We’re told that a fire broke out at almost exactly the same time as the Marathon bombing, a short distance away at the JFK library. -----------------------------------------
That was a mechanical fire and MILES away. On Thursday, May 16, 2013 9:27:37 AM UTC-5, MJ wrote: > > > *WHO in Boston: Bombing Story Mysteries > *By Russ Baker <http://whowhatwhy.com/author/russ-baker/> on May 14, 2013 > > Most of the national and international media have left Boston -- and > essentially moved on from the Marathon bombing story. But at WhoWhatWhy, > we’re just getting started. > > Why? Because we see a lot of problems with what we’ve been told so far. > We’ve been disappointed that the media have failed to demonstrate healthy > skepticism while passing along, unchallenged, the (self-serving) assertions > of “the authorities.” > > It is the job of journalism not only to report what authorities say, but > also to confirm their claims, and address anomalies, errors, > inconsistencies, outright lies, and cover-ups, large and small. > > When it comes to falsehoods of all types, we’ve seen plenty of doozies, > and you don’t have to go all the way back to the Tonkin Gulf incidentwhich > helped pave the way for the escalation of the Vietnam conflict. Most people > now understand that circa 2002-2003, the George W. Bush Administration > knowingly > exaggerated and > deceived<http://whowhatwhy.com/2013/03/13/not-so-fast-not-all-media-screwed-up-the-iraq-story-just-almost-all/>in > order to justify a desired invasion of Iraq. > > Things have not markedly improved with the Obama Administration. The 2011 > “raid that killed Bin Laden” at Abbottabad, Pakistan, went a long way > toward bolstering Obama’s “toughness cred,” and was probably a factor in > his being re-elected. Yet staggering inconsistencies > <http://whowhatwhy.com/2011/08/17/raidbinladen/>in official accounts of > the raid have never been properly reconciled. The current scandal du jour > is over the Obama Administration’s putting out fake story lines on Benghazi > to divert attention from how it handled facility security in that troubled > location. > > Yet even partisans on the attack in each of these cases typically fail to > get at the real story -- which, in the case of Benghazi, has to do with how > the entire “humanitarian intervention” in Libya was, as we > reported<http://whowhatwhy.com/2011/08/31/now-that-we%E2%80%99re-celebrating-qaddafi%E2%80%99s-end-can-we-get-a-little-truth/>, > > a cover for a deadly geo-strategic gamble that has opened a can of worms > from which have sprung untold Al Qaeda types. > > *** > > So what about the Boston Marathon bombing, in which innocent people died > seemingly at the hands of anti-American monsters? While some insist that > under these circumstances everyone, including the media, should prove their > patriotism by shutting their eyes and ears, we hope you agree that > especially at such times it’s important to ask the tough, even unpopular > questions. The Boston story, as we previously > noted<http://whowhatwhy.com/2013/04/19/the-marathon-bombing-what-the-media-didnt-warn-you-about/>, > > is full of question marks and high-stakes implicationsall the more reason > to dig beneath the screen of official handouts. And, in the coming weeks, > that’s just what WhoWhatWhy plans to do. > > For now, here are some examples of the things we wish to better understand: > > *Race Security > > *We have been toldand see evidenceof a security presence unprecedented > at such athletic events. This includes the claims by Alastair Stevenson, a > college cross-country coach and frequent marathoner, that he heard > announcements of security drills that day and saw beefed up security. It > also includes the presence of personnel from the private contractor Craft > International, first in the crowd watching the runners, then, after the > bombs went off, actively involved in the crime scene investigation. Is > there an explanation for this? What exactly were these security people > deployed against? > > *The JFK Library Fire > > *We’re told that a fire broke out at almost exactly the same time as the > Marathon bombing, a short distance away at the JFK library. Although > initial reports indicated a possible explosion, we have since been told > that it was just an “accident.” We’ve had very few details since then, > though the museum did reopen after a number of days. > > *MIT Cop > > *We originally heard from reporters that a police officer from MIT was > killed during a confrontation with the Tsarnaev brothers. Later, around the > time of a highly publicized funeral for the “hero cop,” the authorities > quietly revised their story; in the new account, the officer was shot while > sitting in his car, perhaps during an attempt to take his gun, though we’ve > seen no evidence of this. No explanation of why the Tsarnaev brothers would > even have been on the campus, or wanted or needed his gun, nor has hard > proof been produced that the brothers were in fact the cop