doors and windows. On the floor of the restaurant she "felt like her foot was on fire." She said, "I knew I couldn't stand up." Her "mangled" foot might have never fully healed so she decided to have her left leg amputated below the knee.

On the day of the marathon, Roseann Sdoia attended a Red Sox game with several friends and then walked from Fenway Park to the Forum restaurant, waiting to see one of their friends cross the finish line. While waiting for her friend, who had just run past Kenmore Square, Sdoia went inside Forum to get a drink. Upon receiving an alert that her friend was coming soon, she left her drink with the hostess and told her she'd be back in a few minutes. Sdoia was outside for about 10 minutes [she had been leaning on the railing near the mailbox to the left of the Richard family], she said, when the first bomb went off. A guy to Sdoia's left began yelling for people to get in the street, but she knew she was too short to make it over the barricade, so she decided instead to move to her right [which put her in the direct path of the explosion since the bomb was at the corner of the patio's railing]. "I ran to my right, and I saw two flashes of white light explode at my feet," she said. "I remember, and I think it's probably before I hit the ground, but in my head, it registered that I lost my leg." When Sdoia came to, she said, there was blood pouring out of the place where her knee was supposed to be.

It is possible to determine that the epicenter was on the patio (click here to read the hypothesis):

To stress it again, the locations of D and E prior to the blast are hypothetical, because I'm not in the possession of photos or videos from immediately before the blast. But the FBI is, and they have certainly footage from the immediate aftermath of the blast, too. The FBI and the prosecution don't need to "believe" (DesLauriers) that Tsarnaev's bag was the epicenter of the bomb — they could have found out by simply matching the pre-blast footage with the post-blast footage. And they should have done it before accusing an apparently innocent young man of planting a cruel and deadly nail bomb.

So why didn't the FBI check the footage to determine the epicenter?

- End Woody Box's Quote -

"He said it emphatically," he said, "No one deserves to suffer like they did," Tsarnaev said of the Boston Marathon bombing victims. - Sister Helen Prejean in her testimony before the jury at Dzhokhar's trial.
Tsarnaev was arrested on April 19, 2013 but not read his Miranda rights until April 22, 2013, at his hospital bedside, after the Justice Department invoked Miranda's public safety exception. A federal magistrate judge read the rights to Tsarnaev, an American citizen of Chechen descent, at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, where he was hospitalized in serious condition. Tsarnaev nodded his head to answer the judge's questions, and answered "no" when asked if he could afford a lawyer. The Justice Department said on April 20, 2013, that Tsarnaev would not immediately be read his Miranda rights and would be questioned by the department's High-Value Interrogation Group. ABC News and NBC News reported that Tsarnaev answered questions in writing on the night of April 21, 2013. Boston Police declined to comment on those reports. [Source]
Dzhokhar was severely injured. He was in critical condition after being shot by law enforcement, while unarmed in the boat, with 16 bullet wounds, intubated, jaw wired shut, left eye sutured closed, a basal skull fracture involving his C1 and C3 vertebrae, medicated, having multiple surgeries, traumatized, and sleep deprived. In this condition, and shackled to his bed, he was interrogated for 2 days by the FBI and a Guantanamo high value detainee interrogation team. The alleged hospital interrogation-confession made by Dzhokhar — and threat of further destruction and call to jihad — was never recorded by audio or video, and no reports were shown in court or admitted as evidence, so his jihad ideas are nothing but hearsay.
We saw only a small section of notes allegedly written by Dzhokhar. These were pleading to please let him sleep, and asking for a lawyer. [Source]
In May 2014, prosecutors submitted a 29-page response to fight a move by Tsarnaev’s defense team to throw out everything he said when he was recuperating at Beth Isreal hospital. Read: Court Filing.pdf

PROOF: Boston Bombing Suspects Were FBI Patsy Operatives

Former Wrestling Teammate Says the Guy in Court Hearing is Not Dzhokhar Tsarnaev

Dzhakhar Tsarnaev Deceased Photos Boston Bomber Patsy

A defense filing detailed Tsarnaev's injuries:
[He suffered] gunshot wounds to his head, face, throat, jaw, left hand and both legs. Within minutes of arrival, Tsarnaev's "mental status suddenly declined," and doctors had to perform an emergency tracheotomy to keep him alive. One of the shots had fractured the base of Tsarnaev's skull, and his attorneys, citing hospital records, said another gunshot "likely caused traumatic brain injury… Damage to the cranial nerves required his left eye be sutured shut; his jaw was wired closed and injures to his left ear left him unable to hear on that side."

Two months after the bombings, on July 10, 2013, Tsarnaev pleaded not guilty to all 30 counts against him. He was brought into a Boston federal courthouse in an orange jumpsuit and shackles. The seven-minute hearing was the first the public has seen of Tsarnaev since his arrest after he was shot by police and badly injured. In court Tsarnaev's face was swollen on one side and his left hand was bandaged. He leaned into a microphone to say "not guilty" seven times in response to his charges and repeatedly turned to smile at his two sisters in the court audience, who were heard crying throughout the hearing. Later, Tsarnaev blew his weeping sisters a kiss as marshals led him out.

Since Tsarnaev’s imprisonment beginning on April 19, 2013, SAMS ("special administrative measures") have been imposed on him (the government wants no one in the world to question their official narrative). Special Administration Measures were basically invented for Muslim “terrorists,” supposedly to protect others. They want people to think it is to protect citizens, but it is obvious it is to protect the FBI and CIA and other law enforcement agencies, and make sure the so-called “terrorists” never get to tell their story.

Yahoo News detailed the SAMS, and Gumshoe News wrote an open letter to the US. Attorney General condemning the SAMS ("incarcerating someone for a crime is one thing, but then silencing them forever, in a small cement room, never to be seen or heard from again until you kill them, is very cruel and unusual"). On his conditions and SAMS, TalkLeft reported:
Tsarnaev is allowed to write one letter — three pages, double sided — and to make one phone call per calendar week to his immediate family. His letters are read, and the calls are recorded by federal officials.

His family is prohibited from discussing the telephone calls or recording them.

He is not allowed to speak to the media. The rules allow him to have a TV or radio, but he has neither. Newspapers are edited to cut out ads and letters to the editor to prevent the chance they include coded messages.

If his sisters visit, an FBI agent must sit in on the visit. He is not permitted to have any contact with other inmates. The only human contact he has at the prison is with jail staff, who pass his meals through a slot in in his cell door. He is in his cell 24 hours a day, except for an hour on weekdays, when he is allowed to go to a small outdoor enclosure for exercise, "weather permitting."

The original SAMs are here, and the defense argument against them is here and here.
His attorneys repeatedly sought to reduce the restrictions, which they said were unnecessarily burdensome and might allow the prosecution to eavesdrop on their case preparation.

Heading up Tsarnaev's defense was Miriam Conrad, the chief federal public defender for Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Rhode Island. Joining her was prominent San Diego attorney Judy Clarke. "It was him," Clarke told jurors during opening statements at Tsarnaev's trial. Clarke was also Ted Kaczynski's attorney, and she spent months convincing the "Unabomber" to accept the plea deal that would ultimately save his life.

Uncut: Marathon Bombing Suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Caught on Camera

Tsarnaev has not been photographed since his arrest on April 19, 2013. Above is a grainy and blurry video of him from a distance on the day of his pretrial hearing on December 18, 2014, but his face is obscured. And below is leaked footage from the pre-trial hearing. The only other images of him are courtroom sketches from various artists, none of which look much like him (see below). He has grown taller since his arrest, now standing at least six feet tall; he was 5' 9" when arrested in April 2013.

Leaked - Dzhokhar Jahar Tsarnaev Courtroom Footage

On April 22, 2015, the media published images of Tsarnaev from a July 10, 2013 video. A few seconds of the video were presented to the jury during the penalty phase of the trial, showing him giving the prison camera the middle finger (images below; the full video also is below).

A courtroom observer commented that Tsarnaev looked years younger in the prison video compared to his appearance in court during his trial.

Surveillance Video: Tsarnaev in Holding Cell in July 2013

Glenn Greenwald reported on the the images captured of the then-teenager extending his middle finger up — flipping the proverbial bird — to the surveillance camera in his cell.  The following is an excerpt from his report.
The graininess of the photo, and the proximity of his face to the lens, created an image at once menacing and dehumanizing: this encaged, orange jumpsuit-clad monster was in your face, full of unbridled rage and hatred directed right at you. The photo was used to show that, even three months after committing such an atrocity, he lacked any remorse or other redemptive human emotions.

CNN’s melodramatic “news” description was typical: “He glares into the camera defiantly, his middle finger raised in a profane salute.” Glares defiantly, a profane salute.

The New York Post, asked: “Could a photo of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev giving the finger ensure his death penalty?” The reporter for Fox’s Boston station, Catherine Parrotta, observed that “a collective gasp was heard in the overflow courtroom as the photo of Tsarnaev giving the camera the middle finger was shown.”

It was, explicitly, the prosecutors’ intent to provoke exactly this reaction: this one photo, standing alone, was designed to produce a visceral, bottomless contempt for Tsarnaev which even disgust at his actual crime could not achieve. The expectation was that it would irreversibly establish the jury and public’s view of him as not just evil but sub-human, deserving of state-imposed death.” This is Dzhokhar Tsarnaev: unconcerned, unrepentant and unchanged,” said the federal prosecutor as she touted the photo. “Without remorse, he remains untouched by the grief and the loss that he caused.”

It worked. All over the TV airways and the Internet, all sorts of people cited the photo to argue that he should be killed. The Washington Free Beacon’s Lachlan Markay’s reaction was common:

Like most things that happen in a U.S. criminal court, and like most dominant narratives propagated by the American media, the message created by exploiting this photograph was completely misleading. All anyone has to do in order to see that is watch the 37-second video from which the screen shot was grabbed:

Rather than some sort of calculated, sustained display of evil scorn for America and his victims — CNN’s “defiant salute” — the actual video shows a 19-year-old prisoner bored from sitting alone for hours in a jail. The middle finger was preceded by other gestures that he maintained longer. He was using the camera as some sort of mirror and appears to be occupying and mildly amusing himself. The still photo was shown by prosecutors rather than the video because the former is menacing and the latter is not. Long-time criminal attorney Jeralyn Merritt noted how banal the actual behavior was:

"I don’t see any anger, just boredom. Who wouldn’t be bored sitting alone in a holding cell all day?"

What a big to-do about nothing. The reporter who said his face showed huge anger should cover something other than criminal trials.

Beyond that, it seems clear that to the extent this was an expression of hostility, it was directed to his captors and not to “America” or his victims: hardly evidence of some sociopathic lack of remorse but rather a predictable and very common sentiment on the part of those who are imprisoned. And then there’s the fact that someone’s emotional posture two years ago does not prove they hold the same one today.

The jury was allowed to see the full video only yesterday, a full day after having the photo paraded around in front of their faces. While the prosecutor used the photo to make all sorts of claims about Tsarnaev’s death-deserving character, “the judge did not allow [his lawyer] to characterize the fleeting gestures.” It will be left to the jury to use their rational faculties to process the potent emotions that have been purposely stoked in them with the manipulative use of the photo — something most human beings are not very good at doing.
Why did Tsarnaev plead not guilty and then go to trial with defense attorneys saying in opening statements that he did it? Why not settle for a plea bargain? The defense is not working for Tsarnaev, but for the U.S. government. This charade of justice was played out for the government to exhibit fabricated evidence to the public and media. Its witnesses committed perjury with impunity. All prosecutors needed to do was reach a plea agreement with Tsarnaev. In a plea deal he could have pleaded guilty to the bombings to avoid the death penalty. That's what Atlanta-Olympics bomber Eric Robert Rudolph did. Rudolph was sentenced to four life terms. He is currently incarcerated in the supermax federal prison in Florence, Colorado, which also houses Ted Kaczynski (the Unabomber, who also accepted a plea deal to avoid the death penalty), Terry Nichols (of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing), Ramzi Yousef (of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing), and Zacarias Moussaoui (professed al-Qaeda member convicted of conspiracy to commit murder for the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon).

Any decent and moral defense attorney would have objected to fabricated evidence submitted by the government [one of Tsarnaev's attorneys, Miriam Conrad, is a fat cat bureaucrat, so that would explain why she wouldn't object to lies told by the prosecution]. The prosecution also submitted into evidence a video of the shooting death of MIT police officer Sean Collier: the two subjects in the video are unidentifiable yet the government claims they are the Tsarnaev brothers [click here for video of the "ambush" presented at trial].

Did Tsarnaev allow his attorneys to say he did it because his family is being threatened?

Both of the Tsarnaev sisters, Bella Tsarnaeva and Ailina Tsarnaeva, in the least, could be sent to prison on trumped up charges or, at the worst, be killed by government employees.
Bella Tsarnaeva was arrested on marijuana charges in December 2012 — on September 16, 2013, five months after the Boston Marathon bombings, she appeared in Superior Court in Hackensack. The New York Daily News reported that "it’s likely her criminal record will be wiped clean." Bergen County prosecutors said she would be admitted into a pretrial intervention program.

Ailina, who lived in North Bergen, NJ, at the time of the Boston Marathon bombings, had been required to check in with Massachusetts probation officers since prosecutors said she failed to cooperate with a 2010 counterfeiting investigation. Prosecutors said Ailina picked up someone who passed a counterfeit bill at a restaurant at a Boston mall and "lied about certain salient facts during the investigation." Six months after the bombings, at a October 2013 hearing for the 2010 counterfeit charges, prosecutors released her pending a court date, saying that since she was pregnant with her second child she was unlikely to flee.

On August 27, 2014, Ailina again was arrested on suspicion she threatened to bomb a woman who previously had a romantic relationship with her boyfriend. Police said she made the threat against an upper Manhattan woman via telephone on August 25th. She turned herself in at a Manhattan police precinct, and police charged her with aggravated harassment. Several media outlets reported Ailina told the Harlem woman she had "people who can go over there and put a bomb on you." 

Other than an alleged visit by one of his sisters and visits by his legal team, apparently Dzhokhar Tsarnaev has had no other visitors in prison. His parents, native Chechens, live in Makhachkala, Dagestan. In June 2013, his mother recorded a phone conversation she had with her son, the only conversation she had with him since his arrest.

The parents have been adamant the brothers were set up and continue to proclaim their innocence. Similar sentiment is evident in Dagestan and Chechnya, where mistrust of the authorities runs deep and graffiti shouts Dzhokhar is innocent, reported the New York Daily News.

When Tsarnaev took the stand and pleaded not guilty during the first pretrial hearing on July 10, 2013, watching the trial were about 30 people representing the victims’ families, as well as a row of family members and supporters of Tsarnaev. His family began to cry as soon as he walked in; and when he later waved at his sisters, one of them burst into tears.

Karin Friedemann reported on the events at the first pretrial hearing:
According to witnesses, Tsarnaev, who wore an orange jumpsuit, kept turning around to look at his family and friends in a row behind him. At one point he waved at his sisters, whereupon one of them burst into tears.

He appeared to be heavily medicated and not entirely aware of the seriousness of the proceedings.

Friends say he was not acting like himself.

According to his wrestling teammates, Tsarnaev, who went to high school in the U.S. and was thoroughly Americanized, spoke in court with an uncharacteristically heavy Russian accent that his friends called “weird.”

A former schoolmate and wrestling teammate said Tsarnaev looked tired and “beat up.”

“His face was swollen on one side. He looked exhausted.”

Brittany Gillis, who went to UMass Dartmouth at the same time as Tsarnaev, was inside the courtroom. “It was very nerve wracking,” she said. “His family was crying as soon as he walked in. And the victims’ families were very upset. You could just tell they were upset just by seeing him. His family was crying and he kept looking back at his family. It seemed like he was very nervous.”

A small rally in support of Dzhokhar Tsnarnaev and suspicious of the government gathered outside the courthouse. At least one protester wore an “Anonymous” mask.

There is certainly reason to doubt the veracity of government accusations – and if Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev really did use homemade bombs to kill and injure hundreds of Boston marathon spectators, there is good reason to suspect FBI and CIA involvement.

The FBI is trying to destroy the life of the Tsarnaevs' friends. Attorney Bernie Grossberg, who represents one of the Tsarnaevs’ friends, said: “What’s happened is everybody who has spoken [in] the Chechen community in Boston has wound up having legal problems or potential legal problems. They all knew each other and now they are all deathly afraid of doing anything. And these are all law-abiding citizens.”

