RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment

Rowley writes: Author John Laughland wrote: 'the leading group which pleads the Chechen cause is the American Committee for Peace in Chechnya (ACPC). The list of the self-styled 'distinguished Americans' who are its members is a roll call of the most prominent neoconservatives who so enthusiastically support the 'war on terror.'"

Donald Rumsfeld was one of the Neocons who supported Chechnya's fight against Russia. (photo: Boston Globe)
Donald Rumsfeld was one of the Neocons who supported Chechnya's fight against Russia. (photo: Boston Globe)

Chechen Terrorists and the Neocons

By Coleen Rowley, Open Mike

20 April 13


almost choked on my coffee listening to neoconservative Rudy Giuliani pompously claim on national TV that he was surprised about any Chechens being responsible for the Boston Marathon bombings because he's never seen any indication that Chechen extremists harbored animosity toward the U.S.; Guiliani thought they were only focused on Russia.

Giuliani knows full well how the Chechen "terrorists" proved useful to the U.S. in keeping pressure on the Russians, much as the Afghan mujahedeen were used in the anti-Soviet war in Afghanistan from 1980 to 1989. In fact, many neocons signed up as Chechnya's "friends," including former CIA Director James Woolsey.

For instance, see this 2004 article in the UK Guardian, entitled, "The Chechens' American friends: The Washington neocons' commitment to the war on terror evaporates in Chechnya, whose cause they have made their own."

Author John Laughland wrote: "the leading group which pleads the Chechen cause is the American Committee for Peace in Chechnya (ACPC). The list of the self-styled 'distinguished Americans' who are its members is a roll call of the most prominent neoconservatives who so enthusiastically support the 'war on terror.'

"They include Richard Perle, the notorious Pentagon adviser; Elliott Abrams of Iran-Contra fame; Kenneth Adelman, the former US ambassador to the UN who egged on the invasion of Iraq by predicting it would be 'a cakewalk'; Midge Decter, biographer of Donald Rumsfeld and a director of the rightwing Heritage Foundation; Frank Gaffney of the militarist Centre for Security Policy; Bruce Jackson, former US military intelligence officer and one-time vice-president of Lockheed Martin, now president of the US Committee on Nato; Michael Ledeen of the American Enterprise Institute, a former admirer of Italian fascism and now a leading proponent of regime change in Iran; and R. James Woolsey, the former CIA director who is one of the leading cheerleaders behind George Bush's plans to re-model the Muslim world along pro-US lines."

The ACPC later sanitized "Chechnya" to "Caucasus" so it's rebranded itself as the "American Committee for Peace in the Caucasus."

Of course, Giuliani also just happens to be one of several neocons and corrupt politicians who took hundreds of thousands of dollars from MEK sources when that Iranian group was listed by the U.S. State Department as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO). The money paid for these American politicians to lobby (illegally under the Patriot Act) U.S. officials to get MEK off the FTO list.

Down the Rabbit Hole

Alice in Wonderland is an understatement if you understand the full reality of what's going on. But if you can handle going down the rabbit hole even further, check out prominent former New York Times journalist (and author of The Commission book) Phil Shenon's discovery of the incredible "Terrible Missed Chance" a couple of years ago.

Shenon's discovery involved key information that the FBI and the entire "intelligence" community mishandled and covered up, not only before 9/11 but for a decade afterward. And it also related to the exact point of my 2002 "whistleblower memo" that led to the post 9/11 DOJ-Inspector General investigation about FBI failures and also partially helped launch the 9/11 Commission investigation.

But still the full truth did not come out, even after Shenon's blockbuster discovery in 2011 of the April 2001 memo linking the main Chechen leader Ibn al Khattab to Osama bin Laden. The buried April 2001 memo had been addressed to FBI Director Louis Freeh (another illegal recipient of MEK money, by the way!) and also to eight of the FBI's top counter-terrorism officials.

Similar memos must have been widely shared with all U.S. intelligence in April 2001. Within days of terrorist suspect Zaccarias Moussaoui's arrest in Minnesota on Aug. 16, 2001, French intelligence confirmed that Moussaoui had been fighting under and recruiting for Ibn al-Khattab, raising concerns about Moussaoui's flight training.

Yet FBI Headquarters officials balked at allowing a search of his laptop and other property, still refusing to recognize that: 1) the Chechen separatists were themselves a "terrorist group" for purposes of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act's (FISA) legal requirement of acting "on behalf of a foreign power" and 2) that Moussaoui's link to Ibn al Khattab inherently then linked him to bin Laden's well-recognized Al Qaeda group for purposes of FISA (the point in my memo).

This all occurred during the same time that CIA Director George Tenet and other counter-terrorism officials - and don't forget that Tenet was apprised of the information about Moussaoui's arrest around Aug. 24, 2001 - told us their "hair was on fire" over the prospect of a major terrorist attack and "the system was blinking red."

The post 9/11 investigations launched as a result of my 2002 "whistleblower memo" did conclude that a major mistake, which could have prevented or reduced 9/11, was the lack of recognition of al Khattab's Chechen fighters as a "terrorist group" for purposes of FISA.

As far as I know, the several top FBI officials, who were the named recipients of the April 2001 intelligence memo entitled "Bin Laden/Ibn Khattab Threat Reporting" establishing how the two leaders were "heavily entwined," brushed it off by mostly denying they had read the April 2001 memo (which explains why the memo had to be covered up as they attempted to cover up other embarrassing info).

There are other theories, of course, as to why U.S. officials could not understand or grasp this "terrorist link." These involve the U.S.'s constant operating of "friendly terrorists," perhaps even al Khattab himself (and/or those around him), on and off, opportunistically, for periods of time to go against "enemy" nations, i.e., the Soviet Union, and regimes we don't' like.

Shifting Lines

But officials can get confused when their former covert "assets" turn into enemies themselves. That's what has happened with al-Qaeda-linked jihadists in Libya and Syria, fighters who the U.S. government favored in their efforts to topple the Qaddafi and Assad regimes, respectively. These extremists are prone to turn against their American arms suppliers and handlers once the common enemy is defeated.

The same MO exists with the U.S. and Israel currently collaborating with the Iranian MEK terrorists who have committed assassinations inside Iran. The U.S. government has recently shifted the MEK terrorists from the ranks of "bad" to "good" terrorists as part of a broader campaign to undermine the Iranian government. For details, see "Our (New) Terrorists, the MEK: Have We Seen This Movie Before?"

Giuliani and his ilk engage, behind the scenes, in all these insidious operations but then blithely turn to the cameras to spew their hypocritical propaganda fueling the counterproductive "war on terror" for public consumption, when that serves their interests. Maybe this explains Giuliani's amazement (or feigned ignorance) on Friday morning after the discovery that the family of the alleged Boston Marathon bombers was from Chechnya.

My observations are not meant to be a direct comment about the motivations of the two Boston bombing suspects whose thinking remains unclear. It's still very premature and counterproductive to speculate on their motives.

But the lies and disinformation that go into the confusing and ever-morphing notion of "terrorism" result from the U.S. Military Industrial Complex (and its little brother, the "National Security Surveillance Complex") and their need to control the mainstream media's framing of the story.

So, a simplistic narrative/myth is put forth to sustain U.S. wars. From time to time, those details need to be reworked and some of the facts "forgotten" to maintain the storyline about bad terrorists "who hate the U.S." when, in reality, the U.S. Government may have nurtured the same forces as "freedom fighters" against various "enemies."

The bottom line is to never forget that "a poor man's war is terrorism while a rich man's terrorism is war" - and sometimes those lines cross for the purposes of big-power politics. War and terrorism seem to work in sync that way. your social media marketing partner


We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

+95 # flippancy 2013-04-20 09:18
No matter how well educated you may be, if you're conservative the chances of you being igbnorant, stupis or insane approaches 100%
+56 # SundownLF 2013-04-20 13:32
Quoting flippancy:
No matter how well educated you may be, if you're conservative the chances of you being igbnorant, stupis or insane approaches 100%

Don't forget corrupt, greedy, grasping, lying, arrogant, ETC.
0 # Malcolm 2014-03-13 22:25
That's extremely judgemental, don'tcha think?

