Saturday, April 16, 2016


by Brian Wright

Book Review: And Nobody Died in Boston Either (2016)

State-sponsored terrorism with Hollywood special effects
Edited by James Fetzer, PhD, and Mike Paleck

Nobody_Died_in_Boston_EitherNote: The Coffee Coaster is proud to publish this review on April 15, 2016—241 years after the British were ordered to march on Lexington and Concord, Mass., thus leading to, on April 19th, the first colonial armed resistance that produced British casualties: the ‘shot heard ’round the world’ and the beginning of American Independence. [And, ironically, the third anniversary of a major hoax-assault produced, in Boston, by an out-of-control, clandestine, federalized oligarchy for purposes of destroying all vestiges of individual liberty in our country.]
The good news is this book, unlike the notorious Nobody Died at Sandy Hook (2015), was not ‘banned'[1] by Amazon. The bad news is that with the Boston stage performance, many in the alternative community—which initially was all over the false-flag indicators and images in real time that completely demolished the official story—seemed to stop writing and caring a month later. Was it because the two alleged terrorists had hard-to-spell names and a Muslim orientation? Did the government’s case miraculously start making sense? Or did higher priority stories come along, e.g. what ‘the Donald’ ate for breakfast yesterday morning?
In any case, both Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the ‘Brothers Chechen,’ became the ‘it’ victims of the ultimate synthetic-terror tag game—this one apparently designed to groom American TV-Nation booboisie for martial law and 24/7 law enforcement pounding-slash-photo ops. “USA, USA, USA!” greeted the rampaging goons… large numbers of them, too… 9,000 men, armed and dangerous, sources report. “Sleep safe tonight, America, your steroid-amped, federalized, militarized police are here to throw you and your family out in the street.”  
The federal Boston bombing drill 4/15/13 is more a collage of imagery than the Sandy Hook event, which happened a year and a third earlier, 12/14/12. We also have a timeline, and various camera footages, including mainstream media and surveillance videos; it’s hard to keep it all straight. What I was looking for was something like 10 easy reasons why the Boston Bombing was a false flag, and the best aid was actually from Craig McKee’s chapter (3) where he lays out the official story under the following headings:
  • Summary
  • The police bomb drill exercise
  • The identification (of the Tsarnaev brothers as suspects)
  • The pursuit
  • The ‘confession’
  • The connections of the suspects (to Intelligence)
  • The ‘carnage’
  • The grooming for martial law
Then as he’s laying out the official sequences of events under each heading, McKee asks pointed questions as to whether any given official fact passes the smell test. Few do. [Many such factoids are withdrawn by the authorities, then submitted again, then withdrawn, as if proceeding from a random number generator.]  Indeed, like Sandy Hoax, virtually nothing about the official story of the Boston Bombing makes any sense — EXCEPT as a very poorly executed federally sponsored terror drill, using crisis (bad) actors, while serving the objective of advancing a total police state in America.
To cite one example under ‘The pursuit:’
“Why would the brothers drive to MIT, then kill a cop to get his gun (when they already had one) and then not take (MIT police officer) Sean Collier’s gun? Why would they then proceed to carjack the SUV of Danny Meng when they already had a vehicle, THEN each of the brothers drive one of the two vehicles they now had, before abandoning the vehicle they had originally? Why continue to drive Danny’s SUV when its theft would be reported to police? Why confess their crimes to Danny then let Danny go or let him escape so that Danny can run on to the police and convey their confession? And why remain in the Boston area for three days if they were actually guilty?”
The book presents literally dozens more absurdities. It’s just a story that would never happen the way we’re told unless it were made up. The book adduces reasonable evidence and/or absolute proof that:
  1. The backpack with the explosives was black; the backpack carried by Dzhokhar was white; the case against him should have been dismissed on that obvious ‘black vs. white’ fact alone.
  2. We know that government intelligence was in contact with both men for several years, also with members of their families; this jibes with other false flag operations, like 9/11, where suspects were long monitored by Intelligence.
  3. Audio of the Boston Bombing includes Boston law enforcement officials (LEOs) blaring from a bullhorn, “This is a bomb drill, do not be alarmed.” Tweets by those other than the Tsarnaev brothers announced that explosions were scheduled to go off… as part of a drill or some other controlled explosion.
  4. FBI special agent Richard DesLauriers—in response the wide Internet dispersal of photos of Craft International (government contractor-spook company) men on the scene carrying around and depositing (black) back packs—stated, “These (official FBI) images should be the only ones, and I emphasize the only ones, that the public should view…”
  5. All police statements about the alleged gunfight with the two brothers, the killing of Tamerlan, the apprehension of Dzhokhar in the boat, the alleged confession Dzhokhar wrote on the curved inside surface of the boat (in darkness), the handcuffed naked man, etc., are so fantastic and riddled with contradictions they must be rejected out of hand.
  6. An eyewitness claims the police ran over Tamerlan in the SUV, not Dzhokhar; Infowars asserts the brothers were trying to surrender to police, that they fired no weapons of any kind.
  7. The official story of Dzhokhar escaping from police and running over Tamerlan with the SUV to get away makes no sense: 1st, how would Dzhokhar manage to get away and, 2d, why would he deliberately run over his brother in any case, much less take the time to do so as he is trying to escape from the police?
  8. Judy Clarke, Dzhokhar’s famous defense attorney, greets the jury by stating that her client is guilty! She did not cross examine most of the prosecution’s 92 witnesses and only called four of her own. Clearly, she—along with the federalized LEOs, judges, prosecutors, jury members, and media—were scripted to suppress any evidence that might undermine the official story.
  9. The ‘Miracle Man’—his name is Jeff Bauman according the official story, but some have alleged (and, for one, does not challenge) that his real name is Nick Vogt, a US Army Veteran who lost his legs in action in Afghanistan before taking a leading crisis-actor role in the Bombing production—is scooted off on a wheelchair by Hollywood hero-moron, Carlos Arrendondo. With both legs blown off below the knees, and a loosely applied tourniquet to only one leg, why do we see no blood… anywhere? How is it Miracle Man is not screaming, or unconscious, or dead? Why did hero Carlos stick him on a wheelchair, anyway, with the torso raised to facilitate more blood loss? Where was Miracle Man carted off to?
  10. You’ll really appreciate the Commentary section of Allan William Powell’s chapter (5), where he does a simple listing of one flagrant contradiction after another—it’s actually comical how poorly the Bombing stage show was cobbled together. One notable farce: large numbers of ‘victims’ experience swaths of ripped clothing, particularly pants, with no shrapnel damage whatsoever to the body parts beneath the clothing. Two special bombs, eh?
If you’re a viewer of all these incongruities and you still buy the official story, then, I’m sorry, your days on earth as a functioning human being capable of independent survival (even in the Idiocracy America has become) are numbered. And it’s a small number.


To expand on what’s noted above as rationale for the Boston incident not receiving as much alternative media exposure, I find that editor James Fetzer hits the nail on the head: a big component of the globalist mind-control agenda for the previous decade or two is to scapegoat Muslims. He supplies a list, in case we’ve forgotten:
  1. 9/11 was blamed on Muslims.
  2. The Boston Bombing was blamed on Muslims.
  3. Charlie Hebdo was blamed on Muslims.
  4. The Paris Attacks were blamed on Muslims.
  5. San Bernardino was blamed on Muslims.
  6. ISIS is supposed to created by bad Muslims.
  7. Iran is supposed to be run by bad Muslims.
  8. Muslim hordes are invading Europe.
“All of which lead to the inescapable conclusions that:
  1. Muslims are bad, therefore,
  2. Keep them out of the United States [per Don Trump, anyway].
“For those who know no better, I have done enough research with enough collaborators to be convinced that none of the above—with the possible exception of (8)—is true….
“The one that bothers me the most may be (7), because all 16 US intel agencies concluded in 2007 that Iran was not pursuing nuclear weapons, a finding they reaffirmed in 2011. Even the Mossad reported to the Israeli government the same, just three weeks before Benjamin Netanyahu went to the UN to affirm the opposite. Our sanctions [vs. Iran] violate Article 33 of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 as forms of collective punishment, which properly qualify as war crimes. The Iranians are not ‘the bad guys.’ That honor falls to the government of the United States.”


And Nobody is a compendium of several writers, and each of them has a unique story to tell, some more adroitly than others. [I have quibbles with some copyediting lapses and overall layout—as I expressed for the similarly configured Sandy Hook book—but they pale to insignificance compared to the courage and vital information conveyed herein.] The analyses uniformly draw the reader into a world where reason and logic are important; it’s even entertaining in places. It’s a hard book to put down; it’s a worthy demolition of the official story and you won’t be disappointed. I applaud Dr. Fetzer and all the writers for another superb contribution to the Gandhian global truth force, Satyagraha. Thank you very much, again, for raising the torch.


If, like Sandy Hoax, the Boston Bombing was not a federally funded simulation drill to serve a control agenda, then where were the emergency vehicles? Not a single ambulance showed up on Boylston street, didn’t they have directions? Why were no death certificates produced? Why did we see no blood gushing from the many newly created amputees? Why was fake blood poured on the concrete? Why did hospital officials deny requests for records of admissions?
The reasons government officials commit such hoaxes (and real killings/injuries) is because the people have no effective tools to prevent them from committing crimes.  Or rather we do have the tool—the fully empowered people’s First Principles grand jury—but we’ve let it atrophy from disuse.
The restoration of the grand jury—which would simply launch a people’s investigation into and indictments of legitimate suspects for any gross official  misconduct… such as false flag crimes, official deception, crisis-actor fraud and complicity in a felony conspiracy, etc.—must be Americans’ highest priority in law today. Especially for Sandy Hook and Boston. [Note: I have envisioned how the resurrection can occur in my recent book, The Truman Prophecy. For access to preview versions, please go to the home page of the Worldwide Society of Independents:]
[1] Technically, a banned book means the coercive state has forcibly prevented anyone from publishing or reading it. What Amazon et al have done is refuse to publish Nobody Died at Sandy Hook, which is strictly different from banning. [Though, you can make an argument that Amazon is such a dominant catalog that not to be listed therein is tantamount to being prevented from publishing… an effective ban.]
SPECIAL NOTE: Upon hearing from one of the authors, let me rephrase the above footnote. It does appear that Amazon has gone to great lengths to deny the existence of or access to the Sandy Hoax book. To the degree that in the modern world of publishing amounts to a BAN. Here are Prof. Harwood’s comments on the lengths Amazon is taking to prevent any readership or discussion of Sandy Hook or Boston:
“Amazon has not just refused to publish the book but has also apparently banned any secondary seller from selling the book on its site.  Similarly, when I ordered the book from a secondary seller on eBay, the order was suddenly canceled and my money refunded.  I ordered from a seller in Australia for about $90 with the postage.  The book is not listed on eBay to this day.  Who [but coercive state agencies (‘Intelligence’)—ed.] could lean on Amazon and eBay enough to ban all secondary sellers even though obviously both Amazon and eBay would make a profit from selling the book?…
“And another thing… the censorship or ban extends from the Sandy Hook book to the Boston book in that no book reviews of the Boston book are being posted on its page.  I posted a 5-star review of our book and it was unceremoniously removed without any explanation or notice to me or on the page for the Boston book.  Try posting a review of the Boston book on the Amazon link and see for yourself what happens.”
[Note: To check out Professor Harwood’s claim, I, Brian Wright, the author of this book review, have just submitted and had a five-star review approved on the Boston book Amazon page. I’ll keep you posted if my review should be cancelled in the next few days. (It is certainly odd that until my review was posted, the page indicated no reviews…  since January 2016?) — bw]

Needless to state, the authors would prefer you buy And Nobody Died in Boston Either from their Moonrock books site here.


    It may be the case that these comments are being messed with by someone other than me.
    The ONLY comments I have moderated (recently) have been by "Emmanuel Goldstein" and some by "Godsend."
    If you have tried to comment and either been unable, or seen your comment disappear, please contact Jim to let him know.
    We appreciate all of your on-topic, reasonable input and value all of you greatly.

  2. Plus,Paul McCartney really died and laser beams took down the twin towers.

    1. Directed Energy Weapons. "Laser beams" has a cheap, dismissive quality to the verbiage.
      Thanks for posting "anonymous" ...we missed you.

    2. Anonymous, are you one of the long line of semi-morons who comments mindlessly when he has not bothered to do any research? Not only do Paul and Faul have different teeth and palates, different ears, different sized and shaped craniums and different heights, but Paul was great on the guitar and weak on the piano, while Faul is weak on guitar and great on the piano. You have missed the boat. I am sorry, but there is too much evidence out there for me not to reprimand those who do not do their homework.

    3. Yeah, "Anonymous!" I see you on all kinds of websites with your snarky, dismissive little comments.
      You do add a bit of flavor though.

  3. How exciting that such a comprehensive review was done by Brian Wright. I intend to contact him in an appropriate way and express my appreciation.
    I wish that one fact was more prominently discussed. The real Dzhokhar was a rather strikingly handsome young man who spoke English without an accent. Whoever was presented to the courtroom had a heavy accent, and said only the words "Note Gooilty" and likely did not understand English or what was "happening" to him. Add to that the fact that friends in the courtroom said it wasn't him, and that the "drawings" showed a bearded, crazy haired, hook nosed fellow that looked nothing like the photos we have seen, and we have another perspective on the 'trial.'

    1. Excellent comment, Angel. You are spot on! The trial, like the marathon bombing, was a charade. There are many chapters that take it apart in the second half of the book. You, by contrast to some others, HAVE "done your homework"!

  4. Posted on Brian Wright's blog, which you can access by clicking on his name above.

    What a wonderful review, thank you. I really do hope to hear whether your comment sticks. Many of us will try to replicate your efforts.
    One of the facts that is often overlooked, but means a lot to me, is that Dzhokhar spoke English very well without an accent. The person who was “presented” at the “trial” said only two words, “Note Gooilty” in a heavy accent, and his friends who attended the first session said they did not think it was him (didn’t look like him or move like him.) In addition, the “artist renderings” don’t look anything like the handsome kid that had his throat slit as he was taken down outside the boat. What real defense attorney would allow their client to keep totally wild hair and a terrorist beard anyway? Who knows where the real Dzhokhar is.
    Maybe their final defense will be, “Are you kidding? There is no way anyone with a brain could have thought this was real! It was all “news theater” which was made legal 5 years ago. What kind of idiots could have imagined this absurd “educational propagandistic newscast” was real? You? Did YOU think that Dylan Storm Roof’s “hearing” was real? “Bowman’s” legs were blown off and he’s in a wheel chair with a cowboy holding his artery? Are you serious? Ha ha ha ha! Good thing we are in charge, cause the “people” are really stupid. Stop second guessing us, you don’t deserve to vote or make decisions, and we just proved it.”