Boston Conspiracy Theorists - Please Answer

We all know it was a cunning plan thought up by the Federal Gubment to slow the welfare cheese distrubution to the area. Seriously, there is no conspiracy except people were maimed and died tragically thanks to a few toolswho thought they had to uphold some form of honor.

Since you (relatively) politely asked without the standard sheepish attitude, I'll answer your questions... by more questions.

But no I am not a conspiracy theorist. To call anyone who criticizes or question an official version of those events like that is wrong.

Originally posted by Rocker2013

1. If the brothers were innocent, why didn't they do what others identified in images by guys on 4chan and hand themselves in the moment their images were seen on TV? An innocent person would have seen that and immediately attended the local police station ready to clear their name. So, please explain that to me. If you believe the brothers were duped into it in some way, this still applies, why didn't they surrender and why did they seemingly then go on the run armed with guns and bombs?

According to their father, they've been set up by US authorities. If you'd notice that suddenly he entire US government is deadlocked on YOU, would you like to spend the rest of your life in Guantanamo Bay just out of allegations?

Assuming the first brother would have been killed, it's quite understandable that the second would run away like Hell, not even taking the time to think of the situation.

Originally posted by Rocker2013
2. The images of the two Craft International guys (if that's indeed who they are) have been taken out of context and a fictional time line added. People are claiming that one of them is seen after the blasts without his bag. In fact, the image of the two in the street was taken immediately after the explosions, and both are seen WITH their bags. Why do you accept the false narrative when the evidence is there for all to see that BOTH these men had BOTH their bags immediately after the explosion, are you not embarrassed that you didn't check this before believing that story?

No, not out of context. Exactly within the same context of the explosion, and EXACTLY near the same spot. Unlike Tsarnaev, who was seemingly NOT photographed near the location of one of the bombing.

No one really knows if Tsarnaev was really there, because the only FBI picture of him on the scene was PHOTOSHOPPED!

Ever heard about Sunil Trepati? he looks a lot more like the guy seen on the pictures than Tsarnaev does!
cdn.storyleak.com...

As for the whole photoshopped backpack controversy, this is irrelevant, as that picture shows just how anyone, including the alleged suspect, can carry a backpack just on ONE shoulder:




Same place as the explosion:




Okay, the two Arabic guys may not be the bombers, and were not wearing any Craft International outfits, so it's pure speculation.

But these two other Craft agents were there, too, at the precise location of the explosion, just BEFORE the explosion... waiting for something:


THen... a fraction of second after the explosion, what do we see? What seems like one of the Craft guys, running away from the explosion.

Originally posted by Rocker2013
3. For those who believe the common "actors" story... how do you explain medical professionals, volunteers, BPD and race officials not noticing that there were no real injuries? Do you believe that all those present were actors? Thousands of them? If not, how many actors were there? Did they replace all the police who work there every year? How do you explain all the hospital staff who would have dealt with the injuries? Do you also claim that all those nurses, doctors and surgeons were all "replaced" by actors after the event? And if so, where are the doctors and nurses who would have been on duty and why haven't they asked why they all had a couple of days off at the same time, while strangers are appearing on the TV giving news briefings in their uniform?

A straw man argument. Not many people are claiming such things. Exactly in the same way than the "no planes hit the towers" theory on 9/11... just floating around to discredit the people asking legitimate questions on the events. Most people here aren't doubting there were casualties in that bombing.

[

1. If the brothers were innocent, why didn't they do what others identified in images by guys on 4chan and hand themselves in the moment their images were seen on TV? An innocent person would have seen that and immediately attended the local police station ready to clear their name. So, please explain that to me. If you believe the brothers were duped into it in some way, this still applies, why didn't they surrender and why did they seemingly then go on the run armed with guns and bombs?

I have no idea, but I do find it baffling that they had no escape plan whatsoever. Considering the prepping/planning that must have been involved. I also found it very odd that Janet N. came out and said it was not part of a larger plot despite the fact that the suspects were not identified or caught at the time.

2. The images of the two Craft International guys (if that's indeed who they are) have been taken out of context and a fictional time line added. People are claiming that one of them is seen after the blasts without his bag. In fact, the image of the two in the street was taken immediately after the explosions, and both are seen WITH their bags. Why do you accept the false narrative when the evidence is there for all to see that BOTH these men had BOTH their bags immediately after the explosion, are you not embarrassed that you didn't check this before believing that story?

I have ran 4 marathons, countless half marathons and other events, I cant think of one single reason why these guys were even there. There are two reasons for military personnel to be at an event like this, recruiting and participation..The fact that contracted mercenaries were there is just scary.

3. For those who believe the common "actors" story... how do you explain medical professionals, volunteers, BPD and race officials not noticing that there were no real injuries? Do you believe that all those present were actors? Thousands of them? If not, how many actors were there? Did they replace all the police who work there every year? How do you explain all the hospital staff who would have dealt with the injuries? Do you also claim that all those nurses, doctors and surgeons were all "replaced" by actors after the event? And if so, where are the doctors and nurses who would have been on duty and why haven't they asked why they all had a couple of days off at the same time, while strangers are appearing on the TV giving news briefings in their uniform?

I dont buy into the acting part.

4. If it were a false flag and the two were "convinced" into doing it, why is the younger brother still alive? Would it not make a lot more sense - given that they have already killed three and maimed more than 150 - that one more life wouldn't be much to end? So, if these "mysterious people" can convince those brothers to take two explosive devices into the crowd, kill three, wound more than a hundred, why would they let them live? Do you not think they could have killed them in the days after, when both brothers were behaving as they normally would have? Why would such a loose end be left dangling?

This one, im not sure, but based on the amount of ammo spent while he was in the boat, I don't think he was supposed to live. I find it kindof odd that he supposedly negotiated with police to exit the boat peacefully but now he is unable to speak. So was he unable to speak while in the boat or did he just pop up unannounced? Maybe he passed the negotiator a note?

5. Why did those brothers then have a shoot out with police in the street, and how did those "innocent" brothers get hold of explosives if they were innocent? I will concede that we have no factual evidence ourselves of any of that happening, but this is the narrative we have, and there would have been numerous local BPD involved in that - did they all just "imagine" the bullets and bombs?

I dont think they were innocent, I think they were part of a larger plot.

Originally posted by Rocker2013


4. If it were a false flag and the two were "convinced" into doing it, why is the younger brother still alive? Would it not make a lot more sense - given that they have already killed three and maimed more than 150 - that one more life wouldn't be much to end? So, if these "mysterious people" can convince those brothers to take two explosive devices into the crowd, kill three, wound more than a hundred, why would they let them live? Do you not think they could have killed them in the days after, when both brothers were behaving as they normally would have? Why would such a loose end be left dangling?

5. Why did those brothers then have a shoot out with police in the street, and how did those "innocent" brothers get hold of explosives if they were innocent? I will concede that we have no factual evidence ourselves of any of that happening, but this is the narrative we have, and there would have been numerous local BPD involved in that - did they all just "imagine" the bullets and bombs?

(continuing...)

4- There is no proof, as of now, they had anything to do with the bombing, or that they were there when it happened. Why you still push the idea that they did it, even being set up into doing it? Because initially this idea was pushed onto you, perhaps?

A scapegoat doesn't necessarily have to be involved at all... he could just have been picked falsely, either out of incompetence or planned intent.

5- The circumstance of this shoot out is a matter of controversy, and the police version seems to be far too bogus to be true (guy runs over his brother with his car just because he's in a rush to escape cops? huh....). THing is that the facts behind both local PD and FBI reports are not demonstrated. They're just issuing those declarations, holding back the facts.

What do they have to hide if they aren't lying, then? Why the secrecy?

Originally posted by eXia7
We get it, you believe the official story, no matter what people bring forth will not be good enough for you to believe. You seem to be taking the story at face value, and don't want to believe the inconsistencies that are present at this time. Note: We are still lacking evidence to believe the official story.

If you want to believe the official story that's fine, but no need to be condescending to others who share an alternative view.

edit on 4/22/2013 by eXia7 because: (no reason given)

He wasn't being condescending, rather YOU are....to the people who are not wanting a conspiracy so badly that they will convince themselves of it at any cost. The arguments supporting a conspiracy in this case are so weak and far-reaching that anyone who has the brainpower to formulate a thought should be ashamed of reading into them.

Originally posted by MikeHawke
this right off the bat is shady. you dont tweet crap like that and expect no conspiracy theorists to come forward. thats like expecting an insurance company not to investigate you when you have fire insurance for your house then it burns down on the day you make a facebook post that says "housefire".

Maybe I'm missing something here, but what is suspicious about the Boston Globe tweeting reports of what's happening?
I can only assume that you are seeing something there that no one else is seeing.

Originally posted by MikeHawke
ever hear of the fbi catching itself in its own terrorist attacks? www.nytimes.com... and people of america actually call this police work. where i come from thats called entrapment and a set-up.

Yep, I've heard of that, and seen the examples, and I say WELL DONE to the FBI for trapping those sickos into it! I don't care about what people think, no one would go along with a plot like that unless they wanted to, the FBI didn't force them to do anything, they gave them enough rope to hang themselves!

If someone plans to murder people, and the FBI help them along in that plan to see if they'll actually do it, that's great! It gives even more evidence that they would have done it whether the FBI had caught them in time or not!

Originally posted by MikeHawke
the fbi was very involved in their lives. the parents seem pretty firm on it being a set-up.

Nope, you're making things up here. The FBI interviewed the elder brother once and found nothing. There is no evidence that the FBI was "involved in their lives" in any way more than that. You are believing the mother, without any evidence, without any reason to trust her any more than the FBI.
Why do you trust one story without any evidence, and refute another story with evidence?

Originally posted by MikeHawke
the martial law tactic was the main event here that lots of people miss.

Another massive fail on your part, Martial Law was not declared or enacted on any US soil as a result of this attack, none, not anywhere, at any time. You have "translated" the request for people to stay off the streets as such because it suits your conspiracy.
There WAS NO MARTIAL LAW.

Originally posted by MikeHawke
if those "craft guys" were nobodys. why are they around cop cars and let behid police lines? why not be in uniform if you have a job to to at the event? why so undercover? was it also coincidence they have seal team hats on?

Why would they all be captured, on film, by potentially thousands of witnesses, if they were responsible for murdering three people and maiming more than 100?
Don't you think, logically, if they were responsible they would have DRESSED LIKE NORMAL PEOPLE!?
The "craft guys" were hired security, were they not? I have also only seen photos of them in the crowd before the explosions. But either way, security for an event can go all kinds of places the public cant. They can also have uniforms, ear pieces, and all kinds of tech.
Nothing you have stated there is proof of anything.

Originally posted by MikeHawke
but the best point. why is it every time americans are so retared that killing the guy is the best way of dealing with the problem. its never get him a live and question him then hear out is reasons and give him a public trial.

Last time I checked, the 19 year old was in custody, ALIVE, responding, and is going to get a standard trial and NOT treated as an enemy combatant.

Once again, there is no evidence here, none at all. Everything is pretty easy to dismiss, and the known story still has far more validity than any random conspiracy theory anyone responding in this thread can come up with. You are not giving me any actual evidence, or even likely cause to think about.

All future posters in this thread, please actually offer what you think is EVIDENCE. I don't want your opinions, or possible scenarios, I want actual evidence that you have seen that gives you adequate reason to believe this was a false flag. If you cannot offer that evidence and a decent debate based on FACTS, then please go to one of the many other threads about "actors" and "fake limbs".

Originally posted by Echtelion
THen... a fraction of second after the explosion, what do we see? What seems like one of the Craft guys, running away from the explosion.

Oh my, there's too much debunked BS for me to respond to.

The Craft guys were not photographed immediately running away. They are photographed on the sidewalk, then after the bombs explode they are seen in the middle of the street BOTH WITH THEIR BAGS! Then, there is an image of them meeting up with their colleagues to secure the area, THEN there is another image of one of the two running without his bag.

You have either missed all of this debunking, or you are deliberately choosing to ignore it.

The photo of the younger brother running away without his bag has not been photoshopped, this has been debunked also, by people analysing original versions of that photo.

Again, you are just repeating all the BS because you are determined to believe the conspiracy. None of what you have offered is evidence of anything other than your complete gullibility or your desire for it to be a false flag.

I applaud all the questioning. As to why these brothers did not just come foreward and say they were innocent, let's put you on at some scene of a horrible crime, have the media crucifying you, and the full force of the Gestapo after you and tell me if you feel safe enough to come foreward or get a fair trial.

The images of the younger brother climbing out of the boat do not jive with the official story at all. He has no blood on him, does not appear to have a neck wound, and yet they want us to believe he shot himself trying to commit suicide. Now, more parts of the propaganda are falling apart:

Boston Terror Narrative Starts Falling Apart

We have no idea whether or not the Chechen brothers Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev were the Boston terrorists. But several parts of the official narrative are already falling apart. Initially, the claim that they robbed a 7-11 is totally false. USA Today reported on April 19th:

There was a 7-Eleven robbery in Cambridge last night, but it had nothing to do with the Boston Marathon bombing suspects. Margaret Chabris, the director of corporate communication at 7- Eleven, says the surveillance video of the crime was not taken at a 7-Eleven and that the suspect that did rob the 7-Eleven does not look like Tamerlan or Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.

“The suspect in the photos for that particular 7-Eleven robbery looks nothing like the suspects,” Chabris says. “The police or someone made a mistake. Someone was confused.”

Continued

Originally posted by Echtelion
There is no proof, as of now, they had anything to do with the bombing, or that they were there when it happened. Why you still push the idea that they did it, even being set up into doing it? Because initially this idea was pushed onto you, perhaps?

I can say the same thing about people who claim that it was the Saudi national, or those who believe it was the FBI, or the CIA.

The fact is there is MORE EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST that these two brothers actually did do this, than there is evidence to suggest that anyone else did it!

1. The elder brother was interviewed by the FBI on a tip off from the Russian government
2. Both brothers were seen at the location on CCTV, with bags (neither was running in the race, neither was there for a time before as a spectator)
3. There is (reportedly) CCTV footage of one of the brothers placing an explosive device on the ground before it detonated. This will be presented in a court case.
4. A seriously injured witness states that he looked into the eyes of the person who placed the bag down that then exploded and took his legs off.
5. Several police officers encountered both suspects and engaged in a fire-fight with them, during which explosives were reportedly thrown and the elder brother died.
6. The younger brother was successfully arrested and detained, and had medical treatment to keep him alive, that doesn't sound like a good patsy to me. If he were set up, or duped into it, why wasn't he killed in the days after the bombing, or by police on the scene on his arrest?

Now compare all of that information with the "theories" we have suggesting alternatives. There are a lot of traceable, named, identifiable and concrete people and events there, and in the theories there are none.
So which do you believe, the story with numerous people able to say this happened to them, or the story from "unknown witnesses", random internet trolls, people unable to piece together a proper time-line...?

Yes, we need to see evidence, but that is what a trial is for.

In the meantime, there is STILL a mass of information all leaning towards them being responsible for the attack, and nothing but complete speculation about any and all alternative scenarios!

You and I both need to make up our minds given the available evidence and information, and all of it is pointing to these brothers being responsible. This is basic logic, and yet people are actively refusing logic and believing random thoughts and accusations based on absolutely nothing.

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity
I applaud all the questioning. As to why these brothers did not just come foreward and say they were innocent, let's put you on at some scene of a horrible crime, have the media crucifying you, and the full force of the Gestapo after you and tell me if you feel safe enough to come foreward or get a fair trial.

They were not crucified in the media, they were identified as suspects.
There were several other men identified as possible terrorists all over the net and media in the days before the brothers were identified, and they all came forward and cleared their name with the police.

And, if so innocent, why did they run, why did they have a shoot out with the police, why did they have explosives in the vehicle?

We can assume that there are several police officers able to testify that these two brothers are the ones they shot at, and had return fire from, yes?
If not, what happens when the younger brother stands up in court and tells the world that he wasn't even there, or that he and his brother did not shoot anything at the police?

You're not making any logical sense here. Are we supposed to think that the police involved in that fire fight were lying? Shot at someone else? Killed someone else? Chased someone else?

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity
The images of the younger brother climbing out of the boat do not jive with the official story at all. He has no blood on him, does not appear to have a neck wound, and yet they want us to believe he shot himself trying to commit suicide. Now, more parts of the propaganda are falling apart:

Can you see blood in grainy images like that? Also, I thought the belief was they he shot himself through the neck trying to take his own life? The report I read stated that they believed he put a pistol in his mouth and pulled the trigger, and the bullet exited the nape of his neck (the back). That is when the police started shooting at him, believing he had shot at them. There is also the belief that they were using rubber bullets because they wanted him alive.
Either way, there is no possible chance that you can tell whether there is blood on him or not in that image. I have seen it, and there is no way you could know that or make that kind of assertion.

You say it's all propaganda, but you cannot prove it can you!? You're basically just saying "I don't believe it, therefore they're lying to us and the government murdered people!"

Oh, and Infowars is not a credible source in any way shape or form, so I won't be dignifying that BS with a response.

Agreed to all Rocker2013.

I have been intentionally holding this one back, for a long time, because I did not want to derail the thread. But I think now is the time to speak my mind. I want to make it clear, this is not in any way an attempt to derail this thread into a 2nd Amendment discussion, but it is relevant to the events of last week in regards to the suspects actions. Please, keep this aspect tightly focused upon these events, and not a larger gun-control issue.


For those unaware, Cambridge, MA is one of the most STRICTLY gun-controlled regions in the entire state of Massachusetts (in a state that is heavily gun controlled itself). The entire area is the equivalent to a "gun free zone". Locally, it's joked that the word Cambridge is code for "gun-free".

So, in a town that is soooooooo heavily gun controlled, to a point it's the equivalent to a complete ban on guns, these suspects had multiple weapons (hand guns and possibly long rifles), loads of ammunition, and numerous explosives. Since these are all in effect "banned" there, they shouldn't be able to be in possession of these, right? So, even if, for the sake of this argument, they are not responsible for the Monday bombings at the Marathon (which, I believe they are personally), they were definitely criminals in possession of illegal firearms, and explosive devices. They allegedly fired upon and attempted to murder police officers.

They could be tried and convicted on these facts alone, regardless of the events on Monday.

I have another theory to add to the collection(most of which I don't subscribe to)

Chechen guy gets Mirandized so he doesn't have to incriminate himself, and his handlers make a deal with him he will get off easy as long as he doesn't implicate a larger terrorist cell.


It could happen. There's always an extra degree of separation in Soros run organizations.

Meanwhile I believe the two were part of a larger organization operating out of the Northern Caucus area of former Soviet Republic. Not saying no one is helping them out. There is wealthy Saudi connection and supposedly Bin Laden himself sent a contingency to that area.

Did I mention the older brother is dead and can't talk?

Oh sorry I don't have evidence for my theory but I could see it happening. Except he did get Mirandized and got lawyered up. One can imagine what an Eric Holder type of person would do in this scenario.

Gonna try to answer your questions and also ask some in the process.

1) They should have turned themselves in but did they know they were suspects? Everyone seems to think that once the pictures were posted that the brothers knew instantly that they were suspects and went on the run. What if they did not know nor did anyone tell them? If they are innocent and didn't know they were suspects then how are they to act? They were doing normal everyday stuff like going to parties and such, which sounds like they might not have known they were wanted. Not everyone checks up on stuff like this and only those who recognize them would have alerted them.

I do believe there was a suspect for another crime involving armed robbery that happened days before this one where the main suspect didn't know he was a suspect and just did what he did everyday while going to school. It wasn't until a "few days" later that a friend of his told him he saw his picture off the news when he went and turned himself in. It was a "few days", and here in the Boston incident it was later that day, I believe somewhere around 20 hours before they found out who the suspects were.

As for the going on the run and shooting the cops, were you there to witness this? There is a witness who states they saw the cops run over the older brother and then shoot him as he was on the ground. Shoot first, ask questions later. If it really is a false flag and cover up, they would try to kill the suspects which is what happened to the older brother. Also if both brothers were "supposedly" together and the city was under lock down, how did the younger one get away with so many cops at the scene? Wouldn't there have been at least 1-2 patrol cars on the chase along with helicopters? How did he manage to steal a police SVU if the police are standing next to it and the suspects in front? And don't say cops don't get trigger happy and shoot to kill first. Remember the 2 ladies in LA who were delivering newspapers that got 40 bullets shot into their vehicle before they were even identified? Or how about the 2 cops in New York that unloaded on the 1 armed suspect while hitting 9 bystanders?

2) Honestly not sure on this one. There are pictures showing the person running without a backpack but then having a backpack a little later. Does seem odd they were all there wearing backpacks though. Why would they need to carry backpacks? Almost all of them had backpacks on so what was in those backpacks? One of the backpacks worn by them does look very similar to the one found by the police while the younger brothers backpack was not even close in similarity.

3) As for this one, you have to think outside the box. In a chaotic situation such as a bombing, not many people have a mind that can handle the situation. Most panic, run, scream, and do all sorts of odd stuff. Most do not know what's happening even if its right in front of them as their mind is lost to the chaos at hand.

I'm not saying they used actors but given the situation and the magnitude of the event, if they were to use actors to play injured victims, then why not use actors to play doctors and nurses? That why you have both groups under your control and supervision. If your smart enough to pull off a stunt like this, you would be smart enough not to cut corners and use actors for all the elements and variables. Why risk having a real doctor tend an actor when you can have an actor play a doctor to tend another actor? Why can't the emergency staff also have been actors? Would make sense if your trying to stage certain things while taking pictures of it. Like a magician, look at one hand to distract you from looking at the other. If you have all the elements under your control and wish to use this moment to your benefit, it would only make sense that you have actors for all the parts. Seriously, who is going to be able to tell during the incident? Most people are running and fleeing like crazy. Anyone who gets close to the actors would be escorted away by police or emergency staff. Heck, the actors can also be real doctors so in case a "real" victim was there, they could treat them, it makes the whole situation more real.

You pretty much have to think in terms of, "if you were doing this how would you do it so that you don't get caught". Which is by making sure every element is under control.

4) I do believe they did try to kill the younger brother. There are pictures that show him unharmed when he got out of the boat and then lying on the ground with a gunshot wound to the neck. Maybe they hoped he would die from the wound or maybe they missed when aiming at his head. Point is, he was uninjured before and then dying shortly after. They probably had one chance to do this before those who are not part of it took him in for protection and questioning. Not all cops are bad or on someone's payroll and not everyone can be bought. It does look like they tried to kill both brothers. The dead can't argue back.

reply to post by Krakatoa


Good point about how they obtained guns in such a heavily controlled State.

And that after the older brother was interviewed by FBI. Perhaps the angle will be if they had a gun database these guys woulda got flagged, but then likely they got them through an alliance with group operating in Chechnya. It is not far fetched to imagine a group like that smuggling arms into Mass.

reply to post by Rocker2013


The logical answer is they are guilty. It really is that simple normal people who are not guilty do not do this kind of crap they would turn themselves in as soon as possible.



I am not a rocket scientist but if it walks and quakes like a duck...........The Saudi student comes to mind.

reply to post by Lostmymarbles


Maybe they were not innocent and still went to a party hoping to blend in. Perhaps they just thought they got off scott free and when their pics turned up in media they decided to make a run for it. Then they hijacked an SUV, got caught and then the kid ran over his bro in flight.

reply to post by Lostmymarbles


I'm not buying that Boston PD shot the guy while he was cuffed and on the ground. Even if he was resisting arrest they could just use a tazer. Maybe the witness saw him being tazed and thought it was a gun. Who knows.

reply to post by Echtelion

Assuming the first brother would have been killed, it's quite understandable that the second would run away like Hell, not even taking the time to think of the situation.

That was after they had commandeered a privately owned SUV for their flight. It will be interesting to see if the widow cracks under questioning about her apartment being used to build bombs.

Originally posted by Rocker2013
So there are a few theories out there right now making the rounds that many are jumping on with their usual gusto. There's everything from the "they're all actors!" story to the "military did it!" crowd. The motive for any false flag is as unknown to them and us as the motive for the brothers accused of it...

Thanks for the invite, Rocker2013... Not that I have a theory to put forth...but, I do find what you've laid out to be particularly limiting.
On the other hand...your line (above), I think is as key as any -- "The motive...is...unknown...for the brothers accused of it."
Motive is always key, and, as yet, I haven't been able to get the pieces to fit for that.
While it looks like (has been reported that) the authorities are looking for a "sleeper cell" that may have some connection to either the two brothers (or...what?...I don't know), it further seems that this would be an entirely inept "cell", if they were involved.
I haven't come close to aligning with any "false flag" angle I've heard put forth...yet... But, as another respondent has said - "It's still early, and whole lot of information is still...unknown (to us, at least)", so...
...back to motive --
Their actions (while successful in the sense of getting the bombs placed and detonated...without being the victims of their own actions) seemed text-book amateurish, to me.
I'm guessing they "hung around 'til time to detonate" to make certain their packages weren't moved/or stolen...(?)
And what further "statement" could they have intended...than to instill terror?
They didn't know the people they hurt/killed.
No "high-ranking officials" of a government...or religion... Just - terror.
Then...it appears that the younger brother went about his business, as if he'd gotten away with it...
As to "conspiracy"...it was/is, by definition, a conspiracy, since more than one conspired to commit the act. Unless we're to believe that two brothers traditionally walk around with backpacks loaded with pressure-cooker bombs, and by mere coincidence decide individually & separately, to set them down in a crowd 1,500' (or so) apart...and then, by chance, detonate them within 15 (or so) seconds of each other.
I know you are not saying the above...but...again...IT IS A CONSPIRACY.
And...if two were involved...we don't know that there weren't more.
(Or - we/you/I don't have enough evidence in hand to come to such a conclusion...yet.)
And...if we don't know that there weren't others involved in the conspiracy...we are not in position to conclude that such "potential" answers might not include (involve or touch upon) one or more conspiracy theory that you've alluded to...or any number of possibilities that we haven't even considered.

Well done OP on some thought provoking questions. When you look at the full story however, there are a number of anomalies. Mainly due to people listening on the scanners and swearing they heard stuff, which has either a) not been verified by the Police or b) refuted by the police.

We have seen a number of threads started on ATS questioning things like inconsistencies with back packs, did Tamerlan get hit over by his brother in a stolen Police SUV and video of bomber dropping the back pack and scurrying away. (The video hasn't been released yet, but others have which just causes suspicion)

The actors qestion I never believed until I saw this video of the Boston Commissioner, talking to Fox News.



Was this just a slip of the tongue? Or did he get his lines wrong?

So whilst it seems a clear cut case, is it? I think not to be honest, but that's just my opinion.

From the tone of your OP it appears you have already found him guilty, without this even going to trial.

As the suspect is still alive I am hopeful that he will get a fair trial and if found guilty, a just and fitting sentence is served on him. If that means the death penalty, then so be it.