Russ Baker at WhoWhatWhy is challenging the accepted narrative of Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s actions in the wake of the Boston Marathon bombings (tip o’ the pixel to AlterNet).
Boston Bomber Carjacking Unravels
An exclusive WhoWhatWhy investigation has found serious factual inconsistencies in accounts provided by the only witness to the alleged confession of the Boston Marathon bombing suspects.
Why does this matter? Because this witness is the sole source for the entire publicly accepted narrative of who was behind the bombing and its aftermath—and why these events occurred.
[O]ur sense of certainty that the Tsarnaevs did this—and did it alone without America’s security apparatus knowing a thing—is actually dependent largely on the say-so of one person, one witness. While we’ve been told that authorities have definitive proof, including a video showing the brothers leaving the backpack with the bomb, we’ve never actually seen it.
Thus, the problems we have uncovered with the witness’s testimony (as represented by law enforcement) now raise questions about almost everything concerning what has been described as the largest terrorist attack on American soil since 9/11.
[To be sure graf comes next]
To be sure, Baker has a history of questioning the official version of events up to and after the Boston Marathon bombings. Plug him into the Googletron and up pops this:
That’s just Page 1. Beyond that you’ll find an assortment of Grassy Knollers talking among themselves. But that doesn’t mean they’re necessarily wrong. Baker goes to great lengths to demonstrate that the story told by the witness (“Danny”) – who says he was carjacked by the Tsarnaev brothers three days after the bombings – has resulted in wildly divergent accounts in the media.
How Did Danny Gain His Freedom?
Danny said: He escaped when Tamerlan, seated next to him, was momentarily distracted, according the Boston Globe, NBC and CBS.
Conflicting version 1: He simply got out of the car when both brothers were outside the car, having left him alone, according to WMUR.
Conflicting version 2: The Tsarnaev brothers never held Danny as a captive, according to the Associated Press and Cambridge Police Department. They simply detained him for a few minutes, then left him by the roadside, essentially confiscating his vehicle. In this scenario, he had almost no interaction with the brothers, raising questions as to whether they would have confessed to the two crimes before taking off with his car.
There’s lots more along those lines in Baker’s report (which is Part I of II).
[To be clear graf comes next]
To be clear, the hardworking staff isn’t endorsing what Baker wrote.
But it might be grist for someone who has a larger mill than we do.
Hey, Mick – I’m just saying check the piece out and see if it doesn’t make you wonder. It’s not necessarily a government plot, but there do seem to be a lot of inconsistencies out there.
Yeah. But is an inconsistencies in media reporting meaningful?
I’m thinking we’ll find that out in court, Mick.