The False Prosecution of Dzhokhkar Tsarnaev

Guest Post by Paul Craig Roberts

As I reported at the time, and as all evidence indicates, the alleged Boston Marathon Bombing was a publicly announced drill in which crisis actors were used. There were no real deaths or injuries, and the Tsarnaev brothers did not set off a bomb.

The drill was turned into a real event by propagandists who used the propaganda to advance their agenda of police state regulation and to test US reaction to the use of martial law to close down the city of Boston and the airport and to use 10,000 armed troops to invade without warrants and search citizens’ homes under the guise that a dangerous 19-year old “terrorist,” who was already shot up by soldiers or police, was on the loose. The insouciant American public, the law schools, bar associations, US Congress and media accepted this extraordinary violation of the US Constitution based on the most flimsy of all possible stories, thus opening Pandora’s Box of police state measures by the US government.

The faked terrorist event required terrorists, and the Tsarnaev brothers were selected for that patsy role. The older brother was murdered by police. The younger brother, having unexpectedly survived police attempts to shoot him to death, was put on trial. His attorneys were appointed by the government, and the attorneys, rather than the prosecutor, convicted their assigned client.

All of this was accepted by the public, but not by John Remington Graham, an attorney of wide experience. He saw that exculpatory evidence proving the innocence of the surviving younger brother, Dzhokhar, was ignored and later kept out of the trial. Mr. Graham took action that succeeded in the First Circuit accepting into the record the exculpatory evidence, thereby requiring that the evidence be considered in the appeal of Dzhokhar’s kangaroo court death sentence.

Attentive people abroad have noticed the increasing corruption and collapse of justice in America. On July 4, the Danish publication, Radians & Inches, published John Remington Graham’s account of the prosecution of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. With permission, it is reproduced below. Documents relating to the case will be posted seperately.

RADIANS & INCHES, VOL. 1, NO. 2
Published in Denmark on July 4, 2018
THE PROSECUTION OF DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV IN THE BOSTON BOMBING CASE

Over fifty years of practicing law, largely in criminal justice and forensic science and medicine, I have had reason to distrust the FBI.  When I was a young lawyer, I defended hundreds of young men who refused to be drafted into the armies of the United States in Vietnam.  I used an argument against the constitutionality of such conscription which had been successfully used by Hartford Convention in New England in bringing the War of 1812 to an end.  For those interested in details, I refer my readers to United States v. Crocker, 420 F. 2d 307 (8 Cir. 1970), and Kneedler v. Lane, 45 Pa. St. 238 at 240-272 (1863). All of my clients were eventually acquitted or pardoned.  Yet in those days, while I was teaching at an accredited law school, my Congressman called me from Washington, D. C., to warn me that the FBI had a dossier on me.  The FBI considered me a probable criminal because I defended my generation successfully, according to strict standards of law.  A little over twenty-five years ago, I was suspended from the practice of law for sixty days, because an FBI investigation memorandum put words in the mouth of a key witness who later gave a live deposition, completely clearing me of any suspicion of wrongdoing.  When the deposition was published by a veteran journalist, the people of my county put my name on the ballot by citizens’ petition, and elected me as their general counsel and chief public prosecutor.  I can provide details from the public record on request.  It came to me as no surprise, therefore, when I learned that, in the Boston marathon case, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev could not have detonated a pressure cooker bomb on Boylston Street in Boston on April 15, 2013, for which he was indicted, convicted, and sentenced to death, and that the FBI’s own evidence, of which counsel on both sides and the major news media of the United States were fully aware, conclusively proves that the accused was not guilty.  The trial in Boston was a giant hoax, a show trial produced by the FBI and major media in a flagrant abuse of the First Amendment, and most Americans are still not aware of the critical facts.  Probably tens of millions have read the internet-accessible report by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, a former assistant secretary of the treasury of the United States, about the prosecution of Mr. Tsarnaev, drawing heavily from the judicial record, and published widely in the United States, Canada, Europe, and Russia on and after August 17, 2015.  I shall attempt here to retell and update that story again here, by attaching several of the most important documents accessible to anybody with a Pacer account, so my readers may review them for themselves.

