View Full Version : Yikes- 2 bombs exploded at the Boston Marathon
Details still coming in on the injured....Two bombs went off around 3pm during the Boston Marathon. Runners still on the course, although many had already finished.
It looks awful. So horrendous.
Life_is_Simple
4-15-13, 5:25pm
That's awful. It's a Massachusetts holiday, so many people will have the day off from work, and will go and watch the marathon and cheer people on - whether they know them or not. I went there myself to watch one year. It's very sad.
A friend of mine, and my main firefighting partner, was running the race today. I think from his pace on the runner-tracking app he'd have been a few hundred yards back. I'm hoping a) he is OK b) he was in good enough shape after running a marathon to start helping people.
Still waiting on word.
Is this a tax protest? Could it be connected to recent assassinations of law enforcement personnel?
Life_is_Simple
4-15-13, 5:39pm
A friend of mine, and my main firefighting partner, was running the race today. I think from his pace on the runner-tracking app he'd have been a few hundred yards back. I'm hoping a) he is OK b) he was in good enough shape after running a marathon to start helping people.
Still waiting on word.
the video at the BBC looks like it may have affected onlookers, and not runners --> BBC link (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22160826)
Is this a tax protest?
The fact that it is April 15 raises that suspicion. It will be interesting to see if any group takes credit for this.
the video at the BBC looks like it may have affected onlookers, and not runners --> BBC link (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22160826)
2 dead, 90+ injured, many severe. People have lost limbs, many are in hospital. There were 2 other bombs that did not go off.
Oddly, there was also some sort of incendiary event at the JFK library (which is nowhere near the event). Tons of smoke from a fire there.
It's so weird, I walk through that area at least once a week. I saw the stands and tents for the marathon set up when I was there Friday.
A friend of mine, and my main firefighting partner, was running the race today. I think from his pace on the runner-tracking app he'd have been a few hundred yards back. I'm hoping a) he is OK b) he was in good enough shape after running a marathon to start helping people.
Still waiting on word.
Maybe this might help - http://google.org/personfinder/2013-boston-explosions/
Adrenalin takes over in a situation like this bae. If your friend is there, I'm sure he will help as much as he can.
What I dread is the video of dancing in the streets in the mid-east. I want to believe it won't happen, but I'm afraid it will. Just like the celebration after Thatcher's death, there are haters everywhere.
So so sad. Unfortunately, no matter how tight our security is, we can not protect against everything as the very tenant of our country is freedom of movement, and privacy of our citizens and visitors. This is a huge wide open country. Frankly I'm surprised this doesn't happen more often. I guess it's a testament to our security and intelligence that it doesn't .
A friend of mine, and my main firefighting partner, was running the race today. I think from his pace on the runner-tracking app he'd have been a few hundred yards back. I'm hoping a) he is OK b) he was in good enough shape after running a marathon to start helping people.
Still waiting on word.
We have a friend who was 2 miles from finish when the blasts occurred. She is safe, and on a flight back to Seattle at this very moment. Craziness.
We have a friend who was 2 miles from finish when the blasts occurred. She is safe, and on a flight back to Seattle at this very moment. Craziness.
Heard back. He and his wife were fine, they helped out folks as best they could, back home soon.
...
What I dread is the video of dancing in the streets in the mid-east. I want to believe it won't happen, but I'm afraid it will. Just like the celebration after Thatcher's death, there are haters everywhere. ... .
The Middle East didn't cross my mind. I thought of the Olympic Park bombing, and the foiled one recently in Spokane. I'll be very surprised if this isn't domestic terrorism.
We have heard back from most of the people we know who were running the race and they and their families are safe. Otherwise, we're in a bit of shock here in Boston. It's Patriot's Day - the proudest day of the year for our Commonwealth. That morning, a large crowd gathered at Lexington Common near where I work to view the re-enactment of the beginning of our American revolution. And then this horrific and pointless tragedy, some coward hurting spectators including children for no reason. It's still sinking in. It was even more surreal this morning receiving a message of support from our minister, currently traveling in Iraq. The world's turned upside down.
rodeosweetheart
4-16-13, 6:22am
We have heard back from most of the people we know who were running the race and they and their families are safe. Otherwise, we're in a bit of shock here in Boston. It's Patriot's Day - the proudest day of the year for our Commonwealth. That morning, a large crowd gathered at Lexington Common near where I work to view the re-enactment of the beginning of our American revolution. And then this horrific and pointless tragedy, some coward hurting spectators including children for no reason. It's still sinking in. It was even more surreal this morning receiving a message of support from our minister, currently traveling in Iraq. The world's turned upside down.
I spoke with my sister-in-law in Boston at 4. Surreal was the word she used, too. She said it was such a beautiful day--and now this craziness. I am so sorry, bUU, and glad you are not hurt.
I, too, am leaning towards it being domestic........probably some misfit who hated all the crowds in his neighborhood on this holiday. In a country with so many freedoms, it will always be hard to stop these heinous acts.
I'm so sad.
The Middle East didn't cross my mind. I thought of the Olympic Park bombing, and the foiled one recently in Spokane. I'll be very surprised if this isn't domestic terrorism.
I didn't mean I thought the person who did this was from the mid-east. I was talking about haters in the mid-east celebrating that we were hurt, like those in London celebrating Thatcher's death.
It very well could have been a home grown terrorist. There is plenty of hateful rhetoric going around to get some nut fired up. It could be someone against Boston, someone against the race itself, or even someone against the government (patriots day) Who knows. But the fact that they found two un-blown bombs helps in that there is a world of evidence there not blown into a million pieces.
SteveinMN
4-16-13, 10:46am
It very well could have been a home grown terrorist. There is plenty of hateful rhetoric going around to get some nut fired up. It could be someone against Boston, someone against the race itself, or even someone against the government (patriots day) Who knows. But the fact that they found two un-blown bombs helps in that there is a world of evidence there not blown into a million pieces.
As an update, this morning they said the only two bombs were the ones which detonated -- no undetonated bombs were found.
I, too, lean toward thinking this is domestic terrorism. Frankly, I think AQ or other more famous terrorist organizations would have done a much better job of timing and sizing the blasts. In addition, someone (newspaper? TV?) pointed out that this week in American history is rife with domestic protest: Waco, the Oklahoma City bombing, and some other incident I don't remember at the moment, all occured this week in April.
ApatheticNoMore
4-16-13, 12:20pm
As an update, this morning they said the only two bombs were the ones which detonated -- no undetonated bombs were found.
Yea I thought that information about undetonated bombs would be found false (isn't there always lots of misinformation floating around at such times - the degree of it is astounding). No, I'm not going to go deep down some tin foil rabbit hole with "yes there were undetonated bombs and they are now covering them up". I'm just going to go with the official story and the initial informaiton was wrong, it amazes me how good my instincts are in suspecting all initial information sometimes. Called it!
I don't bother to have an opinion on who it is yet. We could find out it's North Korea for all I know (it's the type of scale they are actually capable far more than nuclear warheads). It could be a faulty gas line for all I know (yes I know there are supposed to be bombs and there probably were, I'm just withholding certainty). It could be some right wing nut in a very blue state obsessed with Patriot day (mind you being angry at the govt can be rational and maybe even moral, blowing up a marathon having nothing to do with it is not). I certainly don't have any reflexive urge to blame the middle east. Because yea it's theoretically possible, but we've been told to worry about mid-east violence for a decade plus since 9-11 and there hasn't been pretty much ANY in the U.S.. So me thinks that threat is overblown. In the same time period there actually have been a few incidents of domestic terrorism. Although if they party in the middle east I'd know why. They are tired of being blown up by U.S. government bombs pretty much.
It could be some right wing nut in a very blue state obsessed with Patriot day.....
If we're going to speculate, I'll go with the President's friend and neighbor, Bill Ayers. Once you develop an explosive ordnance skillset, you gotta use it or lose it.
My bet is on Norwegian Lutheran extremists.
My bet is on Norwegian Lutheran extremists.Well years of eating Lutefisk will drive you mad :-)!
Personally I think this is probably a disgruntled anti-tax person/anti-patriots day person - a single person - rather than a domestic terrorist group (shades of the original tax revolt - the Boston tea Party?). Domestic terror groups have greater skills at explosive device making then these ones were - which were just a step up from a pipe bomb it seems (pressure cooker with shapnel and probably a timer). But I'm just speculating. It is so sad and tragic that people have to express their "rage against the machine" in this way when there are so many more productive outlets to get your message to the public. .
A sovereign citizen perhaps?
Never Again
4-16-13, 2:50pm
Some of us who live here love to hate the marathon - though in a good natured way poking fun at it - due to the big disruption that it causes in our lives once a year. I hope that no one hated the marathon enough and took it seriously enough that it was a motivation for this awful act.
I have trouble imagining that someone would be so disturbed over taxation to cause so much meaningless human destruction, but it is a strange world sometimes. It seems to me like if there was a true point to be made by the responsible party or parties, it would be lost without a claim of credit and purpose. I tend to think it might just be some sick person or persons much like the mass shootings we've had.
I'm beginning to come around to that conclusion, myself. I was reserving judgement until this afternoon, wondering if the bombings yesterday were the start of an ongoing infliction of terror in US cities. Now that that seems less likely, I'm more inclined toward the mental illness explanation.
ApatheticNoMore
4-16-13, 4:07pm
I have trouble imagining that someone would be so disturbed over taxation to cause so much meaningless human destruction
true killing innocent people is beyond the pale. But forgive me but everytime I find myself infinitely twisted in some new heck hole of the 1040 I think of that Stack guy who flew his plane into and IRS building, and forgive me but then I smile (that was his issue, he had no clear political agenda, he wasn't even anti-tax in principle, he just found himself subject to some wildly obscure unfair tax law - and yea he was economically a mess, probably a little batty etc.). That was considered an incident of domestic terrorism.
It seems to me like if there was a true point to be made by the responsible party or parties, it would be lost without a claim of credit and purpose. I tend to think it might just be some sick person or persons much like the mass shootings we've had.
It it's entirely devoid of political meaning, it's not even terrorism (maybe if it's 90% devoid of it it shouldn't be either).
Heartbreaking.
I hope there is heaven, and hell.
I got an interesting email from my BIL in Peshawar, Pakistan. They had a bombing today that killed 16 and injured 35 (preliminary numbers). It was the fourth such attack there in the past three days. His take on the differences between the US and Pakistan boils down to two points. First, and most obvious, we don't have much Taliban activity. Second is the fact that since 9/11 various government entities have kept a very close eye on suspicious groups/people and closely monitored anyone buying abnormal quantities of materials that could be used in bombs. He is involved in global counter-terrorism discussions on a fairly regular basis and the consensus from those seems to be that such activity in the US will increase in the coming years. The bombs in Boston were basically IEDs. Low tech, cheap (way below the cost of an assault rifle and ammo) and effective at inflicting small scale damage that can have a much larger psychological impact. I don't know if that assessment is correct or not, but if a tactic like this continues to be effective in other places it makes sense that disturbed people, either individuals or groups with a common cause, would realize that and begin to consider this an option more often.
Gregg - Just a month or so ago, I went through some extensive required HAZMAT operations training for firefighters. 40 hours of classroom, plus lots of practical work.
It was basically a graduate class on How To Be A Better Terrorist. And we train 10s of thousands of people a year through that program, essentially required since 9/11.
Nobody who has taken this training would bother with something silly like guns or small IEDs to cause A Real Ruckus, if they were really motivated, when there are so many...more effective...things just sitting around. It's positively scary.
It's frankly a miracle we haven't had more Bad Things happen than we have. Either people are inept (and I don't want to fall into the trap of underestimating bad guys), or our intelligence/security is really good (which, working in the field a bit, I don't believe), or our enemies aren't really so numerous and motivated inside the USA (which is my leading theory).
rosarugosa
4-16-13, 8:21pm
I work just down the street, but luckily, we always have Patriot's Day off as a company holiday. Strange to see so many National Guardsman and state police keeping watch in the subway stations today.
Bae, what you've said is why I think this bombing was done by a crazy person, non-affiliated. Kinda like the Olympic Park bombing.
What sort of bothers me is that these sorts of things are often meant to incite fear and demoralize. I wonder if there aren't other people of groups that see this as an opportunity to drive the wedge a little deeper.
What ever people might say about the high cost of Homeland Security or the inconveniences like long lines and inspections in airports, or certain perceived loss or privacy, some of which are probably valid, it does seem like there has been a degree of effectiveness in catching or deterring similar things.
Bae, what you've said is why I think this bombing was done by a crazy person, non-affiliated. Kinda like the Olympic Park bombing.
Eric Rudolph was anything but some lone nut. From Wikipedia:
Eric Robert Rudolph (born September 19, 1966), also known as the Olympic Park Bomber, is responsible for a series of bombings across the southern United States between 1996 and 1998, which killed two people and injured at least 150 others in the name of an anti-abortion and anti-gay agenda. The Federal Bureau of Investigation considers him a terrorist.[1]
As a teenager Rudolph was taken by his mother to a Church of Israel compound in 1984; it is connected to the Christian Identity movement.[2] He has called himself a Roman Catholic in "the war to end this holocaust" (in reference to abortion).[3] He has confirmed religious motivation, but denied racial motivation for his crimes.[4]
He was cut from the same cloth as Timothy McVeigh (anti-government militia movement), Kevin Harpham (white supremacist Movement), and the assassins of law enforcement personnel in Texas and Colorado, thought to be members of the Aryan Brotherhood.
Gregg - Just a month or so ago, I went through some extensive required HAZMAT operations training for firefighters. 40 hours of classroom, plus lots of practical work.
It was basically a graduate class on How To Be A Better Terrorist. And we train 10s of thousands of people a year through that program, essentially required since 9/11.
Nobody who has taken this training would bother with something silly like guns or small IEDs to cause A Real Ruckus, if they were really motivated, when there are so many...more effective...things just sitting around. It's positively scary.
It's frankly a miracle we haven't had more Bad Things happen than we have. Either people are inept (and I don't want to fall into the trap of underestimating bad guys), or our intelligence/security is really good (which, working in the field a bit, I don't believe), or our enemies aren't really so numerous and motivated inside the USA (which is my leading theory).
I've had no where near your level of training bae, but even just from basic OSHA training on how to safely handle some materials you can get a pretty good idea of how to cause a commotion. Even so, the relatively small and inefficient IEDs in Boston have caused quite a disruption in that city and drawn a massive amount of national attention. I'm guessing that is mission accomplished for whoever set them up.
I agree that our (foreign) enemies are not particularly motivated to actually attack the US inside our borders. The primary emphasis, at least in the middle east, seems more geared toward pushing us outside of their borders. If our leaders follow through with the proposed military exit strategy there may be even less reason for most foreign terrorist cells to target us.
My take on my BIL's information is that we should be more worried about domestic terrorism similar to what he has to deal with. The Taliban in Pakistan is, after all, a domestic group. The level of training you and so many others have received only seems to amplify the potential threat. Sooner or later there will be someone with that knowledge who will find the motivation to use it in a negative way.
What sort of bothers me is that these sorts of things are often meant to incite fear and demoralize.
Isn't that really just the definition of terrorism?
A sovereign citizen perhaps?The British finally retaliating for the Revolutionary War? Hmmm.. and I thought they achieve that vengence when they sent us British pop back in the late 1960's :-)!
Bae, what you've said is why I think this bombing was done by a crazy person, non-affiliated. Kinda like the Olympic Park bombing.I agree. I haven't heard the news today (yet) so there are probaly tons of new info but I also think it was some "lone gunman (bombman) in the watchtower" kind of thing. Back when I was in my senior year of college for Criminal Justice I had to take a semester long class called "Terrorism and Violence". It went thru all the various domestic and international terror groups of that time - as well as some of the more wacko left and right wing groups - and disscussed their methods and "tools" commonly used. And like both Bae and Gregg said, these kind of bombs, while used worldwide, are generally that of small unsophiticated groups or lone disgruntled people. Like other's here, I too can't even fanthom how wound up a person (or group of people) must get to do something like this to innocent people - unless they have mental health issues. Just boggles the mind. Especially if it was over something like taxes. Throw some tea in the harbor and protest for change - don't kill people!
Eric Rudolph was anything but some lone nut. From Wikipedia:
Eric Robert Rudolph (born September 19, 1966), also known as the Olympic Park Bomber, is responsible for a series of bombings across the southern United States between 1996 and 1998, which killed two people and injured at least 150 others in the name of an anti-abortion and anti-gay agenda. The Federal Bureau of Investigation considers him a terrorist.[1]
As a teenager Rudolph was taken by his mother to a Church of Israel compound in 1984; it is connected to the Christian Identity movement.[2] He has called himself a Roman Catholic in "the war to end this holocaust" (in reference to abortion).[3] He has confirmed religious motivation, but denied racial motivation for his crimes.[4]
He was cut from the same cloth as Timothy McVeigh (anti-government militia movement), Kevin Harpham (white supremacist Movement), and the assassins of law enforcement personnel in Texas and Colorado, thought to be members of the Aryan Brotherhood.You're right but often individuals - or a couple of individuals - will splinter off from the main group and act alone rather than acting on the groups behalf. Usually in a more violent fashion then the main more political arm of the group would act. Often times those groups deny any current connection to the individual (and their acts of violence) even if they had been a member at one time.
The Saudi Marathon man...
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2013/04/the-saudi-marathon-man.html
dado potato
4-18-13, 3:52pm
IBEW Local 103 has a billboard in Boston. I like how the brotherhood's sign says: COWARDS; and, Pray for Boston.
ApatheticNoMore
4-19-13, 1:39am
Bomb threat today at work, had to evacuate the building. The new normal? I guess so. Gotta love it, eh?
I'm not easily fazed by such things but there is a moment of real gut level fear when you hear it - and then you get out of there. Get out of there very confused, should one take elevators or stairs for a bomb threat? I have no clue, all our training was for earthquakes and fires where the advice is usually to take the stairs.
What's going on since 1am this morning has been mind-blowing. Stay inside. Stay safe.
what is going on since 1 am?
It started about 10pm last night. The suspects held up a convenience store, killed a young campus police officer, and had a shoot-out with police, including use of explosives. One of the suspects is dead. The other is still at large, and many towns around here are under lock-down. Word now is that they're Russian Chechens.
Suspect at large has been identified by the AP as Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev, 19, of Cambridge, Mass., a Chechen from Russia.
Latest word is that he ran over his buddy as he was making his get-away from the gunfight with police.
Shelter in place now extended to include the entire city of Boston and a number of the surrounding suburbs.
Apparently they are brothers. My cousin lives in Watertown, which is totally shut down. He says its totally quiet, with only birds singing. The brothers are here legally from Turkey......although I guess they are originally from Chechnya. They've been here for a year. They don't know yet if they are part of a group, or just working by themselves. Apparently when they got to the dead brother, he had explosives on him.........so they are concerned the surviving one might too. Apparently in the gun fight, the brothers were throwing explosives.
I don't understand the mind of people who will intentionally hurt/kill innocent people. And these brothers were something like 19 and 21. So much hate at such a young age.
I don't understand the mind of people who will intentionally hurt/kill innocent people. And these brothers were something like 19 and 21. So much hate at such a young age.
I'm seeing a lot of hateful comments, about Islam, specifically, in other forums related today's events which help shine a light on how this could be. Before we had any idea who these people were, there were numerous posts projecting suspicion on Islam, itself, rather than Muslim extremism. The abject lack of perspective and capacity to differentiate between a religion and its extreme aspects was rampant. Once the Chechnyan connection was made, the hateful rhetoric escalated exponentially. The critical aspect here is that this offensively hateful bigotry is, effectively, the product of American socialization (at least from certain quarters thereof). I'm scared for the safety of myself and my friends, given that this terrorist is loose in the area, but after today, the more lingering concern I'll have is with regard to the danger that so many regular-everyday-Americans pose, given how quick they were to project vicious hate.
The abject lack of perspective and capacity to differentiate between a religion and its extreme aspects was rampant. Once the Chechnyan connection was made, the hateful rhetoric escalated exponentially.
Right now, CBS (at least) is reporting that Dzhokhar himself has been in the U.S. since he was 7, so well over a decade. That leaves me with some questions as to how developed their connections are to Chechnya. Yet that seems to be a key descriptor in headlines and captions. :(
<remainder removed; off-topic>
Now they're saying the brothers have been here for about 10 years. A woman who went to school with the younger brother, said he was a great kid........lots of friends and a nice guy. something has happened since then.
Also, this woman said that the older brother was 26.
I understand your comments bUU...........but isn't it sort of natural for people to make connections, as a self-preservation instinct kind of thing? It doesn't mean it works well or is fair, but I think its a very instinctual thing to lump people together, who are from a certain area, or a certain religion, or certain looks, etc.
I know I'm repeating myself........but I really think we need to see ourselves as natural beings, who come from different areas, have different beliefs, different emotions, etc., etc.. BUT........we are a country that encourages all of these groups to live together. I think its unreasonable to think that we can overcome these very instinctual urges to side with "our own kind", and to see others, as "others". This is just another problem we will always encounter in our attempts to be "civilized." I'm unfortunately not offering any suggestions, just to maybe explain why these things happen.
So my "home-grown violent idiot" hypothesis was off the mark, apparently.
It seems that hatred and factionalism and separatism are the problem, not the solution. But the white supremacist bomb throwers mentioned above would certainly support exclusion and apartheid.
Being cautious, even to a degree suspicious, of others who are outside your own group is a deeply rooted as fight or flight. That alone isn't a bad thing, just an obstacle to get around on the evolutionary trail. It's when we don't work to get around it, when we let irrational fears take over, that problems arise. Unfortunately any mob, even the internet based groups, are prone to mass hysteria.
Re: Boston. It doesn't make much sense to think there is any State sponsored connection with these guys. It also doesn't add up that they are part of any well funded, highly organized terrorist sect. As buu said, all signs point to them being extremists operating on their own (at least so far). In a sad way that is a common bond for all of us. Every one of us is associated with some group that could spin off a person capable of this behavior.
Be safe all of you guys in Boston!
So my "home-grown violent idiot" hypothesis was off the mark, apparently.
It seems that hatred and factionalism and separatism are the problem, not the solution. But the white supremacist bomb throwers mentioned above would certainly support exclusion and apartheid.Wrong here too. The FBI was wise to boot me out of their hiring process (after 6 months of tests and paperwork and more tests - UGH) once they realized I was deaf as a doorknob - had 'em fooled for awhile until the physical ;-)! As I certainly jumped to the wrong conclusion based on little info. Agent Scully I am not :-)! But once I saw the photos yesterday I actually did think they may be Turkish or from one of the new "x-istan" countries of the former Soviet Union and probably had ties to some Islamic terrorist groups. I also heard they were here quite a long time and that their parents, who also lived and worked here on legal greencards, had moved back to Russia last year. Doesn't seem that the father had any radical Islamic ties but who knows who the "kids" were involved with in this country - if any - or if just acting alone based on their own beliefs.
Twitter has been an awesome window on this entire thing. I was on till nearly 2 am PT last night... Following journalists, mostly, and Mass State Patrol.
Twitter has been an awesome window on this entire thing. I was on till nearly 2 am PT last night... Following journalists, mostly, and Mass State Patrol.
I've been glued to it - twitter has been a better source of information than the media. Given when I see things on twitter and when the media reports it, I wonder how many of them are using twitter for information as well.
I know this is probably a silly question.........but how do you get on Twitter?
I know this is probably a silly question.........but how do you get on Twitter?
http://www.twitter.com - you can set up an account there - and then you select what you want to follow. Mine is pretty utilitarian - I follow local police, fire, town, public transportation system and a few others.
Lots of folks use apps on their phones to access it - since I'm cheap (no, frugal :-), and I use a locked down blackberry my work provides (no personal media access), I just access it via the web on my computer.
iris lilies
4-19-13, 5:52pm
I don't understand why this is so interesting, but it seems to be 24/7 news. Other than for those of your in the Boston area I don't get it. And then, because they (the media) think they have to broadcast 24/7 it's the same damn story over and over.
I don't understand why this is so interesting, but it seems to be 24/7 news. Other than for those of your in the Boston area I don't get it. And then, because they (the media) think they have to broadcast 24/7 it's the same damn story over and over.
They took the 2nd suspect into custody just a few minutes ago.
The media banging it to death I understood. What I didn't understand is how little I've seen of the tragedy down in Texas.
Yes, the tragedy in Texas really got ignored. Maybe they'll pick up on it now. Really tragic.......
The media banging it to death I understood. What I didn't understand is how little I've seen of the tragedy down in Texas.
It's all about priorities. The New York Times has apparently criticized Fox News for spending airtime covering the tragedy in Texas rather than the gun debate.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/19/business/media/fox-news-msnbc-and-the-gun-debate.html?_r=0
"...That would come as news to Fox fans, who have heard comparatively little about the subject. While most of “Joe” was dedicated to guns on Thursday, Fox’s morning show, “Fox & Friends,” didn’t mention the word once. It focused instead on news about a Texas fertilizer plant explosion..."
I've been glued to it - twitter has been a better source of information than the media. Given when I see things on twitter and when the media reports it, I wonder how many of them are using twitter for information as well.
I've not sent a single tweet, but I find Twitter to be invaluable as a news source.
Even NPR had 24/7 coverage here in CO. So boring with the same stuff over and over. Glad I had an mp3 player in the car.
Never have so many said so little for so long. (media that is.) Even Anderson Cooper was boring and looked stressed at having to ask nonsense questions and keep the camera busy.
I'm glad the President made a point of acknowledging the tragedy in Texas and pledged the resources needed to recover and rebuild, promising that those affected have not been forgotten.
The people in the Texas tragedy must feel totally forgotten/abandoned. I don't understand why stations couldn't have shared their time with that story too. NBC seems to be the worst. They sent Matt Lauer down there, and I don't think they even used any of his stuff.
Kim Jong Un must have been really ticked off. haha
SteveinMN
4-20-13, 12:00pm
What I didn't understand is how little I've seen of the tragedy down in Texas.
I think it's because the Marathon story was far less predictable (and therefore more interesting) television than watching a bunch of people pick through burned buildings and belongings in Texas.
Not to seem callous about the tragedy in West. In many respects, the toll of that disaster is bigger than in Boston. But the fire is out and there very likely won't be any more surprises out of that. Not the same way the Marathon story featured a late-night shootout, a door-to-door manhunt, and a standoff. And the story behind the story in West -- assuming the fire/explosion was not the work of terrorists -- is one of bad zoning ordinances, corporate greed, and unobserved safety regulations, not the story of two young Chechen-American men who had what appears to have been mixed success in transitioning to life in America.
I wish I could verbalize my thoughts as well as you do Steve!
ApatheticNoMore
4-20-13, 12:32pm
I think it's because the Marathon story was far less predictable (and therefore more interesting) television than watching a bunch of people pick through burned buildings and belongings in Texas.
only people are complaining how bored they were seeing it all the time when there was nothing new to report so it wasn't even fulfilling a purpose as entertainment. Makes you wonder ... But yea MSM keep boring us all away, so that noone pays any attention to you anymore, hey I like this. :) A brave new world self implodes because they're so blindered they can't even get entertainment and distraction right anymore.
Not to seem callous about the tragedy in West. In many respects, the toll of that disaster is bigger than in Boston. But the fire is out and there very likely won't be any more surprises out of that. Not the same way the Marathon story featured a late-night shootout, a door-to-door manhunt, and a standoff. And the story behind the story in West -- assuming the fire/explosion was not the work of terrorists -- is one of bad zoning ordinances, corporate greed, and unobserved safety regulations, not the story of two young Chechen-American men who had what appears to have been mixed success in transitioning to life in America.
I tend to be way more conspiratorial. What agenda does 24/7 covering of the boston bombings serve? The need for more and more money to be poured into homeland security, anti-terrorism, police miltiterization etc.. And of course with it the need for the loss of more and more civil liberties. What agenda would covering the fertilizer explosion serve? The need for more safety and environmental etc. regulations on industry? Which one serves the current government agenda and that of our corporate masters? Which one is totally inline with the direction the wind is blowing and which is not?
Well, loss of civil liberties and ever expanding security beuracracy has been the trend has it not? Meanwhile not just the regulations themselves but the *ability* to regulate industry is being meta-bargained away with things like the TPP (it will limit the ability for states and feds to regulate even if they wanted to - international corporate law that is superior to soveriegnty).
To say that much of the MSM is bad is to say something totally obvious. I don't expect anything good out of it anymore. I only expect the worst.
.
What agenda does 24/7 covering of the boston bombings serve? The need for more and more money to be poured into homeland security, anti-terrorism, police miltiterization etc.. And of course with it the need for the loss of more and more civil liberties. . I don't think the media has any agenda other than to service the general fasination of the public with these kinds of things. Like Steve pointed out, the fertilzer plant was a natural event and thus...tragic but boring in many ways to public interest. Where as the attack in Boston by 2 seemingly bright and well adjusted young men with no apparent terrorist ties to their homeland is interesting. Just the sheer speculation of all the what-fors and possible what-ifs makes it interesting to follow. I just watch a bit to catch up and then turn off the TV (or go to a network that has other stuff on) so don't get the 24/7 news casts. However I do miss other news - like what's going on with the gun and immigration debate, the weather and what else is going on in the world - but they generally touch on that stuff briefly..
I found it much easier to just catch up with the news occasionally online and then drop it. The few times I saw TV news, it was pretty boring and I hate it when they thrust a camera and mike in someone's face.
I normally don't watch much talking head type news, but thought the media coverage was good and got my attention. You had a couple of wild yahoos on the loose spewing bullets and explosives, and who knows what further and possibly more serious plans they had for acts of terrorism. As far as that goes, now that it is basically over, I wonder if there might be some sort of organized group who was in on all of this. I suppose in terms of priorities, these things are somewhat daily events in some places around the globe and we only hear blurbs about them. The great thing about TV news is that it can be turned off easily.
it's interesting. i no longer watch the news. i read headlines, and then read more if I want. Might watch a short online video (news or just raw footage, etc).
it makes life so much nicer.
but, is anyone else concerned about the martial-law look of boston in photos? and searches of homes without warrants (just going door to door and searching?). Of course, people can permit police to search their homes, which circumvents this -- but what if someone refused? then what? a shoot-out at their home? harassment? going to get a warrant?
I look at it and go "wow, americans are getting increasingly comfortable with a police state."
and that freaks me out.
and I don't even think that Alex Jones is completely on his rocker (i don't think he's completely off, either).
poetry_writer
4-20-13, 6:22pm
it's interesting. i no longer watch the news. i read headlines, and then read more if I want. Might watch a short online video (news or just raw footage, etc).
it makes life so much nicer.
but, is anyone else concerned about the martial-law look of boston in photos? and searches of homes without warrants (just going door to door and searching?). Of course, people can permit police to search their homes, which circumvents this -- but what if someone refused? then what? a shoot-out at their home? harassment? going to get a warrant?
I look at it and go "wow, americans are getting increasingly comfortable with a police state."
and that freaks me out.
and I don't even think that Alex Jones is completely on his rocker (i don't think he's completely off, either).
Someone walking around blowing up people concerns me more than my house being searched..........
I guess I just don't get complaints of being bored by the 7x24 news cycle. No offense to anyone. Just that watching the news ad nauseum is a choice. Bored of the talking heads and the repeated tape loops? Use the Censorship button. It's labeled "OFF". Take a walk, cook something, whittle, read a book. Watch the sitcom channel. I certainly will beef that most TV news is incredibly superficial and geared more toward selling soap than informing. It used to be much better. But that's another discussion.
