Category Archives: New World Order

Coyote Ugly

Movie definition:
A person that is so ugly, that when waking up next to that person with one’s arm underneath them, one would rather chew one’s own arm off than risk waking them by pulling one’s arm out.

hillary-clinton-winking-AP-640x480

So (spiritually) ugly, she has to sneak up on an exorcist.

Think Obama is the worst possible president? Really?

This woman and her husband of convenience have already received massive amounts of bribe money from China’s bellicose military leaders and a variety of oil-rich, Christian-hating muslims, including the muslim brotherhood. That money is fueling her campaign and making she and Bill extremely wealthy.

Q. So what are Hillary and Bill selling that our enemies are buying at such high rates?

A. You, me and everyone we hold dear.

WE… have been sold.


Thank you Vic Bailey.
Let’s bring on the ugly jokes!

Country singer Tim McGraw sells out. Headlines Sandy Hook gun control concert

I’m not a fan of country music, but even I have heard of Tim McGraw, husband of another country music megastar Faith Hill.

AWR Hawkins reports for Breitbart that on July 17, 2015, Tim McGraw will headline a concert fundraiser in Connecticut for a gun control group called Sandy Hook Promise.

McGraw’s “A Concert For Sandy Hook Promise” will also feature country singers Billy Currington and Chase Bryant.

Tim McGrawTim McGraw in 2003. McGraw had never served in the U.S. military, so why is he in this faux military garb?

Sandy Hook Promise is a vehicle through which various alleged family members of alleged Sandy Hook victims have joined to push gun control until it passes. One of the group’s members is Newtown father Mark Bearden, who has pledged to “dedicate the rest of his life” to pursuing gun control.

McGraw is quoted by NBC Connecticut as saying:

Out of this tragedy a group was formed that made a promise to honor the lives lost and turn it into a moment of transformation. Sandy Hook Promise teaches that we can do something to protect our children from gun violence. I want to be a part of that promise – as a father and as a friend.

According to Wikipedia, McGraw is a Democrat and has stated that he would like to run for public office in the future, possibly for Senate or Governor of Tennessee, his home state. In the same interview, he praised Bill Clinton and said that he had supported Barack Obama for president in 2008.

Breitbart reporter AWR Hawkins points out that “It should be noted that there was 100 percent gun control at Sandy Hook Elementary on December 14, 2012. No guns were allowed, period. You can’t have more gun than that. Moreover, there were laws against stealing guns and possessing stolen guns as well. But none of these laws stopped or even dissuaded Adam Lanza.”

AWR Hawkins should also know that all of that is quite beside the point because no one died at that school on Dec. 14, 2012, perhaps not even Adam Lanza himself, who supposedly shot himself in the head minutes before police and first responders arrived at the school that morning. If you doubt that, ask the State of Connecticut why the government continues to refuse to release Lanza’s and his 21 victims’ death certificates — documents that are deemed public record, i.e., accessible to the public, except in the case of Lanza and his alleged victims.

For all the other many, many reasons why many sane people, including Professors James Tracy and Jim Fetzer, believe the Sandy Hook massacre is a gigantic, elaborate false-flag fraud in the interest of gun control, go to our “Sandy Hook Massacre” page.

I dare you.

~Éowyn

What’s with Time magazine giving élites sinister devil’s horns?

Time magazine has a penchant to give élites devil’s horns on its cover.

The latest to receive that treatment is Hillary Clinton, on the cover of Time‘s March 13, 2015 issue:

Time's Hillary cover

The cover caught the attention of many media outlets, including Drudge Report, Fox News, National Review, and Politico.

But Time was quick to deny that the horns were intentional, and responded with a tongue-in-cheek article on its website titled “34 TIME Magazine Covers That Appeared to Give People Horns.”

Here are some examples of Time‘s other élites sprouting horns, including even Jesus. The elites can be grouped into 3 groups:

  1. Political leaders — presidents, other heads of state, and Bill Gates.
  2. Entertainment élites, including actors Russell Crowe, Angelina Jolie, Kate Winslet, Jodie Foster, Jay Leno, and Darth Vader.
  3. Religious leaders — all Christians, including the three most recent popes of the Catholic Church (Francis, Benedict, John Paul II), Billy Graham (whose horns are especially striking), and even Jesus Christ.

time-cover-bill-clinton-devil-hornsTime7Time9Time8060925_DomCNNL1R1.apnTime5Time10Time3Time4time-cover-bill-gates-devil-hornsTime2Time1time-cover-graham-devil-hornstime-cover-jesus-devil-horns

The magazine coyly insists:

Given the shape of the letter “m” in the magazine’s name and its location on the cover, many other subjects in the past have also appeared to sprout extra features (in fact this happened to Hillary Clinton at least once before. Same goes for Bill Clinton. George W. Bush too). Check out everyone from Margaret Thatcher to Pope Francis to Jesus to Darth Vader who have received the rough end of TIME’s “horns.” Any resemblance to cats, bats or devil horns is entirely coincidental.

Do you buy Time‘s excuse?

I don’t! For surely the magazine’s graphic artists could have positioned the élites’ heads underneath the letters T I M E, or have the heads to the side of the letters so that the two horns of the letter M aren’t right on top of their heads.

Time is also being disingenuous when they say the horns may “resemble” cat ears, bat ears, or devil horns, for the magazine itself labels the pictures of the élites as “devil horns.”

Verify this for yourself by going here and saving the pictures to your hard-drive. You’ll discover that every one of the 34 covers, except the first one of Hillary Clinton, is labeled “devil horns,” e.g., “time-cover-pope-francis-devil-horns.” This gives the lie to Time‘s disclaimer that “Any resemblance to . . . devil horns is entirely coincidental.” On the contrary, any resemblance to devil horns is precisely intentional and deliberate.

The Hillary cover of March 13, 2015 alone is not labeled “devil horns.” Instead, the pic is labeled “hillary-final.”

So what exactly is Time trying to tell us? What do you think?

~Éowyn

From Chains to Glory

The Rescue

chains_square_view

This is a scene of spiritual violence, and an act of angelic valor in the rescue of a family who has committed their lives to Jesus Christ. It is a look into the reality of the spiritual darkness that has taken over our society.

chains_pyramid_view

In the distance we see hordes of people chained and led around by demonic principalities and powers, in a bleak landscape of stepped pyramids (emblems of human power and achievement) under a rusting iron sky with a black sun.

chains_explosion_viewIn the foreground we see a demon falling backward toward us from the explosive impact of a flaming sword cutting though the chain he was using to hold the family captive.

The angel wielding the sword is standing on the chest of another demon he has subdued.

Another angel, with his back turned toward us, is holding off a demonic prince on horseback (admittedly a little bit of Tolkien influence here).

chains_angel-2_view

Just beyond that we see a family rushing into the waiting arms of the Lord Jesus Christ. Surrounding them is beautiful white light indicating that they are escaping the kingdom of darkness and entering into the liberty of the children of God, a world filled with light and color and beauty.

chains_heaven_view

When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said,
“I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”
– John 8:12


TSA agents collude to grope men’s genitals at Denver International Airport

TSA groping

A male Transportation Security Administration (TSA) screener at Denver International Airport (DIA) colluded with a female agent so as to grope the genitals of attractive male passengers.

Brian Maass reports for CBS4 Denver, April 13, 2015, that according to law enforcement reports, a male TSA screener would alert his female accomplice whenever a male he finds attractive comes to be screened. The female agent would falsely instruct the scanning computer that the person being screened is a female. The scanning machine, “thinking” the individual is a female, would issue an alert that there’s an anomaly in the genital area. That in turn leads to the male TSA agent to conduct a pat-down of the male passenger’s genitalia.