During the trial, after I had looked into the case, I wrote an opinion, stating that, in light of known FBI-gathered evidence, there was no probable cause to charge Dzhokhar.  Drawing from fragments at the scene of the explosions, the FBI crime lab and the indictment against Mr. Tsarnaev, and also the major news media, stated that the culprits were carrying black backpacks, filled with heavy pressure cooker bombs, at the time of the explosions, yet Dzhokhar in particular who was charged, not to mention his deceased brother Tamerlan, was shown in a still-frame photo from a street surveillance video used by the FBI to identify the suspects, carrying a light-weight white or silvery bag over his right shoulder only minutes before the explosions. It so happens that there were widely published photos at the time, these still available, showing men in paramilitary gear, wearing black backpacks which perfectly matched the black backpacks projected by the FBI crime lab, but these individuals were not questioned by the FBI.

The backpacks did not match, which in itself proves that Mr. Tsarnaev was not guilty as charged in the indictment.  In an ordinary criminal investigation, Dzhokhar would have been eliminated as a suspect, and the men in paramilitary gear would have been approached and questioned, but the FBI let them all go. Shortly before I released my opinion, Dr. Lorraine Day, who had for twenty-five years been chief trauma surgeon at the general hospital in San Francisco, came forward with an internet-accessible opinion, in which she unmistakably pointed out that, in news photos of the scene, no blood was visible when it would have been visible if there had been actual explosions, severing limbs as claimed, and that, when the pretense of blood did appear, the color was a bright orange-red Hollywood color, not the sober maroon color of human blood in real-life situations.

Not long afterwards, I was introduced to Maret Tsarnaeva, a Russian aunt of Dzhokhar, a lawyer who had served as a public prosecutor in the Kyrgyz Republic which had at one time been part of the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union.  Maret and I spoke by skype and corresponded by internet and regular mail.  The court-appointed lawyers for Dzhokhar had pressured Dzhokhar’s family to accept a defense that Dzhokhar was merely following the lead of his elder brother in the commission of the crime on marathon Monday.  They had overwhelming proof that Dzhokhar was not guilty, but would not defend him with the powerful exculpatory evidence they possessed, and thereby save his life.  As things finally turned out, the chief counsel for the accused, appointed and paid by the United States, appeared at trial, admitted the guilt of her client in her opening statement, did not use the decisive evidence of innocence in her hands, and did not even ask for a verdict of not guilty in her final summation.  Maret  knew that Dzhokhar was not guilty as charged, and wanted him defended on the merits.  She later submitted an affidavit to the federal district court in Boston, executed on April 17, 2015, and sent from the Russian Federation, in support of her effort to appear as a friend of the court for Dzhokhar, wherein she explained the circumstances.  Students of this prosecution will be interested in the details revealed by Mme Tsarnaeva, and so I attach of copy of her affidavit which stands uncontroverted on the judicial record.  Maret decided to make an appearance as a friend of the court to present available exculpatory evidence in behalf of her nephew Dzhokhar.  I should note here that I had to seek the assistance of local lawyers in Massachusetts to move my admission to the bar of the federal district court in Boston on special occasion so I could represent Maret in her amicus petition.  The help of countless lawyers, including the American Civil Liberties Union, was solicited and refused, because the major news media had created such a forbidding atmosphere that local counsel were afraid of loss of reputation or livelihood if they were known to have assisted anybody seeking to help Mr. Tsarnaev.  I had practiced in Massachusetts before, and had never before encountered such difficulty.  Boston was the last place in the world where a fair trial of Mr. Tsarnaev could be held.  On advice of the bar liaison officer of the federal district court in Boston, Maret represented herself in her amicus petition, with me at her side as “of counsel” so the court would know she had legal guidance. At her request, I prepared Maret’s motion and argument, and filed the documents for her. Her submission was left unanswered, and so the particulars were admitted.  For those who want the facts from the judicial record, I attach her argument which lays down the law and the facts, including four exhibits at the end (designated Tsarnaeva exhibits 1, 2, 3, and 4) which prove conclusively that the projections of the FBI crime lab and paragraph 7 of the indictment (especially Tsarnaeva exhibit 3) are contradicted by a third still-frame photo from the Whiskey Steak House video (Tsarnaeva exhibit 4), and that, therefore, Dzhokhar was not guilty.  This evidence, though offered and not contradicted, was ignored, and no hearing was held upon it.  The trial jury was never made aware of this evidence, which was also hidden from the general public. On June 24, 2015, Dzhokhar was sentenced to death.  The proceedings were legal theater, a game of smoke and mirrors.  But at least we secured a legal record made by the Russian aunt seeking to appear as friend of the court, including the argument and exhibits she offered.  On motion, these items were made a visible part of the court record by the presiding judge.

I have heard from citizens exasperated that I have not believed the confessions attributed to Mr. Tsarnaev.  One fellow insisted I was not a lawyer, because I would not accept those confessions, but he learned from the Minnesota Supreme Court that I am a lawyer in good standing, and have been in practice for a half century.   Why should nobody believe the confessions in the boat and at sentencing?  Because, as Sir William Blackstone said, and as all good criminal lawyers know, “[E]ven in cases of felony at common law, [confessions] are the weakest and most suspicious of all testimony, ever liable to be obtained by artifice, false hopes, promises of favour, or menaces, seldom remembered accurately, or reported with due precision, and incapable in their nature of being disproved by other negative evidence.” — 4 Commentaries at 357.  The alleged confession in the boat in Watertown required a special writing instrument, which Dzhokhar did not have in his possession.  At sentencing the words of the prisoner were plainly scripted for him: no Americanized youth, as Dzhokhar was, says his lawyers were “lovely companions,” or speaks of “Mohamed, peace be unto him,” etc. In any event, confessions must always in law be corroborated with the so-called corpus delicti: here the confessions cannot be true, because, if they were true, Dzhokhar would have carried a black backpack as projected by the FBI crime lab and charged the indictment, yet Dzhokhar carried a white bag over his right shoulder.  If there had been real explosions, as Dr. Day said, there would have been blood, of which there was none when it should have appeared, and, when blood appeared, it would not have been a flashy orange-red in color.  False confessions are common in criminal practice, which is why the law has for years been absorbed in using Miranda warnings and other ways to prevent false confessions.  False confessions are a problem, especially for prosecutors, because if an innocent suspect is convicted, the guilty party remains at large, and public safety is imperiled.

A new team of court-appointed lawyers for Mr. Tzarnaev took an appeal in his behalf to the First Circuit.  “Counsel for the appellant” will submit their arguments, but I daresay we shall hear nothing from them about the backpacks that do not match, and nothing about the phony blood, which completely change the case from guilty to not guilty, and warrant at least a new trial, if not an acquittal as a matter of law.

Something had to be done for Dzhokhar by somebody other than his court-appointed counsel who had thus far done nothing for him. And that is why three distinguished Americans have appeared before the First Circuit as friends of the court. I attach a copy of their amicus motion without appendices and addendum.  The motion refers to the record in the federal district court in Boston, including the exculpatory evidence and exhibits, and was filed on October 13, 2017.  If the First Circuit had wanted to continue the cover up the exculpatory evidence proving actual innocence, including proof that the backpacks do not match, the First Circuit could easily have denied the motion, because, never before in American jurisprudence, as far as I am aware, has a private amicus motion ever been allowed in a major public prosecution.  If the motion had been denied, nobody would have noticed. But, on November 9, 2017, the First Circuit granted the amicus motion of the three distinguished American friends of the court, including a retired professor of philosophy, an international scholar in political science, and a doctor of medicine with thirty-seven years of practice behind him.  The appellate court will consider the decisive exculpatory evidence which had been kept from the attention of the trial jury and the attention of the general public, previously buried in the record as if not part of the judicial process.

On November 24, 2017, argument in support of the amicus motion was filed as ordered by the First Circuit.  I attach a copy of the text of the argument before the First Circuit, without caption, tables, appendices, or addendum.  The motion and our argument are now visibly part of the judicial record, although the major media have continued to abuse the First Amendment by hiding this material from public attention in their game of intentional deception.  We have learned of this sad reality from an honest journalist associated with the Boston Herald, who interviewed me for about forty-five minutes on November 26, 2017, after she discovered our filings with the First Circuit two days beforehand.  As she expressed her impression in conversation with me, this material completely changes the story of the Boston marathon case as reported by major news media of the United States, and she was glad to have discovered the facts and to report them, as a good journalist should have been. But her supervising editor blocked publication of the story.  She should have won the Pulitzer prize and seen her work published.  If the country does not find out what really happened in this case, Mr. Tsarnaev will die by lethal injection, and the United States will be disgraced in the eyes of history.   And those responsible will be answerable to God.  I have intervened, because I am an American lawyer, and I want to be proud of the law and proud of my country.

The lawyers on both sides of this prosecution did not want the court to know of the decisive exculpatory evidence in the federal district court in Boston, but the First Circuit has reached out and demanded it.  Let us hope that the First Circuit will tell the country the truth, even though the major news and entertainment media of the United State have thus far failed us and let us all down.  I recall and remind others of the famous Pentagon Papers case, New York Times v. United States, 403 U. S. 713 (1971), which recognized the duty of the press to prevent deception of the people by their government.  In this case, however, it is clear from contemporary history that the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, and associated major media have shamelessly aided the government of the United States in hiding exculpatory evidence in the prosecution of a man whom they knew or should have known was not guilty of a heinous crime, and they were guilty of this breach of moral duty in order to mislead the American people. – John Remington Graham of the Minnesota Bar (#3664X), [email protected], 418-888-5049.

37
Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Anonymous
Anonymous

” There were no real deaths or injuries, and the Tsarnaev brothers did not set off a bomb.”

That needs to be told to the families of the dead and injured, and the critically injured who survived with major life changing debilitation.

Maybe you should go organize pickets outside their homes to bring it to both their and the public’s attention. Those people actually believe their relatives are dead and missing parts of their bodies and such.

youno
youno

The government does not care how many are killed in their false flag operations.

pyrrhus
pyrrhus

That has become obvious.

pyrrhus
pyrrhus

Evidence?

Warren
Warren

Look up Operation Sea-Spray a 1950 U.S. Navy secret experiment in which Serratia marcescens and Bacillus globigii bacteria were sprayed over the San Francisco; or Operation Northwoods, a true false flag op, on wikipedia or elsewhere, from the early 60s if they were that vicious then, in today’s day and age they are potentially much worse

Anonymous
Anonymous

So who was it blamed on instead?

That’s the hallmark of a “false flag”, ya’ know, one party deliberately pulling it off to blame on another one.

Martin brundlefly...eat moar chikin
Martin brundlefly...eat moar chikin

Go back and look at some of the fake ass amputation photos. Then talk shit.

Anonymous
Anonymous

How about you take some photos of those “fake amputation” victims and show us walking around in public today without anything amputated?

No one ever has yet, you know, so maybe you should be the first.

PlatoPlubius

@ Anon et al

Ever see the movie,
A LONG Kiss Goodnight?

A 2 minute scene that explains fundraisers …
A classic Samuel L. Jackson movie in his prime
https://youtu.be/N1vwjFhF4dA

StackingStock
StackingStock

No one died there, just like sandy hoax. They were able to pull this hoax off because of people who bought the sandy hoax story.

Now I will say they are getting better at these orchestrated events than in the past, because they are fine tuning them from the critical thinking crowd.

If it comes from MSN, then it’s fake as fuck.

Peace

StackingStock
StackingStock

Boston Bombing is Sandy Hook Part 2–Frenchfries With Gravy Max Malone
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRlLclTfRQ4&list=PLLLkIztS4okZQHCAW9NQXaBvF-LwTTXSz&index=5&t=0s

Places everyone, take your places. Ready action shoot.

Peace

StackingStock
StackingStock

Tough crowd here today , what truly amazes me is how gullible you seem on this event as opposed to other validated false flags recorded in history.

Peace

StackingStock
StackingStock

Here’s the video I tried to post earlier.

No blood, no blood and then fake blood like the article states.

WOW!

Boston Bombing is Sandy Hook Part 2–Frenchfries With Gravy Max Malone https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRlLclTfRQ4

Peace

Todd H.
Todd H.

If they tell obvious lies often enough, it blows out their credibility completely. When a large enough minority doesn’t believe the official government-sanctioned explanation, they have an increasingly difficult time pulling it off. Case in point is the Las Vegas mass shooting last October. There are so many holes in the story that it is on shaky ground even with mainstream normies (non-TBPers). The intelligence agencies who stage such false flag events are beginning to call into question such previously unquestioned (by the mainstream) fables like the Kennedy murder, staged lunar landings and 9/11/01 office building demolitions.

Iska Waran
Iska Waran

This John Remington Graham sounds like a kook. Here’s where he was disciplined for making false statements.
https://www.leagle.com/decision/1990766453nw2d3131753
Also, he appears to have sued half of the state of MN including several counties and the state itself. He doesn’t appear to have won any of these lawsuits. He once ran for MN Attorney General despite being a resident of Quebec, where his wife was “mairesse” http://www.brainerddispatch.com/content/graham-running-minn-attorney-general

pyrrhus
pyrrhus

Clearly, the defense at trial was a sham. You don’t ignore exculpatory evidence and essentially plead your client guilty in a capital case…His attorneys should be disbarred, and a new trial ordered.
But we all know that the Appellate Court won’t do it.

Todd H.
Todd H.

Cowboy hat dude with blown off leg guy in the wheelchair has to be the most unprofessional and fakest shit I have ever seen. He would have bled to death in about 30 seconds with such an injury. They both need to go on Tucker Carlson’s show and recount the events of that day.

Anonymous
Anonymous

I saw soldiers get legs (and arms) blown off in Vietnam when there was too intensive a firefight going on to render immediate aid and live till it was over and they could get help.

I imagine there are current soldiers from the ME that can tell you a similar thing.

Todd H.
Todd H.

If what they portrayed on camera was real, they shouldn’t have a problem going on television and answering difficult questions from a guy like Tucker Carlson. Where are they? It seems like they have disappeared completely.

Hollywood Rob

Well I honestly can’t say if PCR is better than this, but I do agree with Yo. Sure, maybe the bros were set up to take the fall. Maybe the moosad with the black backpacks were the real bombers. Why wouldn’t they be? They have provided the manpower for every killing for the past fifty years. Why not this. I can believe all of this and I can believe that the bros had nothing to do with the bomb, but to claim that there wasn’t one surely doesn’t bring anything positive to the conversation.

anarchyst
anarchyst

Look up “Crowds On Demand”, a real company that provides rioters and protesters for any situation. Yes, it is a real company that provides professional troublemakers, rioters and protesters who are paid around $15.00 per hour.
Maybe this is why police “stand down” whenever these left-wing hired thugs are present.

gilberts
gilberts

Like I said on the last PCR article, he’s prejudiced against the US to the point he’s willing to buy anything anti-US/pro-Russia he sees. I understand critical thinking can lead you away from the majority. For me, the truth usually seems to lead you away from the majority, often in direct conflict with what the majority agrees is fact, but there’s a point where that determination to look elsewhere for truth takes you across the line into conspiracy quackery and fantasy.

If you believe the blood is fake and there were no victims, you better be able to prove it better than saying it wasn’t the right color. The bag evidence is interesting and provokes thought. The idea you can fake that attack with the public right there, and it was the public who responded before even the cops or paramedics could, and fool them with some kind of moulage and corn syrup is ludicrous.

Even if you trucked in a team of pre-amputated crisis actors, trained to bleed on command and wearing pre-bloodied, shredded, and burned clothes under their street clothes, which they somehow managed to hide in their backpacks during and immediately after the blast, it would be awfully hard to get past the hospitals. If you theorize what I just said really happened, I think you are denying reality.

What is more likely- some ragheads from a Chechnya, one of the most violent muslim regions in Russian history, blew up the marathon because they’re muslim crazies and that’s how they roll, or the fedgov had an army of pre-injured actors to fake it, many of whom had to act their way through months of physical rehab and now walk on their fake metal legs and even run in the marathon to maintain the fake story, and they staged gallons of fake cornsyrup blood and shrapnel to throw everywhere? All faked for the chance to fake a manhunt and running shootout through Boston so they could bring in the cops to illegally search houses for suspects they knew weren’t even there, all with the eventual goal of dismantling your right to privacy in your home? Does it sound like a stretch the way I typed it?

If you google pics from the event, it looks like they both had backpacks, one of which looks black and one of which looks silver. I have no idea how the Tsarnaev’s speak casually, but as Chechnyan muslim fanatics speaking English as a 2nd language and attempting to martyr themselves, I would not be surprised if the confession was worded strangely and referenced the child molester prophet, ‘Mo. I don’t think Graham’s claims hold up. I think he’s doing what all defense attorneys do, trying to create doubt in the reasonable mind events occurred as claimed by the prosecution, and PCR bought right into it. I assume he’s doing it because he’s an expert in Constitutional Law and he’s offended by the obvious violation of our rights during the search. I get it. I agree. I wouldn’t want to be treated like shit in my own home by a bunch of occupying militarized cops, either. I wish 1 person had refused on Constitutional grounds, but you know they would have been shot for their principals.

I get a lot of us distrust the government. If you don’t, you haven’t been paying attention. Taking that distrust to this extreme, however, is ludicrous. Maybe I have more common sense than the government, which is easily possible, but if I wanted to take your right to privacy and freedom from illegal searches away, I could probably do it easier than faking a massive bombing and manhunt in Boston. I think I would just sell you on social media, Live Streaming, Elf on the Shelf cameras, “Going Transparent,” smart phones, smart appliances, TVs that watch you,See Something-Say Something, and other social engineering nonsense to get you to voluntarily and thoughtlessly give up your privacy. Nobody needs to spy on you when you give up your privacy freely.

