Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
U.S. Supported Chechen Terrorists
Posted on April 20, 2013 by WashingtonsBlog
Just Like We Supported Al Qaeda When It Was Fighting Russia (And We Are Now Supporting Al Qaeda In Libya, Syria and Elsewhere)
It’s extensively documented that U.S. backing of Al Qaeda led to 9/11, and that the U.S. is the world’s largest sponsor of terror.
Former FBI agent Colleen Rowley – a 2002 Time Person of the Year – points out that the neocons also backed Chechen terrorists as a way to challenge Russia:
Chechen “terrorists” proved useful to the U.S. in keeping pressure on the Russians, much as the Afghan mujahedeen were used in the anti-Soviet war in Afghanistan from 1980 to 1989. In fact, many neocons signed up as Chechnya’s “friends,” including former CIA Director James Woolsey.
***
For instance, see this 2004 article in the UK Guardian, entitled, “The Chechens’ American friends: The Washington neocons’ commitment to the war on terror evaporates in Chechnya, whose cause they have made their own.”
Author John Laughland wrote: “the leading group which pleads the Chechen cause is the American Committee for Peace in Chechnya (ACPC). The list of the self-styled ‘distinguished Americans’ who are its members is a roll call of the most prominent neoconservatives who so enthusiastically support the ‘war on terror.’
“They include Richard Perle, the notorious Pentagon adviser; Elliott Abrams of Iran-Contra fame; Kenneth Adelman, the former US ambassador to the UN who egged on the invasion of Iraq by predicting it would be ‘a cakewalk’; Midge Decter, biographer of Donald Rumsfeld and a director of the rightwing Heritage Foundation; Frank Gaffney of the militarist Centre for Security Policy; Bruce Jackson, former US military intelligence officer and one-time vice-president of Lockheed Martin, now president of the US Committee on Nato; Michael Ledeen of the American Enterprise Institute, a former admirer of Italian fascism and now a leading proponent of regime change in Iran; and R. James Woolsey, the former CIA director who is one of the leading cheerleaders behind George Bush’s plans to re-model the Muslim world along pro-US lines.”
***
Prominent former New York Times journalist (and author of The Commission book) Phil Shenon’s discovery of the incredible “Terrible Missed Chance” a couple of years ago.
Shenon’s discovery involved key information that the FBI and the entire “intelligence” community mishandled and covered up, not only before 9/11 but for a decade afterward. And it also related to the exact point of my 2002 “whistleblower memo” that led to the post 9/11 DOJ-Inspector General investigation about FBI failures and also partially helped launch the 9/11 Commission investigation.
But still the full truth did not come out, even after Shenon’s blockbuster discovery in 2011 of the April 2001 memo linking the main Chechen leader Ibn al Khattab to Osama bin Laden. The buried April 2001 memo had been addressed to FBI Director Louis Freeh (another illegal recipient of MEK money, by the way!) and also to eight of the FBI’s top counter-terrorism officials.
Similar memos must have been widely shared with all U.S. intelligence in April 2001. Within days of terrorist suspect Zaccarias Moussaoui’s arrest in Minnesota on Aug. 16, 2001, French intelligence confirmed that Moussaoui had been fighting under and recruiting for Ibn al-Khattab, raising concerns about Moussaoui’s flight training.
Yet FBI Headquarters officials balked at allowing a search of his laptop and other property, still refusing to recognize that: 1) the Chechen separatists were themselves a “terrorist group” for purposes of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act’s (FISA) legal requirement of acting “on behalf of a foreign power” and 2) that Moussaoui’s link to Ibn al Khattab inherently then linked him to bin Laden’s well-recognized Al Qaeda group for purposes of FISA (the point in my memo).
This all occurred during the same time that CIA Director George Tenet and other counter-terrorism officials — and don’t forget that Tenet was apprised of the information about Moussaoui’s arrest around Aug. 24, 2001 — told us their “hair was on fire” over the prospect of a major terrorist attack and “the system was blinking red.”
The post 9/11 investigations launched as a result of my 2002 “whistleblower memo” did conclude that a major mistake, which could have prevented or reduced 9/11, was the lack of recognition of al Khattab’s Chechen fighters as a “terrorist group” for purposes of FISA.
***
Officials can get confused when their former covert “assets” turn into enemies themselves. That’s what has happened with al-Qaeda-linked jihadists in Libya and Syria, fighters who the U.S. government favored in their efforts to topple the Qaddafi and Assad regimes, respectively. These extremists are prone to turn against their American arms suppliers and handlers once the common enemy is defeated.
The same MO exists with the U.S. and Israel currently collaborating with the Iranian MEK terrorists who have committed assassinations inside Iran. The U.S. government has recently shifted the MEK terrorists from the ranks of “bad” to “good” terrorists as part of a broader campaign to undermine the Iranian government. For details, see “Our (New) Terrorists, the MEK: Have We Seen This Movie Before?”
***
the lies and disinformation that go into the confusing and ever-morphing notion of “terrorism” result from the U.S. Military Industrial Complex (and its little brother, the “National Security Surveillance Complex”) and their need to control the mainstream media’s framing of the story.
So, a simplistic narrative/myth is put forth to sustain U.S. wars. From time to time, those details need to be reworked and some of the facts “forgotten” to maintain the storyline about bad terrorists “who hate the U.S.” when, in reality, the U.S. Government may have nurtured the same forces as “freedom fighters” against various “enemies.”
The bottom line is to never forget that “a poor man’s war is terrorism while a rich man’s terrorism is war” – and sometimes those lines cross for the purposes of big-power politics. War and terrorism seem to work in sync that way.
(And read this post from Sibel Edmonds, former FBI translator, who the Department of Justice’s Inspector General and several senators have called extremely credible.)
Was the Boston terror attack yet more blowback from idiotic U.S. foreign policy?
Given that we have recently backed Al Qaeda terrorists in Libya, Syria and elsewhere, the idiocy continues …
Postscript: We do not know what the true facts of the Boston bombing are. Not only are thee confusing and contradictory facts, but – as Yves Smith points out – there’s not yet even an “official” story.
Was Boston Bombers’ ‘Uncle Ruslan’ with the CIA?
The uncle of the two men who set off bombs at the Boston Marathon, who struck the only grace note in an otherwise horrific week, worked as a “consultant” for the Agency for International Development (USAID) a U.S. Government Agency often used for cover by agents of the CIA, in the former Soviet Republic of Kazakhstan during the “Wild West” days of the early 1990’s, when anything that wasn’t nailed down in that country was up for grabs.
“Uncle Ruslan” Tsarni of Montgomery Village Md., whose name was the top trending topic worldwide on Twitter last Friday for his plain-spoken condemnation of his two nephews, has had a checkered business career, that began well before he graduated (as Ruslan Z Tsarnaev) from Duke Law School in 1998.
Tsarni, a well-connected oil executive, is currently involved in an international criminal investigation into a Kazakh billionaire banker-turned-fugitive alleged to have absconded with $6 billion from Kazakhstan’s BTA Bank.
The London Sunday Times on May 8, 2011 reported the sale of the personal home of England’s Prince Andrew to billionaire Kazakh Oligarch Timur Kulibayev, who “controls that country’s oil industry and happens to be married to the daughter of its autocratic President Nursultan Nazarbayev.”
"Can't tell your Oligarchs without a scorecard"
Headlined "Prince's home in 'laundered cash' inquiry," the story raised several red flags.
One was that the President-for-Life’s son-in-law had paid $5 million over the asking price to purchase Prince Andrew’s home, which raised eyebrows.
Red flags and eyebrows were raised still further, in these times of global near-depression, at the conspicuous oligarchic consumption (read: bad tasted) exhibited when the Kazakh President-for-Life’s daughter-for-life Goga Ashkenazi celebrated her 30th birthday with a lavish party before the scandal hit.
Goga, who made her appearance in a Swarovski crystal-encrusted, backless lace dress, attended by Prince-for-Life Andrew, was entertained by fire-eaters, peacock-feathered stilt-walkers, and a girl swinging on a trapeze pouring vodka into ice sculptures shaped like naked male and female torsos.
There was even a woman suspended in a bird cage (true) was there to direct guests to vomitoriums strategically placed about the mansion grounds. (alas, not true.)
Enter "Uncle Ruslan"
But the biggest red flag, the one pertinent to murder in Boston, was Oligarch Kukibayev's use of money laundered through a network of offshore companies to attempt to hide his ownership, a fact which emerged during a legal battle between another billionaire Kazakh oligarch, Mukhtar Ablyazov, and BTA Bank, from which Kazakhstan claims Ablyazov embezzled a very cool $6 billion dollars.
And this is where “Uncle Ruslan” Tsarni comes in.
The purchase of the Prince's estate was put together, according to prosecutors in Italy and Switzerland, by a group of oil executives who comprise “a network of personal and business relationships” allegedly used for “international corruption," reported The London Telegraph.
Tsarni, called “a US lawyer who has had dealings in Kazakh business affairs,” by the Sunday Times, clearly appears to be a member of that network.
The Sunday Times reported, “A statement by Ruslan Zaindi Tsarni was given in the High Court in December, claiming that Kulibayev bought Sunninghill and properties in Mayfair with $96 million derived from a complex series of deals intended to disguise money laundering.”
“Tsarni alleged that the money came from the takeover of a western company, which had been used as a front to obtain oil contracts from the Kazakh state.”
A Big Big Sky's the Limit
The “western company” used to launder the money which the Sunday Times referred to is Big Sky Energy Corporation, where Ruslan Tsarni was a top executive.
Big Sky, which used to be known as China Energy Ventures Corp, is a now-bankrupt US oil company run by S.A. (Al) Sehsuvaroglu, a long-time executive of Halliburton, which had oil leases in Kakakhstan’s Caspian Basin.
Tsarni was Big Sky’s Corporate Secretary and Vice President for Business Development. He joined Big Sky in 2005.
A press release announcing his appointment stated:
“Mr. Ruslan Tsarni, a U.S. citizen, has over 10 years of professional experience in oil and gas legislation and corporate law. Previously, Mr. Tsarni served as Corporate Counsel of Nelson Resources Limited Group as well as Managing Director of several of its operating subsidiaries.
“From 1999 to 2001, Mr. Tsarni worked as Head of Legal Affairs of Golden Eagle Partners LLC.
Big Sky was on somebody's watch list
“From 1994 to 1996, Mr. Tsarni served as a consultant contracted by USAID for projects aimed to develop securities markets in Central Asia, where he trained corporate governance and corporate finance principals in state and private companies.”
According to a source who worked for many years as a journalist at Platts Oilgram News, a respected oil industry trade publication, good corporate governance was not a Big Sky priority.
“Nelson, Big Sky, Ablyazov, Kulibayev and the rest were all on my watch list for intelligence connections and pay-offs of various kinds at Platts,” stated the source, who requested anonymity.
The news corroborates other reports beginning to emerge about the family and its abundant connections.
A "connected" family?
Before the Tsarnaev family moved to the United States a decade ago, they lived in the northern Kyrgyz town of Tokmok, near the border with Kazakhstan, which is home of the country's largest ethnic Chechen community.
The day after the massive manhunt in the Boston area that led to the death of Tamerlan and the capture of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, Radio Free Europe and Kyrgyz Service correspondent Timur Toktonaliev traveled to Tokmok.
From there, he reported that the extended Tsarnaev family is well-known there, even beyond their local community.
“It is not known if there was anything more than a personal connection,” the story reported, “but organized crime boss Aziz Batukaev, who is also an ethnic Chechen, lived next door to the Tsarnaevs. Batukaev grew up and lived in Tokmok, but is now in Chechnya.
Halliburton executives, suspected CIA assets, Chechnyan crime bosses, oligarchs stealing billions from banks and laundering money with seeming impunity, fire-eaters, peacock-feathered stilt-walkers, and a girl swinging on a trapeze pouring vodka into ice sculptures shaped like naked male and female torsos…
If there hadn't been two of them, the investigation would already be pointing to a single misfit, a lone nut bomber.
The Sunday Times reported, “A statement by Ruslan Zaindi Tsarni was given in the High Court in December, claiming that Kulibayev bought Sunninghill and properties in Mayfair with $96 million derived from a complex series of deals intended to disguise money laundering.”
“Tsarni alleged that the money came from the takeover of a western company, which had been used as a front to obtain oil contracts from the Kazakh state.”
Flashback: When Chechen Terrorists Were Framed
Posted on April 19, 2013 by WashingtonsBlog
Preface: We have no idea whether the Chechen brothers who are alleged to have carried out the Boston terrorist attacks are guilty or not. If half of what the FBI claims is true, then they are. But it is also important to be aware of history.
In 1999, the Russian KGB allegedly conducted a wave of bombings in Russia in order to justify war against Chechnya and put Vladimir Putin into power
(see also this short essayMoscow bombers jailed as doubts rise
By Julius Strauss in Moscow
(Filed: 13/01/2004)
Two men were sentenced to life in prison yesterday for bombing Russian apartment blocks in a terrorist campaign that Kremlin critics claim was mounted by the KGB's successors to justify invading Chechnya.
Yusuf Krymshamkhalov and Adam Dekkushev, both from Russian areas close to Chechnya, were convicted of taking part in the blowing up of blocks of flats in Moscow and Volgodonsk in 1999 that left 246 people dead.
The case is one of the murkiest in post-Communist Russia and politically explosive as Vladimir Putin was head of both the FSB - the renamed KGB - and the influential Security Council at the time.
Were the charges of FSB complicity ever proven the president could face disgrace and, possibly, criminal charges.
The bombing campaign came out of the blue in 1999, just as Boris Yeltsin's tenure was coming to an end. It caused panic and led to calls for vengeance from ordinary Russians.
Mr Putin responded by invading Chechnya later that year and rode a resulting wave of popularity to electoral victory the following spring.
According to critics, who include the exiled tycoon Boris Berezovsky, then a Kremlin insider, the FSB organised the explosions as part of a campaign to create support for their boss.
Senior military and intelligence officers have claimed that a parallel invasion of Dagestan, a southern Russian republic, by Chechen warlord Shamil Basayev, was also tacitly encouraged by the FSB.
"I myself heard tapes of officials from Moscow speaking with Basayev to discuss arrangements for the attack," an FSB officer told The Telegraph. At the time Russians hawks were itching for an excuse to rekindle the war in Chechnya.
When the explosions began, the Kremlin pointed the finger at Chechen rebels who had used terrorist tactics before in their fight to gain independence. But on September 22, 1999, locals in the regional town of Ryazan saw three men emerging from the cellars of a block of flats who later turned out to be FSB officers. When local police checked the cellars they found sacks of high explosive wired up to a detonator.
The FSB later attempted to explain away the incident by claiming that the entire operation had merely been a drill and the explosive was in fact sugar, despite a test that proved the contrary.
In true Soviet style they rewarded the three locals who notified the authorities with colour television sets.
and this report).The Russian apartment bombings were a series of explosions that hit four apartment blocks in the Russian cities of Buynaksk, Moscow, and Volgodonsk in September 1999, killing 293 people and injuring 651. The explosions occurred in Buynaksk on 4 September, Moscow on 9 and 13 September, and Volgodonsk on 16 September. Several other bombs were defused in Moscow at the time.[1]
A similar bomb was found and defused in the Russian city of Ryazan on 22 September 1999. Two days later Federal Security Service Director Nikolai Patrushev announced that the Ryazan incident had been a training exercise.[2] This has led to the support of theories by Alexander Litvinenko (later murdered by an unusual radioactive isotope) and Anna Politkovskaya that the apartment bombings were carried out by the Russian secret service FSB (formerly KGB).
Together with the Invasion of Dagestan launched from Chechnya in August 1999 by Islamist militia led by Shamil Basayev and Ibn al-Khattab, the bombings caused the Russian Federation to launch the Second Chechen War.
Although on 2 September 1999, the militia commander Ibn Al-Khattab announced that "The mujahideen of Dagestan are going to carry out reprisals in various places across Russia,"[3] on 14 September he denied responsibility for the blasts, adding that he was fighting the Russian army, not women and children.[4]
An official investigation of the bombings was completed by the Russian Federal Security Service in 2002. According to the investigation and the court ruling that followed, the bombings were organized by Achemez Gochiyaev, who remained at large as of 2010, and ordered by Ibn Al-Khattab and Abu Omar al-Saif, who were later killed. Six other suspects have been convicted by Russian courts.
State Duma member Yuri Shchekochikhin filed two motions for a parliamentary investigation of the events, but the motions were rejected by the Duma in March 2000. An independent[5] public commission to investigate the bombings was chaired by Duma deputy Sergei Kovalev. The commission was rendered ineffective because of government refusal to respond to its inquiries.[6][7] The Commission's lawyer Mikhail Trepashkin was arrested for exposing classified information.[8]
Yury Felshtinsky, Alexander Litvinenko, Boris Berezovsky (oligarch in British exile), David Satter, Boris Kagarlitsky, Vladimir Pribylovsky, and the secessionist Chechen authorities claimed that the 1999 bombings were a false flag attack coordinated by the FSB in order to win public support for a new full-scale war in Chechnya, which boosted Prime Minister and former FSB Director Vladimir Putin's popularity, and brought the pro-war Unity Party to the State Duma and Putin to the presidency within a few months although there was little concrete evidence for these claims.[9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20]
Gordon Bennett from Conflict Studies Research Centre, Robert Bruce Ware, Paul J. Murphy, Henry Plater-Zyberk, Simon Saradzhyan, Nabi Abdullaev and Richard Sakwa criticized the conspiracy theory, pointing out problems such as the lack of evidence.[21][22][23][24][25]
The 1999 bombings were apparently a false flag attack wrongfully blamed on Chechen terrorists.
The Tsarnaev Conundrum
by craig on April 20, 2013 1:28 pm in Uncategorized
Cui Bono? Putin. The alleged actions of the Tsarnaev brothers are a massive setback to the cause of Chechen nationalism. The Russian government have been trying for a decade to conflate the repression of Chechen nationalism with the western construct of “the global war on terror”, with very limited diplomatic success. Now expect to hear continually about “Al Qaeda in the Southern Caucasus” in the next few years. Events in Boston have been a massive diplomatic coup for Putin.
In the late 1830′s, Palmerston launched a (disastrous) secret service operation to ship weapons to anti-Russian rebels in modern Chechnya and Dagestan. This was contributory to the tensions that caused the First Anglo-Afghan War, and will feature in my forthcoming biography of Alexander Burnes. For almost two hundred years now there has been covert Western encouragement of anti-Russian movements in the Caucasus – which is not to say that the West was involved in or encouraged the urban terrorist wing of the Chechen nationalist movement in modern times. But links between Chechen nationalists and the US government have been maintained, and there is no support whatsoever among any significant Chechen nationalist leadership for the Boston bombings.
I cannot recommend too highly “Darkness at Dawn” by David Satter, a book which is crucial to an understanding of a key part of the modern world. Satter sets out an extremely strong case, from eyewitness interviews at the time, that The “Chechen” apartment bombings which paid such a crucial part in building the cult of Putin, were false flag – something which the British Embassy in Moscow also strongly inclined to believe. There is a history of false Chechen bombings being very helpful to Putin. These bombings are very helpful to Putin.
It is perfectly possible that this is not relevant at all, and the Tsarnaev brothers became radicalised in the United States by real, and non-Chechen related, terrorists, or simply auto-radicalised. But presuming the Tsarnaevs really did plant these bombs, just who was ultimately pulling the strings and why may be an extremely complex question – and one to which young Dzokhar Tsarnaev is most unlikely to know the real answer.
APRIL 22, 2013
Boston Offers Grim Preview of Coming Attractions
Police State on Display
by DAVE LINDORFF
The Boston Marathon bombing has already demonstrated the best and the worst of America for all the world to see.
First, let’s talk about the best. When the bombs detonated, despite the shock and the horror of the blown-off legs and arms, and the blood on street and sidewalk, and without knowing what else might be coming, ordinary citizens jumped into action to try and help the gravely wounded and the dying. Average people with no experience in this kind of mayhem stepped up without hesitation to care for strangers, applying tourniquets, carrying people who couldn’t walk to hospital tents, or just holding a hand and calling for help.
People pored over their cellphone photo records and camera files, looking for photos that could help identify the killers. Without their volunteer actions, the police and federal agencies would have had no clue who they were looking for. With them, it was quick work pinpointing and identifying the two men who appear to have placed the two bombs.
Later, while police failed to catch one of the brothers suspected of having been a bomber, despite placing all of metropolitan Boston under a kind of martial law, it was a citizen who, after the so-called “lock-down” of the city had been lifted, spotted the suspect and alerted police.
Now for the worst.
Let’s start with the martial law. Okay, it wasn’t a declaration, but with police and the Mayor ordering everyone in Boston and its suburbs to stay inside and lock their doors, “answering only to police,” it was virtually the same thing. Cops, FBI, ATF and DEA agents were everywhere, and the streets were being patrolled too by National Guard troops and armored personnel carriers equipped with machine guns — this in pursuit of a single wounded 19-year-old on the run on foot! Talk about overkill. We’re lucky that police in this amped up man-hunt didn’t gun down anyone who might have been unaware of the “stay-inside” order, or who decided he or she needed a beer or an ice-cream and ventured outside. Look what the LAPD did to the Latina mother and daughter newspaper delivery team when they thought the pick-up they were driving was the truck of the rogue cop they were hunting — peppering it from behind without warning with over a hundred shots from pistols and automatic rifles. (As it is, the several cops who responded to the 911 call about a man hiding in a boat nearly blew away the chance to question him about his motive by mindlessly blasting away at him though he was pinned down inside the boat, until a federal agent ordered them to quit firing.)
The argument that the lock-down might have spared people from being shot by the fleeing Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is absurd. Considered armed and dangerous, he might, instead of slipping inside a canvas-covered boat, have broken into a home and taken a family hostage. In fact, arguably had people been out and about, Tsarnaev would probably never have managed to escape unnoticed on foot from the 20-block perimeter police had established around the scene of the initial shootout in Watertown. People would have noticed him wounded and running. Instead, they were all huddled inside their locked homes.
Worse is the precedent that was just set. Now when police have a “situation” anywhere in the country, it’s a good bet they’ll adopt the new Boston model as the option of choice, “locking down” (note that this is a prison term used to describe the tactic of locking all prisoners in their cells during disturbances — a pretty unsavory concept to apply to a community in a supposedly free society) whole towns or cities to give police a free hand.
Because Bostonians had been suitably frightened by the breathless coverage of the manhunt for the Tsarnaev brothers, people were, at least for the relatively short time the “lock-down” was in effect, willing to obey orders and stay inside, but had Dzhokhar not been found so quickly, and had authorities decided to extend the de facto martial law, it would have been illuminating to see how police would have responded to those people who did get tired of being cooped up and decided to go outside and run some errands, or go visit friends. Would they have been harassed? Probably. Arrested and taken in? Maybe. There were reports of people who stuck their heads out of doors being “yelled at” by police and “ordered” back inside.
And then we have the federal government’s response since Tsarnaev’s capture. The White House and Justice Department have announced that he will not be read his Miranda warning, which tells those who are arrested for a crime that they have the right not to answer questions from police, and the right to an attorney. Miranda warnings, the Supreme Court has long ruled, are an important part of upholding the intent of the Fifth Amendment which protects everyone in this country against being compelled to testify against themselves — one of the main grievances that led the colonists to fight to throw off British rule.
President Obama, by secret executive order two years ago, gutted that protection, saying that it would be okay to ignore the Miranda warning in the case of suspected terrorists. Will he be subjected to torture to get him to tell police whether he had any confederates beside his dead brother? We don’t know. The government has reserved the right to use coercive measures against alleged “terrorists” (even though experts have warned that statements obtained under torture are notoriously unreliable).
Note that the gutting of the Miranda rule for terrorists was not a court ruling. Nor was it a change in the Constitution. It was simply a presidential executive order. It and countless others are secret; we only know about that one because it was leaked.
We don’t know that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is a terrorist, unless you are of the view that any whack-job who kills a bunch of people is a terrorist. As far as we know, he was no different from Jared Lee Loughner, the guy who fired into a crowd of people coming to meet Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Arizona, killing 6 and seriously wounding 13, including the congresswoman herself, or from James Holmes, who slaughtered 14 people in a Colorado movie theater. Mass murderers, yes. But terrorists? I don’t think so, if the word is to have any meaning.
Fascists like Sens. Lindsay Graham (R-SC) and John McCain (R-AZ) are calling for the US to forget the Constitution altogether, and to declare American citizen Tsarnaev an “enemy combatant,” thus depriving him of the right even to a trial, forget the Miranda thing. They want him run through some kangaroo military tribunal and then executed.
What’s happening is that US the government, and a disturbingly large segment of the American public, is losing patience with the wheels of justice in a free society. We’ve entered an Alice in Wonderland world where what is wanted is “sentence first, verdict later,” and where the trial part, with its presumption of innocence and its jury of peers, is either for show, or is simply left out entirely. (Remember, they have trials in China, Cuba, and even Myanmar, but they certainly don’t have justice.)
The thing is, if the only time we adhere to the concept of “innocent until proven guilty,” and the only time we require police to follow the Miranda procedure of advising those they arrest of their right to remain silent until they have an attorney is in cases like traffic violations and petty crimes, but we ignore those protections when it really matters, in the case of serious crimes, then we no longer have those critical protections against tyranny.
At that point, we are in a police state.
What we are seeing in Boston is a preview of that police state — a kind of “coming attractions” look at it. The mindless post-capture applause for the army of police who implemented the “lock-down” of the city after the marathon bombing was part and parcel of that police state.
Someday, those cheering images will make a great clip in some Leni Riefenstahl-style propaganda film glorifying whoever is the current maximum leader of the American dictatorship.
Boston Bombing – Good for Israel?
Top Netanyahu Aide Sees Diplomatic Dividends for Marathon Attack
by Jason Ditz, April 21, 2013
For most countries last week’s Boston Marathon bombing was a grim reminder that violence can break out anywhere, at any time. For a select few it became a huge inconvenience, as with the Czech Republic, whose ambassador has had to explain to Americans that Czechs and Chechens aren’t the same thing at all.
And then there’s Israel, who, if you listen to top Netanyahu aide Ron Dermer, may as well have just hit the lottery with this bombing. Dermer is seeing it as a “big boost” that is going to make the average American more pro-Israel and even more eager to increase aid to them.
In the video interview Dermer, seen as one of the front-runners for the next Israeli Ambassador to the United States, insisted that there was a “big change” in a pro-Israel direction among Americans after 9/11, adding that he believes the bombing in Boston will convince people to “identify more with Israel and its struggle against terrorism.”
Though Dermer’s comments are likely to shock the uninitiated, they reflect long-standing beliefs among Israel’s ruling Likud Party, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu famously causing controversy in 2008 when he told university students that 9/11 was hugely beneficial for Israel.
Salon / By Andrew O'Hehir 12 COMMENTS
How Boston Exposes America’s Dark Post-9/11 Bargain
Why did this story drive the whole country nuts? Because we traded rights for "security," and didn't get either.
April 21, 2013
To put it mildly, this has been a bad week for democracy and a worse one for public discourse. In the minutes and hours after the bombs went off in Boston last Monday, marathon runners, first responders and many ordinary citizens responded to a chaotic situation with great courage and generosity, not knowing whether they might be putting their own lives at risk. Since then, though, it’s mostly been a massive and disheartening national freakout, with pundits, politicians, major news outlets and the self-appointed sleuths of the Internet – in fact, nearly everyone besides those directly affected by the attack – heaping disgrace upon themselves.
We’ve seen the most famous TV network in the news business repeatedly botch basic facts, while one of the country’s largest-circulation newspapers misreported the number of people killed, launched a wave of hysteria over a “Saudi national” who turned out to have nothing to do with the crime, and then published a cover photo suggesting that two other guys (also innocent) might be the bombers. We’ve seen the vaunted crowd-sourcing capability of Reddit degenerate into self-reinforcing mass delusion, in which a bunch of people whose law-enforcement expertise consisted of massive doses of “CSI” convinced themselves that a missing college student was one of the bombing suspects. (He wasn’t – and with that young man’s fate still unknown, how does his family feel today?)
We’ve watched elected officials and political commentators struggle to twist every nubbin of news or rumor toward some perceived short-term tactical advantage. It was as if the only real importance of this horrific but modestly scaled terrorist attack lay in how it could prove the essential rightness of one’s existing worldview, and — of course! — how it would play in the 2014 midterms. On the right, people were sure the Boston bombings were part of a massive jihadi plot – no doubt one linked to al-Qaida and Iran and Saddam Hussein and all the other landmarks in the connect-the-dots paranoid worldview of Islamophobia. (In fact, many people are still convinced of that.) On the left we heard a lot of theories about Patriots’ Day and Waco and Oklahoma City, along with the argument that it would be better for global peace if the bombers turned out to bewhite Americans rather than foreign Muslims. (I sympathize with the underlying point David Sirota was making there, by the way, but the way it was phrased was deliberately inflammatory.)
How long did it take conservative pundits and politicians, after the bombing suspects were identified as Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, immigrant brothers of Chechen heritage born in Kyrgyzstan, to seize on that fact as a reason to walk back the supposed Republican change of heart on immigration reform? Was it even five minutes? Never mind that the young men in question came here as war refugees in childhood, one was an American citizen and the other a legal resident, and we still have no idea what role their religion and national background may or may not have played in motivating the crime. It’s hard to imagine what possible immigration laws could have categorically excluded them, short of a magic anti-Muslim force field. And don’t even get me started on the irrelevant but unavoidable fact that the shameless, butt-licking lackeys of the Senate’s Republican caucus (with a few Democrats along for the ride) took advantage of the post-Boston confusion to do Wayne LaPierre’s bidding and kill a modest gun-reform bill supported by nearly the entire American public.
I might have assumed, in other circumstances, that the Family Research Council’s press release suggesting that the Boston bombings were caused by abortion, “sexual liberalism” and hostility to religion was actually an Onion article. Or that right-wing pundit Pat Dollard’s now-famous tweet (“GEORGE BUSH KEPT US SAFE FOR 8 YEARS”) came from some Brooklyn hipster’s parody account. But nothing, it seems, is too painful or stupid or wrong for this particular week. There are many reasons why this happened: A terrorist bombing at the Boston Marathon is a big news story by any measure, and this news story happened in a disordered media climate that’s changing so fast no one can keep up with it. Our political culture is so fundamentally broken and divided that people on all sides seized on the story as a weapon and a symbol long before we had any idea who was behind the crime. (It would be almost too perfect if the loaded question of whether the Boston bombings were foreign or domestic terrorism turns out not to have a clear answer, as now seems possible: A little bit of both, but not quite either.)
But I think the real reason why this gruesome but small-scale attack sent the whole country into such an incoherent panic lies a little deeper than that. As a New Yorker who lived through 9/11, by the way, I’m aware that the trauma felt by people in and around Boston, whether or not they were directly affected, is real and likely to last quite a while. What I’m talking about is the media spectacle of fear and unreason delivered via TV, news sites and social media, the nationwide hysteria that made a vicious act apparently perpetrated by two losers with backpack bombs seem like an “existential threat” (to borrow a little bogus “Homeland”-speak) to the most powerful nation in the world.
Because it was, in a way. In America after 9/11, we made a deal with the devil, or with Dick Cheney, which is much the same thing. We agreed to give up most of our enumerated rights and civil liberties (except for the sacrosanct Second Amendment, of course) in exchange for a lot of hyper-patriotic tough talk, the promise of “security” and the freedom to go on sitting on our asses and consuming whatever the hell we wanted to. Don’t look the other way and tell me that you signed a petition or voted for John Kerry or whatever. The fact is that whatever dignified private opinions you and I may hold, we did not do enough to stop it, and our constitutional rights are now deemed to be partial or provisional rather than absolute, do not necessarily apply to everyone, and can be revoked by the government at any time.
The supposed tradeoff for that sacrifice was that we would be protected, at least for a while, from the political violence and terrorism and low-level warfare that is nearly an everyday occurrence in many parts of the world. According to the Afghan government, for example, a NATO air attack on April 6 killed 17 civilians in Kunar province, 12 of them children. We’ve heard almost nothing about that on this side of the world, partly because the United States military has not yet admitted that it even happened. But it’s not entirely fair to suggest that Americans think one kid killed by a bomb in Boston is worth more than 12 kids killed in Afghanistan. It’s more that we live in a profoundly asymmetrical world, and the dead child in Boston is surprising in a way any number of dead children in Afghanistan, horrifyingly enough, are not. He lived in a protected zone, after all, a place that was supposed to be sealed off from history, isolated from the blood and turmoil of the world. But of course that was a lie.
We are supposed to be protected, and then something like Boston comes along, a small-minded and bloody attack that appears to have been conducted by a couple of guys flying under the radar of law enforcement or national intelligence, pursuing some obscure agenda we will probably never understand. (We have recently learned that Tamerlan Tsarnaev and his family were interviewed by the FBI in 2011, apparently at the request of Russian intelligence, and agents found “no derogatory information.” Is that the right’s new Benghazi I smell?) Not only does it conjure up all the leftover post-traumatic jitters from 9/11 – which for many of us will be there for the rest of our lives – it also makes clear that our Faustian bargain was completely bogus, and the devil never intended to hold up his end of the deal. We surrendered our rights to a government of war criminals, who promised us certainty and security in a world that offers none. We should have known better, and in fact we did. At the literal birth moment of American democracy, Benjamin Franklin summed it up in a single sentence: “Those who would give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
Who’s Behind the Boston Marathon Attack? by Justin Raimondo -- Antiwar.com
Two lone nuts – or a conspiracy with overseas connections?
The investigation into the Boston Marathon terrorist attack is now focused on what is the most important question: Did they act alone? In my view, the answer is no.
To begin with, the brothers engaged in a firefight with police and held their own, throwing bombs at the police as they attempted to flee. Tamerlan was killed in a fusillade of gunfire, but Dzhokhar managed to get away. At least one of them was very familiar with firearms and knew how to use them. Neither has any known military experience: somebody trained one or both. The question is: who?
Tamerlan traveled to Dagestan two years ago, where his father now resides, and together they went to Chechnya. Six months later, Tamerlan returned – and began posting jihadist videos on his Youtube page. Dagestan, a former Soviet “republic” in Central Asia, has been torn apart by a Muslim fundamentalist insurgency for years, and is one of the most dangerous countries on earth.
There are unconfirmed reports that the explosive devices which caused such mayhem at the marathon were set off by a sophisticated triggering mechanism, which, according to an unnamed law enforcement official, aren’t the kind of thing you can jigger from information garnered from a Google search. The same unconfirmed report says authorities are frantically trying to uncover what they believe is a “12-man sleeper cell,” and although this seems like an extravagant claim – how did they come up with the number 12? – I wouldn’t discount it entirely.
Initial speculation as to the motives for the attack centered around the brothers’ ethnicity and religious views, and these indeed seem to be important. Nineteen year old Dzokhar had a Twitter account, where he posted the usual trivia one might associate with a typical American teenager – along with a few comments explicitly expressing his religious beliefs and his frustration with people who believe all Muslims are terrorists. His tweets, usually light-hearted, took on a darker aspect just prior to the Boston attack: on April 15 he tweeted: “Ain’t no love in the heart of the city, stay safe people.”
The content of Dzokhar’s Russian Facebook page includes a video dramatizing the persecution of Muslims in Syria, and another one featuring some kind of religious discussion. There is also a video of Tamerlan, who is speaking in Russian, mocking the various accents he encountered in Central Asia. There are also links to Dzokhar’s favorite internet sites, including salamworld, an Islamic version of Facebook, and various similar sites.
Tamerlan was undoubtedly a devout Muslim at this point in his life. His relatives all point to a period starting about two years ago when he became very religious: he was reportedly asked to leave the house of one of them when he went to visit them in Dagestan. A friend of his wife describes him as “intense,” “controlling,” and “manipulative” in her account of his growing religiosity and his insistence that his wife convert to Islam, wear the hijab, and behave like a good Muslim wife.
Nearly unnoticed in the dramatic denouement of Dzokhar’s capture: the apprehension of three people, including Dzokhar’s alleged girlfriend, in nearby New Bedford. The three were later released, but authorities reappeared at their apartment complex on Saturday and apparently detained two of the same men, who are reportedly from Kazakhstan: a van with consular license plates had earlier turned up in front of the complex, and a young woman was seen entering the van in a hurry. The Tsarnaev brothers weren’t lone nuts: they had help.
One important detail is that the Russian security apparatus asked the Americans to investigate Tamerlan before he made his trip to Russia two years ago. Here is the FBI statement, with its ass-covering final paragraph averring “The FBI requested but did not receive more specific or additional information from the foreign government.” However, according to a senior congressional aide cited by the Boston Globe, the fault lies with the FBI: “The FBI had this guy on the radar and somehow he fell off.” And the Daily Mail reports:
“Russia reportedly asked the FBI to investigate one of the alleged Boston bombers just six months ago after he was seen meeting an Islamic militant six times – but the agency never responded, it has emerged.”
In addition, Tamerlan reportedly came to the attention of the Joint Terrorism Task Force in Boston, probably on account of his altercation, three months ago, with the head of a local mosque, who threw him out for expressing radical views. The Tsarnaev brothers’ uncle, who lives in the US, has said this has nothing to do with Chechnya, or the Chechen independence movement, and that it’s simply the fact that the brothers were “losers” which explains their actions: yet he also points to alleged “mentors” who supposedly radicalized Tamerlan in the United States – he specifically referred to an Armenian convert to Islam who purportedly lives in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Yet this information, if true, hardly rules out an overseas connection: he may have been radicalized in America and sought out compatriots on his Russia trip, where he reportedly met with a known Chechen “militant.” (“six times,” according to the Daily Mail).
Aside from these religious and regional connections, there is a link to criminality that may or may not be significant. Tamerlan – a boxing champion who represented New England in the Golden Gloves competition – once introduced the owner of his gym to one Brendan Mess, whom he described as his “best friend.” Mess was murdered on the afternoon of September 12, 2011, in his apartment, with two others: all three had been stabbed to death, their bloody bodies left covered in marijuana. Mess was 25: he had been arrested prior to that for possession of marijuana with intent to sell, and at least one of the other two had arrests for petty crimes, like assault, and, like Tamerlan, were into physical fitness. At the end of the above-linked news article, a neighbor is quoted: “According to her, five men lived in the apartment and they were frequently coming in and out. One of the men drove a Mercedes-Benz, she added.” Tamerlan drove a Mercedes, according to this account: was he one of the five men who lived at that address? Or did he just spend a lot of time there, so much that the neighbor thought he must live there?
In any case, there was apparently some kind of drug-dealing business operating on the premises, but whoever killed Mess and his two friends left the drugs behind, ruling out a pecuniary motive. What’s more, they were stabbed with what appeared to be a pick axe or similar weapon: all three died from massive cuts to the neck. A symbolic beheading? A gangland hit? Did a newly converted Tamerlan suddenly turn on his “best friend”? The murder is unsolved to this day.
If Tamerlan’s best friend had a drug-dealing/gangland connection, and if the elder Tsarnaev brother – undoubtedly the dominant figure in the bomb plot – was involved in some manner, then that is interesting in and of itself.
The Chechen insurgency is deeply involved in the sale of illegal drugs, and the Chechen Mafia, known as the Obshina, has an ideological as well as a criminal character. A good account of the big overlap between the Obshina and the Chechen guerrilla movement can be found in the late Paul Klebnikov’s Conversations With A Barbarian, which consists of extensive interviews with Chechen Mafia chieftain Khozh-Akhmed Nukhayev, whose career included financing pro-rebel newspapers as well as forcing the Russian Mafia out of Moscow and taking over its illicit empire. The late Boris Berezovsky, the exiled Russian oligarch whose recent suicide made headlines, made good use of the Obshina in his efforts to dominate the Russian car dealership market. In return for their protection, the oligarch financed pro-Chechen propaganda and other activities.
Boston’s Chechen community is the largest in the United States, and the Obshina has a presence extending as far West as Portland. According to one study, in addition to the Russian Mafia, “at least 150 ethnic-oriented Russian criminal groups had also been identified, including Chechens, Georgians, Armenians, and Russian-Koreans, of which at least 25 were active in various parts of the United States, the Caribbean and Latin America.” Unlike these other Russian-based criminal gangs, the Chechens have an ideological – and religious – coloration: there are reported links between Al Qaeda and the Chechen Mafia.
So what do we have here? The answer, I’m afraid, is a clear-cut case of carefully premeditated Islamist terrorism with an overseas connection. Tamerlan clearly went to Dagestan, and then Chechnya, where he received training and instructions. He returned to America, recruited his brother, and together they carried out the plan. Whether this operation was coordinated by Al Qaeda, or some other group – possibly some Chechen fundamentalist faction, which outsourced the operation to the Obshina – may seem irrelevant, except for the fact that if there is an organized crime connection then we really have a problem on our hands.
The lessons to be drawn from all this? First and foremost, the idea that we can invade other countries – indeed, that we must invade countries like Afghanistan – so as to prevent terrorists from acquiring a “safe haven” is absolute nonsense. We tried that, and it didn’t work. Boston is the proof.
The second lesson is that American officialdom is comprised of hysterics, whose overreaction must have the terrorists chortling in their Chechen lair. A nineteen year old punk succeeded in shutting down a major American city: whoever organized the Boston atrocity can surely count that as a victory.
The third lesson we can draw is that Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham are opportunists of unusual talent and perspicacity. No sooner had Dzokhar been caught then these two were all over the media demanding he be tried as an “enemy combatant,” presumably in secret, and denied a lawyer. If we ever see a police state imposed in the US – and are we very far from that now? – McCain and Graham will go down in history as two of its Founding Fathers. The sooner these two are involuntarily retired, and driven out of American political life, the better are our chances of preserving what’s left of our old republic.
As the hunt for Dzokhar went on, I saw a lot of denial on Twitter amongst liberals who resisted – and still resist – linking the Boston bombers’ motives to either the Chechen independence movement or radical Islamist ideology. Yet the evidence is staring them right in the face: they simply refused to see it because it didn’t confirm their own politically correct biases.
That simply will not do. Antiwar activists, and those who rightly resist the often violent wave of Islamophobia that has swept the country since 9/11, are going to have to face facts, and fight accordingly. Anti-interventionists are actually given more intellectual and political ammunition on account of this incident, as pointed out above: the invade-the-world strategy hasn’t worked. And unless Senators McCain and Graham are going to be advocating a US invasion of Chechnya and Dagestan, it’s clear the War Party hasn’t got an answer for this one.
On the other hand, civil libertarians are going to have a harder time of it: Sen. Graham’s invocation of the New Tyranny’s slogan – “the Homeland is the battlefield” – is a creepy reminder that we are on the brink of establishing a police state in this country. The irony is that the police state methods “legalized” by legislation like the Patriot Act didn’t pick up on the Boston conspirators’ plans. For all their snooping and sneaking around, prying into our emails and investigating supposedly “subversive” individuals and groups – including myself, I might add, and this web site – they were caught flat-footed.
If and when a connection to Chechen terrorist groups is established, I would think that the West’s longstanding support for the Chechen cause would be called into question. The US State Department under both Bush and Obama has routinely sided with the Chechen separatists, and Britain, in particular, has been their invaluable ally, granting asylum to Chechen terrorist leaders as well as their Russian oligarch sponsors, such as Berezovsky. The growing cold war between Russia and the US no doubt squelched any real cooperation between Moscow and Washington in tracking terrorists: that’s the real explanation for the FBI’s failure to take Russian warnings seriously. And besides that, they were too busy monitoring Antiwar.com and other Americans engaging in legal and constitutionally protected activities to bother with the brothers Tsarnaev.
Nearly unnoticed in the dramatic denouement of Dzokhar’s capture: the apprehension of three people, including Dzokhar’s alleged girlfriend, in nearby New Bedford. The three were later released, but authorities reappeared at their apartment complex on Saturday and apparently detained two of the same men, who are reportedly from Kazakhstan: a van with consular license plates had earlier turned up in front of the complex, and a young woman was seen entering the van in a hurry. The Tsarnaev brothers weren’t lone nuts: they had help.
Justin Raimondo wrote:There are unconfirmed reports that the explosive devices which caused such mayhem at the marathon were set off by a sophisticated triggering mechanism, which, according to an unnamed law enforcement official, aren’t the kind of thing you can jigger from information garnered from a Google search.
barracuda wrote:Justin Raimondo wrote:There are unconfirmed reports that the explosive devices which caused such mayhem at the marathon were set off by a sophisticated triggering mechanism, which, according to an unnamed law enforcement official, aren’t the kind of thing you can jigger from information garnered from a Google search.
FWIW, I garnered this information from a google search in about fourteen seconds:
FourthBase wrote:If we're going to have multiple threads spinning off from Boston...
Perhaps a good one would be "The Constitution's American Enemies", yeah?
Meaning, big public figures like McCain, Graham, Ayotte, Peter "Douche" King.
Who unmistakably outed themselves as enemies of the Constitution, as future prisoners.
There have been others recently. There will be more. Let's keep track.
seemslikeadream wrote:FourthBase wrote:If we're going to have multiple threads spinning off from Boston...
Perhaps a good one would be "The Constitution's American Enemies", yeah?
Meaning, big public figures like McCain, Graham, Ayotte, Peter "Douche" King.
Who unmistakably outed themselves as enemies of the Constitution, as future prisoners.
There have been others recently. There will be more. Let's keep track.
not multiple threads fourth......just ONE... because I was tired of sifting through your crap to get to anything worthwhile
start a thread fourth be my guest
but if you continue to piss on this one I will complain...keep your piss in my other thread
FourthBase wrote:seemslikeadream wrote:FourthBase wrote:If we're going to have multiple threads spinning off from Boston...
Perhaps a good one would be "The Constitution's American Enemies", yeah?
Meaning, big public figures like McCain, Graham, Ayotte, Peter "Douche" King.
Who unmistakably outed themselves as enemies of the Constitution, as future prisoners.
There have been others recently. There will be more. Let's keep track.
not multiple threads fourth......just ONE... because I was tired of sifting through your crap to get to anything worthwhile
start a thread fourth be my guest
but if you continue to piss on this one I will complain...keep your piss in my other thread
What piss? I suggested a new thread. I was serious. This one was worth having, too. My bad.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 182 guests