I'm a certified tree hugger, since 1968, but you're attitude does not promote communication, in any way. I know plenty of "conservatives" who are really fine people.

I'm dismayed that you've gotten over 100 thumbs up-what the fuck is WRONG with RSN readers?
0 # Malcolm 2014-03-14 13:04
No replies. Maybe rsn readers are "...igbnorant, stupis or insane..."

Just kidding. Probably only judgemental.
+70 # MichaelArchAngel 2013-04-20 09:30
We need to focus on our own chicken coop and leave others to manage their own.
+94 # tswhiskers 2013-04-20 09:53
The motto, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" has been proven false so many times that you'd think the U.S. govt. would have wised up to this fact decades ago. And yet, the Bush II cabal couldn't wait to stick its fingers into Iraq, Afghanistan, and now many of that same group are itching to get into Iran. No matter that WMD was an out and out lie, that their informants were bald liars. Either the Bushies believed the lies or the lies suited their agendas and they used them for their own ends. I would lambaste the Reps. here except that I know the Dems. were equally blind and stupid during the Vietnam War. I will say for the umpteenth time, this country's govt. CANNOT run as it was meant to run without an informed electorate and an energetic media. The media have occasionally dug out important stories that have changed the politics of their time, but far too often the media have been craven in their bow to corporate owners, politicians, and power in general. And the public have been and are lazy (the euphemism is "busy") about keeping an eye on state and federal politics. My hope is that until the Rep. Party undergoes drastic reformation the public will stay sufficiently awake to vote its best interests and thus avoid economic and political ruin for all of us.
+39 # Cassandra2012 2013-04-20 12:27
They're itching to get into Iran's oil ... .
+15 # AlexBrown 2013-04-20 21:14
And the Caucasus.
+8 # Walter J Smith 2013-04-20 14:13
The US Government has not notably changed courses and we have consistently, five years now, put Democrats more in charge than the GOP.

Nothing has changed other than a few token crumbs tossed out as symbolic gestures (education, alternative energy, etc.) except the words coming from the rhetorical clerk in chief are now more interesting and even less connected to the reality of his & his party's policies. The Democrats will vote for almost nothing unless they can successfully hide behind the Tea Party to get it done.

Obama has made much noise about what he was going to change, from 2007 to the present; he still changes only to expand GWB's worst policies. He routinely caves in to the Tea Party, sometimes with such haste they laugh at him and then "move the goalposts" farther into regressive politics.

Watch him. He will cave again (he often has) before there is even any political contest. He apparently loves hiding behind the Tea Party and hates the left, which his mouthpieces routinely curse or denigrate.

And to the D party's leadership, you are "left" if you don't love ungoverned money-grubing more than you love anything else.
+7 # tomo 2013-04-21 17:00
Along with a lot of readers, I like this statement. Picking up on the "informed electorate" need, I would suggest that it is not entirely an accident that education in America is both underfunded and often done poorly. The "powers that be" cannot endure in their trajectory if the electorate are well educated. Of late they seem increasingly successful in seeing they are not.
-26 # BobC 2013-04-20 09:57
The author's logic escapes me. Unsavory characters whom we supported often turn against us (Saddam, Bin Laden, e.g.) but not BECAUSE we supported them. The reasons they turn against us are that they don't like our foreign policy (specifically our military presence in their part of the world) or they think we're easy prey in their power plays, or both. Giuliani's an ass for the most part, but his statement that Chechen Muslims have not generally shown antipathy toward the U.S. seems to be correct, and nothing the author is describing indicates otherwise.
+72 # jmac9 2013-04-20 10:46
America, the great hypocrite: preaching freedoms through corporate media, while in reality creating and supporting dictatorships that crush human rights.

