Terrorist Attack at Boston Marathon #12

[4MYGUYS]

And he hasn't been convicted of any crimes thus far.

By pleading Not Guilty, they have chosen to take this to trial. It might not get there, but with a defense team renown for their death penalty expertise and especially Judy Clarke who is anti death penalty I believe DT will refuse a plea deal and continue onto trial. Because at the end of the day, he has very little to lose right now. He either would prefer the death penalty (instead of life in prison) or take a chance with a trial.

JMO

If you are willing to kill innocent women and children, and maim 100's of others, in the name of Jihad, why then didn't he fight it out at the end. Why did he suddenly crawl out of the hole he was in with his hands up, and then be hospitalized, rehabilitated and now is given top attorney'S all of course, at our expense.
We have lost thousands of men and women who fight for our rights every day, and they GIVE UP THEIR LIVES for the good of the American people, and this coward kills one day stating it is in revenge for American mistreatment of Muslims, but the next wants to fight for his life in our courts. He is not a nice guy, he is a sick, twisted coward who does deserve to die. I just am not sure it wouldn't be a better fate or example to let him rot in prison for the next 60 plus years.
Here is one of the most recent fallen Hero's who died for us: 19YO Benjamin Tuttle http://projects.militarytimes.com/valor/marine-lance-cpl-benjamin-tuttle/6568481

 

[CuriousGrace]

We will try not turn this into a political discussion, as there have been many innocent citizens maimed and killed abroad due to this ongoing war too.

I said he WAS probably a nice boy before he was brainwashed into atrocity, there is no information or statements to suggest otherwise. Everyone who was associated to this young boy was clearly shocked. Very few were shocked by TT. If found guilty then he deserves perhaps the same fate as his victims but the justice system clearly states an individual is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. JMO

 

[i.b.nora]

When one 'googles' the phrase "Banned in Boston" they will get hundreds of hits but most of the hits come down to a group active in Boston called "The Watch and Ward Society".

"Initially established in 1878 as The New England Society for the Prevention of Vice, the Society was formed in response to concerns about the proliferation of, among other things, “impure literature” in Boston. The name was changed in 1891 to the New England Watch and Ward Society but its dedication to “remove temptations to vice and crime – to stop up sources of corruption” remained strong well into the early part of the twentieth century." - From:

852 RARE: New England Watch and Ward Society Records Digitized
by: Margaret Peachy - September 16th, 2010
The Harvard Law School Library is pleased to announce the digitization of the Records of the New England Watch and Ward Society.

I daresay the Watch and Ward Society still exists today.

Here is a book Banned in Boston: The Watch and Ward Society's Crusade against Books, Burlesque, and the Social Evil I think would be a good read.

The wikipedia entry isn't too bad as a starting point if you are limited by time or other things.

 

[CuriousGrace]

I thought it was a good article. Very informative. If we never learn what to look for in terms of red flags in people we are doomed to repeat these situations over and over. Maybe if RollingStone had left the picture off the front cover people would have been more receptive to read the article. jmo

I agree, however it created such a stir and grand exposure to a world wide audience especially amongst a demographic that wouldn't ordinarily read such an article or publication yet have done so through MSM exposure. RollingStone, they knew exactly what they were doing and they executed it well. It's journalism, after all. JMO.

 

[time]

Another commentary on the photos:

The earliest image, made available by the F.B.I. while Tsarnaev was still the target of a massive manhunt, showed him near the bomb site in a backward white baseball cap. He looked young, and chillingly anonymous, just another dude in a hat, a kind of bro-bomber. Then others surfaced: of him as a baby-faced young man; a shot of him at his high-school graduation, in a black robe with a red carnation pinned near his left shoulder; others of him smirking, smiling; one in which he wears aviator shades—the kinds of digital snapshots that every young American projects into the world. What we didn’t see, and what perhaps we longed to see in our grief, or anger, or confusion, were any familiar images of the Islamic terrorist. The stories didn’t match the crime, either: the pot-smoking kid, the skateboarder, the student at the diverse Cambridge high school, the anonymous undergrad at the state college. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s older brother, Tamerlan, fit our expectations much better. He looked older and angrier, and the accompanying biographical information was consistent with the appearance: he was alienated, radicalized, adrift, and dangerous.

...Yet the vitriol and closed-mindedness of the Web response to the Rolling Stone cover, before anyone had the chance to read the article itself, is an example of two of the ugly public outcomes of terrorism: hostility toward free expression, and to the collection and examination of factual evidence; and a kind of culture-wide self-censorship encouraged by tragedy, in which certain responses are deemed correct and anything else is dismissed as tasteless or out of bounds. The victims of the Boston Marathon bombing deserve our attention, and will continue to teach us about perseverance and the best parts of our common nature. But the dark stories of the bombing need to be told, too. And we need to hear them.

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blo...ersy.html?mbid=gnep&google_editors_picks=true

 

[4MYGUYS]

I agree, however it created such a stir and grand exposure to a world wide audience especially amongst a demographic that wouldn't ordinarily read such an article or publication yet have done so through MSM exposure. RollingStone, they knew exactly what they were doing and they executed it well. It's journalism, after all. JMO.

Agreed, doing it for monetary gain IMHO. It's not a question of whether or not you can do something, it is a question of how many people you hurt by executing your "rights".

 

[cityslick]

Agreed, doing it for monetary gain IMHO. It's not a question of whether or not you can do something, it is a question of how many people you hurt by executing your "rights".

Money talks. To be honest though, how is this any different then putting pictures of Osama Bin Laden on the cover of magazines?

 

[i.b.nora]

NY Times Backs Rolling Stone, Decries 'Hysteria' Over Boston Cover

The Huffington Post | By Jack Mirkinson
Posted: 07/19/2013 8:03 am EDT | Updated: 07/19/2013 8:37 am EDT

"The New York Times editorial board strongly backed Rolling Stone on Friday, saying that critics of the magazine's decision to put Boston bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on its cover were guilty of "hysteria."

The cover has become the subject of boycotts and political condemnation and has even caused one especially angry man to promise to buy as many copies as he can just so he can burn them.

The Times made clear it did not approve:"

A short article with a quote or two and a direct link to The New York Times editorial "Judging Rolling Stone by Its Cover".

 

[danzn16]

Money talks. To be honest though, how is this any different then putting pictures of Osama Bin Laden on the cover of magazines?

The photo used of bin laden did not look like a cover shoot photo, regardless of DT took it himself or not. Bin laden looked like be monster he was and DT's photo does not depict that at all. I get that they were trying to show how everyone is shocked because he was a "great guy" but it really just gives him attention he doesn't deserve.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Linda7NJ]

The photo used of bin laden did not look like a cover shoot photo, regardless of DT took it himself or not. Bin laden looked like be monster he was and DT's photo does not depict that at all. I get that they were trying to show how everyone is shocked because he was a "great guy" but it really just gives him attention he doesn't deserve.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm more upset by the idiotic teenage girls defending him like a bunch of rock star groupies because he's cute.

Reminds me of those sick women that worshipped Manson or Richard Ramirez the night stalker serial killer.

 

[BeginnersLuck]

Just like they have their right to put his face on the cover of their magazine, so does the public have a right to speak out against it.

I would not call this public hysteria at all. I would call it citizens taking a stand for our country and those that were affected by the bombing. We stand strong and we stand together when we see something that we find offensive. It is our right to do so.

They could have used a different photo for the cover but they chose that one. It makes me sick to see his face and I'm sure others feel the same way.

 

[Elley Mae]

NY Times Backs Rolling Stone, Decries 'Hysteria' Over Boston Cover

The Huffington Post | By Jack Mirkinson
Posted: 07/19/2013 8:03 am EDT | Updated: 07/19/2013 8:37 am EDT

"The New York Times editorial board strongly backed Rolling Stone on Friday, saying that critics of the magazine's decision to put Boston bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on its cover were guilty of "hysteria."

The cover has become the subject of boycotts and political condemnation and has even caused one especially angry man to promise to buy as many copies as he can just so he can burn them.

The Times made clear it did not approve:"

A short article with a quote or two and a direct link to The New York Times editorial "Judging Rolling Stone by Its Cover".

Not surprising. I expected no less from the times, huff post, or wash post.

 

[LambChop]

I wonder how many pictures Rolling Stone had to pick from? As far as DT's picture I think it is what it is in terms of this is what he looks like. I still do not like to see the pictures of the burning twin towers. Makes me feel ill inside. So I'm sure Rolling Stone did not want to put the pictures taken the day of the bombing on their cover just to write this article. However I did read the article through a link here and I thought it was a good article. It always helps to have as much information as we can about why this happened.

JMO

 

[nao]

Is this not what terrorism is, terror of the couldbe, maybe, create an emotional state of paranoia,.
The rolling stones pic shows Dzhokhar Tsarnaev shows a young man, well he dos'nt have tattoos, he's just --well you never know.The pics of him bloody just make him look dumb and young to me.

Well done terrorism, does not need blood, just fear. the Rolling Stones pic just shows, you never know who will get mixed up in this. jmo moo

 

[CARIIS]

RBBM: They did capture him, he didn't walk into the police station and give himself up, now did he?

JMO

IMO,Thats true, "capture" hit me as they did some stellar police work ---- he put his hands up and crawled out!

 

[CARIIS]

.

Rolling Stone has seen long-form journalism as part of its mission, and more recently has proven its journalistic chops with important stories about Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal and the so-called vampire squids of Goldman Sachs. Those were good, important stories and while the profile about Mr. Tsarnaev did not break a lot of new ground, it did an excellent job of explaining how someone who looked like the kid next door radicalized in place and, according to the federal charges, decided to attack innocents to make a political point

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/20/business/media/with-accused-bombers-selfie-rolling-stone-got-more-attention-than-it-may-have-wanted.html?_r=0[/url][/b]




I read it last night. Great writing IMO. Learned lots about him. And yes it did generate empathy on my part not sympathy. Learning so much more nuance about him -- the kid was a good kid, obviously something went drastically off rail here.

Since that day I have not read one thing, from people who knew him that did not describe a kind, fun, sweet person. He was popular among peers evidently, IMO, from what I have heard and read.

And in some fashion, the entire ruckus about the cover story is IMO, just silly. It is a picture of him -it’s not like anyone air brushed it or anything.
He was a nice looking kid -- that simple. He most certainly engaged in evil actions.

IMO, people who do hideous things do not "become" ugly! Their actions are, but he was a nice looking kid.

Rolling did nothing other than put a picture of him on their cover regarding the biggest story of the year.

All the commotion about it has (which is what IMO, good reporting should do) has given this piece of writing tremendous exposure and will be read by many more IMO.



More from the New York Times piece about the Rolling Stone piece!

Behind Rolling Stone’s Cover, a Story Worth Reading

....... the image was unremarkable. It was a self-shot photo, or “selfie,'’ and there is no more ubiquitous photographic image in the current media age. Young people use their phones to take pictures of a lot of things but they love taking pictures of themselves.

That photo is the way he wanted the world to see him. It was a compelling enough image that The New York Times decided to use it on its front page, where it came and went without a great deal of reaction.

Editorially, the cover was a win. (The Boston media writer Dan Kennedy called it “brilliant.”)

When is the last time someone said to you, “Did you see the cover of Rolling Stone?”

People who read beyond the cover discovered that the pretty boy on the front appeared to have deep, nascent ugliness in his heart. Just as you can’t judge a book (or a magazine) by its cover, the kid behind that confident selfie was, it seems, a big, hot mess.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/20/business/media/with-accused-bombers-selfie-rolling-stone-got-more-attention-than-it-may-have-wanted.html?_r=0[/url][/B]



From the article itself:
He was a charming kid with a bright future.

"I felt like a bullet went through my heart," the coach recalls. "To think that a kid we mentored and loved like a son could have been responsible for all this death. It was beyond shocking. It was like an alternative reality."

to his friends – as a beautiful, tousle-haired boy with a gentle demeanor, soulful brown eyes and the kind of shy, laid-back manner that "made him that dude you could always just vibe with," one friend says.

He had been a captain of the Cambridge Rindge and Latin wrestling team for two years and a promising student. He was also "just a normal American kid," as his friends described him, who liked soccer, hip-hop, girls; obsessed over The Walking Dead and Game of Thrones; and smoked a copious amount of weed.

They were Muslim, yes, but they were also American – especially Jahar, who became a naturalized U.S. citizen on September 11th, 2012.

after several months of interviews with friends, teachers and coaches still reeling from the shock, what emerges is a portrait of a boy who glided through life, showing virtually no signs of anger, let alone radical political ideology or any kind of deeply felt religious beliefs.

And yet a deeply fractured boy lay under that facade; a witness to all of his family's attempts at a better life as well as to their deep bitterness when those efforts failed and their dreams proved unattainable. As each small disappointment wore on his family, ultimately ripping them apart, it also furthered Jahar's own disintegration – a series of quiet yet powerful body punches.

"He was always like, 'Mommy, Mommy, yes, Mommy' – even if his mom was yelling at him," says Anna's son Baudy Mazaev, who is a year and a half younger than Jahar. "He was just, like, this nice, calm, compliant, pillow-soft kid. My mom would always say, 'Why can't you talk to me the way Dzhokhar talks to his mother?'"

All of the Tsarnaev children went to Rindge, as the school is known, but it was Jahar who assimilated best. Though he'd arrived in America speaking virtually no English, by high school he was fluent, with only a trace of an accent, and he was also fluent in the local patois.

In his junior year, the team made him a captain. By then, everyone knew him as 'Jahar,' which his teammates would scream at matches to ensure the refs would never mispronounce his name...............................

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/jahars-world-20130717#ixzz2ZeJcK1Rp


Other notions regarding some posts:

Originally Posted by 4MYGUYS
If you are willing to kill innocent women and children, and maim 100's of others, in the name of Jihad, why then didn't he fight it out at the end.

He was not suicidal, IMO
----------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by time
Another commentary on the photos:
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blog...ors_picks=true

Super post - thanx!
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by cityslick
Money talks. To be honest though, how is this any different then putting pictures of Osama Bin Laden on the cover of magazines?

Or Ted Bundy, James Holmes, Zodiac Killer,on and on I could go!
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by danzn16
just gives him attention he doesn't deserve.

All of us here are paying him a lot of attention- no?

 

[tezi]

IMO,Thats true, "capture" hit me as they did some stellar police work ---- he put his hands up and crawled out!

They did do some stellar police work, IMO.

We are going to have to just disagree on the stance each of us takes on LE. I am not going to debate it anymore.

 

[LambChop]

How about surrendered? Seems an appropriate term considering he was in the boat hiding from the 100 plus or minus police officers who surrounded the boat with weapons pointed at him. So surrendered might be the better word because he had no choice if he wanted to live.

I think a lot can be learned from this young man because he does not appear to be radical and may cooperate. Time will tell. Give the system a chance to work. In the meantime articles about him give us insight into who he was before he involved himself with his brother, who definitely appears to be the radical one. DT is the one who can give us information on his brother and what his plans were. jmo

 

[CuriousGrace]

http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/2013/07/dzhokhar_tsarnaev_s_dream_photos

 

[danzn16]

IMO,Thats true, "capture" hit me as they did some stellar police work ---- he put his hands up and crawled out!

Pretty sure the coward had no other choice but to crawl out when surrounded and getting flash bangs thrown in there with him. Crawling out due to police work = captured.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk