Media is flying with wild speculation about the Tsarnaev brothers. Someone posted some links on FB (reproduced below), supposedly in support of various conspiracy theories. I reproduce my response here:
Not sure what you mean when you use the word “verified”.
The Salon bit is good. I don’t think you read it. It has nothing to do with anything else you posted, or it debunks most of the other things you posted…or, at least, provides a convincing argument that many of them are the rantings of a variety of stupid people. Good piece, though.
The Democracy Now interview is also good. It offers no evidence that there is any reason to suppose these two bombers were pawns of the FBI – in any way directed, controlled, incited, influenced or anything else.
The question of how the FBI goes about identifying and preventing terrorist attacks; the means they employ; the ways they may be argued to have engaged in entrapment in other cases is an interesting topic and says a lot about what America has become. In fact, the definition of entrapment was previously addressed in this thread.
In any case, the problem identified by the transcript is that the FBI is setting up innocent people to arrest for plots that don’t exist because the patsy is just some mentally ill individual… or gang of idiots. None of the investigations or arrests described in the interview involved anything that went beyond plotting and/or paying an informant. No bombs went off, no one was shot.
What appears to have transpired in Boston is not that. It’s beginning to look as though it’s just the opposite problem. The FBI missed one. They had a reason to look at this guy – they were ASKED to look at this guy. They LOOKED at this guy. And this guy and his brother blew up the Boston Marathon. They weren’t Saudis, or Yemenis, or Syrians or Lebanese or Egyptian. They weren’t from a place that American foreign policy was directly fkng over…they were from a place that Russian foreign policy had directly fkd over. They flew under the radar.
In any case, it certainly doesn’t even try to make the argument that this was some sort of false flag event.
The Global Research piece is similar to the Democracy Now piece. I agree that there should be no rush to scream RADICAL ISLAM! That is shallow, knee-jerk, often dangerously racist. Once again, it laments true cases where unstable individuals and bumbling idiots were led into ill-conceived plots that did not happen. And that these cases grew out of sending agents provocateurs into Muslim communities to troll for and incite victims.
One supposes the implication here is, at least in principle, to lend credence to the idea that we ought not dismiss allegations that Tamerlan Tsarnaev was such an agent, or under the direction and influence of such an agent.
The only evidence for THAT is the word of the mother, which amounts to little more than a confirmation of the timeline already presented by the FBI, all the facts as we know them, and wild speculation for which there is no evidence, and about which the Global Research article makes no claims.
The MotherJones article only restates what the FBI has already said – they looked at Tamerlan Tsarnaev at the request of a foreign government. They didn’t find anything. The mother’s aforementioned wild speculation, for which there is no evidence beyond her word, is formed into a question and used as the headline for the bit. I find it unsurprising the any news website would publish such a piece, but it doesn’t “verify” anything…well, except that his mother said something.
The photo you posted that reads “Most obvious false flag yet” is pure Alex Jones. There’s never a need to deconstruct Alex Jones. You just have suppose he’s right and it falls apart under its own weight. You previously posted a list of questions in this thread. Perhaps you missed the response.
1. why would guilty individuals stay home and wait to be caught?
Because they’re not very experienced at this sort of thing; thought they would never be ID’d / caught. They were barely out of high school, with no military training or criminal backgrounds. Idiots get caught.
2. how did the cops catch em so fast if they didnt know who they were looking for to begin with
Surveillance cameras and a shitload of man hours. Witnesses (including one who lost both his legs) saw them drop the bags and walk away. Photos were released, suspects were identified. After that, it was only a matter of time.
3. suspects mom claims FBI had been watching son for about 3 yrs, since he became religious. how could someone under surveillance pull off such an attack?
What the suspect’s mother says is not a very credible source. “Under surveillance”? There’s no remotely reasonable basis to make that claim.
4. witnesses report bomb drills in athletes village b4 attack
Alex Jones ALLEGES that that there are witnesses who say that. The only person I’ve heard SAY that is Alex Jones. Not credible.
5. search for images of men in cams, with huge backpacks and hats with Craft Int. or Seal team logo on it, watching the whole thing go down calmly…
More Alex Jones.
6. more than half of US terrorism cases have involved entrapment, usualy by FBI, who even admit in court to supplying potential terrorists with bombs/weapons (ie. the fbi plans it, finds someone stupid enuf to do it, then busts them)…
Two competing tests exist for determining whether entrapment has taken place, known as the “subjective” and “objective” tests. The “subjective” test looks at the defendant’s state of mind; entrapment can be claimed if the defendant had no “predisposition” to commit the crime. The “objective” test looks instead at the government’s conduct; entrapment occurs when the actions of government officers would have caused a normally law-abiding person to commit a crime.
Providing someone with materials is not entrapment. If someone approaches an undercover agent asking to get hold of explosives, and the agent provides materials to the suspect, that is not entrapment. Further, if an agent approaches someone and says, “Hey…I have a bunch of explosives. Do you want to blow up a government building?” and the suspect responds, “Fk yeah! Give me the bombs!” THAT ain’t entrapment. It is only entrapment if the suspect would not have engaged in criminal behaviour BUT FOR the actions of the government. Cooking up a plot and waiting to see who wants to play does not qualify.
There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that either of these brothers had any contact with any government agents whatsoever in relation to planning or executing the bombing, or the subsequent running gun battles throughout large chunks of MA.
7. always easier to see a false flag after the event when you find out its objective–there always is one: see if the govt uses this attack as an excuse to: increase security, station active troops on US soil (already happening), us drones in the US (already happening), attack or assassinate someone they blame for being involved in the attack (like they did in yemen after the underwear bomber) or start another war…
If these things – troops operating domestically, drones operating domestically, and killing “enemy combatants” (even American citizens so deemed) in foreign countries – are already happening, why would anyone need a false flag operation in order to do them?
Start another war? With whom? Chechnya? I don’t generally care to quote Paul Fucking Wolfowitz in order to make an argument that has nothing to do with seeing that treasonous piece of shit indicted for war crimes, but there REALLY aren’t any targets in Chechnya.
I would add one small comment to the discussion of entrapment. When an agent of the government provides explosives to someone who is of a mind to use them…it is still NOT entrapment. It does, however, demonstrate a serious lack of good judgment. It would support the argument that the government thus becomes a co-conspirator, but it is not entrapment, per se, if the “patsy” possessed a guilty mind.
Where Tamerlan Tsarnaev got the explosives he used will be a focus of the investigation. I consider the possibility that he got them from an agent of the government a literally incredible allegation.