Phi Quyền Chính - Anarchism

Nhân Chủ-Chủ Quyền Cá Nhân Con Người-Thượng Đế, Nhà Nước là Ảo Thể- Chúng Ta là Thực Thể- Không có Thượng Đế, Không có Nhà Nước, Chỉ có Chúng Ta, Tôi và Quí Vị phải Quyết Định Phương Cách Tự Trách Nhiệm Trao Đổi để Sống Chung Tự Do, Bình Đẳng với Nhau Mà Thôi!

Nhận Định

The Jewish Cabal, The Law, The Legal System, Its Judicial Murder, and A Rare Human Conscience

PQC: Thousands of years ago, the ancient Greek playwright Aristophanes
complained that the most difficult thing is to explain the obvious to the public. Today false flag after false flag have been carried out brazenly  with such obvious self-evidences of fakes and lies appearing in front of our naked eyes;  with all absurdities that defy logic even in the eyes  of a layperson, all but that have been officially presented as “facts” and that the majority of “people” has  believed as true,   have vindicated the ancient playwright. But worst, even “in the eyes of the law”, where burden of proof is its fundamental principle, facts and proofs  do not matter anymore !

However, the most important remained question must be asked is CUI BONO? Who benefits from such brazen act of murdering and that of  shameless act of injustice and criminality  of the legal system?  Who would have such power to dictate the whole fourth estate, law enforcement agency,  and the whole judicial system of not only the USA but virtually of all western world?

The Muslims are the sole target of all these acts. Muslims have been demonized, humiliated, suspected,  and hated around not only the western world, but in many part of the non-western world as well, such as Myanmar, Singapore, the Philippines, China, Japan, Korea…

I happen to be in the same opinion with former PM of Malaysia Dr Mahathir that “Muslims have been more busy killing each other rather than Americans or Europeans” and that Muslim Arabs today are unable to carry out any meaningful  attack much less a sophisticated attack , especially inside the heartland of the  West. With the exception of the victory of Hezibulah in Lebanon in self-defense against the Jews, Arab world is simply incompetent!

 

9. The Arabs may have been great warriors in the past but after they fell under western rule they seem to have lost their prowess in wars. In their wars against Israel they were so inept that they have never won a single battle, even when their forces far outnumbered the Israelis. In the years immediately after the formation of the State of Israel, the combined armies of Egypt, Jordan and Syria were defeated by smaller Israeli forces. The Arabs never seem to be able to plan or strategise and certainly their execution of battle plans are just plain bad.
10. They are not a disciplined people and this lack of discipline shows everywhere. And they cannot keep anything secret. Someone would leak whatever plan they may have worked out. For money there are Arabs who are prepared to reveal the hiding places of their leaders. (Dr Mahathir)

Therefore the inevitable conclusion must be It’s  the Jewish controlled Cabal.  Only “the Jews” can wield such power over the West. ( Have you seen enough how Western politicians, academians, business leaders  etc… crawling at the Jewish lobbies- Have you seen enough of what happened to those who dared to speak the truth about and to  “the Jews”)   Only “the Jews” can make the brain of the Western people turn such cowdung. And  last but not least, neither the people of the West nor the Arab and Muslims, but only the Jews, who are the sole beneficary from those “events”!

=====

October 26, 2017

A Case of Judicial Murder?

“When we tolerate what we know to be wrong–when we close our eyes and ears to the corrupt because we are too busy, or too frightened–when we fail to speak up and speak out–we strike a blow against freedom and decency and justice.” – Robert Francis Kennedy

A Case of Judicial Murder?

John Remington Graham

I have been asked many times why I have intervened in the federal prosecution of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the young man who was convicted and sentenced to death in the Boston  Marathon bombing case where two brothers, on April 15, 2013, allegedly detonated pressure cooker bombs on Boylston Street in front of the Forum Restaurant that killed or maimed many people.

As I wrap up my career of fifty years as a member of the bar, including service as a public defender in state and federal courts, co-founder of an accredited law school, and chief public prosecutor in Minnesota state courts, I am apprehensive that my country might be entering into an era of judicial murder.

Judicial murder is the practice of designing a trial to get a guilty verdict, regardless of the facts, and a death sentence carried out.  It has happened in many countries in all ages.  It has been recognized as a threat of public justice by the United States Supreme Court in Powell v. Alabama, 287 U. S. 45 at 72-72 (1932). Judicial murder is followed by corruption and destruction of society.The judicial murder of Socrates was followed by loss of the classical civilization of ancient Greece.  The judicial murder of Jesus of Nazareth, whether son of God or venerable philosopher, was followed by the destruction of Jerusalem and the second temple. The judicial murder of Joan of Arc was followed by loss of most English lands in France. The judicial murder of Charles the First was followed by loss of the free constitution of England.  The judicial murder of Louis XVI was followed by 150 years of defeat, ruin, suffering, and chaos in France.  Judicial murder in the Third Reich was followed by humiliating defeat of Germany.  Judicial murder in the Soviet Union was followed by collapse of the Soviet empire.  If the justice system cannot be trusted, evil consequences follow.

My active intervention in the case began when I assisted the Russian aunt, herself a lawyer, of Dzhokhar file pro se papers in the federal district court in Boston, asking that she be recognized as a friend of the court so she could present evidence conclusively showing, by FBI-gathered evidence, incorporated by reference into the indictment, that Dzhokhar could not have detonated the bomb he was supposed to have detonated.  I proceeded in this way as instructed by the bar liaison officer of the federal district court and the clerk’s office.  Dr. Paul Craig Roberts wrote up this legal adventure in his column of August 17, 2015, in a way which draws from the judicial record, and portrays the scenario clearly enough.  The link is https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2015/08/17/fbi-evidence-proves-innocence-accused-boston-marathon-bomber-dzhokhar-tsarnaev.  Those unfamiliar with this case need to read that article.

The claim of the Russian aunt sounds fantastic only so long as one believes newspapers and does not pay attention to critical, undeniable facts gathered by the FBI, and the language of the indictment as returned on June 27, 2013, especially paragraphs 6, 7, and 24.  A number of things have caused me to doubt Dzhokhar’s guilt.

The FBI crime lab determined from fragments at the scene of the explosions by no later than April 16, 2013, that the culprits were carrying heavy-laden black backpacks on Boyleston Street just before the explosions.  This was not an evaporating investigation theory, but was incorporated into the indictment, was part of the government’s case-in-chief, and was never disavowed by anyone involved in the trial.  On April 18, 2013, the FBI determined that the culprits were portrayed in a street video maintained by the Whiskey Steak House on Boyleston Street. Two still frames were used to identify the brothers Tamerlan, who was shot dead by police, and Dzhokhar, who survived, and was charged, convicted, and sentenced to death.   A third still-frame from the same street video shows Dzhokhar, carrying not a heavy-laden black backpack, but a light-weight white backpack over his right shoulder. The very evidence used by the FBI, and described in the indictment to identify Dzhokhar eliminates him as certainly as white is distinguished from black. The FBI evidence of an exploded backpack is black and the FBI’s identification of Dzhokhar at the scene of the crime shows him with a white backpack. This exculpatory evidence was kept out of the trial.

What of the confessions attributed to Dzhokhar?  The law has always known that, contrary to popular belief, confessions are highly unreliable, often contrived or staged by artifice, or otherwise false, which is why the law has long used safeguards to assure that alleged confessions are received only cautiously under proper circumstances.  The alleged confession by Dzhokhar written in the dark on the side of a boat under which the boy injured from gunshot woulds was hiding is highly suspect. Moreover, if Dzhokhar was willing to confess, why was he hiding?  The confession at sentencing was plainly enough scripted for him, and is not corroborated by what the law calls the “corpus delicti.”

But more troubling evidence exists.  Dr. Lorraine Day was the chief of orthopedic surgery at San Francisco General Hospital for some twenty-five years.  She treated many grave injuries, and is an impeccable medical expert.  She prepared a decisive report, dated May 4, 2015, on the Boston bombing case, which she concluded was a hoax. https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/34vs8r/lorraine_day_md_former_chief_of_orthopedic/  She observed, for example, that photos of the scene after the explosions revealed no blood when it should have been visible everywhere, and that, when blood did appear, it was of a bright orange red Hollywood color, not maroon as real blood appears in real life.  The Boston marathon case appears to be at least contaminated by crisis actors if not entirely a false flag event. The video of the man showing no trauma whose leg is purported to be blown away being wheeled down the street sitting upright in a wheelchair is a dead giveaway as to the presence of crisis actors. Any such casualty mishandled in such a way would have quickly bled to death.

The trial of Dzhokhar raises more serious questions. Mr. Tsarnaev was defended by court-appointed lawyers who did not do their job.  His chief counsel had powerful exculpatory evidence available, yet she forcefully asserted that he was guilty in her opening statement, never used the exculpatory evidence at trial, and did not even ask for a verdict of not guilty in her final argument to the jury. Dzhokhar had no defense.  As a lawyer with a half century of experience, it was painful for me to watch what looked like a show trial in which the verdict and sentence were assured in advance.

On verge of retirement, I have no interest in acquiring notoriety to build a practice. I have nothing to gain from coming to the defense of a person abandoned by law, the media, and everyone but his aunt. But my country has everything to lose from judicial murder in behalf of some government agenda. We must examine if that is the case and, if so, prevent it.

