Magna Charta Anniversary Essay# 5: Tsarnaev’s Aunt

tsanaevs mother

by Mary W Maxwell

Thank God for Youtube. Talk about a piece of machinery changing the human condition!  For thousands of years there’s been some degree of meet-and-greet going on among individuals and tribes on this earth. But never could there be such an intermingling till we obtained this miraculous means of carrying faces and voices electronically around the world.

That’s how we’ve met Dzhokhar Tsarneav (nickname Jahar). More importantly, we’ve met his aunt who lives in Toronto. She is the key to Jahar’s survival. Our survival, too, perhaps.

What has this to do with Magna Charta? Well, just about everything. The barons who got King John to sign that parchment in 1215 were “modern” enough to demand freedom from thuggery by the rulers. Apparently the people of Massachusetts in 2015 aren’t modern. They think it’s OK for police to shoot anybody dead on a whim. (But do they really think that?)

Tsarnaev-boat1-267x300

Look at this boat, riddled with bullet holes. Bostonians are supposed to agree “Yes, the mad bomber was inside the boat (age 19 at the time) and we needed to be protected from him.”

Oh? When did cops acquire a shoot-first policy? Why not a nice little “Come out with your hands up”? Couldn’t they spray the boat with Mace? The Massachusetts police could have done what Bush did to Manuel Noriega when he was “resisting arrest” (as heads of state tend to do) in the Vatican embassy in Panama City. They forced him out with loud music.

The “new way” seems to have started in 2005, when the London police shot dead a 27 year-old Brazilian, Jean Charles de Menezes, in the tube station because… well… just because, that’s all.

In 2013, when police shot at Jahar, who had been decorating the walls of the boat with religious philosophy (he weren’t the type, said an article in Rolling Stone), the only evidence police had on him was that his face, and the face of his older brother Tamerlan, were recorded at the Marathon and at an ATM. Wow.

Enter the aunt, Maret Tsarnaeva of Toronto. She’s a lawyer. She can prove that Tamerlan, age 24, did not get killed in a shooting match with police, as the media claim. She saw the video of a naked man being put into a police car, not dead, not even wounded, and she says it’s definitely her nephew Tamerlan. Being a lawyer she asks “Why wasn’t I asked to identify the body?”

There’s a journalist named Dan Dicks of pressfortruth.ca who looks trustworthy to me. He has made a video about his conversation with Auntie, in which she says she’s afraid she’s going to be killed.  Hooray for Dan.

Note: Auntie expressed her worries before we heard about the death of Ibragim Todashev, a friend of the brothers. Remember? The FBI men went to the home of this Chechen guy, Todashev, in Florida to “take a statement” and then simply murdered him.

That occurred shortly after the April 15, 2013 Marathon bombing. I presume the baddies did not want Todashev to say anything “exculpatory” about the Tsarnaev boys. But maybe they also wanted the “home invasion” publicized so we’ll all understand that FBI men can do that and get away with it.

Sorry, boys. I’m not letting you get away with it. If nobody else will file a murder charge in Florida, I will. For one thing, I know the Constitution by heart, and am well aware that members of a “Federal Bureau of Investigation” have only the power of investigation, not arrest.

Sure, they do arrest people (google “Gordon Kohl” for a shocker), but they do it under the rubric of  “citizen’s arrest.” No joke. Or they get deputized by states to participate in a — barf, barf – Joint Terrorism Task Force.

An aside here. The first JTTF was formed when a “lone gunman” from overseas shot several tourists on the roof of the Empire State Building. Well, he didn’t really – it’s garbage. But relatives of the deceased failed to protest because they were just not around.  Like Menezes’ family I suppose, in London.

Like how Aunt Maret, refugee from Chechnya, now in Canada, was not called to be a defense witness at Jahar’s trial in 2015. Amazing. And the New Jersey-based sister of Jahar, in the lead-up to his trial, was taken aside by the FBI for threatening a girlfriend with a bomb. Oh my. And Jahar’s college buddies are behind bars for “obstruction of justice” in the case.

The federal law against obstruction of justice is at 18 usc 1510.

I can think of some people it would apply to.

Back to the Florida killer admitting boldface that he did it. Such FBI officers act like they won’t get in trouble, and the public accepts it. In so doing, the public voluntarily yields up some of its manhood. Pay attention, this is an important aspect of the psy-op.

Consider the word “impunity.” I used to think it meant bravado or cheek — a person could “act with impunity.” No, that is NOT the definition! It’s the onlookers, us, who provide the impunity. The dictionary says impunity is “exemption from punishment.”

Why in the world are we granting this exemption to a bunch of thugs? It’s extremely unnatural. I’ll bet Tavistock has simply figured out that if the TV newscaster reports the killing of Todashev without raising her eyebrow, it will enter our brains that this is now acceptable.

And of course the reporters can just mis-state the facts. Maria Sacchetti of Bostonglobe.com wrote, on March 25, 2014: “Tamerlan Tsarnaev was killed in a police shootout in Watertown.” Well, no he wasn’t, Maria, so you’d better check it out.

And we can assume that it’s equally a pile of media nonsense that Jahar then “jumped into an SUV and escaped the scene, dragging his dead brother, by mistake, in one of the wheels.” (Tell me: where is the limit to what people will believe?)

The best part about Aunt Maret is that she is emotional. She jumps up and down. Newscasters can’t compete with Auntie’s body language or tone of voice. I feel sure she is the real deal.

Think about the central issue here: we’ve got Tamerlan dead and Todashev dead, and NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT IT. Come on, peeps. Don’t go into a trance. Act smart!

Whoops, I just searched Google Scholar for “Tsarnaev” and got this frightening clip. Professor Amitai Etzioni, a moralist at George Washington University, wrote in Commentary (albeit only nine days after the 2013 Marathon, and in response to people saying the lad should have been “miranda-ized”):

“The commitment to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, even in the wake of such vicious attacks, is one of most laudable features of American society. Yet one wishes it would evolve to a fuller understanding of what our founding document entails. It seeks to balance individual rights and the protection of the public. So far there is no indication that this balance has been violated by the authorities in dealing with the Marathon bombers. This is what should make us proud.”

Oh boy. Count me out. I am not proud. I am furious. And you are wrong, Amitai. The Bill of Rights does not endeavor to protect the public from Sirhan Sirhan, James Earl Ray, Arthur Bremer, Jahar Tsarnaev, and all the other WELL-KNOWN PATSIES. The Magna Charta had the picture right: the individual is no match for the “authorities.”

They win every time. You ought to look into the way they have crucified three generations of Malcolm X’s family. What was Malcolm’s sin? He was a moralist like you, Professor. He had his head screwed on properly. That was his sin. He cared about America.

Amitai, are you working for the wrong team? I know your writings; they are sharp and inspiring. You once invited me to join your Communitarian Summit. Recall? Has someone brainwashed you since then? Why can’t you see what is happening? It could not be plainer! Please, have a look!

To repeat: the aunt has a video, apparently from a regular news channel. It shows Tamerlan being escorted, in the flesh – we won’t worry about the lack of clothing, or about stupid Miranda’s – over to a patrol car.  Thus, he was NOT SHOT. Not killed, as we were told, in “the police’s self-defense.”

How, then, is he dead? Did he get Todasheved, if I may call it that?  Did he get Menezesed?  Are we all going to get Todasheved?  Orwell has promised us that we will.

And Judge George O’Toole did his best to see we are not protected from the maniacs who actually did organize “the Boston bombing.” O’Toole graduated from BC and Harvard Law. Would the thousands of alumni now living in Boston please send him a letter? Offer to help him if he is being coerced. Strength in numbers.

Fancy him letting the defense attorney present a not-guilty plea, and yet say that her client did it! None of the liars got cross-examined. Nobody even mentioned the aunt’s claim that Tamerlan did not die in a shootout.

Bostonians, get a grip, will you? All you need do is sashay down to any local police station and report the murder of Tamerlan Tsarnaev. I recommend you be white to do this, as ethnic minorities at the moment are all “suspects.”

If you’re black, take two elderly white companions – EWC’s — with you. If you’re white, take two EBC’s. Make an outing of it. Have some fun!

It’s simple. Tell the cops you want to fill out a complaint form; believe me they do stock them. If they ask to strip-search you, just say “Yes, I’d love it.” It’s time to be creative and not fall for all the clever schemes of intimidation.

You’re a grown-up, right?  So make up your mind to do what needs to be done. Get busy. Go on, you can lick this problem.

It’s not nearly as daunting as you think to overcome a bunch of thugs, while you still have the legal weapons for it. But if you wait till the day when you are not even allowed to leave the house you gonna be SOR-ree. And don’t come crying to me then.

 

— Mary W Maxwell, LLB, who grew up in Boston, writes for the Melbourne media outlet: GumshoeNews. Her forthcoming book is “Fraud Upon the Court.” Her email address is: mary@ProsecutionForTreason.com.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

Comments

  1. iwasleah10years says:

    Reblogged this on Writing The Wrong For Jahar and commented:
    Another gem of an article by Mary Maxwell of Gumshoe News.

  2. Five cheers for the Magna Charta:

  3. This short video shows front view of the “mysterious naked man.”

  4. Sorry, I had not realized that Oz carried the story two years ago.

    http://www.news.com.au/world/north-america/who-was-bostons-naked-man/story-fnh81jut-1226627017169

  5. Dear Christopher,
    I don’t want to hog up the space here, as I would like others to chime in. Your questions are spot on.
    In regard to your last paragraph, I notice that when a major newspaper tells us something (say, about the Tsarnaev case), there are immediately several angry Comments in the blog beneath. They mock anybody who would believe, say, that Muslims are not bombers. It looks to me like they’re all written by one person, using different names.
    These certainly would have the desired effect, which is to make the reader shy away from entering the Comments section with a different point of view.
    In other words, the owner to whom you refer knows that individuals hate to stick out. Rupert gets mucho bang for the buck, merely by knowing of such simple mental traits, and paying people to write those initial comments.
    (Are they even paid? Perchance they are slaves.)

  6. Christopher Brooks says:

    Mary, the logical “constitutional” question that arises is how is our challenge to the “power” and “processes” going to be enacted in a practical real sense.
    I agree YouTube is a unique tool but the mind control is so effective most people unconsciously discriminate against quality information and watch sports and seduction.

    The “State of Mind” documentary examines how this is achieved. A critically important point in the documentary was
    that to neutralize the effects of the “sorcery” you must expose the existence of the Sorcerer and the methods.

    I have viewed many brilliant presentations on YouTube that only have a count in the hundreds of views.
    The alternative deception laced interpretations are viewed by millions or hundreds of millions on TV, DVD’s and cinema.

    What must be done?

    Do we stand on the street and plead with those passing by in the hope of sharing our opinion and convincing others there is a serious problem?

    Do we email MP’s, journalists, academics and all the various associations making policies and plans?

    Do we physically engage with the processes by personally petitioning, pleading and evidencing our views, explanations and proposals?

    Do we take a video camera and microphone to apply accountability and create the opportunity to expand the force and effect of the effort, along with creating a record to build evidence of the pattern and dynamics of the political and information reality?

    Do we join in associations that plan achievable limited objectives that can intensively focus our meager limited resources upon a vulnerable front of the “enemy” by formulating and enacting a disciplined challenge grounded in very disciplined correct social and political dynamics?

    Do we act with short term precise and measurable objectives that builds permanent territory for integrity with a parallel plan towards longer term victories for justice and honesty?

    How much of our personal life do we sacrifice towards the life of others near and far?

    How much compromise do we negotiate to build associations that are sufficient in ability and resource to break through the “enemy line” of resistance?

    How do we judge the priorities of time and resources to engage in training and action when faced with the creeping threats of totalitarian rule and constant military conflicts that could possibly engulf the globe if present tensions are not disarmed?

    How do we judge the value of our own effort and resources when the option must be contemplated to back fellow demonstrably brilliant and capable leaders to focus and concentrate the intensity of effect and achieve better clarity and consistency of interpreting problems and designing solutions?

    These points are just a sample of the practical realities of constituted thinking and acting that should be under constant review if we are vigilant, engaged individuals that grasp the centrality of asking questions and taking personal responsibility to know what is good, what is right and what is beautiful.

    Education begins with, and flourishes from, questions.
    My questions need to be contemplated and answered if we are to evaluate what plan of action will work to move us towards our chosen destination.

    If I was in control of the “printing press” and wished to implement a collective society that serves myself I would be going to great efforts to destroy the efforts of honest people by generating much confusion and conflict in those who threaten my mischief.

Trackbacks

  1. […] also seek extradition of the FBI guy in Florida who killed a potential witness, Ibragim Todashev (see Appendix O). Naturally, I’d put Aunt Maret under the Witness Protection program, even if it means she has to […]

Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: