Processing Distortion with Peter B. Collins: Black & White Evidence Negates Tsarnaev Verdict

Peter B. Collins Presents Attorney John Remington Graham

Based on a recent blog post by BoilingFrogsPost contributor Paul Craig Roberts, I interviewed Jack Graham about his novel filing with the court in the Boston bomber trial, using the government’s own evidence to show that Dzhokar Tsarnaev was carrying a white backpack that did not show signs of a pressure cooker inside, and that the evidence used to convict depicted a black backpack. Graham brought this exculpatory evidence to the trial court’s attention in an unusual affidavit from Tsarnaev’s aunt in Chechnya, but it was ignored. He roundly criticizes the tactics of defense counsel Judy Clarke, along with prosecutors and the media for a show trial detached from facts and evidence.

*John Remington Graham is a veteran attorney who has served as a prosecutor and public defender. His affidavit is included in this post by Dr. Paul.

Listen to the Preview Clip Here

Listen to the full episode here (BFP Subscribers Only):

SUBSCRIBE

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING and/or DONATING.

Comments

  1. There is one question that I have often pondered upon. Are “they” in actuality hugely incompetent?
    They meaning the real perpetrators, the shadow government, the people behind the curtain, the real rulers etc.
    Because so many of these false flags or manufactured terrorism ops using patsies leave behind a giant trail of fingerprints and clues.
    Here we have the Craft agents with their skull insignias suspiciously running around with their backpacks. Backpacks that match the remnants of the ones that exploded. There are scores of pictures with these shady skull adorned operative. Even one taking right after the explosion with a running craft operative who is now missing his backpack. The picture was widely circulated on the internet with the comment “Hey bro, where’d your backpack go?” written over it. Good question.

    So what is it? Sloppiness, amateurism, ineptitude?

    Or do they follow the principle, sometimes its best to hide in plain sight?

    Followed up with a second principle, “the individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists”

    When the evidence is staring people right in the face – they know. Be it conscious or subconscious. Yet they choose to reject this reality. For countless reasons but in the end it all comes down to fear. The mentioned second principle.

    Very much aided by the real strength of the reality-makers. And here is where they can employ their real craft. Through the media, the politicians, the shills and what not the official narrative is introduced. To be repeated over and over. The majority of the people happily accept this reality because it is safe. Much, much safer than the frightening monstrous conspiracy. Everything is well again. Thus the reality is firmly established in record pace. All that is left is mopping up the loose ends and if necessary discredit and ridicule the few non-believing troublemakers. Which is very easy because the willfully ignorant public in their masses are now doing most of the suppression like programmed fire and forget weapons. Like one can leave a basket full of lobsters unattended. If one tries to climb out the others pull him back in. Self regulating.

    George Orwell phrased it eloquently. “Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past.”

    The reality-makers as of now control the narrative, the present. And thus the past, And thus the future. And thus the Trial of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, before it ever began.

    • The phrase I’ve heard is called “revelation of the method.” If I trick you that’s one thing, but if I trick you and knowing you’ve been tricked you still accept the lie, I actually gain more energy and power over you. So my thought at this point is that they are not terribly concerned if their narrative is transparently frail. In the same way, I think a very large number of people understand that the ‘war on drugs’ is bullshit, yet their is little or no political will to reverse it (though pot legalization is making some progress) and journalists who take it on and show government complicity get the unified media, Gary Webb treatment (“He’s nuts!”).

    • I think the sloppiness, the obviousness, the ridiculousness of these false flags, and the Boston bombing in particular, is by design. Bear with me…
      Good marketing depends on good market research and analysis. I’m sure the social engineers behind this event did their homework. Thus, they know 80% of people….for whatever reasons…aren’t gonna question anything they see, no matter how implausible. They are sold.
      They also know the other 20% are alert and skeptical. If they present a cohesive story with no ambiguity, we will shut up and go home. That won’t do. That’s not going to serve a divide a conquer strategy at all. Much more effective to give us something to speak out about. Because they know we will be compelled to do so. And that’s when the trouble starts – when we start squawking.
      For their purposes, the more we squawk and the louder we squawk, the better. Because it works the “other side” up into a lather. They literally cannot take it.
      And we cannot stop.
      So, when you think about it, the more anomalies, inconsistencies, incredulities the better. All the better to divide us with. With that in mind, you have to say the Boston event was beautifully conceived and executed.