Pinochet in Chile, Diem in Vietnam, Shah of Iran, Noriega in Panama, Samosa dictatorship in Nicaragua, Sam Doe-Charles Taylor in Liberia, Military junta in Guatemala, military junta in Honduras,
and lest we forget: Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban in Afghanistan,

and we still support $3 Billion a year, Israel's terrorism against Islamic Palestinians. Which fuels the Islamic extremist propaganda which keeps the whole fraud of 'war on terror' going.
+9 # Walter J Smith 2013-04-20 14:00
Bob has deluded himself into learning to read, but not read what is written. It is sad, but common.

He simply didn't see the evidence that wasn't interpreted word-by-word for him.

Or, perhaps, he is writing for someone else, or he is one of the insiders who loves just stirring stink wherever thoughtful people gather. Especially if they gather to read and exchange their comments on the reading to further clarify any questions or related contributions.

There are clearly several possible reasons why he missed what is plainly written (except for the anacronym MEK) for anyone who cares to read with a sufficiently open mind. For whatever reason, his whining complaint is either immature or disingenous.
+2 # BobC 2013-04-20 16:01
Walter: Perhaps you're the one with a reading comprehension problem. I'm not arguing that Giuliani and other neo-cons aren't ignorant hypocrites, or that when we support those whom we regard as the lesser of two evils we run the risk that they won't always be on our side. I'm merely arguing that Chechen Muslims' terrorism in the past has not typically been directed against the U.S. and thus I'm surprised that the 2 suspects are Chechen Muslim immigrants. I, and presumably Giuliani, would similarly be surprised if the 2 suspects were Albanian Muslims whose asses we had saved in Kosovo in 1999.
-3 # BobC 2013-04-20 16:06
jmac: I agree with most of what you wrote. However, the reason we support Israel's continued occupation of the West Bank and Gaza to the tune of billions per year isn't because we want to keep the "war on terror" going; it's because we fear that Israel will be destroyed by the enemies who surround them if we cut off aid. We do this despite our profound annoyance at their refusal to stop building new Jewish settlements in the occupied territories.
+16 # Mannstein 2013-04-20 19:14
You forgot to mention Palestinian Christians. Israel does not differentiate between Moslem or Christian Palestinians. As long as they can grab their land is all that matters to the Zionists. A fact about which US Evangelicals are in denial.
+63 # jmac9 2013-04-20 11:09
The USA creates and then destroys its Frankenstein monsters.

They don't 'turn on' the US - they were always psychos - the US just used them for US interests as long as needed then disposes of them.
Look in the article: Chechen leader is tied to Bin Laden - but the US used Chechens to proxy attack Russia.

The US gave billions to Osama B Laden and Taliban to fight against Russians in Afghanistan - encouraging 'jihad' against 'foreign invaders' - then Russian pulls out - and SURPRISE! Those jihadies want to continue - jihad against 'foreign invaders'-

1953 US creates dictator Shah of Iran, crushing elected Iranian government, so that US can control Iranian oil.

To keep Shah in power, US trains terrorist police force, the SAVAK, who torture and murder Iranian citizens resistance to US dictator Shah.
Finally Iranians overthrow US dictator and SURPRISE!
Iranians don't want anymore US interference in their affairs.

US supports Samosa dictatorship in Nicaragua. Finally in 1979, Nicaraguans overthrow US dictator and SURPRISE!
The Nicaraguans don't want a government modeled on the 1% corporate rich vs. 99% repressed poor - USA model.
+12 # Coleen Rowley 2013-04-21 08:52
I wrote this so fast yesterday and it’s not exactly polished. For instance I almost always put “terrorists” in quotes because it’s a term that doesn’t have a real definition or fixed meaning but is just used to manipulate people by pressing their emotional buttons (fear, hate, greed, false pride and blind loyalty). But yes, we HAVE seen this movie before! Our corrupt politicians and neocon-controll ed national security-foreig n policy connivers just keep running the same “Charlie Wilson War” script: “they might be terrorists but they are our terrorists!” Charlie Wilson’s War was hardly worth seeing the first time as you’ll recall it ended on a (falsely) high note without showing the blowback of 9-11. But only a few astute analysts and movie reviewers criticized that big omission.

