australianvoice (australianvoice) wrote,

DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV: “I never done it.” Part 3

What happened at the Boston Marathon? Terrorist attack? False flag attack? Or could it be a mistake made during a disaster emergency exercise? Suppose real bombs were planted in the exercise and one exploded by accident? What would the authorities do then? They would look for someone else to blame it on.

I do not claim to know what happened during the Boston Marathon in 2014. Part 1 ( and Part 2 ( have presented what are really pieces of a puzzle of an unknown picture. As I worked through this material some scenarios occurred to me which I will now consider in the light of what we have seen in the first two parts. I cannot say I have found “the answer” to this puzzle, but there is lots of room for further investigation.

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is innocent.
What seems most certain is that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and his brother Tamerlan are innocent. As explained in Part 1, the way Jeff Bauman can be said to have “identified” the Tsarnaevs is that his description was USED BY the FBI to pick the Tsarnaevs out of the thousands of young men. My guess is that someone in the FBI who had worked with the Tsarnaevs saw them in the hours and hours of video footage they would have gone though in their search to find a patsy for the explosions. Their real qualification was that they were known by the FBI to be Muslims. They fit the part in the drama presented by the US government since 7/11: Muslim terrorists.

You will say: “This is just speculation.” Correct. At this point we can only speculate about what happened before, during and after the bombings. However what shows they are innocent is that there is no real evidence linking them to the bombing other than unsupported assertions of the FBI and Boston Police. Consider this assessment of the situation by Joe Quinn of Signs of the Times:

“The only evidence that the two Tsanarev brothers were involved in the bombing is the alleged testimony of Bauman and, more importantly, the allegation that they killed a policeman a few days later at MIT. All that is really known is that the policeman, officer Sean Collier, was approached by an unknown person(s) as he sat in his car and shot multiple times. The only evidence linking the Tsarnaev brothers to this killing is the claim made by the unnamed man who was allegedly taken hostage by the brothers after they allegedly killed officer Collier. The story goes that after he was taken hostage in his own car by the brothers, the older brother asked him if he had heard about the Boston bombing. The unnamed hostage replied that he had, and the older Tsarnaev brother then allegedly said; "I did that, and I just killed a policeman in Cambridge."
“So basically, the only real evidence linking the brothers to the bombing is the claim by an unnamed alleged hostage that the brothers made their bizarre confession to him that they had killed Collier and were responsible for the bombing.”(1)

So What Really Did Happen?
The two most popular accounts of the Boston Bombings are the Official Story and the claim that it was a false flag attack, that is, one organized by people working for the US government to point the finger at someone else. On this account the real purpose was to pretend there was a real “terrorist attack” and use that to justify the lockdown and massive police reaction.(2)

This could be correct, but it has at least one obvious objection. When such false flag attacks are made, care is usually taken to find a convenient patsy to blame BEFORE the attack is made. For example, the recent killings in Paris were accompanied by appropriate Muslim terrorist statements by the killers themselves, and there was an ID card conveniently left in one of the getaway cars. This does not prove it was a false flag attack, but such clues are usually used in false flag attacks to direct the media coverage. If the Boston Bombings were a standard false flag operation, it was dangerously incompetent, as the organizers had no patsy lined up to take the blame.

Five suspects were named before the Tsarnaev brothers were identified.

It is obvious that the authorities were completely at a loss to identify the bombers. The first two bombs went off about 2:49 pm on the 15th at 671 and 755 Boylston Street. Three days later, on Thursday the 18th, the FBI released the photos of the Tsarnaev brothers as the suspects.

The first suspects identified within hours of the explosions were Yassine Zaimi, a 24 year old track coach, and Salah Barhoum, 17, a Moroccan American middle distance runner.(3) They were soon cleared. Police also investigated Abdulrahman Ali Alharbi, a 22 year old student from Saudi Arabia who was himself injured in the blasts. He was considered as a person of interest to the federal authorities soon after the event. His apartment was raided but he was eventually cleared.(4) Note that these are all Muslims. How did the FBI know that the people who planted the bombs were Muslims? It is part of the Muslim terrorist script. Anyone who knows anything about real criminal investigations will tell you that such simple-minded assumptions used at the beginning of an investigation are totally unprofessional.

While official attention moved away from Abdulrahman Ali Alharbi, others have pointed out that there is a prominent Alharbi clan in Saudi Arabia. Many individuals from this clan are reportedly active in al-Qaeda and several in Guantanamo Bay.(5) This has led to another strand in the conspiracy theories about the bombings: a Saudi connection.(6)

For a while there were also reports in the media blaming “right-wing extremists” for the bombing, but no individuals or groups were ever named.(7) After these three named individuals were ruled out as suspects, the new suspects were said to be Sunil Tripathi, a teenager who had gone missing a month or so before, and Mike Mulugeta. The latter was said to have been shot, an apparent confusion with the death of Tamerlan.(8) Sunil Tripathi was found to have committed suicide.(9)

Another Scenario: A fatal mistake during a disaster emergency exercise.
Is there another was to understand the events of the Boston Bombing besides the Official Story and a false flag attack? An important part of military and administrative thinking is to run drills or exercises to make sure that all systems will work successfully when they are actually needed. Now that the US Army had developed a well-trained set of crisis actors to prepare soldiers for combat disasters, why not use such actors in a bomb-blast exercise at a prominent public event to see how well all the disaster response teams work? There could be sniffer dogs, snipers, fake bombs, crisis actors, and even perhaps, a few real bombs for the bomb detection teams to find. This would be a perfect opportunity to see how the people like Carlos Arredondo, from Disaster Services Human Resources, can work with the volunteers in getting the victims away for medical treatment. Perhaps you could ask the folks at Craft International to lend a hand?

Suppose the organizers of this alleged training exercises had used two pairs of decoy bombs. One pair was to be the usual fake bombs of smoke and noise used in the exercises with soldiers, set to go off at the same time. The other pair would be hidden to test the skills of the bomb detection units. This second pair of bombs would be the real thing – with gunpowder in pressure cookers – but not set to explode. This alleged exercise needs only one little mistake to turn it into something like the Boston Marathon Bombings. Suppose one of the real bombs – instead of a fake one - is mistakenly set to go off at the designated time (ca. 2:49 pm)?(10)

How would the authorities respond in a situation like this?
Now you have a crisis. A practice drill goes wrong and people are mistakenly killed and wounded. What can you do? You could just admit that the FBI and Craft International were holding a drill to train people in dealing with a terrorist incident, but something went wrong. “We had an accident.” This means that the very bodies who are supposed to protect people from death and injury by terrorists have themselves killed and injured innocent bystanders. And what would happen next time they approached the organizers of another major event to ask for their permission to hold a drill? People might even start to think that they have more to fear from the FBI than they do fanatical Muslim terrorists who hate their freedoms.

Or you could insist there was no drill and declare it to be a terrorist attack. It might take some time to find the guilty parties, but this is less of a challenge than actually admitting the guilt lies with the security services themselves. And you might have been very lucky. Perhaps you noticed that one of the people you have worked with regularly, a Muslim named Tamerlan Tsarnaev, attended the Marathon with his brother. Because the brothers were actually harmless young men, the police and FBI would need to scare people into keeping away from these two until they were captured in order to completely control the story. So you spread stories of murder and mayhem to make people stay indoors.

What might have happened once the FBI captured Tamerlan?
Fast forward to a conversation between Tamerlan Tsarnaev and the FBI when he is finally captured. Yes, he has helped the FBI now and then. Yes, he likes it in the US and wants to stay. “And you want me to agree that I planted a bomb, trying to kill innocent people in the US? No way!!” I don’t know much about Tamerlan, but with his history of boxing behind him, he does not strike me as a wimp. And perhaps he had what one might call normal human pride. “I didn’t do it, so why should I say I did and shame my self, my parents, my wife and child?” After you finish reminding Tamerlan who is boss, perhaps his brother will see reason. Just explain how he could die of his wounds in prison or commit suicide. No need to speculate about the rest.

Two more alternative scenarios.
There are two more sinister alternatives to this scenario. Suppose that, instead of the second explosion being a mistake, it was deliberately planted by people who knew there was going to be a drill, but wanted to send a message to the people at the top in Washington? The message would be: “You have your fancy drills but they can’t stop us. We can strike whenever and wherever we like.” On this scenario, the people running the show in Washington know who is behind the bombing, but they would be too powerful to name publicly.

This would not be a “false flag” operation, because the bombers are not intending to pass the blame on to anyone else. Their goal would be to make the FBI and the security state look ineffective and powerless against them. For the FBI, their weakness could not be exposed, so this scenario would play itself out in much the same way as the mistake scenario explained above. Find someone to pin it on and sweep it under the carpet as quickly as possible. Some people might see this possibility as not far off blaming the explosions on the activity of aliens from outer space, but you need to remember one thing. The US is by far the most powerful country in the world. Is it not naive in the extreme to imagine that, when the wealth and power at stake is so enormous, the actors will all play by the rules if they do not get what they want?

Finally, it is also possible that someone with (secret) government approval decided to create a real “terrorist attack” in conjunction with the drill. This would be the classic false flag action, in that the person or persons who are officially blamed for the deaths are either not involved at all, or only play a minor role. It seems that there is evidence of drills taking place during the Norwegian attack and the London 7/7 bombings.(11)

In conclusion.
Why is there so little interest in a serious examination of the Official Story? One answer is that many people seem to have complete faith in the statements of the FBI. In spite of all the terrible things the US does overseas, the government wouldn’t lie to us, would they? The relentless focus in the public mind on terrorism has successfully produced an almost universal mindset described by Wayne Madsen in an article for Global Research: the Boston Marathon bombings represent the “new normal,” and “Americans should get used to the idea of living under virtual martial law with the U.S. Constitution representing nothing more than a ‘quaint piece of paper’.”(12) Another answer is that people are immobilized by fear. Deep down they know that the US government and its agencies are above the law. These agencies can and will do anything to silence opposition or even questions. If I keep quiet and keep my head down I will at least be safe myself.

The death and injury inflicted by explosions at the Boston Marathon are indeed tragic. However, the far greater tragedy is the way that many people who should know better accept the Muslim terrorist mythology of the security state and turn off their critical faculties at the right time, just before the evening news comes on.



10.Here I use the assumption that there were four bombs found at the Marathon. This was reported in: and in a Euronews report:
11. This website also has a list of 50 different points related to the Boston bombings, some of which are not covered here.
Tags: united states

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.