Two Boston Bombing Conspiracy Theories: Tamerlan Tsarnaev Is NAKED & ALIVE and The Police RAN OVER Tamerlan
Like every tragic event these days, the Boston Bombings have produced some conspiracy theories. There are a couple that seem to have gotten a little more traction than the others.
The first is that Tamerlan Tsarnaev was actually arrested, not killed. That’s based off of some footage shot by CNN.
There’s a man being stripped down naked by the police and, yes, he does look like Tamerlan Tsarnaev. His aunt even said, “100% that is my nephew Tamerlan”. Moreover, the fact that the police had him strip suggests that they think he’s the bomber, right?
Except the police deny it’s Tamerlan. They say they ran across someone who looked like Tamerlan in the general vicinity, apprehended him, forced him to strip down because they feared he was wearing a suicide vest and then later let him go when it turned out they had the wrong man.
Given the chaos, it’s understandable that the police could grab the wrong man in the general vicinity of the crime. It’s also understandable that the man hasn’t come forward to reveal his identity. After all, there are grainy, naked photos of him out there that people can’t currently identify. The moment he says, “Yeah, that’s me,” people will be able to forever point to his naked pictures.
Moreover, you have to work backwards and deconstruct how a conspiracy would work.
There are probably 50 cops on the scene, all of whom would have been close enough to realize in retrospect that this was Tamerlan Tsarnaev. Any one of them could blow this whole conspiracy by coming forward. Then you’d have to consider that someone would have to order all of these cops to participate and would be able to keep them silent. Even if you believe the FBI, CIA or DHS could pull something like that off over the short term, “Listen, keep this quiet for a little while because our national security is on the line,” the whole thing would disintegrate the moment Tsarnaev’s body turned up. At that point, all these police officers (and everyone else involved in ordering it, taking him into custody, killing him, etc., etc.) would know that the first person who came forward would be a whistleblower and everyone else would be part of a conspiracy that could involve years of testimony at a minimum and possible time in jail for the people who were in on it. For something this juicy to stay quiet, only a small group of people could know about it and execute the whole thing. Otherwise, it would inevitably fall to pieces.
And if all that doesn’t convince you, the man in the video has no chest hair while pictures of Tamerlan Tsarnaev during his boxing days and the photo of his corpse (You can find that easily enough if you want) that have leaked out, do have chest hair.
Now comes the next conspiracy theory: The police actually ran over Tamerlan.
This is based on an a supposed eyewitness (Linda) who says that the police SUV ran over Tamerlan and then shot him.
Well, first question here: Was Tamerlan arrested naked or did the police run over him? It can’t be both, right? Wait, maybe it can if it’s a “false flag” operation involving thousands of policemen, the FBI, Homeland Security and quite possibly the Illuminati. Trust me, folks, if you realized how slow, stupid and incompetent the government really is, you wouldn’t worry too much about “false flag” operations.
Getting beyond that, let’s focus on this particular claim: Did the police run over Tamerlan Tsarnaev?
Well, to start with, we don’t know from the video how far away she was, how good the light was, or how good her vantage point was. Additionally, although the woman says she saw Tsarnaev get shot, she says she thought he fired back at police, but didn’t see it. That’s an indication that she didn’t have a clear view of what was going on the whole time. That’s not a minor point because there is no dispute about whether Tsarnaev was hit by a SUV. The dispute is over whether the SUV was driven by Tsarnaev’s brother or the police.
So, the police say one thing and “Linda” says another. How do we decide which is right? Another eyewitness account from someone who provided pictures that corroborate the police story should do the trick.
Here it’s clear to see the brothers taking aim and firing on the officers. (Taken at 12:47:57AM)
…This is a zoomed in view from the last image. The red circle highlights the pressure cooker bomb that was used just moments after this photo was taken. The use of this explosive created an enormous cloud of smoke that covered the entire street. While the street was still cloudy with smoke one of the brothers started running down the street towards the officers, while still engaging them in gunshots. As he got closer to the officers, within 10 -15 yards of them he was taken down. From my vantage point I did not see whether he was tackled to the ground or brought down by gunshots.
…As the one brother was running toward the officers the second got back into the SUV, turned it around in the street and proceeded to accelerate at the vehicle barricade. This image shows the black SUV charging the officer vehicles. (Taken 12:50:57AM)
…This is a zoom-in from the last image and the red circle highlights where one of the brothers was taken down and still laying in the street. The black SUV proceeded to accelerate towards the officers and drove in between the two cars at the top of the picture. The SUV side swiped both cars taking out doors and windows and ultimately broke through the vehicle barricade and continued driving west on Laurel St. This was the last I saw of the black SUV.
Does this account mean “Linda” is a dirty liar who is trying to trick everyone? No, it just means that eyewitnesses get things wrong sometimes. A woman mistaking a black SUV for a police SUV in a smokey, chaotic situation is actually a pretty minor error in the scope of things. Once you truly get that, you don’t try to spin something like that into a big conspiracy theory in the first place.
Good for me but not for thee is Obama’s refrain as he invoked Executive Privilege to keep hidden his actions
Yesterday I wrote about how Democrats in Cincinnati threw a big welcome home party for a criminal convicted of vote
Why isn’t this case just as significant as the Trayvon Martin case? Actually, scratch that. Given the ambiguous nature of