Source: Boston bomb suspect says brother was brains behind attack

[dballance]

Source: CNN

Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev has told investigators his older brother Tamerlan was the driving force behind last week's attack and that no international terrorist groups were behind them, a U.S. government source said Monday.

Preliminary interviews with Dzhokhar Tsarnaev indicate the two brothers fit the classification of self-radicalized jihadists, the source said. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, wounded and held in a Boston hospital, said his brother wanted to defend Islam from attack, according to the source.

The government source cautioned that the interviews were preliminary, and that Tsarnaev's account needs to be checked out and followed up on by investigators.

Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/22/us/boston-attack/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

---

So, if true, he's really not an enemy combatant and neither was his brother.

On Edit: Could just possibly, maybe be an angry immigrant (older brother) who didn't integrate into US society very well, didn't make it in boxing, got his citizenship put on hold and just got angrier and angrier because of all those things. Then, at the same time he was turning to militant Islam - an extreme and not the norm for Muslims - he decided to take out his anger on the US by bombing something. The Boston Marathon happened to be convenient maybe. Just theorizing.

[Amonester]

1. So he 'joined' his radical bro. in his attack against (who?)

How does joining an enemy combatant and playing an active role in his combat not making him an enemy combatant?

[dballance]

3. By the Technical, Legal Definition Neither of them are Enemy Combatants

From dictionary.com an enemy combatant is: any member of the armed forces of a state with which another state is at war; also, any person in an armed conflict, including terrorism, who could be properly detained under the laws and customs of war

If they were not associated with any of the the foreign military groups in Iraq or Afghanistan as this article indicates then they're not enemy combatants because they're not part of any armed forces. They're just plain old criminals. Even one of the former FBI directors pointed out they're more like the Columbine guys than Al Qaeda.

[Xipe Totec]

9. also, any person in an armed conflict, including terrorism,

who could be properly detained under the laws and customs of war.

[DonViejo]

6. The older brother cannot be charged with anything, he's dead...

therefore he cannot be considered an enemy combatant. And, contrary to Graham and Lindsay's caterwauling, neither can the little brother.

[Wash. state Desk Jet]

10. Good point

It seems like some people want it summed up fast-urban terrorism that's it,just a couple of crazy narcissistic sociopaths.

Does it occur that there is global interest in the case?
It said they seem to fit the type- self proclaimed defenders of Islam, but it also said that it all has to be checked out.

Which further means at current there is no way to tell if what he seemed to communicate in front of a judge is true.

Franky I wouldn't believe a word he says even if he were capable of speaking.

[karynnj]

39. There is no way the US will NOT investigate their contacts from here to Sunday!

No one is going to take the words of the younger brother as complete truth. Everything will be checked out. I would assume that any archived data the NSA has - phone or internet - will be examined for who these guys spoke to AND who the people they spoke to spoke to.

The FBI quickly put out that they investigated the older brother after the US was warned about him by Russia. Though obviously, things were missed or their investigated ended too soon, but it does show two things. 1) There was cooperative exchange of information from Russia. This is a good thing that has not previously been demonstrated. and 2) The State Department did correctly pass the information to the FBI. It is interesting that had the FBI done a more thorough job - or just been luckier - this could have been a story most of us never would have heard of - of a disgruntled pair of immigrant brothers being arrested for making home made weapons. (Think of the series of similar stories - that have always been intriguing, but often not obvious that they were real threats.)

The last good thing is that the FBI admitted they did investigate. This leaves them open to criticism, but it does show that we are getting at least some of the good and bad of the government work on preventing terrorism. If it really was two guys in a garage, it may be that it was as a tough to see ahead of time as the attack on Sandy Hook was.

[Wash. state Desk Jet]

41. It does leave them open to criticism

FBI cases also have time allotments which has much to do with the budget-human resources.

I don't think he ever fell off the radar but they didn't find anything ,so they cleared him.


Down investigative lines look at the Gilberto Valle cannibal cop case and where that investigation is going to get an idea of how they are going to get into them through computer forensics and followup on the case.

This thing will be ongoing for a long time to come.

Gilberto Valle's mother's public reaction to the outcome of the trial is about like those two brothers mother- Her little angle.

i know the comparison is off topic but reading into where the case is going down investigative lines (Valle)- you can clearly see where it branched out.

One thing is for certain, there will be no lack of resources down investigative lines .

Why did the FBI seemingly drop the ball-? budget & bureaucracy.

[karynnj]

42. Interesting

By the way, I was not blaming the FBI. It very likely was that there was nothing obvious at the point they investigated. If they check up on someone before they have done anything - that anyone knows of , they will have to clear them. What is too bad is that apparently once he was cleared, he was completely out of the system - and there was no red flag when he went to Russia. (I wonder if they could at least change the rules so if a foreign country warned about him, his name would be flagged if he was flying to that country.)

