SWAT teams enter a suburban neighborhood to search an apartment for the remaining suspect in the Boston Marathon bombings in Watertown

A glib article published in the Boston Globe on July 27 suggested that those who question the opaque law enforcement narrative about the Boston Marathon bombing have a screw loose.

“There are those,” the writer begins, ”who believe the bombs and blood were staged, the amputees and others injured were actors in some kind of Hollywood production designed to justify martial law.”

David Abel’s lead is a splendid Straw Man ploy: dismiss an idea by seizing upon an absurd exaggeration, like looking at a reflection in a funhouse mirror.

For validation, Abel quotes Jeanne Kempthorne, a Massachusetts criminal defense lawyer who worked from 1992 to 2003 as an assistant U.S. attorney in Boston. She slapped aside skeptics.

“It’s just human nature,” Kempthorne told the paper. “There will always be flat-earthers or grassy knoll types, people who will go to great lengths to dispute the obvious or find conspiracies or come up with evidence-free speculation.”
But what she calls evidence-free speculation others call collaborative deduction.

A fast-forward evolution is happening in criminal justice as citizen gumshoes use the Internet and social media to wheedle out clues and, yes, even evidence.

In one instructive example, a blogger named Alexandria Goddard used evidence collected from social media to help expose the sexual assault of a 14-year-old girl last summer in Steubenville, Ohio.

“The authorities” view this as meddling by amateurs. But online gatecrashing by “grassy knoll types” is certain to increase as law enforcement agencies like the FBI, once viewed as virtually infallible, have grown increasingly furtive, under cover of the surveillance state.

We asked Martin Garbus, one of the country’s premier constitutional attorneys, about the issue of public trust for law enforcers. He suggested that Americans have been taught a lesson by recent revelations of wholesale spying on citizens by the National Security Agency.

“There is no more reason to think that the FBI will do the right thing,” Garbus told us, “than there is to think that the NSA will do the right thing.”

William Keating seems to agree, and he doesn’t seem like a kook. He is a Democratic U.S. Congressman who represents southeast Massachusetts, including Cape Cod, New Bedford and Plymouth. But he has respectful skepticism about law enforcement, learned on the job.

Like Kempthorne, Keating is a former prosecutor, having served 12 years as district attorney for Norfolk County, Massachusetts, before he was elected to Congress in 2010. He is a member of both the House Homeland Security and Foreign Affairs committees.

For three months, Keating has doggedly pursued answers about the Boston bombing from the FBI. He wants to know when the FBI recognized that Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the dead bombing suspect, was a threat to national security and why it did not share its intelligence with the Boston Police Department and other law enforcement agencies.

It would be charitable to describe the Bureau’s response as “less than forthcoming.”

So on July 31, Keating sent a wrathful three-page, 1,200 word letter letter to James Comey, the newly confirmed FBI director, demanding answers to seven questions related to the bombing investigation. Keating, who traveled to Russia in late May to investigate the case on his own, said he found the Russian intelligence agency, the Federal Security Service, to be more forthcoming than the FBI.

Keating complained that the FBI has three times declined invitations to appear before the House Homeland Security Committee to answer questions publicly. And in an Orwellian plot twist, FBI officials replied the next day–but not by contacting Keating. They planted a response in the New York Times.

The story begins, “The F.B.I. has concluded that there was little its agents could have done to prevent the Boston Marathon bombings, according to law enforcement officials, rejecting criticism that it could have better monitored one of the suspects before the attack.”

In other words, no mistakes were made.

Unnamed agency officials told the newspaper that the FBI has no intention of conducting an internal investigation. Nor, apparently, does it intend to cooperate with Keating’s committee.

If the congressman was seething when he sent the letter to Comey, he must have been apoplectic when he saw the response in the Times—by agency officials who were allowed by the newspaper to push back against the people’s representatives while remaining anonymous.

This has become a pattern for the FBI. Information is channeled without specific attribution through the major media, especially via John Miller, a CBS correspondent who once served as the agency’s spokesman. Often, the information has been flatly wrong.

One example was the New York Times’ report on April 22 about the weapons used by the Tsarnaev brothers, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar. One paragraph read:

“Along with determining that the suspects had made at least five pipe bombs, the authorities recovered four firearms that they believe the suspects used, according to a law enforcement official. The authorities found an M-4 carbine rifle — a weapon similar to ones used by American forces in Afghanistan — on the boat where the younger suspect was found Friday night in Watertown, Mass.”

The same story cited a “senior United States official” as describing a gunshot wound to Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s neck as “close-range, self-inflicted style.”

Two days later, an Associated Press story—again citing unnamed officials—reported that the brothers had had a single gun, a 9mm pistol, and that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was unarmed as local, state and federal law enforcers peppered his boat hideout with dozens of shots.

The April 22 story in the Times was corrected twice. One error concerned the geographic relationship of Watertown to Boston. The second clarified the use of the Miranda Warning exception used in the case. But the totally fallacious inventory of weapons was not corrected, and those details are still found in the electronic version of the story in the Times archive.

In fact, mistakes were made. Lots of them—and on more than a few significant aspects of the story.

But do such details really matter?

If you believe in the infallibility of the FBI, probably not. (The agency regards itself as infallible, as this perceptive –dare one say “skeptical”?– New York Times story about the FBI’s remarkable perfect record of faultlessness in agent-involved shootings dating to 1993.)

But the Boston Marathon bombing investigation has bloomed into a complex filigree of related inquiries—from the unsolved triple murder in 2011 in drowsy Waltham, Mass., to the rare “shelter-in-place” order and live-TV posse search for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on April 19, to the puzzling FBI-agent shooting death in Florida of an unarmed friend of the Tsarnaevs who might have been able to answer crucial questions–had he lived.

Yes, details matter because they often can reveal larger truths.

So WhoWhatWhy joins flat-earthers like the American Civil Liberties Union and Congressman William Keating in asking questions that deserve answers.

1.  If Russia recognized Tamerlan Tsarnaev as a potential security threat, why didn’t the FBI?

In March 2011, Russian security officials asked the U.S. to help determine whether Tsarnaev had gone radical. The agency did a cursory investigation, and then dropped it. In a justification published in the New York Times on Aug. 1, unnamed officials said the FBI had absolved itself of any missteps in “several internal reviews.” The agency also has claimed it was prevented by law from delving further into Tsarnaev’s activities.
A point of contrast concerning what the authorities can do, inside or outside the law: On July 31, six law officers showed up at the Boston-area home of Michelle Catalano because members of her family had Googled the terms “pressure cooker” and “backpack.” It turns out they had been shopping online.

