Boston probe expands to Russia; report says CIA wanted older brother on watch list
BOSTON — From Boston and Washington to Russia, investigators pressed for answers on Wednesday about the Muslim radicalism believed behind the Boston Marathon bombings, while more than 4,000 mourners paid tribute to an MIT police officer who authorities say was gunned down by the bombers.
Among the speakers at the service in Cambridge was Vice President Joe Biden, who condemned the bombing suspects as “two twisted, perverted, cowardly, knockoff jihadis.”
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19, was listed in fair condition as he recovered from wounds suffered during a violent getaway attempt. He is seen in video with his older brother, now dead, placing bombs that killed three people and wounded more than 260 on April 15.
The bombs were detonated by remote control, U.S. officials close to the investigation told the Associated Press. It was not clear what the detonation device was, but the charges against Dzhokhar say he was using a cellphone moments before the blasts.
The CIA asked the main U.S. counterterrorism agency to add the name of Tamerlan Tsarnaev to a watch list more than a year before the attack, U.S. officials told The Washington Post.
Russian authorities had contacted officials there in the fall of 2011 and raised concerns that Tsarnaev was an increasingly radical Islamist and could be planning to travel overseas. The CIA requested that his name be put on a database maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center.
In Russia, U.S. investigators traveled to the predominantly Muslim province of Dagestan and were in contact with the brothers' parents, hoping to gain more information.
The parents, Anzor Tsarnaev and Zubeidat Tsarnaeva, plan to fly to the United States on Thursday, the father told a Russian state news agency.
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 â 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.