For example, Khairullozhon Matanov, a 24-year-old cab driver from Kyrgyzstan, had been living in Quincy, Massachusetts, before he was apprehended by federal agents in May 2014. Since then, he’s been behind bars. Before his trial he was oftentimes held in a cell by himself. In March 2015, Matanov deliberated with his lawyers three times before hesitantly pleading guilty to all four counts of obstructing the 2013 investigation into the Boston Marathon bombing. The Daily Beast reported on the story:
This was not an easy decision for him to make.

“The whole case is mystery,” he wrote to The Daily Beast last fall. “FBI is trying to destroy my life.”

If Judge William Young agrees to the deal, Manatov will get 30 months in prison, including the 10 months he’s already served. If he goes to trial and is found guilty, he could spend the next 20 years behind bars.

Even in pleading guilty, Matanov asserted his innocence.

“You’re afraid if you go to trial you could be found guilty of all four of these charges and the sentence might be longer than the 30 months?” Judge Young asked. “Is that it? That you think you are not a guilty person but given the circumstances you’d rather [not] go to trial?”

Matanov’s dark bowl cut bobbed slightly.

“I signed a deal and I found guilt most fitting for my situation.”

For months after the bombing, FBI agents trailed him constantly. In Matanov’s bail hearing, an agent testified that Matanov once got out of the car to talk to an agent he knew was following him.

At one point agents called his lawyer, Paul Glickman, to tell Matanov to stop speeding. He complied.

Federal agents monitored Matanov even as he slept. At night, an aircraft would circle his West Quincy home.

The unexplained night flights became a point of local mystery and outcry. At the time, spokespeople for the Federal Aviation Administration refused to say who was piloting the plane and why.

And then, more than a year after the attack—and more than a year after the crimes for which Matanov is charged are alleged to have taken place—he was arrested.

When he wrote to The Daily Beast last November, Matanov said he was innocent, and perplexed at the position he found himself in.

“I don’t understand what on earth I have done to be treated this awful way and prisoned [sic] for such a long time? Now on top of that media made me already guilty even before my trial happen,” he wrote.

Michael German, a former FBI agent and terrorism specialist now with the Brennan Center for Justice, says cases like the one against Matanov are antithetical to the Department of Homeland Security’s See Something, Say Something effort, he explains.

“It creates a potential for blowback—an atmosphere where no one talks to the FBI at any time about anybody because any crime someone does report opens themselves up to liability.”  
According to Lara Turner, almost completely ignored by traditional media outlets was the relentless persecution, deportation and even killing of many of the Tsarnaev circle:
Tamerlan was an out-of-work boxer [with a toddler daughter], married to a nurse’s aide who worked 60 hours a week to make ends meet. How he could come up with $900 cash to send to his mother in Russia two days before the bombings — and afford to buy several backpacks, ammunition, BBs and other supposed bomb-making material — was never answered during the trial. Whether he participated in something illegal or earned the cash in some other manner was not explored. [He had only $19 in his wallet when he was apprehended and murdered by the government on April 19, 2013.]

Also noteworthy was the fact that of all the receipts the average person sticks into his or her wallet while shopping, the only receipts found in Tamerlan’s wallet were those that showed specifically his purchases of materials related to the bombings [the receipts were all cash purchases].

An important potentially-related situation, almost completely ignored by traditional media outlets, was the relentless persecution, deportation and even killing of many of the Tsarnaev circle. Did this astonishing federal campaign result in any useful intelligence? If so, we haven’t learned of any. Or, was it for some other purpose? Some have charged that the harassment was explicitly accompanied by warnings that friends of the Tsarnaevs not talk to the press.

Three of Dzhokhar’s friends — Robel Phillipos, Dias Kadyrbayev, and Azamat Tazhayakov — were charged with a variety of federal offenses, including making false statements and obstruction of justice. His high school buddy, Stephen Silva, pleaded guilty to drug and gun charges, and then testified, in hopes of a reduced sentence, that he gave the brothers the gun used to kill MIT Officer Sean Collier.

Another of Tamerlan’s friends, Khairullozhon Matanov, pleaded guilty in federal court to misleading investigators. Yet another, Mustafa Ozseferoglu, is being threatened with deportation.

But the most high-profile of the brothers’ friends to meet with federal officers is Ibragim Todashev, who was shot and killed on May 22, 2013, in his Orlando apartment by FBI officers after allegedly admitting that he and Tamerlan killed three of Tamerlan’s friends in what appeared to be drug deal gone wrong in 2011. [Ibragim's girlfriend, Tatiana Gruzdeva, was deported for talking to the press: her interview with Boston Magazine is a must read.]

Todashev’s alleged confession did not match evidence found at the crime scene, and the events surrounding his death are the subject of a $30 million suit filed by his family last month.

That the federal government has so doggedly made sure that so many of the Tsarnaevs’ friends would be unable to speak out about the events surrounding the Boston Marathon bombing only raises more questions about what these young men knew about the Tsarnaevs’ involvement.

On May 17, 2013, almost one month after Tamerlan was murdered (photo above; click here to read the real story about his death), two FBI agents died in a training accident. They fell out of a helicopter, the press service of the FBI said:
Two officers of the counter-terrorism department of the Federal Bureau of Investigation died on Friday, May 17. The incident occurred during training exercises conducted by the FBI at a distance of 12 nautical miles from the coast of the U.S. state of Virginia.

An official statement from the FBI says that special agents Christopher Lorek and Stephen Shaw fell out of a helicopter while training a complex exercise. The agents were supposed to be lowered by rope from a helicopter to a ship. For yet unknown reasons, the two agents fell out of the helicopter and were killed by the fall into the ocean.

"Like all who serve on the Hostage Rescue Team, they accept the highest risk each and every day, when training and on operational missions, to keep our nation safe. Our hearts are with their wives, children, and other loved ones who feel their loss most deeply. And they will always be part of the FBI Family," FBI Director Robert S. Mueller said in a statement.

After Tamerlan was murdered, "authorities" in Boston suspended all mass transit and warned close to one million people in the entire city and some of its suburbs to stay indoors as the hunt for his brother went on. Businesses were asked not to open. People waiting at bus and subway stops were told to go home. From Watertown to Cambridge, police SWAT teams, sharpshooters and FBI agents with armored vehicles surrounded various buildings as police helicopters buzzed overhead. [Source]

Police Dressed Like Soldiers with Assault Rifles Locked Down and Militarized Watertown, Massachusetts

Boston Bombing: What You Aren't Being Told

Side by Side of Real & Fake Boston Bombing Photo - What These People Are Capable Of

One logical suspect in the Boston Marathon bombings is pictured in the photos below; he is carrying what looks like a Fox backpack (see the image above of a Fox backpack), which was one of the backpacks containing a bomb (the second blast site at Forum restaurant). However, the FBI wants us to ignore this because they have setup and framed two Muslim patsies, the Tsarnaev brothers, for this staged terror event. After the arrests, the FBI eventually admitted to interviewing Tamerlan in 2011 and tracking and following him ever since. So the FBI is either grossly inept or directly involved in the marathon bombings.

The Boston Marathon bombings, like the 9-11 attacks, are a "false flag" operation. False flag terrorism occurs when elements within a government stage a secret operation whereby government forces pretend to be a targeted enemy while attacking their own forces or people. The attack is then falsely blamed on the enemy in order to justify going to war against that enemy.

The term "false flag" comes from the old days of wooden ships, when one ship would hang the flag of its enemy before attacking another ship in its own Navy. Because the enemy's flag was hung instead of the flag of the real country of the attacking ship, it was called a "false flag" attack. Or as Wikipedia defines it:
False flag operations are covert operations conducted by governments, corporations, or other organizations, which are designed to deceive the public in such a way that the operations appear as if they are being carried out by other entities. The name is derived from the military concept of flying false colors; that is, flying the flag of a country other than one's own. False flag operations are not limited to war and counter-insurgency operations, and have been used in peace-time; for example, during Italy's strategy of tension.
TruthAndShadows reported on the marathon false flag and the FBI's direct connection to Tamerlan. The following is an excerpt.
An early clue that Boston was a false flag operation was the bomb “exercise” that was going on at the exact same location and time as the actual bombing. This has become a tell-tale sign of false flags, particularly since 9/11, when numerous exercises were taking place that simulated the very thing that actually happened at the very time it was happening.

Loudspeakers announced to the crowd near the finish line of the Marathon that they needn’t worry about the bomb squad and their bomb-sniffing dogs patrolling the area during the race because it was just an exercise.

Incredibly, two hours before the blasts the Boston Globe tweeted at 12:53 p.m. that there would be a “controlled explosion opposite from the library within one minute as part of bomb squad activities.” Boston Public Library is right across the street from where the first blast went off just before 3 p.m. Quite a coincidence.

Another tweet came later specifying the JFK Library (which is some distance away). It said: “Third incident: Explosion earlier today at the JFK Library.” Later still, the story changed again: “Fire earlier today likely unrelated to Marathon bombings.”

No more talk of bomb squad activities.

The most absurd example of an exercise being synchronized with an actual false flag event is the 7/7 London bombings of July 2005 when a simulation of the bombing of three underground stations was going on as those same stations were actually being bombed (not to mention a real bus bomb that was also reflected in the exercise). The pattern was repeated with the mass shooting in Norway in 2011, the Aurora movie theater shooting in July 2012, and the Sandy Hook school “shooting” in December 2012.

Zubeidat Tsarnaeva (who maintained after Dzhokhar’s guilty verdict that he is innocent), says the FBI had been watching their family for years and had even been in their home, telling her that her eldest son, Tamerlan, was a dangerous extremist. She was quoted in as saying:
“He was controlled by the FBI, like for three, five years,” she said. “They knew what my son was doing, they knew what actions and what sites on the Internet he was going [to], they used to come…and talk to me…they were telling me that he was really a serious leader and they were afraid of him.”
Peter Dale Scott goes further, suggesting that Tamerlan may have been an FBI informant:
“If Tsarnaev was a double agent, he would be just one of thousands of young people coerced by the FBI as the price for settling a minor legal problem into a dangerous career as an informant,” Dale Scott writes.
Both of the brothers’ parents claim their sons are being set up. In an article in Global Research, Bill Van Auken makes this telling statement:
“While much remains murky about these and other issues, one thing is clear: the Boston bombing, like virtually every other major terrorist incident, real or invented, since the September 11, 2001 attacks on New York City and Washington, was carried out by someone who was known to and under surveillance by U.S. intelligence agencies.”
And perhaps most significant are the connections between the brothers, their uncle Ruslan Tsarni (who called them “losers” on TV even though he claimed hadn’t seen either of them in several years), and the CIA. Tsarni, it turns out, was married to the daughter of senior CIA official Graham Fuller. He even lived at Fuller’s home for a time, as reported by researcher William Engdahl.
“This uncle was married to the daughter of Graham Fuller, one of the most important CIA architects of using Islamic Jihadists/terrorists against the USSR during the Cold War and after, throughout Central Asia, including Chechnya and Kazakhstan,” writes Engdahl.
In fact, Fuller was the CIA station chief in Kabul at one time and author of The Future of Political Islam. Tsarni and Fuller also worked together to set up a support group for Chechen nationalist guerrillas, as Nick Barrickman reports in Global Research.

But there are more links than that between Tamerlan and the CIA. Investigative journalist Wayne Madsen wrote in a May 2013 article that according to documents obtained from the Georgian Interior Ministry, Tamerlan attended training sessions in Tblisi, Georgia, sponsored by the CIA-linked Jamestown Foundation, which was founded in the 1980s by former CIA director William Casey to serve an anti-Soviet agenda.
“Jamestown has two major missions on behalf of the CIA: (1) to ensure the flow of energy, including oil and natural gas, from the Caspian through pipelines in Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey,” Madsen writes, “and (2) to prop up or topple governments in the region to ensure U.S. predominance. The latter is accomplished through organizing the political opposition, setting up conferences, and gaining influence in universities through non-governmental organizations established to veil the CIA’s financing of the operations.”
And on the connection to the Boston bombing, he concludes:
“The interests who are linked to the Boston Marathon and terrorism in Russia run the gamut from NGOs, to CIA front companies and non-official cover (NOC) agents, foreign intelligence services, and Western energy companies.”
Engdahl asks:
“Is it mere 'coincidence' that the uncle of the two young men accused of the Boston bombings was related in marriage to the CIA figure who advocated using the networks which were later named “Al Qaeda” across Central Asia, including Chechnya where the Tsarnaev brothers had roots?”
Breaking! FBI Admits Link to Boston Terror Suspect

In the photos below, the bald man holding yellow and blue items in his left hand has a black strap over his right shoulder that matches the FBI photo of the backpack which held one of the bombs. This man is later photographed a short distance below the first bomb site without his backpack, but he still has the yellow and blue items draped over his left forearm and something in his left hand that he is manipulating with his right. He appears to be alone in both photos. He isn't in any of the photos after the bombs exploded.

The logical suspect is just outside of camera range in the image above, but he comes into range in the following image. The man wearing the red shirt and blue jacket (circled in red) is carrying a bag similar to the one that the logical suspect had been carrying, but no longer has in the image below (circled in yellow). Did he just hand off his backpack to the man wearing the red shirt and blue jacket? The backpack this man is carrying has the same gray straps as the one carried by the bald man, which is identical to the straps on the black backpack which contained the bomb detonated at the second location. The man in the red shirt and blue jacket is walking away from the finish line (the location of the first blast) and up the street toward the patio of the Forum restaurant (the location of the second blast).

On April 10, 2015, Yahoo News reported that the Tsarnaev's mother condemned the guilty verdict delivered by the jury in his federal death penalty trial, calling Americans “terrorists” and proclaiming her sons innocence. The following is the report.
In an interview with the website Vocativ conducted over the WhatsApp messaging application, the Tsarnaev's mother, Zubeidat Tsarnaeva, insisted on the innocence of her Chechen sons, Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev. She went on to say that the United States will ultimately pay for “framing” them.

According to the website, Zubeidat Tsarnaeva wrote:
Tsarnaeva, who is of Avar origin and lives in Dagestan, wrote the text messages in both Russian and English, according to Vocativ, which obtained her phone number and verified her identity through dated selfies she provided. She wrote:
In a separate note posted to a Russian social media site, Tsarnaeva thanked a family friend for her support of “my precious boy.”
“The terrorists are the Americans and everyone knows it,” she wrote. “My son is the best of the best.”
On April 19, 2013, just prior to the FBI releasing their official statement, Zubeidat Tsarnaeva went live on RT (see video below) and told the world that the FBI had investigated her sons and found nothing. But she also stated that the investigation continued and that the agent actually made contact with her several times, once even saying her sons were being “radicalized,” to which she flatly denied that accusation.

Tsarnaev Brothers' Mother: My Sons Are Innocent, This is a Setup

In Scott Creighton's 2013 report, he pointed out the following.
The mother's revelation forced the FBI to post their press release about their extended contact with her sons, and it opened up a rather stunning debate, all for the wrong reasons. People were writing that the FBI should have been more invasive and thus they could have stopped all of this, but what they didn’t acknowledge is the simple fact that the contact may very well have been ongoing… all the way up to the bombing.

Also on April 19, 2013, Tamerlan and Dzohkar's father was interviewed, and he said flat out that his sons had been set up by the “secret services,” meaning the CIA or FBI or NSA:
‘‘In my opinion, my children were set up by the secret services because they are practising Muslims,’’ Anzor Tsarnaev told the Interfax news agency from the North Caucasus Russian city of Makhachkala.” [Source]
The uncle, Ruslan Tsarni, who said earlier that his nephews did not deserve to live and called them “losers,” may have inadvertently provided the strongest eyewitness evidence to date that the Tsarnaev brothers were under the influence of “mentors” who brought them to that location at that time as part of a bigger plan [also read more about the uncle at Who are the Real Boston Marathon Bombers? Part 1].

The uncle can hardly be considered a family member making things up to help the brothers out of this jam. He has been nothing but hostile toward them since it all began. But what he says in this interview, though he may think he is helping the official story, when you take all the rest of it into consideration, it completely exposes something entirely different.
The uncle of the Boston Marathon bombing suspects told TODAY Saturday that he believes Dzhokar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev were pawns in a deadly scheme.

I strongly believe they were just puppets and executors of something of bigger scale,” Ruslan Tsarni told Savannah Guthrie.

He said Dzhokar, the younger of the brothers, was “used by his older brother. He’s just another victim of his older brother. He victimized others, but he’s been used by his older brother.”

Tsarni, a Maryland resident who is the brother of the suspects’ father, believes Tamerlan, 26, who died in a confrontation with police early Friday morning, was radicalized by others. He noted that the suspects were in his house as children, and recalled a surprising transformation the last time he saw Tamerlan in 2009.