The opportunistic neocons used Iraqi ex-pat con-artist Ahmed Chalabi to gin up their war on Iraq and were SO surprised to discover him later turning on and spying on them. Years later we get Hillary feigning surprise—almost identical to Guiliani’s!— how could it be that our Libyan rebel “friends” whom we armed for our own “regime change” purposes turned against us and killed our Ambassador?! What a surprise! In fact we have seen this movie so many times now that we all should be prepared for the same ending with Syria and Iran.
+13 # Coleen Rowley 2013-04-21 09:10
I wouldn't exactly say "psychos" as it's really quite simple to radicalize individuals, and the younger brother was in all probability just following older brother---much as the 16 yr old followed along with older, more powerful DC sniper John Muhummad. You often find also weak women being seduced into violence by violent males. In fact you can attribute the following of the large mass of the American public, just following their bipartisan and MIC-corrupted leadership, including but not limited to the neo-cons, into supporting illegal, unethical and counterproducti ve wars and violence on other people. In a way the "psychopathy" does exist but it's like a disease, it's on both sides of "wars" and it spreads rather easily, enabled by propaganda. War and terrorism are both forms of this psychopathy and they work in sync.
+7 # treadlightly 2013-04-21 12:02
Thank you for the follow up. You are the first author to enter the commentary section.
I appreciate your diligent work in helping to connect the dots. Well done.
+18 # kelly 2013-04-20 11:40
I'll tell ya'.
I was watching CNN last night when the interview took place. Guiliani was saying,"you remember I was in Chechnya around the time of that school incident, don't you Piers? If this thruly is a Chechyan thing then I'm surprised, we've never had anything with the Chechnyans before."
+29 # Walter J Smith 2013-04-20 14:01
Guiliani is so deluded with his own self-importance he will believe anything that proves convenient at the moment.
+39 # treadlightly 2013-04-20 10:03
Without an enemy, the products of the MIC become obsolete . They might have to get real jobs that contribute to the health of the nation. Don't expect them to do that voluntarily.
+29 # cmp 2013-04-20 10:08
Let us also never forget:

"A poor person's class is terrifying whenever a rich person's terrorism is class"
+25 # tonywicher 2013-04-20 10:29
Here is my current best guess as to how this was done. If you listen to the CNN interview of Piers Morgan talking to the mother of the bombers, she is saying that the FBI had been “counselling” him for 5 years, ever since he became involved with “religious politics”. So this went down just like the 7/7 London bombings. The older brother was targeted to begin with because of his Chechen origen. He was recruited by the FBI as an informant, and sent to Chechnya to be “sheep dipped”, that is to establish his connection with “terrorists” in Chechnya. At this point he was ready to be used as a patsy. He was told that he would be able to help by assisting in a counter-terrori st “drill” that was going to be held during the Boston marathon. The drill was being carried out by Craft International. Craft has a hat with a skull on it and the motto “No matter what your mother told you, violence does solve problems”. Look up Craft International on the Net. Several of these Craft operatives may be seen standing around in many videos of the event. They all wore the same khaki pants and dark jackets and carried backpacks. The patsy was given an identical backpack containing what he thought was a fake pressure cooker bomb and told to place it somewhere as part of the drill. He must have been the most surprised person there when it actually went off.
+7 # Coleen Rowley 2013-04-21 09:02
Other very likely unfortunate outcomes are: 1)that the Boston bombings will serve to reinvigorate the AUMF which serves as the (illegal) basis for insanely counter-product ive drone assassinations on the "global battlefield"; 2) surveillance cameras will likely be installed a thousand times over what they now exist in public places and 3) FBI will argue that they need to redouble their "pre-emptive" targeting of profiled targets in their massive database for "entrapment schemes"---they will point to the Boston bombing as justification for continuing their extremely counterproducti ve targeting in order to justify their "Minority Report-esque" claims that they can prevent such acts of terrorism. Despite the facts showing precisely the opposite conclusion that should be drawn: that if the FBI, NSA, DHS, etc were not wasting so much time collecting irrelevant data on innocents, they might have focused and followed up better on the Russian tip. Seeking a needle in the haystack so let's add more hay doesn't make any sense. But who will care when fear and hate emotions being ginned up?

At the end of the day, it's entirely possible--altho ' no way to actually know (and I have no way of knowing how reliable, credible Debka report below is, but it's possible we may have another CIA "recruitment of "our terrorists" that backfired:
0 # tonywicher 2013-04-23 09:15
Please see following comment
+1 # tonywicher 2013-04-23 09:21

You still seem to embrace the concept of "blowback" as if somehow the FBI and CIA were unwittingly and through incompetence allowing these terrorist events to occur. No, they are manufacturing these events deliberately and with malice aforethought for the purpose of justifying war and establishing a police state. The Tsarnaevs would have been normal boys living a normal life if not for them. THIS IS STATE-SPONSORED TERROR, NOT "BLOWBACK". "Blowback "is what the government wants you to believe. There was not blowback here. This was a total setup of innocent people. Stop saying blowback. If anybody thinks this is blowback they don't understand the situation.
0 # tonywicher 2013-04-23 09:23
Oh, and I would not believe one word of the debka report. They are nothing but an Israeli disinformation outlet.
+43 # NanFan 2013-04-20 10:38
#BobC ~ Your interpretation is your interpretation, but you got this wrong.

The US chooses to create these "Frankenstein monster" leaders, we use them, we destroy them when we're done with them.

Example: Manuel Noriega, Panama, was Reagan's connection in the Iran-Contra cocaine/weapons trafficking scam. Trained in the US, by the way.

Example: Bush, Sr. went in after Reagan, arrested Noriega, knowing full well he was a drug trafficker, illegally invaded Panama, took Noriega to the states, claiming he was a "prisoner of war," tried him, and sentenced to 20 years in jail for drug trafficking and other related things. He was no longer useful.

Example: Saddam Hussein was a US government creation. They propped him up for years, providing weapons and training in exchange for oil and to fight against Iran. Then, when he was no longer useful, they got rid of him. Bad guy no doubt. But he had nothing to do with 9/11 and the US knew exactly what kinds of weapons he did or did not have.

Example: The Shah of Iran in 1953. The US government created this dictator to keep control of ... once again ... Iranian oil. It was the Iranian people who finally threw him out. The US gave HIM asylum ... they weren't done with him, but the Iranian people were, so the US government were done with Iran and George W. proceeded to put them in his so-called "axis of evil."

I could on and on, but you hopefully get the drift.

-5 # BobC 2013-04-20 16:23
Those are great examples of U.S. screw-ups with blowback. But how do our hypocritical motives set us up automatically for attacks at the hands of the unsavory characters we helped? Noriega and Saddam and Bin Laden made the wrong choices after receiving our help. Saddam in particular should not have been a surprise given his history of starting wars. Maybe even Bin Laden should not have been a surprise since he was a religious nut. If Pinochet or the Shah of Iran had turned on us, those would have been surprises. Chechen Muslims are a surprise if they were politically or even religiously motivated (which perhaps they were not --- we shall see as the investigation unfolds).
+20 # Romesh Bhattacharji 2013-04-20 10:43
The Tsarnaev parents have said that the FBI had contacted Tamerlan for visiting mosques. What happened after that? Did the neocons step in?
+3 # BobC 2013-04-20 16:59
The FBI interviewed Tamerlan because Russia suggested it. Whatever he told them, they were satisfied that he didn't pose a threat to the U.S.
+15 # mjc 2013-04-20 11:12
Coleen Rowley blows away a lot of the smoke and mirrors involving our security agencies and those that want to protect this nation and its citizens. The first thing that came to my mind was Chechnya is a small "state" in the "Soviet Union" fighting to keep their independence... against a very formidable odds: why would anyone of Chechen ethnicity want to plant bombs that would kill Americans? But of course these days that image..of what Chechen ethnicity is has apparently been reworked in an effort to smooth our relationship with "Russia". Now they are terrorists. Still wonder how these two Americans got their hands on so many weapons, expensive weapons, and if Tamerland was the leader, where did he learn his bomb-making skills? Nothing makes me more sick to my stomach than to hear a so-called leader like Lindsey Graham imply thst we need to look a little more deeply into our immigration policies: we should have recognized that these youngsters were potential terrorists when they came here ten years ago. Their uncle and their father and their aunt all seemingly unable to believe that these two brothers could have done such a thing. Lots of good legal advice? or real sentiment, but the message is quite scary to those of us who live here, whether it has been for a lifetime or a few years. Adam Lanza had little in common with the brothers...but ???
+23 # jwb110 2013-04-20 11:25
The history of America in this kind of covert overthrow is that the US has without exception back the wrong guy.
+13 # carp 2013-04-20 11:30
The MIC business model is making money for their no bid no oversight private contractors. As long as we have a war to attend to they can continue their business model of planned obsolescence of blood and treasure.
As long as we were a part of all that, jobs and benefits from the 50s to the 80s before they started reneging on jobs and benefits we gave the MIC license to operate. But now that we don't have job security or benefits let alone a living wage the MIC has lost it's credibility. I don't know if we can do a thing about it now.
+9 # tonywicher 2013-04-20 11:38
Let me add to my previous comment a link to the CNN interview of the brother's mother where she says that the FBI had been "counselling" the older brother for five years. It is really compelling. I saw it when it was originally broadcast on CNN and now it is already strangely hard to find on the Net, but fortunately Russia Today and Global Research have preserved it:

