Boston Bombing Case Blown Wide Open?

Originally posted by ipsedixit
Whether or not other devices were found is probably not completely clear and might never be clear, especially if there were unexploded devices found and their existence is being denied by authorities.

Be that as it may, a more pressing problem for the authorities is how did Tamerlan Tsarnaev get shrapnel wounds?

The obvious answer is that he's just a dumb bomber whose bomb went off before he could get away from it. That happens sometimes. Bombers blow themselves up, or come close to doing so.

Unfortunately both explosions happened within a few seconds of each other. That argues against a misfire of one of the bombs or a miscalculation on the part of the bombers. Errors don't generally coordinate themselves.

If there was no error, why did bomber Tamerlan get caught in his own bomb?

Because he didn't know he was a bomber.

The shrapnel wounds to Tamerlan are a big problem. The next important press conference will be the one where the doctor revises his opinion and says there were no shrapnel wounds on Tamerlan.

It has not been 100% confirmed he had shrapnel wounds but as he was being apprehended it was reported that he threw various explosive devices at Police, who then shot him. They also thought he could be wearing a suicide vest but again, this was not confirmed and it is possible he wasn't and any shrapnel injuries came from the devices he threw at police. So this was at the shoot out - not the marathon.

www.boston.com... L/story.html

Officers pursued the car, which turned out to contain the two Tsarnaevs, who threw explosives at them. The elder brother was shot by police early Friday in a gun battle at Dexter and Laurel streets in Watertown, in which, officials said, the brothers wielded improvised explosive devices and homemade grenades. A doctor who treated Tamerlan Tsarnaev also said he had some blast-type injuries. “It was more than gunshot wounds,” said Dr. Richard Wolfe of the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. “We believe a combination of blasts, multiple gunshot wounds.”

Originally posted by DrHammondStoat
It has not been 100% confirmed he had shrapnel wounds but as he was being apprehended it was reported that he threw various explosive devices at Police, who then shot him. They also thought he could be wearing a suicide vest but again, this was not confirmed and it is possible he wasn't and any shrapnel injuries came from the devices he threw at police.

Why stop there? Isn't it also probable that his bullet wounds were caused by the bullets he shot at the police?

So this was at the shoot out - not the marathon.

That will be the official version.

www.boston.com... L/story.html

Officers pursued the car, which turned out to contain the two Tsarnaevs, who threw explosives at them. The elder brother was shot by police early Friday in a gun battle at Dexter and Laurel streets in Watertown, in which, officials said, the brothers wielded improvised explosive devices and homemade grenades. A doctor who treated Tamerlan Tsarnaev also said he had some blast-type injuries. “It was more than gunshot wounds,” said Dr. Richard Wolfe of the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. “We believe a combination of blasts, multiple gunshot wounds.”

Did they say how many police involved in that shootout were injured by shrapnel? Tamerlan is shooting at the police, throwing bombs and grenades at them but is the only one hit by anything.

I would like to see the design of the homemade grenades as well.

Am I being unreasonable here?

You are being reasonable for the side of the argument you see..it was fake or they were not the actual bombers.

I could sit here and come up with arguments that go the other way.

it won't get us anywhere. I think we need more facts\info to come out. Of course many people on both sides have their mind made up regardless of the facts..

"It was fake, they were fake, it was the MilCon"

or

"The terrorists did it, i know this for sure"

reply to post by opethPA

I agree. I am playing devil's advocate. I am making the case for the defense.

We definitely need more disclosure.

I have trouble believing that Tamerlan, an athlete, is going to go out and deliberately blow up a sporting event.

This is reposted from another thread, but I think it needs to be seen in the context of this thread as well. An eyewitness contradicts the police story, says that Tamerlan Tsaraev was run over by a police vehicle and then executed in the street by the police.

It is unclear because follow up questions were not asked, if the witness was absolutely sure that the police and not Tamerlan's brother was in control of the vehicle that ran him over, but one thing seems clear. The witness says that shots were fired at Tamerlan after he was run over.

The police say that they had handcuffed him at which point they jumped out of the way to avoid the vehicle that ran Tamerlan over.

The story the witness tells is at variance with the police story, particularly the part where they allege that Tamerlan's body was dragged down the street by the vehicle. The witness in this video does not mention that and did not hear explosions.