There certainly were mentors,’’ Tsarni said. “I was shocked when I heard his words, his phrases, when every other word he starts sticking in words of God. I question what he’s doing for work, (and) he claimed he would just put everything in the will of God. It was a big concern to me. He called me ‘confused’ when I started explaining to him, make yourself useful to yourself and to your family and maybe you’ll have extra to share with everybody else.

“It wasn’t devotion, it was something, as it’s called, being radicalized. Not understanding what he is talking (about). He is just using words for the sake of the words and not understanding the meaning of it.’’

The suspects’ parents told NBC News they believe their sons were framed. Tsarni said a family acquaintance told him there was an outside influence on Tamerlan.

He said there is someone who brainwashed him, some new convert to Islam,’’ Tsarni said. “I would like to stress (the acquaintance was) of Armenian descent.’’ Scott Stump, TODAY
"My take is that during the five or more years the feds followed Tamerlan and his whole family, he didn't comply with their wishes. I also think the uncle was involved in the same manor but, unlike Tamerlan, he complied and did as they asked, dropping the ball on Tamerlan and his family. And Ibragim Todachev had that information, so the FBI tried to coerce Ibragim into a confession. He started writing it and waited for the right time to make a break for the door of his home (so maybe the public will see and hear his pleas for help), where he was shot both in the front of his body and in the back of his head, just like an assassination...... to make sure he didn't talk." [Source]

Josée Lépine said December 12, 2015 at 10:07 pm at Gumshoe News:

1) The worst in this case is the complicity of the Media who were represented at the trial by many journalists who have seen the exhibits and willingly chose to write nothing about the truth. Americans have been lied to by their government through the media.

The white backpack carried by Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (government exhibit 22) that turned black as it was deposited on the sidewalk (Defence exhibit 3090).

Remember Richard DesLauriers’ statement of April 16, 2013:
‘In addition, this morning, it was determined that both of the explosives were placed in a dark-colored nylon bag or backpack. The bag would have been heavy because of the components believed to be in it. At this point, it is difficult to determine specific components used until we can eliminate other factors which may have been already present in the environment. In fact, that won’t be known with some certainty until the Laboratory completes its final review.’ (Ref :
Look at government exhibit 22, the beginning of it. It shows Dzhokhar Tsarnaev with a very light colored backpack (not black) casually slung over his shoulder. Look further at the backpack and you will notice it is hallow in the middle of it. Now tell me that a 6 lb. pressure cooker loaded with nails and ball bearings was concealed inside of that backpack! The weight of it with a bomb would have been close to 30 lbs.,yet it appears to have little weight to it as he carries it on one shoulder. Is this the reason he is under SAMS, so he cannot reveal his backpack does not match what the Boston-FBI determined to be on April 16, 2013? But it is not only Dzhokhar that is under strict SAMS, so are his lawyers, who cannot reveal to anyone that is not included on the approved FBI list, the truth about this exculpatory evidence.

Government exhibit 29 shows the awful backpack that exploded at site 2 (Forum restaurant), so they say. However, it also shows a backpack that not only does not match the backpack that Dzhokhar carried, but it shows that it does not even touch the ground. So Boston-FBI what is it – did he or did he not deposit that backpack on the ground?

At the trial the Government admitted to photo-shopping exhibit 1575. Prosecution, if your case was so strong, why steep so low as to photo-shop your own exhibit? Sorry, I forgot that your team includes a prosecutor that is known to plant evidences!

The killing of Officer Collier – The US Justice department really thinks their citizens are dumb – come on who can absolutely, without a reasonable doubt, identify the Tsarnaev brothers in government exhibit 0724? If prosecutors were able to show those two mice why were they not able to show the actual act of murdering the MIT Officer? Why were they not able to show us the witness bicycling by the cruiser who stunned Dzhokhar? Do they really want us to believe that the MIT campus has only one surveillance camera and it happens to be located on the 24th floor of a building? Americans, I urge you to remove your kids from MIT as it is not a safe environment for your precious kids.

Usually while investigating, you ask a court for a search warrant and then you go and retrieve whatever you are looking for. But in the case of the killing of Officer Collier, the FBI-Boston purchased from MIT all the video surveillance tapes. Why? What are you trying to hide from the public?

Prosecution always said they had an airtight case. Then why did you have to re-enact the scene of the MIT killing of Officer Collier if you had the evidence that proved without a doubt the Tsarnaev brothers killed Officer Collier?

So FBI-Boston you could not prove that the Tsarnaev brothers killed the MIT officer so you had to come up with something – plant bloody gloves in the Honda. But you see this scenario has a fault. The person that had those gloves on their hands (by the way we never heard about DNA testing of the inside of those gloves at the trial!) had to remove them in order to throw them on the floor of the driver side – and to do so it had to leave some blood on at least one hand. That same hand had to reach in a pant or coat pocket to reach the key of the Honda (you showed us the blood stained car key). Was the pants/coat pocket tested for Officer Collier’s blood? We certainly have not heard anything during the trial about blood found on either brother’s clothing. As a matter of fact it was proven in court that Officer Collier’s blood was not found on Dzhokhar clothing. Was Tamerlan clothing tested for any trace of Officer Collier’s blood? Now how can you accuse them of killer Mr. Collier? This is a class text-book to teach future lawyers about reasonable doubt or how to plant evidences and hope for the best!

The carjacking – Prosecution told the jurors that Tsarnaev tweeted: I am a stress free kind of kid. Well I guess he is a stress free kid since he was sitting on Dun Meng’s laps for the entire duration of the carjacking. Indeed, look at government exhibit 748 – Dzhokhar Tsarnaev exits from the front passenger door at the Shell station – then look at government exhibit 752 where you clearly see Dun Meng exiting — when he escape, and after Dzhokhar exited — from the same front passenger door. WOW, Dzhokahr is really a stress free kid. Remember Dun Meng testified that while he was being kidnapped, the SUV encountered a police cruiser. I don’t know about the US but I can assure you that if this happens in Canada, the police would have stopped that car.

The gun fight with Law Enforcement on Laurel Street – Those Tsarnaev brothers have supernatural powers (no wonder the Feds are scared of them) – they can clone themselves! They were able to engage in a firefight with Watertown law enforcement on Laurel Street and at the same time being arrested and killed on Adams Street. I have learned a long time ago that Tamerlan Tsarnaev was murdered on Adams Street; and defense, at trial, gave me a good indication that I was right when they asked a witness if something else was happening on Oliver Street. Google it and you will see what I am talking about.

This case is about the USA engaging in genocide by killing and getting rid of all Muslims. The USA is acting just like Hitler did. They have not learned from this historic event.

2) The incredible in this case is the lack of defense for this young innocent man.

Anyone that doubt what I have written can go and look with their own eyes at the government exhibits at

Photos from the First Bomb Site Near the Finish Line

Who are the Real Boston Marathon Bombers? Part 1



  1. In the penalty phase of the trial, the defense called Michael Reynolds, a Princeton University associate professor who specializes in Russian studies, the Middle East, and near-eastern studies, with a particular interest in the Caucuses. Reynolds said he has his PhD, speaks Russian, has studied Arabic, and knows a lot about Islam. This would be his first time as a witness.

    Reynolds: the Chechens have lived in the Caucasus mountains from "before recorded time". Thousands of years, without any centralized rule.

    Prosecution rises, saying Reynolds need to but his analysis in a timeframe or else "it's potentially irrelevant."

    Reynolds says, to this day, the Chechens live in spread out mountainous communities, isolated but interdependent.

    Reynolds: Chechens have a social code they invented to determine how people interact with each other; family units are very strong.

    Reynolds: Chechens are highly patriarchal; the father is in charge of the family. Absent him, the eldest brother takes the lead.

    Reynolds: "It's expected that the younger brothers will listen to the older brother." Children learn this from birth, he says. #Tsarnaev

    Reynolds: The younger brother owes his loyalty & deference to his older brother. It's like a military unit, he says: discipline & hierarchy.

    Reynolds tells jury about Stalin's Russia & his WWII-era ordered deportation of 400K Chechens for their perceived disloyalty.

    Reynolds: in 2 weeks' time, Stalin had almost every Chechen person put on cattle cars & shipped to central Asia-left to fend for themselves.

    Reynolds reviewed 2 high school essays #Tsarnaev wrote re: this deportation; says they weren't radical in tone; just reflect family history.

    As jurors take in this history and geography background information, some are taking notes, others look attentive. not.

    Chechens go to war with Russia in the 90s; jihadi fighters take advantage of the situation, Reynolds says, to "further their cause".

    Chechens return to war with Russia from 1999-2009, Reynolds says, and it was even bloodier war for Chechnya.

    Reynolds: Chechens were regarded as unwanted people throughout Russia; target for bribes, unwanted peoples.

    Reynolds: It would be very easy for a young Chechen to go online and see his country "intertwined" with the cause of international jihad.

    Reynolds reviewed Tamerlan's computer, noting that one of his most-visited websites was one focused on Chechen jihadi struggles.

    Reynolds: Tamerlan's computer had Islamic videos and "atrocity videos" showing people being victimized; Bruck wants to show 3 mins of that.

    Govt asks for sidebar, as defense tries to get excerpt of this online "atrocity" video based on conflict in Syria to be shown to jurors.

    Sidebar ends; we will not see that video after all. Govt wins that battle; Reynolds is asked to just describe the "quite graphic" video.

    Reynolds: Tamerlan's computer had "a very large quantity" of those atrocity videos on it. #Tsarnaev

    Reynolds also found a lot of what he calls "motivational videos", also largely from Caucasus region, on Tamerlan's computer.

    Reynolds: such "motivational videos" seek to inspire young men to be part of a greater cause: jihad to defend their faith. #Tsarnaev

    Reynolds: Tamerlan created what he calls a "classmates" page, a Russian-language type of Facebook, we are told. Govt wants another sidebar.

    Defense wants jury to see Tamerlan's "classmates" page; govt says this witness has no foundation to be talking about that. #Tsarnaev

    Sidebar ends; again, Bruck has to move on, unable to show jury something he wanted to show them.

    Twitter feed from Jim Reynolds (@JimArmstrongWBZ) on May 5, 2015

  2. Bruck now wants to show jurors a couple of webpages typical of those pro-jihadi sites Tamerlan #Tsarnaev spent so much time on.

    That site,, shows jihadis fighting, lecturing. Explains the "obligations" a Muslim has to his faith.

    Tamerlan #Tsarnaev was on that site as late as 4/7/13, just before the Marathon Bombings.

    Reynolds now reviews for the jury some of the messages exchanged b/w #Tsarnaev brothers while Tamerlan was in Russia & Dzhokhar was here.

    Bruck: "switching gears now..." He asks re: #Tsarnaev's boat note & how original it was. Reynolds: some, not original at all; common quote.

    Reynolds: the line #Tsarnaev wrote about "looking down the barrel of a gun" is often used by people trying to look cool; posers, he says.

    Bruck: Let's talk about Tamerlan's 6-month trip to Russia in 2012.

    Dagestan was in the midst of an insurgency when Tamerlan #Tsarnaev was in Russia.

    Bruck now shifts to "several hours" of Russian language audio files found on Tamerlan's computer; Reynolds listened to about 3 hours of them

    Reynolds: these audio files are conversations, generally among 4 people. Govt objects, asks for sidebar. #Tsarnaev

    Sidebar over; Bruck says he's not going to go into the content of those audio tapes, after all. He has to move on, again. #Tsarnaev

    "I think that's all," Bruck says. Govt says their cross-exam will be "much more than 10 minutes" (i.e., will run into lunch break).

    Judge callls teams back to sidebar. #Tsarnaev

    Judge says we will break for lunch, but will only take 30 minutes, not an hour. Sounded like he said we may end at 3pm today. #Tsarnaev

    Back from abbreviated lunch; AUSA Bill Weinreb to cross-examine Princeton professor Michael Reynolds. #Tsarnaev

    W: didn't the same lack of centralized government you described in Chechnya occur here in the US? R: I'm not an expert in US history.

    W: Well, a lot has changed in Chechnya over the centuries? R: Generally, yes.

    Weinreb: It has changed a lot since WWII? Reynolds: When you say "it" do you mean the country, the people, the culture of Chechnya?

    W: Anzor wasn't born or raised in Chechnya, was he? Nor any of his brothers? Nor was Zubeidat? Tamerlan? His sisters? R: No.

    W: Families who move to new countries bring some traditions, abandon others? R: Yes.

    W: You followed the news of the marathon bombings? Of Tamerlan's death, Dzhokhar's arrest? R: Yes. W: Must have intrigued you? R: Yes.

    W: How did you get involved in this case? R: Defense contacted me in July, 2014. W: You know what they're seeking to prove here? R: Yes.

    W: In May, 2013, weeks after bombings, you wrote an article about the #Tsarnaevs? R: Yes, before I met the defense.

    Weinreb shows that article to Reynolds; he remembers writing it. It's called: "The Northern Caucasus, the Tsarnaevs, and Us"

    Weinreb wants the jury to hear some of what Professor Reynolds wrote in this scholarly article weeks after the bombings.

    Defense objects, govt asks for a sidebar. #Tsarnaev

    Twitter feed from Jim Reynolds (@JimArmstrongWBZ) on May 5, 2015

  3. Weinreb is back, post-sidebar. He will ask about the article; jury will not see it in its entirety.

    W: In your first paragraph, you ask what could drive a pair of Chechen brothers to commit this act of violence. R: Yes.

    W: Then you wrote, the actions of people cannot be reduced to their identity; "Identity is not destiny," you wrote? R: Yes.

    R: You need to understand peoples' cultures. W: But are you saying a Chechen terrorist is less morally culpable for his crimes? R: No.

    Weinreb now focuses on Reynolds' writing that the "cult of elders" declined a lot in recent times in Chechnya; less focus on older males.

    Weinreb is using Reynolds' earlier scholarship to contradict some of what he just testified to. R says he wrote re: culture, not #Tsarnaevs.

    Weinreb asks Reynolds if Tamerlan's decision to marry a Christian woman (Katherine) w/o father's permission violated Chechen rules. - Yes.

    W: Would it violate Chechen rules if a younger brother smoked a cigarette against his older brother's wishes? R: It depends on context.

    Overall govt theme: Anzor violated Chechen customs, Tamerlan violated Chechen customs, Dzhokhar violated Chechen customs. #Tsarnaev

    Weinreb suggesting that Reynolds' testimony about the patriarchy's role in the #Tsarnaev family was exaggerated or incorrect.

    W: You wrote that "some Chechens rejected violent extremism"? R: That is correct. W: So seeing terror propaganda could push you away? R: No.

    W: Whether you're repelled by violent jihad or encouraged by it, depends on the kind of person you are? R: Yes. #Tsarnaev

    Weinreb: Didn't you write the #Tsarnaev's chose to carry out terrorism? Reynolds: That is no longer my belief; I have since changed my mind.

    Bruck for re-direct exam. B: Chechen culture doesn't dictate every single action? R: No, no serious scholar would say that. It all depends.

    Reynolds: One can identify "general patterns". Bruck: A younger brother and an older brother? R: That would be a good example, yes.

    Bruck: These brothers do identify as Chechens, correct? Reynolds: Yes. B: Do Chechens assimilate well to other cultures? R: No.

    Bruck: In fact, Chechens in Jordan and elsewhere still maintain their distinct language, generations after leaving home? Reynolds: Yes.

    Bruck, hoping to show that individual families can preserve as much native culture (brother following brother) as they see fit. #Tsarnaev

    Bruck done, Weinreb will re-cross Reynolds. #Tsarnaev

    W: The Chechen brother-brother relationship is a "hardy" one; it survives immigration? R: Yes. W: Assuming it was there in the first place?

    W: What if the #Tsarnaev sisters told you no such pattern existed in their family-- Objection, sustained.

    Professor Reynolds is done. Next defense witness: Henry Alvarez, Cambridge Rindge & Latin graduate, now at UMass Boston. #Tsarnaev

    Twitter feed from Jim Reynolds (@JimArmstrongWBZ) on May 5, 2015

  4. Glenn Greenwald on How to Be a Terror "Expert": Ignore Facts, Blame Muslims, Trumpet U.S. Propaganda (Video)
    January 13, 2015

    Democracy Now - Who are the so-called terrorism experts? In the wake of the Paris attacks, the corporate media has once again flooded its news programs with pundits claiming authority on terrorism, foreign policy and world events. We discuss the growing and questionable field of "terrorism experts" with three guests: Glenn Greenwald, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and co-founder of The Intercept; Lisa Stampnitzky, social studies lecturer at Harvard University and author of "Disciplining Terror: How Experts Invented 'Terrorism'"; and Luc Mathieu, foreign affairs reporter for the French newspaper Libération.