I bet I could get you to give up your privacy to the police in exchange for a chance to win some kind of small electronic appliance or iCrap. I bet if I were running the Boston PD, I could get a ton of people to let me conduct “Safety Inspections” of their homes in order to ensure children are safe from radon gas or flammable blankets, or some shit, in exchange for a free gaming console or iTunes gift card. People would probably volunteer to turn in their dangerous guns to me if I just gave them a Northface fleece or Bed Bath and Beyond gift card worth $50. I wouldn’t even lose any taxpayer cash on it, since private business would be happy to donate to Safety for the Children. No secret conspiracy needed.

For Bitter Clingers who refuse to join in the fun, I can always bump you up for additional scrutiny and co-opt your bank, medical provider, govt benefits providers, etc, watch your credit and debit card purchases and where you shop, monitor your calls. Beyond that, I can get the truck-mounted Xray and millimeter wave scanners and airborne thermal and IR imagers to drive by your house and car and see what you’re really up to. No invasion needed. No bombing needed. No massive conspiracy needed.

Mark

The ‘evidence’ suggests is what he says. ‘All evidence indicates’…. with understandable reason — it does. Those claiming to be/are victims, make effort to persuade the right to question brigade or no qualms. Have heard those deep into uncovering these widespread appear-scams, pleading, “please contact… if you can help us know, how we’re wrong.” PCR himself put a post up a while back, trying hard to find alternative solutions. The one big challenge is people’s testimony and how so many in the hospital would go along. The appearance is clear and unreported in the mainstream facts and anomalies stark. IF this, or most all — it’s hard not to conclude — involve, subversion over suffering, those involved connect and…
Always welcome to help, all who’d almost prefer, are wrong. Easy to do:

Contact

Anonymous
Anonymous

Why would it be surprising that so many professionals would go along and keep it a long term secret without talking to anyone?

After all, most secrets are easily kept among thousands of people.

cap'n fast

oh, this read like an Infowars statement. sorry, my mistake. must be a lawyer as the article is so long winded. If the author is so adamant that the murderer is not guilty, why did he not defend him?

Zarathustra

For those who believe that our liberty and independence is under assault by dark, evil forces, PCR is one of our best spokesmen. Time after time he has stood in the minority to speak the truth courageously and correctly. Voltaire said, “O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous.” PCR’s enemies are the same neocons and corrupt pols that are ours. If PCR is rendered ridiculous by uttering stupid shit, then the message to us is that he has been forced to do so by the agents of evil. What we must do is to stand by him. The odds that he is losing touch with reality is very small. The odds that he may be presented with the choice of writing idiotic nonsense or someone close to him will be sleeping wif da fishes is huge.

…and of course it is my opinion that Israel must be destroyed.

Anonymous
Anonymous

An opinion shared by Satan himself.

Zarathustra

How so? Israel itself is the spawn of Satan. There is nothing good in it. Death and putrification follow in it’s wake everywhere it treads.

Boat Guy
Boat Guy

Having witnessed enough dishonest or questionable actions and reactions leading to persecution , prosecution and even out right fully engauged heavy military combat action by my government resulting in countless deaths dismemberment of individuals around the world and in our own country . I have very little faith that any report or information being released by “Government Officials” can ever be accepted at face value for truth and accuracy .
I have no doubt there are victims of the Boston Marathon bombing however the circumstances leading up to that atrocity and the reasons why will always be in doubt . This should become especially clear to anyone when the government the MSM and Hollywood movie makers are all on the same page regarding anything . It’s all to easily explained away with less scrutiny than a traffic stop !

Annie
Annie

“As I reported at the time, and as all evidence indicates, the alleged Boston Marathon Bombing was a publicly announced drill in which crisis actors were used. There were no real deaths or injuries, and the Tsarnaev brothers did not set off a bomb.”

False flag? Absolutely
Tsarnaev brothers did not set off a bomb? Possibly
no real deaths or injuries? Absolute bullshit

I stopped reading at this point. Sometimes PCR awes me with his insight. Other times he baffles me with his apparent belief in bullshit.

PlatoPlubius

The movie A LONG Kiss Goodnight explains how false flags are conducted in this 2 minute clip

A MUST WATCH

https://youtu.be/N1vwjFhF4dA

Harrington Richardson
Harrington Richardson

Some here are just plain fucking nuts. You know who you are.

StackingStock
StackingStock

Looks like 3 so far:)

Life is so easy when your eyes are shut, isn’t it Harrington Richardson?

Discover more from The Burning Platform

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading