James Petras
The relation
between the suspected Boston Marathon bombers and the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI), the Massachusetts State Police (MSP) and the Boston Police
(BP) is a point of contention and controversy.
The FBI, at first, claimed no knowledge of the
bombing suspects but later was forced to admit having received at least two
sets of intelligence reports, one from Russian officials and another from the
CIA, identifying one of the suspected bombers, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, as a
potential security threat -linked to a Chechen terrorist organization. Testimony
from Tsarnaev’s mother and father indicates that the FBI was active in
following, harassing and interrogating the suspect before the bombing. Despite
general directives from the US Departments of Justice and Homeland Security
mandating US security to aggressively pursue ‘Islamist terrorists’, the FBI
claims to have made no effort to follow-up on the Russian and CIA security alerts,
especially after Tamerlan Tsarnaev returned from Russian state of Dagestan last
year where he allegedly met six times with a known Chechen terrorist,
Gadzhimurad Dolgatov, in a fundamentalist Salafi mosque.
The official government and corporate media versions
claim the FBI may have ‘over-looked’ the security risk posed by Tsarnaev. Congressional
critics argue that the FBI was ‘negligent’ in following up leads provided by
the Russians and the CIA. A more likely explanation is that the FBI was
actively engaged with Tsarnaev and deliberately encouraged the conspiracy for
self-serving purposes.
The most benign hypothesis is that the FBI was
using Tsarnaev as a means of infiltrating and securing intelligence on other
possible ‘terrorists’. A more plausible hypothesis is that the Boston office of
the FBI had set the pair of brothers up for a sting operation in order to
enhance their anti-terrorist credentials – and that the ‘operation’ got out of
hand - with Tamarlan having his own agenda. The most likely hypothesis is that
the FBI facilitated the bombing in order to revive the flagging fortunes of the
‘war on terror’ foisted on a war-weary and economically depressed American
public.
The FBI in Boston has a long and notorious
history of working with and protecting certain leaders of organized crime in
return for information about targeted rivals: The most notorious example is the
FBI’s 20-year ‘partnership’ with one of Boston’s most feared gangland killers,
James ‘Whitey’ Bulger, where the mobster was provided with protection and
collaboration in return for his information about a rival crime family and
other competitors. In 2012, Bulger was finally indicted for 19 murders mostly
committed under FBI ‘protection’ – although one of his closest mob-partners claims
he murdered 40 people in his lifetime.
The ‘Boston Bombings’ served as a detonator to
mobilize the entire US security apparatus; it has led to the suspension of
constitutional guaranties. It has been accompanied by an intense mass media
campaign glorifying police state operations and the imposition of virtual
martial law in the Boston metropolitan area of over 4.5 million inhabitants. The
military police operation and media campaign aroused fear and terror among the
public. Instant psychodrama produced mass worship of the ‘heroic’ police: they
were portrayed as having saved the public from unknown numbers of armed
terrorists lurking in their neighborhoods. The police, the FBI and the entire
Security Apparatus – were repeatedly ‘honored’ at public spectacles, sports and
civic events, lauded as ‘guardians’ and ‘saviors’. The sordid role of FBI in organizing
entrapment operations was never mentioned. The hundreds of billions wasted in
futile overseas ‘wars against terror’ went down the memory hole. The opposition
to Washington’s cuts in social programs was diverted almost overnight to
support new funding for US military intervention in Syria and North Korea, a
greater arms build-up in Israel and domestic security.
The ‘Boston Bombings’ coincided with the White
House dictating a new round of domestic police state measures and launching a
series of aggressive military moves in Asia, the Middle East and Latin America.
The Pentagon has organized its biggest and most threatening air, sea and land
military exercises right on the borders of North Korea. The White House has
encouraged and promoted Japan’s belligerent military posture toward China
regarding disputed islands in the South China Sea. Secretary of State Kerry has
increased military aid to the Syrian terrorists by at least $130 million and
dispatched hundreds of Special Forces to Jordan to train the jihadi-mercenaries
against the Syrian government. The White House concocted charges that Damascus
deployed chemical weapons against the rebels to justify direct US military
intervention in Syria. Closer to home, the White House has given unconditional
support to the violent Venezuelan opposition’s post-election campaign designed
to provoke a civil war– while refusing to recognize the internationally
certified election victory of President Maduro.
It is very clear the Obama regime wants to
turn the clock back a decade to recreate the terrible political climate of 2001
– 02. He seeks to fabricate a sense of an imminent terrorist threat based on the
‘Boston Bombings’ in order to re-launch another global military campaign. Instead
of Iraq – the ‘threat’ is now Syria, Iran and Lebanon. Today, the threat is
North Korea - tomorrow it could be China. Today, it is Venezuela - next it
could be Argentina, Bolivia and Ecuador …and the entire edifice of Latin
American regional integration.
The civilian casualties and deaths resulting
from the ‘Boston Bombings’, linked to the US backing and sheltering of Chechen
terrorists, are a small price for Washington to pay if it results in escalating
global wars and greater impunity for the National Police State.
Re-launching a new and more virulent version
of militarized global empire building is of the highest priority. The targeted
countries have global significance: Venezuela and Iran are oil producing
giants, the backbone of OPEC and adversaries of Israel. China is the second
biggest economy in the world and the principle challenger to US economic
dominance. Cowering and confusing millions of downwardly mobile Americans
weakens the principle domestic obstacle to bigger and more comprehensive cuts
in social programs in order to finance global wars.
Indeed, the ‘Boston Bombings’ have larger
political and economic consequences; they set the stage for a new round of wars
abroad and regressive (and repressive) changes at home.
