Share This Page

Bombing suspect calls wars incentive

| Tuesday, April 23, 2013, 9:12 p.m.

The wounded suspect in the Boston Marathon bombings has told interrogators that he and his brother were driven by hard-line Islamist views and anger over the U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq but had no ties to foreign militant groups, officials said on Tuesday.

The statements made by Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19, from his hospital bed provide what authorities described as the clearest indication yet of the brothers' apparent motivation in carrying out an attack that killed three people and wounded more than 250 others on April 15.

The information gleaned by a special team of FBI interrogators before charges were filed against Tsarnaev on Monday appears to be consistent with the direction of a broader investigation that has not uncovered any links to terrorist networks abroad, officials said.

“These are persons operating inside the United States without a nexus” to an overseas group, an intelligence official said. Instead, officials said, the evidence suggests that Tsarnaev and his 26-year-old brother, Tamerlan, who was killed during a confrontation with police, were “self-radicalized.”

The officials spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe the preliminary findings of an investigation in which information about key aspects of the plot is still being assembled.

Officials briefed on the interrogation of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev said he has specifically cited the war in Iraq and the campaign in Afghanistan as factors motivating him and his brother in the alleged plot.

Neighbors have described comments by the Tsarnaevs about the U.S. wars. Albrecht Ammon, 21, of Cambridge said in an interview last week that he had recently argued with the older Tsarnaev about U.S. foreign policy.

Tsarnaev said U.S. wars were based on the Bible, “a cheap copy of the Koran,” Ammon said. Tsarnaev said that “in Afghanistan, most casualties are innocent bystanders killed by American soldiers,” according to Ammon.

President Obama has made repairing relations with the Islamic world a foreign policy priority, even as he has expanded drone operations in Pakistan and other countries, inflaming anti-U.S. sentiment among many Muslims.

After attending a classified briefing, senior Republican lawmakers voiced concern that U.S. agencies had failed to share information leading up to the attacks.

“I think there's been some stovepipes reconstructed,” said Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., the ranking Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee, using a term that refers to bureaucratic barriers. Chambliss did not provide details.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., the chairman of the committee, disputed that characterization and praised the work of investigators, saying she had “complete confidence” the case would be solved.

U.S. officials described several other developments in the investigation into the Tsarnaev brothers' actions, saying that the suspects may have killed a police officer at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in an effort to steal his gun and arm themselves after they became the targets of a huge manhunt.

The officials said the officer, Sean Collier, appears not to have attempted to defend himself when he was shot in the head Thursday night. The older Tsarnaev brother had a handgun, and officials said the two may have been seeking to obtain one for Dzhokhar.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.