When he said "we", perhaps he was referring to the US Govt, as in 9/11 was an inside job. In other words, he might be the world's most hapless truther. Think about it--this activist, filled with piss and vinegar over the war and Congress's inability to stop it, and convinced it was pulled off by Bushco, sends off pictures of himself in front of the very same recruiting center that got blown up. He was probably very proud of himself for doing his patriotic duty. Talk about puckering up with fear at the news..."what's that you say honey? A bomb went off where? In front of what? Doh!!"
Not to say he isn't somehow involved, but he'd have to be the dumbest revolutionary in US history if he knew the bomb was going off and fingered himself anyway. I'm going with hapless truther.
Meanwhile, in a story that could shine light on the real culprits, authorities are investigating a Canadian border crossing event they think might be linked. That would seem to suggest foreigners (of course they didn't list the nationality of those involved) however the only foreigners actively involved in trying to attack America are of the Arab-Muslim variety, who usually tend to attack during daylight to kill infidel women and children, and themselves. This bombing doesn't fit that MO and still seems more like anarchists or anti-war leftests. Or Karl Rove, of course.
According to the WaPo, the man wasn't involved in the bombing and was merely the victim of his own bad timing, although his "we did it" doesn't sound very trutherish:
Officials said the "we did it" language referred to the Democratic takeover of Congress in 2006. "This was a citizen exercising his right to make a political comment to his representatives," Eimiller said.To eliminate the man from suspicion would seem to require a thorough examination of his email and web habits to see if he was in contact with subversive groups. It's possible he was, but only in an ideological fashion and some radical group found out about his mailings and decided it was good cover for their bomb. Surely they've run down that aspect.
As to determining his status as a truther or just some disaffected Democrat unhappy with his elected Reps for not getting out of Iraq, we'd need to get our hands on the manifesto, which seems possible only if a Congressional staffer leaks it. And why would they?