Crazy shit going down in Boston

[neil]

I initially thought the same thing as you. That DT was young and led into this by his brother, who by all accounts was aggressive, more religious and generally quite the cunt. However, if you read though this, http://legaltimes.typepad.com/files/marathon-complaint.pdf you will probably change your mind.

 

This is an account of a guy who nonchalantly dropped that bomb off, in-front of an 8 year old (pictures very clearly show this), and casually walked off. Furthermore, he returned to his university and acted completely normally - going to the gym and even attending a party. Compare this to his brother who apparently phoned a relative and begged for forgiveness.

 

Regarding the whole "terrorism" thing. I don't disagree that there is a level of muslim bias to it, however, I also think the fact that this event was purely 2 bombs categorizes it. Something like bombs or flying planes into buildings causes fear a lot more than shootings I think.

 

You should check this out as well, some great photos in here, http://www.getonhand.com/blogs/news/774333...ootout-pictures

[Vice]

Regarding the whole "terrorism" thing. I don't disagree that there is a level of muslim bias to it, however, I also think the fact that this event was purely 2 bombs categorizes it. Something like bombs or flying planes into buildings causes fear a lot more than shootings I think

 

The scariness of an attack isn't what makes it terrorism. Certainly, every person in Sandy Hook elementary school was supremely terrified, as was everyone in the Aurora cinema, and the country as a whole (fears of going to the cinema, talk of arming teachers, etc.). What makes an attack terrorism is that the motive has to be ideological (religious and/or political). And the casualties and deaths from gun violence dwarf terrorism. We've taken to defining terrorism narrowly. When the Wisconsin Sikh temple shooting happen, it was treated as a "terrorist-like incident." When it was revealed that the shooter was a white supremacist, all talk of terrorism was dropped, even though that 'motive' would be textbook terrorism. We still don't know if that was 100% his motive (he shot himself too), but no one was even using the word "terrorism."

[Chest Rockwell]

The problem at the root of this discussion is obviously that terrorism means a few things. One, in its pure definition (ideological motive as you said), secondly it's meaning by recent use where it is used as a codeword to (poorly) disguise prejudices, and also as a buzzword for politicians.

 

There's obviously an overlap between these, and too often those manipulating the definition for their own purposes are allowed to set the agenda for discourse on their own terms.

[David]

I know this is old news, but I've not seen it posted here. Despite reports of a gun battle and a stand off between the cops and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev just before he was caught, including a report of him either shooting himself in the throat in some sort of botched suicide attempt or being shot by the police during the battle, it appears he actually didn't have any weapons on him at all;

 

Boston bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev apparently was unarmed when he was wounded in a barrage of gunfire that ended with his capture after a tense standoff, sources told CNN.

 

No firearm was found in the boat where he was hiding, in the yard of a home in the Boston suburb of Watertown, Massachusetts, said several sources familiar with the investigation, from different agencies.

 

Earlier, Tsarnaev and his older brother, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, had allegedly shot and killed a Massachusetts Institute of Technology campus police officer sitting in a patrol car. Shortly afterward, the two engaged in a shootout with police. Tamerlan died after the shootout.

It