As a last hurrah as a lawyer, I recently filed a motion in behalf of three American citizens before the First Circuit in the appeal of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, asking that they be recognized as friends of the court, so they can show that, on the basis of facts actually of record before the federal district court in Boston, Dzhokhar did not detonate a pressure-cooker bomb on Boylston Street on April 15, 2013, as charged in the indictment. The government and major media of the United States have created such confusion and libelled the accused so foully that it is impossible for the average citizen relying on newspapers to imagine that Dzhokhar is innocent. Major media waged a lock-step propaganda campaign against Mr. Tsarnaev.

However, perhaps a turning point occurred on Monday of this week. Newsweek on October 23, 2017, reported, two years and two months after Dr. Roberts’ report on my filing in behalf of Dzhokhar’s aunt, Maret Tsarnaeva, that evidence might exist of Dzhokhar’s innocence. http://www.newsweek.com/boston-marathon-bombers-aunt-says-fbi-set-her-nephew-and-she-has-proof-691058 If other of the American media would join Newsweek in informing the public that there is doubt about the conviction, perhaps not only a possible case of wrongful conviction can be corrected, but also a case of possible judicial murder could be prevented.

– John Remington Graham of the Minnesota Bar (#3664X), jrgraham@novicomfusion.com, 418-888-5049.

=

FBI Evidence Proves Innocence of Accused Boston Marathon Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev

FBI Evidence Proves Innocence of Accused Boston Marathon Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev

Paul Craig Roberts

I have been contacted by attorney John Remington Graham, a member in good standing of the bar of the Minnesota Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court. He informs me that acting in behalf of Maret Tsanaeva, the aunt of the accused Tsamaev brothers and a citizen of the Kyrgyz Republic where she is qualified to practice law, he has assisted her in filing with the US District Court in Boston a pro se motion, including an argument of amicus curiae, and an affidavit of Maret Tsarnaeva. The presiding judge has ordered that these documents be included in the formal record of the case so they will be publicly accessible. The documents are reproduced below.

The documents argue that on the basis of the evidence provided by the FBI, there is no basis for the indictment of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. The FBI’s evidence clearly concludes that the bomb was in a black knapsack, but the photographs used to establish Dzhokhar’s presence at the marathon show him with a white knapsack. Moreover, the knapsack lacks the heavy bulging appearance that a knapsack containing a bomb would have.

As readers know, I have been suspicious of the Boston Marathon Bombing from the beginning. It seems obvious that both Tsamaev brothers were intended to be killed in the alleged firefight with police, like the alleged perpetrators of the Charlie Hebdo affair in Paris. Convenient deaths in firefights are accepted as indications of guilt and solve the problem of trying innocent patsies.

In Dzhokhar’s case, his guilt was established not by evidence but by accusations, by the betrayal of his government-appointed public defender Judy Clarke who declared Dzhokhar’s guilt in her opening statement of her “defense,” by an alleged confession, evidence of which was never provided, written by Dzhokhar on a boat under which the badly wounded youth lay dying until discovered by the boat owner and hospitalized in critical condition. Following his conviction by his defense attorney, Dzhokhar allegedly confessed again in jihadist terms. As legal scholars have known for centuries, confessions are worthless as indicators of guilt.

Dzhokhar was not convicted on the basis of evidence.

In my questioning of John Remington Graham, I concluded that despite 48 years of active experience with criminal justice, both as a prosecuting attorney and defense attorney, he was shocked to his core by the legal malfeasance of the Tsarnaev case. As Graham is nearing the end of his career, he is willing to speak out, but he could not find a single attorney in the state of Massachusetts who would sponsor his appearance before the Federal District Court in Boston.

This tells me that fear of retribution has now extended its reach into the justice (sic) system and that the America that we knew where law was a shield of the people no longer exists.

Here is the Affidavit of Maret Tsarnaeva:

AFFIDAVIT OF MARET TSARNAEVA CONCERNING THE PROSECUTION OF DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV

Mindful that this affidavit may be filed or displayed as an offer of proof with her authorization in public proceedings contemplated by the laws of the United States of America, and in reliance upon Title 28 of the United States Code, Section 1746, Maret Tsarnaeva deposes and says:

I am the paternal aunt of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev who has been prosecuted before the United States District Court for Massachusetts upon indictment of a federal grand jury returned on June 27, 2013, for causing one of two explosions on Boylston Street in Boston on April 15, 2013. In the count for conspiracy, certain other overt acts of wrongdoing are mentioned. As I understand the indictment, if Dzhokhar did not carry and detonate an improvised explosive device or pressure-cooker bomb as alleged, all thirty counts fail, although perhaps some lingering questions, about which I offer no comment here, might remain for resolution, subject to guarantees of due process of law, within the jurisdiction of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

I am currently living in Grozny, the capital of Chechnya which is a republic within the Russian Federation. My academic training included full-time studies in a five-year program of the Law Faculty at the Kyrgyz State University, and I also hold the degree of master of laws (LL. M.), with focus on securities laws, granted by the University of Manitoba while I lived in Canada. I am qualified to practice law in Kyrgyzstan. I am fluent in Russian, Chechen, and English, and am familiar with other languages. I am prepared to testify under oath in public proceedings in the United States, if my expenses are paid, and if my personal safety and right of return to my home in Chechnya are adequately assured in advance.

Aside from other anomalies and other aspects of the case on which I make no comment here, I am aware of several photo exhibits, upon which the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) relied, or of evidence which their crime laboratory has produced, and certain other reports or material. Together, these plainly show that Dzhokhar was not carrying a large, nylon, black backpack, including a white-rectangle marking at the top, and containing a heavy pressure- cooker bomb, shortly before explosions in Boston on April 15, 2013, as claimed by the FBI and as alleged in the indictment for both explosions. On the contrary, these photo exhibits show unmistakably that Dzhokhar was carrying over his right shoulder a primarily white backpack which was light in weight, and was not bulging or sagging as would have been evident if it contained a heavy pressure-cooker bomb. The only reasonable conclusion is that Dzhokhar was not responsible for either of the explosions in question.

On or about June 20-21, 2013, during their first trip to Russia, which lasted about ten days more or less, Judy Clarke and William Fick, lawyers from the federal public defender’s office in Boston, visited my brother Anzor Tsarnaev, and his wife Zubeidat, respectively the father and mother of Dzhokhar. The meeting was at the home of Dzhokhar’s parents in Makhachka which is in the republic of Dagestan adjacent to the republic of Chechnya, and about three hours’ drive from Grozny. My mother, my sister Malkan, and I were present at this meeting. Zubeidat speaks acceptable English. Mr. Fick is fluent in Russian.

Laying aside other details of the conversation on June 20-21, 2013, I wish to note the following:

— The lawyers from Boston strongly advised that Anzor and Zubeidat refrain from saying in public that Dzhokhar and his brother Tamerlan were not guilty. They warned that, if their advice were not followed, Dzhokhar’s life in custody near Boston would be more difficult;

— Mme Clarke and Mr. Fick also requested of Anzor and Zubeidat that they assist in influencing Dzhokhar to accept the legal representation of the federal public defender’s office in Boston. Mr. Fick revealed that Dzhokhar was refusing the services of the federal public defender’s office in Boston, and sending lawyers and staff away when they visited him in custody. In reaction to the suggestion of Mr. Fick, lively discussion followed;

— As Dzhokhar’s family, we expressed our concern that the federal public defender’s office in Boston was untrustworthy, and might not defend Dzhokhar properly, since they were paid by the government of the United States which was prosecuting him, as many believe for political reasons. Dzhokhar’s parents expressed willingness to engage independent counsel, since Dzhokhar did not trust his government-appointed lawyers. Mr. Fick reacted by saying that the government agents and lawyers would obstruct independent counsel;

— I proposed that Dzhokhar’s family hire independent counsel to work with the federal public defender’s office in order to assure proper and effective representation of Dzhokhar. Mr. Fick replied that, if independent counsel were hired by the family, the federal public defender’s office in Boston would withdraw;

— Mr. Fick then assured Anzor and Zubeidat that the United States Department of Justice had allotted $5 million to Dzhokhar’s defense, and that the federal public defender’s office in Boston intended to defend Dzhokhar properly. Zubeidat then and there said little concerning assurances of Mr. Fick. But for my part, I never believed that the federal public defender’s office in Boston ever intended to defend Dzhokhar as promised. And my impressions from what happened during the trial lead me to believe that the federal public defender’s office in Boston did not defend Dzhokhar competently and ethically.

In any event, I am aware that, following the meeting on June 20-21, 2013, Mme Clarke and Mr. Fick continued to spend time with Anzor and Zubeidat, and eventually persuaded Zubeidat to sign a typed letter in Russian to Dzhokhar, urging him to cooperate wholeheartedly with the federal public defender’s office in Boston. I am informed by my sister Malkan, that Zubeidat gave the letter to the public defenders, shortly before their departure from Russia on or about June 29, 2013, for delivery to Dzhokhar.

During subsequent trips Mme Clarke and Mr. Fick to see Dzhokhar’s parents in Makhachkala, the strategy for defending Dzhokhar was explained, as I learned from my sister Malkan. The public defender’s office in Boston intended to contend at trial, as actually has happened since, that Tamerlan, now deceased, was the mastermind of the crime, and that Dzhokhar was merely following his big brother. I was firmly opposed to this strategy as morally and legally wrong, because Dzhokhar is not guilty, as FBI-generated evidence shows. Some ill- feeling has since developed between myself and Dzhokhar’s parents over their acquiescence.

On or about June 19, 2014, during their visit to Grozny over nearly two weeks, three staff members from the public defender’s office in Boston visited my mother and sisters in Grozny. I am told that they also visited Dzhokhar’s parents in Makhachkala.

The personnel visiting my mother and sisters in Grozny on or about June 19, 2014, included one Charlene, who introduced herself as an independent investigator, working in and with the federal public defender’s office in Boston; another by the name of Jane, a social worker who claimed to have spoken with Dzhokhar; and a third, by the name of Olga, who was a Russian- English interpreter from New Jersey. They did not leave business cards, but stayed at the main hotel in Grozny, hence I presume that their surnames can be ascertained.

I was not present at the meeting in Grozny on or about June 19, 2014, but my sister Malkan, who was present, called me by telephone immediately after the meeting concluded. She revealed to me then the details of the conversation at the meeting. Malkan and I have since spoken about the visit on several occasions.

Malkan speaks Russian and Chechen and is willing to testify under oath in public proceedings in the United States through an interpreter in Russian, if her expenses are paid, and if her personal safety and right of return to her home in Chechnya are adequately assured in advance. She relates, and has authorized me to state for her that, during the conversation on June 19, 2014, in Grozny, Charlene the independent investigator stated flatly that the federal public defender’s office in Boston knew that Dzhokhar was not guilty as charged, and that their office was under enormous pressure from law enforcement agencies and high levels of the government of the United States not to resist conviction. [Remember what happened to Lynne Stewart, the federally appointed public defender who actually served her client. She was sentenced to prison.]

This affidavit is executed outside of the United States, but the foregoing account is true to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief, and subject to the pains and penalties of perjury under the laws of the United States of America.

Given on this 17th day of April 2015.

/s/ Maret Tsarnaeva

Here is the Argument of Amicus Curiae:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

ARGUMENT OF AMICUS CURIAE No. 13-CR-10200-GAO

MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT:

1. Federal jurisdiction: The constitutional authority of the United States cannot be extended to the prosecution of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev in light of the opinion of the court in United States v. Lopez, 514 U. S. 549 (1995), and views of Alexander Hamilton in The Federalist, Ns. 17, 22, and 34 [Clinton Rossiter (ed.), Mentor edition by New American Library, New York, 1961, pp. 118, 143-144, and 209]. Congress has broad power to regulate commerce, including trade and the incidents of trade, but domestic crimes and use of weapons are generally reserved to the States. If there is sufficient evidence to prosecute Dzhokhar for murder and mayhem, he should and can be prosecuted exclusively by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Accordingly, amicus urges that the indictment now pending should be dismissed, and the conviction of her nephew Dzhokhar Tsarnaev of charges under several acts of Congress should be vacated.

2. The actual innocence of the accused: Laying aside misgivings of amicus and many others about of the “official” scenario concerning this case, as broadcast to the world by the government and mainstream news media of the United States, evidence generated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), confirmed on the judicial record of this cause, and clarified by the indictment, or suitable for judicial notice under Rule 201(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence, conclusively proves that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev cannot be guilty of the crimes charged in this prosecution.

The formal indictment against Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was returned on June 27, 2013. The document is 74 pages long, and accuses Mr. Tsarnaev (hereinafter called Dzhokhar) of heinous crimes, including many counts punishable by death. The central event for which Dzhokhar is alleged to have been responsible, according to the indictment, took place, on Boylston Street, in front of the Forum Restaurant, near the finish line of the Boston marathon on April 15, 2013. The most important paragraphs of the indictment are numbered 6, 7, and 24 (including several other paragraphs repeating expressly or by implication the substance thereof). Paragraphs 6-7, read in themselves and in context, state that, acting in concert withhis (now deceased) brother, Dzhokhar set down on the sidewalk and detonated one of two “black backpacks” which contained “improvised explosive devices,” these “constructed from pressure cookers, low explosive power, shrapnel, adhesive, and other materials.” Paragraph 24 clarifies that the black backpack carried, and containing the pressure-cooker bomb allegedly detonated by Dzhokhar, was placed in front of the Forum Restaurant and was associated with the second explosion. The indictment says in paragraph 6 that both bombs exploded at about 2:49 in the afternoon (Eastern time), and that the bombs Dzhokhar and his brother placed and detonated each killed at least one person, and wounded scores of others.

On the morning after the explosions, i. e., on April 16, 2013, Richard DesLauriers, special agent in charge of the FBI in Boston, made a public statement at a press conference, which is published in printed form on the FBI website and in the news media concerning the facts later set forth in the indictment. Mr. DesLauriers said, as paragraphs 6-7 of the indictment substantially confirm,

“. . . this morning, it was determined that both of the explosives were placed in a dark-colored nylon bag or backpack. The bag would have been heavy, because of the components believed to be in it.

“. . . we are asking that the public remain alert, and to alert us to the following activity . . . someone who appeared to be carrying an unusually heavy bag yesterday around the time of the blasts and in the vicinity of the blasts.”

The FBI also published on April 16, 2013, a crime lab photo of a bomb fragment found after the explosions This photo is reproduced as Tsarnaeva exhibit 1 in the appendix hereof, and is believed proper for judicial notice.

From this bomb fragment, the FBI crime lab was able to reconstruct the size, shape, and type of pressure cookers, as was reported on information published by the FBI to the nation on ABC News Nightline on April 16, 2013. A still-frame, taken from (about 01:39-01:54) of this ABC television report, is reproduced as Tsarnaeva exhibit 2 in the appendix hereof, and is offered for judicial notice. A larger segment of this ABC Nightline News report (at about 01:31-02:14) elaborates facts set forth in paragraphs 6-7 of the indictment, including reference to three of the four exhibits reproduced in the appendix hereof. Each of the pressure cookers in question was a Fagor, 6-quart model, marketed in or near Boston and elsewhere in the United States by Macey’s. Its external dimensions are probably about 81⁄2 inches in height, including cover, and about 9 inches in diameter. Stripped of hard plastic handles and filled with nails, bee bees, and other such metal, then prepared as a bomb, it would cause a bag carrying it to be, as observed by the FBI chief in Boston during his press conference on April 16, 2013, “unusually heavy.”

Again on April 16, 2013, the FBI published a crime lab photo, here reproduced as Tsarnaeva exhibit 3 in the appendix hereof, and showing a blown- out backpack which is said to have contained one of the bombs, — a black nylon bag with a characteristic white rectangle marking about 3 by 11⁄2 inches more or less as it appeared following the explosions the day before. This photo pictures the “dark colored nylon bag or backpack” which Mr. DesLauriers described in his press conference on the day after the explosions when he described what was carried by the guilty parties. It was one of the “black backpacks” referenced in paragraph 7 of the indictment. It is pictured in prosecution exhibit 26 which was introduced on the second day of the trial in this cause (day 28 on the transcript, March 5, 2015), showing that the bag or backpack in question was found on the street near the post box in front of the Forum Restaurant on Boylston Street, and, as previously noted, was associated with the second explosion on April 15, 2013, which, in paragraph 24 of the indictment, Dzhokhar is alleged to have detonated. This general impression is confirmed by defense exhibit 3090, showing a backpack with black exterior or covering, and introduced on the sixteenth day of the trial (day 42 on the transcript, March 31, 2015). Tsarnaeva exhibit 3 is also suitable for judicial notice.

On April 18, 2013, the FBI published a 29-second street video claimed to have been taken from Whiskey’s Steak House on Boylston Street at about 02:37- 38 o’clock in the afternoon (Eastern time), only minutes before the explosions on April 15, 2013. It definitively settles the principal question raised by the indictment and the plea of not guilty interposed against it. Part of this video is tucked into prosecution exhibit 22 introduced on the third day of the trial in this cause (day 29 on the transcript, March 9, 2015). From this street video, three still-frame photos have been extracted. Two of these still-frame photos were published by the FBI on April 18, 2013, on posters which were used to identify suspects. All three photos were published by CNN and the Associated Press on April 19, 2013. The third still-frame photo from this video is most telling, and is reproduced as Tsarnaeva exhibit 4 in the appendix hereof. As already noted, the FBI and the indictment have together affirmed that the culprits who detonated these explosions were carrying large, unusually heavy, black backpacks concealing pressure-cooker bombs; but, the third still-frame photo from the Whiskey’s Steak House video reproduced as Tsarnaeva exhibit 4, and drawn from a street video already used by the FBI to identify the suspects and acknowledged by the government in this prosecution, shows unmistakably that, shortly before the explosions, Dzhokhar was carrying a small-size, white* backpack over his right shoulder the same light in weight, not heavy laden, and displaying no sagging or bulging as would normally be evident if the bag identified contained a pressure-cooker bomb of the size and weight which the FBI has described.

(*For all practical purposes and to the naked eye, the color is white, although technical computer analysis suggests a very whitish shade of gray.)