No police dashcam videos of these events have emerged to my knowledge.

www.abovetopsecret.com...&flagit=942033

Originally posted by AmberLeaf

reply to post by ipsedixit


It's strange the way some groups are considered terrorist cells while others aren't.
If a group's motto is "Violence Solves Problems", shouldn't our intelligence agencies be watching them instead of turning a blind eye?
Seems as bit "insider" or "inciter" if you ask me. The words are interchangeable given the context and scenario.
I would bet my last dollar that if I started a group centered on inciting violence and I wasn't an insider, I'd be arrested and that would be that.

reply to post by Afterthought

There is truth to what you say. The false flag movement is just what you are talking about. The insiders fomenting trouble. Menachem Begin, former Prime Minister of Israel was a Stern Gang terrorist at one point in his career. Nelson Mandela was a member of a designated terrorist organization.

In this case I don't know what we are looking at. Is it just another incidence of police "taking care of business" extra-judicially, or is it even more sinister? I tend to think the former. It looks like a case of "taking care of business".

I understand how this could happen. It's common. It's called second degree murder. An act of rage. Covering it up is called being an accessory after the fact. Usually the law penalizes that behavior. However, I think it will be a chilly day in hell when that happens in this case.

We know that the guys hijacked a privately owned vehicle, not a police vehicle, a Mercedes SUV owned by someone that they let go. This was after having spent the night in a Honda CRV, which one of them later ditched, then rejoining his brother in the Mercedes.

The following sequence was put together using links provided by another member in another thread but I am in so many threads now I lost the member's name. Apologies.

They got into a shootout with the Watertown Police from the hijacked car. Then,

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Krakatoa Suspects returned to the car and are on the run again.... (Mass State Police Scanner)

Then:

Originally posted by Krakatoa Shootout with explosives thrown at officers in Watertown, near Dexter Ave. More units called to scene (Mass State Police Scanner)

Then:

Originally posted by Germann explosives being detonated. now there's a black pickup involved. shooting. officers screaming.

Now we have moved from the Mercedes to a black pick-up truck. Second hijacked vehicle.

Originally posted by OpethPASounded like he said "SUV from the State Police"

The black pick-up truck is now thought to be an SUV from the State police.

One of these:



If the brothers hijacked a police vehicle and Dzhokar ran over his brother with it, where was that vehicle recovered? And even more to the point, how did they get it?

Below: The scene of Tamerlan's death in Watertown.

Originally posted link by burntheships

twitter.com...

Here is how a police spokesperson described the incident where Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the older brother, was captured.

"In the exchange of the gunfire, we believe that one of the suspects was struck and ultimately taken into custody. A second suspect was able to flee FROM THAT CAR and there is an active search going on at this point in time."

It is difficult to reconcile this account with the one phoned into the radio program on the same night. I'm not saying the spokesperson is hiding information, just that the account would appear to be extremely abbreviated. I would like to hear chapter and verse myself.

reply to post by ipsedixit


I was watching CNN last night and they said that there were no other devices planted along the marathon trail. Do you have a source that refutes this?

reply to post by MsAphrodite

Earlier in this thread the Daily Mail reported:

www.dailymail.co.uk...

CBS reported that Rep. Bill Keating confirmed there were two unexploded devices found - one at a hotel in Copley Square and another at an undisclosed location, possibly beneath bleachers.

Here is the CBS mention of it. They are hedging their bets a little on the report. However it is interesting that Rep. Keating's information seems fairly specific.

It seems to me that the police are trying to make this story murky as to what vehicle Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was driving when he ran his brother over. I don't think they want to admit it was a police car/SUV. That would be highly embarrassing. On the other hand, the radio call-in witness says she saw Tamerlan run over by a police vehicle. She thinks the police ran him over.

This is a little tricky for the police. I think they were hoping "fog of war" would gloss over a lot of the details in this story, and hoping that the little matter of the alleged shooting of Tamerlan, on the ground, after he had been run over, would never even have come up.

When we go fully Nazi, the lockdowns will be shuttered lockdowns where the police will have the right to shoot at people looking out their windows at what the police are doing during the lockdown.

I am open to the idea that there is "police misconduct" operating here; though I am not sure that it automatically means the brothers were innocent or mere patsies.

I saw an article this a.m. from a witness who said Dzhokar attended a party (I think on Wednesday) after the Boston Marathon events.

How would you respond if you found yourself being framed as an international terrorist?

Different people might respond in different ways. Personally, I wouldn't be attending a 4/20 pre-gaming session if my brother had been injured by a bomb blast that had caused hundreds of casualties, and police were launching a federal manhunt.

But maybe that's just me.

On the subject of unexploded devices found that day. One of the reports originated with Rep. Keating and another is supposed to have come from an official of one of the intelligence agencies.

Here's how the Wall St. Journal reported this:

online.wsj.com...

Counterterrorism officials found five additional suspect devices around the Boston area on Monday, but a law-enforcement official later said closer examinations led them to doubt that they were bombs. An earlier version of this article cited people briefed on the investigation saying officials believed they were undetonated explosive devices.

Let's suppose there was a drill going on that day, as has been alleged by Alex Jones and others. Pseudo bombs are likely to have been part of that drill. You have contractors and dogs running around doing the drill when reality intervenes with two actual explosions.

Everyone on the drill goes into high gear. They are rushing to help people. They may drop their backpacks with the pseudo bombs, or they may forget about pseudo bombs left in place as part of the drill.

When the dust clears or even as it is clearing, the dogs and the responders go into "real" mode, hunting for bombs. They find "five additional suspect devices". Maybe in some cases they are able to determine that they are not bombs immediately, but in other cases they may not be certain, under the circumstances, and play it safe by demolishing the pseudo bombs explosively.

The phrase ". . . a law-enforcement official later said closer examinations led them to doubt that they were bombs", implies uncertainty about the matter. Were they "realistic" looking pseudo bombs designed for drills, enough like real bombs to fool people who were not aware of the drill, or realistic enough to make things interesting for the "Blue" team in the drill?

The finding, even of "suspected" bombs or things that might be bombs but might not, could be said to be consistent with a drill going on that day.

reply to post by ipsedixit


in all of the surveillance his backpack was slung off of his right shoulder. which would make it difficult to see here. what you can see is that the right side of his sweatshirt/jacket is pulled lower on that side. maybe hes still carrying it maybe he isn't hard to tell.

reply to post by mdez13

That's true. As a matter of fact in the video clip of him and his brother walking by carrying their backpacks that everyone has seen, there are a couple of frames of him definitely carrying the backpack but where the backpack is completely hidden from view.

It can't be seen, even from only a very few feet away, even though other frames in the very same sequence make it obvious that he has it with him. How about that?

One photograph of him that doesn't show the backpack is not enough to prove he doesn't have it, especially one taken from a distance.

listening to the scanner, i heard police asking for bomb squad units to go to the hospital where black cap was taken, a little while later, an announcement went out on police radio that the first suspect had a bomb vest on, which he detonated upon apprehension. given the fact that these two seemed to have not tested their devices beforehand, it is reasonable to believe that the vest either had too little explosive or misfired, which is why the suspect/anybody around survived the blast.

The following are some screen grabs from the surveillance video footage released by the FBI, showing the Tsarnaev brothers on the day of the Boston Marathon bombing. They are all from the same scenes showing Dzhokhar Tsarnaev following his brother along the sidewalk, carrying his backpack slung over his right shoulder.



The first shot from the back is there to show the design of the strap on the backpack. The rest of the shots are various views from the left side showing how Dzhokhar's right shoulder appears to someone looking at him from his left side.

In every shot we know that he is carrying the backpack, because this is a video sequence in which the backpack is clearly visible most of the time, although, in one or two of the shots a casual viewer might not think he had the backpack with him because it is hidden behind his body as he walks.

However, it is possible if one looks carefully, in every shot, to see an indication that the backpack strap is there, even in the center shot at the bottom of the set.

Here is a section from the David Green photograph of Dzhokhar leaving the scene of the bombing along with many others who left the scene in the aftermath.

www.usatoday.com...

Note the highlights indicating signs of what is almost certainly the strap of the backpack over his shoulder.



The kid is not "alright", but I think he left the scene of the bombing with his backpack.

Earlier in the thread I posted a picture of what I thought was the place where Tamerlan Tsarnaev was shot by police. That site is actually the scene of the death of the MIT policeman, shot earlier in the evening before the gun battle in Watertown.