CBS4 claims that happened “roughly a dozen times.”

Although the TSA learned of the accusation on Nov. 18, 2014 via an anonymous tip from one of the agency’s own employees, it would be nearly three months before anything was done.

On Feb. 9, 2015, TSA security supervisor Chris Higgins watched the screening area, observing the employees. The law enforcement report says that at about 0925, Higgins observed the male TSA screener appear to give a signal to the female screener who was responsible for the touchscreen system that controls whether or not the scanning machine alerts to gender- specific anomalies. Higgins then watched a male passenger enter the scanner at DIA and the female TSA agent pressing the screening button for a female. The scanner alerted to an anomaly. Higgins then saw the male TSA screener conduct a pat down of the passenger’s front groin and buttocks area with the palm of his hands, which is contradictory to TSA searching policy.

CBS4 continues:

Higgins later interviewed the female TSA agent who was an accomplice in the groping conspiracy. She “admitted that she has done this for (the male TSA officer) at least 10 other times. She knew that doing so would allow (the male TSA officer) to perform a pat down on a male passenger that (the male TSA screener) found attractive,” reported Higgins.

Note to all those who sneer at and mock “conspiracy theories”: Here’s a real case of conspiracy!

The TSA said the male passenger whom Higgins had witnessed being fondled was flying on Southwest Airlines and the agency has a videotape of the incident. CBS4 has requested the tape but it was not immediately released. TSA says it could not identify the male passenger who was groped, which I call B.S.

A spokesperson for TSA released a brief written statement to CBS4 saying,

“These alleged acts are egregious and intolerable. TSA has removed the two officers from the agency. All allegations of misconduct are thoroughly investigated by the agency. And when substantiated, employees are held accountable.”

The agency has not released the names of the two fired employees and refused a CBS4 request for an interview.

Earlier this month a prosecutor from the Denver District Attorney’s Office was asked to review the case but she declined to press charges because there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction and no victim had been identified.

It’s not the first time TSA screeners at DIA have been accused of inappropriate touching of passengers. Jamelyn Steenhoek filed a complaint against TSA screeners at the airport saying the frisking she received in December 2013 amounted to a sexual assault when a female TSA agent searched her at an airport checkpoint after an alarm went off.

Steenhoek said, “There are just areas of my body I’m not comfortable being touched in. On the outside of my pants she cupped my crotch.” She said “the part of the search that bothered most was the breast search. You could tell it shouldn’t take that much groping. I felt uncomfortable, I felt violated.”

However, the Denver District Attorney’s Office announced in 2014 it would not be filing criminal charges in the Steenhoek case.

What happened at DIA is not the first case of TSA agents groping passengers’ genitalia. Infowars reported in September 2012 that following a FOIA request in 2010, the non-profit website Governmentattic.org finally released the files after a two year battle with the TSA to make them public.

The letters confirm that the TSA’s new security procedures for “advanced pat downs” include touching, fingering and groping the vaginas and even the labia of female passengers, and the penises and testicles of men.

Denver International Airport is also where, in 2010, a gigantic, 7-ton, 26-foot-tall concrete statue of Anubis was installed. Anubis, the ancient Egyptian god of the dead and of the afterlife.

The airport is also known for its many occultish symbols, including an apocalyptic horse with glowing red eyes welcoming visitors, nightmarish murals of people wearing gas masks, strange words and symbols embedded in the floor, gargoyles sitting in suitcases, and runways shaped like a Nazi swastika.

This is how Vigilant Citizen describes DIA:

…there are so many irregularities surrounding the DIA, that a voluminous book could be written on the subject.  The facilities and the art displayed lead many observers to believe that the DIA is much more than an airport: it is literally a New-Age cathedral, full of occult symbolism and references to secret societies. The art at the DIA is NOT an aggregation of odd choices made by people with poor taste, like many people think. It is a cohesive collection of symbolic pieces that reflect the philosphy, the beliefs and the goals of the global elite. The DIA is the largest airport in America and it has cost over 4.8 billion dollars. Everything regarding this airport has been meticulously planned and everything is there for a reason.

