BREAKING: Official: Suspect indicates Boston attack was retribution

reply to post by luciddream


The police don't come running to the media every time they find new evidence.

You implying a conspiracy is childish.

reply to post by Krakatoa


The reason i said about the forensics team is that if its real, then either..

1) They didn't find it first, they suck.

2) they found it but it was hush hushed, still this forensic team is part of the whole and the "whole" sucks or has an agenda.

You have to look at it as a fault of the entire system(cops, forensics, chief etc), of course there are good guys in the system but they answer to others(who answers to even higher ups with political/economic agenda).

reply to post by Wertdagf


I guess it was too hard to tell the media that it was a retribution attack for all the massacre drones did?

I mean they already accused them of Terrorist with Muslim affiliation, whats exposing this would do? in fact it might even make them look like hero.

They should have kept it quiet forever, i mean, whats the point of bringing this now? they probably thought, he is a terrorist, he is affiliated with Muslims, but why did he do it? hmmmm "lets make something up for our next course of action"

Hey im not full dismissing it, but im sure i have more rights to doubt this.

Originally posted by Cancerwarrior

Originally posted by luciddream
reply to post by Krakatoa

 

SO they didn't find this "magically" appeared note when they captured him?

I mean, if you catch a guy hiding in a boat, i would want to search the entire area for ANYTHING... weapons, tools, notes.

What a sucky forensics team.

I would not be surprised if this note was planted for some agenda.

You hit the nail on the head.

It is awful funny how this note just turns up several weeks after the bombing with Muslims (yet again) being the reasons for the attack. Its not like he was hiding on a giant cruise ship that they had to scour. It was just some guys fishing boat. You can go through every part of a boat like that in an hour or less.

Lies, lies and more lies.

This could very well be an example of "them" not letting a good tragedy go to waste.

edit on 16-5-2013 by Cancerwarrior because: (no reason given)

Show me where, in any of the referenced articles, there is any implication that the note was just now discovered.

As it's related to the boat in this thread, I thought I'd add this aspect of the story here. This clip, from April 24th, is the local Boston news interview of the owner of the boat in which the suspect was trapped and captured.

Boat owner gives minute-by-minute account of suspect discovery

Wow, good thing he thought to bring along a sharpie (or whatever other pen would write on the inside of a boat) before heading out to do his dastardly deeds that night, ya know, just in case he felt like scrawling a note regarding his intentions somewhere

reply to post by usernameconspiracy


Show me where, in any of the referenced articles that they have been holding onto it since they captured him.

It seems to me that this is something they would have reported right away. Not wait until a month later.

Any chance they can take to throw mud on the Islamic faith (even though I am not a muslim, even I can see it) they use it.

So the suspect, whom the FBI pretended not to know when it initially asked the public to help identify him , calmly wrote his reasons for leaving behind a backpack with a bomb in it (after walking away from the explosion with one still strapped to his back ) whilst dozens of rounds of what he would have assumed were bullets were peppering all sides of the boat. Then he surrended to the police, was disarmed yet managed to shoot/slash his neck (take your pick) whilst being filmed calmly climbing out of the bullet-ridden boat.

Sounds like a second-rate script to the kind of gangster B-movies I used to see 40 years ago.....

Originally posted by micpsi
So the suspect, whom the FBI pretended not to know when it initially asked the public to help identify him

, calmly wrote his reasons for leaving behind a backpack with a bomb in it (after walking away from the explosion with one still strapped to his back

) whilst dozens of rounds of what he would have assumed were bullets were peppering all sides of the boat. Then he surrended to the police, was disarmed yet managed to shoot/slash his neck (take your pick) whilst being filmed calmly climbing out of the bullet-ridden boat.

Sounds like a second-rate script to the kind of gangster B-movies I used to see 40 years ago.....

There's no doubt that picture taken by Mr Green was worked on by the FBI and badly done, and is was worked on to make it appear that the younger brother was no longer in possession of his holdall.
But, there were still two explosions and, going by the FBI's own gub they have video showing the brothers dropping the bags.. that video or videos we still await, and is now past time to be treated with as pristine by this time. This note scrawling is anecdotal, also because it is only now being mentioned, possibly just a sop to the public, but still to keep people guessing.

Going out on a limb, but not too much, I'd say they are still looking for the second bomber, or likely they know who it was and who may be out of their jurisdiction, either way no longer a threat.

Originally posted by smurfy
...There's no doubt that picture taken by Mr Green was worked on by the FBI and badly done, and is was worked on to make it appear that the younger brother was no longer in possession of his holdall.
But, there were still two explosions and, going by the FBI's own gub they have video showing the brothers dropping the bags.. that video or videos we still await, and is now past time to be treated with as pristine by this time. This note scrawling is anecdotal, also because it is only now being mentioned, possibly just a sop to the public, but still to keep people guessing.

Going out on a limb, but not too much, I'd say they are still looking for the second bomber, or likely they know who it was and who may be out of their jurisdiction, either way no longer a threat.

I have asked numerous people, with no reply...so, I'll ask you -
Where does the "claim" come from, that "the FBI...have video showing the brothers dropping the bags"?
I ask this because - If they did, I believe they would have mentioned it in the Criminal Complaint/Affidavit filed against the younger brother.
What they claim in that 'Affidavit is -
1. Video footage of the brothers entering onto Boylston from Glouchester...
2. Photos of the brothers together, with their backpacks ("knapsacks") on...(presumably, still between Glouchester & Fairfield')
3. Video footage (taken by the surveillance camera of The Forum Restaurant) of the brothers together, with their "knapsacks" about "a half-block away" from the Forum Restaurant.
-- Same video footage, shows the elder brother leaving...going out of view for approximately 15 seconds...then reappearing directly in front of the Forum', and continuing to walk in an easterly direction...toward the Finish Line (area) (note - no mention of any other photos or videos of Tamerlan' past this point).
-- And...The Same video footage showing the younger brother remaining at the "half-block-away" location for about a minute, before moving out of the line-of-sight of the camera, and then reappearing approximately 15 seconds later in front of the Forum'...where he stationed himself for the next 4 minutes (approximately).
4. Photos (or - a photo?) from across the street, showing the "knapsack" on the ground, at the younger brother's feet.
AND THEY CLAIM that it is this photo, from across that street that is convincing enough to conclude that "some movement" the younger brother made, shortly after arriving at said location, was "placing the knapsack on the ground".

If they had actual video evidence of D. Tsarnaev placing the backpack on the ground...they would not have relied on the photo across the street to "justify" their conclusion. This (again imo) means that they did not want to say "Approximately 15 seconds later, he came back into view of the Forum' surveillance camera; stationed himself among the onlookers; and...set the knapsack on the ground at his feet"...

Anyway - I continue to hear the claim, and would like to know if you know the source of said claim/s.
Thanks.

A written confession makes for a speedy trial doesnt it?
No nasty questions about past connections etc....
No need to deeply examine the case because he "confessed hey"?
theyll just bury the guy now.

Originally posted by just1question

Right...They had a bullet ridden boat for a month and they just now report there was a note.....hmmmmm...

What's wrong with this story?

They also found empty beer cans strewn all over the inside of the boat indicating the suspect wanted to get drunk while he was bleeding and writing his farewell notes. Whoops..seems as if those beer cans were left over from the owner of the boat, after a day out of heavy drinking and fishing....Now go and do justice and arrest that boat owner for BUI....

Ridiculous.....

???

It was EVIDENCE that was gathered, like everything, and later released to the public or a source.

Also , all my boats back east have beer cans in it. Do you this kid walked into a beer store and bought some before he died, with his face plastered everywhere?

Man... ATS is full of clowns.

Originally posted by WanDash

Originally posted by smurfy
...There's no doubt that picture taken by Mr Green was worked on by the FBI and badly done, and is was worked on to make it appear that the younger brother was no longer in possession of his holdall.
But, there were still two explosions and, going by the FBI's own gub they have video showing the brothers dropping the bags.. that video or videos we still await, and is now past time to be treated with as pristine by this time. This note scrawling is anecdotal, also because it is only now being mentioned, possibly just a sop to the public, but still to keep people guessing.

Going out on a limb, but not too much, I'd say they are still looking for the second bomber, or likely they know who it was and who may be out of their jurisdiction, either way no longer a threat.

I have asked numerous people, with no reply...so, I'll ask you -
Where does the "claim" come from, that "the FBI...have video showing the brothers dropping the bags"?
I ask this because - If they did, I believe they would have mentioned it in the Criminal Complaint/Affidavit filed against the younger brother.
What they claim in that 'Affidavit is -
1. Video footage of the brothers entering onto Boylston from Glouchester...
2. Photos of the brothers together, with their backpacks ("knapsacks") on...(presumably, still between Glouchester & Fairfield')
3. Video footage (taken by the surveillance camera of The Forum Restaurant) of the brothers together, with their "knapsacks" about "a half-block away" from the Forum Restaurant.
-- Same video footage, shows the elder brother leaving...going out of view for approximately 15 seconds...then reappearing directly in front of the Forum', and continuing to walk in an easterly direction...toward the Finish Line (area) (note - no mention of any other photos or videos of Tamerlan' past this point).
-- And...The Same video footage showing the younger brother remaining at the "half-block-away" location for about a minute, before moving out of the line-of-sight of the camera, and then reappearing approximately 15 seconds later in front of the Forum'...where he stationed himself for the next 4 minutes (approximately).
4. Photos (or - a photo?) from across the street, showing the "knapsack" on the ground, at the younger brother's feet.
AND THEY CLAIM that it is this photo, from across that street that is convincing enough to conclude that "some movement" the younger brother made, shortly after arriving at said location, was "placing the knapsack on the ground".

If they had actual video evidence of D. Tsarnaev placing the backpack on the ground...they would not have relied on the photo across the street to "justify" their conclusion. This (again imo) means that they did not want to say "Approximately 15 seconds later, he came back into view of the Forum' surveillance camera; stationed himself among the onlookers; and...set the knapsack on the ground at his feet"...

Anyway - I continue to hear the claim, and would like to know if you know the source of said claim/s.
Thanks.

Could well be, and I'm damn sure that the 'Green' Picture has been worked on. But the 'video' source was from Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick as reported in the Washington Times, and international papers, and that he was briefed by them.

www.washingtontimes.com...

I will add the caveat that you must read everything as stated including this quote from the governor,

“It does seem to be pretty clear that this suspect took the backpack off, put it down, did not react when the first explosion went off and then moved away from the backpack in time for the second explosion”
That quote could not be made looking at a still.

The report is carefully worded, and if you read the other stuff quoted as from the governor, he also is being carefully worded.

Originally posted by smurfy
...the 'video' source was from Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick as reported in the Washington Times, and international papers, and that he was briefed by them.

www.washingtontimes.com...

I will add the caveat that you must read everything as stated including this quote from the governor,

“It does seem to be pretty clear that this suspect took the backpack off, put it down, did not react when the first explosion went off and then moved away from the backpack in time for the second explosion”
That quote could not be made looking at a still.

The report is carefully worded, and if you read the other stuff quoted as from the governor, he also is being carefully worded.
...

Thanks.
Yeah - love the way they word it, now...
The part - "did not react when the first explosion went off and then moved away from the backpack in time for the second explosion"...all mirrors the FBI Criminal Complaint.

Everything in that diatribe is derived from the video EXCEPT seeing Tsarnaev take the backpack off and put it down.

The video may have shown a movement that suggested those conclusions...but, they could not make the claim without the photo from across the street....which is why they both refuse to say, at any point, that "they have video evidence of him putting the backpack down".

Now - what is intriguing to me is - the way Tsarnaev was facing in the photo/s from across the street...would have placed his right side (right shoulder &/or arm) toward the surveillance camera.
Was it so crowded that the camera could not get a clear view/shot?
They claim that when he walked into view (after the 15 second trek from the former spot, a half-block away), he was carrying the backpack.
They claim that...he walked away calmly but rapidly... "without his knapsack, having left it on the ground where he had been standing".
Is there video of this?
I don't know...
Looks to me like they're mixing apparently-established facts (in the Complaint) with "logical progression" (in other words - "if we accept 1 as fact - then, we can accept that 2 logically follows...without having to restate/re-prove 1").

Thanks for your response.

The scoops from CBS News' John Miller keep on coming...

John Miller, who joined CBS News as senior correspondent on October 17, 2011 has quite a storied history-- you may remember John Miller as:
- Deputy Director of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence which is the agency that oversees the FBI and CIA. (2006-2011)

- The former Assistant Director of Public Affairs for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), where he was the FBI's national spokesman. (2005)

- LAPD Bureau Chief for the Counter-Terrorism and Criminal Intelligence, where under LAPD's Bill Bratton, John Miller launched the Archangel Critical Asset Assessment Management System (ACAMS), which has been adopted by other cities and states for ongoing risk-assessment of potential terrorist targets. Miller also is the original designer of the Los Angeles Joint Regional Intelligence Center (JRIC), which combines intelligence and analysis for the LAPD, LA Sheriff, and the FBI. (2003-2005)

- And who can forget that in May 1998 while with ABC News John Miller conducted an exclusive interview with Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan. (1995-2002)

- Chief Spokesperson for NYPD police commissioner William Bratton (1994).

John Miller's newest farce is that "Boston bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev left a note claiming responsibility for the April 15 attack on the Boston Marathon" which Miller refers to as "part manifesto, part suicide note and part justification for the killing and maiming of innocent civilians."

Now we enter the best part of the farce as the article points out that since Dzhokhar had no paper while on the boat, this note was "scrawled with a marker on the interior wall of the cabin". Do you know how difficult, if not impossible it is to write on the textured fiberglass interior walls of a boat? Now try to write legibly in conditions equivalent to pitch black darkness on that textured, fiberglass surface while the walls of the boat are being riddled with bullets.

The Full Story from CBS News

Another point about the Boston Bombings farce that has not been highlighted is the carjacking story with "Danny" the Chinese Immigrant who was driving a 2013 Mercedes ML 350. "Danny" claims that while he was pulled over to the side of the road to send a text message that Tamerlan Tsarnaev opened his drivers side door and stuck a gun in his face. The MAJOR FLAW in this story is that since 2003 ALL Mercedes vehicles doors automatically lock by default when the vehicle reaches 8 miles per hour. The vehicle will not unlock unless the driver manually unlocks the vehicle. Therefore the official story is impossible.

Originally posted by NickDC202
...Another point about the Boston Bombings farce that has not been highlighted is the carjacking story with "Danny" the Chinese Immigrant who was driving a 2013 Mercedes ML 350. "Danny" claims that while he was pulled over to the side of the road to send a text message that Tamerlan Tsarnaev opened his drivers side door and stuck a gun in his face. The MAJOR FLAW in this story is that since 2003 ALL Mercedes vehicles doors automatically lock by default when the vehicle reaches 8 miles per hour. The vehicle will not unlock unless the driver manually unlocks the vehicle. Therefore the official story is impossible.

All good stuff NickDC202...but, I need clarification on something.
The Mercedes, since 2003, automatically lock...when the vehicle reaches 8 miles per hour.
I'll accept that...
What happens when the vehicle stops (and the transmission is moved back to "PARK")?
You state that "The vehicle will not unlock unless the driver manually unlocks the vehicle"... Do you know if this means - "IN ALL CASES"?
In other words... Does this include - "UNLESS THE TRANSMISSION" is placed in "PARK"? Or - "UNTIL THE IGNITION is turned OFF"? Or - ... (as it appears you've stated) ... "UNTIL the doors are MANUALLY unlocked by someone inside the vehicle"?
Anyway - I just don't want to acept that the story (of the car-jacking) is impossible, until qualifying some of the data. Thanks.

reply to post by WanDash

What happens when the vehicle stops (and the transmission is moved back to "PARK")?

Doors stay locked unless the vehicle is completely off then they unlock to allow the door to open for the driver to exit.

Driver can manually unlock the doors when car is not in motion but the locks re-engage when speed is reached.

Don't forget this CNN report on 26 April 2013


CNN's Brian Todd covered the carjacking at the top of the 2pm hour on 26 April 2013. The story comes from Northeastern University criminology Professor James Fox who met with "Danny" (who CNN notes is not his real name, it is his nickname) who refuses to go on camera or give his real name. (* NOTE: Although a few days later "Danny" DID go on camera with his face obstructed and his voice altered for his first and only real interview about the alleged carjacking. Guess which reporter landed this interview with "Danny"? Yep, you guessed it; CBS News' John Miller whose history I detailed in my previous post).

Here is a direct quote from CNN's Brian Todd in the video above: "He's relayed everything through this professor, James Fox and they've told this to the Boston Globe and they also told it to us." Todd continues to give the overview of the carjacking and before going to footage of his on camera interview with professor James Fox he says "professor James Fox tells us the first words of the suspect."

When I initially read the Boston Globe article a few things about the carjacking story struck me as very strange and the details of the alleged carjacking seemed suspect; but add the fact that "Danny's" mouthpiece is a Northeastern University Professor of Criminology, this "Danny" story just seems like a complete farce IMO.

Btw the story about how Tamerlan Tsarnaev allegedly gained access to the Mercedes has changed three times since the initial reporting and include: Tamerlan opened the drivers side door from the outside, Tamerlan was screaming at "Danny" and "Danny" couldn't hear him so he rolled down his window and Tamerlan opened the door from the inside, and "Danny" rolled down his window and Tamerlan opened the door (with no explanation of how it was opened).

Originally posted by NickDC202

Another point about the Boston Bombings farce that has not been highlighted is the carjacking story with "Danny" the Chinese Immigrant who was driving a 2013 Mercedes ML 350. "Danny" claims that while he was pulled over to the side of the road to send a text message that Tamerlan Tsarnaev opened his drivers side door and stuck a gun in his face. The MAJOR FLAW in this story is that since 2003 ALL Mercedes vehicles doors automatically lock by default when the vehicle reaches 8 miles per hour. The vehicle will not unlock unless the driver manually unlocks the vehicle. Therefore the official story is impossible.

Did you really just type this and call it evidence that the story is impossible?

First you say the driver was pulled over at the side of the road sending a text message, then you say that all Mercedes vehicles since 2003 lock the door automatically once you are driving at 8 MPH. If he was pulled over sending a text message, the doors automatically locking at 8 MPH means absolutely nothing.

Are you saying that once the locks automatically engage, then when you are stopped and the vehicle is placed in PARK, the locks will not disengage unless the driver manually unlocks them? I doubt that. I bet they unlock automatically when the vehicle is in PARK. Further, was he on the side of the road with the engine running? To many possibilities for a simple statement to be called proof that his story is impossible.

reply to post by usernameconspiracy


Having done the research and examined all the possible scenarios I would say I am better qualified to comment on this than you who, as your post indicates, has not done any examination of this.

Originally posted by luciddream
reply to post by Krakatoa

 

SO they didn't find this "magically" appeared note when they captured him?

I mean, if you catch a guy hiding in a boat, i would want to search the entire area for ANYTHING... weapons, tools, notes.

What a sucky forensics team.

I would not be surprised if this note was planted for some agenda.

Indeed, no need to be surprised as that is exactly what it's all about, the people will never hear the truth about it, it was a government controlled operation