Boston Marathon Bombing

I just got online and saw the news about the Boston Marathon bombing. How awful. Here's a thread to discuss it.

< Monday Open Thread | Tuesday Open Thread: Concert Time >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    True... (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by kdog on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 10:07:44 AM EST
    we set off bombs with not nearly enough regard for innocent life on the regular...but if we discover this was a foreign terrorist, bet your arse we will drop more bombs and kill more people and feed the cycle...or worse, pick another country to invade and occupy.

    Yes, if it does turn to be out to be a homegrown piece of sh&t, we could suffer the consequences of more lost liberties, more security theater bullsh*t, or god forbid a domestic drone assasination attempt.  But I would rather us suffer the consequences of a government response than some poor innocent slob in Yemen or wherever.  At the end of the day we are responsible for our government, and should suffer the consequences of our failure in that regard.  

    Foreign born Muslim (5.00 / 2) (#109)
    by MO Blue on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 10:23:04 AM EST
    would IMO result in songs of "Bomb, bomb Iran" to be sung non stop.

    Iran not involved in the bombing. Not a problem. Iraq was not involved in 9/11 either.

    Erik Rush, guest commentator on Fox, who also wrote a comment piece titled `Yes, Islam is an enemy' tweeted

    "@erikrush Everybody do the National Security Ankle Grab! Let's bring more Saudis in without screening them! C'mon! #bostonmarathon."

    Then when he was asked by another Twitter user whether he was blaming Muslims for the attack, Mr Rush responded: "Yes, they're evil. Let's kill them all."

    Of course, when his comments provoked fierce reactions, he claimed he was being sarcastic.

    One could also make the argument that even if it is not home grown the very fact that it happened on U.S. soil could allow the feds to start using the tactics they use overseas right here on our home turf. The ground IMO has been plowed already to make that possible.

    Per CNN (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by jbindc on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 12:38:51 PM EST
    A suspect has possibly been identified.

    And arrested (none / 0) (#124)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 12:57:38 PM EST

    Dropping a package with a zillion video cameras watching is not what you would expect from the kid with the best grades in math class.



    Chicago Sun-Times reporting a suspect (none / 0) (#125)
    by caseyOR on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 12:59:36 PM EST
    has been identified and is about to be arrested. NBC News is reporting right now that nobody knows what's going on, that there is no official report of a bomber being identified.

    NBC News, via Pete Williams, now reporting (none / 0) (#127)
    by caseyOR on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 01:01:36 PM EST
    that, according to the FBI, they are looking for a specific person who appears in the various videos of the bomb site. They do not know this person's name yet.

    Ahem...you are very close to the edge (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by christinep on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 03:06:40 PM EST
    with this comment, IMO, Slado.  When I read about the ricin-tested letter sent to the President of the United States today, the kind of statement above with its leading capacity & obvious innuendo is very troublesome ... not in a free speech sense, but in the sense of adding to the pile of growing violence against our own government while at the same time trying to put on a thin veneer of victimhood.  Commentary suggestive of justifying potential nuts in that regard is doing a lot more than pushing the envelope.  And, no, I do not buy that your statement was some kind of emphasis in philosophy, foreign policy, or other pretend conflation...BS.

    You are a bit sensitive (none / 0) (#132)
    by Slado on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 03:39:45 PM EST
    I don't want the terrorist to exist.   I just don't think it matters if he's home grown or foreign.  He or she is still a terrorist.

    I was simply commenting on the obvious hope of both left and right for it to be one or the other.

    I find that troubling.


    Read Peter G's link (5.00 / 2) (#133)
    by sj on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 04:08:07 PM EST
    to the definition of terrorism. The "agenda" aspect isn't present at this time. So far this act is a criminal act.

    I deleted Slado's comment (none / 0) (#138)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 10:45:04 PM EST
    It was a false characterization and inappropriate here. Slado, name calling isn't allowed here. Watch your language please.

    Earlier (4.86 / 7) (#70)
    by lentinel on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 07:47:04 PM EST
    today I read in some newspaper, I don't remember which at this moment, that what happened in Boston represents the first terrorist attack on our shores in 11 years.

    I thought about what happened in Newtown - or in the theatre in Colorado - and all the other shootings that have happened since 9/11. People certainly were terrorized and killed.

    But that doesn't count apparently.

    I (4.80 / 5) (#20)
    by lentinel on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 10:12:18 AM EST
    lived in Boston for several years and got quite attached to the place. I walked on Boylston Street many times, and it hurt me to see film of the devastation.

    Watching those films on television news, it did cross my mind that people in Iraq and Afghanistan have to contend with this on a daily basis - much of it caused by our interventions.

    I also must say that I really can't stand it when the newspeople, or some political figures, try to spin these disasters - shootings and the like - into a feel-good story - about how these things bring the American people together. Please. I don't disparage the work and courage of people on the scene coming to the rescue of others. I praise it. But I don't need it to be spun by the self-serving networks into a story about American goodness and how we are family. Generally, we treat certain less fortunate members of our "family" like so much trash.

    There are ways that we can be brought together other than in response to an attack or a tragedy. Something positive.

    To me, this tragic episode represents the inability on the part of our government to achieve the goal they have set out for themselves: to protect us and keep us safe. We have sacrificed a lot of our freedoms for absolutely nothing - just as Benjamin Franklin declared would happen so many years ago.

    Case in point re: the feel-good spin... (none / 0) (#27)
    by lentinel on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 11:48:02 AM EST
    Howard Fineman over at Huffpo writes:

    In the end, the terrorists will fail because Bostonians did not turn from their fellow men -- they turned toward them. And that is the real music of mankind.

    First, for anyone who was there, knows (4.75 / 4) (#5)
    by Anne on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 06:40:41 AM EST
    someone who was there, lives in the area or otherwise has some connection to the area, I hope you and yours are safe and unharmed.

    That being said, wouldn't Pavlov be proud today that the media is responding as the stimulus of public explosions has conditioned them to?  


    No one knows what this was, who was behind it, or if there is some larger meaning, and yet...it's not stopping the media from speculating, pulling the emotional triggers of 9/11 and firing away at their local and national audiences.  

    Just go about your business, but...BE AFRAID!!!  BE ALERT!!!  Bad day to have brown skin and look even vaguely Middle Eastern, because even though we have no idea who's responsible, well...[fill in this area with whatever knee-jerk, xenophobic stereotypical bias comes to mind].

    Anyone besides me wondering if somewhere in an undisclosed location, some authoritarian who's had an erection over this for more than four hours is dreaming up the next assault on our freedom?  Time to make the Patriot Act even more...patriotic?  Survey, surveil, wiretap, photograph, film, read e-mails, open mail...how else will we ever know who wants to kill us???

    Know who wants to kill us?  People like the kid who shot up Sandy Hook.  People like the guy who shot up the movie theatre, the kid who went on a rampage at Virginia Tech.  We're going to turn the full force of the US government against anything that remotely resembles terrorism - spy on people, read their e-mails, put cameras on every street corner, tap their phones - but if there are guns involved?  All of a sudden, privacy is paramount - don't anyone dare suggest background checks, no, that would be a sin against Charlton Heston, Wayne LaPierre and the 2nd Amendment.  The Amendment that is, of all the Amendments, so sacrosanct that we shouldn't even consider allowing the government to regulate anything remotely connected to it.