On the Chechnya connection, I also recommend reading everything Sibel Edmonds has to say on Boiling Frogs Post, information she has first hand from her time as an FBI translator.
+15 # Cassandra2012 2013-04-20 12:36
It also makes one wonder about the kind of patsy, Lee Harvey Oswald, the supposed 'lone' killer of JFK was (for the CIA? for the neo-cons-in-tra ining, for LBJ, for the corporate Repugs whose aim appears to be complete control of the US?
+4 # tonywicher 2013-04-20 13:36
Oh sure, Lee Harvey Oswald was a CIA asset used as a patsy. Yes, we have not had a real president since; the presidency has been occupied. But the "corporate rethugs" such as Allen Dulles who assassinated Kennedy, and got us into the Vietnam war and staged 9/11 are not a bit worse than the Wall Street Democrats like Obama, who continued the fraud by bringing you the "death" of CIA asset Osama bin Laden who died in 2002, the Underpants Bomber, the Christmas Tree bomber, and now this.
+3 # Dhimmi 2013-04-20 13:43
Should I care about Chechya? From all that I've heard, the suspects seemed to be generally well liked Americans. Where is the evidence of the importance of Chechnya in all this?
+11 # mdhome 2013-04-20 14:29
If dubya was president now, he would be calling for war with Iran for their support of these bombers.
+10 # Jeff Spurr 2013-04-20 15:01
Much that Crowley says is spot-on, but she frames Chechnya and the Tsamaev brother's lives poorly; the US is not a natural target. She says the brothers' family were from Chechnya? Their forebears were expelled by Stalin to Kyrqyztan in WWII along with the Chechen people, an evil act that gives them an eternal right to be free of the Russians. No people has been brutalized so badly as the Chechens were by Yeltsin and Putin after they declared independence, which outrages radicalized them. The "Chechen" leader Crowley cites was a Saudi volunteer, albeit a committed one. It would appear that neither brother ever spent a moment on the soil of Chechnya, only a brief stop in neighboring Daghestan before coming to the US.
The bombing seems more related to Tamarlan Tsamaev's inability to gain a purchase on life in America and move ahead with his own. Named after a world conqueror, but unable to get a college degree. The interview from the time when he had ambitions to be an Olympic boxer where he said that he had not a single American friend and did not understand Americans is the most revealing piece of information aside from repeated descriptions of a somewhat ornery and volatile character. Whatever the religious/polit ical gloss he may have placed on his resentments, they were likely secondary. Many people live difficult and thwarted lives, so one does wonder why some decide to murder innocent people with whom they have no connection, but that is as American as apple pie.
-2 # BobC 2013-04-20 16:14
EXACTLY. Well said. The guy reminds me a little of Lee Harvey Oswald (who WAS a lone assassin --- pay attention to the actual evidence in that case) except that Oswald didn't string along an impressionable younger brother.
+3 # flippancy 2013-04-22 04:00
Quoting BobC:
EXACTLY. Well said. The guy reminds me a little of Lee Harvey Oswald (who WAS a lone assassin --- pay attention to the actual evidence in that case) except that Oswald didn't string along an impressionable younger brother.

Sorry, the actual evidence in the assassination was sealed for 75 years. All we have is the whitewash job.
0 # BobC 2013-04-22 16:21
No -- we have a mountain of incontrovertibl e physical evidence. That's just for starters.
+5 # Walter J Smith 2013-04-20 15:28
Now that I have looked around that global research site, I wonder how reliable anything coming from there really is.

The reporters do not cite sources; they simply and magically know every assertion they make.

Yet, why is the FBI ignoring the family?

And why is CNN denegrating the family on behalf of pushing the FBI's theories?
+7 # in deo veritas 2013-04-20 15:52
True we have always supported the wrong guy (dictator or ouir stooge, but more importantly we have always taken their side AGAINST the people of their countries and kept them at the mercy of these villains to promote the interests of the military-indust rial complex. Yet we cannot understand why so many people in the world hate this country. They equate the American people with the government we keep in power because of our ignorance and cowardice. Therefore they will direct their venom toward us since they cannot get at the real source of their misery and frustration. Unless we find a way to change the direction in which the country is headed we will have to expect more of the same. We have met the enemy and he is us.
+15 # rhgreen 2013-04-20 16:42
There is some kind of stereotyping going on here. I am, at age 73, a long-time student of history, and I have been sympathetic to Chechnya's aspirations for a long time. If one is not then one shouldn't be sympathetic to Baltic countries like Estonia and Lithuania getting out from under Russia, either. Or America using "violence" to get out from under Britain in the 1770s, for that matter. But I am hardly a Neo-con. My politics are such that I would most enjoy (or would have enjoyed) drinking & talking with Che Guevara, Hugo Chavez, and Rafael Correa.
+6 # Activista 2013-04-20 17:57
... Richard Perle, the notorious Pentagon adviser; Elliott Abrams ...
and NEOCON are marching on ... would like to read some WIKI documents where these Southern Russia countries are buying arms .. or who trains bombers ..
+2 # BobC 2013-04-20 18:53
Not sure why the moderator deleted my responses to Walter J Smith and jmac9 in which I clarified my position. Looks fishy to me. I wasn't the least bit disrespectful to them.
0 # BobC 2013-04-21 10:21
I see that you've restored my responses. Thanks.
-18 # Rick Levy 2013-04-20 20:51
What does all this have to do with the fact that The Tsarnaev's certainly were not mistreated as immigrants in the U.S. They took advantage of the educational and social institutions there and were apparently successful in their endeavors. So why did they turn? Possibly because they became more devout Muslims over time and as a result learned to hate the country that took them in?. Islam has a way of doing that, giving people like these brothers an excuse way to kill innocent people, but at the same time to dodge responsibility for their own actions which were done in the name of Allah. But e Rowley the victims of these terrorists don't matter.
0 # tomo 2013-04-21 16:55
Coleen speaks of Chechnya's fight against Russia. It may also be useful, in the Boston context, to speak of Russia's fight against Chechnya. While many an American policymaker may have been pleased, as Coleen recounts, to see Chechnya give Russia trouble, it seems to me that, where the rubber met the road, we Americans were--in the happy days of Bush II--quite willing to let Putin have his "terrorists" and do unto them as he he saw fit so long as he would sit tight and let us have ours. Throw into Chechnya a generous draft of Wahhabism--a heady brew from Saudi-Arabia that owes much to resentment and has little to do with the Koran--and you may have a clue toward understanding how two young men wandered amok into mindless cruelty and murder.
0 # onewatcher 2013-04-23 17:47
Come now, -17!!! Rick Levy is spot on, well thought out Mr. Levy!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.