~Éowyn

Secret Republicans in California’s Silicon Valley and Hollywood

The two-party system is embedded in the institutional structural DNA of the United States. That’s why historically, third parties have built-in disadvantages and thus fare poorly in elections. Some of us still remember both the allure as well as the ultimate defeat of Ross Perot.

It is bad enough that at the élite leadership level, often there’s precious little difference between the Democratic and Republican parties, despite the fact that a majority of Americans (62% in October 2010) identify themselves as “conservatives.” (Note: Conservative is not synonymous with Republican.) But in some states, California being a notable example, government has become the monopoly of the Democratic party, with all the attendant corruption and unaccountability endemic to single-party states. (See, for example, DCG’s “Shocker, not: Audit finds California departments break law, game personnel system for money“.)

Blacklist

Significant industries and sectors of America are also effective one-party states. Below is Rebecca Nelson’s article in the National Journal, April 8, 2015, on two such sectors that are dominant in forming and molding public opinion and popular culture — Silicon Valley and Hollywood.

Deep in Silicon Valley, where the free market reigns and the exchange of ideas is celebrated, a subset of tech workers are hiding their true selves. Working as programmers and software engineers, they don’t want the stigma that comes with revealing who they really are.

They’re the tech company employees, startup founders, and CEOs who vote for and donate to Republican candidates, bucking the Bay Area’s liberal supremacy. Fearing the repercussions of associating with a much-maligned minority, they keep their political views fiercely hidden.

“It’s a liberal echo chamber,” Garrett Johnson, a co-founder of Lincoln Labs, which was started in 2013 to connect the right-of-center outsiders in Silicon Valley, told National Journal. “People have been convinced that Silicon Valley is reflexively liberal or progressive. And so their response is to conform.”

Silicon Valley has long been a bastion of liberalism. Since George H.W. Bush won Napa County in 1988, Republican presidential nominees have lost every county in the Bay Area. In 2012, President Obama won 84 percent of the vote in San Francisco to Mitt Romney’s 13 percent and raised more for his reelection campaign from Bay Area donors than from those in New York or Hollywood. Political donations specifically from tech workers follow that trend: Google employees collectively gave $720,000 to Obama in 2012, versus $25,000 for Romney. Crowdpac, a nonpartisan political analytics firm, found that between 1979 and 2012, tech companies have overwhelmingly favored liberal candidates.

Rather than ruffle feathers—or worse—Republicans who work there often just keep quiet. Rich Tafel, who coaches tech companies in politics and policy, understands the dynamic. The founder of the gay group Log Cabin Republicans, he’s had many Republicans in Silicon Valley confide to him their true political views.

“You just learn how to operate, if you will, in the closet as a Republican,” Tafel told National Journal. “You keep your viewpoints to yourself.”

One startup CEO who has worked in Silicon Valley for more than a decade says that while it’s popular to talk politics in the workplace, the underlying assumption is that everyone has similar views.

The CEO, who generally votes Republican and donates to GOP candidates—he spoke on background to conceal his right-leaning views—said that in 2012, “you wouldn’t want to say you’re voting for Romney in the election.” At the same time, openly expressing one’s support for Obama was “incredibly common.”

His opposition to raising the minimum wage is just one area where he diverges with most of his colleagues…. But he would never reveal his more conservative outlook on the matter…. “They can’t fathom that somebody disagrees with them,” he said. “And I disagree with them. So I’m not going to open up that box.”

Closeted Republicans aren’t just a phenomenon in the tech industry. In Hollywood, where acclaimed movie stars and directors throw lavish fundraisers for Democrats and unabashedly support liberal causes, Republicans are a rare breed. Friends of Abe, a GOP support group of sorts, caters to A-list conservatives in the entertainment industry. Only a handful of its members have made their affiliation known, and its roster is kept secret out of fears of a blacklisting reminiscent of the McCarthy era.