    GLENN GREENWALD: The concept of terrorism is a very widely debated concept all over the world, and there are incredibly divergent opinions, even about what terrorism is, about who it is who’s perpetrating it, about how it is that you define it and understand it, and whether or not there’s even a meaningful definition of the term at all. And yet you have all of these so-called terrorism experts employed by leading American television networks—all of them, really—and on whom most establishment newspapers rely, who are called terrorism experts and yet who are incredibly homogenous in their views, because they spout the very homogenized American conception of all of those questions.

    It’s an incredibly propagandized term. It’s an incredibly propagandistic set of theories that they have. And that’s really what these media outlets are doing, is they’re masquerading pro-U.S. propaganda, pro-U.S. government propaganda, as expertise, when it’s really anything but. These are incredibly ideological people. They’re very loyal to the view of the U.S. government about very controversial questions. They certainly have the right to express their opinions, but the pretense to expertise is incredibly fraudulent. And that’s why they have not just Steve Emerson, the Fox News strain, but really all of them who are held up as the most prominent terrorism experts in the U.S. have a really shameful history of incredible error and all sorts of just very dubious claims, because they’re really just rank propagandists.

  5. AARON MATÉ: And so, Glenn, what allows them to continue perpetuating these myths that you describe? What is the dynamic that allows this expert industry to keep going?

    GLENN GREENWALD: Well, there are several aspects to it. I mean, one is the United States government obviously has an interest in making people believe that its very particular and self-serving views of terrorism are not subjective or debatable, but are in fact just objective expertise, and so they do all sorts of things to prop these people up. They give them contracts. They pay them lots of money to teach people inside the government about terrorism. Really most disturbingly of all, they continuously call them as, quote-unquote, "experts" at terrorism trials. And all of these experts then dutifully march forth and say whatever the government wants about the Muslim defendants who are on trial, and help the government obtain conviction after conviction, and get a lot of money in the process.

    Part of it is just the role that think tanks play in Washington, which is to lend this kind of intellectual artifice to whatever the government’s policy is or whatever the government wants. And so you have a lot of them who work at think tanks, like Brookings Institute, which employs Will McCants, who misled American media outlets into believing for a full day and then telling the world that the Anders Breivik attack in Norway was actually the work of a jihadist group. Even the more respectable ones are people who generally spout the conventional orthodoxies of the American government about terrorism, and therefore it’s very much in the interest of the U.S. government and these media outlets to continue to depict them not as polemicists and highly opinionated, you know, just participants in debates, but as actual academic experts. And that’s where the fraudulent aspect comes in.

  6. AMY GOODMAN: That’s Evan Kohlmann, an NBC News analyst. Glenn Greenwald, your comment?

    GLENN GREENWALD: And there are so many of them like that. I mean, he’s one of the people called by the U.S. government in these prosecutions, these really dubious prosecutions, of American Muslims for really remote charges of material support for terrorism. And his expertise is basically just that he gets called an expert by the U.S. government. And the more he gets called to testify, the more that expertise builds. That’s really the only foundation for it, is that some people call him an expert because it’s in their interest to do so. There’s another one like him, Matthew Levitt, who was profiled in Harper’s, who has a long history of unbelievably erroneous claims that he makes in service of this agenda. They get paid a lot of money, too. I mean, he goes on—they go on NBC News. They get held up as a terrorism analyst. They get paid for that. They get called as an expert in court. And yet, as that tape said and as Lisa said, there’s really no foundation for the expertise. There’s no Ph.D.s that they have in terrorism studies.

    There’s not even agreement about what the word "terrorism" means, which is why the old cliché that one man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist is, though clichéd, is so resoundingly true. You can have debates about what terrorism is, about who perpetrates it, and yet all of these so-called experts simply assume the answers to those questions, because if they were, for example, to say that the U.S. government is a state sponsor of terrorism by virtue of its support for death squads in El Salvador or the Contras in Nicaragua or any of the other groups across the United States—across the world that the United States continues to support that engages in violence against civilians for political ends, you would immediately have them eliminated. No major network like CNN or MSNBC or NBC would ever call somebody like that a terrorism expert, even though that’s a very plausible claim to make. It’s an extremely ideological and politicized view that gets called expertise. And they don’t even have the basic attributes of what we generally consider that makes somebody an expert.

  7. AARON MATÉ: Glenn, do you personally use the word "terror," or do you avoid it entirely?

    GLENN GREENWALD: I generally avoid it. I mean, you could probably find instances in my writing where I’ve invoked the term, usually just ironically or to refer to the fact that somebody else is using it. But I do think that until we have an understanding of what the term means, it really is a term that ought to be avoided.

    There is some amazingly great scholarly research by Rémi Brulin, who was at the Sorbonne and then NYU, where he traces, essentially, the history of this term in political discourse. And what he has described, in a very scholarly way, is that the term "terrorism" really entered and became prevalent in the discourse of international affairs in the late '60s and the early ’70s, when the Israelis sought to use the term to universalize their disputes with their neighbors, so they could say, "We're not fighting the Palestinians and we’re not bombing Lebanon over just some land disputes. We’re fighting this concept that is of great—a grave menace to the world, called 'terrorism.' And it’s not only our fight, it’s your fight in the United States, and it’s your fight in Europe, and it’s your fight around the world."

    And there are all these conferences in the late '60s and early ’70s and into the 1980s even, where Israelis and Americans and neocons are attempting to come up with a definition of the term "terrorism" that includes the violence that they want to delegitimize, meaning the violence by their adversaries, while legitimizing—excluding the violence they want to legitimize, namely our violence, the violence of Israel, the violence of our allies. And it was virtually impossible to come up with a definition, and that's why there really is no agreed-upon definition. The term is incredibly malleable, because it’s typically just meant as a term that says any violence we don’t like is something we’re going to call terrorism. And at this point it really just means violence engaged in by Muslims against the West. That’s really the definition of the term "terrorism," the functional definition. It has no fixed definition.

  8. AMY GOODMAN: Glenn, I remember at the beginning, at the Oklahoma City bombing attack, when two names of Arab men were floated. It turned out they were New York taxi drivers who had gone to Oklahoma City to renew their licenses. But those names were put out by the media, and then there was the question: Was this a terrorist attack? When it turned out it was Timothy McVeigh—Timothy McVeigh, who worked with other people, had all the—you know, all the definition of a terrorist attack—then it wasn’t. "Oh, no, it was Timothy McVeigh, and he did this, a white Christian man." No longer did we refer to it as a terrorist attack.

    GLENN GREENWALD: Right. I mean, that happens all the time. First of all, it was Steve Emerson, the very same Steve Emerson who just said that Birmingham was an all-Muslim city that no non-Muslims can enter, who was working at the time—either at the time for CNN or just afterwards, who went on, on the air, and was the most influential comment shaping what you just described. And he said the attempt here was to kill as many people as possible, which is a Middle East attribute, and therefore we should assume or highly speculate that this is likely an attack perpetrated by someone from the Middle East, someone who is Muslim. That’s how that narrative actually started. Steve Emerson’s career didn’t suffer at all from that.

    But, you know, if you watch how these attacks are discussed, every time there’s an attack where the assailant or the perpetrator is unknown, the media will say it’s unknown whether or not terrorism is involved. And what they really mean by that is: It’s unknown whether or not the perpetrator is Muslim. And as soon as they discover that the perpetrator is a Christian or is American, a white American, they’ll say, "We now have confirmation that this is not a terrorist attack." It’s something else—someone who’s mentally unstable, some extremist, something like that. It really is a term that functionally now means nothing other than Muslims who engage in violence against the West.

    AMY GOODMAN: I mean, we have a perfect example right now in Colorado Springs. There was a bomb that was affixed that blew up outside the NAACP. The media is not saying right now, as the man is looked for, there is a search for a terrorist going on right now on our own soil in Colorado.

    GLENN GREENWALD: Yeah, I remember there was an individual named Joseph Stack who flew an airplane into a government building in Texas, into the side of the IRS, actually. And for the first several hours of the reporting, it was said that the suspicion is that this is a terrorist attack, because it was on a government facility. And then when it was discovered that he was actually a right-wing, anti-tax, anti-government American, they said, actually, this isn’t a terrorist attack, this is just kind of this crazy person who did this for political ends.

  9. AARON MATÉ: I want to go back to Fox News host Jeanine Pirro, a former prosecutor. This is from her show on Saturday.

    JEANINE PIRRO: We need to kill them. We need to kill them, the radical Muslim terrorists hell-bent on killing us. You’re in danger. I’m in danger. We’re at war, and this is not going to stop. After this week’s brutal terror attacks in France, hopefully everybody now gets it. And there’s only one group that can stop this war: the Muslims themselves. Our job is to arm those Muslims to the teeth, give them everything they need to take out these Islamic fanatics. Let them do the job. Let them have at it. And as they do, we need to simply look the other way.

    AARON MATÉ: That’s Jeanine Pirro of Fox News, a former prosecutor in Westchester, also a former judge. Glenn Greenwald, it’s easy to make fun of Fox News, but your response to this? And how does—how do attitudes like these play out in the corporate media, generally?

    GLENN GREENWALD: I mean, you know, if you listen to her, Jeanine Pirro, that clip you just played, I mean, she’s obviously psychotic. I mean, that’s just like bloodthirsty fascism in its purest, you know, expression. But I don’t really think that the substance of what she’s saying, to the extent one can attribute substance to those comments, is really all that rare or even controversial in the U.S. I mean, we have been a country that has declared ourselves at war with some formulation of Islam, radical Muslims, whatever you want to call it, something that John Kerry actually just affirmed a few days ago, that the French president and others have embraced, as well, over the last week.

    And I think this is one of the most pernicious aspects of these so-called terrorism experts and terrorism expertise, which is, if you are an American citizen or if you’re a French citizen or if you’re a British citizen, you have a greater chance of being killed by slipping in the bathtub tonight and hitting your head on the ceramic tile, or being struck by lightning—literally—than you do dying in a terrorist attack. And yet these terrorism experts have it in their interest to constantly hype and exaggerate the threat and fearmonger over it, because that’s how they become relevant. They become relevant in terms of their work. They become relevant in terms of their government contracts and in terms of the money that they make. And it really has infected large parts of Western thinking to view terrorism as a much, much greater threat than just rationally and statistically it really is. And I think that’s—a big part of that is at the feet of these so-called terrorism experts.

    AMY GOODMAN: I want to thank Luc Mathieu, speaking to us from Paris, from Libération. I also want to thank Lisa Stampnitzky, who wrote Disciplining Terror, speaking to us from Boston, Harvard lecturer.

  10. What’s Not Being Revealed in the Tsarnaev Courtroom
    March 30, 2015 by James Henry and Lara Turner

    1The prosecution pulled a couple of astonishing 180°s in the Dzhokhar Tsarnaev trial Thursday. The fancy footwork actually had the government denying evidence it once claimed to have possessed. In fact, in one instance, the prosecution managed to pull a full 360°.

    It started when one witness, FBI Supervisory Agent Michael Knapp—who works with the Terrorist Explosive Device Analytical Center (TEDAC) in Quantico, Virginia—testified that the bombs allegedly made by Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev were “not that sophisticated.” He also stated that investigators found explosives residue in the Tsarnaev brothers’ Norfolk Street, Cambridge, apartment and in their vehicles.

    However, both these assertions directly contradict what the public has been led to believe since the April 2013 Boston Marathon bombing—based not only on what law enforcement told the media, but also on the prosecution’s own statements. Despite these glaring discrepancies, Knapp’s testimony Thursday went unchallenged by the defense.

    The reason for the defense’s silence seems clear. With the prosecution trying to paint the brothers as “lone wolves” who acted without any outside help, the defense has focused on saving Dzhokhar from the death penalty by blaming the defendant’s actions on older brother Tamerlan. As a result, both sides appear content to ignore the possibility that others were involved in the planning or facilitation of the bombing—even though the government once contended that this might be the case.

    Thursday’s testimony is a case study in how language can be twisted to gain a legal advantage, while leaving potentially significant matters of fact unexplored.

    Let’s take a look at the prosecution’s latest assertions, one at a time.


  11. The prosecution has changed its position on the level of sophistication of the bombs used in Boston.

    The Bombs: Sophisticated or Simple?

    The first issue concerns the design of the bombs that exploded on Boylston Street on April 15. 2013. According to Knapp’s Thursday testimony, the bombs were relatively simple devices. Although he didn’t say it directly, he implied that anyone with an Internet connection could have pulled off the Boston bombing.

    But that assertion contradicts the opinion of numerous experts, and of investigators directly connected to this case.

    Not long after the bombing, former CIA operative Bob Baer, told CNN:

    The police are looking at this as a sophisticated device, which does not precisely follow the internet plans that are in Inspire magazine… In order to have them foolproof, you need a bomb maker to do it, or someone with a lot of practice. These things just don’t go off with that consistency that they managed to make happen.

    About a year later, retired Army Lt. Gen. Mike Barbero, former director of the Joint IED Defeat Organization (JIEDDO), told ABC News:

    For a ‘novice’ pair of IED builders and emplacers, for them to work as they did, to be effective, that indicates to me a level of sophistication that they received some sort of training from somewhere.

    Barbero headed JIEDDO at the time of the marathon attacks. JIEDDO works directly with Knapp’s TEDAC, an interagency organization that scrutinizes explosive devices for various government agencies, including the military.

    The prosecution has changed its position on the level of sophistication of the bombs used in Boston.


    When justifying why FBI agents questioned Dzhokhar Tsarnaev for two days before reading him his Miranda rights, the prosecution pointed to the sophistication of the bombs, which led them to believe there were others involved.

    That, in turn, allowed the government to interrogate Tsarnaev without a Miranda warning under the “public safety exception,” on the assumption that more attacks might be imminent.


  12. The government’s May 2014 motion reads:

    The Marathon bombs were constructed using improvised fuses made from Christmas lights and improvised, remote-control detonators fashioned from model car parts. These relatively sophisticated devices would have been difficult for the Tsarnaevs to fabricate successfully without training or assistance from others.

    Until Thursday’s testimony by FBI agent Knapp, it was assumed that the brothers must have had help in either designing or constructing the bombs. Investigators said Tamerlan could have received training while he was overseas in Dagestan, a Russian state with a jihadi underground, for six months in 2012.

    But the prosecution had reason to stay away from this scenario, because it would play into the defense’s strategy of showing Tamerlan as mastermind and Dzhokhar as weak-willed dupe. So Knapp’s testimony on Thursday portraying the Marathon bombs as “unsophisticated” wrote any need for “explosives training” out of the case.

    And since Dzhokhar’s lawyers have admitted his culpability, the defense was happy to go along with any story that reinforces Tamerlan’s central role. What gets lost in this complicity of silence is the possibility that the Tsarnaevs had help in carrying out the bombing—a possibility that the establishment media should be pursuing, since it could lead to answers about who might’ve been providing that help.


  13. The Black Powder: Now You See It, Now You Don’t. Or Do You?

    The other issue raised by Thursday’s testimony concerns the whereabouts of explosives powder (gunpowder) residue. Investigators seemed to have had a hard time deciding whether there were traces of powder in the Tsarnaevs’ Cambridge apartment. So far, they have reversed themselves three times over the course of the investigation—twice in official proceedings.

    A month after the bombing, a “source close to the investigation” told CNN that explosives residue had been found in the small Norfolk Street apartment. The report said the residue “turned up in at least three places,” namely the kitchen table, the kitchen sink and the bathtub.

    But a year later, in the same government motion that claimed the brothers likely had “training or assistance from others,” prosecutors argued that there were “virtually no traces of black powder” in the Tsarnaev apartment. This would suggest that the bombs were built elsewhere, possibly in an unidentified safe-house provided by those never identified “others.”

    It’s worth noting that this claim was put forward to justify the failure of law enforcement officers to read Dzhokhar Tsarnaev his Miranda rights while interrogating him in the hospital. (Even before the interrogation began, authorities were telling residents in and around Boston that they could be confident “the threat has been removed.”)

    So after informing the court in May 2014 that there was no explosives residue in the Tsarnaevs’ apartment, on Thursday Special Agent Knapp testified that there was evidence of explosives residue—in both the apartment and in the Tsarnaevs’ cars.


  14. Is U.S. Hiding Something?

    The pattern seems clear: the hide-and-seek residue makes its appearance when necessary to prove the brothers were the sole perpetrators of the bombing, thereby diverting public attention from the role others may have played in the attack.

    But when it serves the government’s purpose to raise the specter of imminent danger from shadowy accomplices, the residue conveniently disappears.

    Then, presto-chango, it’s back when any hint of accomplices might aid the defense in warding off the death penalty.

    In other words, the government has been allowed to have its cake and eat it too, while the defense, for its own reasons, has not questioned these reversals, And the press—so far—seems not even to have noticed them.

    The Public Interest

    The whole purpose of a court trial is to decide the guilt or innocence of the accused. But in a case involving the worst terror attack on American soil since 9/11, the public may well want to ask: are there valid trails of evidence leading to the involvement of others in the bombing—trails of evidence that are being ignored, or deliberately suppressed, in the legal games being played in Boston?

    If no one in authority, or in the media, even tries to look deeper into this tragedy, we may never get to the bottom of how, where and by whom the bombs that killed three and injured more than 260 people were constructed.

    And that failure would be compounding the tragedy.

  15. Writers Henry and Turner state that "Dzhokar's lawyers have admitted his culpability." Dzhokar pleaded "not guilty"--which is why they are having this trial. He can't be guilty and not guilty at the same time. To believe lawyers, police or almost any government agent rather than what Dzhokar himself says show how Americans will gullibly trust anything an "authority" figure says. These "defense lawyers" in this kangaroo court have been strenuously supporting the prosecution, not Dzhokar. The prosecution interviewed 94 witnesses in 15 days; the "defense" interviewed 4 in 6 hours! Kevin Cullen, writing in the Boston Globe, said that when the "defense" finally interviewed a couple of witnesses they sounded more like they were lawyers for the prosecution.


  16. FBI failed to intercept or was directed not to intercept any of the hijackers on 9/11 in spite of supposedly watching them all closely. Whatever the reason, 9/11 attacks happened under FBI's nose!

    Why such unearned public trust in such weak evidence?!

    Many Americans have a child-like belief in the overall honesty and integrity of our federal security forces. Americans also have a propensity to deify uniformed, armed authority figures, both police and military. Perhaps to question the integrity of the federal police force would be seen by some as un-American? Or maybe many of us are just brain damaged, gullible dolts.

    So many get outraged at any suggestion that the U.S. may be behind many of the terrible events at home and abroad.

    Twitter announces a "simulated" bomb is going off near the finish line 5 minutes before it did, and there is a video showing authorities announcing, "This is a DRILL....This is a DRILL".....Do the math people. This was a setup to test against the 4th amendment, unwarranted searches, Martial Law....Research Jade Helm 15 (JH15)...and an excuse to expand the surveillance state. Here comes the hammer folks.....

    It will be interesting to see what evidence the lawsuits of the 276 victims of the bombing brings forward. Wait -- there hasn't been a single lawsuit from the victims. Not against the city, or the security arrangements, or the Boston Marathon organization -- deep pockets, all. And why is that?

    Because it's all a litmus test for the Sheep, it was a Fargin DRILL, these boys didn't do it, Backpack evidence alone shows this, best check out one of the G'ubmint's "Contractors" instead, there's your suspects....People please wake up to this insanity instead of falling for it

    The lawsuit should be against the FBI/DOJ for supposedly letting them "slip off the radar" after being interviewed, even though clearly they were tracking them and setting them up all along. This is where the juicy stuff is.

  17. onetree • a month ago

    The first mistake is going along with the government's assertions about pressure cooker bombs and where/when they may have been used, as well as who built them. It still seems very possible to me that the brothers may not have done anything more than show up at the marathon in backpacks and hats. I believe it is an underestimate of the FBI's ability to lie, to fabricate evidence, manipulate people, and to cover up these sorts of mass mayhem. Not to remember and/or realize that "our" government has aspects that are very practiced at this sort of activity. So anything the prosecution asserts or any evidence presented by them has to be judged with this knowledge in mind.

    I watched a video yesterday that shows fairly convincingly that mortars may have been used. The video shows people clearing away those pipes. Other videos show a lot of interesting things -- obvious things -- that have never been discussed or mentioned by the government or defense.

    Another question I had was who is/are the actual publishers of Inspire magazine. I suspect it could be one or more of "our" government agencies for the purpose of setting up people like the Tsarnaev brothers as patsies.

    Something that may have been discussed at some point but that I have missed is how the brothers might have paid for all of the items they supposedly purchased related to bomb making and carrying out the "plan." The suggestion has been made and that Dzhokhar was selling marijuana and "always seemed to have money," without any real evidence given. I'm not even sure whether or not he had a job at the time of the bombing. If Tamerlan was a stay-at-home dad and his wife worked long hours as a home health aid, there most likely wasn't a lot of extra money in their family budget. Many things are said about Tamerlan, many accusations that cannot be proven or disproven because he is not on trial. He cannot defend himself against these. I would not be surprised if we were to eventually find that none of the accusations are true.

    Nothing has been settled, no confidence has been gained by the testimony, and more questions than answers are the only real results of the trial so far IMHO.

  18. "Is Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Drugged or Brainwashed? Fire the Defense."

    "In media report after media report, words come across that give the impression that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is acting in ways which puzzle even seasoned court reporters, and seems to be hardly at his own trial at
    all. As an afterthought reports will not that he is "slouched" in his seat or "looking at the floor." In a pre-trial hearing he kept smiling at his sisters, the only people he acknowledged, who were sobbing the whole time.

    BBC reported last month that as his lawyer confessed for him, Tsarnaev: "slouched in his seat and [showing] little reaction."

    These are alarming indicators in a democracy where competency to stand trial is a key criteria of the legitimacy of the proceedings. The fact is this does not involve only Tsarnaev, but could be anyone.

    In a powerful compilation a Youtube user has pieced together media reports and interviews of the defendant's friends, in his first pre-trial appearance, and it is unanimous that Dzhokhar is behaving like a different person than the one they knew.

    That was nearly two years ago, and since then he has been subjected to another nearly two years in isolation, with the government able to do anything they want to him...

    According to some observers, Tsarnaev had even picked up a new thick Russian accent at his pre-trial hearing in 2013. UK Independent:

    “He never had that accent,” said a friend from the school, declining to give his name as he spoke to reporters outside the courtroom.

    Fast forward two years, and a former high school wrestling teammate tells the Boston Globe that Tsarnaev seems like a “different guy” who had a different “body language.” Even in images as rough as court artist sketches, a dazed and bewildered Dzhokhar emerges from the artist’s hand.

    Fidgets and facial tics seem to be an emerging characteristic of defendants held for long periods in isolation without the ability to confer with their attorney privately. At the trial of Jose Padilla, which took place after Padilla spent two years in isolation in the custody of military doctors in the brig, Padilla exhibited “facial tics, unusual eye movements and contortions of his body,” according to one of his lawyers. Padilla had no contact with counsel for 21 months, and any contact was closely monitored after that. Padilla was accused, at first, of planning to blow up a “dirty bomb” which would spread radioactivity throughout the city of New York, though those charges never found their way to the final indictment. Padilla was eventually convicted on a single charge of “material support” for terrorism.

    These are alarming indicators in a democracy where competency to stand trial is a key criteria of the legitimacy of the proceedings. The fact is this does not involve only Tsarnaev, but could be anyone.

    A defendant not able to speak for himself. A “defense” team which starts his trial by declaring that he is guilty, despite his innocent plea, and ignoring reams of evidence suggesting that the brothers were being handled by outside parties, with full knowledge by the FBI. The only way in which Americans can safeguard what is left of the notion of a fair trial is for Tsarnaev’s family to demand the defense be fired, and Tsarnaev subjected to a full mental competence evaluation.

    News compilation, Tsarnaev demeanor and mental state

  19. A reporter in one of the clips in this video

    who was at the courthouse on July 2013 said Jahar was much taller than she expected, 6' or maybe taller.

    On the FBI's wanted poster in April 2013, it lists Jahar's height as 5' 9".

    Tamerlan was 6'3' and you can see in photos of them standing side by side that Jahar is considerably shorter.

  20. Whether or not there are "valid trails of evidence leading to the involvement of others in the bombing" (though I would readily believe there are, not least because of the prosecution's many objections to certain questions), the statements of the counterterrorism experts from DHS, the CIA, and other respected sources remain (for one example, those quoted here They can't all be so easily dismissed. And no trace of a detonator was found?? And frankly, I have yet to see anything dug up about the Tsarnaev brothers that even remotely substantiates the level of hate or violent radicalism it would take to set off a real bomb to harm Americans, while there is plenty to argue the opposite - i.e., their palpable desperation, as Chechens, to become American citizens and live in the US, far from the violence that has been devastating their native land.

    Who is the agent with the earpiece, who is trailing the brothers BEFORE the bombs go off, in this video? Why did the FBI blur the man's face out before they put it on TV? I am a little surprised that WWW has not jumped on this, it is a smoking gun. They were trailing the brothers all along.

    The agent is making sure that the
    brothers follow their instruction

    As ordered, the way I see it, the
    brothers were working for the? And

    They had no idea that they were carrying
    explosives if so they were.

    Their friend in Florida was informed by the brothers that
    they were

    Working for the US government and that's why he was

    Anyone who has been backpacking knows what a 30 lb. pack feels like, it is no joke. You need it by both straps or you will pull heavily to one side to balance the load. Jahar was doing neither, and looks like he has maybe a book and a bag lunch in there, not 30 lbs. The explosives were already there or dropped by someone else.

    That someone else the the black FBI agent (captured by the missing Lord & Taylor video), who is standing on the Forum patio with a white FBI agent when Jahar arrives at the location. They watch him, with both of them texting on their phones at key points. Jahar is there about four minutes. They do not leave until he leaves, and the second bomb is detonated while they and Jahar are less than 25 feet up the street.

    Video Of Tsarnaev Brothers Around Boylston Street On Day Of Boston Marathon Bombing

    Three men are on Forum patio when Tamerlan passes; the black agent gets on his cell after he passes.
    3:40 mark in video Jahar approaches Forum.

    Around 6:50 Jjahar makes call and the white agent gets on his cell too, around 6:34, looks like he's texting - video fades and switches to stills.

    And just then, at the 7:42 mark, the first bomb explodes (everyone, startled, turns to look up the street, Jahar included, who starts to move faster as the crowd surges forward as they run in the direction he was heading.

    Video fades out to photoshopped images, but the three men are still on the patio although it appears the two agents have stepped just off of it and the large black man has moved back about a foot and is looking at IDs.

    7:45 Jahar starts to walk back up the street, the large black man takes a step back from the two agents, the black agent is watching Jahar walk and the white agent has left and gone up the street.

  21. The Facts of the Boston Bombing - Black Ops Did It

    1. BMB Final Summary
    1. Cover page
    2. The proof that Jahar is Innocent
    3. Jahars Defense Team
    4. Governments Proof of Jahars Guilt
    5. Tamerlan was Framed
    6. Why Muslims are blamed
    7. What happened to the Truth
    8. A Happy Holidays to All
    9. Ask a Lawyer
    1. From Page 1 on BMB
    2. False Flag Chain of Command
    3. CRAFT Blackwater and Academi
    4. 2011 Waltham Murders
    5. 7-11 Robbery
    6. MIT Murder
    7. Carjacking
    8. Shootout
    9. Escape
    9a. Boat
    9b. Hospital
    9c. Trial
    9d. CCTV Cameras
    9e. Backpacks
    Black Ops Did it
    Some Unfinished Evidence
    The Movie

  22. The defense team's portrayal of Tsarnaev differs starkly from the prosecution's portrait of a cold and unremorseful young man.

    Elmirza Khozhugov, the former husband of Dzhokhar's sister Ailina, said the younger Tsarnaev eagerly went along with anything his co-conspirator brother, Tamerlan, said to him.

    "There's a saying we have in Chechnya: In a family with seven sons, it is better to be a dog than the younger son," Khozhugov said. "The youngest of the boys is obliged to do the things the older boys tell him."

    It was evening at the U.S. Embassy in Kazakhstan when Khozhugov testified remotely Wednesday in the penalty phase of Tsarnaev's capital murder trial. With his live testimony from Almaty, the defense team sought to bolster its contention that Tsarnaev was merely following the lead of an older brother he admired greatly when he planted a pair of bombs near the marathon's finish line.

    "Tamerlan loved his younger brother, absolutely adored him," Khozhugov said. "Always put himself as the defender of Jahar. Tamerlan was very charismatic, and he was a leader within himself. It was a very easy thing for him to do, being the elder brother."

    Khozhugov is not subject to sanctions for perjury because he did not take the stand on U.S. soil. The jury can discount his testimony if it chooses. He was the only male relative to testify after four of five female relatives who were brought to the United States delivered emotional testimony earlier this week.

    Khozhugov, who was questioned by defense lawyer Judy Clarke, said he married Dzhokhar's sister Ailina in 2006. He was 20; she was 15. The marriage fell apart when he struck her during an argument over her Facebook contacts.

    "I lost my temper and put my hands on her," he said. "As a result of that, I got arrested, and we got divorced."

    Tamerlan once introduced Khozhugov to an Armenian friend who was a convert to Islam. His name was Misha, and he was a mentor of sorts to Tamerlan, Khozhugov said. Zubeidat Tsarnaeva welcomed Misha, who engaged in conversations about religion and politics.

    Tamerlan started to change during his friendship with Misha. He quit boxing and an acting class, Khozhugov said. He lost interest in music and began talking about conspiracy theories he picked up on the Internet.

    "He particularly told me that Misha told him it was not appropriate in Islam to box and that is why he stopped," he said.

    TESTIMONY ON MAY 6, 2015

    Lawyers arguing, before jury arrives, re: the fact the man about to testify via video won't technically be under oath b/c he's not in the US. Defense suggests "it's the government's doing" that this witness will testify via video from overseas; waiting for details.

    Judge: This witness is in Kazakstan, via "remote connection".
    Witness is sworn in by the court official here; govt. complained that the oath can't be upheld in Kazakhstan.
    The witness is Elmirza Khozhugov; he is at the US Embassy in Kazakhstan, 7:30pm local time there.
    Khozhugov speaks excellent English; says he studied here as a teenager and then again for college in 2004.
    Khozhugov: I was married to Tsarnaev's sister Alina; my other sister is married to Tsarnaev's uncle Ruzlan.
    Khozhugov: I knew Tamerlan better than I knew the rest of the Tsarnaev family. "He was my friend."
    Khozhugov: "Tamerlan was an interesting young man, polite...charismatic, friendly, goofy sometimes."
    K: Tamerlan & his sisters stayed with me in Kazakhstan for a year when his parents went to the US.
    Defense will attempt the feat of reviewing photographic evidence w/ this witness on the other side of the world; he has hard copies of pics
    K: I once tried to convince Tamerlan to move to Washington state with me, where I was going to college. He never came, though.
    K: I told Tamerlan I was having feelings for his sister Ailina; I asked if it was ok. He says sure, as long as you have "good intentions".
    Next photo the jury sees is of Khozhugov & Tamerlan, captioned (by K.) as "The_Professor & The_Chechnian", the nicknames we gave ourselves.
    K: Tamerlan wanted to be called The Professor because he thought it made him sound smarter.
    Soon, Khozhugov marries Ailina Tsarnaev, 4 years his junior. They are married "for almost two years".
    K and Ailina later had an argument about her Facebook account. "I lost my temper and basically put my hands on her." He was arrested.
    Tamerlan Tsarnaev bails out his brother-in-law, arrested for hitting his sister. Tells him: stay calm. The couple separates, later divorces.
    K: While we were still married, Ailina and I spent a lot of time at Tsarnaev family apartment in Cambridge.
    Khozhugov remembers the home as small "and always crowded". Tsarnaev parents had many fights; the mom had more authority than the dad.
    K: Tsarnaev's mother loved Tamerlan; full of praise & encouragement. He loved her back; he listened to her more than to anyone else.
    K: I remember Dzhokhar spent a lot of time studying, reading, writing. "He wasn't very interested in the computer."
    K: Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's mom would put his good grades on the fridge, very proud. Dzhokhar was quiet, patient, responsible.
    K: I remember Misha, a friend of Tamerlan, who taught him about Islam, suggested books to read, offered his "own views".
    K: Zubeidat encouraged Misha's instruction of her son Tamerlan. I didn't like those conversations - conspiracy theories, satanism.
    K: Tamerlan soon tells me he quits boxing. I ask why. Tam. says that Misha told him Islam says he shouldn't "hit people on the head".
    K: Tamerlan also took acting and music classes, which he quit because Misha told him too - saying it conflicted with Islam.
    Khozhugov: Tamerlan was into conspiracy theories, wanted me to see the videos he watched online, about politics and religion.
    K: "Tamerlan loved his younger brother...absolutely adored him." Older brother was leader, I guess, & charismatic. Spent much time together.
    K: Tamerlan was ready to do anything for Dzhokhar to be successful in life.
    K: Dzhokhar listened to Tamerlan, did was he was told, went along to be "good younger brother as he was supposed to be in a Chechen family".
    K: We say, in a family with 7 sons, it is better to be the dog than the 7th son.

