Boston bombings

[titus]

Right on sis.. enough their ugliness of the world out there, must we also embrace their BS in this place?

If you want to exclude non-Muslims then have them change the rules. If you want to reduce the ugliness on these boards then edit your posts.

I see no hatred here from the non-Muslims towards Muslims. I do see lots of hatred from some of the Muslim posters though.

You may not like what we say, but I challenge you to find anything written by myself, Independent or any of the other non-Muslims that is anti-Muslim or "ugly" towards Islam.

 

[Jedi_Mindset]

9/11, the JFK Assassination, and the Oklahoma City Bombing as a Strategy of Tension


Scholar and former diplomat Peter Dale Scott compares the events of September 11, the JFK assassination and the Oklahoma City bombing. He exposes the existence and continuity of a "deep state" behind the facade.

Introduction: Structural Deep Events and the Strategy of Tension in ItalyFrom an American standpoint, it is easy to see clearly how Italian history was systematically destabilized in the second half of the 20th century, by a series of what I call structural deep events. I have defined these as "events, like the JFK assassination, the Watergate break-in, or 9/11, which violate the … social structure, have a major impact on … society, repeatedly involve law-breaking or violence, and in many cases proceed from an unknown dark force." [1]

Piazza Fontana bombing, Bologna bombing
The examples in Italy, well known to Italians, include the Piazza Fontana bombing of 1969, the Piazza della Loggia bombing of 1974, and the Bologna railway bombing of 1980. These bombings, in which over one hundred civilians were killed and many more wounded, were attributed at the time to marginal left-wing elements of society. However, thanks chiefly to a series of investigations and judicial proceedings, it is now clearly established that the bombings were the work of right-wing elements in collusion with Italian military intelligence, as part of an on-going "strategy of tension" to discredit the Italian left, encourage support for a corrupt status quo, and perhaps move beyond democracy altogether. [2] As one of the conspirators, Vincenzo Vinciguerra, later stated, "The December 1969 explosion was supposed to be the detonator which would have convinced the political and military authorities to declare a state of emergency." [3]Vinciguerra also revealed that he and others had also been members of a paramilitary "stay-behind" network originally organized at the end of World War II by the CIA and NATO as "Operation Gladio."In 1984, questioned by judges about the 1980 Bologna station bombing, Vinciguerra said: "With the massacre of Peteano, and with all those that have followed, the knowledge should by now be clear that there existed a real live structure, occult and hidden, with the capacity of giving a strategic direction to the outrages...[it] lies within the state itself...There exists in Italy a secret force parallel to the armed forces, composed of civilians and military men, in an anti-Soviet capacity that is, to organise a resistance on Italian soil against a Russian army...A secret organisation, a super-organisation with a network of communications, arms and explosives, and men trained to use them...A super-organisation which, lacking a Soviet military invasion which might not happen, took up the task, on Nato’s behalf, of preventing a slip to the left in the political balance of the country. This they did, with the assistance of the official secret services and the political and military forces. [4]Gladio connections to sustained false-flag violence, again involving NATO and the CIA, were subsequently revealed in other countries, notably Belgium and Turkey. [5]The original purpose of Gladio was to consolidate resistance in the event of a Soviet takeover. But many of the senior Italians involved in the bombings implicated the CIA and NATO in them as well:General Vito Miceli, the Italian head of military intelligence, after his arrest in 1974 on a charge of conspiring to overthrow the government, testified "that the incriminated organization, … was formed under a secret agreement with the United States and within the framework of NATO." Former Italian defense minister Paulo Taviani told Magistrate Casson during a 1990 investigation "that during his time in office (1955-58), the Italian secret services were bossed and financed by ‘the boys in Via Veneto’—i.e. the CIA agents in the U.S. Embassy in the heart of Rome." In 2000 "an Italian secret service general [Giandelio Maletti] said . . . that the CIA gave its tacit approval to a series of bombings in Italy in the 1970s to sow instability and keep communists from taking power. . . . ‘The CIA wanted, through the birth of an extreme nationalism and the contribution of the far right, particularly Ordine Nuovo, to stop (Italy) sliding to the left,’ he said." [6]Daniele Ganser, in his important book Nato’s Secret Armies, has endorsed a Spanish report that in 1990 NATO Secretary General Manfred Wörner (a German politician and diplomat) secretly confirmed that NATO’s headquarters, SHAPE, was indeed responsible:The Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE), directing organ of NATO’s military apparatus, coordinated the actions of Gladio, according to the revelations of Gladio Secretary-General Manfred Wörner during a reunion with the NATO ambassadors of the 16 allied nations. [7]Extrapolating from such testimony, Ola Tunander has compared the strategy of tension in Italy, with its false-flag bombing attacks, to "what the Turkish military elite might describe as the correction of the course of democracy by the ‘deep state’ [a Turkish term]." [8]

Strategy of Tension
But I believe it would be too simplistic an analysis to blame the Italian strategy of tension exclusively on Vinciguerra’s "super-organisation which… took up the task [of false-flag bombings], on Nato’s behalf." There appear to have been other directing forces besides NATO and those elements Vinciguerra was aware of through Italian military intelligence (the SID, later SISMI). It is important to recall that the Italian trials of those convicted for the 1980 Bologna bombing implicated not only Vinciguerra, SISMI, and Gladio, but also elements of the Italian mafia (the Banda della Magliana) and the Italian Masonic Lodge Propaganda-Due (P-2), with links to criminal bankers and the Vatican. [9]In short, if we suggest that something like the Turkish deep state was involved in the Italian strategy of tension, this does not suggest a solution to the Italian mystery, so much as a zone, or interlocking network, for further research.Has a Strategy of Tension Been Exercised in America?Gladio connections to sustained false-flag violence, again involving NATO and the CIA, were subsequently established in other countries, notably Belgium and Turkey. [10] I wish to propose that America, as well as Europe, has also suffered from a similar series of false-flag structural deep events, including bombings, that have, in conformity with the same strategy of tension, systematically moved America into its current condition, a state of emergency.

Nato headquarters
Among the false flag structural deep events I wish to consider today areThe John F. Kennedy assassination of 1963, or 11/22, which led to the CIA’s Operation Chaos against the anti-Vietnam War movement. (11/22 was clearly a deep event: many documents in the area of Lee Harvey Oswald’s relations to CIA operations are still being withheld, despite statutory and court orders to release them. [11]The Robert Kennedy assassination of 1968, followed immediately by emergency legislation which led to state-sponsored violence at the 1968 Democratic Party Convention.The 1993 first World Trade Center bombing and the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, which led to the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996.9/11 and the subsequent false flag anthrax attacks of 2001, which led to the imposition of Continuity of Government (COG) measures, the Patriot Act, and the proclamation, on September 14, 2001, of a State of Emergency which remains in effect. (In September 2012 it was once again renewed for another year). [12]These structural deep events have had a common and cumulative result: the erosion of public or constitutional power, and its progressive replacement by unconstrained repressive force. I have argued elsewhere that1) as in Italy, all of these events were blamed on marginal left-wing elements, but in fact involved elements inside America’s covert intelligence agencies, along with their shadowy underworld connections.2) some of these structural deep events bore a relationship to the ongoing secret planning - known in the Pentagon as the Doomsday Project - for Continuity of Government (or COG) in an emergency, which entailed its own secret communications network, and arrangements for what (in the Oliver North Hearings) was called "suspension of the American Constitution."3) in every case, the official response to the deep event was a set of new repressive measures, usually in the form of legislation.4) cumulatively, these events suggest the on-going presence in America of what I have called a "dark force" or "deep state," analogous to what Vinciguerra described in Italy as a "secret force…occult and hidden, with the capacity of giving a strategic direction to the [successive] outrages." [13]The Oklahoma City Bombing (4/19) and 9/11Recently I viewed for a film, "A Noble Lie," about the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing. [14] This gave me a chance, for the first time, to test these hypotheses against the case of Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995, or what I shall call 4/19. More than I could have anticipated, 4/19 fit into and strengthened this analysis.

Oklahoma City BombingThe film "A Noble Lie," itself points to some striking similarities between the events of 1995 and of 2001. The most obvious is the alleged destruction of a steel-reinforced building by external forces (a truck bomb in the case of the Murrah Building in 1995, flying debris in the case of Building Seven in 2001). Experts in both cases have asserted that the buildings in fact could only have been brought down by cutting charges placed directly against the sustaining columns inside the building. Here for example is a report to Congress from General Benton K. Partin, a retired U.S. Air Force Brigadier General and expert on non-nuclear weapons devices:When I first saw the pictures of the truck-bomb’s asymmetrical damage to the Federal Building, my immediate reaction was that the pattern of damage would have been technically impossible without supplementing demolition charges at some of the reinforcing concrete column bases…. For a simplistic blast truck-bomb, of the size and composition reported, to be able to reach out on the order of 60 feet and collapse a reinforced column base the size of column A-7 is beyond credulity. [15]There is now a broad and growing consensus among architects, engineers, and other experts, that the three buildings which collapsed on 9/11 in the World Trade Center were also most probably destroyed by controlled demolition charges. [16]Another important similarity was the legal consequence of most of these events: the response to Oklahoma City was the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, while the response to 9/11 was the first implementation of COG and the passage (after a false flag anthrax attack) of the Patriot Act. "A Noble Lie" focuses on the domestic consequences of the Antiterrorism Act, and indeed it did, like the Patriot Act after it, provide for significant restrictions on the right of habeas corpus as the courts had interpreted it. In other words, both acts provided pretexts for implementation of the proposals for warrantless detention that had been a central focus of COG planning in the 1980s with Oliver North. This fit into a larger ongoing pattern of the progressive restriction of our constitutional rights by unrestrained coercive power — a pattern that I will trace back to the assassination of John F. Kennedy in 1963.But there were important foreign consequences of the 1996 Antiterrorism Act as well, in particular Section 328, which amended the Foreign Assistance Act to bolsterassistance in the form of arms and ammunition to certain specific countries, for the purpose of fighting terrorism. [17] This in turn led in 1997 to the creation of secret "Eyes Only" liaison agreement between the CIA’s Counter-Terrorism Center (CTC) and Saudi Arabia, followed by a subsequent CIA agreement in 1999 with Uzbekistan (i.e. two of the most secretive and repressive regimes in the world today). [18]I have argued that these secret liaison agreements - with Saudi Arabia and Uzbekistan - may have provided the cover for secret CIA withholding of information before 9/11 about the designated 9/11 culprits al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar. [19] Thus, if my analysis of the CIA’s withholding in 2000-2001 is accurate, then 4/19 in 1995 did not just exhibit similarities to 9/11: it was a significant part of the build-up which allowed this withholding to occur, and also 9/11 itself.Increases in Repressive Power After Deep EventsThat 4/19 in 1995 had repressive legal consequences links it both to 9/11 in 2001 and also to 11/22 in 1963, after which the Warren Commission used the JFK assassination to increase CIA surveillance of Americans. As I wrote in Deep Politics, this was the result ofthe Warren Commission’s controversial recommendations that the Secret Service’s domestic surveillance responsibilities be increased (WR 25-26). Somewhat illogically, the Warren Report concluded both that Oswald acted alone (WR 22), . . . and also that the Secret Service, FBI, CIA, should coordinate more closely the surveillance of organized groups (WR 463). In particular, it recommended that the Secret Service acquire a computerized data bank compatible with that already developed by the CIA. [20]In the ensuing Vietnam War this involvement of the CIA in domestic surveillance led to the CIA’s Operation Chaos, an investigation of the antiwar movement in which the CIA, despite its Charter’s restrictions on domestic spying,amassed thousands of files on Americans, indexed hundreds of thousands of Americans into its computer records, and disseminated thousands of reports about Americans to the FBI and other government offices. Some of the information concerned the domestic activity of those Americans. [21]The pattern of increased repression would repeat itself four years later in 1968 after the assassination of Martin Luther King, in response to which two US Army brigades were (until 1971) stationed on permanent standby in the United States, as part of Operation GARDEN PLOT to deal with domestic unrest. [22]The pattern was repeated again withthe assassination of Robert Kennedy. In the twenty-four hours between Bobby’s shooting and his death, Congress hurriedly passed a statute— drafted well in advance (like the Tonkin Gulf Resolution of 1964 and the Patriot Act of 2001) — that still further augmented the secret powers given to the Secret Service in the name of protecting presidential candidates. [23]This was not a trivial or benign change: from this swiftly considered act, passed under Johnson, flowed some of the worst excesses of the Nixon presidency. [24] The change also contributed to the chaos and violence at the Chicago Democratic Convention of 1968. Army intelligence surveillance agents, seconded to the Secret Service, were present both inside and outside the convention hall. Some of them equipped the so-called "Legion of Justice thugs whom the Chicago Red Squad turned loose on local anti-war groups." [25]Other Similarities between Dallas in 1963 and Oklahoma City in 1995The repressive consequences after 11/22 in 1963, and after 4/19 in 1995, are linked to other shared features between the two events. Almost immediately after 11/22 there were reports from both inside and outside government, suggesting that Oswald had killed the president as part of an international Communist conspiracy.In Deep Politics and the Death of JFK, I called these "Phase-One" reports, part ofa two-fold process. Phase One put forward the phantom of an international plot, linking Oswald to the USSR, to Cuba, or to both countries together. This phantom was used to invoke the danger of a possible nuclear confrontation, which induced Chief Justice Earl Warren and other political notables to accept Phase Two, the equally false (but less dangerous) hypothesis that Oswald killed the President all by himself. …. [T]he Phase-One story… was first promoted and then defused by the CIA. Michael Beschloss has revealed that, at 9:20 AM on the morning of November 23, CIA Director John McCone briefed the new President. In Beschloss’ words: "The CIA had information on foreign connections to the alleged assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, which suggested to LBJ that Kennedy may have been murdered by an international conspiracy." [26]To this day both Phase-One and Phase-Two stories have dominated the treatment of 11/22 in the governing media, to the virtual exclusion of non-establishment analyses treating 11/22 as a deep event.Many have forgotten that there was a Phase One-Phase Two process with respect to 4/19 as well. Both immediately and thereafter there were a number of reports linking McVeigh and Nichols to Iraqis and other Middle Easterners, including Ramzi Yousef, the fugitive bomber in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing (which also used an ammonium nitrate (ANFO) bomb in a Ryder rental truck.) [27] Both Clinton and his Counterterrorism Coordinator, Richard Clarke, have confirmed that some of these stories were discussed at a meeting of the Counterterrorism Security Group on the day of 4/19. [28] Both men also claim to have dismissed them in favor of a low-grade Phase Two local conspiracy led by the two designated culprits: Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols. But reports of Middle Eastern involvement, sometimes attributed to sources inside government, continued to appear in the governing media, including CBS, NBC, and the New York Times. [29]

First World Trade Center bombing of 1993
Meanwhile, signs of a local Iraqi conspiracy were industriously pursued by an Oklahoma City NBC reporter, Jayna Davis, and collected in her book The Third Terrorist. Her Phase-One evidence was centered on an all-points-bulletin initial search, quickly suppressed, for an unnamed John Doe #2. Her research was subsequently endorsed in a Congressional Report by Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher. [30]Moreover Richard Clarke has written that the Oklahoma City bombing was followed by a spate of new internal Presidential Decision Directives or PDDs (in addition to the Antiterrorism Act), which were drafted by himself. One of these addressed a security problem in response to the Oklahoma City bombing, and another conferred new counterterrorism powers on himself, including his new title as National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Counter-terrorism. Two (PDD 62 and especially PDD 67) dealt with what he calls a more "robust system of command and control" for "our Continuity of Government program," which in his words "had been allowed to fall apart when the threat of a Soviet nuclear attack had gone away." [31]These words recall Tim Weiner’s report of April 1994 in theNew York Times that in the post-Soviet Clinton era, "the Doomsday Project, as it was known" was scheduled to be scaled way back, because "the nuclear tensions" of the Soviet era had faded away. [32] In other words Clinton had planned to scale back the Doomsday Project (which was governed by a secret extra-governmental committee including Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney, then both not in government); but Richard Clarke used Oklahoma City to save the Doomsday Project, make it more robust and place it under his own control.According to author Andrew Cockburn, a new target was found:Although the exercises continued, still budgeted at over $200 million a year in the Clinton era, the vanished Soviets were now replaced by terrorists. . . . There were other changes, too. In earlier times the specialists selected to run the "shadow government" had been drawn from across the political spectrum, Democrats and Republicans alike. But now, down in the bunkers, Rumsfeld [and Cheney] found [themselves] in politically congenial company, the players’ roster being filled almost exclusively with Republican hawks. "It was one way for these people to stay in touch. They’d meet, do the exercise, but also sit around and castigate the Clinton administration in the most extreme way," a former Pentagon official with direct knowledge of the phenomenon told me. "You could say this was a secret government-in-waiting." [33]Of course the fact that 4/19 was followed by a strengthening of COG does not of itself corroborate my thesis that COG planning has been a significant factor in the planning and execution of America’s structural deep events [34] However there were other recurring features in the picture I have presented of America’s structural deep events, and we do find these in the Oklahoma City story.Of these the most prominent is the importance in the official story of designated culprits who were very possibly government informants or double agents. [35] Perhaps the best documented recent example is the US Government’s use and protection of the senior al-Qaeda operative Ali Mohamed as a double agent inside al Qaeda; this protection allowed him to train some of the participants of the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993, and later help organize the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombing in Kenya. [36]In my 2008 book The War Conspiracy I discussed the possibility that both Lee Harvey Oswald and some of the Arabs designated in 9/11 (Ali Mohamed, al-Hazmi, al-Mihdhar) may in fact have been double agents working with a US Government agency, such as the FBI or Army Intelligence. [37] Others have suggested that at the very least Oswald was an FBI informant; and Lawrence Wright wrote in The New Yorker that, in withholding the names of al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar from the FBI, "The CIA may also have been protecting an overseas operation and was afraid that the F.B.I. would expose it." [38]In this context I noted with great interest the contention in "A Noble Lie" that Timothy McVeigh, the prime designated culprit in 4/19, may also have been an informant or double agent working for the U.S. Army. [39] Of course this contention remains unproven, but the film provides some corroborative evidence

.The Oklahoma City Bombing and Operation PATCONWhat is certain is that McVeigh, like Oswald, al-Hazmi, and al-Mihdhar, was in a milieu of known informants and or double agents, who were part of an important secret operation. In the case of Oswald and the two Saudis, this suggests reasons for the U.S. Government’s on-going suppression of important facts about them, both before the crimes they are alleged to have committed, and ever since to the present day. [40]In 2005 John M. Berger, an excellent researcher, discovered that in the 1990s the FBI, in a major counterintelligence operation, codenamed PATCON for "Patriot-conspiracy," had been investigating McVeigh’s milieu of armed right-wingers — or what Berger calleda wildly diverse collection of racist, ultra-libertarian, right-wing and/or pro-gun activists and extremists who, over the years, have found common cause in their suspicion and fear of the federal government. The undercover agents met some of the most infamous names in the movement, but their work never led to a single arrest. When McVeigh walked through the middle of the investigation in 1993, he went unnoticed. [41]PATCON was particularly focused on a former asset of Oliver North’s illegal network to supply arms to the Nicaragua Contras: Tom Posey and his paramilitary group Civilian Material Assistance (CMA). In the 1980s, according to Paul de Armond, CMA had begun as "as an adjunct to the Alabama Ku Klux Klan." [42] Enrolled in the Contra supply effort by first the Defense Intelligence Agency and then Oliver North, CMA’s "volunteer" work in patrolling the Arizona border against incoming aliens persuaded then-Congressman John McCain to serve on its board. [43] But in PATCON’s eyes in the Post-Reagan era, "Posey was a notorious black market arms dealer, suspected of having contraband sources on more than one U.S. military base." [44]In both JFK and 9/11 it seems clear to me that the subsequent cover-ups derive from the fact that the respective plots were skillfully designed to piggy-back on authorized covert operations, in such a way as to ensure a subsequent cover-up. Berger’s important essay in Foreign Policy on PATCON does not suggest a connection between McVeigh’s plot and the FBI operation. However he notes deep in the essay that Dennis Mahon, an associate of McVeigh and another important target of PATCON,would go on to be a well-known figure in white supremacist circles and was convicted in February for the 2004 mail bombing of a state diversity official in Arizona. After his arrest in 2009, Mahon told his cellmate that he was "the number three anonymous person in the Oklahoma City bombing investigation."In other words, Mahon identified himself as John Doe #2.Berger, on his own Website Intelwire, has written that "Mahon has spoken of knowing McVeigh in the past," and has concluded that, "Based on those comments and other information, it is at least plausible that Mahon was involved in the [Oklahoma City] bombing. [45] Berger’s "other evidence" is the testimony of ATF informant Carol Howe, transmitted first by Jayna Davis and then by Congressman Rohrabacher, that before 4/19 "Mahon talked about targeting federal buildings for bombings. …[and] took three trips [with McVeigh’s contact Andre Strassmeir] to Oklahoma City." [46]Mahon has been characterized as a self-aggrandizing loose talker. However, it seems safe to say that we better understand the context of Oklahoma City after considering the new evidence relating to PATCON, a secret FBI operation from 1991 to 1993 then known only to insiders.

Was Oklahoma City "a Sting Gone Wrong"?Although PATCON itself was officially terminated in 1993, we learn from its files that there were in fact a number of ongoing informants at Elohim City, Oklahoma very likely including not only Howe but also Strassmeir. [47] The Government’s lack of response to the reports they received of an intended bombing strengthens the hypothesis, voiced in the film "A Noble Lie," that the 4/19 plot was initially intended as a sting, the lethal result of which represented "a sting gone wrong."If so, this would increase the similarity between 4/19 and the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993. According to the official account, this was also a conspiracy penetrated by the FBI, also involving an ANFO bomb on a Ryder rental truck that was also later identified by its vehicle identification number (VIN) on a metal fragment. [48] In the 1993 bombing the New York Timeslater reported from tapes of interviews of the FBI’s informant with his FBI handler:Law-enforcement officials were told that terrorists were building a bomb that was eventually used to blow up the World Trade Center, and they planned to thwart the plotters by secretly substituting harmless powder for the explosives, an informer said after the blast.The informer was to have helped the plotters build the bomb and supply the fake powder, but the plan was called off by an F.B.I. supervisor who had other ideas about how the informer, Emad A. Salem, should be used, the informer said. [49]This Times story of the 2003 WTC bombing clearly describes a conspiracy that had been effectively penetrated by the FBI, which nonetheless, for whatever reason, reached its lethal conclusion. One such case of a penetrated operation "gone wrong" in 1993 might be attributed to confusion, bureaucratic incompetence, or the problems of determining when sufficient evidence had been gathered to justify arrests. A repeated catastrophe two years later raises the question whether the lethal outcome was not intended.Together with the example of inaction on the CIA’s prior knowledge of the alleged 9/11 hijackers, the three mass murders strengthen the claim to the International Criminal Court of Judge Ferdinando Imposimato, the Honorary President of Italy’s Supreme Court: that 9/11 was "a repeat of the CIA’s ’strategy of tension’ carried out in Italy" from the 1960s to the 1980s. [50] I appreciate that it will be difficult as well as painful for most Americans to contemplate that America’s own history, like that of Italy a half century ago, could have been systemically manipulated and destabilized by unknown forces. But the more research I do, the more I am convinced that something like Judge Imposimato’s verdict must be considered.Moreover, if the Italian analogy is applicable to the United States, then the judgment that "9/11 was "a repeat of the CIA’s ’strategy of tension’ carried out in Italy" raises a larger question about all the structural deep events we have considered, especially the bombings of 1993 and 1995. Were these all part of a single sustained strategy of tension? It is too early to tell. But at the very least the WTC bombings of 1993 and 2001 show suggestive signs of common origins - both outside government (the plotters Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and the informant Ali Mohammed) and possibly inside (as indicated by the overlapping, ongoing cover-ups of both). [51]In contrast, all of the structural deep events I have been discussing are predictably treated by the governing media as the work of marginal outsiders - by a "lone nut" like Oswald, or a "lone wolf" like Timothy McVeigh. The commonalities between these events I have presented suggest a different analysis: that insiders including intelligence officials and other government officers, as well as outsiders, including government agents and double agents, must be held responsible for repeatedly designing plots that, because of their interface with sanctioned intelligence operations, will not be revealed by government.My own analysis identifies these insiders as part of an on-going milieu, admittedly amorphous and unstructured, linking the secret networks in government to other powerful forces in our society, For want of a better phrase, I have labeled this milieu, reluctantly, as the "deep state." [52] But as I remarked earlier with respect to Italy, the term "deep state" is not offered as a solution to these unsolved crimes, but as a focus for further research.

