April 24, 2013
Since last Monday’s twin bombings at the finish line of the Boston marathon, suspicion has been cast on a range of suspects but aside from the officially-nominated culprits attention has mostly been drawn to elements within the US government, but the theories springing up are far from coherent and convincing. As I have previously explained, this was initially on the basis of misinformation about a possible drill being run that morning, though that has since been replaced by similarly unfounded claims about the role of several black-jacketed, tan-trousered men.
For several days now it has been claimed that the men, seen in the vicinity of the bombs prior to the explosions, yet all managing to escape completely unharmed, work for Craft International, a private mercenary firm. On the basis of the skull logo on the baseball cap of one of the man this claim has turned into a stated of supposed fact. The similarity to other logos, such as that of Blackwater and the Navy SEAL Team Five, has also provoked accusations that they were somehow involved in the bombing plot.
This is all inaccurate and a distraction. Several days ago Keelan Balderson of WideShut identified the men as members of a WMD ‘Civil Support Team’ or CST. This is readily confirmed by a picture showing the ‘CST’ logo on the back of their black jackets.
In the aftermath of the explosion one member of the team was pictured walking around with a radiation detector, showing that the purpose of these men was likely part of the huge security operation around the marathon. Their responsibility following an explosion is to check for the possibility of a dirty bomb (that old chestnut), which is exactly what the available footage and photos show them doing.
How and why the men in these pictures were wrongly identified and baselessly accused of taking part in this terrorist attack is a matter of some concern for the alternative media. Just as with the ‘bomb sniffer dog drill’ theory that was being bandied about as solid evidence of a US government false flag attack, there are obvious and instant problems with the ‘Craft guys’ theory. If the US government were going to carry out a false flag by secretly placing bombs at the Boston marathon then the last thing they would do is put bomb sniffing dogs in the area. It provides no advantage to those carrying out the bombings and considerably increases the risk of exposure. Likewise, you don’t carry out a false flag wearing your own uniform. This is an elementary lesson in covert operations philosophy that even a young child could understand, but was missed by many major figures in the ‘alternative media’.
The ‘Craft guys’ almost certainly weren’t working for Craft International, and are very likely a red herring who had nothing to do with carrying out the bombing. If there were covert operatives in the vicinity of the blasts prior to the explosions, either planting the bombs and making sure their patsies turned up on time and in place or ensuring the bombers were following orders, then they would not be dressed in such conspicuous clothing and wearing heavy backpacks. They would be in ordinary civilian dress, looking like any other marathon enthusiast. The idea that the reall culprits could be found by looking at a few photos and watching a few clips on youtube is nothing more than the ‘alternative media’ congratulating itself on a job that in reality has been done very poorly.
Massive Security Build-Up
That is not to say that suspicions about the Boston bombings are completely unfounded. What is abundantly clear from the photos, video and eyewitness accounts is that there was a massive build-up of security around the marathon. According to Ali Stevenson, who reported bomb sniffing dogs and the announcement that they were part of an exercise, he had never seen this much security at a marathon before. Spotters on rooftops (not ‘snipers’ as reported by some ‘alternative media’ organs), sniffer dogs, and lots of men on the streets in uniform add up to a full-spectrum security operation at both the start and the finish of the race.
There are several ways to potentially interpret this. It could be another example of the state using a high-profile public sporting event to roll out large scale, overt security to continue to acclimatise the public to having uniformed men with guns surround them whenever they gather en masse in public. In this view the fact that the bombings occured in the middle of a massive security operation would be a coincidence, the result of the simple rule that if you have this kind of build-up at lots of major events, sooner or later one of that events is going to suffer an attack. There was similar boots-on-the-ground heavy security at the London Olympics last year, which the same media organs now running wild with theories about Boston had insisted for years would the target of a huge false flag. They were profoundly wrong about that, there was no attack or even a hint of an attack at the Olympics, though don’t expect them to acknowledge the damage they did through their fear-mongering, let alone apologise.
Another possibiity is that they had some kind of foreknowledge, or at least had heard some chatter or otherwise got a whiff of a plan to attack the marathon. The fact that they had the full range of security personnel, including the WMD CST guys, suggests that they were very much expecting something to happen but weren’t sure what that something was going to be. After all, spotters on rooftops and sniffer dogs over 20 miles away are pointless if you know that the finish line will be the target of bombings at ground level. This is distinct from those personnel being complicit in the attacks, though the ’let it happen’ tactic might also be relevant in this instance.
Then there is the interpretation that the security were there to actually carry out the attack, though this is doubtful for two major reasons. First, they were there in uniform and were (relatively) easily identified. Secondly, it would entail one of two implausible plots. Either everyone in all the security teams from all the different agencies present in Boston was in on the plot or the small, compartmentalised team of false flag operatives were running a huge risk that someone from one of the other teams who wasn’t in on the plot would spot them. While I am not completely ruling out the idea that this was an attack sponsored or carried out by the US government, at this point the arguments in favour of that idea have been weak, counterintuitive and the result of confirmation bias.
That said, given the sheer number of security personnel in the area it is unlikely that they would all escape injury unless they were being managed in such a way as to keep them away from the blasts. It seems that the CST guys were unscathed, but what about the others? The FBI and the local police were also present, were any of their people hurt? It would be suspicious if every single one of the government security officials got away without a scratch.
Instead of trying to solve the case through the extremely limited scope of the media coverage from the day of the attack we should be considering the Boston bombings in a more three-dimensional way. For one thing, it took the US government several days to name and present the officially-designated culprits, Tamerlan Tsarnaev who is now dead and his younger brother Dzhokhar who after a lockdown that lasted most of Friday and spread across most of the city of Boston was found hiding out in a boat. Normally when a government carries out a false flag attack on its own territory the official story is scripted in advance. It seems that this wasn’t the case in Boston.
Likewise, whether the Tsarnaev brothers actually planted the bombs (yet to be determined either way) the suggestion they were being handled by some or other intelligence service is ever-present. If someone was handling the brothers, or possibly handling Tamerlan who in turn was directing or manipulating Dzhokhar, then clearly they abandoned them following the bombings. It seems that the men had no escape plan, no exfiltration route, no way of fleeing after the attacks. Likewise they man no great attempt to disguise themselves while they were in the area where the bombs went off, and Dzhokhar in particular was very easy to identify.
So if someone was handling the brothers, as agents or dupes or absolute patsies, the key issue is: who that was, which agency of which nation? So far the primary focus has been on the FBI, though many people making that sort of accusation are failing to distinguish between sting/entrapment operations – an FBI specialty - and false flag violence which is more of a Pentagon/CIA specialty. Feeding into this is an RT interview with the mother of the two alleged bombers, saying explicitly that there were innocent, that they were set up and that they were ‘controlled’ by the FBI.
The FBI have officially admitted that they investigated and interviewed the older brother Tamerlan two years in response to a request from a foreign government. So, which government? Given that the Tsarnaevs are of Chechen extraction, and lived in Dagestan before moving to the US in the early 2000s, the obvious government would be Russia. After all, who else is concerned with Chechens as a security issue? According to ProPublica, the FBI interview took place ‘at the request of a Russian security agency’.
It is often useful when looking at intelligence operations to mirror your interpretative framework, to flip the whole puzzle round and see what it would look like from the reverse perspective. In this case that means asking whether Russia were behind the Boston bombings. After all, Chechens would have no apparent reason to attack the US, especially given that the Chechnyan independence movement has been used by the NATO bloc as a means of harassing Russia. By contrast, the Russian motive for carrying out a pair of bombings in Boston could well be revenge for the long-standing and continued use of Islamic movements and groups by NATO as a means of destabilising Russian power and foreign relationships. Whether this is about Chechnya or Syria, or possibly the recent theft of money from Russian accounts in Cyprus, the clear fact is that the Cold War is not over.
Similarly, the KGB may have renamed itself once against but it is basically the same organisation it has been for two centuries. Putin’s FSB is the same institution that a century ago was called the Department for Protecting the Public Security and Order (the Okhrana) and was infiltrating and provoking and manipulating the Anarchists and Nihilists in the War on Terror of the day. They have for many years been the masters of disinformation, in fact the word ‘disinformation’ is of Russian origin, from ‘dezinformatsiya’. So is the RT interview with the mother of the alleged bombers an example of this strategy at work? Was the request from the Russians to the FBI to look into Tamerlan part of a bigger spying game? Were they checking to see if the Feds had anything on their man, or on someone they wanted to be their man in the future? This whole story has conveniently put the focus onto the FBI as possible culprits or at least for the ‘intelligence failure’ regarding Tamerlan. We should never forget that RT is Russian state propaganda.
This story was given another shot in the arm when Dan Dicks of Press for Truth apparently interviewed the aunt of the two Tsarnaev brothers, and was told that she believes ’100%’ that the naked man who was arrested in Boston during Friday’s martial law lockdown/manhunt was Tamerlan. Officially Tamerlan had died hours earlier in a chase and shootout with the Boston police.
The available videos of the naked man (see here and here) do not appear to be of Tamerlan, though the flashing police lights and general darkness make it difficult to be sure. So is the aunt simply burying her head in the sand, refusing to accept the possibility that her nephews could be responsible for such violence? Suspicions about the naked arrested man were circulating for some days before Dan Dicks spoke to her, and as with the RT report on the FBI this does all play into an alternative narrative that is very convenient for the Russian authorities. Are the family members working with the Russian authorities to put out dezinformatsiya?
A further hint is possibly offered by the story that the FBI are now looking for a 12-person Islamist ’sleeper cell’ in connection with the bombings. Such a sleeper cell has never actually been found in the US, despite the FBI’s best attempts to fabricate them, but another thing we should not forget is the Russian sleeper spy ring that was exposed in 2010.
Islamists do not appear to the human intelligence capacity to run a 12-person sleeper cell within US borders, but the Russian security services certainly do. At this stage in an investigation nothing should be taken for granted, and this hypothesis is only that, but it does offer a different and more subtle interpretive framework than those presented so far by the mainstream and corporate alternative media. Hopefully further information will come to light that enables us to make more sense of the smoke and mirrors game that is currently being played by intelligence agencies around the world.