What agenda does 24/7 covering of the boston bombings serve? The need for more and more money to be poured into homeland security, anti-terrorism, police miltiterization etc.. And of course with it the need for the loss of more and more civil liberties. What agenda would covering the fertilizer explosion serve? The need for more safety and environmental etc. regulations on industry? Which one serves the current government agenda and that of our corporate masters?
I don't happen to be very conspiracy-minded. But I don't reject conspiracy theorists out of hand. I agree that there has been a push since 9/11 to legitimize activity that clearly runs afoul of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights and people's own self-interests. I wouldn't even argue very hard against labeling the effort exploitive. But I think if that were the primary agenda, we'd be seeing more coverage of terrorism all over the world with the explicit message that it could happen here unless we (continue to) cash in our Constitutional rights.
these things are somewhat daily events in some places around the globe and we only hear blurbs about them.
It is interesting that IEDs in Iraq or Afghanistan don't even warrant a mention in the news anymore now that they're not injuring American troops, but the equivalent of two of them on Boylston Street gave rise to the massive press effort that we just witnessed.
ApatheticNoMore
4-20-13, 7:01pm
but, is anyone else concerned about the martial-law look of boston in photos?
yea and I think I've made a decision about it too, staying inside was voluntary (it wasn't even illegal to go outside, as far as I know, it was just advised to stay inside), so ... if I'm told to stay inside I'm going out, gonna paint the town. It's the least we can do to resist the police state. Go out of our !@#$ houses. Now a natural disaster would be different and I don't know, I haven't made those types of plans for a 9.0 earthquake or something but I doubt in such a situation staying inside would be advised, I'm just saying something similar. A whole city was shut down for two (and soon only one) crazies - can you say overreaction?
and searches of homes without warrants (just going door to door and searching?). Of course, people can permit police to search their homes, which circumvents this -- but what if someone refused? then what? a shoot-out at their home? harassment? going to get a warrant?
I look at it and go "wow, americans are getting increasingly comfortable with a police state."
What Americans? @#$# their curfews @#$# their imprisonment in people's homes. I'm an American last I checked (haha, maybe a Californian first and foremost :)).
and that freaks me out.
yea it's disturbing, the least one can do is refuse to obey their "shelter in place" orders
"With an iron fist in a velvet glove
We are sheltered under the gun"
shelter in place - that phrase is like verbal waterboarding
yea and I think I've made a decision about it too, staying inside was voluntary (it wasn't even illegal to go outside, as far as I know, it was just advised to stay inside), so ... if I'm told to stay inside I'm going out, gonna paint the town. It's the least we can do to resist the police state. Go out of our !@#$ houses. Now a natural disaster would be different and I don't know, I haven't made those types of plans for a 9.0 earthquake or something but I doubt in such a situation staying inside would be advised, I'm just saying something similar. A whole city was shut down for two (and soon only one) crazies - can you say overreaction?
What Americans? @#$# their curfews @#$# their imprisonment in people's homes. I'm an American last I checked (haha, maybe a Californian first and foremost :)).
yea it's disturbing, the least one can do is refuse to obey their "shelter in place" orders
"With an iron fist in a velvet glove
We are sheltered under the gun"
shelter in place - that phrase is like verbal waterboarding
All that said, the strategy did work in this instance. What worries me is they are now casually discussing dimissing the rights of a US citizen (redefining him as an enemy combatant) just because it may be more expedient to do so.
Someone walking around blowing up people concerns me more than my house being searched..........
see, thing is, that doesn't concern me much.
to me, this is just a process of getting people acclimated to these sorts of searches.
it's easy enough for media to assert "there's a dangerous person in your area. police will be coming by to search your homes for him/her in due time."
and everyone is then supposed to go "oh, ok." becuase it might be true that someone might be dangerous and might do something?
I don't know. I feel like I'm turning into Alex Jones about this.
creaker. i head you there.
rosarugosa
4-20-13, 8:52pm
I live just outside of Boston and go into Boston to work for about 10 hours a day, five days a week, and then do homework on the side. I work about three blocks away from where the explosions happened. My company gives us Patriot's Day off as a holiday. I've never watched the marathon in my entire life; would just as soon watch paint dry. So spent Monday hiking in the woods and then working in the garden, and a friend came by, talking of explosions and such. I might not have known about it for a few more hours, but I would have heard about it on FB that night, if Scott hadn't come by. So went to work the next day with some trepedation about traffic, etc. but it was pretty OK except for media people, etc. in the way. I had a planned vacation day yesterday, but a robot called in the early AM to say that the city was closed and the office wasn't going to open until 10 AM. Then got another message that the city was CLOSED and to stay home! Spent hours walking in the woods and enjoying the day off, and came home to an e-mail from my manager that one of my employees, who lives far away (Hyannis) had gone to work and was one of the few people in the building. They gave them free caf food & water, and later in the day, sent her home in a livery car when the shut down order was lifted. Gotta love my company for keeping an eye out for my employee and sending her home in a livery car!
ETA: I've not watched one moment of TV coverage of the event. I just don't really do TV. I'm not really sure how to turn the damned thing on even.
but, is anyone else concerned about the martial-law look of boston in photos? and searches of homes without warrants (just going door to door and searching?). Of course, people can permit police to search their homes, which circumvents this -- but what if someone refused? then what? a shoot-out at their home? harassment? going to get a warrant?
Google "exigent circumstances". I had to take a whole class on this as a firefighter/EMT.
Your house is on fire, and there is a need to remedy imminent danger to life or serious damage to property, I'm coming in, no warrant needed. The police will come in under their own set of similar circumstances. There's a whole pile of Supreme Court cases on this.
Now, of course, you have to be reasonable about your actions, and there is a whole bunch of fine print.
But likening that to "a police state" shows ignorance of law, custom, and history.
awakenedsoul
4-20-13, 10:09pm
After what happened here recently in Big Bear, (I think his name was Christopher Joiner,) I think they handled this well. Personally, I appreciate all the police do. They're risking their lives, (and many of them are getting killed these days,) with all these criminals shooting at them at carrying explosives. I just shake my head when I hear the stories. As a single woman, I would greatly appreciate them searching door to door when they know the person is in the immediate area. The housekeepers in Big Bear were tied up. Police officers are getting shot and killed... I am very relived when I hear these criminals are killed or caught. (Or when they kill themselves.) Police work has become such a dangerous job. We have so many enraged people with guns these days. In a local case they sent the police dog in first, and the guy shot the dog. I think we're lucky that the police officers will stay in the field. I can't imagine being in their position. When I think back to 9/11 and all of the firefighters who lost their lives trying to save others...it's just so sad and tragic.
The one thing that stands out to me is that people are helping solve these crimes. The cameras, phonecalls, and tracking are all leading to captures and arrests. It seems like people were more passive before. Now they are participating and assisting.
I think it was very wise to stay inside. I'm glad I have a stockpile of food and two German shepherds. It's a different world now, and I'm afraid we will see more crimes of this sort.
Life_is_Simple
4-20-13, 11:57pm
but, is anyone else concerned about the martial-law look of boston in photos? and searches of homes without warrants (just going door to door and searching?). Of course, people can permit police to search their homes, which circumvents this -- but what if someone refused? then what? a shoot-out at their home? harassment? going to get a warrant?
At one of the press conferences, the police rep said that what they were doing was focusing more on searching garages, sheds, and (maybe?) basements, where a person might hide. <-- that, more than just walking into someone's house.
Life_is_Simple
4-21-13, 12:00am
All that said, the strategy did work in this instance. What worries me is they are now casually discussing dimissing the rights of a US citizen (redefining him as an enemy combatant) just because it may be more expedient to do so.
I want them to read him his rights, let the public defender lawyer (http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2013/04/20/public-defenders-will-represent-bomb-suspect/0qwfHvzBksRtBHqpg8zfCP/story.html)get things lined up, and do this all the proper way.
I want them to read him his rights, let the public defender lawyer (http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2013/04/20/public-defenders-will-represent-bomb-suspect/0qwfHvzBksRtBHqpg8zfCP/story.html)get things lined up, and do this all the proper way.
Yes, they need to run him through the full civil court system, since we are still a nation of laws, and not operating under martial law.
But, you only need to read him his rights under certain circumstances, and they may not think they need to worry about them.
It is possible they simply don't intend to use his testimony to convict him.
But likening that to "a police state" shows ignorance of law, custom, and history.
Exigent circumstances do not apply here.
As I understand it, the police asked to enter any premises -- which is not necessary when it's exigent circumstances, and therefore indicates that this did not qualify as exigent circumstances.
Likewise, it is perfectly acceptable for someone to choose to allow a search of their property for a suspect, and likewise equally acceptable for them to refuse.
My interest is in what would happen if someone had refused (I haven't heard of anyone refusing in the media thus far -- admittedly, i'm not looking hard! lol). What then?
Likewise, to see such a large city shut down with all manner of police and military vehicles around, with the suggestion that everyone stay inside and wait to give permission for their property to be searched *does* look a lot like a police state.
Also, in relation to ignorance in terms of law, history, and custom: the difference between civil and criminal courts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_procedure).
By "civil" I meant "civilian" as opposed to "military", alas my iPad betrayed me. See Rehnquist's book on the subject.
As to "exigent circumstances", that's a judgement call by the person on the scene. I'm issued an axe and a halligan tool, and other fun toys, and assumed to have a certain amount of judgment, and I *will* force entry into your home under some circumstances, without a warrant. I might *choose* to be polite, but it's not *required* in many cases :-)
one of those 'damn you, autocorrect!' moments. and I agree that this is a civilian matter, not a military one. martial law is really interesting.
And for the record, I did have to take a whole class in law school on due process, so I'm pretty clear on the law, history, and custom. We spent a fair amount of time on search and seizure, exigent circumstances (ec), including what "hot pursuit" may mean, and of course things like plain sight doctrines and related.
Usually, the very fact that someone is *asking* is enough to assert that it's not exigent. But, it's not an illegal s/s issue because the people give permission.
That's why I'm questioning -- what would have happened if a person refused? Would they assert ec?
And even more, what I'm questioning is what people are thinking about their own experience. On the one hand, with nothing to hide, I have no issue with the search for someone in my property per se -- in particular if the circumstances are truly exigent. But on the other hand, the nature of this process. . . this particular one in boston. . . just seems so. . . weird. And, I'm wondering how I would have felt about that circumstance.
And in general, what americans who are living there feel about it.
Also, living in a country with similar history, custom and law, it's interesting to me that here in NZ, if a suspect runs into your house and sits down on the couch, and the police come to the door -- that's an exigent circumstance technically -- they usually walk away and get a warrant, rather than go in and get into a potential legal mess.
Granted, there's not as much violent crime here. Most of it is theft.