      • Mgrdichian says:

        In light of your theory, I wouldn’t be surprised if things like “fake blood” are staged not for dramatic effect, but to discredit conspiracy theorists when they latch on to it. So IMO when we see really strange phenomena (fake blood?), we should ignore it rather than “expose” it. There are always far less sensational aspects that are less controversial , which could expose a false flag.

        • I sure wish I knew the best way to proceed…and I think that’s exactly where they want us. A damned if you do, damned if you don’t scenario, no?
          They’ve been discrediting CT’s for a long time, but it seems the number of critical thinkers is on the rise regardless. My hunch is this particular tactic is meant to divide the “truth community” from the inside, rather than to discredit us to others. A change in tactic, if you will.
          It certainly has worked in that regard, but has it caused 80 percenters to be more resistant to our information? I don’t know.

          • Mgrdichian says:

            One of the reasons I’m still here is because almost immediately Sibel connected the dots with the CIA and Graham Fuller. Why would anyone need to follow an unprovable road about fake blood, fake injuries when we have a clear path to identifying the real perps? So IMO the best path is follow solid leads like those illuminated by Sibel and ignore the crap. If more of us did that we would one: get closer to unraveling the real plot, and two: the provocateurs would be much more obvious. Pretty simple if you ask me.

          • I want to tread very carefully here…
            As a licensed type person, my conclusion is forced and, therein, lies the problem. Enough said?
            So, at the bottom of the trap lies a mountain of….scientific data, if you will. That is the card we were dealt, and calling it simple doesn’t make it so. Calling it anything it’s not doesn’t make it so. Relabeling it doesn’t make it go away, either. In fact, it’s going to be around longer than we will.
            Same thing holds true for the folks espousing a different theory. They aren’t going anywhere and they’re not going to do it “our” way.
            Given those realities, I think the best approach might be to say: I don’t know, I’m not sure, That is not a theory I invest in, I don’t think so, They could be right, I’m not sure if it matters, I can’t decide what to make of it, I’m not sure I’m ready to comment on that, and so on.
            The trap isn’t set only for them, the trap has been set for us, too. Allowing our community to become divided is taking the bait.

          • Mgrdichian says:

            In this interview Jack Graham mentioned in passing “anomalies” in the bombing narrative pointed out by Lorraine Day, MD. Graham has also acknowledged that he is an admirer of Jim Fetzer. Both Day and Fetzer have been outspoken on the idea that the deaths, injuries and blood at the bombing are all fake. Does anyone other than me see a problem with any of that regarding the advancement of Maret’s affidavit?

  2. This sounds like the most important episode of PD in a while, I’ll spread the word.

  3. I have read most of the article but have not listened to the cast, but how have they defended against any possible assertion that he switched bags? That loose end needs to be tied.

  4. The view from outside ‘the States’ is very clear. Your sons are D O N E .
    This is the play.
    Sign here.
    No defense. No offence. No truth. No justice. There are only pretty little FBI informers licking their way up the chains of command, a theater of the malevolent
    dressed in words of those mourning their dead.
    “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;..”
    otherwise known as a threat.
    “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.” [Maret Tsarnaeva]
    The rule of law – Habeus Corpus – show us the body – is murdered by the knife of BUSH.

    • I still remember when I was a member of democraticunderground and how Habeus Corpus was suspended early in his second term, I think, and nobody fucking reacted…even then many were saying it was all over for the citizenry.

      • It was the same here. Is still. ‘Everyone’ just looked the other way. the 911 thing. Having not seen what bullshit THAT was, left no choice but not to see long fought for rights disappear in the thermitic materiel raddled DUST of 911. and then the sinister little gnome went on to paint pictures in DALLAS. Of his feet in the bath. Of his beady little eyes in a mirror in the shower (BUSH I am talking about). While the unleashed idiot military slaughtered the children of IRAQ.
        Men and Women of J R Grahams experience are telling their peers straight up, the case is RIGGED, and not one fluctuation In the hum of superstate. not one flicker in its thousands of long corridors of florescence .. NO lawyers in Massachusetts will assist the very able Maret Tsarnaeva as ‘ friend of the court’ to witness and exculpatory evidence . This is a very very bad sign indeed.

  5. CuChulainn says:

    could we have a link to the video evidence that Mr. Graham is citing?

  6. CuChulainn says:

    sorry, i missed the PCR link… never mind!

  7. My link seems to be under moderation. Perhaps I should have elaborated.

    The video details the absurdness of the disaster: everything, including the injuries, was staged by ‘crisis actors’. None of the injuries were real.

    Check out the official footage. It matches what’s shown here.

  8. I havent seen the vid but it would be wise not to be nasty about things. Actually now I am curious about the vid.

    But focusing on these sorts of things… It is better to focus on what is undeniable, not theories. Theories are just theories.

    And on that note, if one were to wish to talk about fake blood and such, how would one do it without the stigma? Since the underlying narrative of “conspiracy theorists are wacko” is so well entrenched it seems quite impossible.

    Best just to focus on the backpack for now. And the fact he was never seen with the one that was recovered from the scene. Still need to finish lisyening to this one.

  9. Thisnpost should be down here where it makes sense.

    I havent seen the vid but it would be wise not to be nasty about things. Actually now I am curious about the vid.

    But focusing on these sorts of things… It is better to focus on what is undeniable, not theories. Theories are just theories.

    And on that note, if one were to wish to talk about fake blood and such, how would one do it without the stigma? Since the underlying narrative of “conspiracy theorists are wacko” is so well entrenched it seems quite impossible.

    Best just to focus on the backpack for now. And the fact he was never seen with the one that was recovered from the scene. Still need to finish lisyening to this one.

  10. dancingbrave says:

    Solis
    You say ‘The trap isn’t set only for them, the trap has been set for us, too. Allowing our community to become divided is taking the bait.

    I would add it can be part of what stifles anyone new looking into alternative theories; in the same way the anomalies and the ambiguity in the official story can baffle people into giving up critical thinking and so go along with what they are told by the MSM and the authorities, If you manage to get past that, the infighting and bickering amongst the alternative media can further baffle people and turn them away which then strengthens the official narrative as this is what they will be fed every day.

    Some people might say it is stupid concentrating on the backpack instead of some other reason, John Remington Graham doesn’t think so!

    I would say most people who read and listen to the alternative news for long enough will follow intelligent arguments as opposed to outlandish ones.

    • Yep.
      I think the backpack evidence is of fundamental importance. It proves they didn’t have probable cause. I hope it leads to something.
      It’s so compelling because it’s (direct photographic) evidence, not theory. Evidence is paramount. That’s why we should be careful how we address ANY evidence, not just the evidence that supports theories we find intelligent. We don’t need to advocate for it, we can circumvent it, but it risks our credibility if we call it something it isn’t. That’s all I’m saying.
      Mr. Graham addressed it perfectly in the podcast, imo.

  11. 344thBrother says:

    Black and white evidence, readily available, OBVIOUS, and yet somehow the courts ignore it, the media lies about it and the “People” eat it up. I feel sorry for Tsaerniev.
    p
    d

  12. While most of us do not subscribe to the idea that these various terrorist attacks are fake I do have to wonder about some of them. I think the fake blood meme is probably a red herring in many cases such as this.

    But I also have to wonder when I see a machete that was used to kill 1 person and maim 2 others with no blood on it, and only a small spattering of blood on the ground.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3705823/Machete-wielding-attacker-kills-woman-injures-two-new-German-outrage.html.

    I have also wondered if the rape gang meme is false. I recall once the MSM used a video on muslims on a train doing something that I cannot recall, but it was apparently threatening, that was later found out to be some innocent video from years before the story was made.

    Maybe some of it is fake, but I doubt the big stuff is fake. Too difficult to fake. They can manufacuter and augment the big ones with mercenaries, but for the destruction itself to be fake, I doubt.

Speak Your Mind