For some right-leaning techies, the GOP brand itself is a liability. The startup CEO stressed that there are “a number of ideas that conservatives have that I totally disagree with,” such as opposition to same-sex marriage, and he abhors the thought of being lumped in with Republicans who deny climate change or evolution.

“Republicans are regarded as assholes,” he said. “And I wouldn’t want to be associated with assholes.”

Another Republican who founded a small San Francisco-based startup told National Journal that he’s worried potential partners and investors would be turned off by his libertarian views. Recently, it seems like all of his peers in Silicon Valley have been outspoken about their opposition to the thwarted religious liberty law in Indiana, he said. He thinks business owners should be allowed to decide whom they serve, and if they discriminate against gays, people can choose not to patronize their business. He won’t discuss that view, though, or debate his left-leaning colleagues on Facebook or Twitter.

“If I were to speak out about something like that, maybe one of these companies wants to buy my company one day and the CEO is like, ‘Oh, I remember this guy saying all this stuff about this thing that I really disagree with.’ And that obviously could have negative effects,” he said. “Getting your point across isn’t worth it.”

The consequences for being outed for conservative views can be dire. In a highly public controversy last year, newly-hired Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich stepped down after critics attacked his 2008 donation to support Proposition 8, the anti-same-sex marriage law in California. Eich, who declined to comment for this story, faced an internal uprising from within the Mozilla community, as well as boycotts from other tech companies, and quit after just two weeks on the job.

Though Eich’s was an extreme case, some Republicans in Silicon Valley fear that if they go public, they’ll face subtler, less direct repercussions. The CEO who spoke on background keeps his conservative-leaning views to himself, he said, because he doesn’t want to risk people not liking him, which could hurt his job in imperceptible ways. As a leader, he needs to be able to inspire people to join and thrive in his company. If he’s “contrarian,” he said, he can’t build the necessary camaraderie to succeed.

Matthew Del Carlo, the former president of the San Francisco Young Republicans and the COO of the California Young Republican Federation, said that transparent Republicans can have a much harder time finding work in the Bay Area. “I’ve had people tell me, ‘If I found out that this person’s a Republican, their resume’s off the list.‘”

Prominent Republicans do openly work in Silicon Valley, and not all of them feel stigmatized for their political views. Billionaire Paypal founder Peter Thiel is a high-profile GOP supporter who has made considerable donations to presidential contender Ted Cruz’s 2012 Senate run and former congressman Ron Paul’s 2012 presidential super PAC. And Sarah Pompei, who handled Romney’s regional press in 2012 and now serves as Hewlett-Packard’s director of corporate communications, told National Journal she’s never felt denigrated for her conservative views.

Both Pompei and Thiel, who declined to comment for this story, prove success in the tech industry is possible for Republicans who are open about their political leanings. But they wield more power and cachet than the average start-up employee.

“There’s fearless people out there that don’t care, but those tend to be people that are in a better position financially. They’re secure in their job,” Del Carlo said. Those with more to lose, he said, often find it easier to keep quiet.

Still, Thiel’s attention-getting fundraising for GOP candidates and libertarian causes, along with other high-profile Republicans in the tech sector, show that the climate in Silicon Valley is—albeit incrementally—becoming more politically inclusive. Lincoln Labs, the group dedicated to connecting right-of-center techies in the Bay Area, has been a big part of that effort. Earlier this year, its annual conference, Reboot, brought libertarians and conservatives from Silicon Valley to Washington to hear Sens. Ted Cruz and Rand Paul speak on deregulation, net neutrality, and other tech-industry priorities.

Throughout the year, the organization holds meetups and hackathons to build a “sense of community, so that people don’t feel like they are isolated,” Johnson said. He and Lincoln Labs’ other co-founders, Aaron Ginn and Chris Abrams, want to empower a true exchange of ideas within the tech community, without ostracizing any one view.

Silicon Valley purports to be a place where the best ideas win,” Johnson said. “If we are going to encourage diversity, let’s not just stop with gender and ethnicity. How about ideological perspective?

Conservatives and libertarians in Silicon Valley like Johnson are pioneering a new kind of Republican. With a distinctly libertarian flavor, they align with the party on the principles of liberty and limited government, but don’t necessarily lean right on—or care much about—social issues.

The entrepreneurs and techies of the Bay Area, said Tafel, are “very aligned to what could be a Republican party.” They just need to come out.

See also:

~Éowyn

Boston Bombing: 2 reasons to doubt jury’s guilty verdict

Yesterday, April 8, 2015, in a U.S. district court in Boston, after only 12 hours of deliberation, the jury convicted 21-year-old Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on all 30 counts of the Boston Marathon bombings on April 15, 2013. 17 of the 30 counts carry the death penalty. The same jury will now decide whether to sentence Tsarnaev to death or give him life in prison without possibility of parole.

Tamerlan & Dzhokhar TsarnaevTamerlan (l) and Dzhokhar (r) Tsarnaev

Incredibly, Tsarnaev’s defense team didn’t say he was innocent. Instead, the defense admitted he had carried out the bombings, but blamed Dzhokhar’s older brother, 26-year-old Tamerlan, for having “masterminded” the bombings. Tamerlan Tsarnaev didn’t make it to trial because, we are told, he was gunned down in the evening of April 18, 2015, in a shoot-out with police in Watertown, a suburb of Boston, then run over by his younger brother in a stolen SUV.

I wrote “we are told” because there’s this video showing what appears to be a naked, unwounded and very much alive Tamerlan being handcuffed and escorted into a Boston Police Department vehicle. According to 21stCenturyWireTV that uploaded the video to YouTube on April 20, 2013, the video had appeared on Brazilian TV earlier that day (April 20).

Please make a note of the image of “Tamerlan” with a well-trimmed beard at the 0:17 mark. Here’s a screenshot I took.

Tamerlane Tsarnaev being arrested on 4-18-2013

There are at least two reasons for us to be skeptical of the culpability of Dzhokhar and his older brother Tamerlan.

Reason #1: FBI video showing tsarnaev setting down a backpack doesn’t exist

Remember this much-publicized image of the Tsarnaev brothers at the marathon?

The image is from an FBI video, and was widely circulated by the media. Note that the Tsarnaevs were not actually depicted as depositing their backpacks that presumably contained the bombs. But just the image of the two was enough to convince us they had been present at the marathon.

The only problem is the FBI video doesn’t exist.

On April 18, 2013, Richard DesLauriers, Special Agent in charge of the Boston Division of the FBI, gave a press conference in which he asked for the public’s help to identify two suspects (who later were identified as Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev) for the bombings. DesLauriers said:

After a very detailed analysis of photo, video, and other evidence, we are releasing photos of the two suspects. They are identified as Suspect 1 and Suspect 2. They appear to be associated.

Suspect 1 is wearing a black hat. Suspect 2 is wearing a white hat. [Jurors at Dzhokhar’s trial were told he was the one wearing the white hat.]

Suspect 2 set down a back pack at the site of the second explosion just in front of the Forum Restaurant….

As you can see from one of the images, Suspects 1 and 2 appear to be walking together through the marathon crowd on Boylston Street in the direction of the finish line….

Further, on FBI.gov, we have videos of the suspects. The photos and videos are posted for the public and media to use, review and publicize.

Here’s the video released at the press conference:

Note that although Special Agent DesLauriers clearly said at the press conference that “Suspect 2 set down a back pack at the site of the second explosion,” the actual image of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev setting down his back pack was never released to the public, nor does the surveillance video above depict Tsarnaev setting down the back pack.

Why is that?

New York Daily News reports that in a pre-trial hearing on March 2, 2015, Dzhokhar’s defense attorney David Bruck made a “stunning assertion” that a video billed by the FBI as a caught-in-the-act piece of evidence “does not exist.” From the Daily News:

The feds claimed the video, which was never made public, showed Dzhokhar Tsarnaev dropping a backpack concealing a homemade bomb next to a 6-year-old boy who was killed.

At the time, FBI officials only released still photos of Tsarnaev mingling with finish-line revelers near where little Martin Richard was standing. Other photos made public showed both Tsarnaev brothers walking through the crowd before the explosions carrying backpacks.

So how is it that so many people believe they’ve seen a video that doesn’t exist — a video showing the Tsarnaev brothers dropping a backpack at the marathon? Indeed, on April 21, 2013, I had asked about precisely that video in my post “Where is the video showing the Tsarnaev brothers placing the bombs?

WhoWhatWhy points out that what we’d seen is merely a TV re-enactment in a National Geographic docu-drama entitled, “Inside the Hunt for the Boston Bombers.” The National Geographic video, however, was not actual footage of the Tsarnaevs, but a re-enactment of the video the FBI claimed to have but never released. To add to the irony, the National Geographic’s reenactment wasn’t even shot in Boston—actors created the scene on the streets of Phoenix, Arizona.

Note: Yesterday (April 9) when I wrote this post, I was able to view the above video on YouTube. Today, however, we are told that the video is no longer available. Hmm . . . .

Reason #2: Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s now-you-see-it now-you-don’t beard

As presented by Professor Jim Fetzer for Veterans Today, Tamerlan Tsarnaev had a well-trimmed beard when he was seen in a video working out at the Wai Kru gym on April 12, 2013, three days before the Boston Marathon. But FBI images of Tamerlan on April 15 depicted him as clean shaven. Three days later, however, when he was killed in a shoot-out with the police on April 18, Tamerlan again had a well-trimmed beard.

A friend of Tamerlan, Manatov Khairullozhon, said he had dinner with the Tsarnaev brothers at the Somerville Cafe on the evening of April 15, 2013, where he observed Tamerlan was wearing a beard. Khairullozhon went to the authorities when he saw the FBI images of a clean-shaven Tamerlan at the marathon to inform them that he and Tamerlan, sporting a beard, had had dinner the night before, but they did not want to hear it. For coming forth, Khairullozhon has been targeted and abused and is being prosecuted for obstruction of evidence.

↓ Click image below to enlarge ↓

Tamerlan Tsarnaev's beard

Tamerlan’s now-you-see-it now-you-don’t beard is why his aunt, Maret Tsarnaev, believes the surveillance video and the images of the two brothers at the Boston Marathon are fake.

There are so many questions we can ask Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s defense team:

  1. Why wasn’t former CIA agent Robert David Steele, who says Boston bombings were a false flag, called as a defense witness?
  2. Why wasn’t Hollywood producer Nathan Folks, who says Boston bombings were a false flag, called as an expert witness for the defense?
  3. Why weren’t Boston police witnesses asked why Catholic priests were turned away from ministering to the bombing victims? (Was it because if the priests were allowed, they would discover that the victims were crisis actors?)
  4. Why didn’t the defense ask a medical expert how is it that Jeff Bauman, who supposedly had both legs blown off by the first Boston Marathon bomb, was fully conscious when he carted away in a wheelchair, when his severe injuries would have knocked him unconscious? Why wasn’t a medical expert asked how Bauman could  so quickly recover from losing both legs that he appeared at a Bruins hockey game a mere 19 days later?

H/t 21st Century Wire, WhoWhatWhy, and FOTM’s josephbc69.

See also Jim Fetzer’s “Boston Show Trial: Dzhokhar ‘Guilty!’ on All 30 Counts.”

For all the posts FOTM has published on this subject, go to our “Boston Marathon Bombings” page.

~Éowyn