posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 09:22 AM
The incident involving the naked guy is important because there are only three options for who the man is - and all three seem to incriminate the
FBI/police in some way. The fact that this story has completely been ignored and practically erased - after massive live breaking news coverage -
seems very odd to me. It feels like something is being covered up.
Option 1. The naked guy is an innocent person who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. In this case, why isn't this just admitted?
And the bigger issue - shouldn't we be concerned that FBI/police can treat an innocent person this way and get away with it? This is a pretty big
precedent. Do you want the police stripping you naked and parading you around where you live just because they have a suspicion?
Option 2. The naked guy is a bombing suspect that we haven't heard about. This seems unlikely, but possible. In this case, I would wonder why we
haven't been told anything about him. I would also argue that he should have been treated better - he's still only a suspect! Let him put his
clothes back on!
Option 3. The naked guy is Tamerlan Tsarnaev. (Check out this link: farm9.staticflickr.com...
) Although the
chest hair seems to be missing, it looks a LOT like him. In this case, the FBI/police have a lot of explaining to do. He was handcuffed, naked and
ALIVE. Why is he now reported to be dead with a gruesome purported death photo? How did he die if the cops took him alive? Is he really dead?
Maybe he's working with the FBI and the death photo is bogus. Or maybe they killed him to keep him quiet?
I'm not suggesting that option 3 is the correct answer - but it is the only scenario where keeping completely silent on this incident makes sense...