Also, I had to take a "whole class" in Due Process in law school, and while my grade wasn't the greatest ever, I was pretty clear on legal vs illegal search and seizure and exigent circumstances.
I helped my wife with her "whole class" in law school, and multiple states' bar exams, and have to myself apply exigent circumstances almost every week in firefighting and arson investigation in ways that will cost big $$$ if I mess up. And with that, we'll have to disagree. I don't think anything illegal happened here, and people didn't have their rights trampled on, and there wasn't "a police state".
OMG: breaking news: police state!
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-monrovia-fire-20130421,0,6722608.story
That is to say, there's enough *real* police state stuff going on that making an issue out of this event is a bit...precious :-)
But likening that to "a police state" shows ignorance of law, custom, and history.
I agree. I think the opposite is actually what's going on increasingly in our society: Antisocial obstruction of reasonable measures to safeguard the community.
I helped my wife with her "whole class" in law school, and multiple states' bar exams, and have to myself apply exigent circumstances almost every week in firefighting and arson investigation in ways that will cost big $$$ if I mess up. And with that, we'll have to disagree. I don't think anything illegal happened here, and people didn't have their rights trampled on, and there wasn't "a police state".
OMG: breaking news: police state!
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-monrovia-fire-20130421,0,6722608.story
foremost, you started the comment of someone not knowing about the law, history, or custom. I never stated that you weren't aware -- I just simply countered that I am aware.
second, I never claimed that anyone's rights were trampled on. From the beginning, I noted that they were asking and receiving permission -- which essentially states that there's no violation here (and no exigent circumstances either).
My only question is to the mindset of why the individual citizens seemed so cool with it all. I'm not entirely comfortable with that reaction (from the citizenry).
third, i was focusing specifically on "looks like" a police state. I reiterated that the photos of an empty city, police going door to door asking to search "looks like" a police state. I also agree that there are other things that are far more concerning and actual "police state-y" things happening all around that need more attention.
which also points back to -- why are citizens doing what they are doing? how are they making these sorts of decisions?
finally, inflammatory (haha!) comparisons are unnecessary.
Everything did go back to normal after the suspect was caught.
If one was to target actions pointing to a police state, I'd point at the NYPD stop and frisk program. Or harassment of those videotaping or monitoring police. Or labeling legal protest as "low level terrorism" (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,526972,00.html).
awakenedsoul
4-21-13, 10:18am
Zoebird,
You said that most of the crime is theft where you are. We've had people blowing themselves up here in bunkers and in vacation homes. One guy took a child hostage for a week! In these situations, most of us just want to assist the police in finding and catching someone who would blow your legs off. It's scary. Terrorism is a totally different mentality. Having a child, you might feel differently if the police were rescuing him and needed to search each yard for a killer on the run.
Miss Cellane
4-21-13, 11:33am
To me, those pictures of Boston do not look like a "police state." They look like a state of emergency. They look like similar pictures taken during or after a hurricane or blizzard (minus the snow) or a major blackout. Not a police state. We've had the National Guard in Boston after major blizzards that closed the city down, and we were grateful for their presence. Definitely eerie, so see familiar streets so empty, but not a vision of a police state.
To me, a "police state" is more something you feel, rather than something you see. You feel afraid of doing something that someone else might see as suspicious and report to the police. You feel afraid of speaking out against the government, or a specific religion, or a specific law. There might be a curfew, and travel would be restricted, but day to day, people would still go out and go to work and school and go shopping, etc. However, I admit I might be biased here--I grew up on military bases. To me, people in uniform are the "good guys."
My brother, "Ted," lives and works in Boston. He walked the 5 blocks from his apartment to his office on Friday with no problem. He worked all day, with only a few other employees in his company. There were a few other people scattered around the office building. His biggest problem was that almost everything was closed, and he had a hard time finding a sandwich shop that was open so he could get lunch for everyone in the company who made it in that day.
Another brother, "Ned," lives outside Boston and takes the commuter rail into work in the center of the city. He enjoyed a day off, and did a lot of yard work. He was not in an area where houses were being searched.
My cousin was volunteering at the finish line at the Marathon. He lives and works in Boston. After Monday's events, he took the week off from work, because he was very upset at what he saw and needed time to deal with it.
They don't feel as if they were living in a police state for a few days. They are grateful that the suspects were found and dealt with. Mostly what I'm hearing from friends and family is that they were very scared all day Friday, and they are very relieved that the second suspect was caught.
I did catch some blogs and reports from people living in Boston and Cambridge--they were mostly bored, but those that left their homes found nothing to do, because everything was closed.
Up until last year, I lived two miles away from where the second suspect was found, in a town bordering Watertown. Even though my town was not officially on lockdown, I gather that most people stayed home because of the T shutdown, and most people stayed indoors, because the town is right on the border of Cambridge and Watertown and people didn't feel safe leaving their homes.
What I was struck by was the courage that the law enforcement people showed, in going in after someone they knew was armed and who possible had explosives on him. They know their job is dangerous, and they face this every day. I'm grateful we have people willing to do these jobs. My sister and I were watching some bomb squad people getting geared up and didn't know how they manage to face doing that job.
Miss Cellane
4-21-13, 11:39am
f
My only question is to the mindset of why the individual citizens seemed so cool with it all. I'm not entirely comfortable with that reaction (from the citizenry).
Zoebird, based on what family and friends living in Boston have said, and my own opinions, most people just wanted the suspects caught and taken off the streets. Once the manhunt started, and people in Watertown knew that someone was on the run, armed with guns and explosives, they just wanted him caught, whatever it took. They wanted to be free from the fear that he was walking their streets, free from worrying about their kids and what might happen to them.
Once the second suspect was caught, people crowded out onto the streets and applauded the police.
While it may have looked like a police state, I think to the people living in the area, it was much more a case of the police doing their jobs and protecting the people.
Of course, once the initial relief is over, I'm sure we'll start hearing some complaints about how the searches were conducted, and the brusk manner in which some householders were treated. Because this isn't a police state and people do have the right to complain.
ApatheticNoMore
4-21-13, 11:53am
Everything did go back to normal after the suspect was caught.
If one was to target actions pointing to a police state, I'd point at the NYPD stop and frisk program. Or harassment of those videotaping or monitoring police. Or labeling legal protest as "low level terrorism".
But it's within that context that one might see it as a police state. In a paranoid context, oh very well, but more accurately within a narrative context, within a context that sees things getting worse for civil liberties in the U.S. and is perfectly aware of most of the other things, and that's kinda why one thinks so. And shutting down a major city is *major*. Of course I hear it has been shutdown twice for storms before. It's hard to imagine shutting down a city for crazies, and there have been crazies. Of course on the plus side as extreme as it seems, it could be argued to be handled better than having police shooting at random people just because they feel like it (the Dorner case). Ugh, what a standard to go by though! At least the police didn't go completely feral ....
My only question is to the mindset of why the individual citizens seemed so cool with it all. I'm not entirely comfortable with that reaction (from the citizenry).
third, i was focusing specifically on "looks like" a police state. I reiterated that the photos of an empty city, police going door to door asking to search "looks like" a police state.
Yea pics of tanks and stuff right? And how were the tanks useful at all in the situation, oh right they weren't. I hear various reports on the emptiness of the streets. It wasn't illegal to go out and I hear reports of many people actually going out. Still how was the attempt at a lockdown even useful? It wasn't either, the guy was found after it ended.
I also agree that there are other things that are far more concerning and actual "police state-y" things happening all around that need more attention.
which also points back to -- why are citizens doing what they are doing? how are they making these sorts of decisions?
In many cases it's the having never experienced anything like it, so one acts mostly on reflex, like one has a plan on what to do if an entire city is shut down for a crazy or two (as if crazies in America was anything new, it's not). And no terrorism is not unique, not compared to mass shootings etc., there's nothing particularly unique about it, it's just a word that's used. But though it seems new to me and would be here, and it seems like complete overkill, a whole city afterall - and it didnt' even work, and many many places have faced much more frequent incidents of terror and not shut down cities, they actually did have the precedence of several storms also leading to shutdowns in MA apparently, so maybe the citizens treated it the same way.
ApatheticNoMore
4-21-13, 12:10pm
Once the manhunt started, and people in Watertown knew that someone was on the run, armed with guns and explosives
I suspect there's a good chance some of this will turn out to be false (armed with explosives etc.). Because ... because ... conspiracy! Well no, because much information we get right at the time of such a thing unfolding turns out to be false.
To me, a "police state" is more something you feel, rather than something you see. You feel afraid of doing something that someone else might see as suspicious and report to the police. You feel afraid of speaking out against the government, or a specific religion, or a specific law.
I think there are good reasons to fear protesting from what one hears about how protests are dealt with (occupy had people trying to kill them. who? it's redacted). Note, I did not say don't protest.
I doubt a police state in the U.S. ever would take the form of cracking down on everyone, what would be the point? You just need to target a very small minority of the population that is really political active (most aren't, voting doesn't cut it).
Miss Cellane
4-21-13, 12:25pm
I suspect there's a good chance some of this will turn out to be false (armed with explosives etc.). Because ... because ... conspiracy! Well no, because much information we get right at the time of such a thing unfolding turns out to be false.
I think there are good reasons to fear protesting from what one hears about how protests are dealt with (occupy had people trying to kill them. who? it's redacted). Note, I did not say don't protest.
I doubt a police state in the U.S. ever would take the form of cracking down on everyone, what would be the point? You just need to target a very small minority of the population that is really political active (most aren't, voting doesn't cut it).
Well, about the explosives--all the police knew was that explosives had been thrown at them during the chase. It was a logical assumption that the second suspect might have more. A reasonable precaution, if you will. He might have not had them, but I can see how law enforcement would continue to operate on the assumption that he might have more. Better safe than sorry, and all that sort of thing. I grant you, there's a lot of misinformation flung about in an emergency, and I don't think the rabid news media helps.
I avoided tv for most of the week, but I did watch the final hours of the manhunt--the local stations were covering it without stopping for commercials. At one point, a guy in the newsroom was asking a reporter on the street where he was, so that the newsroom people could tell him how to get closer to the scene of the action. And the guy on the street stopped them--"I'm not getting any closer. I'm not moving. The police won't let me and I don't want to." That's what I mean by rabid news media--getting too close to flying bullets.
And I'm only talking about "police state" here as it applies to conversations people are having about how Boston looked on Friday. Just because the streets were empty does not, to me, signal a police state. I used to walk to church every Sunday through the Common and it was just as deserted, but that's to be expected at 7 am on a Sunday.
Am I concerned about how our rights have been trodden upon since 9/11? Yes. Do I think this one incident in Boston is an example of that? No, as regards the general public.