  24. On the three Waltham murders, who besides the feds and the mob can afford to throw weed and money all over corpses, who would never know the money and weed were there, seeing they are now deceased?. Tamerlan, Dzhokhar and Ibragim were in no way that well to do to waste $6,000 in cash and weed on dead corpses, but the feds and mob can afford it. They just used Tamerlan, Jahar and Ibragim to close the case. They already knew Tamerlan was a close friend to the victims before the Marathon bombings.

    Maybe if you people concentrated on showing how he was set up instead of saying everything is fake we might have gotten better responses. Peekay and all the people claiming fake bombs and fake victims were ill informed and assumed a fallacy in which many of you believed it, and you were 100% wrong. This hurt the support movement big time. The government just loved the division of supporters shooting themselves in the foot and making a laughing stock of the movement.

    Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev were set up as patsies

    They said the two Brothers set their packs down and left.

    Has anyone seen the remnants of those two packs at trial ?

    Seeing they collected nails, BB's and cooker parts from the scene, where is Tamerlan's backpack and the cooker pieces from the second blast site, and where is Jahar's white backpack in the evidence exhibits?

    This whole event was planned out by the DoD and Law enforcement.

    A covert Black Operation was brought into the event without letting anyone know.

    This info proves Tamerlan and Jahar were set up

    The black bag found in the street at the second site is not Jahar's bag, obviously.

    Where is the white material from Jahar's and Tamerlan's backpacks in the evidence exhibits?

    Seeing they collected BB's nails and bone fragments, it should be there if indeed their packs were the bombs.

    Why wasn't this evidence ever shown at trial ?

    If you recall, the DHS bomb pack drill was suppose to start at 12:53 that day and it was announced.

    But it never happened...... Why?

    No more was said about the drill.

    Then two hours later Tamerlan and Jahar come on the scene and the bombs were blown at this time.

    They were late is my guess... traffic.... parking or whatever delayed them.

    And they didn't even hide who they were is a dead give away they thought they were part of the DHS Drill:

  25. If the purpose of the US judicial system in criminal trials is to ensure that all factual evidence surrounding an alleged crime or crimes be accurately and fairly presented so that the jurors can properly assess the best semblance of the truth as presented by both prosecution and defense in order for the jury to adjudicate and decide a defendant’s true guilt or innocence, this trial was a complete travesty of justice. And if a basic tenet of the justice system in the United States holds that a defendant is considered innocent until proven guilty, then again this verdict outcome is an obscene farce and a shameful joke exposing America’s justice system for its gross injustice. Just as the 9/11 commission failed to adequately address and answer dozens of questions that its official narrative failed to deliver, and years earlier the Warren Commission failed JFK and America, so does the prosecution’s case of evidence of Tsarnaev’s guilt fail to be convincing, much less provide definitive and unequivocal proof that the 21-year old Chechen American with his brother committed the Boston Marathon crimes.

    And the prime reason why is that so much of the testimony and so called evidence was based on the FBI and local law enforcement’s dishonest versions of events that were based near exclusively on the government’s one star witness’s faulty, changeable, non-credible accounting of events. The identity of this sole witness that even through the trial was never revealed, testified in court by his fake name “Danny.” Later it was learned that Danny’s real name was Dun Meng. A Chinese national finishing his masters at Northeastern University in engineering, during his alleged carjacking, Meng claimed that the deceased brother Tamerlan confessed that he and his younger brother were responsible for both the Marathon bombings as well as the murder of the MIT campus policeman.

    Throughout his trial testimony, the key witness maintained constant eye contact with what seemed almost like his handler, Northeastern University criminology professor James Fox. Fox clearly acted as Meng’s coach and gatekeeper ensuring that Fox would be present in a tentative interview with WhoWhatWhy journalist Russ Baker though it turned out Fox made sure it never happened. In a television interview with the immigrant gas station attendant that Meng ran to when he escaped, it was Fox once again guarding his henhouse, making sure the attendant stayed on script, an odd role for a criminology professor. But in a case where the entire story was badly scripted by the feds, necessitating absolute control over all outgoing information to the public, Professor Fox was merely playing his part. And that part also included state propagandist.

    When the strength of the state’s evidence to convict and execute a man relies solely on one incognito witness whose tightly controlled testimony repeatedly kept changing depending on whom he talked to, how can a guilty verdict be considered legitimate or fair? Virtually the entire guilt or innocence of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev rested on what this one alleged witness claimed, yet he kept changing his story on numerous occasions despite his gatekeeper’s best intentions.

  26. Just as the French authorities made sure that no prisoners were allowed to be taken alive in the alleged Hebdo Paris crime spree in January, nor in Osama bin Laden’s alleged execution in Pakistan in 2011, nor in the JFK assassination, that barrage of gunfire into that boat by FBI and/or local police was also intended to kill the only suspect. That way the government’s complicity, criminal involvement and subsequent cover-up would have conveniently been eliminated – wiped clean of any messy complications in the form of a suspect trial and the truth inadvertently leaking out. So the US government proceeds with a pseudo-trial that kept the defendant silent and unable to ever present his side of the story. In effect, he may as well have been silenced by the bullets intended to kill him.

    Another of the dozens of discrepancies in this case is over how and when older brother Tamerlan actually died. A series of photos of a naked and handcuffed Tamerlan were taken as the police placed him into custody and inside a patrol car. Both CNN and the Boston Globe reported that Tamerlan was alive in police custody. Yet the feds’ official line was that after the brothers robbed a 7-Eleven, Tamerlan was killed in the Watertown shootout with the police while Dzhokhar backed the car over him as he made his temporary getaway. It can only be one or the other. The photos don’t lie. Cops do.

    For so many incredulous inconsistencies to actually be accepted as convincing “evidence” while so many discrepant facts directly contradict state evidence, and then the “no questions asked” defense and mainstream media throughout the trial passively swallowing it hook, line and sinker in its rush to convict Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (trial being over in less than a month with 95 witnesses) is utterly preposterous and again, a complete and total miscarriage of justice. For nearly two years all the potential defense witnesses were constantly harassed, deported, jailed, and even killed, thus, virtually silencing any chance of a fair defense for Dzhokhar.

    But then the propaganda lies built into this case from the start were designed to convict the brothers as the patsy fall guys all along.

  27. Going back to the JFK assassination and Lee Harvey Oswald, every false flag operation has its unwitting stooges who are used by the feds as props to take the sole blame. From President Obama to the FBI to their propagandist presstitutes, they were all publicly weighing in their guilty verdicts no sooner than the release of the photos that within days of the bombings identified the two brothers as the only prime suspects, thus prejudicing the entire case, effectively swaying Americans into believing that the one suspect still alive was guilty long before his trial ever began. And we know based on both Obama and the FBI’s track records that they both are constantly lying through their teeth and obviously cannot be trusted.

    The overwhelming majority of American citizens per last August’s CNN poll, an all-time high of 87%, of Americans simply do not trust their own government, knowing that they are constantly being lied to every day. And with so many blatant holes in the state’s case, anyone half aware and informed of what’s been allowed to go down in the Boston Marathon bombings case would be near 100% certain that the government is once again producing an over-the-top false narrative designed to hide its own criminality. But then the US federal government’s become a militarized dictatorship, part of an international crime cabal that uses state propaganda as effectively as the Nazis ever did.

    All kinds of unexplained anomalies are rampant throughout this case. A number of paid mercenaries from Craft International, a paramilitary private security contractor out of Texas (not unlike notorious Blackwater/aka Xe/aka Academi) were also spotted in photos wearing those same black colored government-issued-like backpacks. The question of whether any of them laid their backpack and its contents on the ground never quite came up in the trial. Apparently these guys were part of a Homeland Security training exercise that just happened to be training at the exact same time and place as the so called terrorists on that Boston Marathon day. Think about those odds, kind of like America’s entire national air defense on 9/11 conveniently being absent, purposely diverted to training exercises in the Atlantic just so the 9/11 false flag could be executed as planned. In Boston the unmistakable heavy presence of the military and special ops personnel assembled en-masse instantly on the scene after the marathon explosions is yet another giveaway indicating that the feds had something if not everything to do with this tragedy.

    Clearly it was a training exercise alright, Bostonians was used as a guinea pig litmus test for assessing how a large US urban population of over a million people would react to a first practice, simulation dry-run of martial law in America, conveniently prepping us for what’s to come. The 2012 National Defense Authorization Act upheld by the US Supreme Court a year ago now permits the US military to invade our homes without warrant, arrest us without charges, and imprison us indefinitely without trial, legal representation or due process. After the marathon bombings the feds’ stand down order issued over an expansive, densely populated metropolitan area to remain in their homes while a massive police state-army dressed and armed for war against its own people without warrants entered thousands of homes with automatic weapons drawn in the largest, monster-scale manhunt in US history searching for one teenager from a family with whom the feds were already very familiar.

  28. Perhaps the most respected independent news team that’s been diligently investigating the Boston Marathon bombings the last two years – WhoWhatWhy – has asserted that older brother Tamerlan was most likely an FBI informant. Through court motions last year Dzhokhar’s defense team submitted evidence that the FBI had approached the older Tsarnaev brother in an effort to recruit him to spy on his fellow Boston Chechen and Muslim community. The US intel community has a verifiably long history both here and around the globe of seeking out troubled youth and young people like the Tsarnaevs as informants in its worldwide clandestine operations.

    The FBI and CIA’s common misuse of paying informants to entrap others globally into joining plots of terrorism was well documented in researcher-author Trevor Aaronson’s book The Terror Factory: Inside the FBI’s Manufactured War on Terrorism. Between 9/11 and 2011 he confirmed that 508 defendants were recruited by informants paid up to $100,000 in multiple sting operations. In fact, in all but only three high profile cases were the FBI and their informants not involved. Again, this demonstrates that the US government’s calling card around the world reads “Terrorism-R-US,” just another M.O. for squandering hard earned taxpayer dollars to keep its invented “war on terror” very much ongoing and alive forever.

    What seems most probable are efforts by the FBI to recruit Tamerlan to become a snitch in the neocons’ self-serving war on terror. Yet this piece of crucial evidence has been purposely withheld from all court proceedings and MSM’s dubious, half-ass coverage. 26-year old Tamerlin was a down on his luck, unemployed boxer whose dream of Olympic gold had been shattered, married to a nurse’s aide working 60 hours a week to make ends meet. Yet WhoWhatWhy states that just two days prior to the bombings, Tamerlan could afford sending his mother in Russia $900 cash along with paying for the backpacks (or were they government issued?), ammunition and bomb-making materials. Yet this critical piece of information was also prohibited from further inquiry during the trial.

    Of course the FBI predictably denied any Tsarnaev solicitation to become an informant. Prior to last month’s trial, the US Circuit Court judge presiding over the case explicitly ordered that the brother’s involvement with FBI not be allowed to enter his courtroom during the trial. It remains to be seen if Judge George A. O’Toole will permit the defense to present this critical information during the upcoming sentencing phase. Because the government has so much to hide and has failed to address so many discrepancies in the case for obvious high stakes reasons, it probably won’t be included, which of course only reinforces what many of us already know, that this trial is but a sham for police state propaganda and truth suppression.

  29. Of all the receipts for typical everyday items purchased, the only receipts found in Tamerlan’s pockets were receipts for his self-incriminating bomb-making materials. That’s almost like finding the unblemished passport belonging to the lead 9/11 box-cutter a couple blocks from the towers’ ashes the day after, or the Hebdo gunman’s wallet with ID left carelessly on purpose in the cab so those terrorists could instantly be identified. This calling card pattern smacks of yet another inside job rendition with the same shabby, grubby fed fingerprints carelessly smudged all over it.

    Another inconsistent weakness in the prosecution’s case was the sophistication required for making the “pressure-cooker” bombs used at the marathon. Supposedly Tamerlan learned off an al Qaeda internet website where the article’s authors mention the directions being beyond the scope of a novice. Throughout the trial, the prosecution team would go back and forth promoting the notion of the bombs’ complexity whenever it served their purpose. For example, as the reason used to justify the FBI interrogating Dzhokhar for two days straight without reading him his Miranda rights, the FBI suspected that others were also involved, partially based on the bombs seeming more than homemade-like. Yet whenever it would come up as a reason to mitigate seeking the death penalty, the notion of lone wolves would get drummed home every time.

    The traces of bomb materials in Tamerlan’s apartment underwent the same flip floppy logic as a transparent prosecution ploy used to convict the younger brother. Three times the feds changed their tune on traces of the bomb material being found in the apartment and whether the brothers had outside help or not. These discrepancies consistently went unchallenged by the defense during the trial as if pre-scripted to let the shady government off the hook in its back and forth rendition of “truth,” protecting the feds’ cover-up lies of discrepancy in order to allow the US government to get away with its incriminating part.

    The one thread of unfailing consistency throughout this entire two year story is the constant inconsistencies and the countless conspicuously avoided bottom line questions that smack of inside cover-up. Initially the Tsarnaevs were not the suspects. Apparently once the photos of the Tsarnaev brothers at the Boston Marathon were made public asking for help in identifying their names, overheard on a Boston police scanner and then scooped up immediately by social media network sources, the names Mike Mulugeta and Sunil Trapathi were erroneously identified as the suspects. The fact that the FBI knew who the two men in those photos were because they had previous dealings with them enough to place them on a no fly list, the FBI willfully lied to America pretending it needed the public’s assistance to identify them. And then the police put out false names of innocent people as suspects. Mike Mulugeta reportedly was shot dead though any actual accounts confirming his death are completely absent. However, East Indian American and Brown University student Sunil Trapathi who had been reported missing since mid-March was found floating face down in pond water in Providence, Rhode Island about a week after the Marathon explosions. What little information about his suspicious death was released through his family and the question of whether the death resulted from foul play is still largely unknown.

  30. More bogus, planted propaganda against the brothers shortly after they were identified as the prime suspects was the FBI claim linking them to the triple murder case in Waltham, Massachusetts that took place on September 11th, 2011. Only during the trial did it come out that there existed absolutely no evidence that Tamerlan was involved. Yet the systematic damage of misinformation supporting the brothers’ guilt was already done, ensuring that in the court of public opinion the Tsarnaevs were guilty as charged right from the get-go.

    Here the Tsarnaev brothers were supposedly on a no fly list acting as more evidence supporting prior contact with intelligence agencies, yet Tamerlan was permitted to fly to known terrorist hotbed Chechnya and neighboring Dagestan from January 21, 2012 to July 17, 2012. His family members insist he spent his entire time with family, among them a distant cousin who heads a non-violent organization critical of Western policies toward Islam. Yet his visit was used by prosecution as so called evidence that the older brother was “radicalized” there and came home an inspired terrorist seeking revenge on America.

    A New York Times article dated April 20, 2013 suggests that Tamerlan was first approached by the FBI in January 2011 after a return trip from Russia. Russian intelligence services that monitored phone calls in Chechnya warned the FBI in March 2011 that Tamerlan was becoming a potential threat. Thus two plus years well in advance of the bombings, the FBI was already cognizant of Tamerlan’s extremist leaning activities. Yet the FBI allowed him to travel yet again to Russia despite being on a no fly list and less than nine months after his return from that final trip abroad, the Boston Marathon bombings occurred. This damning piece of government evidence makes the feds minimally guilty of criminal gross negligence if not actually a criminal accomplice.

    Yet another despicable chapter to this tragic saga is the FBI’s murder of Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s friend in Florida. Within weeks after the Boston bombings, an unarmed Ibragim Todashev was shot by an FBI agent previously reprimanded for excessive force as an Oakland police officer. Initially the FBI lied about the circumstances, falsely claiming Todashev wielded a knife. The victim’s family is suing the FBI for $30 million. Even after admitting the lie about the victim brandishing a weapon, the Justice Department (overseeing the FBI) and a Florida prosecutor cleared the murdering FBI agent of any wrongdoing. The official government’s response that in effect supports such egregious acts of violence toward innocent civilians strongly indicates that the victim knew too much and the crime syndicate’s answer for people aware of the feds’ evildoing is to systematically assassinate those who might incriminate the federal government. Neutralizing perceived threats is standard operating procedure.