killers. > > *7-11 > > *In the midst of the manhunt, we were told that the suspects robbed a > 7-11 convenience store to obtain cash for a getaway. But later, that > scenario vaporized. How did the initial wrong story come about? > > *How Tamerlan Died > > *On the night Tamerlan Tsarnaev was reportedly shot by police, then > accidentally run over by his fleeing younger brother, CNN broadcast a video > showing a crime scene teeming with police, in which a handcuffed man who > looks quite a bit like Tamerlanhaving been made to strip nakedis being > hustled into a patrol car. The reporters speculated at the time that it > might indeed be the bombing suspect. > > Later on, the police issued a statement saying it was someone else, a case > of mistaken identity. Fine. But who was it? Surely by now we can be told > the name of that personand presumably that person would have no problem > recounting his harrowing evening. Perhaps the police are withholding his > identity at his requestbut given all the wild online speculation that the > man in the video might have been Tamerlan himself, why not make more of an > effort to clear up the matter? (While the original CNN video does not > appear to be available online, numerous people copied and posted versions > onto YouTubeand can be found there with a search on “naked man Watertown > CNN.”) > > *Missing the Crucial Block > > *Somehow, the police managed to comb many blocks in Watertown, but not > the block on which Dzhokhar was eventually found. As a result, police did > not find him. A homeowner, David Henneberry, didand that story is rather > strange. As soon as the governor relaxed the order that everyone stay > indoors (why would the police do that if a deadly terrorist was still on > the loose?), Henneberry came out to his driveway, took a look at his boat > and noticed, according to the *Boston Globe, *that > > something was amiss. The straps weren’t quite right. The pads seemed > somehow askew . Henneberry, a former telephone company technician, climbed > a ladder and peeked inside. There was blood. A lot of blood. And on the > other side of the boat’s engine box there was a body. > > *The Dzhokhar Capture Story > > *Originally, we were told that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev held police at bay > during a lengthy and formidable gun battle from the boat where he had taken > shelter. We later learned that he was unarmed, and the hail of gunfire had > all come from police. We did not learn what the basis for this deadly > torrent wasespecially because there’s no evidence that police even knew > that the body Henneberry glimpsed on the floor of the boat was Tsarnaev’s, > or that this bloodied body, which put up no resistance, was an imminent > threat. > > *From NoBos to Rambos > > *We were told that the brothers demonstrated great bravado and > confidence with firearms, yet there’s no evidence that they possessed > either the experience or skills for such a hypercharged performance. > Ordinary people usually only turn into Rambo types in the movies. (Early > stories that the brothers practiced at a firing range appear to have > fizzled.) > > *FBI Monitoring > > *We were originally told that the FBI had no awareness of the brothers. > Later, after reports surfaced that the Russians had warned the Americans > about the brothers, the FBI admitted it had monitored them. Why the delay > in admitting this? And if the FBI knew the brothers were potential > problems, why did the bureau dismiss them as of no interest? The FBI has > shown the capacity to be interested in, and a willingness to monitor, > almost anyone, including peaceful anti-war protestersso why the purported > lack of interest in these two brothers, given the Russian concern? > > *How Radicalized Were They? > > *It was widely reported that in 2010, Tamerlan declared that “I don’t > have a single American friend, I don’t understand them.” But in a call to > local radio station WEEI shortly after Tamerlan’s death, a good friend of > his since 2005an Americandisputed this: “It’s not trueall of his friends > were American.” Describing Tamerlan as “happy go lucky,” this American > friend said he was “completely shocked” by the turn of events. He said > there were no indications of anything amiss or afoot. In fact, he said, > Tamerlan had called him just two months ago, and asked him to go skiing, > and had been at his house in the past month. > > Also, we are told that Tamerlan became more active and radical *after *the > Russians and FBI took an interest in him. What’s this about? Blowback in > response to what he felt was bullying by the feds? > > Equally dubious is the evidence of his purported conversion. To wit, an > article in which the *New York Times *interviewed some friends of > Tamerlan Tsarnaev, and concluded that during a trip last year, as the > headline put it, “Suspect in Boston Bombing Talked Jihad in Russia.” > > But if you read the report carefully, and think about it contextually, > it’s