Am I concerned that the suspect in custody hasn't apparently been read his Miranda rights and may not be read them? Yes.
Do I have an answer to balancing freedom from terrorism and freedom of personal rights? No. I wish I did.
One thing that feels more like a police state is the ramping up of automatic license plate detection/analysis equipment in cruisers. They have them here in Boston (http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/04/08/big-brother-better-police-work-new-technology-automatically-runs-license-plates-everyone/1qoAoFfgp31UnXZT2CsFSK/story.html).
Life_is_Simple
4-21-13, 1:04pm
To me, those pictures of Boston do not look like a "police state." They look like a state of emergency. They look like similar pictures taken during or after a hurricane or blizzard (minus the snow) or a major blackout. Not a police state. We've had the National Guard in Boston after major blizzards that closed the city down, and we were grateful for their presence. Definitely eerie, so see familiar streets so empty, but not a vision of a police state.
Agreed. The first thing it reminded me of was the blizzards we had where everyone was told to remain off the streets if possible, to let the plows do their jobs.
Plus, numerous people in Watertown heard the noise of the shootout. Here's a doctor from Watertown (http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2013/04/20/doctor-dead-bomb-suspect-had-wounds-head-toe/MIDInodtX9OZqQCkNRZYFM/story.html):
"[Dr] Schoenfeld lives in the Boston suburb of Watertown and heard explosions from the shootout between the two brothers and police early Friday. He called the [Beth Israel] hospital to alert staff they likely would be getting injured people, then rushed in to coordinate preparations."
I have read that others in Watertown heard the noise as well.
Here's what EJDionne says on Twitter: "Most complied because the request made sense to them. Voluntary compliance only works if governments don't abuse their authority "
When the press conference occurred in the later afternoon, where they said they couldn't find him, and people should go about their daily business... that made me nervous, because you know some resident is going to spot the guy.
Up until last year, I lived two miles away from where the second suspect was found, in a town bordering Watertown. Even though my town was not officially on lockdown, I gather that most people stayed home because of the T shutdown, and most people stayed indoors, because the town is right on the border of Cambridge and Watertown and people didn't feel safe leaving their homes.
Yeah, I also lived in a bordering town a few years back, and to see all the footage on tv of an area I was very familiar with... Arsenal St, the Watertown Mall, etc... That made me more nervous than if the situation had been in another suburb I was unfamiliar with. So I can only imagine how the people in Watertown felt.
Am I concerned that the suspect in custody hasn't apparently been read his Miranda rights and may not be read them? Yes.
Why does that concern you? What are "the Miranda rights", and when do they apply, and what do they prevent?
It would only concern me if they used the suspects statements during his trial to incriminate him. (Modulo the public safety exception, see New York v. Quarles, 467 U.S. 649, which would allow them to do a bit more...)
Why does that concern you? What are "the Miranda rights", and when do they apply, and what do they prevent?
It would only concern me if they used the suspects statements during his trial to incriminate him. (Modulo the public safety exception, see New York v. Quarles, 467 U.S. 649, which would allow them to do a bit more...)
Given the current medical state of the suspect, it's also quite possible (or could be argued as a defense) that the suspect was not in a state where he could understand the rights being read to him.
There has been no interrogation, yet. The telling point will be if he has been mirandized or not prior to being questioned.
There has been no interrogation, yet. The telling point will be if he has been mirandized or not prior to being questioned.
And that only really matters if they use the results of that questioning to convict *him*. Otherwise they can pretty much talk to him as much as they want. He of course doesn't have to answer. (Unless the court orders him to talk, and (even against his will) grants him immunity from prosecution based on the words coming out of his mouth, as I believe some mobsters have discovered in the past...)
I wonder how much of this falls under the NDAA of 2012, where as I understand it, suspects of acts of terror on US soil basically have no constitutional rights to due process of law.
And that only really matters if they use the results of that questioning to convict *him*. Otherwise they can pretty much talk to him as much as they want. He of course doesn't have to answer. (Unless the court orders him to talk, and (even against his will) grants him immunity from prosecution based on the words coming out of his mouth, as I believe some mobsters have discovered in the past...)
As long as due process is followed. I read some things insinuating Miranda rights were not read because that would be an acknowledgement that the suspect has rights - that argument worries me.
I wonder how much of this falls under the NDAA of 2012, where as I understand it, suspects of acts of terror on US soil basically have no constitutional rights to due process of law.
That's scary - anyone can be a suspect.
gimmethesimplelife
4-21-13, 5:33pm
I have an interesting take on this. I have been out of the country since this happened last Monday. I have been in Los Algodones, Mexico, having some crowns done at $140 each before leaving for my seasonal job in Utah, and also I have been here so that my mother could have her plate put in at a much lower cost than in the US - she did not want to come down to Mexico alone. So I have been here in Mexico since 4/15. It has been funky getting the news from the Internet and seeing the flag at the border at half mast all week. Wow, my mind is boggled that such a thing has happened in Massachusetts - makes me very grateful to live so close to the southern border with Mexico is all I can say. Rob
awakenedsoul
4-21-13, 6:05pm
I wonder how much of this falls under the NDAA of 2012, where as I understand it, suspects of acts of terror on US soil basically have no constitutional rights to due process of law.
That feels right to me. They've got the videotapes and the description from one of the victims who survived. If an American did this in another country, they wouldn't have any rights. Not to mention he ran over his own brother in front of all those people.
gimmethesimplelife
4-21-13, 6:13pm
That feels right to me. They've got the videotapes and the description from one of the victims who survived. If an American did this in another country, they wouldn't have any rights. Not to mention he ran over his own brother in front of all those people.Ouch, I don't totally want to open a can of worms here? But I remember being taught in high school one of the great things about America was that citizens of this country were entitled to due process of law? Given that our lives are not worth guaranteed access to health care and this is the only country in the first world this holds true for, perhaps holding onto due process for all citizens might not be a bad idea? True, the person we are talking about is a POS in my humble opinion, but I still would like to see him not be treated like some animal - a fair trial, legal representation, and a chance to tell his side if he so desires - are these not rights that we once held dear in the United States? As I said, since human life is not automatically worth access to health care here, should we not fight and fight like hell to protect what few rights differentiate us from those many in the US consider lesser? Food for thought as always, Rob
Zoebird,
You said that most of the crime is theft where you are. We've had people blowing themselves up here in bunkers and in vacation homes. One guy took a child hostage for a week! In these situations, most of us just want to assist the police in finding and catching someone who would blow your legs off. It's scary. Terrorism is a totally different mentality. Having a child, you might feel differently if the police were rescuing him and needed to search each yard for a killer on the run.
This begs me to question *why* it's so violent there, though.
And, please note -- I was born, raised, and educated in the US, and have only lived here for 3 years. It's interesting to me that some countries are far less violent than others, and that the US is as violent as it is.
Likewise, throwing my kid into the game as an emotional argument is. . . basically uncool. Obviously, if my son were in danger, I would utilize every resource at my disposal, and hope that others would do the same. But I do not expect the manhunt to shut down a major city's transportation lines, work, etc and for there to be door-to-door searches of people's homes looking for it. When this happens, the police go about their business, and so does everyone else.
I'm not arguing any differently in stating that I don't understand how the citizenry is thinking these days.
I might also note that I have friends in boston, too -- many of whom were writing a fair amount of FB -- and most of whom thought the whole situation was bizarre.
for many of them, they don't see why this race would be targeted. It isn't that important of an event, really, and it's apolitical. It was patriot's day, but really only bostonians know and/or care about that.
from there, many of them didn't see the need for the whole city to shut down for the manhunt. Manhunts continue for other incidents without shutting the whole city down and calling in the national guard. Wildfires, blizzards, and floods are one thing -- but a simple police matter of a man hunt? It just seemed excessive.
This from my bostonian friends, mind you, not just me. It's what we talked about. We talked about how weird it was to have tanks in the streets and door-to-door searches for a very simple police/FBI matter. . . something that they do every day for all manner of violent (and nonviolent) crimes.
This is why we were asking the question of -- why is everyone ok with this? And is this a drill? I mean, look at how "terror" really controls the masses so easily.
Anyway, this is something that my friends and I were mulling over. And trust me, we are no advocates of conspiracy theories, nor do we like that Alex JOnes guy, or anything else.
SImply, we are looking at this from a POV of "hmm, this is strange." Because it is strange. It's strange all around.
gimmethesimplelife
4-21-13, 6:34pm
I might also note that I have friends in boston, too -- many of whom were writing a fair amount of FB -- and most of whom thought the whole situation was bizarre.
for many of them, they don't see why this race would be targeted. It isn't that important of an event, really, and it's apolitical. It was patriot's day, but really only bostonians know and/or care about that.
from there, many of them didn't see the need for the whole city to shut down for the manhunt. Manhunts continue for other incidents without shutting the whole city down and calling in the national guard. Wildfires, blizzards, and floods are one thing -- but a simple police matter of a man hunt? It just seemed excessive.
This from my bostonian friends, mind you, not just me. It's what we talked about. We talked about how weird it was to have tanks in the streets and door-to-door searches for a very simple police/FBI matter. . . something that they do every day for all manner of violent (and nonviolent) crimes.
This is why we were asking the question of -- why is everyone ok with this? And is this a drill? I mean, look at how "terror" really controls the masses so easily.
Anyway, this is something that my friends and I were mulling over. And trust me, we are no advocates of conspiracy theories, nor do we like that Alex JOnes guy, or anything else.
SImply, we are looking at this from a POV of "hmm, this is strange." Because it is strange. It's strange all around.Seriously? Take this with a grain of salt because I started questioning the United States and how things are done here at the age of 15 - there is a cynical part of me that indeed wonders if this was a drill. And if what's his face the 2nd supsect that is still alive does not get a fair trial, I wonder if this is a drill for the future too. Very scary stuff and I hope with all my heart that I am wrong. Rob
Miss Cellane
4-21-13, 7:03pm
Zoebird, I agree the whole thing--from the target to the finish in a boat in a back yard--is strange.
As for what law enforcement was thinking? Well, they had a picture of suspect #2 leaving what looked like a backpack with a bomb in it right next to an 8 year old boy and his sister. They knew the two men on the run had shot at and thrown IEDs at police. One of the suspects had walked directly up to a group of policemen, shooting and I think throwing IEDs. They suspected the two suspects had killed a policeman. They knew they had carjacked a car and kept the driver with them for a period of time.
My best guess is that law enforcement knew the men were armed and dangerous and were trying to prevent any further deaths. Also, clearing (or mostly clearing) the streets made it easy to spot the few people who were moving about. Shutting down public transit made it difficult for the suspects to get anywhere.
Maybe it was overkill. Maybe it was the best way to keep the general public safe. I'm sure in the days to come every single decision made will be questioned and debated.
ApatheticNoMore
4-21-13, 8:15pm
This begs me to question *why* it's so violent there, though.
And, please note -- I was born, raised, and educated in the US, and have only lived here for 3 years. It's interesting to me that some countries are far less violent than others, and that the US is as violent as it is.
It's a violent culture. I get the impression with these guys the influences were multicultural though and not *just* American culture. Chaos in a melting pot.
I'm not arguing any differently in stating that I don't understand how the citizenry is thinking these days.
Why not just trust your Bostonian friends to represent what the citizenry is thinking too. It's not a poll, so it won't tell you what percentage think what, but it's what some Americans think. The U.S. doesn't always have to be represented by what the worst possible elements think here.
And how they are thinking might be: deeply troubled and not sure entirely what to make of it all. Shutting down an entire city is troubling. Many places still, yes still, have experienced worse terrorism than the U.S. and have not shut down whole cities. Still it was mostly voluntary, and people did leave their houses. And if you take the official line at face value, they were throwing around explosives, and engaged in shootouts. So it is crazy behavior with the potential for people to get hurt.
Meanwhile, things to fill one with dread: bomb threats were being reported all over the place, most that had nothing to do with these guys (just copycat stuff), and that were mostly fake, for instance several colleges here got bomb threats. Now there was never much suspicion it was related I don't think. But it's just adding to an overall atmosphere of crazy ("the new normal" as I called it sacrastically, seems Cuomo stole my line). Bomb threats taken seriously in multiple places, the whole city of Boston being informally shutdown, and tanks rolling around there. C-R-A-Z-Y. Stuff that's hard 1to look at without deep dread. I wouldn't want to live in America right now, oh right .... I do :)
I mean, look at how "terror" really controls the masses so easily.
not sure what you mean but suppose you live somewhere and you got orders that the authorites were telling everyone to stay inside, and what would you do? With forethought maybe pay no attention to it, but in the moment ....
Anyway, this is something that my friends and I were mulling over. And trust me, we are no advocates of conspiracy theories, nor do we like that Alex Jones guy, or anything else.
SImply, we are looking at this from a POV of "hmm, this is strange." Because it is strange. It's strange all around.
I didn't even get the Alex Jones line, except referring to general paranoia, because he's not someone I follow. Then I remembered he might be one of the ones trying to do CI internet edition, with identifying the guy, and a whole bunch of stuff I never attempted (I read news to try to understand overall workings of things, not to pretend I'm a criminal investigator).
Regardless of all that, and one could get lost in it, is this situation likely to lead to more draconian attacks on civil liberties? Yes. And that's the dread too. Not good ...
Yes. It's a violent culture.
Why is it a violent culture?
Diversity cannot be the only reason for it.
Yes. It's a violent culture. Why is it a violent culture? Diversity cannot be the only reason for it.
Diversity isn't any reason for violence. Maybe fear of difference, but violence is a chosen response to limbic brain based emotions -- fear, anger, vulnerability, perceived loss of control.
Ok, so why does the American culture seem to have a lot of fear, anger, vulnerability and perceived loss of control, and how can the culture not feel those things?
As long as due process is followed. I read some things insinuating Miranda rights were not read because that would be an acknowledgement that the suspect has rights - that argument worries me.I've read all manner of conspiracy theories surrounding this case. There is no reason to believe that the withholding of the Miranda warning has anything to do with anything other than the suspect's incapacity and/or the suspect's status as a terrorism suspect and the consequent intention to interrogate him with regard to the extent of future danger to the public. Until it is established definitively that there are no other conspirators, no other related dangers, then there actually is no right to remain silent.
But I remember being taught in high school one of the great things about America was that citizens of this country were entitled to due process of law?Yes, of course. This is the process: Ensure that the public is safe from further terrorist, then turn attention to the past crimes.
Given that our lives are not worth guaranteed access to health care and this is the only country in the first world this holds true for, perhaps holding onto due process for all citizens might not be a bad idea?I don't see the connection.
gimmethesimplelife
4-22-13, 7:59am
I've read all manner of conspiracy theories surrounding this case. There is no reason to believe that the withholding of the Miranda warning has anything to do with anything other than the suspect's incapacity and/or the suspect's status as a terrorism suspect and the consequent intention to interrogate him with regard to the extent of future danger to the public. Until it is established definitively that there are no other conspirators, no other related dangers, then there actually is no right to remain silent.
Yes, of course. This is the process: Ensure that the public is safe from further terrorist, then turn attention to the past crimes.
I don't see the connection.The connection is to me anyway, that I figured out real young that this is the only country in the first world where you can get sick and lose everything - even these days if you have insurance. To me this implies human life is not worth much in America and that life all boils down to money. This is why I think it is so important to hold onto what few rights may be left - such as due process - as human life in and of itself by design is not worth much in the US. I was twelve when I figured that one out and its only become more true to me over time due to health care getting more and more inaccessible to more and more people. Rob
Okay I understand. I guess I'm just more of an optimist - that although that's the direction so many Americans seem to be trying to drive the nation, that there are still enough people left who do care about humanity more than money.
gimmethesimplelife
4-22-13, 8:27am
Okay I understand. I guess I'm just more of an optimist - that although that's the direction so many Americans seem to be trying to drive the nation, that there are still enough people left who do care about humanity more than money.I do believe it is true that there are people out there who care more about humanity than money - I like to count myself in their number - but as far as the people with the political and economic power go in America? Not so much is the nicest observation I can make. Rob
@ Zoebird: I don't know if anybody knows why the US is generally more violent than some other countries with similar demographics. Canadians have a high rate of firearm ownership but don't have the same level of purposeful shooting deaths, even in big cities (because population density has something to do with it). Even different states among the US have different rates of violence per capita and different types of violence. I don't know if anybody knows. I don't think any single thing is completely responsible. Culture obviously plays a role, and by culture I mean the folks one interacts with or sees as examples. This can be anything from friends to movies to the press, right? We have a lot of violence in all types of media, but of course exposure to that does not make most people violent. Every single time there's an act of violence, it seems like we have this discussion.
This is why I think it is so important to hold onto what few rights may be left - such as due process - as human life in and of itself by design is not worth much in the US.
I think too many of us have a TV drama view of due process. The Miranda warning serves two purposes, one being to inform the suspect of the right to resist self-incrimination and the second being the understanding that counsel is available to assist in purpose #1. Failure to provide that warning ensures that the suspect's self-incriminating statements cannot be used against him/her in a subsequent trial.
If the state believes that there is ample evidence to ensure a conviction, such as photographs, video, witnesses and confessions made to witnesses, etc., the due process argument doesn't hold water as any post-arrest self incrimination is not necessary to the trial.
To me, the real question is whether or not the suspect should be classified as an enemy combatant, a designation which leaves me with mixed feelings in this case.
gimmethesimplelife
4-22-13, 9:21am
I think too many of us have a TV drama view of due process. The Miranda warning serves two purposes, one being to inform the suspect of the right to resist self-incrimination and the second being the understanding that counsel is available to assist in purpose #1. Failure to provide that warning ensures that the suspect's self-incriminating statements cannot be used against him/her in a subsequent trial.
If the state believes that there is ample evidence to ensure a conviction, such as photographs, video, witnesses and confessions made to witnesses, etc., the due process argument doesn't hold water as any post-arrest self incrimination is not necessary to the trial.
To me, the real question is whether or not the suspect should be classified as an enemy combatant, a designation which leaves me with mixed feelings in this case.Hi Alan.
In this case I am not so worried about the reading of the Miranda Rights - I am more worried that this individual has access to a fair and speedy trial, legal representation if he can not afford it, and also a chance to tell his side of the story if he so desires. I have heard rumblings online that this may be denied here and I hope this is not true as in my book such would take America down even further. I don't read the future, so I don't know what is going to happen, and I also realize that just because I read something online, that does not make it true. So I'm hoping for the best here - even though I think the supsect is a POS - in my book he still deserves all of the above from the justice system, otherwise we as a nation become ever more uncivilized.....Rob
To me, the real question is whether or not the suspect should be classified as an enemy combatant, a designation which leaves me with mixed feelings in this case.
Me too. Rights aren't worth much if you can have them when you don't need them but they can be taken away whenever it's expedient.
gimmethesimplelife
4-22-13, 9:24am
Me too. Rights aren't worth much if you can have them when you don't need them but they can be taken away whenever it's expedient.+1 Rob
NPR had an interview with a former attorney general who gave a perspective on the Miranda rights. "The Miranda warning, which informs suspects of their rights, including the right to remain silent and to have legal counsel, is being withheld from Tsarnaev for now under the public safety exception (http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2013/04/19/the-public-safety-exception/), which U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts Carmen Ortiz has said officials are invoking due to an immediate threat to the public."
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/04/21/178254784/miranda-rights-and-tsarnaev-ashcroft-says-u-s-move-is-the-right-one
I also under stand that there is still some debate about whether the trial will be military or civilian, which will make a difference.
but, is anyone else concerned about the martial-law look of boston in photos? and searches of homes without warrants (just going door to door and searching?). Of course, people can permit police to search their homes, which circumvents this -- but what if someone refused? then what? a shoot-out at their home? harassment? going to get a warrant?
I look at it and go "wow, americans are getting increasingly comfortable with a police state."
and that freaks me out.
and I don't even think that Alex Jones is completely on his rocker (i don't think he's completely off, either).
I don't think we are any more of a police state then we've ever been. Law enforcement has always been able to search a home - or car, boat, RV, person - without warrant as long as there is probable cause and they can't wait for a warrant. And the determination of probable cause is left up to the discretion of the officers on scene. So technically they can - and always have been - able to do searches even without warrants and even by force. Now what happens at trial with any arrests or evidence is A different story.
Fortunately, thanks to the original Miranda ruling and thousands of media references, I don't believe there is anyone left in this country who doesn't know "You have a right to remain silent..."
Yeah, by not issuing the suspect his Miranda rights you are actually protecting the suspect since whatever he says can,t usually be used in court. There are exceptions but in general Miranda-ising someone asap is a greater benefit to law enforcement than the suspect.
Me too. Rights aren't worth much if you can have them when you don't need them but they can be taken away whenever it's expedient.Me too. But there are so many more - different - charges that can be brought to bear using military law rather than in the civilian codes. And since this guy isn't a citizen and may well be part of an international organized militant terror group, then I can see where using the military Justice codes or Geneva Convention rules may work better. Of course time will tell if he is just a disaffected radical youth or part of something larger.
iris lily
4-22-13, 11:50am
Me too. But there are so many more - different - charges that can be brought to bear using the UCMJ rather than in the civil codes. And since this guy isn't a citizen and may well be part of an international organized militant terror group, then I can see where using the military Justice codes may work better. Of course time will tell if he is just a disaffected radical youth or part of something larger.
Wait--he's not a citizen? I've missed this in the endless media chatter.
ApatheticNoMore
4-22-13, 11:55am
He is a citizen. It was the older brother who wasn't.
He is a citizen. It was the older brother who wasn't.
My bad. Had heard they were both here on legal greencards as were the parents before they returned to Russia. How did he become a citizen? Although, even as a citizen he could be subjected to military law/Geneva Convention rules - if it's proven he was part of an international terror group. He also would still be subject to civilian law - both Fed and State - afterwards. The military justice system does follow procedural laws of due process but they can often be different in structure.
awakenedsoul
4-22-13, 3:04pm
NPR had an interview with a former attorney general who gave a perspective on the Miranda rights. "The Miranda warning, which informs suspects of their rights, including the right to remain silent and to have legal counsel, is being withheld from Tsarnaev for now under the public safety exception (http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2013/04/19/the-public-safety-exception/), which U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts Carmen Ortiz has said officials are invoking due to an immediate threat to the public."
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/04/21/178254784/miranda-rights-and-tsarnaev-ashcroft-says-u-s-move-is-the-right-one
I also under stand that there is still some debate about whether the trial will be military or civilian, which will make a difference.
That's a relief to me. I think part of the reason we have so much violence here is that we have too permissive of a society. I've worked in Japan, throughout Europe, and all over the US. They don't play in Germany. Officers are on the trains checking your passport. If you don't have one, they put you in jail. There's much more of an authoritive approach to foreigners there. I think America has been foolish and naive. I feel we could learn a lot from other countries with strict borders and boundaries.
A friend of mine who is English says that she thinks Russian people perceive freedom as being able to do anything they want. We studied Russian ballet together, and I left because of the opressiveness in that culture. Dictatorships really affect people. We tend to mirror our government when we travel and live somewhere else. It's in our subconscious. When I worked as an asst. director in Berlin, I ran rehearsals in a democratic way. They don't respond to that. It confused them. They are comfortable with a socialist atmosophere at work. Realizing this, I went home.
I believe part of the reason we have so much violence here is because people clash. Even family members clash and fight. Integration doesn't always work. It's hard to be around people that want to force you to see things their way. (Especially religious fanatics.)
My bad. Had heard they were both here on legal greencards as were the parents before they returned to Russia. How did he become a citizen? Although, even as a citizen he could be subjected to the UCMJ - military law - if it's proven he was part of an international terror group. He also would still be subject to civilian law - both Fed and State - afterwards. The military justice system does follow procedural laws of due process but they can often be different in structure.
I think he just went through the normal process of becoming a naturalized citizen. I've heard today he will be tried in civilian court, which I think is appropriate.
"(Especially religious fanatics.) "
I think that's the salient point.
awakenedsoul
4-22-13, 7:16pm
I don't have t.v. anymore, but in one of the articles I read it said that he believed that "Americans use the Bible to invade other countries." Although I feel the death penalty is appropriate in this case, I also see his point. I think this is an insight into why so many people in other countries hate Americans.
A lot of people that come to America from places like Croatia have had their country invaded...sometimes three times! It can destroy them, psychologically. The man I'm thinking of hated everybody and didn't speak to anyone at work. The uncle of these boys described them the same way. "They hated everybody." I've seen this with one of my Russian ballet teachers. He came here, and worked here, but he despised us. I think it's more common in subcultures than we know.
I had another ballet teacher who was from Egypt, but trained at the Kirov school from age 9-17 in Russia. He is Muslim, and extremely talented. He really resented American women who were powerful and succesful. His idea of a woman's place was very, very low. Even though he lived here, his ideas and beliefs reflected a society where women have no rights. They bring all that with them when they come here. It's no wonder we have so much conflict. It's perfectly fine to beat up your wife and children in a lot of these countries.
that's just the diversity argument, again, though.
it isn't just diversity. there is diversity here (particularly in our main cities). We also have a lot of racism and other problems here -- problems that exist in the US. We also have gangs and a drug problem, too -- and also domestic violence, rape, etc.
And yet, we don't have bomb threats and the last massacre was 1997 (source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_New_Zealand)). And here (http://www.crime.co.nz/c-files.aspx?ID=11926) are our crime statistics (or some of them). I won't bother mentioning terrorism per se, because I don't see NZ as much of a target compared to the US in terms of political power/etc.
And, it might be noted that Australia also hasn't seen a massacre since 1996 (source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Australia)). Australians also have an intense history of racism and a diverse population, as well as a large population spread across a large land mass. And, they have more "anti-immigrant" sentiment than NZ does overall. In NZ, over 60% of people polled felt that immigration was positive and immigrants of other nationalities (predominately asians) were an asset to the nation, whereas in AUstralia, like much of Europe, that is around and often below 50%.
SteveinMN
4-23-13, 10:58am
I had another ballet teacher who was from Egypt, but trained at the Kirov school from age 9-17 in Russia. He is Muslim, and extremely talented. He really resented American women who were powerful and succesful. His idea of a woman's place was very, very low. Even though he lived here, his ideas and beliefs reflected a society where women have no rights. They bring all that with them when they come here. It's no wonder we have so much conflict. It's perfectly fine to beat up your wife and children in a lot of these countries.
American exceptionalism.
There is nothing wrong with conflict when it is directed toward creating a better society for all. Bludgeoning one's fellow Americans into submission with bombs (Tsarnaev) or bombast (Gingrich)? Not the way to do it. But challenging assumptions that we tend to make in the U.S. -- with valid studies and factual arguments and a genuine interest in assessing positives and negatives -- is not a bad thing. The discussion ought to be what is best for everyone, not just the 1% -- or the 80% who have pretty much won the lottery just by being born middle-class and white in America.
I'm not at all suggesting that America is better off reducing women to housekeepers and baby machines. And I do have a very hard time imagining that there is a positive to beating up wives and children (though Americans are surprisingly okay with mental abuse). But does any American ask why civilizations much older than ours have persisted despite maintaining these traditions/laws? No, we simply act appalled and, typically, don't even bother to ask the question.
In the Egyptian teacher's case, he grew up in a society in which women had no rights. For him, it is normal. When he moved to Russia, he brought with him a lifetime of that kind of training and "normal". If an American were to move to Egypt and proclaim that headgear on women was useless and that, despite what the predominant religion "says", women should have just the same rights as men and, oh, by the way, there's no reason to make alcohol or paying interest on loans illegal, you can guess what the reaction would be. It's no different here. Exceptionalism exists in most places. And it is a common cause of conflict, often not carried out peacefully.
ApatheticNoMore
4-23-13, 12:01pm
And I do have a very hard time imagining that there is a positive to beating up wives and children (though Americans are surprisingly okay with mental abuse).
I tend to think beating up wives and children is pretty common in the U.S. anyway. It doesn't necessarily have the legal ok though (well spanking might, but domestic violence doesn't) and making it illegal is a form of saying it's not ok.
I think he just went through the normal process of becoming a naturalized citizen. I heard today that he will be tried in civilian court, which I think is appropriate.Thanks. I also think it's good that he'll be tried in civilian court as I personally wouldn't consider him an enemy combatant. Actually, now that I have coffee in me and can think straight, even if they did try him as an enemy combatant he wouldn't be tried under the UCMJ since that is specificly for US military members. It would probably be according to the Geneva Convention law or international treaty laws. They probably still have that option to bring charges under that as a civilian acting as an enemy combatant but can still bring federal as well as state charges too.
that's just the diversity argument, again, though.
it isn't just diversity. there is diversity here (particularly in our main cities). We also have a lot of racism and other problems here -- problems that exist in the US. We also have gangs and a drug problem, too -- and also domestic violence, rape, etc.
And yet, we don't have bomb threats and the last massacre was 1997 (source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_New_Zealand)). And here (http://www.crime.co.nz/c-files.aspx?ID=11926) are our crime statistics (or some of them). I won't bother mentioning terrorism per se, because I don't see NZ as much of a target compared to the US in terms of political power/etc.
And, it might be noted that Australia also hasn't seen a massacre since 1996 (source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Australia)). Australians also have an intense history of racism and a diverse population, as well as a large population spread across a large land mass. And, they have more "anti-immigrant" sentiment than NZ does overall. In NZ, over 60% of people polled felt that immigration was positive and immigrants of other nationalities (predominately asians) were an asset to the nation, whereas in AUstralia, like much of Europe, that is around and often below 50%.
New Zealand: Where men are men and sheep are afraid :-)! Just teasing!
My sister lived in New Zealand for a year and had much the same sentiments as you do - a fairly peaceful place with some crime, some racial issues, and yet very few violent crimes or terrorist activities and really no need for any kind of heavy police or military intervention in day to day life (until those millions of sheep run amok!!).
However I lived in Europe at different periods in my life - for instance Spain for almost a year, Germany (6 months) and North Ireland (Belfast for a couple of months when in the coast guard - during the Bobby Sands hunger strike - you oldsters will remember that) and in almost all of Europe there are (or were) constant terror attacks. They were usually done by local rebel Seperatrist groups like Basque Seperatists in Spain and the IRA in Belfast and Red Army in Germany rather than international groups - although that happens there also. When I was in Spain almost all of the train stations had been bombed at one time or another, and they had permanently closed the baggage storage locker areas and some of the waiting areas to reduce that. And it was very common to have heavily armed security teams, with bomb sniffing dogs, board trains or buses at random points enroute to search for explosives. That was actually fairly common in much of Europe - even in the northern countries. And of course in Belfast it was basicly in a permanent lock down. Fenced off areas in the city where you had to go thru a turnstile to get around in - and searched by heavily armed British soldiers - and even in the countryside you'd see soldiers at all the cross roads (amongst the cows and green farm fields) that would stop vehicles to inspect them.
Personally I understood that was needed in Europe at those times I lived there, but would find it not only prohibitive here in the USA and a big overkill based on the number of "terror-type" of instances we have had historicly - as well as a huge violation of my rights. I would definetly consider that a police state. I'd rather we keep it like you have it in New Zealand and not turn this into a Belfast (which has been back to normal now for years) with heavy police and military security at every corner, curfews and city lockdowns. No need IMHO - unless OUR sheep run amok that is :-)!
IshbelRobertson
4-26-13, 4:44am
the IRA did not confine their bombings to Northern Ireland, unlike the Loyalists, they also bombed the UK mainland. I know that from personal experience as I was living in London during the height of their bombing campaign.
Perhaps we in Europe have lived with internal terrorists for such a long time, we mourn, then move on... And await thenext atrocity.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.