[Wash. state Desk Jet]

45. I didn't read into it thinking you were assigning blame,

I simply wanted to point out that there is a thing called time allotments where it is about FBI investigative procedure. Since 9/11/2001 much of the fbi's case load was passed down to the states and localities.And by the way much or most of those crimes go un investigated. The states and localities say there is not enough resources to handle the case loads. Examples, bank fraud ,identity theft ,credit card fraud,mail fraud- ,so ,much of the resources are utilized over seas .

Again I don't think he completely fell out of the system- (fell off the radar), they just didn't have anything or enough of anything to make a case. The investigation was brought to a close but the case remains. In such a case if something pops up later in time,they reopen the case. it's a waiting game.

What is interesting is we let him go and they let him in.
What they are investigating now is where he went when he was there and what contacts did he make.

I imagine there is a lot of computer forensics involved on the Russian end of the investigation.
We must trust there is joint cooperation.

Time will tell.

[karynnj]

48. Thanks - your explanation is worth my misunderstanding your comment - just to read

this explanation.

[Ruby the Liberal]

2. Thats a lot of words for a man conditionally un-sedated

and intubated.

Not buying it, but thanks for the update!

[DonViejo]

8. Based on the transcript of today's court hearing...

the best the guy can do is nod his head affirmatively and mumble something the Judge took to be "no." He could have gone through interrogation the same way.

[Ruby the Liberal]

12. Yup - Just read that transcript earlier.

Something smells about this whole thing. Meh.

[Tx4obama]

26. When investigators were asking questions he WROTE out the answers for them

Here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/22/boston-suspect-denies-terrorist-groups_n_3135523.html

[Spitfire of ATJ]

4. And once again,..John McCain throws a bowl of oatmeal against the wall.

[onehandle]

5. Not a terror cell. A Columbine type duo. 300+ bullets fired at officers.

This will fall back on gun safety, gun nuts.

[Ruby the Liberal]

14. With what funding over the YEARS of not working?

[DLnyc]

28. could have been dealing drugs?

[Fumesucker]

30. I know people who show no income on the books at all and yet work regularly

It's really not that uncommon for people to survive without what most of us would consider a "normal" job, there's millions of undocumented immigrants who do it every day in this country.

[Ruby the Liberal]

31. And these folks are driving mercedes

and paying for professional gym training - not to mention having the means to take off and fly half way across the world for half a year?

Follow the money.

[Fumesucker]

35. Oh I agree, I think it should be looked into

There may well be something there, so much in life depends on who you know.

And I think it's interesting that the subject doesn't seem to be one the media is focusing on.

[brett_jv]

44. I have a buddy that drives a brand new Acura, a $2000/mo apartment

Flies wherever he wants whenever, owns numerous $3000 suits, etc ... he's 46, and he's probably made a grand total of MAYBE $10000 in his life from actual work, and hasn't had a 'job' since he was like 25 y.o.

How is this POSSIBLE, you ask?

His parents are rich.

[bemildred]

7. Blowback then. nt

[dballance]

11. Blowback from what? If they're really not associated w/ any group what's the blowback? /nt

[bemildred]

13. "Blowback is unintended consequences of a covert operation ... suffered by the civil population"

So that would be the war on terror then, in all of its many facets, seen as a war on Islam, like the kid apparently said?

Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowback_%28intelligence%29

[dballance]

15. I Know the Definition of Blowback. But the Kid Didn't Indicate the Bombings Were a Response...

The kid didn't indicate the Boston Bombings were done in response to any US actions.

From the article at CNN: "Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, wounded and held in a Boston hospital, has said his brother -- who was killed early Friday -- wanted to defend Islam from attack, according to the source."

He didn't say anything about taking revenge for attacks on Islam; which would indicate blowback. You're putting words in his mouth and making huge leaps about their intentions.

When someone from Pakistan, Afghanistan, or Iraq, whose innocent family has been blown up by US drones, comes to the US and blows things up here - that will be blowback.

[bemildred]

16. You have my argument, which you asked for, I didn't expect you would agree.

Edit: the term used was "defend Islam", not revenge as you would like. And the term "unintended" is very important too, it is not the expected response in kind one is talking of in "blowback", it is the off-the-wall unexpected stuff like some guys flying planes into the WTC, that's blowback.

[dballance]

17. Of Course I Don't Agree. You're Wrong. Wrong on the Def. of Blowback, Wrong on Your Use of It.

You Really Shouldn't Use Wikipedia for Definitions. It's Not an Objective Source.

From Merriam-Websters

blowback: an unforeseen and unwanted effect, result, or set of repercussions

It's not tied to "covert" operations nor limited to being visited upon a civilian population.

Of course I don't agree with you because you're wrong. You're wrong on your definition of blowback and you're wrong to suggest, at this point given what we know, that the attacks were blowback because the actual perpetrator hasn't indicated they meet even your definition of blowback. He hasn't indicated the bombings were a done in response to any US covert or overt actions.

[bemildred]

18. Have a nice day. nt

[sofa king]

22. You're all wrong! I have the definition here.

As much as it amuses me to watch you fight Wikipedia with the Wikipedia of dictionaries, I feel compelled to correct you both.

According to Spy Book: The Encyclopedia of Espionage, p.76, the definition of blowback is this tortured paragraph:

Deception planted abroad by an intelligence agency to mislead people in other countries, then returning to the originating nation, where it misleads that people or even the government itself. When William Colby, the US Director of Central Intelligence, testified before the Church Committee in 1977, he admitted that the CIA disseminated information that blew back to the United States and was picked up by the media as true.

The point of my posting that definition is that it is totally obsolete, being completely replaced by the snidely-spoken dismissal, "WMDs."

The definition of "blowback" changes and has changed depending upon whom is using the term. The above definition is an analyst's term. Bemildred's definition is the operations term.

Your definition comes from a dictionary that doesn't have spycraft definitions for "honey trap," "dead drop," "disappeared," or "swallow." So you've pretty much brought a knife to a gunfight.

(Edit: and bemildred needs neither knives nor guns!)

[bemildred]

23. LOL.

That's the trouble with slang terms, not at all precise, or stable. I do remember Mr. Colby's version, ran into it somewhere before.

Come on, I'm a pussycat.

[sofa king]

24. I seen your claws!

[bemildred]

25. Yeah, yeah, King of the Innertubes, like my ego needs encouragement.

[bemildred]

40. Orwell does America

Welcome to the sweet abyss of an Orwellian vortex. 2013 increasingly looks like 1984.

In two previous articles, for RT RT and for Asia Times Online I have looked into the superimposed levels of blowback implied by the Boston bombing.

With still so many unanswered questions regarding what took place on the ground in Boston after the bombing, it's time to look at an extra, possible Top Ten list of lingering absurdities. And this without sidestepping other unanswered crucial questions, such as why a bomb drill - organized by Craft - was going on during the marathon at which the bombing took place; and why it was vehemently denied that a bomb drill was going on. For this current set of questions, I'm grateful for the help of Asia Times Online's Bostonian readers.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/World/WOR-01-230413.html

[olddad56]

19. 'His brother wanted to defend Islam for attack". Over here in Boston. I find that interesting...

Sort of like the US Military defending our freedom by illegally invading Iraq and Afghanistan. With all of the US success defending our country from half way around the world, I hope this tactic doesn't catch on.

[CJCRANE]

32. I'd like to know more about the youtube videos he watched.

I wonder if there's some kind of sect or cult that's pushing this stuff?

It doesn't seem to be very coherent.

[Tx4obama]

20. NBC: Tsarnaev told authorities in writing he and his brother discovered instructions for bomb...

-snip-

NBC also reported that Tsarnaev told authorities in writing that he and his brother discovered instructions for bomb-making on the Internet.

-snip-

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/22/boston-suspect-denies-terrorist-groups_n_3135523.html

[jakeXT]

29. I'm so glad CISPA is nearly through / sarcasm. /nt

[Nye Bevan]

21. Yeah, pretty convenient given that his brother is dead.

"But it was his idea!"

Enjoy that Supermax cell for the rest of your life, scumbag.

[brett_jv]

46. Well, granted it's 'obvious' excuse ...

But just because it's obvious doesn't make it by definition 'false'.

From all I've read about both these dudes in the last week, I very quickly formed the opinion that it's very likely the older brother was the driving force/instigator of the plot.

From top to bottom, all the facts we know about them so far point to this most likely being the case. When you add on the fact of just simple human nature, wherein boys that are much younger than their older brothers tend to look up their 'big bro' and want their 'approval', often throughout their lives, let alone when they're only 19 years old ... it becomes quite easy to believe.

I'm in no excusing this scumbag, nor do I think it's going to prove 'relevant' to his eventual sentencing, but I ZERO trouble believing this particular story. Research their backstory and things people who know them have said about them, even just a little bit, and you'll discover why I suspect this is true.

[Rowdyboy]

27. None of it matters in any way. His life is over and has been since the pictures were broadcast.

He'll never see another moment of freedom. Whether that gives you satisfaction or enrages you doesn't really matter. All that matters is that he will never know another moment of real freedom. What he is positively responsible for is enough to guarantee his lifetime incarceration.

And so it goes.

[MelungeonWoman]

33. Well sure, it was all his brothers fault...

I'm sure the fact that his "firework" loving friend Junes shares a surname with
Dokku Umarov, the leader of the Islamic Caucasus Emirate, al Qaeda's affiliate in the Caucasus, is a TOTAL COINCIDENCE.

[Sunlei]

38. lets please not go 'name hating' now, though fireworks access may be an issue.

[brett_jv]

47. Wow, that sounds like something pulled straight from some paranoid rant on infowars ...

Newsflash: it could easily be a total coincidence.

[yellowcanine]

34. Why is this information coming out now? Seems a little premature.

I would think investigators would want to keep this information close to the vest at least until they have finished questioning the suspect. And some information should not come out until the trial. Pretrial publicity in high profile cases has a way of tainting the jury pool and can make it more difficult to have a fair trial.

[geek tragedy]

36. "brains behind attack", well I guess in the land of the blind . . .

[Sunlei]

37. not an enemy combatant, just followed his bitter brother to his doom.

[XemaSab]

43. He's just telling us what he thinks we want to hear