An Alternative Analysis of Deep Events: State Crimes Against Democracy

Let me contrast my own analysis with those of two others. The first is the notion of a "secret government" put forward in an important PBS program in 1987 by Bill Moyers. [53] It rightly points to the dangerous rise of covert agencies, and above all the CIA, inside government since the National Security Act of 1947. And it analyzes the crimes of Iran-Contra in particular as an example of secret government escaping from the jurisdiction of the law and other restraints of the Constitution and public state.In the words of the Moyers showThe Secret Government is an interlocking network of official functionaries, spies, mercenaries, ex-generals, profiteers and superpatriots, who, for a variety of motives, operate outside the legitimate institutions of government.In other words, the show was pointing to the "Enterprise" used by North and his allies inside and outside the Executive Office Building to implement Iran-Contra and other policies that violated law and/or the directives of Congress. As I have shown elsewhere, North, implementing these policies, availed himself of the emergency antiterrorist network, codenamed Flashboard, that had been put together, at immense cost, by the Doomsday Project. [54] In so doing, he was "piggy-backing:" using the authorized secret network for an illicit, criminal program, outside of the network’s designated purpose.Such an analysis could be screened on PBS in 1987 because one part of the U.S. government at that time was at war with another - a war which set Casey at odds not only with Congress but even with senior officers in his own agency the CIA. [55] One can locate Moyers’ show as part of a series of insider leaks and governing media exposés of Oliver North’s off-the-books "Enterprise," which North (and behind him CIA director Casey) had used to violate official policies and laws. [56] In short Moyers’ challenge to Casey’s and North’s "warriors" suited the aims of the traditional CIA (and their usual backers, the "traders" on Wall Street). [57]Thus we should not be surprised that it had nothing to say about the role of North’s superior, Vice-President Bush, or about the stake of corporate interests in promoting CIA covert operations around the world (such as the much larger 1980s CIA operation in Afghanistan). Above all, it had not a word about North’s Doomsday Project planning to "suspend the U.S. Constitution," even though this did surface for an instant in the Iran-Contra Hearings. [58] By its silence about the Doomsday Project, the show failed to address the ongoing planning which, I believe, allowed for the fruition of COG plans in 9/11 and the Patriot Act. To sum up, the Moyers attack on the secret government was largely confined to what was already in the public record. It did not venture into deep politics.More recently the concept of State Crimes Against Democracy, or SCADs, has been proposed by Prof. Lance deHaven-Smith, and endorsed by some of my friends in the 9/11 Truth community, including Peter Phillips and Mickey Huff. By SCADs, Prof. deHaven-Smith means "concerted actions or inactions by government insiders intended to manipulate democratic processes and undermine popular sovereignty." [59]One great advantage of the SCAD hypothesis is that, unlike my own work, it has been discussed in academic journals, thus breaking a kind of sound barrier. But I have problems with the term "State Crimes." On the one hand I would claim that the State, or some segments of the state, is often the victim of deep events, as in 4/19. On the other I see the State as primarily a guarantor of democracy, not simply an enemy of it.I agree that some government insiders play an important role in these events, indeed, I have documented some of these in the preceding pages. But I find it misleading to pin the blame for the crime on the State alone. After all, if a bank insider opens the door to a group of bank robbers, what ensues (even if you choose to call it an "inside job") is unmistakably a robbery of the bank, not by it.SCAD analysis is far more useful and sophisticated than I can present it here, and I expect to continue to learn from those who pursue it. But it is not deep political analysis. DeHaven-Smith’s list of SCADs includes "the secret wars in Laos and Cambodia," two relevant policy decisions (rather than events) that we know came from the Oval Office; although covert at the time, and very arguably illegal, they were when exposed not at all mysterious and thus essentially not very deep.By positing SCADs as a struggle between the State on the one hand and democracy on the other, I believe this analysis oversimplifies both concepts, and underestimates (as Moyers did not) the internal contradictions within each. Democracy is after all a form of the state in which the people’s freedom and power is constitutionally guaranteed by the state (or what I call the public state). And at least one of deHaven-Smith’s SCADs - the JFK assassination - might more logically be considered a crimeagainst the state, rather than by it.Phillips and Hoff seem to recognize this difficulty: they drop the JFK assassination from their own list of SCADs. [60] But this artificially segregates the JFK assassination from other deep events, such as the Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy assassinations, which I believe are parts of a common syndrome.In short I believe in the crucial importance of a distinction that SCAD analysis does not make - between the public state that is ostensibly dedicated to fostering the welfare, rights and upward power of the people, and that residue of unofficial powers inside and outside government, or what I have awkwardly called the deep state, that for a half century has been progressively eroding that upward or persuasive power, and replacing it with unrestricted, unconstitutional power (or violence) of its own.My final objection to SCAD analysis is practical. If the state is the author of these crimes, then the work of critics must be to mobilize public opinion against the state. This fits the libertarian politics of those who (like Alex Jones and other lovers of the Second Amendment) profoundly distrust the public US state in its entirety, and not just its covert agencies. Prof. DeHaven-Smith’s own analysis implicates not just covert intelligence agencies of the US Government but the government as a whole, and perhaps particularly the courts. (In support of this indictment, he is able to point to the Supreme Court’s unusual action, in 2000, of itself electing George W. Bush as president, by a vote of five to four.)But a strategy of attacking the state as a whole seems to me an example of defeatist politics. Here again we can be enlightened by the Italian strategy of tension, which is a tale of indiscriminate terror with a happier ending. The terror bombings ended after Bologna in 1980, thanks to a series of vigorous and courageous investigations by first journalists, then parliamentary commissions, and finally the courts (not least the court of Judge Imposimato himself, which investigated the murder of Italian premier Aldo Moro and the attempted assassination of Pope John Paul II). The victory of truth over violence did not come easily: journalists, parliamentarians, and at least one judge were themselves killed. And it was clearly a victory against one part of the state, which was achieved through the countervailing forces of other parts.The Italian example proves that the forces behind a strategy of tension are not invincible. They also suggest that, if the dark forces of the deep state are to be defeated, this will take the combined resources, not just of the people, but of those elements in government that can, eventually, be aroused in search of the truth.If this essay contributes to this purpose, it will be because others take up the line of inquiry I have indicated. I myself do not claim to understand the inner truth about these structural deep events. But I hope I have successfully indicated some of the directions which future investigations should pursue.

http://www.voltairenet.org/article178312.html

Where is indy now?

 

[islamica]

Jedi bro, would mind sticking to the topic of the thread only. You can post all that stuff in another thread. I just don't want the mods to close this thread or for it to to be derailed by other stuff.

 

[Jedi_Mindset]

Jedi bro, would mind sticking to the topic of the thread only. You can post all that stuff in another thread. I just don't want the mods to close this thread or for it to to be derailed by other stuff.

Ok i am sorry for that
Have deleted my first post but didnt delete the 2nd one as it kind of fits in this topic, just read it and you will know why.

 

[Naeema]

It is a small thing, but I think it is worth noting that "naked guy" as we in Boston called him was in the wrong place at the wrong time. He was ordered out of his car, ordered to strip (fear of concealed weapons), and breifly detained while it was determined that he was not involved in the car chase. He had a really bad day. Showing his photo again and again just adds to his humiliation.

 

[IAmZamzam]

I see no hatred here from the non-Muslims towards Muslims. I do see lots of hatred from some of the Muslim posters though.

You may not like what we say, but I challenge you to find anything written by myself, Independent or any of the other non-Muslims that is anti-Muslim or “ugly” towards Islam.

Oh nobody ever said that all of the Muslims on the board are sparkly clean in all of their behavior so kindly spare us the childish “I know you are but what am I?” evasions if you please. We’re all human and two wrongs don’t make a right. To call what you did hateful or Islamaphobic may be pushing it but all the same you seem to have come to the board, and to the thread, solely to mock people:

I haven’t been here in a while so I thought I would drop by. I made a couple of predictions before I did. One was that there would be a conspiracy theory thread about the Boston bombings—Looks like I was right on both counts. Independent, I think the fun will come later...I also love the baseless accusations that are made with no proof but also no way of disproving them. It makes the people feel like they are making an intelligent point when in fact they are not. (this was all practice for imposing national martial law? Really?) It's like those people that claim that the world leaders are all really lizards disguised as humans. It's so ridiculous that you can't believe people would fall for it, yet you really don't have an answer when they ask you to disprove it. And just for some fun....

I couldn’t help but notice that this post was edited by the administrator as well. I wonder how much nastier the original version was.

 

[~Zaria~]

I see some video but no context. I do not deny that it may have happened, but I have yet to hear of any illegal searches or sweeps.

What you have seen in that small segment of the video, is a scene of military, forcely removing residents from their homes without any warrant.
You may be sceptical whether this was in relation to the Boston saga (which is fine), but do realise that youtube has many more first hand accounts by the residents of Boston, who confirm the above.
Research for yourself.

As for the older brothers death I have seen nothing to disprove the account given about him being run over. We shall see if the younger brother denies it or gives a different story. You also have to believe that every witness to those events were a part of the conspiracy, so if the conspiracy is true the number of people that have to be involved in it is creeping into the thousands.

The naked man, seen to be hand-cuffed and led away by an ARMY, had been positively identified by his aunt and his mother.
Stangely enough, there is no video footage of the events leading to his death......isnt that amazing? Even though media/ reporters were on scene?
(Has anyone else seen this footage? Cos it doesnt seem to exist!)

I find it interesting that there are so many missing pieces to the actual events of that day.
e.g. Theres live aerial footage of the younger brother hiding in the boat.
But no footage of when he was shot? Apparently they are still not sure if he shot himself or was shot!?

Why did they kill him-- cries mother of Boston bombing suspects

They interviewed him a long time ago and came to the conclusion he wasn't a threat. That is a far cry from being able to see the pictures of him with a cap on and positively identify him.

According to his mum, the FBI had been in frequent contact with her sons over the years.
Before releasing their pics to the world, a simple check through their database of 'suspected muslim terroriosts' would have sufficed to positively identify them.
In fact, even when they were identified, the FBI did not immediately acknowledge their past with him. Why?
It was their parents, who brought this to light.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

​

Brothers and sisters, we are simply here to provide both sides of the story, as far as we know best, and to highlight the problems with the current narrative of events.
If our visitors/ members do not wish to agree with this - this is ok.
It is their right to believe what the media feeds them, despite the many holes in their plot.
As it is our right to research for ourselves and form our own opinions.

It is very much like giving dawah.

We are only meant to deliver the message.
Whether or not they accept the message, is not in our hands and nor should it bring us down.

The truth will eventually prevail, in shaa Allah.

We have Allah (subhanawataa'la) on our side - which is all that we need.


:wasalam:

 

[titus]

Oh nobody ever said that all of the Muslims on the board are sparkly clean in all of their behavior so kindly spare us the childish “I know you are but what am I?” evasions if you please. We’re all human and two wrongs don’t make a right. To call what you did hateful or Islamaphobic may be pushing it but all the same you seem to have come to the board, and to the thread, solely to mock people:

Please read my post again because you obviously did not read it correctly the first time. You may, incorrectly, call my post childish but I was simply pointing out a fact. If you believe that someone is coming to this forum simply to harass Muslims then that person should be banned. If you want to ban someone simply because they are non-Muslim and disagree with some Muslims on an issue then the problem is probably one of being oversensitive.

What is more childish, also, is putting words in someones mouth in order to create a false argument. I never claimed that the non-Muslims on this board were "sparkly clean" nor did I even insinuate "I know you are but what am I".

As for mocking people, I don't believe I have. If my opinion offends you then so be it.

I couldn’t help but notice that this post was edited by the administrator as well. I wonder how much nastier the original version was.

A bit. It was directed towards one individual that shows a strong dislike of anyone that is non-Muslim or disagrees with her. It was not directed at Muslims in general, nor even the members of this forum in general.

What you have seen in that small segment of the video, is a scene of military, forcely removing residents from their homes without any warrant.

I don't disagree with you, but I don't agree with you either. I just want some source other than a youtube video that does not place the video in context nor speak with anyone in the video.

The naked man, seen to be hand-cuffed and led away by an ARMY, had been positively identified by his aunt and his mother.
Stangely enough, there is no video footage of the events leading to his death......isnt that amazing? Even though media/ reporters were on scene?

Are you speaking about this naked man, who is not one of the bombers?:

New Yorker

The video was shot blocks away from where the shootout took place, and there were some pictures taken at the location of the shootout.

So do you believe that the police and FBI decided as part of their false flag operation decided to arrest their patsy at one public spot, then arrange a fake shootout at another public spot, both of which had people either filming with a camera or taking pictures with their phone? And, of course, that all of the law enforcement involved were in on the conspiracy?

But no footage of when he was shot? Apparently they are still not sure if he shot himself or was shot!?

From what I understand there was blood on the boat and that was why the owner of the boat checked it. He had been shot before he got in the boat and before anyone knew where he was, therefore it is only logical that there is no footage of him shooting himself (if he did) because nobody knew where he was at the time. It is also possible he shot at the shootout where his brother died.

According to his mum, the FBI had been in frequent contact with her sons over the years.
Before releasing their pics to the world, a simple check through their database of 'suspected muslim terroriosts' would have sufficed to positively identify them.
In fact, even when they were identified, the FBI did not immediately acknowledge their past with him. Why?
It was their parents, who brought this to light.

I think you overestimate the power of the FBI. The pictures they had of the two gentlemen were grainy, and regardless of the movies and television they don't have computers that you can put a grainy image into that will spit out that persons identity. Any form of identifying that they have takes time, and time is not something they had a lot of when they released the pictures. The fastest way to identify them would be to make them public along with searching their databases.

And why would the FBI not immediately acknowledge their past? First I am not aware of the timeline for sure but I remember finding out about the FBI involvement fairly quickly after they were identified (the same day if I am not mistaken, April 19th). If you can give times to back up your belief that they dragged their feet I would like to see them. If they were to drag their feet it is probably from embarrassment since they basically had to come out and say "We investigated and found this man to not be a threat. We were wrong. We screwed up.". This is not good PR for them.

I also have to ask you why you think the FBI would create a false flag operation that involves making themselves look incompetent?

It is their right to believe what the media feeds them, despite the many holes in their plot.
As it is our right to research for ourselves and form our own opinions.

It is also anyones right to believe what Youtube and fringe political sites feed them, despite the massive holes in their plot.

I plead for people to research and form their own opinions. But I plead for them to look at all the facts and ask all the questions.

 

[جوري]

Are you speaking about this naked man, who is not one of the bombers?:

New Yorker

It is also anyones right to believe what Youtube and fringe political sites feed them, despite the massive holes in their plot.

I plead for people to research and form their own opinions. But I plead for them to look at all the facts and ask all the questions.

Seems even the people from the very article you cited as evidence have formed their own opinion based on what was presented:

9 comments |


Posted 4/28/2013, 6:23:30pm by MahmoudHarriReport abuse

Please, if you google "New footage of the naked man in Boston bombings and a summary" you will find a second video taken by CNN of the naked man and you see he is indeed tamerlan Tsarnaev
Posted 4/28/2013, 6:15:35pm by MahmoudHarriReport abuse

lol, ok seth, please let us know when you hear back from the Watertown police about the naked man. Funny how the whole point of your article was inserted as a parenthetical. "(When I asked a Boston Police Department spokesman about their identities, he referred me to the F.B.I.; an F.B.I. spokeswoman referred me to the Watertown police; and I’m waiting to hear back from the Watertown lieutenant handling media inquiries.)"
Posted 4/28/2013, 5:24:35pm by lolzupReport abuse

Mr. Mnookin: Why do I have to read Al-Monitor to find out Ruslan Tsarni's connection to the CIA? Wouldn't a thoughtful query into Tsarni's curriculum vitae be more useful than the dreck you've served up here? Is Remnick out to lunch along with the rest of you? Doh!
Posted 4/28/2013, 3:31:22pm by newyorkerirrelevantReport abuse

Snooker-since this article only raised more questions than it answered, your attempt to radicalize all conspiracy theories failed. There are multiple cover ups going on in this case. While the naked man may or may not be part of any of them, make no mistake there are others. Nice try to make those of us who question authority look like kooks. It didn't work but Barry thanks you anyway.
Posted 4/28/2013, 12:10:03pm by dirtywater1Report abuse

I am the last person to buy into conspiracy theories of any kind, but we can't launch into a rant about "wow--these crazy government-conspiracy nuts!" without at least a basic explanation of this very weird video. My jaw dropped when I saw it...if that's not Tamerlan Tsarnaev, who the hell is it? His secret twin? A movie double? The resemblance is startling--build, face, hair--everything. If its not him, who is it?
Posted 4/28/2013, 10:35:40am by greengageReport abuse

Clearly photo of man on ground playing dead isn't tamerlan. I wonder if the New Yorker staff can remember all the conspiracies(lies)of history that turned world events and started wars? Gulf of Tonkin, the Maine, Saddam's wmd. How dare you be so flip.
Posted 4/28/2013, 4:21:55am by markb4Report abuse

But this does look *exactly* like the older brother, and the article doesn't really explain anything...
Posted 4/27/2013, 10:40:04pm by PhlagReport abuse

funny world innit..

As the great scholar once said: ''what do the clouds care for the barking dogs below, & even if said dogs are rabid''!

best,

 

[titus]

Obviously then all the police at this location are in on the conspiracy to bomb their own town, as well as the Police Chief who is corroborating the story. Oh, and then police staged a shootout in a residential neighborhood with lots of witnesses (really smart if you are trying to do a cover up), including one taking pictures, that involved hundreds of bullets being fired and residents witnessing the SUV taking off.

You think that is reasonable, yet you think misidentifying a man in a fuzzy picture taken at night is far fetched?

 

[جوري]

what is that reverse irony? Frankly, folks who come up with stories about invincible passports and plane parts showing up ten years later at 'would be mosque' sites don't strike me as particularly interested in sizing up your intelligence. Of course, we also can't be made responsible for what you choose to believe.
Islam when it comesto judicial matters and especially so allows no room for hearsay- he said or she said or third party buffoons, or fourth party peddlers expressing ridicule when there's indeed much to be ridiculed from where we are standing.
Btw, not all the pictures are fuzzy, just the ones you chose to share. It seems like you have a far wider audience that's disillusioned than the pitiful Muslims on board.

best,

 

[جوري]

completely on a tangent but I'd appreciate if someone would find me this show pls.

moyers and company ''liberties and national security'' with Glenn Greenwald.

:jz:

 

[IAmZamzam]

Please read my post again because you obviously did not read it correctly the first time…What is more childish, also, is putting words in someones mouth in order to create a false argument. I never claimed that the non-Muslims on this board were “sparkly clean” nor did I even insinuate “I know you are but what am I”.

The irony here is astounding:

“I see no hatred here from the non-Muslims towards Muslims. I do see lots of hatred from some of the Muslim posters though. You may not like what we say, but I challenge you to find anything written by myself, Independent or any of the other non-Muslims that is anti-Muslim or ‘ugly’ towards Islam.”

Oh nobody ever said that all of the Muslims on the board are sparkly clean in all of their behavior so kindly spare us the childish “I know you are but what am I?” evasions if you please. We’re all human and two wrongs don’t make a right. To call what you did hateful or Islamaphobic may be pushing it but all the same you seem to have come to the board, and to the thread, solely to mock people...

Ordinarily I have an instinct, a little voice inside me in a situation like this that’ll whisper to me, “Well maybe it was your fault. Maybe you really didn’t make it clear enough that you weren’t accusing him of saying that the non-Muslims on this board had squeaky clean behavior”. That voice was silent this time. My conscience is clean. Because it would just be too ridiculous. I was ridiculously clear. The straw man is yours and yours alone. The lack of cautious reading is yours and yours alone.

You may, incorrectly, call my post childish but I was simply pointing out a fact…As for mocking people, I don't believe I have.

When your original post, again, contained this...

I haven’t been here in a while so I thought I would drop by. I made a couple of predictions before I did. One was that there would be a conspiracy theory thread about the Boston bombings—Looks like I was right on both counts. Independent, I think the fun will come later...I also love the baseless accusations that are made with no proof but also no way of disproving them. It makes the people feel like they are making an intelligent point when in fact they are not. (this was all practice for imposing national martial law? Really?) It's like those people that claim that the world leaders are all really lizards disguised as humans. It's so ridiculous that you can't believe people would fall for it, yet you really don't have an answer when they ask you to disprove it. And just for some fun....

…I guess it’s just down to your word against mine. Which isn’t to say that I’d be sweating bullets if we got any impartial jury in the world to act as arbiter.

As for “not liking your opinion” I’m not even sure which one you’re referring to. In case you’ve forgotten I’m actually on your side as regards the likelihood of this conspiracy. I just don’t like it when people troll. I’m certainly not fond of the opinion that it’s okay to go around comparing people to psychotics who believe that presidents are lizards wearing human suits.

 

[titus]

Btw, not all the pictures are fuzzy, just the ones you chose to share. It seems like you have a far wider audience that's disillusioned than the pitiful Muslims on board.

I never shared any pictures unless you want to count the ones in the article I posted. In that case it was the New Yorker doing the editing, not myself. Maybe you would care to post the clear picture that was taken?

folks who come up with stories about invincible passports and plane parts showing up ten years later at 'would be mosque' sites don't strike me as particularly interested in sizing up your intelligence.

I could say the same about folks who believe in a conspiracy that would have had to involve thousands of people killing thousands of their own citizens and yet 12 years later not a single one of them has stepped forward or let it slip, yet think that anything short of everything vaporizing on plane when it crashes is inconceivable.... those are the intelligent ones I guess?

…I guess it’s just down to your word against mine. Which isn’t to say that I’d be sweating bullets if we got any impartial jury in the world to act as arbiter.

Yes, looking back I did mock conspiracy theorists in a way. It was a poor attempt at making my point and I should have worded things differently.

That being said I have quite a few posts on this forum. I ask that read them (probably excluding the ones that involve Skye) and then come to a conclusion about my intent on being here before assuming that I have come here solely to mock people.

As for “not liking your opinion” I’m not even sure which one you’re referring to. In case you’ve forgotten I’m actually on your side as regards the likelihood of this conspiracy.

I apologize. I got ahead of myself.

I just don’t like it when people troll. I’m certainly not fond of the opinion that it’s okay to go around comparing people to psychotics who believe that presidents are lizards wearing human suits.

I am most certainly not a troll. As for the lizard man argument again it was poorly worded. I brought that up as an example of the type of logic used by conspiracy theorists and the fact that they often use the inability to disprove something as evidence that that thing is true. I cannot prove Obama is not really an alien lizard disguise, therefore the assumption must be that it is true until I can disprove it.

Do I think the people who believe these conspiracy theories are psychotic? No, but I do believe that they have a strong desire to ignore reality when they don't like reality.

 

[islamica]

Tamerlan's father identifies the naked man being led into the police car captured on footage on Youtube as his son Tamerlan, not a random bystander as per police report. Questions arise as to who that guy was if not Tamerlan and how he died if he was Tamerlan.

"I feel hopeless. We are simple people. We are trying to understand. We are attacked from all sides," he said, clutching his head in despair.

"I don't know whether I should talk or stay silent. I don't want to harm my child. ... We are used to all sorts of things here but we didn't expect this from the United States."


He and other members of the family believe a man shown on television being led naked into a police car the night of the shootout was Tamerlan, and that the blurry footage, still widely available on YouTube, proves Tamerlan was captured alive. Boston police say Tamerlan was killed in a shootout, and the man seen being led into the car was a bystander who was briefly detained.


Anzor Tsarnaev said he raised the issue with U.S. officials who visited him earlier in the week in his home in Dagestan.


"I asked them: 'I saw my child alive, he was being put into a police vehicle alive and healthy. How come media said he was killed?' They were shocked themselves," the father said.


The suspects' mother, Zubeidat, was with Anzor Tsarnaev in the village but did not wish to speak.


"She is ill, she is shocked, she is depressed. She lost her children," Tsarnaev said. The couple are divorced but have stayed together.


Although the Tsarnaev brothers have roots in Dagestan and neighboring Chechnya, neither had spent much time there until Tamerlan returned to Dagestan last year for six months.


During his interview, Anzor Tsarnaev denied Tamerlan had any contact with militants during his stay, painting an idyllic picture of his son's visit to his ancestral homeland.


"When he came to stay here, he was a good boy. He read books, (Leo) Tolstoy, (Alexandre) Dumas and thick English language books. He would wake up late and read all day, late into the night," he said.


"Sometimes we went to the mosque. We went to see our relatives, in Dagestan, in Chechnya. We visited a lot of households, it was a nice atmosphere."


Tsarnaev said he had to force his son to return to the United States to complete his U.S. citizenship application after Tamerlan tried to convince his family to allow him to stay in Dagestan for good.


"I told him: 'No, you have to go back to obtain your U.S. citizenship'. I forced him to go back. I thought it was the right thing to do. I shouldn't have done that," he said with a pained expression on his face.


The father said he had no hope that Tamerlan's body would be released by the U.S. authorities to be buried in his homeland.


"They won't give us his body," he said, his voice breaking with emotion. "We wont be able to bury him in our land."


http://news.yahoo.com/exclusive-boston-bomb-suspects-father-abandons-plan-return-160819875.html

 

[faithandpeace]

There sure does seem to be a lot of evil going on. The official story is full of more and more holes. As to all of these "witness" accounts the fact is that witnesses are not as reliable as people are led to believe. I personally have probably a much better level of situational awareness than many people out there yet I have come across a variety of incidents in public where things happened so fast that I nor anyone else could clearly determine much if any details of what happened. An example is being in a store and someone had set their purse down and a thief grabs it and runs. With two dozen people around nobody knows who or what to look for. You hear a woman scream and can't even tell at first if it is an emergency or someone joking around with her friend on her cell phone. In the case of the Boston situation if we are talking about explosions and shootouts I would think witness accounts are even less reliable. The first thing in most people's minds when bullets are flying or things are exploding is to evacuate the area and duck. They don't have time to stand around and watch and whatever license plates, descriptions of people, etc. they get will be forgotten within seconds due to their adrenaline going through the roof. What people think they remember can change 10 minutes later, then an hour later, then a day later. I have also been around many people over the years who are so unaware of their surroundings that even screaming at them that they are about to be hit by a car that is in front of their eyes and they can't seem to know what is going on but alhamdulillah they end up ok. I believe the average person is not very aware of their surroundings and in an emergency life-threatening situation is not likely to be a reliable witness. Yet many people with egos want to become "witnesses" to get a little TV time. In other cases, people honestly and legitimately wish to help but don't realize just how much they end up exaggerating. It is easy to lie and believe one's own lies especially if one's intentions are impure and impious.

Some here have tossed around that the Boston bombing among other things is a Zionist conspiracy. I don't think that is true as I don't see how this would relate to the situation in Israel. However, Israel among other nations is very much part of the global profit system. I believe there is a global elite that basically worships money and profit and whose goal is to maintain their position of wealth and power at the top of the pyramid of the profit system. There are people in this world who have enough money, friends, and family, and other associates with money totalling up in the many billions as to be able to hold massive control. If you have a million dollars you can buy a nice home and travel the world. If you have a billion dollars and friends who do then you can now buy entire countries.

It is possible that many Islamic countries have resources that the capitalists want. It is also possible that capitalism in and of itself sees spirituality, religion, and particularly Islam as a competitor. I've wondered about this for many years actually. Capitalist culture tries to secularize and water down religion and spirituality as much as possible. Christmas for Christians in much of the West has long since been commercialized, same with Chanukah for Jews but to a lesser degree. When the core philosophy of a social, economic, and political system (capitalism) is to live for the sake of consumption and production and profit then spirituality and religion become a threat. It is no accident that the type of Islam that is accepted in secular capitalist societies is a secularized watered-down version of Islam. If you are a Muslim who looks and dresses in Western clothing, drinks and smokes, and spends more time buying consumer goods than praying then that is considered more or less ok by this system. I've read many reports and articles by the EEOC (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) documenting discrimination cases on the basis of religion. Muslims, Jews, and Sikhs seem to be targeted the worst from what I have gathered. It seems to be because of the dress style. If a person calls themselves a Muslim, Jew, or Sikh but in reality demonstrates no spiritual or religious significance to that label and behaves in a completely secular manner allowing the corporation to mold him or her into the company's culture and philosophy, then most people are fine with that person. "He's Muslim but he's cool." Yet when the woman wears hijab or the Jewish guy wears a yarmulke, or Sikh man wears turban now is when there is a problem. Most of these articles I've read don't even center around religious accomodations (for prayers, holidays, etc.). It is the clothing they have a problem with.

Back to the Boston bombings, it is the same kind of a cultural war. They keep focusing on how this wife and mother both used to be "normal" people (i.e. drinking, smoking, partying, listening to lots of music, TV, etc.) wearing "normal" clothes (sexually provocative Western dress) but recently started "concerning friends" by wearing hijab, not going out much, etc. The Boston bombings were never about some big political move in my opinion. It is just another piece of the culture war against Islam. I think it is an anti-spiritual/religious agenda in general but the reason that Jews and Sikhs for instance are not so targeted as much is because worldwide they don't make up a large percentage of the populace. Christianity is already so watered down and secularized for the most part anyway. Islam is not so easily secularized and therefore a competitor to the system. You cannot package our Salat or Ramadan onto a shelf and sell it back to us for a price. Insha'Allah I hope not. The Boston bombings continue to perpetuate this idea that anyone "too religious" in a way that doesn't blend in with American pop culture is someone who may be a threat to this country. It is a problem with the value system. Islam places God first. Capitalism places the dollar bill first. There's your problem. A consumer system operates off of a perceived need that previously did not exist. Suddenly a person is convinced they need a product or service to continue to be fulfilled in whatever aspect of their life even though they got along fine without it before. When someone holds on to the tight rope of spirituality and religion placing their need on God and His will first, then he sees the triviality and bankruptcy in the consumer model. I'm not opposed to entrepreneurship so nobody get the idea I'm some marxist as I'm not. But I believe that a system that aims to keep people in a state of fear so that they always have temporary solutions for all of their problems and provided temporary enjoyment and values in things always at a profitable price is going to find threat to any system or systems that gives people faith and truth and peace in things that are eternal and hold value beyond any material price.

The proof of all of what I've said here can be seen in so many media reports. They aren't going to call Muslims who drink, smoke, drug, party, and immerse themselves in secular pop culture as "jihadists, radicals, or extremists." It is when you turn off the TV and stop compulsively consuming that you become the so-called "radical."

My humble opinions.

 

[Independent]

He and other members of the family believe a man shown on television being led naked into a police car the night of the shootout was Tamerlan, and that the blurry footage, still widely available on YouTube, proves Tamerlan was captured alive. Boston police say Tamerlan was killed in a shootout, and the man seen being led into the car was a bystander who was briefly detained.

Parents often refuse to accept that their children have turned into murderers - which is understandable. In this case, according to the latest reports, the mother was herself on the international suspect terrorist database.

I've looked at various picture analyses of the naked man video and he is similar (which is why he was arrested) but I don't think it's the same man. Tamerlan was 6ft 3in tall, this man is shorter. In close up his nose and his ears don't look the same. But the pictures are grainy and I would agree with anyone who said it's hard to be certain.

As it stands, it doesn't constitute proof in any direction (unless you have given up bothering to be objective).

The naked man was arrested at least an hour after the shoot-out in which Tamerlan is supposed to have died. The man was released within a couple of hours once it became clear that the suspects were identified elsewhere.

If you choose to believe the naked man is Tamerlan, that means you also have to explain who were the two men in the other shoot out and why were they attacked? If one of them was Dzhokhar, why wasn't he with Tamerlan? And how did the police manage to find Tamerlan such a short time afterwards in the same area? It doesn't make sense, it's so complicated. Even if you think it's a conspiracy it's too elaborate. If the government control the media, why were CNN allowed to film the arrest of the naked man in the first place?

The official explanation (given within two hours of the arrest) that the guy was arrested by mistake is simple and totally plausible. It would be far more suspicious if the police never made any incorrect arrests or searches.

 

[Independent]

There sure does seem to be a lot of evil going on. The official story is full of more and more holes.

Contrary to what you may think, I could be persuaded that a given event was a false flag op if the evidence was good enough. But I’m not convinced by what’s on offer here and it bothers me that so many people approach this with preconceived convictions that it’s all a conspiracy - people who will accept any old story without the slightest attempt to check them out.

People talk about seeing through ‘mainstream media’. But at this stage, conspiracists are also an organised media with their own agenda, their own financial incentives, and their own fixed prejudices. Therefore, we should place the same standards - the same burden of proof - on conspiracists that the conspiracists place on the official version.

1. Witnesses

I believe the average person is not very aware of their surroundings and in an emergency life-threatening situation is not likely to be a reliable witness.

I totally agree with you about this and I've seen it demonstrated in tests just how unreliable people's memories can be. However, this unreliability cuts both ways. The conspiracy witnesses are no more reliable than anyone else. (eg in Boston, when you get one guy out of tens of thousands (Ali Stevenson) who says there was a bomb drill announced, but no one else reports it, you should discount him altogether.)

2. Photographic/video evidence

Everyone has a mobile phone, so almost any event is now quite likely to be accompanied by at least some photographic evidence. You would have expected this to lead to more clarity. It hasn't. The pictures are often poor quality and capable of interpretation. From now on, there will always be those who claim that the person in the picture is not the person the officials say, but someone else (a secret policeman, a victim from Sandy Hook, a war veteran - whatever). There will never be another event where this doesn't happen. Too much faith is placed in photography, it doesn't always tell the full story and sometimes it’s downright deceptive. There is a long history of conspiracy sites showing photos taken from entirely different times and locations and passing them off as evidence.

3. Throw enough mud against a wall and some will stick.

This is probably the single most valuable tool in the conspiracist’s arsenal. In any major event there are a huge number of stories that fly around. It doesn't seem to matter to people when the stories totally contradict each other (even though people jump on the slightest inconsistency in the official story). Many of these issues subsequently fall by the wayside as being irrelevant or just plain wrong.

For instance - to mention just a few from Boston - we had the man on the roof (an employee of a company that uses the balcony as a place to have a smoke), the Saudi suspect (no longer relevant), the library bomb (a confusion between two libraries and timing), Craft International (they don't provide security staff and their kit is available to anyone). At a higher level, we have the now mostly-abandoned theory that this was a right wing/patriot false flag op (irrelevant since the Muslim link emerged). Although these no longer form part of the main conspiracist's narrative, they have still played a big job in softening up people into believing "there's no smoke without fire". Yet when you go back through the timeline you realise almost all of them have been junked.

4. 24 hour news and the internet.

The news media need to fill every minute of every day. To do that, they will pick up on every lead no matter how slender and give it airtime. They capture the chaos and confusion of unfolding events, the false arrests, the bombs that weren't, the eyewitnesses with random comments. This provides limitless material for the conspiracists. Meanwhile, the internet is the perfect vehicle to spread absolutely any theory no matter how far-fetched.

5. Governments screw up.

We're only human. Governments and police too. We make mistakes. Often, we try to cover them up afterwards. If an FBI officer fails to spot a potential suspect who then goes on to kill 100 people, let's not be surprised if he tries to cover up his error. It doesn't always mean that he's part of a conspiracy.

Also, we should bear in mind that counter espionage is a dirty business. Intelligence is key to success. It’s extremely likely that the CIA have at least some double agents in various Muslim terrorist groups. Sometimes, those double agents participate in a crime to retain their cover. The CIA or other intelligence agency have to decide to let some people get killed to save more in the future (eg see the history of Enigma in WW2). That doesn’t mean that they control or orchestrate the whole thing – you need more proof than that.

6. Leading conspiracists are proven liars.

There really is no doubt in this - for instance Alex Jones, who has led the Boston reports, has been caught many times spreading stories which are factually untrue. You may choose to believe his overall agenda. But if you look at his work, it's impossible not to see that he has lied repeatedly. He does not care about the provenance of a story, so long as it creates unrest. (eg tweets and facebook pages that appear to have foreknowledge of the attack - when he knows that for technological reasons the times are not recorded accurately or can sometimes be changed afterwards). These are outright lies and he knows it. Yet people swallow his stories without any critical analysis at all (whilst telling the rest of us that we are 'sheeple'). You can’t accuse the government of lying unless you apply the sae standards to Alex Jones etc.

7. The unholy alliance
There are a huge diversity of conspiracy groups who often hate each other as much as the government. So you may find white supremacists on the same side as Muslims and left wing liberals. A weird, weird mix.

It also means that there’s always a ‘motive’ available for any event. It’s to justify an invasion, a police state, ideological warfare – whatever. Who cares which.

8. Inconsistent narratives
Conspiracists have no shame. They expect the official story to be watertight in every detail, whilst their own stories don't even make sense in their own terms (and they never apologise for their mistakes). This was never so clearly expressed as in the split over 9/11, the Planers and the No Planers. They can't both be true. So maybe the 'overwhelming evidence' isn't so overwhelming after all.

In Boston we have big divisions between a) those who think the event was faked altogether (ie there were no bombs, the injuires are faked etc) and b) those who think there was a bomb, but Tamerlan and Dzhokhar didn't plant it and c) there was a bomb, they planted it, but they are just patsies.

All of these theories are incompatible (some of them in a major way) yet the conspiracists still seem to regard that any evidence that supports any of the theories counts for them too.

 

[islamica]

 

[IAmZamzam]

Let's all stop dancing around it and just come right out and say it (although to give him credit Independent has come close to doing so):the real problem here is that the news media is almost never trustworthy, and the government's official story about anything will always be full of holes. So what difference does it make? If there is some conspiracy going on then we could hardly have any genuinely reliable way of picking up on it. It's the boy who cried wolf. Yet I'll remind you again that every single time there's a disaster which has a certain kind of emotional impact of the nation there's an anti-government conspiracy theory formed around it, and usually in short order. Pearl Harbor. JFK. Bay of Pigs. 9/11. The Ohio shooting. Even Columbine had a few people here and there doing it. And now this. At this point I saw it coming a mile away. I'm too used to it. In fact this seems to be so inevitable and so universal a psychological experience that the DSM may as well come up with an official "syndrome" name for it.