Dzhokhar is not guilty of carrying and detonating a pressure-cooker bomb, as charged in the indictment, as is literally as obvious as the difference between black and white. There were and remain other suspects whose identities have been credibly suggested. See, e. g., Toni Cartalucci, Land Destroyer Report, April 19, 2013 (illustrated commentary entitled “‘Contractors’ Stood Near Bomb, Left Before Detonation.”). But here it is enough to reflect on the comment of Lord Acton that “historic responsibility has to make up for the want of legal responsibility.” — J. Rufus Fears, Selected Writings of Lord Acton, Liberty Fund, Indianapolis, 1985, Vol. 2, p. 383 (Letter to Mandell Creighton, April 5, 1887). Whatever is done in judicial proceedings, history will judge this case, as surely as history has judged other significant cases.

3. The grievance of amicus: It is impossible that federal prosecutors and counsel for the accused did not know of the exculpatory evidence which has just been identified and illustrated. Yet federal prosecutors went head without probable cause, as if decisive evidence of actual innocence, impossible to ignore in a diligent study of this case, did not exist, as is wholly unacceptable in light of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U. S. 83 at 86-87 (1963).

Moreover, in her opening statement at trial on March 4, 2015, as reflected in the fourth paragraph of the transcript of her comments, court-appointed counsel for the accused forcefully insisted that Dzhokhar was guilty of capital felonies, as is positively disproved by evidence generated by the FBI, reinforced by the indictment itself. She said,

“The government and the defense will agree about many things that happened during the week of April 15th, 2013. On Marathon Monday, Tamerlan Tsarnaev walked down Boylston Street with a backpack on his back, carrying a pressure cooker bomb, and put it down in front of Marathon Sports near the finish line of the Marathon. Jahar [i. e., Dzhokhar] Tsarnaev walked down Boylston Street with a backpack on his back carrying a pressure cooker bomb and placed it next to a tree in front of the Forum Restaurant. The explosions extinguished three lives.”

And in her summation to the jury on April 6, 2015, as the transcript shows, court-appointed counsel for the accused said nothing of the exculpatory evidence in this case. She did not even ask for a verdict of not guilty. She could hardly have done more to promote a conviction and the severest sentence possible, even though the third still-frame photo from the video at Whiskey’s Steak House, reproduced as Tsarnaeva exhibit 4, showed Dzhokhar carrying a white backpack, as alone was enough to defeat the indictment insofar as paragraph 7 thereof averred that the accused and his brother committed the principal acts of wrongdoing by carrying and setting down black backpacks. Such misconduct is altogether unacceptable in light of Strickland v. Washington, 446 U. S. 668 at 687- 688 (1984).

The misconduct of which amicus complains served to conceal decisive exculpatory evidence by legerdemain. Amicus urges not only that the death penalty may not be imposed in this case, for all three opinions in Herrera v. Collins, 506 U. S. 390 (1993), allow that the death penalty may not be constitutionally imposed where the accused is demonstrably innocent, but that sua sponte this court order a new trial with directions that new counsel for the accused be appointed, motivated to provide an authentic defense for Dzhokhar.

4. The corpus delicti: Paragraph 10 of the indictment recites a statement in the nature of a confession by Dzhokhar written on the inner walls of a boat in Watertown. But with respect to any and all evidence offered or treated as suggesting an extrajudicial admission of guilt in this case, amicus cites the penetrating observation by Sir William Blackstone in his Commentaries on the Laws of England, Edward Christian, London, 1765, Book IV, p. 357: “[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.” Amicus and countless others suspect that the alleged confession in the boat was staged as artifice to suit the government’s case, and not authentic. But she stands on ancient wisdom which casts doubt on all extrajudicial confessions without adequate safeguards, including the rule that an extrajudicial confession is insufficient to convict, unless the corpus delicti be sufficiently proved up. The rule is defined with various degrees of rigor from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. In federal courts, in any event, the corroboration required to sustain a confession or statement in the nature of a confession need only be independent, substantial, and reveal the words in question to be reasonably trustworthy, as appears, e. g., in Opper v. United States, 348 U. S. 84 (1954).

If such be the law here applicable, the required corroboration in this case must include evidence showing that Dzhokhar actually carried a large, heavy, black backpack on Boylston Street before the explosions on the afternoon on April 15, 2013, as claimed by the FBI and alleged in the indictment. Tsarnaeva exhibit 4, a product of investigation by the FBI, shows plainly that Dzhokhar did no such thing, hence no required corroboration has been established

5. Closing remarks: The views here expressed are not unique, but shared by good Americans, and others the world over. The undersigned and her sister Malkan are prepared to testify as expressed in the affidavit filed in support of the motion for leave to file a submission as amicus curiae. This argument is

Respectfully submitted,

May 15, 2015 /s/ Maret Tsarnaeva

Zhigulevskaya Str. 7, Apt. 4
364000 Grozny, Chechen Republic, RF Telephone: 011-7-938-899-1671

E-mail: marettsar@gmail.com 10

Of counsel:

John Remington Graham of the Minnesota Bar (#3664X) 180 Haut de la Paroisse
St-Agapit, Quebec G0S 1Z0 Canada
Telephone: 418-888-5049

E-mail: jrgraham@novicomfusion.com

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

The undersigned certifies that this submission is consistent with the rules of this Court, that it is prepared in 14-point Times New Roman font, and that the bare text thereof consists of 2,331 words.

May 15, 2015 /s/ Maret Tsarnaeva

APPENDIX TSARNAEVA EXHIBIT 1

Appendix Tsarnaeva Exhibit 1

APPENDIX TSARNAEVA EXHIBIT 2

Appendix Tsarnaeva Exhibit 2

APPENDIX TSARNAEVA EXHIBIT 3

Appendix Tsarnaeva Exhibit 3

APPENDIX TSARNAEVA EXHIBIT 4

Appendix Tsarnaeva Exhibit 4

This is the communication I received from attorney John Remington Graham:

TO DR. PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS, GREETING :

Dear Sir, — By way of introduction. I have practiced criminal law for nearly forty-eight years, both prosecuting and defending, and served as a founding professor in an accredited law school in my native Minnesota. I have appeared as counsel before courts of record in sixteen jurisdictions, and have a background in forensic science and medicine. I can provide a résumé on request.

On March 25, 2015, while the trial was underway, I wrote and distributed a short opinion on the prosecution of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, accused of capital felonies in Boston on April 15, 2013 in United States v. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, No. 13-CR-10200-GAO on the docket of the United States District Court for Massachusetts, commonly known as the “Boston marathon case”, or “the Boston bomber case”. I used eight photo exhibits to explain my conclusions that, as a matter of law, there was no probable cause to support the indictment, and that Mr. Tsanaev was plainly not guilty as charged. These views were shared by others reporting on the internet, but my opinion was meant to provide professional assurance to fellow citizens that, legally speaking, something was radically wrong with the prosecution. In fact there were then and still are a great many anomalies with the case.

The substance of the Boston marathon case, as I then saw it, and as I still see it, is that, on the day after the explosions on Boylston Street in Boston, the FBI crime lab determined from fragments at the crime scene, the FBI chief in Boston announced, and the indictment itself later confirmed that, shortly before the explosions, the culprits were carrying large, heavy-laden, black backpacks containing pressure cooker bombs. Two days later, the FBI chief in Boston stated publicly that the suspects were identified by a certain street surveillance video, which for some days was later displayed for public viewing on the FBI website. The video had been taken from Whiskey’s Steak House, and was used to create still-frame photos of Tamerlan Tsarnaev (the big brother, now deceased), and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (the little brother, later accused) as they walked up Boylson Street toward the finish line of the Boston marathon, shortly before the bombs went off. These two still frames were featured on posters distributed by the FBI in soliciting cooperation from the general public. But there is a third still-frame photo, taken from the same video, which shows unmistakably that Dzhokhar was carrying a small, light-weight, white backpack. The backpack carried by Dzhokhar was flat, and did not sag or bulge as would have been apparent if it contained a pressure cooker bomb filled with shrapnel as described in the indictment. This third still-frame photo was published by the major news media of the United States. I retrieved my first copy of this third still-frame photo from an internet report of CNN on April 19, 2015.

The bottom line is that the FBI’s own evidence eliminates Dzhokhar as a suspect, and conclusively proves he is not guilty as charged. This reality is literally as clear as the difference between black and white. The establishment press knew about it, and I cannot imagine how the federal prosecutors and counsel for the accused could not have known about it. So obvious was the actual innocence of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev that there was no need for a trial at all, because a good criminal defense lawyer could have taken the FBI information published the day after the explosions, the text of the indictment, and the third still-frame photo from the street surveillance video used by the FBI to identify suspects, and employed those items to support a pre-trial motion for dismissal of the indictment. I have on many occasions made such motions or seen such motions made by colleagues in federal courts, based on facts revealed by disclosures which prosecutors must and routinely do make available to counsel for the accused under a famous decision of the United States Supreme Court. And I have seen such motions granted on not a few occasions. Such practice is not uncommon, as I know from my own experience.

What was going on in Dzhokhar’s case? Why was there no motion to dismiss the indictment based on indisputable facts? Why was there a trial at all? Why did Judy Clarke, a big-time death-penalty lawyer appointed to defend Dzhokhar, admit to the jury in her opening statement that her client was guilty? She had decisive evidence that her client was not guilty. Why did she not use it, bring the case to an end, and thereby save her client’s life? In her final summation to the jury, Mme Clarke did not even ask for a verdict of not guilty. She made no mention of the exculpatory evidence generated by the FBI and mentioned in the indictment. Available were widely published photographs of possible paramilitary agents near the crime scene in Boston about the time of the explosions, carrying large, heavy-laden, black backpacks with characteristic markings which the FBI crime lab material revealed. But these persons with black backpacks were never investigated by the FBI. Why not?

I contacted Maret Tsarnaeva, the paternal aunt of Dzhokhar living in Chechnya which is part of the Russian Federation, a lawyer trained in the old Russian school of law in the Kyrgyz Republic which was once part of the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union, but has been independent since the conclusion of the former Cold War. A very bright and interesting woman Maret turned out to be, and, from the beginning, she maintained that her nephew was not guilty. My conversations with her over Skype led me to conclude that Judy Clarke and her colleagues in the federal public defender’s office in Boston could not stand up to the political pressure and thus threw the case instead of defending Dzhokhar.

Mme Tsarnaeva executed an affidavit on April 17, 2015, which explains events when representatives of the federal public defender’s office in Boston met with Dzhokhar’s family in Russia. For those interested in details, I attach a copy of her affidavit exactly as sent to me by Maret from Russia and later filed with the federal district court in Boston, except that the affidavit filed in the federal district court includes Maret’s original signature in Russian script which I can verify with my business records.

Maret hoped to call exculpatory evidence to the attention of the presiding judge, because Dzhokhar’s lawyers were not defending the accused and federal prosecutors were acting without probable cause. After diligent research on options was made, Maret decided to attempt an appearance before the federal district court in Boston as a friend of the court. She had to apply to the presiding judge for permission to appear in this capacity, and to make a motion asking the court to appointment me as her personal counsel for this purpose on special occasion. Normally, to be admitted to practice before the court on special occasion, I would need a motion from a member of the local bar. My paralegal assistant and I contacted many lawyers in Massachusetts. Some were sympathetic, but none dared to participate, lest their reputations be harmed. I had practiced before the federal district court in Boston some years previously, and then had no difficulty in securing the routine courtesy of a member of the local bar in sponsoring my appearance on special occasion. But not even the American Civil Liberties Union in Massachusetts dared to assist Maret or myself. I had to assist Maret in making an intervention pro se, representing herself, while she listed me as “of counsel” so as to signal that she was guided by a lawyer, and asked the presiding judge to admit me on special occasion without sponsoring motion of a member of the local bar, due to unusual circumstances. On instructions of court personnel, we could not proceed on the electronic record, and Maret’s pro se motion with supporting documents was served upon the federal district attorney and the federal public defender in paper and by registered mail, and the papers had to be filed with the office of the clerk of the federal district court, again in paper and regular postal service. But our task was accomplished by May 29, 2015.

For your convenience, I attach herewith the formal argument made by Maret Tsarnaeva acting pro se with my guidance, exactly as filed in the federal district court in Boston, except that the copy served and filed included the signature of Maret Tsarnaeva in Russian script, as I can demonstrate from my business records. We showed by text and exhibits, and by reference to the trial record and FBI-generated evidence that Dzhokhar cannot be guilty, because the FBI determined and the indictment alleged that the culprits carried black backpacks, but the FBI’s evidence showed that Dzhokhar was carrying a white backpack.

Maret expressed her grievances against the unethical misconduct of the federal prosecutors in proceeding when they knew they had no probable cause, and the unethical misconduct of court-appointed counsel in not defending in earnest. We enclosed the four most critical photo exhibits, including the results of the FBI crime lab investigation and the exculpatory third still-frame photo from the video used by the FBI to identify the culprits.

I am aware that many incredulous citizens cannot accept that the government of the United States would stage a show trial in Boston to convict an innocent young man and sentence him to death. But such events are not unusual in history. Judicial murder spoils the history of many nations. These incredulous citizens point to Dzhokhar’s alleged confession statements inside the boat in Watertown and at the time of sentencing. But contrary to the beliefs of the uninitiated, it has been clear from ancient times that confession statements are the weakest and most suspicious of all testimony, as is stated by legal scholars going back many centuries. Maret’s pro se argument cited Sir William Blackstone, from whom the founding fathers of the United States learned the law, for this truth. False confessions are very common, and result from fabrication, artifice, duress, unfounded hopes, attempts to curry favor, even brainwashing. Hence, going back centuries the law has struggled to develop safeguards against false confessions.

The intervention by Maret Tsarnaeva in behalf of her nephew in the Boston marathon case is significant because, although denying her motion to appear as a friend of the court, the presiding judge entered an order, which appears on the electronic record, is numbered 1469, and directs that her filings be maintained by the office of the clerk of the federal district court in Boston. These documents should be accessible to those wishing to see and read them. Therefore, it is a matter of public record, not merely a matter of internet protest or gossip, that the federal prosecutors, the court-appointed lawyers for the accused, and the presiding judge are all aware of the FBI’s own evidence which excludes Dzhokhar Tsarnaev as a suspect, and proves his actual innocence. It is also clear that the major news media of the United States, which orchestrated a false appearance that Dzhokhar was guilty of heinous crimes, and called for his execution, were aware that he was not guilty. They knew, as the report of CNN four days after marathon Monday makes plain, that Dzhokhar was in fact carrying a small, light-weight, white backpack, and that the government’s own evidence shows that the culprits, whoever they were, carried large, heavy-laden, black backpacks.

John Remington Graham of the Minnesota Bar (#3664X)

John Remington Graham is an attorney with decades of experience in the fields of constitutional, environmental, and criminal litigation. He served as a federal public defender; special counsel to Brainerd, Minnesota; and Crow Wing County attorney. He has a great many publishing credits in constitutional law and history, and also forensic medicine and science. He has lectured on constitutional law and legal history in the United States and Canada. Graham was also cofounding professor of law at Hamline University in Minnesota. As a young lawyer, he quickly realized an investigation into constitutional history was necessary to properly defend his clients against the judicial machine. Since then, Graham has been a diligent student of American, Canadian, and English constitutional history and law. He recognized that the American Constitution could not be understood without a thorough knowledge of its foundation in English Constitutional law and history. He has participated in major cases raising difficult questions of constitutional law, appearing before courts in sixteen jurisdictions within the United States. Additionally, in 1998 he was the advisor on British constitutional law and history for the amicus curiae for Quebec in the Canadian Supreme Court, a position that afforded him the opportunity of shaping Quebec’s argument in its case for peaceable secession. Graham received both a bachelor of arts in philosophy and a law degree from the University of Minnesota. Graham, his wife, and children have lived in Minnesota and Quebec.

=

edit: trying to fix layout. I’ve screwed up the numbering of items, but at least now you can read it.

By Lorraine Day, M.D.

My background: I am an Orthopedic Trauma Surgeon. For many years I was Chief of Orthopedic Surgery at San Francisco General Hospital, the only trauma hospital in San Francisco. For 25 years, I took care of massive injuries from gang wars, explosions, severe motor vehicle crashes, survivors of attempted suicide from jumping off the Golden Gate Bridge, etc.

I am fully qualified to assess the supposed injuries at the total HOAX “bombing” that took place at the Boston Marathon. And I am not the only one who is writing about this. There are many others who also understand that it was a HOAX!

The documentation for what I have written below is contained in the links given at the end of this article. Please read those articles and view those videos so you will have some facts – evidence – before you make up your own mind.

Consider these facts:

  1. In the pictures taken immediately after the blast, there is NO BLOOD on the ground. That could never be. The bomb blast instantaneously would have spread blood from the injured victims everywhere.
  2. There were only about 10 “victims” at ground zero of the blast – and all of them are alive and do not appear to be even close to death. Where are these other “200” people who were supposedly injured?
  3. When “blood” does eventually appear on the sidewalk at ground zero – it clearly is some kind of paint – NOT blood. The paint is bright orangish-red, obviously for the maximum frightening effect on the populace. REAL BLOOD is dark maroon.
  4. Notice in the initial pictures after the (smoke) bomb exploded, almost all of the “victims” are holding themselves up on one elbow, or they are sitting up. No one is in severe pain, or really in any pain at all. Severely injured people are not propping themselves up on one elbow. They would have their head on the sidewalk.
  5. Obviously, these crisis actors (See crisisactors.com) don’t want to put their head or the side of their face down on the dirty Boston sidewalk where everyone walks (and spits).
  6. In one video, a man is seen clapping together two towels or other items, causing the crisis actors “victims” to be covered with soot – so they’ll look more like bombing victims.
  7. One woman “victim” is seen in early photos (but after the “bombing” has taken place) with no blood at all on her white blouse. However, later, she is taken off on a gurney with a lot of “blood” on her white blouse.
  8. There are many “handlers” in the early pictures, positioning “victims” and assisting in the set-up of the HOAX scene. You might think that they would be concerned about being seen by the by-standers, but when a “bomb” goes off, most people run for their life, allowing the Hoaxsters and Crisis actors to set up their HOAX scenes undisturbed.
  9. There are no Emergency Medical Technicians (EMTs) at the scene, no ambulances, and no fire engines (after all, a supposed “bomb” went off – it would be mandatory for the fire department to respond). Where are they? The people “helping” the “victims” are also Crisis actors. No emergency medical personnel are on the scene.
  10. Certainly, wheel chairs may be available at various places along a Marathon route, and at the end of the race, but wheel chairs are never found on ambulances. And wheelchairs are never used to transport severely injured victims. When a victim has lost a lot of blood, whether from internal or external bleeding, he or she is always kept flat and transported on a gurney. Otherwise the life of that victim is at severe risk.
  11. The man with the supposedly blown off legs – with about sixteen inches of bone (tibia) sticking out of one leg – is taken away in a WHEELCHAIR! That would NEVER happen! If a person has both legs blown off, his blood loss would be so severe that if someone sat him up, he would lose consciousness (his heart could not pump enough blood to supply his brain when he was in the upright position) and he would die. No ambulance company would ever take on that liability, nor would any bystander. That man was a crisis actor who lost both of his legs in war some time ago while in the military. You will see in the documentation below. There are many former military personnel, amputees from war injuries, that are now being used as crisis actors for “drills” as it was repeatedly announced over loudspeakers that this (Boston Bombing) was.

The “gory blown-off” leg was nothing but a prosthesis (made by “central casting”) made to look like an amputation caused by an explosion. The prosthesis, however, is a very poor replica of a real amputated limb. I have performed many amputations of both legs and arms and I have seen many hundreds of severely injured limbs from all sorts of horrendous accidents. None of them ever look like that one. But apparently it is good enough to fool the population (most of whom have never seen such injuries). Unfortunately, the average American chooses not to spend any time investigating these events and chooses to believe the mainstream media propagandists.

The injuries and blood spatter are so badly done, they are almost comical to a trained trauma surgeon such as myself.

Also, that man who supposedly lost both his legs in the “bombing” seemed to be in no pain, nor did he have blood all over him. And 4 or 5 days later, when photographed in the hospital, he is giving a thumbs-up, happy-faced smile. This is ludicrous When a person loses even one limb, there is a “grieving” process that goes on for weeks, similar to the grieving response that would happen if a person lost a close loved one. And it’s usually months before one actually can face the situation and get on with his life.

One more thing: in the links below, there is proof that this man who supposedly lost both of his legs in the “bombing” was wheeled through the crowd TWICE – in his wheel chair – clearly for the media’s benefit: a photo opportunity! During one of those episodes, his fake “blown off” leg/prosthesis started to fall off and had to be put back on by one of the men in the yellow jackets, obviously an “insider” – another crisis actor!

  1. The glass from the “blown-out” windows from the “bombing” is all on the sidewalk. If the glass had been broken from a real bomb blast – the glass would be inside the apartments or offices, not outside on the sidewalk.
  2. The “runner” who fell down when the “bomb” exploded as though he had been “blown down” by the bomb, was an actor. There were many men much closer to the “bomb” that were not affected by its force at all.
  3. The supposed “Principal” of the Sandy Hook school who was “killed” in that false flag attack, showed up – alive and well – at the Boston Bombing.
  4. There are Craft International employees (operatives) on the scene. One is carrying 2 bags. The other operatives quickly leave ground zero – BEFORE the bombs explode. Who is Craft International? A private contractor that provides security, defense and combat weapons training to military, police, corporate and civilian clients.
  5. The U.S. and Israel desperately want to bomb Iran and need some event to polarize Americans so they’ll be willing to send their sons and daughters to die – not for freedom – but for the One World Government that is now gobbling up all the countries and resources in the world. This particular False Flag Attack allows them to blame it on two young, innocent supposed “Muslim Terrorists” in order to incite the American people into agreeing to go to war against Iran and Syria.
  6. These 2 boys whose parents are from Chechnya had been interviewed by the FBI many times. They had even been sent to Chechnya by the FBI to attend a clandestine meeting, the purpose of which was to undermine the government of Chechnya.
  7. The boys’ uncle, Ruslan Tsarni, had been married to Samantha, the daughter of Graham Fuller, a high level CIA agent.
  8. The American wife of the older Tsarnaev brother is the granddaughter of a Skull and Bones member – an organization that is part of the New World Order Illuminati.
  9. Both boys were arrested alive and well. The older brother, according to an eye witness, was deliberately run over by a police car, then was shot multiple times and mutilated by the police. (See the picture of his corpse.) Witnesses say he was unarmed at the time of his arrest.
  10. The younger brother was arrested without a struggle, but ended up almost dead, having been shot through the throat and possibly will never be able to speak again. How convenient! He was taken to a Jewish hospital and “cared for” by Israeli doctors before being transported to prison!
  11. Many witnesses saw bomb-sniffing dogs both at the beginning and end of the race. Why didn’t the dogs find the bombs? Unless, of course, agents of the government contractor, Craft International, planted them. The backpacks they (Craft employees) were wearing (all black) are the same as the ones carrying the bombs, whereas the backpacks of the Tsarnaev brothers, who were Photoshopped into the crowd pictures, were not the same as the one seen surrounding the “bomb” after it exploded.
  12. Numerous witnesses, including runners in the race, have stated that it was announced repeatedly over the loudspeaker that “This is a drill.” Indeed it WAS a “drill” with no one hurt or injured, except of course, the Tsarnaev brothers who were set up as patsies – just like Lee Harvey Oswald in the JFK assassination. But the government has taken this False Flag “live” – to deceive the American public into giving up their freedom for “safety.”

Little does the blind American public realize that those who are promising “safety” in exchange for the loss of the rights of the public, are the very ones who are setting up the “terror” incidents!

  1. In 2012, the head of the Boston Emergency Services Department said, “A PLANNED Mass Casualty Event at a Marathon” is coming! Well folks, this was it!
  2. And now, less than a month after the “Bombing,” the FBI agents who arrested – and murdered – at least one of the Tsarnaev brothers have conveniently died in a “fall from a helicopter” during a “training drill.” Obviously, they have been silenced from telling what they know.

Here is the link so you can check it yourself.

http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2013/05/fbi-agents-killed-in-virginia-were-investigating-the-boston-bombing-2659348.html

How can anyone be proud of a government that plans this kind of heinous event, including the murder and severe maiming of two young innocent men and the deliberate deceiving of the population of America – and the world – for MONEY, POWER and CONTROL!

from: http://www.goodnewsaboutgod.com/studies/political/newworld_order/boston_marathon.htm

==

Boston Marathon Bomber’s Aunt Claims FBI Set up Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and She Has Proof

The Russian aunt of convicted Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev has filed a motion in his death penalty appeal case that reveals new details on the meetings her nephew’s attorneys had in Russia with his parents and makes a bizarre allegation that the FBI said the bomber had a “heavy-laden black backpack,” not the white one he can be seen carrying in video taken before the deadly blasts.

In the filing, Maret Tsarnaeva, a Chechen attorney and the sister of Tsarnaev family patriarch Anzor, asks to join her nephew’s death penalty appeal defense team, a request denied by a federal judge this year.

Tsarnaeva’s filing includes a still photograph of Dzhokhar taken from a 29-second clip recorded by a Whiskey’s Steak House surveillance camera on Boylston Street. Of it, she says that “the FBI and the indictment have together affirmed that the culprits who detonated these explosions were carrying large, unusually heavy black backpacks concealing pressure cooker bombs.” But her affidavit states, “Dzhokhar was carrying a small-sized white backpack,” which she calls exculpatory evidence.

“The very evidence used by the FBI to identify the ‘Boston bombers’ referenced in the indictment excludes Dzhokhar as plainly as white is distinguished from black,” Tsarnaeva’s filing states. “What can be more compelling than the difference between black and white?”

RTSE5P5 A still image from a surveillance video shows Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev in this handout photo provided by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Boston on March 11, 2015. Reuters

Tsarnaeva’s filing also provides the first details into a trip to Russia taken by two members of Dzhokhar’s defense team, famed death penalty lawyer Judy Clarke and attorney William Fick, who speaks fluent Russian, in late June 2013, just a couple of months after the April 15, 2013, attack. Tsarnaeva says she attended the meeting at her brother’s home in Dagestan, where he has lived with his ex-wife, Zubeidat, since the couple left the United States in 2012.

During the meeting, Tsarnaeva says, Clarke and Fick convinced Dzhokhar’s mother to write him a letter urging him to “cooperate wholeheartedly” and said they planned to point to his brother, Tamerlan, as the “mastermind” of the murderous Patriots’ Day attack attack that killed three, left 17 people amputees and seriously wounded 260 others. They assured the parents that their client, the couple’s son, was “merely following his big brother,” a defense that was used during Tsarnaev’s trial.

Tamerlan was killed during a firefight with law enforcement in Watertown on April 18, 2013, four days after the bombing. He died late that night, after he and his brother executed MIT police officer Sean Collier, carjacked a young businessman and attacked police officers with bullets and bombs. Tamerlan was shot nine times during that gun battle and was then run over by his younger brother as he sped away in a stolen Mercedes SUV. His brief escape launched a 16-hour manhunt; he was eventually found hiding inside a dry-docked, shrink-wrapped boat in a backyard in Watertown.

Paramedics who tended to Tamerlan later testified that he was still alive at the scene and released a final growl before he was pronounced dead at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center on April 19, 2013. His death certificate states he was “shot by police and then run over by a motor vehicle.”

RTX1AVC4 Flowers are left on the memorial for MIT police officer Sean Collier following dedication ceremonies in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on April 29, 2015. Collier was killed by Boston Marathon bombers Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on April 18, 2013. Reuters

Tsarnaeva also said her nephew’s defense attorneys assured his family that the Department of Justice had earmarked $5 million for his initial defense in a meeting at the home that Anzor and Zubeidat have shared in Dagestan since leaving the U.S. in 2012. In unusual move in a federal trial, U.S. District Court Judge George O’Toole ordered that the cost of Tsarnaev’s first trial remain under seal and also shielded any monies associated with the ongoing death sentence appeal from the public.

“As Dzhokhar’s family we expressed our concern that [the legal team] was untrustworthy, and might not defend Dzhokhar properly since they were paid by the government of the United States which was prosecuting him, as many believe, for political reasons,” Tsarnaeva wrote in the motion. That sentiment has been shared by other Tsarnaev family members in Russia who have repeatedly accused the government of framing Dzhokhar.

Minnesota lawyer John Remington Graham filed Tsarnaeva’s affidavit in Tsarnaev’s federal appeals case last week as part of a motion requesting that a judge allow her to work with his current defense attorneys, a request denied this year by O’Toole and rebuffed by his legal team.

“In my judgment a trial court presiding over criminal prosecution should not receive or consider volunteered submissions by non-parties,” O’Toole wrote.

Tsarnaev is incarcerated at ADX Florence, a Supermax prison in Florence, Colorado, after being sentenced to death in 2015.

==

NO ONE Died in the Boston Bombing – Nor was ANYONE Even Hurt.

(Except, of course, the innocent “suspects” – the Tsarnaev brothers, who were killed/maimed by the police) 

This was a Total Hoax – a False Flag Operation – To Take Away Our Remaining Rights 

By Lorraine Day, M.D.

My background:  I am an Orthopedic Trauma Surgeon.  For many years I was Chief of Orthopedic Surgery at San Francisco General Hospital, the onlyTrauma Hospital in San Francisco.  For 25 years, I took care of massive injuries from gang wars, explosions, severe motor vehicle crashes, survivors of attempted suicide from jumping off the Golden Gate Bridge, etc. 

I am fully qualified to assess the supposed injuries at the total HOAX “bombing” that took place at the Boston Marathon.  And I am not the only one who is writing about this.  There are many others who also understand that it was a HOAX! 

The documentation for what I have written below is contained in the links given at the end of this article.  Please read those articles and view those videos so you will have some facts – evidence – before you make up your own mind.  

Consider these facts:

1. In the pictures taken immediately after the blast, there is NO BLOOD on the ground.  That could never be.  The bomb blast instantaneously would have spread blood from the injured victims everywhere. 

2. There were only about 10 “victims” at ground zero of the blast – and all of them are alive and do not appear to be even close to death.  Where are these other “200” people who were supposedly injured? 

3. When “blood” does eventually appear on the sidewalk at ground zero – it clearly is some kind of paint – NOT blood.  The paint is bright orangish-red, obviously for the maximum frightening effect on the populace.  REAL BLOOD is dark maroon. 

4. Notice in the initial pictures after the (smoke) bomb exploded, almost all of the “victims” are holding themselves up on one elbow, or they are sitting up.  No one is in severe pain, or really in any pain at all.  Severely injured people are not propping themselves up on one elbow.  They would have their head on the sidewalk.

5. Obviously, these crisis actors (See crisisactors.com) don’t want to put their head or the side of their face down on the dirty Boston sidewalk where everyone walks (and spits). 

6. In one video, a man is seen clapping together two towels or other items, causing the crisis actors “victims” to be covered with soot – so they’ll look more like bombing victims. 

7. One woman “victim” is seen in early photos (but after the “bombing” has taken place) with no blood at all on her white blouse.  However, later, she is taken off on a gurney with a lot of “blood” on her white blouse. 

8. There are many “handlers” in the early pictures, positioning “victims” and assisting in the set-up of the HOAX scene.  You might think that they would be concerned about being seen by the by-standers, but when a “bomb” goes off, most people run for their life, allowing the Hoaxsters and Crisis actors to set up their HOAX scenes undisturbed.

9. There are no Emergency Medical Technicians (EMTs) at the scene, no ambulances, and no fire engines (after all, a supposed “bomb” went off – it would be mandatory for the fire department to respond).  Where are they?  The people “helping” the “victims” are also Crisis actors.  No emergency medical personnel are on the scene. 

10. Certainly, wheel chairs may be available at various places along a Marathon route, and at the end of the race, but wheel chairs are never found on ambulances.  And wheelchairs are never used to transport severely injured victims.  When a victim has lost a lot of blood, whether from internal or external bleeding, he or she is always kept flat and transported on a gurney.  Otherwise the life of that victim is at severe risk.

11. The man with the supposedly blown off legs – with about sixteen inches of bone (tibia) sticking out of one leg – is taken away in a WHEELCHAIR!  That would NEVER happen!  If a person has both legs blown off, his blood loss would be so severe that if someone sat him up, he would lose consciousness (his heart could not pump enough blood to supply his brain when he was in the upright position) and he would die.  No ambulance company would ever take on that liability, nor would any bystander.  That man was a crisis actor who lost both of his legs in war some time ago while in the military. You will see in the documentation below.  There are many former military personnel, amputees from war injuries, that are now being used as crisis actors for “drills” as it was repeatedly announced over loudspeakers that this (Boston Bombing) was. 

The “gory blown-off” leg was nothing but a prosthesis (made by “central casting”) made to look like an amputation caused by an explosion.  The prosthesis, however, is a very poor replica of a real amputated limb.  I have performed many amputations of both legs and arms and I have seen many hundreds of severely injured limbs from all sorts of horrendous accidents.  None of them ever look like that one.  But apparently it is good enough to fool the population (most of whom have never seen such injuries).  Unfortunately, the average American chooses not to spend any time investigating these events and chooses to believe the mainstream media propagandists.  

The injuries and blood spatter are so badly done, they are almost comical to a trained trauma surgeon such as myself. 

Also, that man who supposedly lost both his legs in the “bombing” seemed to be in no pain, nor did he have blood all over him.  And 4 or 5 days later, when photographed in the hospital, he is giving a thumbs-up, happy-faced smile.  This is ludicrous  When a person loses even one limb, there is a “grieving” process that goes on for weeks, similar to the grieving response that would happen if a person lost a close loved one. And it’s usually months before one actually can face the situation and get on with his life. 

One more thing: in the links below, there is proof that this man who supposedly lost both of his legs in the “bombing” was wheeled through the crowd TWICE – in his wheel chair – clearly for the media’s benefit: a photo opportunity!  During one of those episodes, his fake “blown off” leg/prosthesis started to fall off and had to be put back on by one of the men in the yellow jackets, obviously an “insider” – another crisis actor! 

12. The glass from the “blown-out” windows from the “bombing” is all on the sidewalk.  If the glass had been broken from a real bomb blast – the glass would be inside the apartments or offices, not outside on the sidewalk. 

13. The “runner” who fell down when the “bomb” exploded as though he had been “blown down” by the bomb, was an actor.  There were many men much closer to the “bomb” that were not affected by its force at all. 

14. The supposed “Principal” of the Sandy Hook school who was “killed” in that false flag attack, showed up – alive and well – at the Boston Bombing. 

15. There are Craft International employees (operatives) on the scene.  One is carrying 2 bags.  The other operatives quickly leave ground zero – BEFORE the bombs explode.  Who is Craft International?  A private contractor that provides security, defense and combat weapons training to military, police, corporate and civilian clients. 

16. The U.S. and Israel desperately want to bomb Iran and need some event to polarize Americans so they’ll be willing to send their sons and daughters to die – not for freedom – but for the One World Government that is now gobbling up all the countries and resources in the world.  This particular False Flag Attack allows them to blame it on two young, innocent supposed “Muslim Terrorists” in order to incite the American people into agreeing to go to war against Iran and Syria. 

17. These 2 boys whose parents are from Chechnya had been interviewed by the FBI many times.  They had even been sent to Chechnya by the FBI to attend a clandestine meeting, the purpose of which was to undermine the government of Chechnya. 

18. The boys’ uncle, Ruslan Tsarni, had been married to Samantha, the daughter of Graham Fuller, a high level CIA agent. 

19. The American wife of the older Tsarnaev brother is the granddaughter of a Skull and Bones member – an organization that is part of the New World Order Illuminati. 

20. Both boys were arrested alive and well.  The older brother, according to an eye witness, was deliberately run over by a police car, then was shot multiple times and mutilated by the police. (See the picture of his corpse.)  Witnesses say he was unarmed at the time of his arrest. 

21. The younger brother was arrested without a struggle, but ended up almost dead, having been shot through the throat and possibly will never be able to speak again.  How convenient!  He was taken to a Jewish hospital and “cared for” by Israeli doctors before being transported to prison!

22. Many witnesses saw bomb-sniffing dogs both at the beginning and end of the race.  Why didn’t the dogs find the bombs?  Unless, of course, agents of the government contractor, Craft International, planted them.  The backpacks they (Craft employees) were wearing (all black) are the same as the ones carrying the bombs, whereas the backpacks of the Tsarnaev brothers, who were Photoshopped into the crowd pictures, were not the same as the one seen surrounding the “bomb” after it exploded. 

23.Numerous witnesses, including runners in the race, have stated that it was announced repeatedly over the loudspeaker that “This is a drill.”  Indeed it WAS a “drill” with no one hurt or injured, except of course, the Tsarnaev brothers who were set up as patsies – just like Lee Harvey Oswald in the JFK assassination.  But the government has taken this False Flag “live” – to deceive the American public into giving up their freedom for “safety.” 

Little does the blind American public realize that those who are promising “safety” in exchange for the loss of the rights of the public, are the very ones who are setting up the “terror” incidents! 

23.In 2012, the head of the Boston Emergency Services Department said, “A PLANNED Mass Casualty Event at a Marathon” is coming!  Well folks, this was it! 

24. And now, less than a month after the “Bombing,” the FBI agents who arrested – and murdered – at least one of the Tsarnaev brothers have conveniently died in a “fall from a helicopter” during a “training drill.”  Obviously, they have been silenced from telling what they know. 

Here is the link so you can check it yourself.  

http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2013/05/fbi-agents-killed-in-virginia-were-investigating-the-boston-bombing-2659348.html 

How can anyone be proud of a government that plans this kind of heinous event, including the murder and severe maiming of two young innocent men and the deliberate deceiving of the population of America – and the world – for MONEY, POWER and CONTROL! 

These young men were patsies, set up to take the fall, for nothing other than the continued attempt of Israel – and its colony, the United States of America – to take over the world!

 Boston Bombing: Government PsyOp

=

Tuesday, November 20, 2012

“9/11 REVISITED – SEEKING THE TRUTH”


 

As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on November 20, 2012

Speech by Tun Dr Mahathir bin Mohamad at the International Conference
 on at Dewan Tun Dr Ismail, PWTC, Kuala Lumpur on Monday, 19 November 2012
1. The Perdana Global Peace Foundation is doing the unthinkable. It is going to seek the truth about the destruction of the twin World Trade Centre buildings in New York on 9/11 i.e. on 11th September 2001.
2. The immediate reaction to this unprecedented aerial attack in America was that it was the work of Muslim terrorists. The Al-Qaeda is especially identified as the organisation behind this act. As a result President Bush wanted to go on a crusade against Muslims. He later withdrew that statement. But in fact his subsequent acts against Muslims reflected this mindset. He attacked two Muslim countries, Afghanistan and Iraq, killing their people and destroying these two countries, destabilising them and arresting their progress, even after knowing that the hijackers were not Afghans or Iraqis.
3. The whole Muslim world became suspect. The Muslims are distrusted, subjected to humiliating discrimination and detained without trial and tortured at will for years in camps situated outside the jurisdiction of US laws – in Guantanamo, Cuba for example and in Iraq. Others were flown to countries where torture was practiced so they could be tortured and not break us laws. Then the US actually passed a law legalising torture, a retrogressive act most unworthy of its claims as leader of modern civilisation.
4. But the US & Europe are even now paranoid that another similar attack might take place. Security measures and laws have been tightened. All of them were clearly directed against Muslims. Muslim airline passengers have been subjected to humiliating searches. Shoes have to be taken off for examination, toothpaste and hair creams and liquid cosmetics confiscated. Machines are developed to scan the whole body and at the slightest suspicion passengers were hauled off for questioning and detention.
5. The fact that Muslims have been more busy killing each other rather than Americans or Europeans has not changed the attitudes of the Europeans. Perhaps it is because they feel guilty and expect revenge for the injustices perpetrated by them that they fear Muslims, any Muslim. And more than a decade since 9/11, they are still obsessed with their own security, to the detriment of the security of other people.
6. The official explanation for the destruction of the twin towers is still about an attack by suicidal Muslim extremists. But even among Americans this explanation is beginning to wear thin and to be questioned. In fact, certain American groups have thoroughly analysed various aspects of the attack and destruction of the twin towers, the pentagon building and the reported crash in Pennsylvania. And their investigations reveal many aspects of the attack which cannot be explained by attributing them to attacks by terrorists, Muslim or non-Muslim.
7. Some of these Americans and many other prominent people have been invited by the Perdana Global Peace Foundation to give their views on 9/11. These people have no axe to grind. They are only interested in seeking the truth. The truth is important because 9/11 has triggered attacks on muslim countries and people in which hundreds of thousands have been killed and their countries devastated by the ‘shock and awe’ wars.
8. I have thought a lot about 9/11. I have seen pictures and video clips of the attacks. I have heard the narrators give their opinions regarding the attacks. But to this i would like to add my own opinion based on my observation of the Arabs at peace and at war.
9. The Arabs may have been great warriors in the past but after they fell under western rule they seem to have lost their prowess in wars. In their wars against Israel they were so inept that they have never won a single battle, even when their forces far outnumbered the Israelis. In the years immediately after the formation of the State of Israel, the combined armies of Egypt, Jordan and Syria were defeated by smaller Israeli forces. The Arabs never seem to be able to plan or strategise and certainly their execution of battle plans are just plain bad.
10. They are not a disciplined people and this lack of discipline shows everywhere. And they cannot keep anything secret. Someone would leak whatever plan they may have worked out. For money there are Arabs who are prepared to reveal the hiding places of their leaders.
11. The attacks on 9/11 involved very complex elements which needed detailed planning, precise timings and disciplined execution.
12. There has never been (and will never be) a hijacking of four large aircrafts simultaneously. Yet this was what was supposed to have happened. At apparently the same time the hijackers took command of four aircrafts while flying in different airspace in different directions.
13. We cannot know whether the hijackers carried arms but there has been no report of guns in the debris of all the four aircrafts. How they could overwhelm the whole crew and take control of four aircrafts at about the same time is a mystery.
14. Then the hijackers were supposed to make the aircrafts change course and fly to the four places. Pilots who realised they were going to die anyhow would have tried to steer away from the towers when it was obvious they were going to crash into them. It would not need much change of direction to miss the towers. But the planes hit the towers squarely, bursting into flames apparently due to the fuel they carried.
15. Maybe the hijackers were actually flying the aircrafts. But we are told they had only trained with small aircrafts. How did they know how to navigate the huge aircrafts so perfectly after changing course. And time was the essence. If the second plane was delayed, the ground control would have detected that there was something wrong with the second, third and fourth planes.
16. I can imagine trained operatives like those in the CIA or Mossad planning and executing this complex operation but i cannot imagine an Arab like Osama bin Laden planning and directing this sophisticated aerial attack from some remote place in Afghanistan. They would need an airport control tower with sophisticated instruments to do this. And they would need to be near enough to observe the flights and give instructions.
17. The planning alone would have been extremely complex. Lots of data would have to be collected a long time earlier. The pilots had to be trained for very many years before they could fly and navigate the commercial aircrafts.
18. The hijackers needed to take over the four aircrafts at about the same time while in flight. The aircrafts to be hijacked must be well selected so as not to be too far from the targets. The aircrafts had to be diverted at the right time for each to reach their targets at about the same time.
19. All these would require a lot of detailed planning from deciding which planes should be hijacked, to the number of hijackers for each plane, to the different roles of the hijackers to control the passengers and seize control of the aircrafts from the pilots, to the change in the flight plan, to the routes to be taken, to forcing the pilots to take the new routes or for the hijackers to take over the piloting of the planes etc etc.
20. Hijacking one aircraft is difficult enough. But hijacking four aircrafts and flying them so as to hit the targets at about the same time is an impossible task for amateurs. Even professionals would find it difficult to do. Yet four aircrafts crashed at about the same time.
21. I apologise to the Arabs but planning and executing of these complex operations are not something that they can do well. They are brave and they are willing to die for their beliefs. But they are not like the American Seals who planned and carried out the assassination of Osama bin Laden. Their planning included the disposal of the body of their victim. And they were “brilliant”. This is something that they were trained for years to do.
22. If the Arabs were to undertake such training it would soon become known to the CIA or Mossad and they would ensure that the whole operation be aborted.
23. But the fact remains that four planes were hijacked and they all crashed on their targets. If the hijackers could not be Arabs, then who were the “brilliant” hijackers. Clearly there is a need to know, for the event changed the world, making it insecure for everyone, and launching a clash of civilizations as predicted by Huntington.
24. I may be wrong of course but this forum will hopefully reveal the truth behind the events of 9/11. The Pearl Harbour attacks forced the us to join the second world war. I don’t think the Arabs planned to force the us to go to war against the Muslim world. But 9/11 did just what Pearl Harbour did, launch a horrific war which killed hundreds of thousands of Muslims, devastated Iraq and Afghanistan, and made Muslims the universal enemies of the whole world. Someone obviously gained from this.
25. Find the beneficiaries and I believe you will find the real terrorists.
26. This conference is about finding the truth regarding the world-shaking events of 9/11. Attempts will be made to blackout reports on the talks and discussions here. They will be made by the very protagonists of free speech and the free press. But the alternative media will frustrate them and shed light on the events.
27. The majority will probably conclude that the revelations by the speakers are preposterous. But a substantial number will believe or at least rethink their views of the events.
28. As I said earlier 9/11 had resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and afghans, as well as a few thousand us and British soldiers. It has devastated two Muslim countries and destabilised them with fratricidal wars which promise to last a very long time. It has divided the world into Muslim and non-Muslim, and sowed the seeds of suspicion and hatred between them. It has undermined the security of nations everywhere, forcing them to spend trillions of dollars on security measures. Yet the threat remains, not so much from alleged terrorists as from the powerful states and their crusade to change the world.
29. Truly 9/11 is the worst man-made disaster for the world since the end of the last world war.
30. For that reason alone, it is important that we seek the truth, because when truth is revealed than we can really prepare to protect and secure ourselves.
Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: