Sunday, April 28, 2013

The final (for now) word on Boston

I think I'm done with the Boston bombing case, at least for a little while, unless something startling and new comes up. (Or unless I change my mind.)

No, I don't have answers to the remaining mysteries. I would never dissuade anyone from pursuing the case. But for now, interested readers should do that work elsewhere.

We've reached the point where some people I respect are making claims that I question. If I raise those questions in public, the result might be one of those otiose internet pissing matches that always end up by making all parties look foolish. And who needs that?

As a parting shot, I'd like to direct your attention to this piece in the Boston Globe by Kevin Cullen, who writes in convincing detail about the shootout that ended with the death of Tamerlan Tsarnaev.

As you may know, I have questioned the assertion (made by Watertown's police chief) that Tsarnaev was killed after being struck by an SUV driven by his brother. This claim struck me as dubious because the morgue photo shows a bullet hole and the physician who worked on Tsarnaev said that he saw no evidence of a vehicle impact.

Here's the relevant section from Cullen's piece:
Thinking fast and with sure tactical instincts, Pugliese drove not into the firefight, but down one of the side streets he knows like the back of his hand. He ran through yards in the dark and outflanked the bombers. Pugliese began firing from the side, and police believe that he hit 26-year-old Tamerlan Tsarnaev, bringing him down.

Pugliese and a Boston police officer converged on the wounded man and subdued him. They didn’t know where the younger brother, Dzhokhar, had disappeared to until they heard the gunning of an engine. Dzhokhar aimed the stolen Mercedes-Benz SUV at the cops who, in a scene that would not be out of place in a Hollywood film, dove to safety. Tamerlan Tsarnaev wasn’t as lucky. His body was dragged by the car for a short distance before his little brother drove off.
That accounts for the bullet hole in the rib cage. The position of the hole indicates a strike from the side.

As for the SUV hit: Although we still don't have the level of detail we would prefer, it seems that Dzhokhar aimed for the cops, not his brother. I would suggest that, from the driver's point of view, Tamerlan's prone body might have been hidden by the cops who stood around him. As the SUV zoomed toward the officers, they leaped out of the way, making Tamerlan visible -- for an instant. Even if Dzhokhar tried to swerve away or skid to a stop, the body might have been dragged by the car a short distance.

If you have ever accidentally hit a deer carcass in the road, you can visualize this sequence of events.

So it seems that the police chief was both right and wrong. He was right to say that the body was dragged by the SUV. He was wrong when he claimed that the vehicle impact caused death.

Now let's have an explanation as to why the cops used that boat for target practice.
As unlikely as it first sounds, I have to say the 'over-reaction to flash-bang' excuse may have some merit. I wasn't around for the first volley of gunshots, but I do know that as the night wore on, the police prefaced each stun grenade fired into the boat with repeated announcements over the radio that a flash-bang was about to be fired and that no one should return fire. Even at the time I thought it represented a surprising amount of ass-covering -- and just assumed a similar moment of shock and awe earlier must have triggered an embarrassingly disproportionate response from the mob of nervous lawmen...
Daniel Hopsicker has something interesting, Joe.

For chrissakes, Ben. How many times are people going to push that same piece at me?

Re-read paragraph three above. Do I need to spell it out for you?

Joseph; Does his disclaimer make any more sense?

Does anyone, retire from CIA, ever?

This comment has been removed by the author.
We definitely don't know what happened that night, nor do we have a better understanding of who the Misha character who so heavily influenced the older brother was. The AP put out an article stating that law enforcement had identified him and that he had no role in the bombing, but that doesn't make things any clearer. If this was an FBI sting gone awry, wouldn't they prefer to keep their involvement quiet rather than admit their mistake?
"Now let's have an explanation as to why the cops used that boat for target practice." I'd rather have an explanation as to why the cops drove up and down through residential areas in armored vehicles, pointing the muzzles of rifles and machine guns at the heads of any citizens naive enough to look out of their doors or windows to see what was going on in their neighborhoods. I would also like to know why it was necessary to have armed men burst into peoples' homes, drag them outside at gunpoint, and frisk them in public as if they were criminals, merely for residing in their own homes. I guess the sheep are so conditioned by propaganda now that they don't mind being stripped naked on their own front lawn while having a gun barrel stuck up their rectums as long as it protects them from terrorists.
Misha surfaces:
Among all of Alex Jones's minions parroting his 'false flag' line on Boston, how many do you suppose will notice that the ricin letters likely actually were a 'false flag' event, of sorts. Although the motive behind that may turn out to be something considerably less dramatic than one-world government.
Sorry, but you're full of shit.
tsisa, that was so superbly argued I can presume only that you are one of Alex Jones' fans.
InfoWars "reporter" makes the mistake of coming to Cambridge: .
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is 

powered by Blogger. 

Isn't yours?