pretty thin gruel. Imagine that you were looking into most any young > person who went back to the “homeland”where the homeland was the scene of > war and unrest. Israel, Palestine, Northern Ireland, Kurdistan, etc. How > shocking would it be that the young person might discuss his enthusiasm for > the “cause” or even professions of interest to “suit up”? Would that be so > unusual? Would it point to a probability of someone wanting to kill and > maim a large number of innocent people in his adopted countryespecially > when the adopted country was not the enemy of the people in the homeland? > > * Brothers in Arms? > > *For two brothers to become accomplices in this astonishing crime > requires enormous bonds of trust, loyalty, and shared values. Yet friends > of the brothers indicate no great closeness between the two. The younger > one was apparently not influenced by his brother, and had virtually no > interest in Islam or Chechen nationalism. Friends of the older brother > barely knew his sibling. And when the older brother was in Russia being > ”radicalized,” the younger brother was back here, doing normal kid stuff. > How did Tamerlan bring Dzhokhar into this dastardly plot? > > *Burial > > *The whole story of Tamerlan’s burial is odd. First, police announced > that the body was being entombed in an undisclosed location thanks to a > “courageous and compassionate individual” who had come forward to cover the > costs. What was courageous about that? Courageous to buck public sentiment? > Why was it even necessary for a private individual to do this? > > Another thing: We later learned that it was the Tsarnaev’s “Uncle Ruslan” > who had claimed the body. > > This was surprising because of the uncle’s poor relationship with his > nephews, and his crucial early role in incriminating them. Within days of > the bombing, the uncle had declared Tamerlan “a loser,” implying that he > found it totally believable that his flesh and blood would commit this > astonishing atrocity. We later learned that he hadn’t had contact with them > for years. We also later learned (although not from mainstream news > sources) that Uncle Ruslan worked in the oil and gas business and had > intriguing connectionsand that his ex-father-in-law was a high CIA > official with ties to Chechen operations. > > Will the burial of Tsarnaev near Richmond, Virginia, 550 miles from the > scene of the crime, hinder any potential efforts to exhume his body and > learn more about how he died? > > *Dead (and Almost Dead) Men Tell No Tales > > *We have a case where one of the suspects was killed, and the other was > nearly killed and literally silenced up to this point. Obviously, the key > to this case would be to get Dzhokhar into a place where he could speak > freely and without fear or coercion. What is happening on that front? > There’s been a near blackout of information. > > *Anonymous Sourcing > > *This story has seen constant leaks by “sources close to the > investigation.” Assuming those leaks are authorized, what is the purpose? > Assuming everyone is entitled to a fair trial, these leaks make it harder > for Dzhokhar to get oneand consistently advance a hostile narrative. > > * Kids with Cars > > *There’s an awful lot of money and fancy cars around this story. > Tamerlan had a Mercedes; Dzhokhar’s foreign friends had expensive cars. And > the unnamed “carjacking victim”? A 26-year-old engineer who had recently > gotten his Masters, he had a brand new $50,000 Mercedes SUV and was “out > for a spin” at the time of the alleged carjacking. Remember the classic > journalistic advice: “Follow the money?” Maybe it should be *Follow the > Mercedes*. > > *Qui Bono? > > *What motivations could anyone have to manipulate this tragedy in which > three innocents were killed and hundreds were injured and maimed? What role > does international jockeying for access to the tremendous mineral wealth in > the republics on Russia’s southern flank play in the actions of terrorists > at an iconic American sporting event? As we are reminded time and again, > with Iraq (see > this<http://whowhatwhy.com/2011/02/15/the-empire-strikes-again-2/>and > this<http://whowhatwhy.com/2011/03/02/iraq-invasion-revelations-part-ii-the-payoff/>) > > with > Libya<http://whowhatwhy.com/2011/06/06/libya-connect-the-dots-you-get-a-giant-dollar-sign/>, > > with > Afghanistan<http://whowhatwhy.com/2012/09/10/the-real-reason-for-the-afghan-war/>, > > with just about any deep and complex story with global ramifications, you > probe a little and pretty soon you’ve struck oilor some other precious > resource. Find a big story that doesn’t have money at its root, and it will > be an unusual story, to say the least. > > Also, in a time when our civil liberties are eroded and the security state > expanded every time terrorists strike, we’d do well to always take a closer > look. > > http://whowhatwhy.com/2013/05/14/who-in-boston-bombing-story-mysteries/ > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