    As an aside, the Tsarnaev brothers’ uncle who went public shortly after the bombings blasting his nephews as “losers” was married for several years in the 1990’s to the daughter of well-known CIA career officer Graham Fuller. Fuller is the CIA architect for creating the Mujahedeen movement that fought the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980’s, the same outfit whose leader Osama bin Laden emerged as the so called 9/11 al Qaeda mastermind. Fuller was a committed advocate for using Islamic fundamentalists as US proxy war mercenaries. Another coincidence that the CIA VIP’s son-in-law and his nephews came from Chechnya, a hotspot for separatist Muslim terrorist activity?

  31. With the official government narrative of the 9/11 attack filled with a plethora of lies that have since been subsequently exposed, the next biggest “war on terror” event on US soil that the feds failed to stop was the April 2013 Boston Marathon bombings. And now the lone living suspect from that horrific crime that killed three people, left 17 limbless and injured 264 victims (though that number’s been accused of being purposely inflated) has now been found guilty of all 30 counts after the jury’s 11 hour deliberation earlier this week. As we mark the second anniversary of this tragic event and the second and final phase of the trial beginning on Monday that will decide the fate of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev – whether he’ll live out the rest of his life in prison or be put to death, a critical review of preceding events and developments surrounding his high profile, extremely significant case seems both timely and much needed.

    Once again the United States government appears to be at least complicit in another state crime against its own citizens… and then applying a media blackout to any real investigative reporting that would ask the dozens of questions to get to the truth. Even the defendant’s legal representation abandoned Tsarnaev’s right to a fair trial, and by co-opting to act in accordance with the government’s “no questions asked” implicitly applied gag-rule, it too is complicit in this heinous crime for neither seeking the truth nor any real justice for either the defendants or the scores of victims. The US crime cabal and its fabricated “war on terror” is perpetuated globally, both on US soil and around the world as an ongoing crime against humanity. The truth behind 9/11 is in-our-face, and so is the truth behind these Boston bombings. The criminals in Washington must pay for their crimes.

    Joachim Hagopian is a West Point graduate and former US Army officer. He has written a manuscript based on his unique military experience entitled “Don’t Let The Bastards Getcha Down.” It examines and focuses on US international relations, leadership and national security issues. After the military, Joachim earned a master’s degree in Clinical Psychology and worked as a licensed therapist in the mental health field for more than a quarter century. He now concentrates on his writing and has a blog site at http://empireexposed. blogspot. com/. He is also a regular contributor to Global Research and a syndicated columnist at Veterans Today.

    It would appear that Dzhokhar’s Defense team betrayed him. He pleaded not guilty and his attorney conceded that he was guilty.


  32. Boston bomber demands new trial
    July 6, 2015

    Boston bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev filed a motion Monday demanding a new trial, less than two weeks after he was sentenced to death for attacking the city's marathon in 2013.

    The preliminary motion did not stipulate grounds for a new trial, other than to say it was "required in the interests of justice."

    His lawyers said it was a "placeholder" motion that would be expanded upon by August 17.

    Tsarnaev, 21, apologized to his victims for the first time during a highly emotional court hearing in Boston on June 24 when he was sentenced to death on six counts for the April 15, 2013 bombings.

    A US jury determined the sentence unanimously on May 15 after finding him guilty on all 30 counts related to the bombings, the murder of a police officer and other crimes carried out while on the run.

    The bombings killed three people and wounded 264 others in one of the deadliest attacks on US soil since the September 11, 2001 attacks.

    They were carried out by Tsarnaev and his older brother Tamerlan, who was shot dead by police while on the run [he was in the Boston area, not on the run; he and his brother hadn't packed a thing].

  33. Massachusetts prosecutor to charge bomber Tsarnaev with murder
    July 11, 2015

    Massachusetts district attorney plans to bring state murder charges against Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who has been sentenced to death in a federal trial for a deadly bomb attack on the 2013 Boston Marathon, her office said on Saturday.

    The Boston Globe reported that Middlesex District Attorney Marian Ryan said she would charge Tsarnaev with murdering MIT police officer Sean Collier and for other crimes in the aftermath of the marathon attacks.

    Ryan said a guilty verdict in Massachusetts could keep Tsarnaev in prison if he successfully appeals his federal convictions.

    "When you come into Middlesex County and execute a police officer in the performance of his duties and assault other officers attempting to effect his capture, it is appropriate you should come back to Middlesex County to stand trial for that offense," Ryan said in a statement.

    Critics have said a prosecution is Massachusetts would be expensive and unnecessary, given the death sentence dispensed in federal court.

    Other state charges could include carjacking and kidnapping, the newspaper report said.

    Tsarnaev was convicted in April of killing three people and injuring 264 in the bombing near the finish line of the world-renowned Boston Marathon in 2013, as well as fatally shooting a police officer three days later.

    The same jury voted for execution by lethal injection in May, placing him on federal death row. Massachusetts does not have the death penalty.

    At his formal sentencing on June 24, the 21-year-old ethnic Chechen apologized and admitted he and his now-dead older brother carried out the attack.

    Tsarnaev filed a motion in federal court on Monday seeking a new trial, according to court records.

  34. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Admits to Guilt in 2013 Boston Marathon Bombings and is Sentenced to Death by Lethal Injection for Crimes He Didn't Commit

    By magiclougie
    June 24, 2015

    "There is no crueler tyranny than that which is exercised under cover of law, and with the colors of justice ..." - U.S. v. Jannotti, 673 F.2d 578, 614 (3d Cir. 1982)

    The truth is simple to understand unlike the convoluted mess of lies spread by the government.

    "He said it emphatically," he said, "No one deserves to suffer like they did," Tsarnaev said of the Boston Marathon bombing victims. - Sister Helen Prejean in her testimony before the jury at Dzhokhar's trial.

    It is a crime to make false statements to law enforcement personnel but it is legal for them to lie to you. Apparently is it not a crime for the prosecution to lie about the facts of a case to the press and during the trial, and for its witnesses to lie on the stand under oath. This is why you should never answer questions by government employees such as the police and FBI — you have the right to remain silent and you have the right to legitimate expectation of privacy (of your person, clothing, purse, luggage, vehicle, house, apartment, hotel room, and place of business, to name a few examples). Never talk to government "officials" without an attorney present. They will misconstrue what you say and fabricate, alter, hide, plant and destroy evidence to help the prosecution convict you, and judges will be biased against you and lenient with the prosecution, who work for the same system they do.

    "It is far harder to promulgate a lie than to simply tell the truth."

    The U.S. government has become like the brutal governments of other countries. For example, former Washington Post reporter David Satter argued convincingly in his 2003 book on Russia, Darkness at Dawn, that the Russian government had directed deadly and incomprehensible bombings of Russian apartment buildings in 1999 — which killed 300 people — to justify a new invasion of Chechnya and to speed Putin’s rise. In the Boston Marathon bombing case, the U.S. government fabricated, altered and withheld evidence, so don't put it past them to plant evidence and entrap associates of the Tsarnaev brothers and threaten them with imprisonment to get them to give false testimony to frame the Tsarnaevs' for the bombings. The government has threatened the Tsarnaevs' friends with deportation or prosecution on trumped up charges if they don't cooperate in framing them.


  35. The Tsarnaves allegedly were fleeing to escape the FBI manhunt yet they didn't pack any clothing or personal items, not even toothbrushes. And in Tamerlan's wallet was only $19. What happened to the $800 they allegedly stole from Meng by withdrawing it from his checking account via an ATM [the timestamp on the withdrawal was 11:19 PM; an hour later, at 12:19 AM, Deng escaped]? There was no mention at trial if Dzhokhar had a wallet when captured and there was no explanation of the missing $800.

    From the movie, "A Few Good Men:"

    "After Dawson and Downey's arrest, Santiago's room was inventoried. Four pairs of camouflage pants, three khaki shirts, boots. Four pairs of socks... Why hadn't Santiago packed? He was asleep at midnight, and you say he had a flight in six hours. Yet everything he owned was in his closet or his footlocker. For one day, you packed and made three calls. Santiago was leaving for the rest of his life. And he hadn't called a soul or packed a thing. Can you explain that?"

    Why didn't the FBI release footage from the dashboard cameras of the many cop cars on the scene in Watertown where Tamerlan was killed? Instead, Andrew Kitzenberg's out of focus, dark and long-distance iPhone snapshots from a third-story window of his home were submitted into evidence. Hundreds of media outlets published his photos and his dubious descriptions of what was depicted in the images.

    "Each of these pictures on this page together with the description of them are individually licensed by Andrew Kitzenberg with the requirement of attribution to Andrew Ktizenberg and a reference to his company’s website under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. For anyone looking to purchase 8GB BOSTON STRONG USB Wristbands from (whose proceeds will go to the One Fund Boston, Inc. to help the victims who were most affected by the Boston Marathon bombing), go here."

    Ktizenberg was called by the prosecution to testify because what he says supports the government's story. He doesn't have video, just blurry snapshots. Both Andrew Kitzenberg and FBI agent David Green were involved in falsely laying the blame on Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. How convenient that Green pulled out his smartphone just in time to catch Dzhokhar running away from the second blast site. According to the Las Vegas Sun, David Green clearly is implicated in framing the brothers:

    “Seconds after the bombs exploded, David Green from Jacksonville, Florida, pulled out his smart-phone and took a photo of the chaos developing a couple hundred yards in front of him — the smoke, the people running in panic.”

    In addition to not releasing any footage from cameras mounted to police vehicles, why didn't the FBI analyze the Garmin GPS found in the Tsarnaevs' Honda to confirm the brothers whereabouts that day. At trial, they presented a detailed analysis of their travels on March 6, 2013 using the Garmin GPS data, but didn't do the same for the most important days, April 15 through April 18, 2013, and all the days leading up to the bombings when they were allegedly making the bombs.


  36. The Tsarnaev brothers arrived at the Boston Marathon on April 15, 2013 at 2:37:40 PM. Twelve minutes after they arrived, at 02:49:56 PM, the first bomb exploded (the second bomb exploded 12 seconds later, at 02:50:08 PM). According to the FBI, during the12 minutes that the brothers walked two blocks on Boylston Street before the bombs exploded, 70 images or videos of them were captured and submitted for analysis. This is not hard to believe since there was an FBI agent on the lookout for them at the corner of Bolyston and Gloucester Streets at the exact moment they arrived, another agent taking photos of them as they stood in front of the Back Bay Social Club, and another two agents at the Forum restaurant where Dzhokhar stopped and waited for his brother, who had passed Forum a few minutes before him and had continued up the street toward the finish line, where he waiting to meet his FBI confidential informant or where his confidential informant told him to leave his backpack as part of the bomb drill. Additionally, there were other agents near the finish line, capturing images of Tamerlan standing in front of Lenscrafters.


  37. After the Boston Marathon bombings, law enforcement asked people for all their photos and videos, and then they deleted everything from phones and cameras that didn't match their official story. This confirms that there was a cover-up to who really committed the crimes.

    The "authorities" played to people's sympathy and shock to get their photos and videos. “You’ve got to help the authorities in any way you can! Please, if you’ve got any photos, videos, anything, please. We need to catch these people.” Then the photos and videos that would have exonerated the Tsarnaev brothers, or provided evidence of who really planted the bombs, disappeared from their phones and cameras.

    If you set your phone to to automatically upload any photos and videos you take into Icloud or Dropbox, then you should be able to retrieve them if the original is deleted off your phone (however, the government probably would hack into Icloud or Dropbox to delete them).

  38. Part I
    Graham Fuller, Uncle Ruslan, the CIA and the Boston Bombings
    by F. William Engdahl

    Are there too many coincidences in the Boston Bombings official narrative to call them coincidences? Behind each one lurks the shadow of Graham Fuller—a top CIA strategist who famously advocated co-opting Islamic extremists to further advance the US agenda in Central Asia—and his cozy ties with the accused brothers’ uncle. William Engdahl delves into the ramifications of the Fuller-Tsarni connection, the most compelling of the Boston smoking guns, and the threatening can of worms it has opened up.
    Voltaire Network | Frankfurt (Germany) | 20 May 2013

    Are there too many coincidences in the Boston Bombings official narrative to call them coincidences? Behind each one lurks the shadow of Graham Fuller—a top CIA strategist who famously advocated co-opting Islamic extremists to further advance the US agenda in Central Asia—and his cozy ties with the accused brothers’ uncle. William Engdahl delves into the ramifications of the Fuller-Tsarni connection, the most compelling of the Boston smoking guns, and the threatening can of worms it has opened up.

    Voltaire Network | Frankfurt (Germany) | 20 May 2013

    Part II
    Boston and the CIA ‘Snafu’: The grey eminence behind Turkey’s Erdogan and the AKP
    by F. William Engdahl

    In the first part, geopolitical analyst William Engdahl discussed the role of CIA’s Graham Fuller in creating the policy of using angry Jihadist Muslims as trained terrorists in Afghanistan and elsewhere against the Soviet Union. Herein—largely drawing on the revelations made by FBI whistle-blower Sibel Edwards—Engdahl throws the spotlight on the entire CIA-sponsored Islamic Jihadist operations run through Fetullah Gülen across Turkey into Central Asia and Russia and China.
    Voltaire Network | Frankfurt (Germany) | 25 May 2013

  39. Soon after joining Tsarnaev’s team, Clarke indicated that her client was prepared to plead guilty in exchange for a sentence of life without parole. Federal officials declined this offer. Clarke then pushed to move the trial out of Boston, arguing that local jurors would have an “overwhelming prejudice” against Tsarnaev. Judge O’Toole disagreed.

    To avoid a trial, Clarke does not shy away from the muscular exertion of leverage. (was this reason behind some of the sealed documents?)

    “For the next several weeks, we’re all going to come face to face with unbearable grief, loss, and pain caused by a series of senseless, horribly misguided acts carried out by two brothers,” she said.

    “There’s little that occurred the week of April the 15th—the bombings, the murder of Officer Collier, the carjacking, the shootout in Watertown—that we dispute,” she said.

    After every witness, (victims) Clarke murmured, “We have no questions.” Sometimes she thanked witnesses for their testimony. To cross-examine them would have been pointless, even offensive.

    During the guilt phase, the defense had called only four witnesses, all technical experts, who demonstrated that the fingerprints on the bombmaking tools were Tamerlan’s, and that, according to cell-phone records, while Tamerlan was purchasing pressure cookers and BBs, Jahar was far away, at college

    On cross-examination, Clarke and her colleagues showed that radical-Islamist material constituted only a fraction of Jahar’s Internet diet. (He most often visited Facebook.) Tweets by Jahar that the government had presented as indications of extremism were shown to be rap lyrics or references to Comedy Central shows. The man who was carjacked by the brothers, Dung Meng, recalled Tamerlan boasting about bombing the marathon and shooting the M.I.T. police officer; Jahar was quiet, asking only if the car stereo could play music from his iPhone

    Seems like Judy plead guilty for him she only tried to keep him from DP. Shouldn't she be disbarred?

    Of course she may have been following the directives of someone higher up the food chain. "National Security" and all. But to what end? To determine that a large metropolitan area could be shut down, people would acquiesce to military law? Couldn't let that be known. Massive coverup and Clarke toed the line.

    The prosecution should have been made to prove every element of every allegation. Perhaps some of their obstructive manoeuvres (regarding evidence) could have been better exposed - instead, they were allowed to proceed largely unchallenged in their pursuit of the death penalty. They obtained it without having their evidence tested in court - which I suspect was their aim from the outset.

    -Show the unedited videos from Boylston, MIT, Memorial Drive... particularly the external cameras on the Shell forecourt during the time that DzhT was in the shop doing nothing of interest....and of course the 'Eureka' video.
    -Show the GPS data from the Mercedes that night... and see if it tallies with any of Meng's versions of events.
    -Tell us who Biker Boy is and what he was doing.
    -Tell us who 'White Shoes' is and what he was doing... (WhiteShoes is the guy in the alcove at Whiskeys, seen gesturing as Tamerlan passes, then seen replacing his earpiece).
    -Tell us what Tamerlan was doing with his phone outside of the Back Bay Social Club, and why the brothers waited there briefly... (by which time, incidentally, WhiteShoes had vanished.)
    - Get Senator Grassley some honest answers to his questions.
    - Et cetera...

  40. Clarke said they (4 senior, well-respected defense attorneys) would not dispute any evidence. And they didn't!

    Now one must admit her next line sounds like it should be "so string him up"....

    When does one have to fire their lawyer? Is it too late, because honestly Judy Clarke did a better job at prosecuting DT than the prosecution.

    Excerpt from

    On April 19, 2013 in Boston, Dzhokhar had been identified as a suspect, and the majority of the greater Boston area was put on lockdown while authorities searched for him. The entire population was confined to their homes, told there was a dangerous on the loose, and that it was too dangerous to go outside. Because the residents of Boston and surrounding suburbs were on lockdown, this forced them out of their routine and turned their attention ever closer to what was happening. And since I was there, I can confirm that when faced with trying to retain some sense of control in a powerless situation, there was only one outlet: watching the news to see if there had been any updates. In that way, not only were Boston residents made aware of the suspect in this case, but they were forced to pay attention to him and his apparent threat to the community, thus already rendering him guilty.

    On the night of April 19th, he was discovered badly injured in a boat in a Watertown backyard. This kicked off a situation that lasted hours before he physically surrendered. (I refrain from using oft-quoted words like “confrontation” or “standoff” when referring to this, because all evidence shows that he was unarmed and never actually threatened law enforcement in any way. More likely is that he was simply too hurt and/or frightened to surrender in a more timely manner. I find that unsurprising, since he had been repeatedly shot unprovoked and then subjected to a series of flash-bang grenades at close range meant to disorient and incapacitate. I could go on, but further scrutiny of this event will unfortunately have to wait for a future post.) Media had been camping out in Watertown all day waiting for action, and many outlets gave real-time updates. My roommates, waiting at Logan Airport for a plane to Europe, told me they watched it all on their phones.

    A few months later, a police photographer leaked photos of his capture to the media in order to show us the “real” Boston Bomber isn’t someone to be pitied. This resulted in his resignation, not to mention an unintentional backfire: without images of a suffering human being seared irrevocably into my mind, I might not have started following this case as closely as I did.

    As this will be my last blog post of 2015, I wanted to end on a note that reflects my current state of mind. I have been thinking about my experiences with this case in the past year. They provided me with some of the scariest and darkest moments of my life. I didn’t know what I was going to find at the courthouse in those weeks in April and May, and when I did, the sick certainty that I was watching a rigged spectacle was overwhelming. I felt wrecked; worse, I felt powerless. I realized I had been struggling with this powerlessness, a belief that I could do nothing for Dzhokhar, since the day he had been arrested. For two years I told myself it was pointless, I was wrong, and it was silly to want to help.

    I’ve been looking into different angles of this case, and will be getting into them soon. Still, I wanted to give a hint of what’s coming up in future posts, and it involves making the case I first posited here right after the trial ended, the one I hope will be able to be used in the event of a retrial in an unbiased venue. That’s what I plan to spend 2016 doing: building the defense Dzhokhar deserves, even though it wasn’t the one he got.

  41. For all the complaints about the defense not "fighting" the prosecution's case during the guilt phase, defense ceded the field when Judy said "it was him." To argue or debate evidence, witnesses, experts presented by the prosecution, other than object to their single-minded focus on showing DT as the mastermind of the plot (not TT) during the guilt phase would have been pointless. I doubt Tool would have (legitimately) allowed them to waste the Court's time by doing so--once Judy spoke. That said, whether or not it was a good defense strategy to make the admission of guilt up front---well, nearly 85% of potential jurors stated he was guilty. (I believe at least 4 of the chosen jurors/alts said he was guilty during voir dire.) When the defense was unable to get the trial moved, was unable to secure a plea deal in exchange for taking DP off the table (Judy's specialty,) and was denied access to evidence (not strictly trial related) that expanded the scope of their inquiry (for what purpose we can only guess)---there wasn't much to be done on his behalf. Clarke and Bruck have focused their careers and life's work on avoiding the DP for their clients. Doing so is a holy mission for them, if you will. They didn't 'throw' the case. However, I do believe any new trial will be focused solely on the sentencing portion of the trial, unless new mitigating evidence either a) comes to light--in the form of a whistleblower or b) satisfies the standard of Brady evidence suppressed by Prosecution.
    We are coming up on 30 days at the end of this month for the possible timetable of releasing sealed docs. (those exchanged thumb drives S. Zalkind mentioned.)

    Will we ever know what were DT's wishes on how he wanted to be defended and doesn't that matter?

    It certainly doesn't matter to the gov., but we do know that in Jun 2013 Dzhokhar did not want Judy as a lawyer and refused to meet with her for a time, so that tells us something. It seems to me he had no say in his own defense, or as it turned out, lack of defense.

  42. Margo Schulter said on October 30, 2015 at

    Ironically enough, Dr. Levitt’s testimony could be considered part of the government’s bid, unfortunately successful, to “radicalize” 12 jurors to needlessly kill Jahar for crimes he committed at age 19, very possibly under duress, and clearly under the powerful influence of his elder brother.

    As you develop very clearly and in detail in your great overview of Levitt’s testimony, the idea of quick and easy “radicalization” was designed to supply one if not both of the main ingredients for a death verdict in any capital case: anger and fear. The argument is that a few stray computer files can be enough to turn a college student — preferably already Muslim, of course, is the implicit condition — into a lethal bomber, with little if any warning that a “lone wolf” is about to strike.

    That kind of junk psychology may have helped to score the prosecution “victory” in the penalty phase. If just a few choice words or ideas from Jahar at ADX Florence, somehow getting past the supposedly unreliable SAMs and making it onto social media, could produce any number of new bombings from other “lone wolves,” then maybe it would be safer to kill Jahar instead as an “enemy combatant” or the like. The small irony is that this “unreliable” system would still be trusted to confine him safety during all the years the appeals go on, and the Richard family are denied the peace and privacy for healing they sought in their public statement asking that the death penalty be dropped and the legal proceedings brought to a close with a sentence of life without parole.

    Of course, while the Levitt radicalization scenario supplied fear, the prosecution at the close of the guilt phase and during the penalty phase also aimed for the other main ingredient of anger by graphically playing and replaying every visually and audibly graphic recording of the bombings they could use and Judge O’Toole would permit. Excluding jurors opposed to the death penalty, the ones unwilling at the start to be “radicalized,” was a big help to the prosecution in its recruitment effort.

    David Bruck was right on to object to lots of the Levitt testimony not only because its prejudicial effect outweighed any evidentiary value (Federal Rule 402, rather like Section 352 of California’s Evidence Code), but as a violation of the Eighth Amendment safeguards in capital cases. A jury that assumes that this or that computer file documents Jahar’s own views, or that the contents of his computer or other electronic device (maybe placed there by his elder brother Tamerlan) necessarily speak for him, may find it harder to weigh mitigation without political biases or unreasoned fears about the ability of ADX Florence to confine him safely.

    At the trial of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg for espionage in 1951, similarly, the prosecutor introduced evidence of their progressive political activities to impeach them as “Communists.” There is was not the jury but the trial judge who imposed a death sentence, ultimately leading to their execution on June 19, 1953. While subsequent evidence, including some Russian sources, suggests that Julius was involved in some kind of wartime espionage for the USSR (then an ally!), it appears from grand jury transcripts that Ethel may not have been involved in any substantial way: but it was hoped, by sentencing her to death also, to persuade one or both members of the couple to inform on others.


  43. Last but not least, Heather, I totally agree that de-radicalization should have been of central importance here. If authentic, the boat note itself suggests that Jahar was already in a process of questioning: David Bruck brought out that in speaking of his distaste for killing “innocents,” Jahar was hardly following the al-Qaida line that civilians in the U.S.A. are not innocents.

    On the hypothesis that Jahar may have acted under the influence and pressure of his elder brother (very powerful in Chechen culture), but in a situation not amounting to a legal defense of outright duress (an issue worthy of being weighed in its own right), he would seem a poster child for de-radicalization. This would involve honoring his love of Islam, talking about how the concept of Jihad can be distorted and exploited, and maybe exploring the idea that many of the criticisms of U.S.A. foreign policy are correct, but more bombings of civilians won’t solve the problem. I’d love to take part in that kind of conversation with Jahar, but the people ordering up drone attacks and other assassinations they know will “kill innocents” might not. Radicalizing jurors to kill instead means never having to say you’re sorry, but only talking about Jahar’s supposed “lack of remorse.”


  44. said:

    The prosecution wasn’t solely to get a conviction, but rather a death sentence. I’ve had several legal discussions with my father debating the admissibility of much of the information the prosecution presented of Dzhokhar’s “motive,” and my father has wondered why most of it was necessary if the charges under which Dzhokhar was indicted did not require proving motive. (In his experience, most prosecutors don’t bother that much with motive, because they don’t need to prove WHY a defendant acted, just that he or she did act.) I’m interested in admissibility of evidence of this case in general, because it could point to more instances of prosecutorial and judicial misconduct, but it’s still a topic I’m learning about, so I’ll have to report more definitively on it at a later date.

    This idea is further corroborated by the reveal from Judy Clarke at Dzhokhar’s sentencing hearing that he would have plead guilty and even issued a letter of apology that was then sealed by the government as part of the SAMs. The prosecution not only deliberately ignored this mitigating evidence in pursuit of the death penalty, they actively suppressed it from being known by the public. In a trial where so much emphasis was put upon the capability of remorse from the defendant, I find this action akin to stuffing a gag in someone’s mouth and then condemning him for not expressing remorse.

    I also absolutely agree with your assessment about invoking anger and fear in the jury. The appeal to emotion was overwhelming at times – harping on the severity of the injuries, the attack on a sacred public event in a city with history of hysteria over such things (i.e. Red Sox fever) undoubtedly meant to play on righteous indignation and city pride – and the assertion that self-radicalizing through the internet could happen so fast and easily is certainly meant to invoke fear. I should note that I’ve looked into the term “self-radicalization” and there is no psychological basis for it. I could find no scientific studies that even acknowledge it as an actual phenomenon. It seems to be chiefly a construction of media, government and prosecutors to keep pushing that narrative of fear.

    Finally, while it saddens and angers me that this isn’t the first time junk science has allowed a prosecution to obtain a death sentence, your example of Dr. Grigson is compelling and gives me more reason to think I’m on the right track with this line of thought. I plan to continue it as I go forward – and thanks to an amazingly kind reader, I do now have the full transcript of Dr. Matthew Levitt’s testimony. I’m hoping I can address the claims made there with more accuracy in an upcoming post.

    All in all, I certainly understand how the pursuit of the death sentence can – and in this case, certainly did – alter the course of the trial itself. I’ve thought many times in my research that if the death penalty had been off the table, it would have been a very different trial, and that the defense could have perhaps focused on duress as an actual defense, given the circumstances. But with the very real chance of losing Dzhokhar’s life, they were forced to scale it way back (not even considering the unfair limitations put upon them by judicial rulings), forcing them to bank everything on the penalty phase, as if the guilt phase didn’t even matter. A law professor who visited the trial with me even commented, “The defense threw the case.” This confused me at the time, but now I understand her meaning. I think the distinction should be made, however, that “throwing the case” implies that they did so voluntarily, when the truth is that they were forced to, in order to make a desperate gambit to save Dzhokhar’s life. Knowing what I know now, I suspect they knew long before it was over that the death sentence was inevitable, and they were saving as much as they could for the appeal. I also suspect (and pray) that they’ve told him as such, to give him some hope in such bleak circumstances.

  45. Government lawyer appointed in Marathon Bombing trial faced allegations of professional misconduct

    November 11, 2014

    A specialist attorney appointed to assist with the prosecution of alleged Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev faced previous allegations of serious prosecutorial misconduct, which forced a trial judge to throw out a kidnapping conviction and order the re-trial of a man convicted of murder in a Federal death penalty case.
    Former Assistant DA Steven D Mellin (pictured), was accused by U.S. District Judge Gerald Lee of deliberately planting evidence in order to sway a guilty verdict during the 2003 trial of Jay Lentz, a Virginia man convicted of kidnapping and killing his wife.

    Lentz was sentenced to life imprisonment after the jury declined to impose the death penalty, but immediately appealed both convictions.

    In 2004, jurors reported a calendar allegedly obtained from the possessions of Doris Lentz, the defendant's wife, had "mysteriously appeared" in the jury room and had been "very influential" in their deliberations.

    The calendar was previously ruled inadmissible by Judge Lee.

    Mellin refused to explain to the court how the evidence got inside the jury room and at one point insisted the Judge had no authority to investigate him, nor "accuse him of misconduct in the first place".

    The Judge tossed aside Lentz' kidnapping conviction and declared the initial murder trial void, stating Mellin, the lead prosecutor in the case, had intentionally put the calendar in the evidence box that had gone to the jury.

    Judge Lee ruled:

    "The Court concludes that Mr. Mellin's testimony indicates much more than a lack of credibility, rather it demonstrates his intent to act outside the Orders of this Court and the confines of the law. In sum, the Court finds that Mr. Mellin's actions with the calenders suggest his conduct was not a benign act or negligent error. Rather this action was reckless, and it was intentional",

    Lentz faced a re-trial and was convicted for the second time in 2006.

    In 2008, the Court of Appeal issued a ruling acknowledging prosecutorial misconduct played a major role in the Judge's decision to dismiss the original guilty verdicts of 2003, despite an earlier appellate court ruling that rejected the finding with respect to Mellin.

    Steven D Mellin is currently employed in the Department of Justice' Capital Case' Section.

    His duties include advising the Attorney General on why a defendant should be subject to Capital punishment, acting as co-government counsel in Federal death penalty trials, and the preparation of evidence shown to a jury should the penalty phase of a Capital case be reached.

  46. Terrorism expert says Boston bombing, investigation 'stinks to high heaven'
    BY Josh Kerns on April 19, 2013

    There are plenty of questions about the two Chechen brothers believed responsible for the Boston Marathon bombing, and a top national security expert says much of the way things have played out "stink to high heaven."

    Terrorism expert Ed Turzanski told KIRO Radio's Dori Monson Show he's concerned about the spread of terrorism from Chechnya, calling the breakaway republic's chief export "foreign fighters or jihadists who go to fight in the name of Islam to places like Iraq and Afghanistan."

    "What does it say that a youngster at the age of nine comes here, lives in a country where he makes friends, he has tremendous educational opportunities, looks like he's on his way to a medical career, and then one day decides, instead of finishing the term paper, he's going to go blow up the Boston Marathon," Turzanski asks.

    Turzanski finds it mystifying Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19, was able to elude capture despite a massive gunfight with police that left his brother Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26, dead. He questions how they could pull off such an elaborate bombing, then subsequently act so careless once their photos were circulated.

    If the pair are tied to Chechen insurgents, who waged a bloody battle for years with Russia, it would be the first time the fighters from the former Soviet Republic have struck in the United States. But NBC News reported Friday leaders of the militant group insisted they have no connection, and called the investigation "completely muddled."

    "The news that the brothers attacked police officers, carjacked a man and did an array of other things, instead of going into hiding, looks strange at the very least," says the official source of the Chechen insurgency, the Kavkaz Center, in a blog post accusing officials of launching an anti-Chechnya "PR campaign."

    It's not the only question being raised about the bombing suspects and handling of the investigation. KIRO Radio's Dori Monson has a few of his own.

    "We know that the government has been involved in a disinformation campaign with the media," says Monson.

    Monson points out authorities showed photos of supposed suspects to select media members Thursday, only to unveil pictures of different suspects at a news conference Thursday afternoon that showed the two brothers near the scene of the bombing.

    "There is someone within the investigative unit of the story that has done the FBI a huge disservice," says Fox News reporter Bill Hemmer, one of the media members shown the false images.

    "They set up websites and made it seem like they were in search of other individuals," says Hemmer. "Who was it on the inside that would even take those images, think about establishing a website, and then put out misinformation?"

    Monson speculates it was a deliberate attempt to deceive either the media, suspects or both that led to CNN's widely-maligned report that a suspect had been arrested Tuesday.

    "John King at CNN is a solid reporter. I don't think he cooked that out of the ether. Somebody in law enforcement told him that," says Monson.

    It's far too soon to draw any definitive conclusions, but Turzanski called on Congress to demand explanations about both the bombing and the investigation "if for no other reason than to kill the rumors."

  47. Some info here

  48. First, Tom Fontaine is a 9/11 shill that was assigned to spread disinfo on Boston. My video titled "My Pursuit of Justice" expose why the FBI did not want to mention the Tree the backpack was placed against. The video I mentioned proves that tree was undamaged by the bomb. Not one single scratch or mark on the tree. Also the mail box that supposedly was peppered in shrapnel is completely untouched. Empty plastic cups and beer bottles only 10 feet from the bombs placement remained unaffected by the blast. I usrge you to check into my research and see it for yourself as its all caught on camera.

    Please use my work however you see fit. - PlasmaBurns


Go to The Lamb Slain Home Page