2.  How was Ibragim Todashev killed, and how has an FBI agent-involved shooting related to a high-profile terrorist bombing managed to become a state secret?

In an April 22, 2013, missive from the Russian FSB to the FBI, Ibragim Todashev’s name appeared under the heading “matters of significance.” He was a friend of Tamerlan Tsarnaev. One month later, on May 22, Todashev was shot and killed in his Orlando apartment by a Boston-based FBI agent.

The first gauzy explanation was channeled through John Miller of CBS, the agency’s former mouthpiece. As the story evolved, we were told that Todashev was armed with a knife. Or a broomstick. Or that he was unarmed—but that a samurai sword was hanging on the wall. The agent, who has never been publicly identified, fired five or six shots. A Massachusetts state trooper who was with him did not fire once. The Florida medical examiner’s office refused to release the autopsy report, by orders of the FBI.

Civil libertarians have demanded an accounting. As Howard Simon, executive director of the ACLU of Florida put it, “Secrecy fosters suspicion.”

Two points: If Todashev was considered a threat (and he should have been), informal questioning in the unsecured surroundings of the suspect’s own apartment was a glaring investigative mistake.  Second, the case highlights, once again, a fundamental lack of accountability for federal law enforcement entities. State and local police agencies are held accountable to the elected officials who hire and fire the top administrators and set budgets. Unless there is pressure from Washington politicians, the FBI can stave off public inquiries with virtual impunity—as in this case.

3.  How did the Waltham, Mass., Police Department and Massachusetts State Police go so wrong in its investigation of the triple murder in which Tamerlan Tsarnaev and Todashev were later implicated?

On Sept. 11, 2011, Brendan Mess, Erik Weissman and Raphael Teken were found dead in a house at 12 Harding Ave. in Waltham, a city of 60,000 west of Boston.  Their throats were slit, and cash and marijuana were sprinkled on the bodies.

It should have been a high-priority crime in Waltham, where triple murders are about as rare as Halley’s Comet. Officials believed the victims knew their killers. Tsarnaev was a close friend of Mess’s and a frequent visitor to the Harding Avenue house.

Friends and loved ones of the victims have said they pointedly told police investigators to question Tsarnaev. The suggestions should have been unnecessary; it is template detective work to interview those closest to murder victims. But no cop ever questioned Tsarnaev about the murders. Why?

4.  Who opened fire on the boat in Watertown, and why?

Amid the chaotic search for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on April 19, David Henneberry alerted police that a bloody person seemed to be secreted in a drydocked boat in his backyard, at 67 Franklin St. in the Boston suburb of Watertown.

Officers from Boston police, Massachusetts state police and the FBI “set up a perimeter,” as Boston Police Commissioner Ed Davis put it, then “exchanged gunfire” with Tsarnaev for about an hour. Much of the action was viewed and heard on live television, included the reports of flash-bang percussion grenades.

Photos showed about 40 bullet holes in the port side of the 22-foot boat. The shot pattern was clustered toward the middle of the boat, precisely the spot where the helicopter imaging had shown him lying.

When a bloody Tsarnaev finally emerged, the media reported that he had been hunkered down with a small arsenal—including an M-4 rifle, as a Washington source told the New York Times—and that he had apparently shot himself in the neck. That was all wrong, it turned out.

In most cases, a law enforcement shooting siege against an unarmed person leads to a weapons-discharge investigation. Will that happen in this case?

5.  Will Danny the Carjack Victim ever emerge from the shadows and tell his story publicly?

American crime heroes usually end up on the sofa at NBC’s “Today” show. But Danny has shied from the true-crime klieg lights, appearing in shadow with a fuzzed-up voice with both Today’s Matt Lauer and CBS’s Miller—after sitting with the Boston Globe, in an interview brokered by Jamie Fox, a Northeastern University criminology professor.

Is something stopping Danny from stepping into the sunshine and enjoying his media star turn?

6.  Why was Sean Collier, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology police officer, killed?

Collier was shot and killed at about 10:20 p.m. on Thursday, April 18, as his sat in a patrol car near Vassar and Main streets on the nearly empty MIT campus in Cambridge. The public has been told that his assailants were almost certainly the Tsarnaev brothers, but produced no rationale or proof. WhoWhatWhy’s Russ Baker explored some of the questions about that particular component of this investigative labyrinth.

[box]WhoWhatWhy plans to continue doing this kind of groundbreaking original reporting. You can count on it. But can we count on you? We cannot do our work without your support.

Please click here to donate; it’s tax deductible. And it packs a punch.[/box]

GRAPHIC:    http://s3.amazonaws.com/dk-production/images/28722/large/RTXYS2R.jpg?1366373332

0 responses to “Monday Morning Skeptic: Questioning Authority in the Sprawling Boston Bombing Case”

  1. 海味直銷 says:


    […]we came across a cool internet site that you just could possibly enjoy. Take a search in the event you want[…]

  2. Eric Clapton says:

    Why do these dates keep popping up? Sept 11 and April 19.

  3. Chris Baker says:

    The girl in Steubenville was 16, not 14.

  4. emerald98 says:

    I love how this organization can quote other organizations and show how false they were, based on further information being brought to light. LOL. Why do you need Danny to show his face, and by the way, it has been shown. Is there anything wrong with not wanting media attention, no that doesn’t help your organization. And your organization can go in after the fact and “clean up stories” or whatever your aim is at the moment. It’s correct vast amounts of organizations were very wrong in some details, but not all details are relevant, some are I agree. Even when Danny tells the story over and over, it is still not enough for you. It does not fit into your narrative – and the stories you print are mostly based on other stories with your own questions or theories. I don’t see a lot of feet on the ground, knocking on doors for answers. I bet I could write a story myself, right now and show all the misinformation, lack of information or skeptics, like Who/What etc. I could make you look like your organization doesn’t believe anything, especially when someone tell you that it is an ongoing investigation and they can’t talk about it. Does that mean it’s a lie or didn’t happen. No, it could mean, just what they said. When you didn’t get the info YOU wanted a bout the Officer Collier story, you assume a coverup, something stinks? You have one person stating “well we didn’t see his face.” You put that in your story, of course to justify and back up your own theory, but does this person really know for a fact? No. Do you think the video is being shown to mounds of people? NO. So to keep with your own “narrative” you dismiss Danny and find fault with what he said. So typical. I have seen all kinds of stories ont he internet, from they took the gun and didn’t use it, or threw it out or to the more logical and now revealed news, they decided against taking it. How about discussing why he was shot 5 times. From the beginning this was chaotic situation with stories flying and people discussing it with the media that did not have the proper authority or full story. Is it right, no. But as things settled, (that is how you guys pat yourself on the back because you don’t do breaking news) You ask good questions, but if the answers don’t measure with your own personal already conceived idea, then you find fault with it. People do this all the type and this site is exceptionally bad at this. From the moment I read a few lines, I see the slant the way this story is to end – it’s like you write on the premise, of your own viewpoint. That is not reporting that is make a case for your own “narrative” that we know best because we ask the tough questions. I would love to see your face if I could, in a Grand Jury courtroom ( I know I could never do this of course) and see what type of information was presented to merit probable cause, to charge Dzhokhar and his brother with the murder of Officer Collier. It had to be more than the 9mm they had, was the same bullets used in the shootout or that belonged to the gun…or Danny under oath, stating what he said to them? What about the video from the patrol car, we cannot assume the person interviewed ever saw that video, he could have heard about it – or maybe that there was enough image know it was both men….or that it was clearly both men. His testimony alone would not merit a probable cause, if that was the case, you would have lots of things to write about. No, you have the luxury of evaluating these stories after the fact, but even your reporting has its human mistakes, and I no more look at your media reporting than I do anyone else, over time, most stories edge out and we really find out the answer we need. And some we have to find, like in court docs. So you are not above the fray in the media world, just different, but still bias and wrong too.

  5. BB says:

    I am sure that mercenary agents/employees of Craft International were along the route of the marathon, and also at the finish line. They wear a quasi-military outfit with a distinctive cap emblazoned with a skull-like symbol. They carry large black back packs that might possibly contain bombs. Yes, I know It could be bananas and twinkies, but still…If a false flag incident was planned and executed the presence of these guys is significant. If not, it’s even more significant. Why were they there? What was their mission? Who sent them, And most importantly, why haven’t the media delved into this.?

    • Matt Prather says:

      “Because despite what your momma told you… Violence does solve problems.”

    • BB says:

      My momma used to violently spank me when I was bad. It didn’t make me good, only more careful not to be caught. I’ve seen many bar-room brawls over the years, all of them useless. Craft International mercenary troops were all over the place in Boston, but didn’t solve the violence problem. More likely, initiated it.

  6. Bumpkin says:

    Nobody covering the BMB ever deals with the two largest problems with the official narrative (if one can call the pile of utter contradictions a “narrative”) :

    1 – The windows of the store adjacent to the ‘finish line bomb’ are plainly and obviously blown OUT onto the sidewalk in every photo that shows it, and not just a little; they are blasted out at least 15 feet or more onto the sidewalk reaching the spot where the injured were concentrated. Why doesn’t anybody deal with this extremely large elephant in the room?

    2 – Lucky little Dzokhar “got away” from a major firearms and explosives firefight with the forces of several law enforcement agencies of a major city who had been fully mobilized on maximum alert for hours already…and got away for a whole day. Of course I want to believe, so someone please just tell me that there were no helicopters or backup units by the end of that firefight, and that the police are so completely incompetent that the guy clean ran away through hundreds of officers on high alert for a whole day. Two elephants.

    • guest says:

      And don’t forget that apparently police dogs couldn’t track down a bleeding teenager who had only traveled a few blocks from where he left the car.

    • SO says:

      About point 1, I considered that, too, and if you look at this photo, http://www.newsmax.com/Newsmax/files/67/67392825-4d94-4cd6-9b26-cd6612aa5133.jpg , you will see glass inside the window on the bottom floor, too. Yes, most of it is outside, but you can see the largest pile of glass is in front of the second floor window which has those blinds, which have some other thing behind them. I think the glass could have been blown in here, and bounced off back outside, creating that large pile of glass below it. In fact, the pattern of that pile of glass matches up very nicely to the blinds. In this picture, obviously taken later, http://www.ilpost.it/files/2013/04/AP13041611322.jpg , you can see that there is much glass on the inside window sill, too. Also, note the damage to the Lenscrafters lettering on the building. It’s hard to see how that could have happened if the bomb had not been outside.

    • macduggie says:

      Cell phone footage shows the Lenscrafter sign as undamaged.
      It’s noteworthy that shrapnel has only enough energy to damage one pane of a double glazed window.

    • Bumpkin says:

      The Lenscrafters sign is very interesting – it is definitely intact after the blast in the shaky video, but the crucial question is which windows are we seeing in that video – whether there was only one Lenscrafter sign or whether there was a second one on the windows down the block. Interesting that the glass on the street lights is also unharmed.

    • Bumpkin says:

      Your second photo is nothing like the original status of the glass. The second story windows obviously were blown out much later after it was over – there is nowhere near that much glass in any of the shots taken at the time of the blast, and no large pieces. How did those upper windows get blown out after the fact? Were they cracked and they just popped them out for safety? Probably.

    • Bumpkin says:

      Actually, your first photo shows the upper left window not yet blown out – you can see the reflection in it and its debris is not yet on the piece of plywood or cardboard below – so both of these photos show glass that fell after the initial event was over. It is very telling that only a couple of windows broke – it was a pretty weak bomb.

    • Bumpkin says:

      …and the Lenscrafters sign gets more damaged even between these two photos – in the first the letters are still dangling, in the second they are completely gone. The wooden benches inside the patio enclosure were also smashed after the main event – photos taken just after the explosion show the bench closer to Lenscrafters totally intact.

    • olballcoach says:

      I had my doubts too. And then some exlposives expert explained it on one of the channels. Help me out here phyisics majors – if I blow this. Apparently, air travels faster than the shrapnel. When a bomb explodes the first effect is the out flow air, heat blast and then microseconds later comes the sharpnel. In this case the bomb blew with such force that the air blast bent or bowed the windows in towards inside the offices – but it was not sufficient to blow them out – he speculated the wind blast rose upwards diminishing its outward effect. As the bowed windows bent back into place they were hit with the shrapnel, thus shattering them into a bazillion pieces in an outward trajectory.

    • Bumpkin says:

      I had not noticed the double-glazed window on the left – is that intact in all photos? – but that may pose additional problems. The outward recoil trajectory had enough energy to blow 15 ft. out? When the shrapnel was moving the opposite direction and the initial pressure wave was insufficient to break the glass? Physics experts please help us out here.

  7. Karin Friedemann says:

    The author claims to know about the Russian “missives” that were given to the FBI regarding the Tsarnaevs and Todashev. Where can we read those missives? I think it’s important to find out what exactly the Russians were thinking and what they told the FBI. From what I understand, the Tsarnaevs were 9/11 truthers and also had become more religious with age. Does that mean you could be put on a watchlist? Yes. Does that mean you are a violent criminal? Not necessarily. So, did the Russians actually suspect them of criminality or were they just being watched because of their political and spiritual outlook? And, why is Russia so concerned about people questioning the official 9/11 story? What is the involvement of the Russian mafia in all this? From what I heard, two of the three drug dealers that got murdered in Waltham were Israelis. This means they were being supplied with drugs by the Russian mafia. There are definitely a lot of holes in this story. In any case, does anyone have any info on how to access the notes given to the FBI by the Russians regarding Tsarnaevs and Todashev so we could judge for ourselves what level of threat they were assumed to be?

    • public_servant_watch says:

      My guess is that this is a fairy tale by the FBI and that there was no warning. Rep Keating claims that he saw this documentation “while in Russia” but they refused to give him a copy. I guess he should have had Steven Seagal convince them that running down to the copy machine would really be no big deal since the document was communication to an agency of the United States!!



      I am selling a bridge I own and accepting credit with no money down if you need one!!

  8. GabrlaMA says:

    Northeastern University, NEU, and President Joseph E. Aoun’s
    cut-throat efforts for a grant renewal have finally paid off. The Department of Homeland Security has recently awarded 2.5 million dollars a year to NEU’s Center of Excellence for explosives detection for the next five years. NEU has not winced in its mask to pass this training exercise as a real explosion. Remember as example, the hundreds of cheering, Star Spangled Banner singing, and flag waving NEU students on Dzhorkhar Tsarnaev’s capture to show how convoluted interests run within the university. Early in May, President Aoun
    sealed Police Commissioner Ed Davis’s hush by presenting him with an honorary doctorate in grand ceremony. Commissioner Davis accepted on behalf of first responders and law enforcement officials “who sprang into action after the bombings.” At the NEU internet site, the Journalism Department slings propagandistic tactics at Dzhorkhar as a terrorist in a feature story. Professor Dan Kennedy states that Rolling Stone article shows Dzhorkhar who he was “before he began his descent into terrorism.” And according to NEU, the reader must have engrained that Dzhorkhar is “accused of carrying out the worst attack in the United States since 9/11.” In your research audience, be sure to find the Boston Globe with ties to NEU.




    • public_servant_watch says:

      Excellent research!! The taxpayer should not have to be the one connecting the dots to this huge racketeering scheme; if our federal law enforcement has criminals factions, our US Congress is in collusion and our federal courts are helping to cover up the crimes with simulated criminal proceedings against a framed defendant what is our recourse??

    • GabrlaMA says:

      I add to my above comment, the Northeastern University Department of Homeland Security Grant Renewal article dated August 19, 2013. to support my comment. The DHS 2.5 million grant was renewed in 2013. The NEU link above shows mixed dates that may be unclear to readers.


  9. Matt Prather says:

    Mr. Krajicek, your post (article) is full of on-point questions for the authorities. I laud it.

    However, ever since I first read the “Representative Keating Letter” post on this web-site, and then Keating’s letter on his web-site, I have had qualms with any characterizations of the letter as “hardball”. It seems soft.

    This is a link to a comment in the “Keating Letter” post from WhoWhatWhy:

    As of my posting today, I see there are twenty-three “up-votes” or “+1″s on the comment, and I agree with it.

    The comment says that Keating’s questions are “tangential and soft.” It says further: “these are the wrong questions to be asking. I don’t feel this article deserves space here at WWWhy.” There are no down-votes.

    Therefore I do not feel alone when I express disapproval of (or at least confusation at) your characterization of Keating’s letter as “wrathful… demanding answers.”

  10. B Hunt says:

    7. Please explain the “naked man” arrested by the BPD that looked identical to one Tamerlan Tsarnaev. Same nose, same muscular build, hair, etc.

  11. Susanne Bader says:

    Too many parallels with 9/11! I’m at the point of where I question everything the media tells us.

  12. Missie Baker says:

    Will there be justice for I. Todashev? Or at least an independent, unbiased investigation by Florida into his shooting?http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2013-08-13/news/os-todashev-father-speaks-tampa-20130813_1_ibragim-todashev-abdulbaki-todashev-hassan-shibly

    • Gaston Lagaffe says:

      From that article: “He said Todashev’s friends have said they were questioned by the FBI in
      the days before the fatal shooting, and threats were made suggesting
      that if the friends did not spy on local mosques, they would risk having
      their immigration statuses changed.”

      Disgusting! I’m guessing Todashev found himself in a similar plight. Tamerlan Tsarnaev most likely also.

  13. macduggie says:

    On the lack of ambulances.

    The police scanners record (at 9.28 in this clip) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uo1NolYUsww
    “We’ve got 10 more minutes before we can go over that finish line, because the Boston Red Sox TFR.”

  14. Danny Cahalin says:

    a ton of photo’s here, and more then likely a target of the hack for that lame stream media mouthpiece for the State the Boston Globe


  15. carl says:

    One of the most damning pieces of evidence re the FBI conduct in the investigation – eyewitness teacher tells how the FBI deleted the photos on his camera after the bombing – “A day and a half later an FBI guy comes over and says “Give me your camera”. I says I got 2000 family photos on here. “Give me your camera” and I said OK. And he went through it, he went to the pictures I had just took (sic) of the crime scene which was right outside the hotel where the bomb, bomb one and bomb two (refers to the map he drew) went off, and he went and deleted everyone of them. He said “You can have all the rest”. I got pictures of 25 ambulances lined up all ready to go. Guardsman, policemen, police cruisers all over the place.”

  16. SO says:

    Not fake bombs with actors. I didn’t seriously consider this before, but I have now. A couple of pictures of Bauman do cause some question due to lack of blood on what’s left of his leg, but everything else confirms that real bombs hurt and killed real people. One photo even apparently shows Dzhokhar Tsarnaev walking away from a back pack placed near the 8-year-old boy who was killed. http://www.dnevnik.bg/shimg/oo_2045037.jpg Real bombs and real people is my conclusion. The monkey business is elsewhere.

    • fromaway46 says:

      “everything else confirms that real bombs hurt and killed real people” What? What confirms there were real bombs and real people were actually hurt and killed? It is a total scam.

    • public_servant_watch says:

      Yes and as the Bulger guilty verdict comes in at this very moment one has to wonder how many tax supported public servants sitting in that courtroom are also guilty of racketeering and conspiracy with an associated homicide. No one is above the law!! Justice is broken!

    • SO says:

      It’s too silly to waste any more time on. This theory requires dozens of doctors and nurses and hundreds of regular people to be conspirators. It’s ridiculous. And what’s the point, anyway? The FBI is going to engineer this vast conspiracy of staging explosions and death and injuries so as not to hurt anybody while they fake a bombing? It’s ridiculous. They would use real bombs and let people get hurt. They don’t care. The more people get hurt, the better, as far as they are concerned. Reality is simpler and more realistic.

    • macduggie says:

      Respectfully disagree.

      Could you clarify the evidence you are defining as “everything else”?

      has a mountain of material.

      Have you looked through all of it?

    • public_servant_watch says:

      You would need a photo that is not in whole photoshopped including the crowd and the young defendant’s head which was placed with a still from the FBI video to make such a determination. Not one person in the picture above is in the raw video of blast site 2 and any of these people that showed up in aftermath pictures with FAKE carnage were starring in propaganda pictures which were in whole or partially photoshopped. Interesting that these people in the FBI fabricated photo were NOT in the raw video but claimed victim status. Show me a bomb scene aftermath where death occurs and limbs are blown off (and dissipate into thin air) yet plastic cups with fluid in them remain intact on the tables in a place besides Boston. Mocking the real horror that people in other parts of the world actually go through on a daily basis with fake carnage is beyond psychologically sick and those who orchestrated and carried this need to be criminally charged!!

    • geepers says:

      The photo of Dzhokhar is NOT of him placing a backpack by an 8 year old. In the picture he is smiling at some guys who are smiling too. Also, you can barely see but there is another person between him and the two ladies. There is no proof Dzhokhar was involved. And you cannot even tell what the “bag” is, although it obviously belongs to one of the two women in front. You cannot even see Dzhokhar’s lower body, let alone see a bag. You have to also take into consideration ‘depth perception’ when looking at that photo.

      Leave this poor kid alone. He will likely be executed for this crime the government did.

  17. GabrlaMA says:

    Countless businesses in the Boston area are in contract
    with the Department of Homeland Security, DHS, for explosive detection receiving millions annually. As details do reveal larger truths, I list Boston and DHS ties with focus on Northeastern University, Boston Globe and witness evidence of the Watertown shooting showing the marathon case as a training exercise. 1. Since 2008 NEU has co-lead with University of
    Rhode Island, RI, in the DHS funded Center for Excellence for Explosives Detection, Mitigation, and Response. In its research,
    one primary focus is to locate leave-behind improvised explosive devices. The center is also known as ALERT Awareness and Location of Explosives Related Threats. NEU President Joseph A. Aoun, “We need more research and training related to security” is appointed to the DHS academic
    advisory council in 1012 which reports to DHS on how universities can contribute to anti-terrrorism. NEU and
    RI are applying to renew their 4 million dollar grant which expires this year. 2. NEU Criminology Department has been at the forefront for the marathon case. Alan J.Fox Professor of Criminology sat with “Danny” also an NEU graduate. Professor Fox distorts characterizations of the Tsarnaevs as the expert criminal-terrorist analyzer in the Boston Globe, where he
    is also a columnist, in network news, and print media. 3. MBTA Transit Chief Paul MacMilan, is a Criminal Justice graduate from NEU. MBTA was at the law enforcement concealed Watertown
    shootout scene and boat shootout scene. MBTA brought down Dzhorkhar from the boat. In June 2013, MBTA unveiled the DHS funded 10 million dollar training center a simulated
    train station to help emergency responders in preparedness training such as terrorist attacks and shooting rampages, Simulation includes explosions, screams, and bomb smoke.
    4. NEU students and Boston Police Academy were recruited as witnesses and terrorists where Boston Globe claims a future Operation Urban Shield training exercise was planned “then
    the real thing happened.” Krystara Brassard NEU criminology major and Victoria McGrath NEU student were marathon victims and witnesses. Witnesses give accounts including insurmountable bloodshed, fear, and injury descriptions.
    An “us versus them” intonates, and key words include, bombing, explosions, shrapnel, blood, and terror. A reliable voicing avenue of these witness accounts has been the Boston Globe.
    5. Forum restaurant owner Euz Azevedo, an NEU business
    graduate states satisfaction that his business provided the video as FBI’s evidence against the Tsarnaevs in the Criminal Complaint “I rest easier knowing I somehow played a small role in getting these guys.” He also witnessed “patrons and bystanders with missing limbs and bleeding profusely”
    6. Boston Globe had 20 to 30 reporters, photography and film crew at the race. A world audience viewed their coverage and 30 million in just the first week. “Oh my God, Oh my God We’ve had an attack” their video begins. David Abel stood in the finish line and immediately captured footage. He commits himself
    as a witness. “I saw some of the worst things I’ve ever seen in my life…There were people, and blood, and shattered glass, and missing limbs…It’s something I’m never going to forget.” he states in a Boston Globe video-article. 7. I provide two videos for comparison of the Watertown scene. Mike Julakis gives eye witness account. He stood outdoors 25 yards from the shooting. “MBTA or a transit cruiser come up the street first.” Tamerlan Tsarnaev was shot dead on the scene. “They shot that one guy. He was dead and then they were leaning over
    him with his foot on him..” The Second video is of Watertown Police Chief Ed Deveau where he hyperbolizes his recount.
    “A gun fight, huge explosions, the bad guys” Chief Deveau stutters at the reporter’s question. His overlay of nervous word entanglement reveals the key reason officers shot Tamerlan. He pleadingly explains the chaos of explosions and grenade sounds, of the training exercise as the cause of the accidental
    death. I pass this information to Mr. Baker and citizen investigators. Indeed, details reveal larger truths.



  18. SO says:

    If they are actors, that’s mighty kind and gentle of our masters, avoiding really hurting people. But, I don’t think that they are that kind and gentle.

    • macduggie says:

      They are.

      There’s only one person screaming on this vid, and they’re shouting “Get out of here!”.

      The flags are worth a watch for the strength of the blast.

      Gore-free clip.


    • SO says:

      As I understand it, the guy who got his legs blown off was a Jeff Bauman of Chelmsford, MA. I don’t know the guy, but presumably there are people in Chelmsford who do, and know him to have had two legs before the incident. Chelmsford is a real place with real people. It’s not some CIA company town. Surely, if Bauman was a fraud, somebody from Chelmsford would say so.

    • SO says:

      He’s 27 years ols, and according to this https://www.facebook.com/ChelmsfordAlumni he went to high school in Chelmsford, meaning, I presume, that he has been in that town for at least 10 years. People in Chelmsford must know him, presumably as a guy with two legs before the bombing.

    • SO says:

      And according to here, http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/news/1007823-469/jeff-bauman-returns-to-nashua-costco-visits.html , he worked at a Nasua NH Costco before he lost his legs, and went back to visit after. Are his fellow workers at Costco part of some conspiracy? There really is a Costco in Nashua, and it would be easy enough to check.

    • macduggie says:

      I don’t live in the States.
      But it’s tough to see how the credibility of Jeff Bauman’s backstory affects the movement of flags.

    • SO says:

      I’m talking about actors, not flags. It seems likely to me that Jeff Bauman actually lost his legs that day, which is, in my opinion, getting a little carried away with the role.

    • SO says:

      As for the flags and the “dust explosion,” I find this to be vague and inconclusive. The video is saying that because the flags didn’t wave more, therefore it was a dust explosion? How is it proven that there is “no shrapnel?” A pressure cooker couldn’t make such an explosion? I don’t know. But, any theory that has Mr. Bauman voluntarily amputating his legs the night before doesn’t seem worth pursuing with much gusto.

    • macduggie says:

      Yes, it’s clear that you haven’t looked through the widely available, easily downloadable, video evidence to see whether the event was staged.

      You don’t need to provide a reasonable justification for not looking, what I am telling you is that plenty of other people and agencies will have looked for evidence that it was staged.

      And it was staged.

      I’m not recommending that you look at the evidence yourself, I’m telling you the conclusion you’d draw from the available evidence if you did in fact look..

    • SO says:

      Thank you for telling me what conclusions I would draw, and for not burdening me with any evidence.

    • fromaway46 says:

      “presumably there are people in Chelmsford who do”? OK, who? Who knows him? What proof is there this guy, Jeff Bauman, Jr., even exists?

  19. Susan says:

    Out of the many different conspiracy theories, I have come across one that has caught my attention.
    1.) The Boston Bombing was an accident. The DHS was running drills that day, with pressure cooker bombs, inside backpacks, at the same time. Furthermore, the Boston Globe tweeted that there would be an controlled explosion that day in front of the library. They denied it, but they never deleted it from their twitter feed. Many people saw them running a drill and said so. At first the DHS denied that they were running drills at the marathon, but a month after ( in late May) once everyone had been convinced of their guilt, they finally admitted they were running drills that day.

    In order to cover up said accident they decided to frame these brothers, because they would make easy and believable scapegoats. A la TWA Flight 800

    • olballcoach says:

      Except the brothers didnt want to play along and agree to be the backup “Plan B.” And neither did DHS take into account that Momma T would spill the beans on the existing relationship TT (the family) had with the FBI and the CIA. Ever since she went off script – its been Keystone coverups.

    • guest says:

      If it was by accident then more likely, by accident on purpose, with the knowledge compartmentalized.

  20. grass-knoll person says:

    Well, are they amputee-crisis-actors or are they not?
    look at the evidence

  21. macduggie says:

    One word question.



    (Contains swearies)

  22. Tanya Stone says:

    Imagine this. You come around a corner and find yourself at the scene of a terrible accident. A man is lying there, his legs seem to have been sheered off. What do you do?
    a) stop the bleeding and call for help
    b) wait for emergency workers before handling him
    c) pick him up and stick him upright in a wheelchair and wheel him down the road
    No one would do c. C is stupid. It is probably actionable.
    Someone who has had his leg(s) sheered off has already lost half his blood. Sitting him up with drain the rest of it. And don’t we all know you don’t touch someone who’s badly injured, in case you make it worse?

    Why didn’t ambulances pull up to where the victims were lying and deal with them? Why were by-standers picking up people with appalling wounds, sticking them in wheelchairs and wheeling them down the street?
    Because it was a photo-op.
    In any case, anyone who still thinks President Kennedy was killed by a single shooter is not paying attention.

    • public_servant_watch says:

      Even more amazing is that we have to spend time trying to convince people of this FACT and that the entire aftermath actions were praised in Congressional hearings by an ER physician from the RAND Corporation.

      Don’t forget the 29 year old sitting up alert and apparently screaming (acting) one minute and then supposedly in cardiac arrest the next who was taken to a medical tent with hospitals minutes away and absolutely zero advance cardiac life support administered. Shocking that people still believe these events were real AND dangerous should this be the guide for an actual event!!!

  23. suezz says:

    I don’t know about the Boston bombings and I would not put anything past anybody in the government but I am a grassy knoll type.

    You want to know why. Becasue I cannot believe the ferry tale called the warren commission. How can one bullit go through two people and break ribs and wrists bones and come out looking like it did is beyond me. That is just not happening in the real world.

    So go ahead and marginalize me and say I am a grassy knoll type but please don’t expect me to believe your ferry tale of a magic bullit.

    While you are coming up with that riddle also please explain why the ceo of chase manhattan bank was on the warren commission which was suppose to be a murder investigation.

    Please I am waiting.

  24. a registered nurse says:

    There’s a Stasi-like apparatus that’s operational in the U.S. It’s not only tracking targets mercilessly, it’s harassing them, spreading rumors, conducting sneak and peek searches of their homes, and stealing and vandalizing property, among other things. When a target becomes violent, which is rare, it shouldn’t be a surprise. The FBI reportedly had the elder Tsarnaev brother in its sights, as was the case with Nidal Hasan. Would these individuals have snapped had they not first been targeted by the American Stasi?

    These seemingly inexplicable rampage murders have an explanation, in some cases:



    (My apologies for the last comment — perhaps you could just delete it. I wasn’t seeing the repetition, for some reason.)

  25. a registered nurse says:

    There’s a Stasi-like apparatus that’s operational in the U.S. It’s not only tracking targets mercilessly, it’s harassing them, spreading rumors, conducting sneak and peek searches of their homes, and stealing and vandalizing property, among other things. When an occasional target becomes violent, it shouldn’t be a surprise. The FBI reportedly had the elder Tsarnaev brother in its sights, as was the case with Nidal Hasan. Would these individuals have snapped had they not first been targeted by the American Stasi?

    These “motiveless” rampage murders have an explanation:


    Read more at: http://www.heavy.com/news/2013/08/nathan-louis-campbell-venice-beach-driver/
    These “motiveless” rampage murders have an explanation:


    Read more at: http://www.heavy.com/news/2013/08/nathan-louis-campbell-venice-beach-driver/
    These “motiveless” rampage murders have an explanation:


    Read more at: http://www.heavy.com/news/2013/08/nathan-louis-campbell-venice-beach-driver/Some of these rampage murders have an explanation:

    These “motiveless” rampage murders have an explanation:


    Read more at: http://www.heavy.com/news/2013/08/nathan-louis-campbell-venice-beach-driver/


  26. SO says:

    Why would Obama pick Comey to head this gang of criminals? Did Obama really have a choice, or was this pick required of him by the people who murder presidents they don’t like?

    • public_servant_watch says:

      The word is Comey AND the US Congress excel in cover-up!!
      “Unfortunately, we can’t expect Congress or the commercial media to do anything to delve deeper into Comey’s role in the House of Death, or to force the release of the long-buried JAT report, because to date they essentially have helped to provide cover for the cover-up.”

  27. Big M says:

    “There are those,” the writer begins, ”who believe the bombs and
    blood were staged, the amputees and others injured were actors in some kind of Hollywood production designed to justify martial law.

    “David Abel’s lead is a splendid Straw Man ploy: dismiss an idea by seizing upon an absurd exaggeration, like looking at a reflection in a funhouse mirror.”

    Go to this web site: davesweb.cnchost.com

    and read the ongoing series at the top of the home page to see whether this is “an absurd exaggeration.”

    • babs says:

      Dave’s series on the Boston Hoax is an excellent in-depth photo by photo study of the phony event.
      It was a shabby show with fake blood, smoke bombs and Crisis ACTORS and served as a pretext to test Martial Law.

    • macduggie says:

      There’s really nothing else to say.

  28. Guest says:

    7. why would you blow up people with a bomb in broad daylight and for the next three days go to school and hang out with your friends and not leave town??

  29. Jennifer O'Harah says:

    One of the first articles I’ve read that actually got it right. Keep up the great work. And don’t be nervous about doing it. More people will be on the sides of journalists that the journalists might think. Anyone with half a brain will know this was a set up.

  30. SO says:

    What do you have when the police, the FBI, are not accountable to civilian authority? A police state.

  31. GuyFlaneur says:

    The FBI and the current Whitey Bulger trial, written by a former prosecutor. Recommended book, recommended website.
    Book: http://www.amazon.com/Dont-Embarrass-Family-Connolly-ebook/dp/B009P5K9CA/ref=as_li_tf_mfw?&linkCode=wey&tag=roouofde-20
    Website: http://thetrialofwhiteybulger.com/an-final-day-for-the-lawyers-92696/

  32. soularddave says:

    one more question: In the image above the story, there’s a logo that contains the word “skeptic”. What are the other words above that, please

  33. soularddave says:

    Look up Charrette: or inquiry, or forum. That seems like what web-connected groups of individuals do these days. That’s what we’re doing here; and very productively, I might add. I learn lots and the additions to my thinking are welcome, as they lead to better understanding of issues and situations that I’m interested in.

    So Jeanne Kempthorne can slap this critic aside if she wishes, but I know she’s playing to her audience and it won’t deter me (or the rest of you) from rational skepticism or collaborative inquiry. In fact, I find this particular forum to be particularly rational and far ranging, both in the matters of discussion and the depth of inquiry and discussion.

    Thank you all.

  34. Andrew146 says:

    Quick emotional blasts to inshore obedience. These “mistakes” could easily be behavior modification techniques. The players are all in place. Well pawns, its checkmate. Time to play another game.

  35. Larry says:

    This just published wall street article is even more disturbing http://m.us.wsj.com/articles/a/SB10001424127887323420604578649830782219440?mg=reno64-wsj
    who gave reporter access to house? Who is the mystery man who cant be interviewed? Those websites and publications reporting on truth of bombing are now allegedly to blame for it. There have been other times in history when reading or possessing certain books was a crime. They never ended well. Incredibly sophisticated media campaign going on here.

  36. a registered nurse says:

    An excellent article. Thanks.

    The FBI had Nidal Hasan in its sights for at least a year before the incident at Fort Hood. There’s some evidence that he was being monitored (and even harassed) in the days preceding the shooting.

    A grand jury was convened in Arizona to look at Jared Loughner quite some time before his rampage. Was he also being monitored? The evidence would suggest that he was.

    One has to wonder how closely the elder Tsarnaev might have been monitored in the days leading up to what happened in Boston, contrary to the official account by the FBI.

    An interview (on NPR, yesterday) about Nidal Hasan:



    And one of the most troubling things about all this is that how could an army psychiatrist have become unhinged this way, if that’s, you know, the correct word, without people noticing it? And the troubling aspect of this after the terrible tragedy is that media reports in the weeks after the shooting showed that indeed people in the military, officers in the military who worked with Hasan and people in the FBI all had worries about Hasan in the years leading up to it. And those worries did not go anywhere.

    MARTIN: You broke some of the stories that revealed some of those concerns that Hasan’s supervisor had about him, specifically at Walter Reed Medical Center here in Washington, D.C. What were they concerned about?

    ZWERDLING: You know, Hasan trained and then worked there as a psychiatrist over six years on and off – most of it on. And starting from the time he first started training there, his supervisors gave him repeated bad evaluations. They said he was a bad psychiatrist. They said he was unprofessional. It got so bad that in the year leading up to Fort Hood, his supervisors actually had a series of discussions where they wondered
    could it be that Hasan is psychotic. And one of his supervisors
    wondered out loud to colleagues, do you think Nidal Hasan could commit fratricide? Fratricide, of course, is when, you know, a soldier kills a fellow soldier. And one supervisor actively tried to get rid of him, kick him out of the program at Walter Reed. And a committee that had to make the final judgments squashed his efforts.

    MARTIN: Did the concerns end there? Were there others?

    ZWERDLING: Yes. The FBI, in the year leading up to Fort Hood, Nidal Hasan popped up on their radar, ’cause they were spying on Anwar al Awlaki, who you mentioned in the introduction, the radical cleric. Lo and behold, here is this Army psychiatrist writing emails to this radical cleric. And some of the emails were asking his opinion on killing innocents and his
    opinions on jihad. And FBI agents actually had an internal debate. Is this guy, Nidal Hasan, dangerous or not? And they finally decided, you know, he’s just doing this for his research for a graduate program at the military university. And that’s where that ended.

  37. Charlie Primero says:

    Good summary of the questions needing answers.

  38. notalent says:

    If government agencies (FBI) are anonymously leaking information or contradictory misinformation to national news outlets such as NYTimes or CBS news without any accountability to the public then those news outlets are essentially acting as functionaries to the State. We would expect this in fascist leaning countries. Has the mass media officially become the propaganda arm of the State?

  39. Missie Baker says:

    I did not know the FSB had identified Todashev as significant post 4/15. It would seem the FBI should soon have available their internal report clearing the agent of all misdeeds. Perhaps the ACLU will be able to use the report’s findings (if it is released to the public) for further action.

    The Catalano family scare, heightened tensions in the area aside, is an example of what can happen when citizens say “I don’t care what the NSA is spying on, I’ve nothing to hide.” I, too, have nothing to hide, but when doing my own superficial researches into the BMB events, much as I would have liked to search on the Inspire website to read those oft-referenced set of instructions, I really didn’t dare do so.

    Along these lines, whatever the true motivations for the BMB, should these ever be revealed in a public forum, we’ve now seen first-hand invasive military-style tactics employed to find an unarmed 19 YO suspect in a suburban setting that were curiously ineffective. Couldn’t help thinking about the implications of that watching 60 minutes last night. “Counterinsurgency cops” http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57596884/counterinsurgencycops-military-tactics-fight-street-crime/
    The premises, the execution and the message was the success achieved by deploying military tactics in a dangerous urban environment. All that was missing from the segment was a section on utilizing drones in these neighborhoods, deployed on a grid system analyzed and developed by the Harvard engineering students.

  40. tinfoilhat says:

    What is the status of Tsarnaev’s trial? Where is he being held until his trial begins? Has anyone heard who is defending him and what their strategy might be? I would think this trial would be one that the law schools would be particularly interested in. Why hasn’t his mug shot picture been leaked?

    • public_servant_watch says:

      Appears to have all the hallmarks of simulated proceedings including a secret docket, no actual notice of appearance by any defense attorney as required by the court’s rules, and fraudulent orders that do not make to the day’s all recent orders docket including his US District Judge assignment which was followed by fraudulent order back to the same Magistrate who took the case without a random draw from the start (I have all these dockets to back these allegations).

      Further, I managed to get a filing on July 26th that had been entered into the ECF system as an ex parte sealed motion undersigned with the name Judy Clarke which immediately disappeared off the docket; these types of filings by the court rules are suppose to be filed in paper form with the clerk.

      The PDF properties indicate that the document came from the Federal Public Defender Office. Previous Clarke documents also have aberrant PDF properties when compared with known Judy Clarke legitimate filings in the Loughner case.

      An attorney has addressed the issue of the unconstitutional docket and as of today his letter still has not made it onto the case docket. Multiple docket entries remain missing including another three that were before the 7/26/2013 filing which remains missing from the docket.


    • tinfoilhat says:

      Got it. Thanks.

  41. Jack says:

    I think the proper historical narrative would be “Oswald seen in Mexico”

  42. Zack B says:

    Here is an excerpt from BBC World News:

    One of the brothers suspected of carrying out the Boston bombings
    was in possession of right-wing American literature in the run-up to
    the attack, BBC Panorama has learnt.

    Tamerlan Tsarnaev subscribed to publications espousing white
    supremacy and government conspiracy theories.

    He also had reading material on mass killings.

    Here is the link to the story: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23541341

    • public_servant_watch says:

      This looks like a new spin in follow up to the FBI NYT story and it just does not fly any better than the FBI’s claim of Radical Islam. Here is an excerpt from a BBC piece where the source is bit more reliable and the content quite a bit more believable.

      Zukhum Zukhumov a philosophy professor reports he met Tamerlan Tsarnaev several times during Tamerlan’s six months in Dagestan.

      “He was tall, good-looking, and intelligent,” says Professor Zukhumov. “He read Turgenev and Dostoyevsky. It’s absurd to think he was inclined towards radical ideas.”


  43. Gaston Lagaffe says:

    Seems like this John Miller person has done his utmost to orchestrate the FBI story. Why tell these downright lies (and I think I can safely conclude they are lies because the statements are never retracted)?

    Here’s an interesting article about the Waltham murders – don’t know how legit it is, but it’s a good thing to look at some other options regarding that case. The attempt to link Tamerlan Tsarnaev and Ibragim Todashev to those killings seems almost desperate.

  44. Anders Aronsson says:

    The article below includes a picture of Dzhokar Tsarnaev when he was arrested. According to the police he was injured in the throat or neck so he couldn’t speak. Obviously that was not true.

    Further more if there is something wrong with his throat now, the police must be responsible. Scary thought.


    • LB in TN says:

      And, thanks to discovery, we now know his injuries: http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/08/19/tsarnaev-injuries-detailed-court-filings/iosBu05QsC8fwGwMKHtdHL/story.html

      But that just makes me more puzzled.

      He had “a high-powered injury that has resulted in skull-base fracture, with injuries to the middle ear, the skull base, the lateral portion of his C1 vertebrae, with a significant soft-tissue injury, as well as injury to the pharynx, the mouth…”

      In the photos released by Sgt. Sean Murphy, we see an injured Dzhokar Tsarnaev, but not with all of those injuries! A direct shot to the mouth? His mouth looks fine in those pictures. If he’d been shot or did shoot himself in the mouth, his mouth would have bled profusely (ever bit your tongue? The mouth BLEEDS!) When did that injury occur? We now know he wasn’t armed, so who? when?

      I don’t think the bombings were fake, but I’m beginning to believe the after-story is one big one. For what reason? I don’t know. Sigh.

    • Anders Aronsson says:

      Now we have a third version of the story. He got shot in exactly the part of the face that the pictures don’t show. Here’s Reuters:

      “He has multiple gunshot wounds, the most severe of which appears to have entered through the left side inside of his mouth and exited the left face, lower face. This was a high-powered injury that has resulted in skull-base fracture,”

      Wouldn’t that be very painful? How does he even manage to stand up?


  45. jah says:

    I believe a correction is required for the para below your question numbered 1: One of those search terms was “pressure cooker bomb”.



    • David J. Krajicek says:

      Hi, Jah: The woman says the search term was “pressure cooker.” The police say it was “pressure cooker bomb.” In either case, the essential question is whether it is reasonable for six cops to show up at the couple’s home based upon nothing more than a Google search.

    • Jack says:

      …so wouldn’t google just have to supply records of search terms used by this person?
      That would clear up any confusion, I believe.

    • soularddave says:

      perhaps she typed “pressure coo…” (for instance) and the Google auto-fill did the rest and “pressure cooker bomb” was what she decided to click on. Try it on your computer.

      Just sayin’

Subscribe to the Daily WhoWhatWhy

Relevant, in-depth journalism delivered to you.
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.