    Worry about bombs in trashcans?  Sure, I can get all nervous and freaked out over that.  But I imagine I have more to fear from the idiot with a gun who only thinks owing one makes him smarter.  

    Lewis Carroll would be impressed by how much deeper the rabbit hole is than even he imagined, and how much more insane things are there.

    This is all going to play very well with the Let's-Go-To-War-With-North-Korea crowd, don't you think?  

    Just wait for it - it's on the way.

    All that nice writing (1.00 / 4) (#61)
    by Slayersrezo on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 06:03:14 PM EST
    And here I was nodding and nodding and suddenly it turns into a paranoid , anti-gun screed.

    It's so freaking ironic that the legislation you support is not only another attack on freedom but is based on literally nothing but fear.

    So I not only have to fight the authoritarians on trashcans and should anyone who has ever taken chemistry get a background check, but I still have to worry about the Ann's of the world as well.


    Maybe all that nodding interfered with (5.00 / 5) (#69)
    by Anne on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 07:28:36 PM EST
    your ability to understand that I was contrasting the embrace of government restriction and regulation in response to "terrorism," with the outright rejection of it in response to anything-that-has-to-do-with-guns-and-gun-crime.

    In my opinion, it's a fair comparison to make.


    The last time (none / 0) (#73)
    by Slayersrezo on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 08:37:08 PM EST
    I supported giving the Federal Government more power was the original Patriot Act. Basically, extraordinary times require extraordinary powers, I expect them to give the power back, etc,etc. Fool me once. I specifically wrote one of Maryland's Senators and did what I could to try and get the extension defeated.

    That's the last time I've trusted the Federal Government with any new powers.


    Peace and healing to all involved (4.75 / 4) (#24)
    by Dadler on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 10:48:35 AM EST
    From victims to first responders who had to witness the worst of the carnage.

    That said, the media coverage is proof positive that the MSM in this nation has officially moved to another planet. The disconnect between what they believe they are and what they really are, between who the average American is and who they THINK that American is, well, it has never been a wider chasm, because those talking heads have never made more money comparatively. It is the epitome of class cluelessness. They are simply ignorant fools who have suffered little in their lives besides and overcooked steak. Because if they had, sorry, this ain't the "reporting" they'd be doing.

    I read some news coverage on line (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by oculus on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 01:32:02 PM EST
    speculating the perpetrator could be extremists on the left or the right. Trying to figure out who the leftist extremists might be. Occupy Wall Street?  Planned Parenthood?  ACLU?  

    The little old ladies of Code Pink (none / 0) (#36)
    by MKS on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 01:49:16 PM EST
    Yes indeed, given the pressure cooker (none / 0) (#37)
    by oculus on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 01:53:32 PM EST
    in the backpack. Good catch.

    So no moderate terrorists are suspected... (none / 0) (#76)
    by unitron on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 09:08:25 PM EST
    ...only the extremists?

    Progressives and centrists need (none / 0) (#81)
    by oculus on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 10:13:22 PM EST
    not apply.  

    Bad apples (none / 0) (#82)
    by ruffian on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 10:14:47 PM EST
    Glenn makes some points that (4.75 / 4) (#26)
    by Anne on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 11:25:27 AM EST
    the media just won't:

    But one wishes that the empathy for victims and outrage over the ending of innocent human life that instantly arises when the US is targeted by this sort of violence would at least translate into similar concern when the US is perpetrating it, as it so often does (far, far more often than it is targeted by such violence).

    Regardless of your views of justification and intent: whatever rage you're feeling toward the perpetrator of this Boston attack, that's the rage in sustained form that people across the world feel toward the US for killing innocent people in their countries. Whatever sadness you feel for yesterday's victims, the same level of sadness is warranted for the innocent people whose lives are ended by American bombs. However profound a loss you recognize the parents and family members of these victims to have suffered, that's the same loss experienced by victims of US violence. It's natural that it won't be felt as intensely when the victims are far away and mostly invisible, but applying these reactions to those acts of US aggression would go a long way toward better understanding what they are and the outcomes they generate.

    I also can't help thinking that, while there is so much compassion and angst and concern, and so much effort to soothe and heal when it's a tornado or a bomb or a shooting or a hurricane, where is all of that for the millions who still don't have jobs, have little access to health care, whose already-meager quality of life may get worse with threatened cuts to the safety net?  Is the chronic nature of the problem such that it's just a fact of life that we've accepted?

    I don't know - there's something really wrong with this country, and I have a real fear that it's just going to get worse.  The wealthy triumph again, as Obama signs into law legislation that repeals the insider trading regulations for Congress of the STOCK Act.  Guess that's more of that "outreach" he's so big on, trying to get closer to Wall Street and the banksters.

    "We are the (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 12:36:46 PM EST
    Hypocrites We've Been Waiting for!"

    I have two nieces in Boston (4.67 / 3) (#4)
    by kmblue on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 05:54:06 AM EST
    They're both okay.  Hope anyone with loved ones there has the same news.

    Eight year old victim (4.67 / 3) (#10)
    by ExcitableBoy on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 08:40:09 AM EST
    is from Dorchester. A national feed described it as a suburb of Boston, but it's not. Dorchester is part of Boston, actually the largest neighborhood in Boston. From an article I read he is from Savin Hill, which is one of the many sub-neighborhoods of Dorchester, very close to the Kennedy Library.

    Savin Hill is a very basic, working-class section of the city. I lived there, and two of my sisters still do. A very small, close-knit community. Just tragic.

    And his mother (none / 0) (#22)
    by jbindc on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 10:38:29 AM EST
    Had surgery for a brain injury and his 6 year old sister had her leg amputated.  Another young sibling was unharmed (how, I do not know).

    So much tragedy for all, but for this family in particular.


    I didn't know he was from dot (none / 0) (#31)
    by CST on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 01:00:38 PM EST
    For some reason that just made me really upset.  This is my neighborhood too..  not savin hill but close enough.

    One of the youths I coach's dad (4.50 / 2) (#2)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Apr 15, 2013 at 11:27:43 PM EST
    finished 19 minutes before the explosions.

    I didn't learn until tonight when ... (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 03:26:01 AM EST
    ... I got back home that The Spouse's best friend was in Boston to watch her fiance run the marathon, and she had been sending cell phone photos to my wife of runners crossing the finish line. She was about 70 yards from where the first bomb was planted, and had just turned her back to walk away from the crowd and seek out a better vantage point for the finish line when it exploded. She ran with the crowd into a nearby department store.

    She's fine, but terribly shaken. To make matters even more stressful, she and her fiance couldn't find each other for over two hours afterward because Boston police and race officials had rerouted the remaining runners away from the original finish line. He had no cell phone with him, so each had no idea where the other was. Because he had her on speed dial, he couldn't remember her phone number when he borrowed a phone, and so he went back to the hotel to wait for her. Further, friends and family were all constantly calling her, understandably frantic with worry, and that probably didn't help any.

    They had just arrived in Boston on Saturday afternoon, and were planning to stay for two weeks in New England, but decided instead to cut the trip short and return home tomorrow. The Spouse is going to pick them up at the airport mid-afternoon.


    Charlie Pierce was at the maraton (4.50 / 2) (#8)
    by MO Blue on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 07:26:08 AM EST
    He writes about the tragedy from the heart of someone from Boston.  He also writes of some of actions of the runners who had trained for years to participate in the event.

    Patriots Day in Boston is a treasured date. Half a million people come to watch the marathon. There are parties all along the route. The final stretch, on Boylston, is a cacophony of joy. It represents this city's confluence of youth and tradition, its crazy obsession with fitness, its elation at the start of spring.

    For runners from around the world, the marathon is a life goal. They train not for months, but years, to meet the daunting qualifying times. Crossing that small strip of pavement is an accomplishment that's as hard to explain as the attack that bloodied it is impossible to understand.

    This time, some of the last runners to cross kept going, to the hospitals to give blood. Doctors and nurses among them volunteered to help.

    Read more: Boston Marathon Bombings - I Was There - Esquire

    As always, Charlie Pierce has it right (5.00 / 4) (#17)
    by cal1942 on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 09:23:16 AM EST
    The Boston Marathon is the gleam in the eye of many extraordinary, ordinary people.  

    My daughter first qualified in October 2008. Qualifying for Boston was a goal and when she crossed the finish line knowing she'd qualified she burst into tearless tears.

    She began running when she was 40 and it took four years of training and running marathons before she was able to qualify.

    The first television reports I saw made me sick.  A reporter on the scene implied that people were not to worry because all the elite runners had crossed the finish line two hours before the explosions.


    The Boston Marathon is about the thousands of runners who train tirelessly, squeezing that training time around work and family responsibilities and spend their own money to go to Boston and run the Marathon.  It's not about the handful of elite runners who are paid to run.

    Again, Charlie Pierce gets it.  


    It's the iconic nature of the race (5.00 / 3) (#19)
    by Anne on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 09:57:01 AM EST
    that strikes that chord of fear, I think; whoever is responsible knew it would be highly publicized, and well-attended.  Interesting, though, is the placement so near the medical tents, as if those responsible didn't necessarily want to be responsible for deaths, as much as they wanted to grab the spotlight.

    I don't know - here I am speculating after railing against the media for doing it.  I'm a hypocrite, I guess.

    I'm glad your daughter and her friend are okay - at least physically; it's the mental effects that can be so hard to deal with, as we know.  I'm sure she will go over and over in her head all the what-ifs having to do with how her slowing down may have saved her from death or physical injury.

    And what a worry for you, not knowing for sure if she was okay.  

    I hope we know something soon - the longer it takes to get definitive info, the worse the anxiety for all concerned.


    Thank you (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by cal1942 on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 02:19:03 PM EST
    for your kind words.

    I wouldn't feel bad about speculating.  I haven't been able to resist speculation.  A burning curiosity can be a curse but, IMO, more of a blessing.

    My quarrel with the media is the usual commentary ignorant of known fact.


    Look at the byline... (none / 0) (#21)
    by unitron on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 10:37:49 AM EST
    ...it's some other guy, not Pierce.

    Charlie had at least two, if not three, (none / 0) (#23)
    by Anne on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 10:41:54 AM EST
    posts on the events of the day, all of which are  insightful and incisive.

    That I do not doubt... (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by unitron on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 09:06:02 PM EST
    ...considering his considerable talent as a writer, but Jon Marcus should be getting the credit for the article linked in the OP.

    You are right (none / 0) (#28)
    by MO Blue on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 11:59:08 AM EST
    I did not catch that.

    My daughter and her running friend (4.50 / 2) (#14)
    by cal1942 on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 08:59:19 AM EST
    had run over 25 miles of the Marathon when the explosions occurred.  They were on Commonwealth nearing Hereford when police blocked the route.

    I was following their progress online and was curious when they seemed to stay in the same place for about 20 minutes.  I called my son-in-law who'd received a call from her.  He said I'd better turn on the TV.

    They were safe, but with the Green Line shut down they were stranded as were thousands of others.   Standing around, scantily clad for 50 degree weather, many runners suffered and some became ill. Buses arrived after a considerable time and transported runners to the Common. They finally got back to their hotel, in Danvers, just past 9 PM.

    My daughter was ill during the last 10 miles and had slowed her pace considerably.  Had she not been ill they probably would have finished about the time of the explosions.

    When I finally got her on the phone all she could talk about was the deaths and injuries and it appeared as well that rumors were spreading.

    So glad that your daughter and her friend (5.00 / 5) (#16)
    by MO Blue on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 09:19:09 AM EST
    are safe. Sometimes fate intervenes with good results.

    Boston Coppers Begging for Photographs... (4.50 / 2) (#30)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 12:41:00 PM EST
    that they used to consider you a threat to nationalist jingoism security for taking.

    Say Cheese!

    If somebody breaks the law... (5.00 / 4) (#77)
    by unitron on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 09:17:19 PM EST
    ...the cops hope everybody gets pictures of it.

    Unless it was the cops breaking the law, then you and your camera are wiretapping or something.


    As Lenin supposedly said... (4.50 / 2) (#86)
    by unitron on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 11:09:36 PM EST
    The purpose of terrorism is to terrorize.

    It's to make you afraid of the next time.

    Likely the work (1.00 / 2) (#6)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 07:05:37 AM EST

    Likely the work of the Aryan Brotherhood that murdered the prosecutor and his wife a short while ago.


    They don't know who killed the DA and his wife. (5.00 / 3) (#7)
    by Angel on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 07:17:38 AM EST
    And it is beginning to look like it was a former JP who the DA had recently prosecuted, not the Aryan Brotherhood.  Quit with the false speculation based on your personal predjudice.  

    How So ? (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 08:23:20 AM EST
    Why? (5.00 / 4) (#12)
    by Yman on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 08:50:37 AM EST
    What would make you reach this conclusion?  Or were you trying to suggest something else?

    The ex-wife of the ex-JP has now been arrested. (none / 0) (#99)
    by Angel on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 09:08:16 AM EST
    Still think it's the Aryan Brotherhood who is responsible???

    Don't assume anyone's guilt (none / 0) (#111)
    by Peter G on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 10:40:51 AM EST
    based on an arrest.  Or on what the police say publicly at the time of an arrest.

    She's been charged with capital murder today. (none / 0) (#115)
    by Angel on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 11:19:17 AM EST
    And, no guilt was assumed or implied in my original comment.  I was simply stating the fact that she had been arrested.  

    If you say so (none / 0) (#116)
    by Peter G on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 11:42:44 AM EST
    I will take you at your word as to what, if anything, was implied by your comment, which suggested to me that you were telling AAA that the arrest of the JP's ex was a reason to change his impression about who was "involved."  I would prefer, on a criminal-defense oriented site in particular, to discourage speculation prior to proof as to either the woman arrested or the Aryan Brotherhood ... or anyone else.

    Perhaps you should direct your speculation comment (none / 0) (#117)
    by Angel on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 11:58:17 AM EST
    to AAA since he's the one who openly suggested guilt by a certain party.  

    Directed as a general reminder for everyone (none / 0) (#128)
    by Peter G on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 01:05:30 PM EST
    not at anyone in particular, to the exclusion of anyone else.  Sorry if you took it personally.

    It may not have been your intention to (none / 0) (#118)
    by Anne on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 12:06:07 PM EST
    assume or imply guilt, but asking whether someone still wants to think the Aryan Brotherhood is responsible after being informed of this woman's arrest reads that way - at least it read that way to me.

    Then you misunderstood my comment . It happens. (none / 0) (#119)
    by Angel on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 12:19:39 PM EST
    See Monday Open Thread (none / 0) (#1)
    by Peter G on Mon Apr 15, 2013 at 10:56:33 PM EST
    beginning at Comment #22.

    Correcting misinformation (none / 0) (#11)
    by MO Blue on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 08:42:05 AM EST
    The central point is that there is still no clear explanation of who was behind the attack or why it happened. It now appears clear that despite yesterday's reports there were no additional explosive devices besides the two that exploded near the finish line at the marathon, the two we knew about from the first moment. The initial report of a further bombing at JFK Library seems to have been ruled out definitively as have various reports of other unexploded devices found in the vicinity of the attack. link

    sorry (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by ExcitableBoy on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 08:56:16 AM EST
    I wasn't trying to imply that the Kennedy Library was involved, I realize that was cleared up yesterday. Just pointing out the geographical connection since the library was mentioned yesterday and shown on maps on some of the coverage.

    No need to be sorry (none / 0) (#15)
    by MO Blue on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 09:15:41 AM EST
    I had not read your comment when I posted mine. Probably one of those times when I started my comment before your comment appeared in the thread. I'm rather slow from start to finish sometimes. So bottom line my comment had nothing to do with your comment.

    I always appreciate people from areas under discussion giving us more on the lay of the land so to speak. So thank you for giving us more of a picture of the area.


    I (5.00 / 3) (#18)
    by lentinel on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 09:47:46 AM EST
    was watching a local Boston news station online - many hours after the explosions - and they were still making references to a bomb at the Kennedy library.

    I am certainly happy that that turned out to be false, but I am also astonished that a false story could have been given such credence and disseminated so widely.

    It just makes me aware how terribly unprepared we are regarding a possible terror attack.

    Unreliable news.
    And really, no way to prevent it.
    We're on our own.

    Another reason to abandon the incredibly costly and unproductive "war on terror".


    Except (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by jbindc on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 01:57:09 PM EST
    Ignoring it and pretending that evil does not exist in the world, isn't going to prevent terrorist attacks either.  Picking up our toys from around the world and becoming isolationists once again won't stop evil people from doing evil things.

    I think it's long past time for us to (5.00 / 2) (#44)
    by Anne on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 02:41:58 PM EST
    start cleaning up our own house, paying attention to how we're upholding the tenets of democracy with our own people - and demonstrate that we hold ourselves to those standards even when dealing with other countries, in order to have the kind of credibility we need if we're going to brand ourselves as the greatest democracy in the world and a beacon of freedom.

    The report of the Constitution Project is out, a daunting 577 pages.  Here's Charlie Pierce:

    The United States Of America tortured people. It tortured a lot of people. It lied about torturing people. It lied about torturing a lot of people. It tortured on its own, and it subcontracted the job to countries with more experience at it, since the United States never had made torture a policy before. Within the government, the theory and practiced of torture was discussed by a bunch of bloodthirsty legal aesthetes the banality of whom would have shocked Hannah Arendt. Godwin be damned, these were people who acted like tiny Heydrichs at their own personal Wannsee, and they dragged us all into a moral abyss with them because not enough of us cried "Stop!" loudly enough even to prevent the re-election of the president who'd countenanced it.

    Simply put, the "government officials" were liars. I don't know when it became journalistic protocol to give the benefit of the doubt to people who lie to us, but that was not a good day for the First Amendment. But the final offense against democracy was not John Yoo's, or Dick Cheney's, or even that of old President C-Plus Augustus. It belongs to Barack Obama and his people.

    Asa Hutchinson, the co-chairman of the panel, and nobody's idea of a centerpiece at the next ACLU fundraising dinner, apparently tumbled to this essential truth about the administration in which he himself had served.

       He said he thought everyone involved in decisions, from Mr. Bush down, had acted in good faith, in a desperate effort to try to prevent more attacks. "But I just think we learn from history," Mr. Hutchinson said. "It's incredibly important to have an accurate account not just of what happened but of how decisions were made...The United States has a historic and unique character, and part of that character is that we do not torture."

    That was true once. It is not true any more. The previous president made sure of that, making us all complicit in monstrous crimes against humanity. And the current president, perhaps because he thinks we are all delicate flowers who need to be shielded from an honest account of what we allowed to happen in this country, is attempting still to prescribe an anesthetic to treat a crime. Read this whole report. Know what we all did, you and I. In the days ahead in which we will talk a lot about the nature of political violence -- and, depending on the news, may well hear again the shrill cries of the harpies of unreason and fear and abandoned wrath -- read this report and learn how the big kids do it. And here's the thing about moral quagmires.

    It doesn't matter if you're looking forward.

    It doesn't matter if you're looking backward.

    You're still fking sinking.



    If you think we have skeletons in the closet now.. (none / 0) (#72)
    by Jack203 on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 08:20:40 PM EST
    You should check out our history.  We've been and done worse.

    However, I'd still take our skeletons over many other countries...and those other countries can come nowhere near all the positive accomplishments we've made.


    "Every one to whom (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by Zorba on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 09:43:51 PM EST
    much is given, of him will much be required."

    Anne never misses a chance to (1.00 / 8) (#78)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 09:42:59 PM EST
    attack and dis America.

    I do not see at all (5.00 / 5) (#83)
    by Peter G on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 10:38:10 PM EST
    how facing up to our failures, and celebrating our ideals, can be described as either attacking or disrespecting America.

    All true (none / 0) (#92)
    by jbindc on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 08:00:06 AM EST
    But not mutually exclusive to the idea that if we suddenly stopped doing whatever is we're doing, or if we abandoned all presence around the world and acted like complete angels, that evil people still wouldn't do evil things to us.

    Yes, some of our actions bring out the worst in people. And yes,absoltuely, we should change some of our behaviors and policies  But we are also not rape victims circa 1955 - "She asked for it," and it's not ALL our fault. Evil exists and it must be dealt with.

    Luckily, I believe as Patton Oswalt wrote yesterday:

    But the vast majority stands against that darkness and, like white blood cells attacking a virus, they dilute and weaken and eventually wash away the evildoers and, more importantly, the damage they wreak. This is beyond religion or creed or nation. We would not be here if humanity were inherently evil. We'd have eaten ourselves alive long ago.

    So when you spot violence, or bigotry, or intolerance or fear or just garden-variety misogyny, hatred or ignorance, just look it in the eye and think, "The good outnumber you, and we always will."

    I'm not foolish enough, young enough (5.00 / 2) (#97)
    by Anne on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 08:44:48 AM EST
    or idealistic enough to believe that even if we were - individually and as a country - the epitome of perfection we would be safe from attack, and I don't think Charlie Pierce, in his comments, was suggesting that we would be.

    What he is suggesting, and what should be a matter of common sense, is that actions have consequences, and our self-proclaimed title as the Beacon of Freedom and Democracy does not provide us immunity for our actions over the immediate last 12 years.  We have been doing a really bad job of observing and safeguarding and being true to the tenets of our democracy, both here and abroad.

    It's understandable for us to mourn the losses of a public tragedy, but I wonder if anyone mourns the daily "little" tragedies?  The ones that result from poverty, or lack of a job, or having to choose food over seeing the doctor.  Have you read at all about how many people who weren't in default lost their homes to a fraudulent and corrupt foreclosure process that almost no one has been held accountable for?  

    Will they fly the flags at half-staff when Social Security and Medicare die?


    Yes, I understand (none / 0) (#100)
    by jbindc on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 09:15:47 AM EST
    And I agree.  But my guess is this act was not done because someone is afraid they are going to lose their Medicare, their home, or their Social Security.  

    And yes, actions DO have consequences, but that goes both ways.  You don't get to bomb the Boston Marathon finish line and then expect the authorities to sit back and wring their hands and say, "Oh my! We must be better people because someone is angry at us!  We will be better - please forgive us!"

    No. You rain down the fury of God (or whatever being) finding that person(s) and bring them to justice and throw away the key so they are never heard from again.


    No, you really don't understand; (none / 0) (#102)
    by Anne on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 09:38:16 AM EST
    explaining it - again - and walking you through my comments - again - isn't going to help, is it?

    I didn't suggest this was done because of Social Security or Medicare - I suggested that there's a disconnect between the national tragedy of [fill in the latest disaster/killings]. and the individual tragedies that are resulting from our domestic policies - and that none of the accoutrements - the memorials, the flags flying at half staff - of the Boston tragedy will be in evidence when programs that help support so many people, and which speak to how we value the least among us, die a premeditated death.

    Who said the person or persons responsible for the Boston bombings shouldn't be held accountable?  Not me, not anyone, so I don't know why you even bring that up.

    Forget the straw man; you've got yourself a whole straw village, it seems.


    Actually (none / 0) (#120)
    by jbindc on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 12:36:53 PM EST
    You are the one with a whole straw man city here as the discussion is about the bombing in Boston and you have managed to throw in how people feel about Social Security and why the media doesn't cover that.

    You need to read more carefully; (none / 0) (#129)
    by Anne on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 01:56:15 PM EST
    I know that might get in the way of having/making the arguments you want, but it gets a little tiresome having conclusions I didn't come to and things I didn't say at all used as a springboard for law-and-order comments that I really don't want to be associated with.

    Re-think the conclusion, lentinel (none / 0) (#45)
    by christinep on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 02:45:13 PM EST
    Insofar as I know, there is no perfect nor anywhere near perfect communication system in a large, diverse society.  We are not unique in that regard...a kind of human nature way, perhaps, of wanting to know all the facts almost as soon as they happen; and, because that expectation cannot be met, we all fill-in-the-blanks or pick up the latest rumor to help the fact-finding process along.  As Anne indicated above, it isn't just the thirsty media that gives in to speculation.  (H&!#, yesterday I already "tried & convicted" the "black helicopter" crew based upon the timing & based upon my anger.  Now, I'll breathe out, and let the investigators do the investigating.  The conversation I'm having with myself today is to remind myself to calm down.)

    It's true that we ordinary folk can't (5.00 / 3) (#49)
    by Anne on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 03:00:45 PM EST
    help speculating, but what is the role of the media?  Do they feed into speculation that goes in a particular direction?  Do they refrain from speculating, and simply present what is known?  Do they ever get to the point where they say, "we don't know any more than we've already told you, so we're not going to yammer on just to fill air time?"  Apparently, that is not an option.

    Do we not - should we not - hold the media to a higher standard, given their ability to influence so many people?  If it were up to me, yes, we would hold them to a higher standard, but apparently what I want or expect isn't part of the equation.

    I totally get that in the heat of the moment, in a situation that appears to be fluid and ongoing, people need to know what is happening.  Where the media takes all of that sideways is in veering off that course into rank speculation - which, in my opinion, doesn't help the situation.

    The media could do such a much better job, but they choose to wallow in whatever will glue the most eyeballs to the TV - it's the money, always the money.


    Excellent questions, Anne (none / 0) (#53)
    by christinep on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 03:33:35 PM EST
    I've begun to wonder whether the media, over the years of network hyperventilating, has grown a doo-loop tail.  In an apparent ongoing effort to hype ratings, their initial reporting of tragedies/catastrophes often starts with a commendably comprehensive response, then quickly shifts to a soap opera phase...and, whether by conditioning or our instinct or curiosity about going to the "scene of the fire," we public seem to demand morsel after morsel.  (Sometimes, I ask myself why my satiation level in these matters seems to keep rising.).

    It would be better for media programs to endeavor to separate out news in a cleaner sense from commentary, analysis, & "educated guessing" ... and, to label it as such.
    I don't find too much fault with guesswork, what ifs, and editorials that are labelled clearly.  The editorial section of a newspaper--especially, if there are competing and varied opinions--can be my favorite pages.  When the front page of the paper resembles an editorial or opinion page, that is another matter, tho.


    Anchors and reporters should just do their jobs (5.00 / 4) (#59)
    by shoephone on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 05:25:20 PM EST
    which, I think, is reporting on the facts, without adding personal commentary. If I have to listen to Brain Williams telling me one more time how it's a good thing for me all those surveillance cameras are out there, I think I may email him and ask him how much DHS, the FBI, and the CIA are paying him.

    The man in the cowboy hat (none / 0) (#25)
    by jbindc on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 11:07:31 AM EST
    I think your link is bad or incomplete... (none / 0) (#63)
    by sj on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 06:19:06 PM EST
    Try this (none / 0) (#94)
    by jbindc on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 08:01:48 AM EST
    Thank you (none / 0) (#122)
    by sj on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 12:42:23 PM EST
    Yes, you're right.

    They've identified a second fatality. (none / 0) (#33)
    by Angel on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 01:39:58 PM EST
    A second victim in the Boston Marathon bombings has been identified: Krystle M. Campbell, a 29-year-old originally from Medford, Mass.

    Her father, William A. Campbell Jr., told Yahoo News he's in shock that his daughter was killed.

    "My daughter was the most lovable girl. She helped everybody, and I'm just so shocked right now. We're just devastated," he said. "She was a wonderful, wonderful girl. Always willing to lend a hand."

    Campbell was at the finish line with a friend to cheer on her boyfriend, who was running the race. William Campbell said he doesn't know if her boyfriend finished the race before the bombs went off.

    More than 170 people were wounded--17 of them critically--and three were killed in the attacks.

    Krystle Campbell's grandmother told the Boston Globe that her granddaughter had recently been living with her in Somerville to help her through an illness.

    The other identified victim, 8-year-old Martin Richard, was running away from the first explosion with his family when the second blast killed him. His mother and 6-year-old sister were injured in the blast as well.

    According to CNN (none / 0) (#34)
    by jbindc on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 01:40:43 PM EST
    One of the bombs was contained inside a metal pressure cooker that was inside a backpack.

    Reuters (none / 0) (#35)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 01:48:10 PM EST
    was reporting that this was being compared to the Atlanta Olympic bombings and Rudolph did use nails etc.

    Yeah (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by jbindc on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 01:53:52 PM EST
    I'm no security expert, and I shouldn't speculate, but if I gad to guess being that it was Patriot Day and tax day,  I would put money on a lone right wing nut job.

    You would be wrong to suspect that (none / 0) (#41)
    by Slado on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 02:21:34 PM EST
    This type of bomb is similar to many other types made by Al Qaeda in previous bombings and is even contained in their instruction manual.


    As of now there is no reason to suspect foreign or homegrown.


    Actually (none / 0) (#43)
    by jbindc on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 02:32:10 PM EST
    Many experts I've been reading around the web, while not conclusive of course, say this doesn't look like Al-Qaedaz. Too small and too much left to chance.  But it DOES look like the Atlanta Olympic bombing.

    And April (especially for the next week) is full of extreme right wing "holidays" - Waco, Oklahoma City, Columbine, and yes, even Hitler's birthday.


    No link? (none / 0) (#47)
    by Slado on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 02:51:48 PM EST
    Anything right now is wild speculation.

    However pressure cookers have been routinely used by foreign terrorists all over the world.

    Are you hoping it was domestic?    I don't care either way but there is zero evidence clearly pointing one way or another.

    We'll know in a few days who did this.  


    Seems to me (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by jbindc on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 07:51:36 AM EST
    That AQ would not plant bombs that were based on when "possibly most people would be crossing the finish line".

    Maybe it is foreign terrorism.

    But my money bets that this is another Timothy McVeigh wannabe.


    That is an assumption (none / 0) (#103)
    by Slado on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 09:38:18 AM EST
    Nothing more.

    Are you like the Guy and Salon that hopes it's a white guy?  At least he'll come out and say it.  

    It appears you'd rather dance around the fact that you hope it's a white guy rather then just come out and say it.

    Not sure why it matters.  


    Home grown white guy (none / 0) (#107)
    by MO Blue on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 10:00:39 AM EST
    vs Muslim either home grown or foreign.

    When Rudolph or McVeigh used bombs here in the U.S. a president did not use those events to start two wars, justify torture or eliminate Constitutional rights. White guys were not attacked on the streets or were their businesses destroyed.

    Just a few reasons why it might matter.


    Not entirely true, as to legislative response (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by Peter G on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 10:51:38 AM EST
    to Oklahoma City (McVeigh).  Pres Clinton used it as an excuse to push through the "Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act" ("AEDPA") of 1996, which (inter alia) gutted federal habeas corpus for all prisoners -- esp. state prisoners, with the most significant impact, of course, on death row prisoners (and intentionally so). As one example of how AEDPA undercuts constitutional rights, the federal habeas corpus judge is directed to uphold the conviction (or sentence) if the state court's decision on the prisoner's constitutional challenge was "reasonable," even if it was clearly wrong!

    I wonder when the last time we - and by (none / 0) (#113)
    by Anne on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 11:01:36 AM EST
    "we," I mean "the lizard-brains that hold elective office" - did not legislatively react in primal fashion to acts of violence?

    Does anyone ever think anything through anymore?



    I stand corrected (none / 0) (#114)
    by MO Blue on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 11:12:02 AM EST
    Thanks for the education. What an assault on justice.

    yes they did (none / 0) (#139)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 10:58:48 PM EST
    See Peter's comment below and this article I wrote at the time, Partisan Politics vs. the Bill of Rights.

    We don't have (none / 0) (#57)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 04:22:05 PM EST
    much but what we do have looks like domestic terrorism. I mean AQ can make these bombs but don't you think if they were going to do it, they would have kept the backpack on and ran into the crowd and blown themselves up? That's the type of thing they do and it would have killed probably a hundred or more people instead of just three.

    I don't know if we'll find out soon though. I think it took months before they figured out if was Rudolph here in Atlanta.


    It was a year and a half before the FBI (5.00 / 2) (#60)
    by shoephone on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 05:37:19 PM EST
    even ID'd Rudolf as one of three suspects in the bombing (he wasn't arrested until 2003). In the meantime, he bombed two abortion clinics a a gay bar. And he hid out in the North Carolina woods for  long time until his arrest. Coincidentally, his Olympics bomb killed two and injured about 150, not unlike the situation in Boston.

    A real scumbag.


    I remember (none / 0) (#62)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 06:03:17 PM EST
    it took a while to even figure out who it was but I couldn't remember exactly how long. I remember when he was found it was by some sheriff in western NC who caught him rummaging through a dumpster but I have to believe that where he was there are/were a lot of people who were sympathetic to his cause and that's why he was able to hide out there for so long. It was BIG news here in Atlanta when he was caught.

    How can you say that? (none / 0) (#74)
    by Slado on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 08:38:46 PM EST
    Zero evidence at this time clearly points in either direction unless you make an assumption.

    The authorities know 100 times more then we do right now and they're not saying.

    All I can say is foreign jihadists are known to use these bombs but none have claimed credit and someone determined enough could build one of these based on what you can find on the Internet so who know.

    At this point if your leaning one way or another its because your making an assumption, not because the facts support it.


    Also (5.00 / 1) (#95)
    by jbindc on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 08:22:44 AM EST
    Your assumption is that we are assuming it's a domestic terrorist group.  It could be just one person.

    Because (none / 0) (#89)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 06:52:26 AM EST
    this bomb clearly mirrors what Rudolph did almost to a T from what we know so far.

    The foreigners go for maximum killings. The profilers who are experienced with this kind of stuff seem to think it's domestic.

    Now there may be some other evidence that comes out that leads in a different direction but just from what's out there right now is what I'm going on.


    You seem to be leaning ... (none / 0) (#93)
    by Yman on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 08:00:25 AM EST
    Zero evidence at this time clearly points in either direction unless you make an assumption...

    At this point if your leaning one way or another its because your making an assumption, not because the facts support it.

    ... one way, but objecting to those leaning the other way.

    However pressure cookers have been routinely used by foreign terrorists all over the world...

    ("routinely" being 4 times cited in your article)

    All I can say is foreign jihadists are known to use these bombs ...

    Of the four examples of pressure-cooker bombs, at least two were not "jihadists".  The 2001 and 2002 attacks were by Maoists, the 2003 French Christmas Market attack was by jihadists and the 2003 Jammu attempt doesn't indicate who was behind it.


    You would be wrong to suspect that (none / 0) (#104)
    by Slado on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 09:43:50 AM EST
    I'm only pointing out that some seem to hope it's a white guy.

    Why I don't know.  

    I don't care either way.   If it's a white guy, foreign guy or a crazy guy what does it matter?  

    All are just as capable as the other of committing this act.

    It's not going to help me sleep any better if it turns out to be one or the other and it's not going to change the fact that no matter who did this it will happen again.  


    The only reason... (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by kdog on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 09:55:27 AM EST
    it would be better if the son(s) of a b*tch(es) behind this are American(s) is it might keep us from bombing, invading, and/or occupying another foreign country.  

    As to the murdered and maimed, and the sadness of it all...I agree it makes no difference.


    Will this be the rallying cry? (none / 0) (#42)
    by Slado on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 02:24:13 PM EST
    More Cameras!!!

    Cause that is exactly what we need.   More intrusive government.

    One of many rallying cries I'm sure... (5.00 / 2) (#46)
    by kdog on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 02:47:29 PM EST
    My rallying cry is live and let live, give peace a mother f8ckin' chance.

    So Much Trouble In The World. No More Trouble.

    Hang in there Boston...hang in there.  


    I (5.00 / 2) (#48)
    by lentinel on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 03:00:26 PM EST
    believe that is why Obama was eager to use the word "terrorism".

    Of course the explosions were terrifying, but since neither he nor anyone else has a clue who is responsible, or their motives, the use of such a loaded word is really uncalled for. At this point, the word "criminal" should have been sufficient.

    I can only assume that Obama wants to justify ever more of our hard earned money to be spent on spying and drones and further degradations of our quality of life and right to privacy.

    Jesse Ventura, speaking as a former Navy Seal, said that the war on terror was a sham. He said that as a former demolition expert, he offered that in his opinion six Seals could bring the entire country to a standstill. I could only agree with him.

    We have given up our liberties, and received nothing in return.


    This is what we've come to (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by CoralGables on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 03:21:38 PM EST
    quoting someone as an expert that made himself famous by being part of a traveling clown show.

    He (5.00 / 2) (#51)
    by lentinel on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 03:28:02 PM EST
    made himself famous as an entertainer, but he was speaking as a former Navy Seal.

    I assume, from your orientation, that you might take seriously some of the utterances by Reagan, who made himself famous selling light bulbs.

    As far as your phrase, "a traveling clown show", my first thought was that you were referring to Washington D.C.


    Light bulbs? (none / 0) (#64)
    by sj on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 06:23:55 PM EST
    Hmmm (5.00 / 3) (#65)
    by MO Blue on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 06:28:44 PM EST
    And all along I thought it was the monkey (excuse me chimp) that gave him his big start. ;-)

    Hey... (5.00 / 2) (#52)
    by kdog on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 03:30:44 PM EST
    Jesse The Body quit 2 clown shows, pro wrestling and politics...please specify but I think you must be referring to politics, the clown show to end all clown shows.

    It's Where Clowns Go... (5.00 / 2) (#55)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 03:40:11 PM EST
    ...when they get promoted.

    Tom Delay was an exterminator, FYI.

    Not that any of it matters, and as crazy as Jesse is, he's always been once of the more lucid people in politics that I can remember.


    I concur.... (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by kdog on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 03:47:01 PM EST
    Jesse is always droppin' straight dope.

    Govenor Ventura also made excellent judicial (none / 0) (#68)
    by DFLer on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 07:10:19 PM EST
    appointments during his admin.

    just saying


    I (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by lentinel on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 04:56:44 PM EST
    want to make clear that I was crediting the man with what I think is an accurate observation: that a handful of individuals can immobilize the entire country. I think that has already been proven.

    The background of Ventura, (he was the governor of Minnesota as you probably know), is not important to me. I think he was spot on making his observation.

    I would wonder if you could really disagree with it.

    I don't see how all these drones and interceptions of emails and warrantless searches - all these things that compromise our civil liberties - can protect us.

    What might protect us is a more enlightened foreign policy. A more enlightened economic policy. A change from our habit of exploiting poor people in other countries as well as our own.
    It makes enemies for us.

    I'm not making any assumption about the motivation of the person or persons who perpetrated this nightmare. It could have been another nut who thought he was in a Batman movie.

    I was simply saying that since the word "terrorism" has been bandied about with respect to what happened in Boston, what I heard Ventura say resonated with me. The futility of the "war on terror" is evident to me. The results of the "war on terror" has been a loss of our rights without any corresponding guarantee of security.

    Whether Ventura is thought of as a Seal, an entertainer or a Governor matters not to me.


    His background very much matters (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by unitron on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 10:39:05 PM EST
    "He said that as a former demolition expert, he offered that in his opinion six Seals could bring the entire country to a standstill."

    It is his military background, specifically his specialized training, that gives that statement more weight than if it had come from someone without any pertinent background.

    For instance, if I had made that claim, you would, when deciding how much faith to put into it, want to take into consideration that the closest I've ever gotten to any experience or training that would make what I said an informed opinion is having read a few Robert Ludlum novels.


    You're (none / 0) (#87)
    by lentinel on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 03:45:16 AM EST

    The Word... (5.00 / 2) (#54)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 03:35:18 PM EST
    is used way too often, seems like once a day someone is arrested for 'making terrorists threats', which generally boils threatening someone's life in public.  Google the phrase, it's nuts.

    Terrorism is the sizzle in out paranoid steaks and they are selling every day.

    What bothers me the most, is the when a bomb goes off, everyone is on the same page, more or less.  But had this been a shooting, a very predictable group would saying very predictable things.  Not realizing that the tragedies are all one in the same and folks should be on the same page regardless of what kind of mechanism was used to kill and maim our fellow citizens.

    I just want to kick these aholes in the head who think bombing kids and people doing something productive and healthy, is a great way to make a point, or strike fear.  Christ if they gotta detonate a bomb, hit someplace that they feel contains the people of their frustration like financial areas or political this or that.  Not sure if that is coming out right, but I am tired of the F's taking out our kids.

    And I really don't give a GD if is a terrorist or where they are from.


    I don't know (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by DebFrmHell on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 06:32:31 PM EST
    how you could call this anything but terrorism.  We just don't know if it is domestic or foreign.

    Unless you think it can only be a foreign source as the qualifier.

    My money is on homegrown.  


    You can call it criminal (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by sj on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 06:59:14 PM EST
    My money is on homegrown, too.

    I would take that bet. (none / 0) (#71)
    by Jack203 on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 08:16:05 PM EST
    I think it's more likely to be foreign over domestic

    That's fair (none / 0) (#80)
    by sj on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 09:44:47 PM EST
    Neither one of us has any particular insight into this.

    In this context, the word "terrorism" (5.00 / 2) (#85)
    by Peter G on Tue Apr 16, 2013 at 10:47:08 PM EST
    does not simply mean "any criminal activity we find terrifying," or "that is designed to terrorize the victim," but rather the indiscriminate use of violence against random victims (so far, so good) for the purpose of bringing public attention to an ideological position, intimidating an entire civilian population, or of influencing government policy. (My own formulation, adapted from this federal law.)

    The third death (none / 0) (#88)
    by CoralGables on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 04:57:30 AM EST
    is a female grad student from China that was attending Boston University. Her family has requested no personal info be disclosed. Another Boston University grad student from China was also seriously injured.

    Powder shortage (none / 0) (#91)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 07:56:57 AM EST

    Once they figure out which powder was used, it may be possible to track recent purchases in quantity. There is very little available at most vendors.

    Scroll down at this link for one popular site.

    Or checkout the back order policy at this sold our vendor.


    Hopefully (none / 0) (#96)
    by Yman on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 08:34:12 AM EST
    Too bad the NRA has been opposing the use of taggants in gunpowder for the past several decades.

    Wrong letters (none / 0) (#98)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 08:51:09 AM EST

    It was the National Academy of Science (NAS) not the NRA.

    Other than costly and ineffective taggants seems to be a great idea.  

    During the summer of 1996, Congress approved an NRA-backed proposal (an amendment to Section 732 in H.R. 3610, the Omnibus Consolidation Appropriations Act of 1997) that an independent body examine all technologies that allow explosives to be detected before a terrorist or criminal explodes his bomb in addition to those that will identify the explosive after a blast. NRA fought hard for the inclusion of this language, knowing that preventive technologies offer our best hope for enhanced public safety and more effective law enforcement. That independent body is the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), which completed the study and published their findings and recommendations in a report titled: "Black and Smokeless Powders: Technologies for Finding Bombs and the Bomb Makers."

    NAS Final Report on Black and Smokeless Powder

    To conduct the study on black and smokeless powders, the National Research Council, the research body of the NAS, created the Committee on Smokeless and Black Powder which conducted the research and wrote the final report. In that final report, which was reviewed by an independent panel of experts with diverse perspectives and technical expertise, included the following findings:

        Bombs using black and smokeless powders account for a small number of deaths and injuries each year. (Annually, 10 deaths and approximately 100 injuries.)

        Information gathered by the BATF and the FBI regarding bombings is incomplete.

        An effective taggant system with the associated record keeping would incur significant costs.

        No taggant system has been found that is technically feasible for use in black and smokeless powders.

    The Committee specifically recommended:

        "Detection markers in black and smokeless powder should not be implemented at the present time."

        "Identification taggants in black and smokeless powder should not be implemented at the present time."



    Nope - right letters (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by Yman on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 09:28:30 AM EST
    But your use of the NRA itself as a source for their claims is funny.  The NRA only agreed to study the use of taggants after they saw the writing on the wall after the Oklahoma City bombing.  

    An NRA spokesman declined to answer questions Thursday. In the past, the group has consistently opposed taggants in gun powder, contending they could affect the trajectory of bullets and also amount to a de facto form of federal weapons registration...

    Noble also said that the Administration is currently focusing on the use of taggants in explosives rather than in gunpowder. In the late 1970s, when the NRA sought to exempt gunpowder, Treasury officials said it was important to include it because gunpowder was often used by terrorist bombers.

    As far as the NRA's partial quote of the NSA study, they forgot the most important part of the quote:

    No current marking system has been demonstrated to be technically feasible for use in black and smokeless powders. While vapor markers have been successfully introduced into plastic and sheet explosives, there has not been a definitive study of how such markers might work in black and smokeless powders...

    Since no tagging system has been fully tested to demonstrate its technical feasibility, it is not practicable to tag at this time.

    IOW - it hasn't been demonstrated because it hasn't been studied, something the NRA has fought consistently for the past 30+ years.

    BTW - The NSA didn't fight the use of taggants - or even the study of taggants - the way the NRA did.  They recommended against the use of taggants at that time because the costs were significant and the benefits uncertain.  But the NRA ommitted a few of their other conclusions:

    Research should be conducted to develop and test markers that would be technically suitable for inclusion in black and smokeless powders.

    A comprehensive national powder database containing information about the physical characteristics and chemical composition of commercially available black and smokeless powders should be developed and maintained.

    Taggants added to black and smokeless powders and/or an associated record-keeping system could assist a bombing investigation by (1) aiding in the identification of the powder, manufacturer, and product line; (2) aiding in tracing the chain of ownership of the powder to a list of the last legal purchasers; and (3) helping to match the powder used in a bomb to powder in a suspect's possession.

    But the NRA fought the study and development of taggants in gunpowder, as well as a gunpowder registry.

    What a shock.


    Duh! (none / 0) (#110)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 10:23:21 AM EST

    IOW - it hasn't been demonstrated because it hasn't been studied, something the NRA has fought consistently for the past 30+ years.

    This may be news to you but all kinds of research is conducted by all sorts of organizations that  don't need to ask the NRA for permission to proceed.  

    There is nothing the NRA can do to prevent the vendors of taggants from proving the effectiveness of their products.



    What the NRA does ... (none / 0) (#123)
    by Yman on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 12:43:31 PM EST
    ... is threaten Congressmen to deny federal funding to study this issue, just as they did with the NHA to deny studies addressing gun violence.  They don't want the answers because they're afraid of what the data will show.  They're not opposing taggants because they're concerned about the technical feasibility of taggants.  They're opposing them because they think it amounts to a federal registry of weapons.  (That, and stoke the fears of the rabid conspiracy-theorists in their ranks to keep the money flowing ... Google any gun forum and search for "taggants" and you'll find threads full of them).

    An NRA spokesman declined to answer questions Thursday. In the past, the group has consistently opposed taggants in gun powder, contending they could affect the trajectory of bullets and also amount to a de facto form of federal weapons registration.

    For your edification:

    The Gun Lobby Takes a Traceable Hit : Forensics: Study of taggants in explosives is approved over staunch objections from the NRA.

    The new federal budget bill funds a study of whether taggants can trace explosives in bombs like the one that blasted the revelers in Centennial Olympics Park. Law enforcement has favored this sensible policy for years, but the powerful National Rifle Assn. has blocked the measure...

    Law enforcement officials have tried for nearly two decades to persuade Congress to pass a taggant law. President Clinton has consistently supported the idea. The NRA and its allies, however, have resisted putting taggants in gunpowder and has resisted even allowing the federal government to study their use. The NRA claims that taggants will raise the cost and lower the quality of gunpowder, and that federal law enforcement agencies are too untrustworthy to conduct an impartial taggant study.

    And you think that - if the manufacturers of taggants were to perform a study on taggants - the NRA and its minions would accept it as proof of their effectiveness?

    Hahahahahahahahahahah ....

    But at least we straightened out your misleading NRA press release re: the NSA recommendations.


    Arrest (none / 0) (#126)
    by Cylinder on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 01:00:08 PM EST
    Various news sources are reporting an arrest has been made.

    Conflicting reports. (none / 0) (#130)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 01:58:41 PM EST
    In an interview (none / 0) (#135)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 05:20:12 PM EST
    with Reuters former Atty General John Ashcroft won't come out and say it's domestic but you would come to that conclusion from the interview. He states that foreign terrorist generally want to hit the first responders so that there is no one there to respond to the wounded and dying.

    Where has someone on this thread called (none / 0) (#136)
    by caseyOR on Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 06:22:37 PM EST
    the bombing a false flag operation?