Sunday, April 21, 2013

Did Watertown's top cop tell a big, big lie?

I'm not at all convinced that there was any larger conspiracy behind the Tzarnaev brothers. (Update: The FBI now says that there were others. More on that soon.) However, I'm increasingly convinced that some cops have conspired to cover-up their own itchified trigger fingers.

Many news articles have stated -- are still stating -- that elder brother Tamerlan was shot dead by the cops. But now we are supposed to believe a new story, which holds that Tamerlan was killed by his younger brother Dzhokhar.
The police chief, Edward Deveau, describes how cops nearly apprehended the older suspect, and were placing handcuffs on him in the middle of the street Thursday night, when the younger suspect came at officers in a carjacked SUV. The cops were able "to dive out of the way," and the younger suspect then continued to drive directly over his brother and dragging him through the street. That's how the older suspect died, according to the police chief.

The younger suspect eventually dumped the SUV and ran into the darkness of the night, according to the police chief.
In the first place, why would a guy in an SUV ditch the vehicle to run from the cops? Would you do that?

More importantly, if Tamerlan was killed because a car struck him, then how can we explain the morgue photo that shows at least one bullet hole in his body? I don't want to reproduce so gruesome a photo on this site, at least not in its entirety; you can see the image here.

But I can show you a close-up of what is clearly a bullet entrance wound. You can see how he bled out from it -- the blood trails first in one direction then in the other.

(The morgue photo also shows a large gaping hole cut into the left side of his chest, apparently made post-mortem.)

In a statement made before the Boston cops issued their revised account, one doctor who worked on Tamerlan was very clear about the cause of death:
Police took Tamerlan ­Tsarnaev to Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center about 1:10 a.m. Friday. He was pronounced dead at 1:35 a.m. Dr. Richard Wolfe said the suspect had been hit by shrapnel from an explosion and that he had died from “a combination of blasts” and “multiple gunshot wounds.”
But after the cops issued their "Dzhokhar did it" yarn, the medical witnesses suddenly became frustratingly vague:
Dr. David Schoenfeld said 26-year-old Tamerlan Tsarnaev was unconscious and had so many penetrating wounds when he arrived at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center early Friday that it isn't clear which ones killed him, and a medical examiner will have to determine the cause of death.

The second bombing suspect, 19-year-old Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, was in serious condition at the same hospital after his capture Friday night. The FBI has not allowed hospital officials to say any more about his wounds or condition.
Why not?
"From head to toe, every region of his body had injuries," he said. "His legs and arms were intact – he wasn't blown into a million pieces" – but he lost a pulse and was in cardiac arrest, meaning his heart and circulation had stopped, so CPR, or cardio-pulmonary resuscitation, was started.

Schoenfeld did not address police's assertion that Tsarnaev was run over by a car driven by his brother as he fled the gunfire.
Way I see it, even one bullet wound in Tamerlan's body damages the new "Dzhokhar did it" story. Do Boston's police officials actually expect us to believe that Dr. Wolfe was wrong when he spoke of multiple bullet wounds? How could a doctor examining a body possibly be mistaken about so basic a fact?

Recall that the initial reports held that Tamerlan had been captured alive -- a story which stayed in place for at least an hour. Several news outlets even published a photo of a naked man (allegedly Tamerlan) in police custody; we were later told that this was another fellow entirely.

The claim that Tamerlan was struck by bullets was made by journalists who spoke with police at the scene. Example:
Tamerlan went down fighting, hit by police bullets. According to the police he was wearing a suicide vest.
How could a cop know about the vest but not know about the guy being dragged down the street by an SUV?

There is no photographic evidence to substantiate the tale that one brother ran over the other, even though police cars often have video cameras, as do civilian cell phones. Journalists were on the scene; NBC had video of the firefight. Under those circumstances, how is it possible that we could be learning of so dramatic a development only now?

Let me once again make myself clear: I am not making any grand conspiratorial claims about the bombing itself. The comments above concern the conduct of the police -- nothing else. Perhaps I'm wrong; perhaps Deveau has an explanation that addresses all of the concerns raised above. Right now, though, I don't see how he can account for the photo of the bullet hole, and I don't see how he can brush aside the statement by Dr. Wolfe.

Other questions: Why was the MIT cop killed? If the brothers had no car, then how did they get to that location? Why does this report say that they stole the cop's cruiser and drove it to commit the 7-Eleven robbery -- a robbery which cops now say was committed by someone else? If they stole a cop car, why did they later hijack an SUV? 
I am absolutely in your court on this. I think there's also a big coverup on what really happened at the boat. I saw that police chief interviewed on CNN. His story was shifty and vague. Kept saying they are still piecing things together and were hindered by FBI having control of the scene. I'm thankful for that because I expect the FBI to reconstruct every second and tell us the truth.
One other thing. Devaeu is the Watertown police chief, not Boston's.

I think the copes were pissed about the MIT cop, and as soon as they heard about Suspect #2 over their radios, they raced there each hoping to be the first cop to make suspect into Swiss cheese -- and to do so before FBI arrived and took over. The first volley of shots ended when a senior officer arrived, saw what was happened, and called for the fdiring to stop. That's my theory.
The whole thing is bullshit. Kept intentionally confusing to keep the infantile American public that buys this shit running into the arms of daddy. This is GLADIO. A Repeating pattern of shock and awe meant to accustom America to living in a police state. Show the video of the kids dropping the backpacks. This is the same story as The Dorner and Lanza shootings. Light on facts and evidence... Heavy on misdirection and Gladio style pumping of the fear factor. Nancy Lanza had traveled to Boston in the year before the Sandy Hook shootings. I wonder why?
The feds are saying that Dzhokar suffered a throat injury and may not be able to talk.

Which is about as believable as the idea that Trevor Rees-Jones, who survived the Princess Diana and Dodi Fayed crash, lost his memory - which was what was reported, after an initial report that he'd literally lost his tongue.
MIchael, I owe you big time. And I feel terribly embarrassed over this story's original headline. The correction has been made.

I even made a mental note of that very point when reading the story the first time, and STILL I made that error. Hell. I really AM getting old.
@Anonymous. That Nancy Lanza went to Boston a year before Sandy Hook is probably totally irrelevant. But regarding the conditioning of the US sheeple, look at the militarisation of the state response in Boston, and at the enormous scale and publicity of that militarisation. It's not jihadists who are the market for that message.
The US media are reporting statements from emiratist mojahedin at and

I've just been to the VDagestan site and read their statement in Russian.

Their position that they are not at war with the US has been much reported.

Unfortunately, the other two main points in their statement have been ignored.

These are that 1) they do not strike at civilian targets, and 2) they believe the Boston bombing to be the probable work of the Russian secret service.

Does this idea pass the cui bono test? Russia doesn't need US assistance in Chechenia or elsewhere in the Russian Caucasus. This isn't a rerun of the early 1940s, when Stalin requested that Britain send a large military force to the region (and Britain declined). Russia can and does fight its own battles in that region. Chechen and emiratist circles outside Russia? Might some assistance from the US and Israel be appreciated? Well maybe. Maybe some nutter in the FSB thinks he can promote a kind of Sharon Doctrine, wherein Russia's problem with Chechenia becomes the world's problem?

I am just positing this as a possibility. I don't think it's likely. The KGB/FSB is very effective at running anti-Kremlin organisations and has been for a very long time. And it's not run by nutters, and never has been. If they called on the CIA for help, the CIA would be likely to fuck everything up. As for Mossad, the cost in terms of a slice of the pipeline, and in terms of South Ossetia, might be too great.

Note that the Chechen community isn't monolithic.

Can someone tell me whether the Wai Kru fight club had any connection with the marathon?

As I have said before, if Tamerlan went in there a few years after his last visit, and started pissing people off, that suggests he had seriously strong gang connections.

Is there a gang warfare side to this bombing?
Devaeu is just trying to blame every death on the suspects. As for why he bailed on the sounds like the cops fired many dozens of shots at it as he tried to get away, probably the SUV was becoming disabled.
Cui bono.


A partial video of Tamerlan's capture was widely broadcast, recall, showing him face down on the street, hands stretched forward, with cops hovering around. He certainly seemed to be alive. But look at the morgue photo. That's not blood on his neck and shoulder; that's purple lividity, which had to have formed while he was lying face down. Also note that the width of the lividity is about the width of a car tire.
(part one)

To "b" at 12:12pm, it IS totally relevant that Nancy Lanza traveled to 6 or 7 cities in the year before the Sandy Hook shootings, Boston being one of those. She had once worked for John Hancock involved with stock trades in Boston. Now we have mass terror coming from Cambridge MA that involved Russian Chechynans. In 2001 there were Russian spies in Cambridge MA. The FBI knew about them in 2001. This is confirmed. Let me repeat.. THE FBI KNEW ABOUT RUSSIAN SPIES IN CAMBRIDGE IN 2001. Ok? When did the FBI kick them out of the country? Ready? -- 2010 --. So, you know I am really REALLY puzzled as to why no one is talking about why the FBI allowed spies to spy on Americans for 10 years? Does no one in the USA have the mental ability to understand the danger of an agency penetrated by Russians in 2001 to then allow Russian spies to spy on Americans for 10 years? What type of info did the Russians collect and send back to Russia? How many American politicians did they surreptitiously spy on and then pass that info back to Moscow so that American politicians could be compromised? Take a guess as to who was targeted and which parties would benefit from that arrangement? Feeling queezy yet? How much of this type of info could Russian spies collect in 10 goddamn years? 50 years ago, when Americans weren't such big weanies and were doing things like fighting Nazis, the idea that an American agency could have allowed Russians to spy on Americans for 10 years unpunished... no way. At the same time that the FBI was trying to frame up innocent Muslims for things they didn't do on the one hand, they were allowing Russian spies to target Americans on the other. Boggles the mind. Russian "Illegal" (spy) Lidiya Guriyeva... New Jersey...targeted Alan Patricof of Hillary Clinton's campaign. Anyone see the bigger picture here? I have written off the Democratic party. And I don't talk to people about politics anymore. They don't want to know why the USA isn't the USA anymore. They want comforting cartoons. Not reality. Every once in awhile I pop onto the web, get pissed and make a post like this, and then realize the problem is not that people don't know what is going on. They don't care or are too afraid to do anything about it.

(part 2)
Donald Rumsfeld had one side of the Pentagon reinforced while he placed himself safely on the other side before 9/11 happened. What does obviously that imply? Never mind the people who say it's just a coincidence. Add up ALL of these coincidences and stop being a baby, and ask yourself, what does it imply? The day before 9/11 he announced that the Pentagon had some how lost track of about 2.3 Trillion dollars. The next day that story was absolutely fucking buried by 9/11. Another convenient coincidence. Add it up. Then he lied the country into a costly war, tortured people he knew were innocent in Abu Ghraib into making false confessions of their involvement in 9/11. Then you got stuck with the bill. ADD IT UP. So we live in a reality in which a guy this monstrous can get on TV have a coffee with some bobblehead on MSNBC and tell us all how Awesome the Iraq war was. The Sheep lap it up. So I give up. We live in a fucked up world where Psychopaths and Mass Murderers can tell us all where we can go fuck ourselves while laughing all of the way to the bank. And 95% of the population will obediently comply. Go research Rumsfeld's role in Europe's Gladio program and then it all starts to look familiar. I understand what 9/11 was.. I have posted many times about the connections. The Pod People don't care. And the Gatekeepers don't care. Hurray for Democracy. I'm reading the tea leaves... I know where this is going. SPOILER : In case you haven't already figured it out. The end game? Installment of an Authoritarian and Fascist government in the USA. We're well over 80% there. That is the intended end product of a series of unexamined multiple bombings and shootings on the population: a Pavlovian response that will predictably be a call for a more Authoritarian government. Keep pretending otherwise. Keep pretending this is all coincidence and that it will just go away. They are gradually getting America more "comfortable" with living inside of a police state. They succeeded in Egypt, are working on it in Libya. And are putting in the finishing touches in the USA.. again, keep pretending you AREN'T seeing what you ARE seeing.. and see how that works out for you. Personally, I give up and don't plan on being there when the full weight of the boot finally comes down. History has a way of repeating itself, so that people can relearn what they have forgotten. Who am I to tell people they can't relearn history all over again? Take a seat folks. Looks like an another interesting chapter in history is about to begin. Popcorn anyone? Good luck America.
Who is the naked man taken into custody?

BOSTON police commissioner on CNN just now, refusing to back up Watertown chief's story. Will only say that Sudpect #1 was run over, and Suspect #2 was driving the car at the time. Doesm't know cause of death. Still a very active investigation.,
(continuing) Will only confirm "gunfire" at the boat scene, doesn't know (or won't say) if Suspect #2 fired at officers. Again, "very intensive and detailed investigation" of what happened.
Time will tell, but my guess is that Dzhokar tried to kill himself when the cops showed up at the boat, That triggered les cochons to shoot up the boat. Once someone realized it was a single gunshot from the boat, they eventually stopped shooting.
As to why the Watertown chief would lie, who knows? As has been pointed out, no one would bat an eye if he was shot 100 times. So, why obfuscate? But once it's out there, it's hard to take back. "I misspoke; he was not run over, he was shot multiple times. Anyone could mix them up."

syborg, I'm largely with you, although I never have and never will refer to a cop as a "cochon."

As for the death of Tamerlan -- there were many reports that he was captured alive. We also know the cops were worried that these guys might be wearing "suicide vests" or even crotch bombs.

So my tentative theory is that Tamerlan was caught alive and more or less well. But then he made a sudden move, something that caused a cop to think that a BOOM was nigh. Gunfire ensued.

Later, the police chief decided that he didn't want an otherwise good cop's career to go into the ditch over someone like Tamerlan.

That's one possibility, and it makes sense to me. Hell, if the chief DID think that way, I can sympathize.

But there are other possibilities. And frankly, there are lots of news stories for me to read that I have not yet read today...
Joseph; From what I've seen the cops really constrained themselves with return fire. They wanted him alive.

This gives me hope this is not a false=flag.

They are asking him questions and he is responding in writing.

"...very intensive and detailed investigation" of what happened. Sounds like the script is still being written on this one. And there are probably disagreements regarding the scriptwriting between the FBI, staties, Boston PD, and whoever else has an interest in the production. Now we see why writing shouldn't be done by a committee.
ben: constrained? maybe later on, but the first volley sounded like crackers on the fourth of July and started as soon as the cops arrived, See the tape?

cracker: I suspect all the gunfighting was done by Boston/Watertown cops, not the FBI. Therefore they have little or nothing to hide. They're pretty anal about details. Expect a detailed report.
This story reveals that for many cops, lying is so natural they don't know how to speak any other way.
A 1000 officers roaming around Boston ploughing through peoples homes, telling them to stay indoors all day, looking for a 19 year old patsy is RESTRAINT?


What I do find funny, every single blog suddenly run over with apologist card carrying "Concern Trolls" trying to convince everyone how fun martial law and fascism can be.
I thought that was probably a made-up story when I heard it. If they were exchanging gunfire with the police, the cops would have shot that SUV full of holes while he drove. He would not have made it 20 yards.

This was definitely an attempt to demonize the guy which seems totally unnecessary given the circumstances. For some reason, the police always seem to feel the need to embellish the facts.

Perhaps there is something of a cover-up taking place as with the Dorner thing.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is 

powered by Blogger. 

Isn't yours?