90.9 WBUR - Boston's NPR news station
Top Stories:
PLEDGE NOW
Manhunt For Boston Bombing Suspect

The massive manhunt for the Boston bombing suspect. The latest news and a closer look at what we’re learning about the suspect.

Police in Watertown

Police in tactical gear conduct a search for a suspect in the Boston Marathon bombings, Friday, April 19, 2013, in Watertown, Mass. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke)

An unprecedented day of American law enforcement today in Boston.  A major American city essentially shut down in a massive manhunt.  Overnight, one suspect in the Boston Marathon bombing shot and killed after a wild chase and shootout.  And throughout the day, a virtual army of security scouring the region for a second suspect.

Two brothers.  Ethnic Chechens in the U.S. for years.  Maybe a million people, asked to stay home, inside, in and around Boston.  Public transit shut down.  Business shut down.

This hour, in a live special edition of On Point:  the marathon bombing manhunt.

Guests

Jack Beatty, On Point news analyst

Carey Goldberg, WBUR reporter and former Moscow reporter for the Los Angeles Times

Fred Thys, political reporter at WBUR.

William Braniff, executive director of the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism, based at the University of Maryland

Dr. Shereef Elnahal, Muslim-American physician at Boston’s Brigham and Women’s Hospital

From Tom’s Reading List

L.A. Times: In the emergency room Monday, Elnahal said, he had never seen such a concentration of human carnage. But just as striking, he said, were the number of people “with large machine guns” running around the hospital trying to guard it.

Photos

FBI photos of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev

This combination of photos provided on Friday, April 19, 2013 by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, left, and the Boston Regional Intelligence Center, right, shows a suspect that officials have identified as Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, being sought by police in connection with Monday’s Boston Marathon bombings. (AP Photo/FBI, BRIC)

Tamerlan Tsarnaev and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev

This combination of undated photos shows Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26, left, and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19. (AP)

 

Please follow our community rules when engaging in comment discussion on this site.
  • JGC

    Hmm, my screen shows there are now “showing 0 comments” for today’s program.  And the 2nd hour program on terrorism has completely disappeared, replaced by a rebroadcast of “Photographing Native Americans.”   Are today’s comments in lockdown?

  • Trond33

    I fail to see the reasoning behind continued “lockdown” of a large section of Boston accomplishes.  At this point, the subject has either escaped from the area or is well hidden and will only emerge when the general population starts moving around.  Holding this large a population “hostage” for this long is starting to have negative social costs.  In the extreme, individuals delaying visiting the doctor or hospital, trying to wait out the “martial law,” who will subsequently receive treatment too late.  

    This is another aspect of the militarization of US law enforcement and society in general.  Tactics learned in the wars of opportunity, Iraq and Afghanistan, being deployed in the homeland.  While it creates more “terrorists” in foreign lands, at home, it will only create resentment of government and its agents.  

    Today we see in full display the advent of the American police state.  An inefficient and dangerous escalation upon the rights afforded to The People by the US Constitution.  All being done while playing into the fear propagated by the media within the population. 

    Reality is, any individual in Boston or anywhere else in the US is at greater risk from death on the roads or even lightening than by a terrorist attack.  Yes, the front line law enforcement individuals are at a greater risk hunting down the suspect in Boston, but after all, lets not forget, these are professionals who chose this line of work.  Much like soldiers, joining law enforcement does place you at greater risk, that is a choice. 

    Its time the US population wakes up and places real limits on the militarization of the US society and curtails the influence of the military industrial complex. 

    • Don_B1

      It was important to make sure the suspect could not move about freely during the day and taking public transportation off the table and people off the streets made any movement he might make much more detectable.

      The police knew he had been wounded and if he was not able to completely stop the blood flow he would be greatly weakened and more likely to surrender when caught if enough (but not too much if they wanted him alive) time was allowed to pass.

      Note that the lockdown was lifted while it was still light so that Watertown residents who did then go out were able to inspect their residences and find traces of his presence if it existed and report it to the police before darkness enveloped the scene, though it was dark when he finally “surrendered.” [Details tbd!]

      What is interesting is why they were not able to use dogs to follow his blood trail from the Mercedes SUV that he had left from the big gunfight that killed his brother. Even if the bleeding had stopped temporarily, his odor should have been present for the dogs?

      • anon

        I wondered that about dogs, too. 

  • John_in_Amherst

    a crazy teen with a pistol and some pipe bombs can shut down a city of several million.  This is “not giving in to the terrorists”?

    • Mike_Card

      Yup, bin Laden won.

      We can crow about coming back ‘stronger than ever’ and play Amazing Grace till the cows come home, but he ruined America’s economy and severely shrank our civil liberties.  Whatever the solution to dealing with crazy terrorists is, nobody has come up with it.  And we are all paying the price.

      • John_in_Amherst

         an apropos cartoon on the web shows in frame one, a TV anouncer, eyes spinning, mouth frothing, Shreiking “Does anyone have the answer to terrorists holding us in their grip?!”.  frame two shows a viewer with a smug grin who has just clicked the TV off with his remote….

  • hennorama

    Watching video of the door-to-door searches that seem to be taking place all over the locked-down area, one feels for all the members of law enforcement who are subjected to the repeated stresses involved in going through all those doors, not knowing what may be behind them.

    The commitment of those dedicated men and women is commendable, to say the least.

    • JGC

      You are so right. I feel stress right now just thinking about approaching one of those doors. One also has to be impressed by Boston’s medical community and its precision response to the emergency, saving so many lives.  A great article by Atul Gawande in the New Yorker, called “Why Boston’s Hospitals Were Ready”.

      • hennorama

        JGC – apologies if my words caused you any distress.

        Indeed, many, many individuals and organizations are to be commended, both for their efforts and their advance preparation, as well as their spontaneous reactions and efforts. Certainly many institutions and individuals are more prepared for such circumstances post-9/11.

        I continue to be amazed, impressed, and humbled by those who run toward disaster rather than away. They are both rare and yet also common. I stand in awe of them, gobsmacked.

        • Tyranipocrit

           they are drivin by hate and vengeance.  (in this situation)

          • hennorama

            Tyranipocrit – TY for your response. I respect your views.

            As both JGC and I were principally discussing “Boston’s medical community and its precision response to the emergency” and “those who run toward disaster rather than away”, your comment seems completely inapt and inappropriate “(in this situation)”.

            TY again for your reply.

          • Tyranipocrit

             i dont think so. Martial law is just what they like and enjoy.  Im sorry but I’ve know enough of these people–they live for the day they can treat America like Iraq–whether they admit it or not.  They should start wearing SS on their shoulder.  Of course its not all of them.  I would run towards disater to help people–firemen, paramedics, heroic citizins, but most police and it seems most people thrive on having enemies and crave the taste of blood.  Ooh so big so bad–we live in a Spartan society.  All one has to do is turn on the telly–and see all the militainment–or play a video game–we are groomed for violence and just thi s response–lockdown the country–take away the bill of rights–terrorists lurk in every home.  Im still more concerned about environmental pollution–why are these terrorists allowed to go free and why doesn’t anyone care–are they stupid or just guilty?

    • Tyranipocrit

      um, no.  We dont need to support a police state.  Get your head on straight.

      • hennorama

        Tyranipocrit – TY for your response. I respect your views.

        This dragnet-style manhunt was certainly unprecedented in its scale, but characterizing this as a “police state” goes too far in my view. Compliance with the requests of government and law enforcement was voluntary. Some called it “a scary snow day”.

        TY again for your response.

        • Tyranipocrit

           Voluntary until you violate it–and its just the beginning–this will no doubt be the response–but on a larger scale the next time the FBI comes out to play with bombs.  Voluntary is not accurate–more like “voluntold”  trust me–its military-speak.  –”for your protection”–is the mantra of all dictatorships.  You are frogs in slowly boiling water.

        • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

          what would you call a police state?

    • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

      thats funny i felt worse for the people who had large groups of armed men pointing guns at them with tanks in their yards.

  • Gregg Smith

    I really feel for you guys in Boston. It’s got to be a helpless feeling, especially if you don’t have a gun. I hope this is over soon. 

    • nj_v2

      Yeah, imagine a dense neighborhood full of people who are frightened and edgy, all with guns, peering into the night looking for anything that moved. What could go wrong?

      No end to Greggg’s idiocy.

      • Gregg Smith

        I was sincere.

        • nj_v2

          That’s part of what’s scary.

          • Don_B1

            I liked your post, but, call me cynical, I sincerely doubt that Gregg was all that sincere in his remark.

            That remark was so uncalled for on so many levels, from politicization of the event in light of the Senate vote on Wednesday night to making a controversial statement without any supporting facts.

            At a time when two perpetrators of inhuman savagery had been removed from this open society, it was a crass comment.

          • Gregg Smith

            I was indeed sincere and don’t understand the controversy. First NJ seems to assume there are not tons of gun owners in Boston. Is it really illogical to think they feel a bit safer than those who don’t?

          • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

            the bpd is notorious for not issuing licenses

  • Dan McKeon

    Idea for an On Point Episode: The Rise of Citizen Media. Last night’s Marathon Bomber shootout story wasn’t broken by Anderson Cooper or Brian Williams. It was live Tweeted by Watertown resident Andrew Kitzenberg (@AKitz). He wasn’t just an eyewitness, he produced the content and published it himself. This is the demarcation point in the growing trend of Citizen Media. In news of the future, it will not be the traditional media outlets that break the story. It will be citizens like Andrew. 

    • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

      but i love when geraldo breaks stories

  • Trond33

    I was under the impression that a declaration of martial law required an Executive Order?  Confining a large population for some 15+ hours can only be interpreted as collective house arrest.  Even if done in the name of “safety”, backed up by para-military law enforcement and hyped up by the media.

    One neighborhood for an hour or two with active tracking of a subject and clearly done for public safety is one thing, this type of blanket population wide house arrest is another. 

    I hope the ACLU does seek clarification on this issue in the courts.  Next we will find ourselves “sheltered in place” at the whim of these government sponsored para-military law enforcement units for any number of reasons.  Have a bank robber, shut down the city!!!  Have a political convention, shut down the city!!!  Big oil wants to have a convention in your city, shut down the city!!!

    If this is the modern reality of life in the USA, then it really is high time to think about leaving the country.

    • Kevin Dole

       *applauds*

      If government uses a single man, terrorist or not, to terrify a city into hiding at home for a day, then what does that say of our government.

    • JGC

      But where would you go? Just curious.

      • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

        if it were me and armed terrorists were in my neighborhood i might want to get out of town till they were caught. seems like a better plan than cowering.

        • JGC

          Well, of course, getting out of town would be preferable, but Trond33 was talking about it being high time to get out of the USA (permanently) because he/she perceived the day-long lock down as equivalent to martial law.

          I can think of a reason or two why some  people would want to shed U.S. citizenship (mainly tax related) to take on another citizenship, but leaving the U.S. hoping there will be a better chance for personal liberty elsewhere?  really, I can’t think of a place like that. For an ordinary person, you know; not a bazillionaire who can buy any fantasy compound on their fantasy island. I suppose Trond33 could go to that floating platform city the Libertarian bazillionaire from PayPal is building in international waters off San Francisco, but that is not an option for most of us. 

          • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

            i dont see how we can claim to be more free than other places when we have the highest incarceration rate. that being said most other places stink also. that does not mean we should not advocate to protect and expand our freedoms. as far as i know such a thing as a day long lockdown is unprecedented and there should be concern for civil liberties in america whenever an expansion of govt power like that happens. it seems like a fine line was walked by making the lock down ostensibly voluntary. when you see kids taken off their bicycles by men with rifles it looks involuntary, like de facto martial law

          • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

            you cant get out of town in a lock down

    • Don_B1

      I think you missed something: there was NO DECLARATION of martial law. The mayors or town governments, with the support of the Governor (or vice-versa) simply asked people to stay at home and most citizens were quite willing to comply.

      It did take the Governor to shut down public transportation, and just like when there is an expected blizzard snowstorm, the pubic can be expected to respect a request to not drive as they know what can happen if they choose to drive anyway.

      • Trond33

        My comment passed right over your head.  I am saying that through the use of fear, government essentially imposed martial law. 

      • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

        except when the governer decides to arrest people that drive in light snow

  • Ralph Silverman

    From photographs it seems suspects walked into crime scene past many undercover police – planted explosives which detonated and they were in same area when they walked out past undercover police without backpacks they had brought in – without challenge. Style of entry looks like undercover police working in pairs. Evidently these men knew how to appear to be police with such skill as to utterly fool police. Also clever design of bombs suggests highly professional planning; this planning is far beyond the capacity of these two people as they are described. Only training by such as C.I.A. can do this. Possibly these men were duped candidates for recruitment.    

    • Don_B1

      It has been widely explained after the explosions that there are designs for just this type of bomb, contained in a ordinary kitchen pressure cooker (~1.5 gallon), on the Internet. These two cretins did not have to reinvent the bomb design and implementation of these bombs.

      As to their attempting to “appear to be police” by walking as if they were a pair of undercover police, I would like to see references for your conclusion or why you would think that that would be something bombers would do. I don’t give it any credibility.

      And to try to create a conspiracy theory for the government to have fomented this is as ignorant as thinking that it was an alien plot.

      Give it up! You dishonor and belittle the whole American people (I guess conspiracy theorists are excepted since they are already or should be a dishonored class) with such ignorant unfounded claims.

      • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

        so have you got any evidence either way about whether this was a false flag operation?

    • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

      while i dont dispute the possibilty this is a false flag type incident i dont think their technology or planning was very impressive

  • Gregg Smith

    It looks like the end is near.

    • JGC

      My husband thinks they just need to back up a truck with a trailer hitch to the boat, and tow him off to jail. 

  • http://twitter.com/Kikkja Francesca Ebeli

    This is insane they were just kids? We just heard reports that that third has a bomb strapped to him and is hiding in a boat?

  • Trond33

    Absolutely disgusting what the para-military law enforcement and local, state and federal government are doing to Boston today.  A sickening display of the militarization of the USA.

    Think about it, the 7/7 bombings in London that included four bombers and four bombs, with 52 casualties – YET, the British government did not impose martial law and collective house arrest on the local population.  

    This is completely irrational.  Thanks to G.W. Bush, there are heavily armed para-military law enforcement throughout the United States.  This could be the scene anywhere in the country.  

    I for one would argue that the average individual is less safe with these heavily armed para-military officers running amuck.  Its all propaganda and fear mongering to justify their own existence.  Heavily armed suspects on the loose have throughout US history been apprehended without the government resorting to martial law.  Other nations succeed in providing public safety without draconian militarization.  

    The bombers will take all the blame, with the para-military law enforcement and government officials portrayed as heros – without any discussion at all about overall public safety at the hands of the tactics employed.

    • http://www.facebook.com/john.burdett3 John Burdett

      And if these crazies killed one of your family would you still use the same argument ? I think not ! 

      • Trond33

        A circular argument, pointless in the overall discussion.  You are missing the point – aimlessly selling out the the concept that more militarization of society will result in higher security.  Much like the public turned a blind eye to McCarthyism in the 1950′s, only later to reflect and reject it. 

    • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

      i wonder who will take the loss for all the buisness that was lost because of devals little stunt this time

  • hennorama

    They got him! Alive!

    • OnPointComments

      I hope Bill O’Reilly is right and the US government eventually executes this terrorist killer so that he can join his brother in hell.

      • hennorama

        OPC – Thank you for your response. I appreciate, understand, and respect your views.

        While there is a natural and arguably justifiable visceral desire for vengeance, we must step back from such reactions and revert to and respect the rule of law. This person is a suspect who has rights, and must first be proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt before being sentenced.

        • OnPointComments

          That’s where “eventually” comes in.

          • hennorama

            Touché.

        • Other Chris

          I admire your patience.

          • hennorama

            Other Chris – Thank you for you kind words. However, this was just a normal exchange of ideas; respect and patience are helpful in such matters unless one’s goal is mere pontification.

            Thanks again for your kind words.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

          Tangent: Not sure if we’re dealing with a death penalty situation. Certainly there’ll be a lot of expertise about that forthcoming this weekend.

          But to open that up to other cases: Visceral is one thing, and exacting my own personal punishment is tempting to wish for. We have the rule of law because I can’t trust myself to do it properly. I can see how an individual can go overboard, myself or others. I was in Framingham on Monday, and many people here were closer to Boston.

          Having said that, I can’t imagine a life in prison to have less suffering than a quick, merciful death.

          (And that’s regardless of any martyr complex a terrorist or killer may be holding for themselves.)

      • Don_B1

        I rather like the prospect that, it convicted, the perpetrator gets some punishment here on Earth, just in case God doesn’t send humans to heaven or hell on death.

        This near 20-year-old would have a long time in prison to contemplate his errors and that kind of confinement would likely concentrate the mind.

        • JGC

          I was thinking about that, too. What can he look forward to? Solitary confinement while awaiting a possible federal death penalty?He had just about every advantage that a youth could hope for here: a wide circle of friends, supportive teachers and coaches, admiration from fellow athletes that was solidified by being named team captain, successful academics resulting in recognition and a scholarship from his city (Boston!); possibly every advantage except a stable nuclear family?  The more I hear about the father and mother, the more it is reminding me of the dangerously nuttified Khadr family here in Canada.

          On the other hand, not to paint the greater family as out of step with American society, the uncle who appeared this afternoon was well-spoken, thoughtful, answered questions with patience and dignity, demonstrated his allegiance with his adopted country and his sympathy for the victims of the violence.  He was a class act, and did a great job of extricating his branch of the family from the excesses of his Boston relatives.  

      • Tyranipocrit

         Yeaah!  HOorah!  Kill kill kill!  Raaar!  Get that bad man. 

  • hennorama

    There will be many Bostonians (and we’re ALL Bostonians lately) who will be “wicked pissed” tonight.

    But in a good way, as in the chiefly British meaning of the word “pissed”.

    You can stand down, and party down, now, Boston.

    Well done, local, state, federal, and international law enforcement!

    • Tyranipocrit

       yeaah!  Raar!  You’re so swept up by the propaganda.  Why dont you have the same passion when it comes to the terrorists of environmental pollution?  The FBI is known to manufacture radicals–its called job security.  We should not be praising the terrorists.  Look behind the curtain and smoke.

      • JGC

        Remember to share your sympathies with the family of Lu Lingzi.  You get so righteously caught up in the verbose grandeur of your greater government plots, you overlook seeing the individuals you exploit for your political views.

        • Tyranipocrit

           who am i exploiting?  That is absurd.  How about we all are being exploited–dont twist the truth.  How is this different than any other manufactured government lie–how soon we forget that every single war we start is a  manufactured lie.  And im the exploiter.  And sorry–I dont know the Chinese person you refer to.  That is my ignorance.  I am not in America being fed all the minute by minute propaganda.  Wake up.  I have no conspiracies.  But you are very easily manipulated.  Terrorism is happening all over the world–where is your sense of outrage for that?  the COngo?  Darfur?  Our invasion of half a dozen countries–burning babies from the sky–and you say I am the one who exploits–you have your head in the sand–to put it nicely.  Stop being so vain and arrogant and self-obsessed–stop waving your flag and be outraged about something that really truly matters–not just to Americans–whose problems are very very small compared to the rest of the world.  Its okay for us to terrorize–no outrage there–maybe a scoff here and there–but no outrage, no heroism–just dancing in the streets for osama–and boston and 911.  Americans are so obtuse.  America is not the only country on earth–and you are not so righteous.

          • JGC

            JGC, Armchair Lawyer, turning to the On Point jury:

            I rest my case.

        • Tyranipocrit

           i’m sorry is this a consolation meeting where we all share our sympathies or a comment roll on policy and current events?  I am terribly sorry people died–the question is who to blame.  I am not a pastor or a minister nor a disciple of false religions–this is not the place for distractions of tears.  The victims are better served by the truth.  Not cries for vengeance or patriotism.  patriotism is the virtue of the vicious.  In my mind–praise for those doing their job on the front line and those who heroically run to assist is given–no need to talk about it here.

      • hennorama

        Tyranipocrit – TY for your response. I respect your views.

        Otherwise, I have no comment.

        • OnPointComments

          I respect Tyranipocrit’s right to express his views, but the actual views are somewhat loony.

          • hennorama

            OPC – that’s effectively what I was saying, without actually saying it.

            These events have prompted strong feelings and I thought decorous comments were appropriate as a bit of a counterbalance.

          • Tyranipocrit

             do you think you are so special–you think i am loony and I think you are a patriotic nut who cant see through the smokescreen.  You got half of America on yourside, and I got 3/4 or more of the world.  Keep worshiping your Americanism.  But you’r enot that special–except to say your so very cloistered.

          • Tyranipocrit

             you dont respect other points of view at all–otherwise you wouldnt say what you said.  To believe anyone who disagrees with you is loony is extremely narorw minded, myopic and obtuse–you are a little dictator in your mind–where no one shall disagree–they are loonies and conspircay theorists and deserve incarceration or execution–if not with me they are against me BS.  That is not how intelligent or wise discussion and debate unfolds.  To call all who disagree loonies.  NOt an argument but a deflection becuase you realize you have nothing intelligent to say.  you are afraid and fearful and small and so you attack rather than debate.  Which make s you wrong.  But oh you feel so safe because so many Ameircans around you think the same way–small, ignorant, fearful, conditioned, brainwashed, hateful. spiteful little creature with no outward thinking or education.  thus so many pronlems in the world–leading to 911 and Boston and millions dead in the middle east.  and elsewhere.  The turht is a hard pill to swallow–so you dont–and you throw the water in my face and call me a loonatic and cry for my head–the witch hunt begins.  Savages.

  • Tyranipocrit

    A little overboard on the boston marathon bombings dont you think.  Give us a break.  people die everyday.  How many people die in car accidents every day?  How many people die of heart disease?  How many innocent children die in the fires of american predator bombs?

    But the media inistst on shoving this down our throats–i wonder why?  Who is ht etrroist?  Who wants us to be very very afraid?

    The FBI is known for manufacturing such events.  its job security.  I would start the investigation by looking at the FBI.

    How much news is missed when the media focuses on such nonsense?  What is happening that they dont want us to think about? 

    We cant even get gun laws passed but I’m sure we can get more rights taken away and enact martial law in ever expanding police state without a problem–long live fascism!  Down with society!  Thank the so-called war on terror.–the War on Truth. Thank the media–waging the war against truth.

    Save your conspiracy and nutjob comments for someone who cares–i dont.  This is a false flag event.  America loves a story.  So many manipulated hateful brainwashed children.  Go get your vengeance children.  go kill people in foreign countries–people who have never heard of Boston.

    Is this mug in the picture for real?  he looks like a comic book thug. 

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       Seek help — quickly.

      • Tyranipocrit

        You bette rheed your own advice.  Then seek a library or a even one book other than the Bible.  Your determined ignorance contributes to “terrorism”.  So very pathetic.  Im gonna go sek help now–yep, im on my way.   If i could just be more like you…hey why dont we go invade some more countries–make us feel better–then we can go door to door raping and murdering and call it freedom!  you’d like that huh?

    • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

      they passed cispa last week

  • Tyranipocrit

    oh right, and he fits the profile.  Let’s invade Syria or Jordon or Iran or Egypt–we need to keep the WMD manufacturers in the blue–our economy depends on it.  And we hate muslim looking people anyways so lets go drop some bombs.  Meanwhile, the head of the FBI snickers at his desk, mumbling you’ll never catch me.  And all the 1% in Washington share a laugh at the country club over brandy.  The mob they chuckle–loves blood and war.  hahahaha–stupid dead peasants, the senators chortle.  And suck on their Cuban cigars..  hahahha, they laugh.  They think they have democracy.  hahha.  Long live Israel.   Long live fascism and war! 

  • Tyranipocrit

    these young suspects are minions of the government.   Environmental pollution is terrorism.  De-regulation of industry is terrorism.  Walmart is terrorism.  Monsanto is terrorism.  The 1% are Terrorists–study that Braniff.  frauds.

    • OnPointComments

      Why don’t you double the dosage on your meds tonight?

      • Tyranipocrit

         oh yes i will thankyou–that is your response everytome–you ar eso smart and so wiae and so caring and kind and empathetic–its obvious.  You really care about people.  So much so you would even send more poor people to war to die for the rich.  You even remind me to take my meds–such a new and fresh joke–you ar eso hilarious nad witty and just well–truthful.  I need to refill my prescription–i will go take mey soma and just be happy and accept all your BS as a good aamerican boy should.  Yes, thats what i will do.  I pledge allegiance…

  • Tyranipocrit

    If “terrorists” hate America so much why would they attack Bostonians or a marathon–wouldn’t it make more sense to attack the people who support foreign wars and imperialism–in the south, in Texas–but never…is it because those people all ready vote for war and are true believers in the fraud that is the war on terror–what the government needs is for northerners and the educated to quake in fear and support the idiot culture of war. So manufacture false flags in the north–bomb northerners–we need their votes. Get professors to validate the fraud.

    I recommended you turn off the news and go watch a movie–you will get the same militainment.

  • Tyranipocrit

    living a double life–because its not true.  They probably work for the FBI–or were manipulated by the FBI or other fascist GOV institution.  Perhaps they didnt do it at all.  Innocent till proven guilty.  But not in this country.  They will get thier man–its better rating for the media and the melodrama of the terrordome.   It makes no sense.  Why a marathon?  I dont buy the “attention” crap.  A man with convictions–radicalized–why would he attack a marathon.  its pointless.  WHy not attack russia–checks have more to hate about russia than america–yes?

  • Tyranipocrit

    My comments are being moderated and delayed as well–is that what you call freedom of speech?  I suppose if i call for blood in the middle east or praise the fascist police, my comments will be placed prominently in front.

  • DrMattoon

    This is a question for Tom Ashbrook.  In high school, you stated in Sociology class that you were against the death penalty.  Now that this man has slaughtered and maimed innocent people in the Boston Marathon bombings, do you still believe he should not be executed or have you changed your views?  Do you believe this man should be put to death for what he has done Tom?  From Dr.Rod Mattoon,  NCHS class of 1973.

    • Tyranipocrit

       i say no–muder begets murder.  And you teach your children to that murder is okay. State execution is even worse.  Mob vengeance.  Scary people–howling for blood at the moon.

  • Gregg Smith

    Lindsey Graham suggested Obama treat Tsarnaev as an enemy combatant if caught alive. I heard the press conference after the capture and learned he was not read his miranda rights.  That may be a sign or they may mirandize him later. 

    There is much still unknown but they sure seem like the type Al Qaeda would target for recruitment. There have been more people brought in for questioning as well. We need to get to the bottom of this.

    I’ve been driving tonight and listening to the BBC, they talk  funny and are pretty awful. They may not be a good example but they were already blaming America. On “All Things Considered” they were extolling his virtue and saying the brother was the bad one. I would put him in GITMO.

    • JGC

      JGC, Armchair Lawyer: 

      Some lawyers last night (the usual suspects: Dershowitz and Toobin) were saying Miranda rights were probably not read because Dzhokhar was in no state to assimilate the information. Something I have missed: Is he a naturalized U.S. citizen, or here on some other status?  And if he is not a full citizen, how will that affect how he is handled after his almost certain conviction (oops, I guess I just eliminated myself from the jury pool)?I think I remember Judge Judy (I listen to ‘em all!) saying one time that young people’s minds are not fully cooked; that is why they make so many stupid mistakes. Dzhokhar was probably under the insidious influence of his older brother. Like a Stockholm Syndrome. Unfortunately for him, the older one took the easy way out (suicide) and left Dzhokhar literally holding the bag(s).   

      • 1Brett1

        Yes, he is a naturalized U.S. citizen. Whatever he says now is admissible. If he were Mirandized, a lawyer could instruct him to keep his mouth shut/use his current injuries to say his statements can’t be used because of his impaired state of mind (due to meds, fevers, loss of consciousness, etc.)

        • JGC

          Thanks for clearing that up. Since he is a U.S. citizen, that makes for interesting dilemmas. Being a citizen, we can’t ship him off to Guantanamo. And we can’t drone him on U.S. soil (yet).  I guess that leaves the old fashioned way: jury trial and life in a federal penitentiary, possibly death sentence to be executed in a McVeigh-ish time frame. I don’t think the public will be able to tolerate a possible life redeemed.

          • 1Brett1

            Historically, our court system does a better job of getting convictions and overall justice than military tribunals, not to mention the whole nether-region of Guantanamo.

          • Gregg Smith

            Really?

          • 1Brett1

            Federal civilian criminal courts have convicted nearly 500 individuals in terrorism-related charges since 9-11 (justice.gov/cjs/terrorism). Military commissions: 7.

            Federal courts have more tools to try terrorists than military commissions.  Federal courts, 

            unlike military commissions, can try suspects for offenses such as those involving fraud, immigration, firearms, and drugs. In addition, convictions for crimes of conspiracy and material support before a military commission rather than a federal court face a greater likelihood of being overturned on appeal because those crimes were not generally considered war crimes before the Military Commissions Act.

            Federal prisons hold more than 300 individuals convicted of terrorism-related offenses.  None has ever escaped. 6  Of the 7 GTMO convicted detainees, only 3 remain in prison.

            Federal courts have repeatedly imposed stiff sentences on those convicted of terrorism-related charges.  

            The average time between arrest and conviction in federal court for the main defendants in the top 50 terrorism plots was 1.4 years. The average time in the military commissions between initial capture and conviction for all seven detainees prosecuted was 7.9 years…

            I could go on for some time, but you don’t care about the truth.

          • Gregg Smith

            You said “a better job” not “more convictions”. What is the rate? Is a conviction always better? What if the defendant is innocent? It’s not like there are thousands of Military Tribunals.

            I’m more concerned about interrogation at this point.

            Please don’t tell me what I think.

          • 1Brett1

             The truth is clear; we have a little thing called Google, you know, if you’d like the truth. Are you as interested in the truth as support of your ideological ideas? I don’t believe so, but that’s just my opinion, an opinion supported by others on here.

          • Gregg Smith

            …as you completely ignore what I wrote. Google is not knowledge.

          • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

            i hope you are right. i am pretty sure last years NDAA allows oboma to drone people no matter where they are as the USA is considered part of the battlefield in the war on terror which seemed pretty silly till last week. hopefully thats not why all this has gone down

    • hennorama

      Gregg Smith – Sen. Graham is running for reelection and is worried about being “primaried “ from the right, so one must take every stupid thing he says with that in mind.

      Sen. Graham is merely one of the least loony of the cabal of notably loony South Carolina politicians. One suspects “there is just something in the water” in SC.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         Watch out.  If you refer to Senator Tim Scott as loony you might be called a racist by Chris Matthews.  Oh wait, Tim Scott is the wrong party. Never mind.

        • hennorama

          WorriedfortheCountry – TY for your response. I respect your views.

          I was far more concerned about the potential of offending Canadians had I misspelled “loony”. I understand that they are pretty sensitive when someone slags the loonie, but I could be wrong.

          • Tyranipocrit

            I cant stand this guy but your Ty for your views and respect and all that is patronizing and sickening.  You are not superior or righteous–its beyond polite–it comes off as snotty and smarmy.  I truly respect your opinions on most topics but I can not get behind you on this one.  Like so many “open-minded” Americans–when they wave the flag you seem to stand up and pledge allegiance to the hysteria and praise of soldiers in the war on terror.  That is exactly what they want.  Dollars for destruction.  

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       Sorry, I don’t get the enemy combatant thing in this case.  However, I do think they will trade the death penalty for info.

      • Gregg Smith

        It depends on what the facts are. There are allegations the elder had terrorist ties. Al Qaeda has a strong presence in Chechnya. If this was part of a cell or if there is some kind of connection to the Ricin and Texas fertilizer plant events then it could warrant it. I’m not saying there was. However I too am uneasy with the idea because he is an American citizen. Obama has established he can have an American citizen enemy combatant assassinated and that barely raised a ruffle on the left.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           I guess I could see a case IF there was a broader conspiracy.

          To me it creates way too many slippery slope issues.  There is a mechanism for revoking a naturalized citizenship.  I suspect revocation would be a prerequisite to going down the enemy combatant path.

          btw – I agree with your assessment of the double standard by left.  I suspect it comes down to “Obama can do no wrong”.

        • nj_v2

          As if any more evidence is needed, Greggg further makes a public spectacle of his utter cluessness by gurgling: “Obama has established he can have an American citizen enemy combatant assassinated and that barely raised a ruffle on the left.”

          http://www.democracynow.org/2012/5/14/noam_chomsky_on_wikileaks_obamas_targeted

          Noam Chomsky on WikiLeaks, Obama’s Targeted Assassinations and Latin America’s Break from the U.S.

          [[ Actually, the same is true of the Awlaki killing, you know, this American cleric in Yemen who was killed by drones. He was killed. The guy next to him was killed. Shortly after, his son was killed. Now, there was a little talk about the fact that he was an American citizen: you shouldn’t just murder American citizens. But, you know, the New York Times headline, for example, when he was killed, said something like "West celebrates death of radical cleric." First of all, it wasn’t death, it was murder. And the West celebrates the murder of a suspect. He’s a suspect, after all. There was something done almost 800 years ago called the Magna Carta, which is the foundation of Anglo-American law, that says that no one shall be subjected to a violation of rights without due process of law and a fair and speedy trial. It doesn’t say, if you think somebody’s a suspect, you should kill them. ]]

          http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/jan/20/why-obama-targeted-killing-is-like-bush-torture

          Why Obama’s ‘targeted killing’ is worse than Bush’s torture
          Both are legally prohibited but speciously justified by the White House. The difference? Obama’s policy kills innocent bystanders

          http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2013/04/13/human-rights-groups-challenge-obama-administrations-targeted-killing-authority-secrecy/

          Human Right Groups Challenge Obama’s Claimed Targeted Killing Authority & Secrecy

          http://www.examiner.com/list/top-12-liberal-democrats-who-oppose-president-obama-s-drone-kill-list-policy

          Top 12 liberal Democrats who oppose President Obama’s drone ‘kill list’ policy

  • 1Brett1

    My own (admittedly subjective) grading/scoring on how the main three cable network news outlets handled this week’s coverage overall:

    MSNBC-
    Field reporting: B
    Talking head analysis: C

    Fox-
    Field reporting: B
    Talking head analysis: F+

    CNN-
    Field reporting: D-
    Talking head analysis: D

    Field reporting for both MSNBC and Fox was professional and decent. Fox’s talking head analysis (panel discussions and commentary) was wildly speculative and asinine. MSNBC’s talking head analysis was okay, average, and what one might expect, although certain talking heads were too speculative and somewhat asinine (e.g., Chris Matthews). CNN’s coverage just sucked all the way around; I felt I was being generous by not failing them on both counts. I’ve always called CNN “the USA TODAY of cable news,” but that might just be too insulting toward USA TODAY, which is the Denny’s menu of newspapers, in my view.

    • JGC

      What would you think of a new Fox program, “Hannity and Tyranipocrit”?  Now, THAT would be “Fair and Balanced”. 

      • 1Brett1

        That’s funny! We could speculate (with popcorn even) on who would be considered “[un]fair” and who would be considered “[im]balanced”!

        • JGC

          Two thumbs up!

      • hennorama

        JGC – if they originated their new show in Canada, they might change the title slightly, to “Hannity and Tyranipocrit, Eh?”

        This would allow for the convenient acronym HATE.

        Alternatively, they could use “Hannity and Tyranipocrit’s Equanimity” if their goal was irony.

        • JGC

          You know, the weird thing is I often agree with certain elements of Tyranipocrit’s screeds. But the delivery is so alienating and bombastic I can barely get past that to hear the underlying message.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      Brett, I forget where you’re located, would you remind us?

      I’m curious because I was in Framingham, 20 miles away, volunteering for the Marathon, and my appetite for the coverage is simply not as robust as yours.

      PS Al Neuharth died today, for better or worse. I guess I can’t complain too much about USA Today, as I figure he didn’t discover or build something others would not have eventually. And it often pays to be a leader, to be there first.

      And the achievement of launching a national newspaper–in print–in 1982 and having it turn a profit in five years, then survive the “deprintification” of news, is not to be dismissed.

      • 1Brett1

        I used to give that sort of information [location] out on this forum, but the place has become too full of crazies in the last year or so…let’s just say I am from the mid-Atlantic region.

        I agree that USA TODAY has been successful, I just don’t think its a newspaper with any depth; it’s for a lowest-common-denominator, wide demographic.  

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

          (Understood. Hey, that’s why I don’t even use a name.)

    • nj_v2

      I mostly tried to watch local TV coverage. As much as i could take, anyway. I obviously couldn’t watch every station simultaneously, but tried to watch each one for a stretch of time.

      Generally, it’s not unfair to say there was a lot of crappy or just plain dumb work, even allowing for the difficulties involved in live covering these kinds of events.

      During the court building bomb scare, with video coverage of vehicles and people going back and forth in front of the building…

      With a fire engine on screen moving down the street, Fox reporter says, “There appears to be fire personnel arriving…”

      With a dark, SUV-style vehicle backing into a side or back entrance of the building, Channel 5 (ABC affiliate) reporters repeatedly noted that this was a typical procedure to bring suspects to the building in an inconspicuous way to avoid notice, implying that the suspect might have been captured and brought to the building.

      During the search in Watertown well before the capture of the “suspect two,” Ed Harding (Channel 5), misinterpreting the message, blurted out a couple of times that one of the field reporters had texted “We got him.” 

      Liz Brunner (Channel 5 again) referred to automatic weapons being carried by law enforcement people as “shotguns.”

      Jack Williams (Channel 4) wildly speculating on all kinds of things such as what possible relevance Chechnya/Russian history might have, and generally getting inappropriately emotional during much of his coverage.

      The choice to be on nearly continuously may have driven some of this (it has to be difficult to talk non-stop when there’s little new information, and when no one really knows what’s going on in live time), but still, some of the coverage was, i think, inexcusable for supposed professional journalists.

      • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

        on one channel an desk anchor was going on a threatening rant to the effect of “you better hope one of us doesnt catch you blah blah” it was pretty wild

    • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

      i find fox and msnbc just as inane for commentary but i have to say fox is usually johnny on the spot for live coverage. they play all of obomas speeches and such when the other networks do not. lol cnn is the usa today

      • 1Brett1

        I thought Fox’s reporters in the street for the bombing coverage were decent and professional, and some of them would even cue the in-studio talking heads to dial back the speculation using subtle re-direction.

        • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

          for me at this point its interchangable, i tune out the spin on both sides. its pretty bad on every channel

  • 1Brett1

    Not Mirandizing the suspect (in the legal way that they are doing so) is (according to legal experts) so they can gather everything he says, he doesn’t have a right to silence, and he doesn’t have to have a right to a lawyer, and all of what he says and does is admissible in court. If he was read his Miranda rights, he could have lawyered up and remained silent. They will need to Mirandize him soon, but he also might die, and it would have been a shame to have him die before they got any information out of him (while a lawyer was advising him to keep his mouth shut). 

    Howie Carr was just on the Fox morning show, and he mentioned how the police lifted “martial law” last night. This exemplifies how shoddy Fox’s reporting and commentary has been. They NEVER declared martial law in Cambridge, Boston or anywhere else in Massachusetts. Fox is also reporting that he hasn’t been Mirandized so they can treat him as an ‘enemy combatant,’ which isn’t the reason. Those who are listening to Fox are listening to a lot of erroneous information. 

    The suspect is an American citizen, there is no evidence (yet anyway) that he was affiliated with any enemy combatant organization (e.g., al Qaeda). He will also be tried in criminal court.

    • JGC

      Ugh – Howie Carr. He’s worse than Limbaugh. No information; just bile and hatred.

    • hennorama

      1Brett1 – here are some select quotes from the FBI website about the “public safety exception” regarding Miranda rights:

      “The exception “permits law enforcement to engage in a limited and focused unwarned interrogation and allows the government to introduce the statement as direct evidence.”

      AND

      “… police officers confronting situations that create a danger to themselves or others may ask questions designed to neutralize the threat without first providing a warning of rights”

      AND

      “This exception does not permit police officers to compel a statement from a subject. It simply permits them to question a subject before providing any Miranda warnings to resolve an imminent public safety concern.

      “CONCLUSION

      “The ‘public safety’ exception to Miranda is a powerful tool with a modern application for law enforcement. When police officers are confronted by a concern for public safety, Miranda warnings need not be provided prior to asking questions directed at neutralizing an
      imminent threat, and voluntary statements made in response to such narrowly tailored questions can be admitted at trial. Once the questions turn from those designed to resolve the concern for safety to questions designed solely to elicit incriminating statements, the
      questioning falls outside the scope of the exception and within the traditional rules of Miranda.”

      See:http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/law-enforcement-bulletin/february2011/legal_digest

      And:http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/467/649/case.html

      On a side note, there are two “September 11th” coincidences in this case:

      Boston Bombing Suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is reported to have become a naturalized U.S. Citizen on September 11, 2012.

      The “public safety exception” to the Miranda warnings came from an arrest that was made in Queens, NY on September 11, 1980.

      • 1Brett1

        I hope I didn’t imply that they could coerce him; that wasn’t my intention, just that they can use whatever he says and does as admissible.

        • hennorama

          1Brett1 – TY for your reply.

          No, not at all. I was just fleshing out the exception for anyone who doesn’t know about it.

          • 1Brett1

            I appreciated your relaying such information; it serves to clarify.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       The Federal DA was asked about mirandization by the Fox reporter at last night’s presser.  Her answer was because of the homeland security exemption.

      Interestingly, I heard Alan Dershowitz state that the homeland security exemption is not appropriate in this situation because in his view there is no longer an imminent threat.  It seems like that is a judgement call.

      I agree that he will be tried in criminal court.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       I never heard officials refer to ‘martial law’ but if you watched the images of police presence in Watertown all day Friday that WAS martial law.

      Personally, I didn’t have any issues with the authorities actions.  It was the best thing for public safety.  However, the images were stunning and very disturbing.  Hopefully they won’t be repeated.

      • 1Brett1

        Martial law is not voluntary. 

        My comment didn’t have anything to do with whether or not I thought the actions of the way everything was handled were okay or not. In fact, I think the approach by law enforcement probably ensured his capture so quickly. My comment was about the fact that the procedures were not an imposed “martial law.” 

        • WorriedfortheCountry

          Tell that to the people that were detained for hours by the police simply because they left their homes.

          I think we are quibbling over semantics and we can agree to disagree.

          In Watertown, IMHO,  it was martial law by most definitions. Thankfully it was relatively brief.

          I’m not the only one with that opinion.

          http://www.salem-news.com/articles/april192013/boston-lockdown-tk.php

      • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

        it seemed like a little much to me

  • 1Brett1

    Fox just had on an “expert” on terrorism…he said, “clearly these guys were either a sleeper cell or part of a much larger terrorist organization…and their descent into terrorism is because of their desire for jihad…”  

    Well, these things may very well turn out to be true, but right now we don’t really know anything about their motives or affiliations.

    • hennorama

      “Experts” and Fox should have learned not to speculate by now.

      Of course, this may simply be Fox and Roger Ailes pushing a narrative.

      Regardless, such speculation is simply irresponsible.

      • 1Brett1

        Exactly.

    • Gregg Smith

      Maybe the expert on terrorism knows a little more than us. I looked at your previous comments and I may have missed it but I did not see any criticism for the speculation it was a Tea Party type. Yet any mention of terrorist ties and you go nuts. Why is there such reluctance to face up to the reality of the radical Islamic threat? It would be irresponsible for a news agent not tot cover it, especially if they are having experts on MSNBC to discuss why it is probably a right winger. Or the “expert” Jessica Stern on this show saying the same.

      BTW, here NPR with an “expert” on terrorism speculating  he may not have self-radicalized, that he may be part of a world-wide effort. That’s responsible journalism.

      http://www.npr.org/2013/04/19/177930886/terrorism-expert-weighs-in-on-mondays-bombing-in-boston

      • 1Brett1

        Well, I didn’t really like how that interview was kind of all over the place; we don’t need that kind of “analysis,” really, but I will say even that expert was a lot more careful in his language than Fox was this morning.

        But, anyway, whatever, you’ve been talking out of your ass all week (based on your sources of The NY Post, The Blaze, Fox, and Limbaugh’s “reporting”). I’m surprised you don’t have vertigo with all of the spinning you’ve (and they’ve) attempted all week. Do me a favor: maybe try polishing your turd with someone else. Thanks.   

           

        • Gregg Smith

          So you don’t deny your double standard regarding Tea Party types? And you accuse me of spinning? BTW, I don’t remember using Rush as a source, maybe I did.

          “…but I will say even that expert was a lot more careful in his language than Fox was this morning.”

          You just went on a rant against the exact same message!

          “I’m surprised you don’t have vertigo with all of the spinning you’ve (and they’ve) attempted all week.”

          • 1Brett1

            I don’t like any of the speculation on either side, but you make up what you wish and inaccurately characterize what you want. You fool no one…well, except Stillhere or your cheerleaders.

  • jimino

    Even without resort to the “public safety exception”, reading Miranda rights to an arrested person in custody simply tells them what everyone who has ever watched a cop show already knows: that they are being questioned by law enforcement and have a right to remain silent.

    Interrogating that person without the advisement ONLY excludes the information obtained from being used by the government in its case in chief.  It DOES NOT affect the ability to criminally prosecute the individual in any other manner.  And it can still be used for impeachment if conflicting testimony is given by the defendant.

    And evidence developed through the information obtained can still be used against anyone else.

    Only an involuntary (obtained by force, threats, inducements of leniency) statement can not be used in a prosecution.

    In this instance, whatever this guy says is almost certainly not necessary for a successful prosecution, so all the talk of “Mirandizing” him is of no importance whatsoever, except as agenda-driven propaganda for ignorant people.

  • 1Brett1

    I have watched Fox on and off all week (for laughs and to see how they were going to report information). This morning (and I’m about to turn the crap off) they have really been ginning up fear, anger and have been wildly speculating. 

    They reported that the suspect “worked out and partied with his friends the day after the bombings.” This serves no purpose other than to a) further promote anger toward the suspect and b) make gathering a jury, before his trial, more difficult.

    They had one of the suspect’s friends on for an interview…the one Fox moron (the Bronx guy who is normally on the morning show during the week) made a statement at the end of the interview along the lines of how people like this friend interviewed are going to need to be relied upon more heavily in future, as terrorists will increasingly be living among us, so average citizens will need to report more potentially suspicious activity. 

    Oh, and now they are speculating about how these young men had been radicalized, how the bombs are “trademark al Qaeda,” how these guys “were being trained under the radar,” etc. It’s just one piece of unsubstantiated reporting after another. We don’t yet know anything for sure about these bombers.  

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       I heard the interview and I didn’t see any problem with it.  Isn’t it important to understand how seemingly normal ‘kids’ who had everything to live for turned to terrorism and random violence?

      The ‘experts’ have been warning that this kind of lone wolf form of terrorism (whether driven by radical Islam or not) is the most difficult to detect.  It looks like this profile was predicted.

      • 1Brett1

        I don’t have a problem with having the suspect’s friend interviewed, and I agree that it serves us well to piece together an understanding of why these things happen. However, constantly beating the drum of “radical Islam”/ “the brothers had been likely radicalized by al Qaeda”/”citizens need to realize that terrorists could be living all around us,” which is what Fox has been doing since I turned it on at 7:15am, is irresponsible.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           Wait, isn’t raising the level of vigilance critical?  Do you assume this is a one-off and won’t be repeated?  The failed Time Square bomber was very similar.  We lucked out that no one was hurt in that one.

          I don’t see what is irresponsible here. It is pretty clear (although not ‘proven’) that this is another case of radical Islam driven terrorism.

          This is very similar to the analysis after Newton and whether there were any signs that Adam Lanza was violent.  Were you equally upset with that analysis?

          • 1Brett1

            What is irresponsible is their speculation, especially since we don’t yet know what the suspect’s motives were for the crimes. 

            We needn’t be any more vigilant today than two weeks ago.

            Come on, Worried…your last paragraph just sounds stupid, but the questions of whether anyone had known Adam Lanza to be violent and asking people if they have seen or heard the current suspect talk of religion or politics are the same. However, Fox is engaging in a little bit more than this.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             I didn’t hear all of Fox’s coverage this AM so I can’t characterize all of their coverage.  However, I have a pretty good feel given the comments here.  IMHO you and other commenters are for some reason hyper-sensitive for the speculation in some of the Fox analysis.

            My sense is we let our guard down.  Did someone notice an unattended backpack at the finish line? Maybe the mayhem could have been minimized.  I confess that if I was at the finish line that I wouldn’t be looking for abandoned backpacks or packages.

            We can all hope that there are no more attacks but that doesn’t mean we should be aware.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    “I wonder, when the “Co-exist” car is returned to its owner, whether he or she will keep the bumper sticker in place. One would not expect him to conclude, as the gays of Amsterdam and the Jews of Toulouse and the Christians of Egypt have bleakly done, that if it weren’t for that Islamic crescent you wouldn’t need a bumper sticker at all.”

    Some brilliant reflections by Mark Steyn.  Hopefully, a reality check for the PC police.  Please keep an open mind.

    The ‘Co-exist’ bombers

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/346146/%E2%80%98co-exist%E2%80%99-bombers

    • hennorama

      WorriedfortheCountry – I would not characterize Mr. Steyn’s words as “brilliant”.

      I would use a different word.  It too begins with b and ends with t, has a double l in the middle, and is only one letter shorter.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         Sorry you didn’t like it. It was thought provoking and good writing — as usual for Mr. Steyn.

         I posted it because so many here appear to be hyper-critical of analyst speculation on Fox News.  Mr. Steyn outed ‘incorrect’ analyst speculation on NPR.  I didn’t notice any criticism of NPR from these same commenters during the week.  That is what we call a ‘double standard’.

        • Gregg Smith

          Steyn is spot on, thanks.

        • hennorama

          WorriedfortheCountry – TY for your response. I appreciate and respect your views.

          I read Mr. Steyn’s words. I’m not a fan of his ceaseless negativity. Let me list some of the negative characterizations and insults he felt compelled to write:

          so-called gun control

          the president rushed ill-advisedly on air to give a whiny, petulant performance

          the media remain terrified

          you gullible rubes

          one of the “clinic”’s “nurses”

          another “women’s health worker”

          “Doctor” Gosnell

          seems likely to prove America’s all-time champion mass murderer

          his victims are ideologically problematic for the media

          And that’s just from his second paragraph.

          It’s difficult to view any of this as analysis, or reflective, or brilliance.

          His opinion piece is merely the diatribe of someone looking for more readers of his books, and who is clearly biased against those who practice Islamic beliefs.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             hennorama, thank you for pulling out those gems.  I could say the truth hurts when it isn’t on your side.  Mr. Steyn, thankfully, ignores the PC police.

            Yes, Mr. Steyn is often negative.  He wrote a book on the debt crisis and the inevitable demise of our country.  He blames both Rs and Ds btw.

            I find your last comment interesting.  The way I see it,  Mr. Steyn is lambasting violence in the name radical Islamist fundamentalism and not Islam in general. I guess you see it differently.  I don’t know why.

          • Gregg Smith

            And that’s the rub, any sober reflection on history and the present state of the terrorist threat is met with BS like the above. It’s dangerously dishonest.

          • hennorama

            Gregg Smith – if you characterize Mr. Steyn’s words in the linked opinion piece as “sober reflection on history”, one shudders to think what you might believe to be unreasoned off-the-cuff remarks on current events”.

          • hennorama

            WftC – TY again for your response.

            As to “the truth hurts” portion of your comment – Mr. Steyn’s words are merely his opinions. Whether one judges them as “truth” is up to the individual reader. Truth involves screening facts through the filter of belief. If one believes something to be true, then it is true, regardless of the facts involved.

            Certainly Mr. Steyn presented little in the way of new factual information in his remarks.

            As to your thought that “Mr. Steyn is lambasting violence in the name radical Islamist fundamentalism and not Islam in general”, let’s repeat the first of Mr. Steyn’s words that you quoted, with emphasis added, OK?

            “I wonder, when the “Co-exist” car is returned to its owner, whether he or she will keep the bumper sticker in place. One would not expect him to conclude, as the gays of Amsterdam and the Jews of Toulouse and the Christians of Egypt have bleakly done, that IF IT WEREN’T FOR THAT ISLAMIC CRESCENT YOU WOULDN”T NEED A BUMPER STICKER AT ALL.”

            Nowhere to be found are the words “radical” and “fundamentalism”. Only the word ISLAMIC was written.

            Here are a couple of Mr. Steyn’s other “gems”:

            He was a fill-in for Rush Limbaugh yesterday (Friday April 19, 2013) and (per dailycaller.com) said

            “As we now know, these guys are Muslim,” Steyn said. “One of them was Muslim. He’s dead — he died in the early hours this morning. The other guy, still on the lam, is Muslim — Muslims from Chechnya. And so, as usual, any moment now we’ll start to hear, ‘Oh well, these are just lone wolves,’ as Rush said. ‘They’re not typical of anything.’ None of these guys are ever typical of anything.”

            What could Mr. Steyn have meant, other than that the Muslim guys ARE typical of Muslims? Again, not a peep about “radical” or “fundamentalism”, only “Muslim, Muslim, Muslim”, and in case you didn’t hear the other three times he said it – “Muslims”.

            See: http://dailycaller.com/2013/04/19/steyn-media-will-downplay-boston-bomber-muslim-link-same-as-ft-hood-underwear-bomber/#ixzz2R1m3z83w

            Then there’s this, from Steyn’s book America Alone, demonstrating that Mr. Steyn believes Muslim population growth itself is a threat:

            “Why did Bosnia collapse into the worst slaughter in Europe since the second World War? In the thirty years before the meltdown, Bosnian Serbs had declined from 43 percent to 31 percent of the population, while Bosnian Muslims had increased from 26 percent to 44 percent. In a democratic age, you can’t buck demography — except through civil war. The Serbs figured that out, as other Continentals [Europeans] will in the years ahead: if you cannot outbreed the enemy, cull ‘em. The problem that Europe faces is that Bosnia’s demographic profile is now the model for the entire continent.

            Repeating, with added emphasis – “… if you can’t outbreed THE ENEMY, CULL ‘EM.”

            Again, nothing about “radical” or “fundamentalism”, just “Muslims” who are “the enemy.”

            See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Steyn

            Based on Mr. Steyn’s own words, I find it difficult to NOT conclude that Mr. Steyn is, as I wrote, “… someone … who is clearly biased against those who practice Islamic beliefs.”

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            hennorama, I give you an A for effort but you failed to support your thesis that Mr. Steyn is an anti-Muslim bigot.

            Notice that Mr. Steyn points out specific persecutions by ‘certain’ Muslims against Women, homosexuals, Jews and Christians in the name of their religion.  IMO he doesn’t need to specifically say ‘radical Islamic fundamentalism’ in every reference because it is clearly implied.

            Therefore, it looks to me like you are attempting to taint Mr. Steyn’s character without the supporting evidence.

            Just because Mr. Steyn is a self described lover of Western culture and a sharp critic of the PC police does not make him  a hater or bigot.  I ‘m surprised you can’t see the distinction.

          • hennorama

            WftC – given space constraints, I’m placing my reply to this post as a reply to your original post containing the link to Steyn’s article.

          • Gregg Smith

            I think you are all over it. It seems to me many believe the truth is just a continuum of perspective, it’s not.

    • nj_v2

      What an ugly, smarmy, smug, condescending, piece-of-s**t writing. 

      Does Mark Stain think he’s being cute by referring to women as “Miss.”? By demeaning an entire state? By implying that those advocating diversity are tolerant of violence?

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         You accuse Mr. Steyn as being condescending and smarmy and then  refer to him as “Mr. Stain”.

        Oh the irony.

        • nj_v2

          Sorry, pal. When confronted with a steaming, hot pile of bovine excrement, i call it a steaming, hot pile of bovine excrement. The article was such. Says a lot about you that you thought it was “brilliant.”

          Honestly, you right wingers seem like another species some times.

          • Gregg Smith

            I think you are confusing Steyn with Stein.

          • nj_v2

            I think you’re confusing the bizarre constructs your brain produces with reality.

    • OnPointComments

      The usual left-wing media sources such as MSNBC’s Chris Matthews and Lawrence O’Donnell speculated early that it must be right-wing extremists who planted the bombs, as did NPR’s Dina Temple-Raston and CNN.  The events of last night pre-empted MSNBC’s scheduled program, which was “The Timothy McVeigh Tapes;”  it made me wonder whether MSNBC scheduled the program because it was the anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing, or was it because MSNBC was compelled to present a different terrorist to offset an Islamic terrorist.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         You’ve got to be kidding: “The Timothy McVeigh Tapes”.  Wow.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        Matthews isn’t my favorite, so it takes something to make me remark: You really are threading a needle to say “speculated”, as if even Tweety didn’t say every other source was on the table. Way to take that one thing he said, out of hours on the air, out of context.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      “Brilliant” and “Mark Steyn” have very little to do with each other.

    • StilllHere

      Great link.
      Interesting how lefty nutjobs here are criticizing the author not the substance.

    • hennorama

      WorriedfortheCountry – as noted below, this is a reply to your “hennorama, I give you an A for effort .. “ post.

      TY for your response and for the high grade ;-). I appreciate and respect your views.

      Please note that I did NOT write “Mr. Steyn is an anti-Muslim bigot.” Rather, I wrote, originally and carefully, “His opinion piece is merely the diatribe of someone looking for more readers of his books, and who is clearly biased against those who practice Islamic beliefs.”

      To be clear, I conclude that Mr. Steyn demonstrates clear bias. To be as clear as possible about what I mean by “bias” I’ll simply quote http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bias:

      “a personal and sometimes unreasoned judgment: prejudice”

      This is far different from being a bigot. A bigot adds hatred and intolerance on top of bias, making it much worse. I have no idea about whether or not Mr. Steyn hates or is intolerant of those who practice Islamic beliefs, and I made no such claim. But his words demonstrate that he clearly is biased against them.

      Please note also that Mr. Steyn never used the term ['certain' Muslims] in the section about those he described as “the gays of Amsterdam and the Jews of Toulouse and the Christians of Egypt”.

      He also never mentioned what you described as ”specific persecutions by ‘certain’ Muslims against Women” in the piece you linked to. You either made up the part about “Women”, made an assumption, or pulled your reference to ”specific persecutions by ‘certain’ Muslims against Women” from other of Mr. Steyn’s words.

      By way of promoting mutual understanding, I’ll simply ask you to interpret Mr. Steyn’s words, all of which I have previously quoted. In other words, would you please explain exactly what you think Mr. Steyn meant when he wrote or said each of the following:

      1. “I wonder, when the “Co-exist” car is returned to its
      owner, whether he or she will keep the bumper sticker in place. One would not expect him to conclude, as the gays of Amsterdam and the Jews of Toulouse and the Christians of Egypt have bleakly done, that IF IT WEREN’T FOR THAT ISLAMIC CRESCENT YOU WOULDN”T NEED A BUMPER STICKER AT ALL.”

      2. “As we now know, these guys are Muslim,” Steyn said. “One of them was Muslim. He’s dead — he died in the early hours this morning. The other guy, still on the lam, is Muslim — Muslims from Chechnya. And so, as usual, any moment now we’ll start to hear, ‘Oh well, these are just lone wolves,’ as Rush said. ‘They’re not typical of anything.’ None of these guys are ever typical of anything.”

      3. “Why did Bosnia collapse into the worst slaughter in Europe since the second World War? In the thirty years before the meltdown, Bosnian Serbs had declined from 43 percent to 31 percent of the population, while Bosnian Muslims had increased from 26 percent to 44
      percent. In a democratic age, you can’t buck demography — except through civil war. The Serbs figured that out, as other Continentals will in the years ahead: if you cannot outbreed the enemy, cull ‘em. The problem that Europe faces is that Bosnia’s demographic profile is now the model for the entire continent.”

      Thanks again for your response.

  • Gregg Smith

    If this turns out to be larger than a couple of disgruntled psychos then we should rethink the idea of targeted assassination. I know the libs prefer it to interrogation but we need info. Capture should at least be considered.

    My view is it is very dangerous to speculate this was homegrown. We should assume it was not instead of assuming it was.

    • 1Brett1

      What’s your definition of “homegrown”?

      • Gregg Smith

        Self-radicalized without aid from foreign radicals.

    • jimino

       Maybe the NRA and its members can organize a militia to go to Pakistan, Yemen, etc. and effect some captures.  Or do you want “the government” to do your dirty difficult work/

      • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

        my local militia was put on alert thursday, you did not get the message to muster?

        • jefe68

          You’re local milita? That would have been cute. You guys running around with your guns. 

          • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

            this time they did not get called out but its nice to know they could be available when needed.  it would be nice to see more images of proper gun use and fewer violent images i think thats what turns a lot of folks off of guns.

    • hennorama

      Gregg Smith – We should not “assume” anything and instead wait for the facts and evidence before drawing conclusions and taking action.

      Perhaps next time you might instead stop at “My view is it is very dangerous to speculate” and leave it at that.

    • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

      well we finally got one alive it took 9000 cops but we got one alive

  • Gregg Smith

    Kudos to law enforcement but I think they will come under criticism for missing the guy the first time. It is also incredible that Tsarnaev, as AllahPundit put it, ” …somehow survived a car crash, a shootout with huge numbers of police, another car crash — and still somehow managed to get away on foot, with thousands of police unable to find him after looking all day today. Unbelievable.”  And in the interim a Police Officer was murdered. It’s still unclear to me who killed him.

    I’m not sure if they will come under fire for lifting the lockdown prematurely. Ironically that led to the capture. 

    But I don’t think Obama will say they acted “stupidly”.

    • 1Brett1

      Let’s see, you’re just making a comment…there’s no ideological point to your last sentence; I mean you don’t have any continued axe to grind over Obama’s “stupidly” comment in the past, right? I’m sure it’s just in my head; you’re innocent of trying to make a point based on your ideology and opinion of Obama, liberals, Democrats, etc. You would never be sarcastic to make some stupid point that is crassly opportunistic. Noooooo, not old Greggers 

      • Gregg Smith

        I’m sarcastic all of the time, what are you talking about? I make political implications all the time, what are you talking about? I’ve got all kinds of axes to grind with Obama, what are you talking about? 

        You can’t read my mind, that’s all. Do you have a comment on the substance of what I wrote?

        • 1Brett1

          There was substance in what you wrote?

          • Gregg Smith

            Yea.

          • jefe68

            You’re a legend in your own mind.

    • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

      we should have just called out the citizen militia immediately. i wonder how many millions they spent to find one guy? did they ever catch the guys who robbed the 7-11 or did they ignore the armed and dangerous criminals to focus on a different armed and dangerous criminal?

      • jefe68

        Citizen milita? There is no such thing.
        You live in a fantasy world. Lets get a posse and hunt down those terrorist.

        • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

          jefe i have already posted a list of citizen militias for you. 

          • jefe68

            I’m not interested in joining any vigilantly groups. I’ll let the professionals deal with it. That’s what my taxes are for.

            Citizen militas, what a joke. 

          • JGC

            I’m loadin’ up my Marshmallow Blaster right now…

          • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

            you dont have to join if you dont want to but i just think its funny you pretend they do not exist

  • Alex Pappas

    TOM – Yesterday during your late evening coverage of the hunt for suspect #2, you had a female expert/interpreter on your show. I tried to call in last night to give you some remarks because i was getting VERY frustrated with her. She was totally romanticizing suspect #2. NOT ONCE did she mention any of the negative or incriminating character issues of this man. Instead she kept gushing how “everything said he was such a great kid” “popular” “wrestler” “great student”. Never mentioned the weird twitter posts, youtube posts, or any of the sick hints…..HEY, HOW ABOUT BLOWING CHILDREN UP AT THE MARATHON? it really saddened me that you wouldnt counter her. 

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    I find it odd that the left reflexively turns to appeasement when it comes to radical Islamic fundamentalism.  They get outraged when some refers to a woman as ‘Miss’ vs. ‘Ms.’ yet give wide berth to an ideology that limits a woman’s rights and freedoms.

    So why the solidarity?  Could it be that both ideologies revere Statism or is there something else?

    • 1Brett1

      “yet [liberals] give wide berth to an ideology that limits a woman’s rights and freedoms.”

      To which ideology are you referring that “limits a woman’s rights and freedoms”?

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        Sorry,  I thought I was clear.  Radical Islamic fundamentalism.

        • Gregg Smith

          In America you are considered to be limiting women’s rights and freedoms if you oppose Kermit Gosnell type procedures. 

          • jefe68

            Hyperbolic.

          • 1Brett1

            And that’s being kind, jefe!

      • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

        maybe how liberals are trying to limit a womans right to choose what gun she wants to use to protect her family?

        • 1Brett1

          There you go; that’s the kind of screwball partisanship I was looking for! Thanks, FB; I was just starting to sense we were having a moment in the last comment exchange–and I have to tell you, it felt good but odd and exceedingly uncomfortable, so thanks for us putting back in our comfort zones.   :-)

          • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

            i never go into the liberal/ conservative thing but you specifically referred to liberals as the subject of your post.  its odd to me that people who call themselves liberals, who are usually on the side of women, want to supress the firearms rights of women. i am an open minded person i even saw something typonowhatever posted that i liked i bet we could find we had a lot of common ground

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      Cos all the lefties look like hippies in ’68 to you. Well, you and discredited hacks like Steyn.

      That dog don’t hunt anymore.

    • Tyranipocrit

       all religions are bunk–primitive barbaric notions.  The faithful are the most backwards hypocritical people on earth–in any religion.  Christianity and Judaism is full of terrorists just as is the Muslim religion.   Does that help?

      • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

        god bless you

        • Tyranipocrit

           and you–go in peace.

  • Gregg Smith

    When I suggested those in Boston with guns probably felt safer with a madman on the loose I was met with disdain. I’m always amazed at how the most common sense comment is reacted to. I thought it was a no-brainer.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/04/18/majority-of-americans-say-guns-make-homes-safer/

    • SpringHill44

       I live within a few miles of Watertown and close to the Cambridge home of the suspects, and yesterday I learned the suspects had a connection pretty close to my home, so I thought there was some chance this suspect might head in our direction. (I didn’t know he had been wounded.) So though I didn’t want to go out yesterday, I never once thought “Gee, I wish I had a gun!”

      what you have to realize, Gregg, is that our houses are all very close to each other, just a driveway separating most houses, and so we know our neighbors well. Also, any shooting would VERY easily hit an innocent bystander. We use neighborhood “eyes on the street” to keep an eye on things. We don’t use guns.

      … And in answer to the person who wrote about the “Co-exist” bumpersticker, many of the people in the Greater Boston area are from all over the world, many different religions and ethnic groups. We DO co-exist — and we all get to know people who are different from us. We are not haters. 

      My hearts go out to the wounded and the families of the dead, and I’m very thankful to the police and even the media, who all risked their lives this week. I’m glad the suspect was captured without any more violence.

      In the words of 8-year-old Martin Richard, “No more people hurting each other — Peace.”

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         “… And in answer to the person who wrote about the “Co-exist”
        bumpersticker, many of the people in the Greater Boston area are from
        all over the world, many different religions and ethnic groups. We DO co-exist — and we all get to know people who are different from us. We are not haters. ”

        I am also from from the Greater Boston area.  I couldn’t be more proud of my community’s reaction to the horrific atrocities committed on Patriot’s Day.

        Of course the CoExist message is a great one that we should all adopt.  Unfortunately, there are haters.  There were at least two haters on Monday that apparently perpetrated horrific violence in the name of their religion.  We cannot bury our heads in the sand.  My must all acknowledge it and confront it so we can remain free.

        Go Sox!!

        • nj_v2

          One minute, the WorriedOne not only posts vile, condescending crap from the National Review, but calls it brilliant. Amongst other ugliness, the article the WorriedOne posted repeatedly ridiculed the very idea of diversity:

          [[ And, in their final hours of freedom, they added a cruel bit of mockery to their crimes by carjacking a getaway vehicle with a “Co-exist” bumper sticker. Oh, you must have seen them: I bet David Sirota has one. The “C” is the Islamic crescent, the “O” is the hippy peace sign; the “X” is the Star of David, the “T” is the Christian cross; I think there’s some LGBT, Taoist, and Wiccan stuff in there, too. They’re not mandatory on vehicles in Massachusetts; it just seems that way. ]]

          [[They were alumni of Cambridge Rindge and Latin, one of the oldest public schools in America and latterly one of the most “diverse,” boasting (being the operative word) students from over 80 countries. The Tsarnaev brothers had spent most of their lives in the United States, and lived the diversity dream. ]]

          [[Either way, the fatuities of the “Co-exist” bumper sticker are not real. The disaffected young Muslim on the lam in a car with a “Co-exist” sticker is. ]]

          Now, diversity is “a great message.”

          It’ll be fun to see how the WorriedOne rationalizes his duplicitousness.

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

            Cmon, NJ, you should know by now:

            Whatever rational, real point Steyn may have to make, ever, is lost to Steyn’s almost preternatual need to make the headline about “hippie punching”.

          • nj_v2

            I already railed against Stain; this post was directed at the WorriedOnes duplicity, and hypocrisy.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            Can’t we all just get along, NJ?

            btw — we don’t need the PC police to ‘get along’.

      • Gregg Smith

        I do not understand the mindset that says you are safer being defenseless with a tyrant on the loose. I can’t comprehend why you seem to think it’s more likely that you will shoot your neighbor than not. I don’t get it, but it’s your right. You are in the minority and thats cool too.

        • hennorama

          Gregg Smith – you wrote, in part

          “I do not understand the mindset that says you are safer being defenseless with a tyrant on the loose.”

          Two points:

          A. You don’t know Bostonians if you think they are “defenseless” simply because they may not possess a firearm.

          B. Which “tyrant” was “on the loose”? Did Syria’s Bashar al-Assad come to Boston out of the blue and then start running around?

          You continue to live up to your “April Fool” moniker. Well done, sir.

          • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

            a. are these the same bostonians who are always having their ithingies stolen in the subway?
            B. i thought tyrant was an odd choice of words too.
            do you think you could explain how these bostonians would defend themselves if an armed terrorist kicked in their door?

          • Gregg Smith

            I like “Armed terrorist” better too. I suppose a Bostonian could lunge at him like the principal at Sandy Hook.

          • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

            perhaps he could tweet ill of him

        • jefe68

          Tyrant on the loose? A tad hyperbolic methinks.

        • SpringHill44

           In reading these comments, I’ve realized that thinking about guns
          and gun safety is really like that optical illusion where some people
          see a beautiful woman at a mirror and others see a witch’s profile. When
          I think of loaded guns, I see an accident waiting to happen. Or a
          homicide .. or a suicide.

          And I’m actually not in the minority … I read a statistic that a
          small percentage of people own guns, but most of those people own many
          guns, not just one.

          @ worried for the country, I’m realistic.
          That’s why I depend on building community, keeping eyes on the street,
          watching out for one another. We try to get to know our neighbors and
          the community cop. Our neighbors are all different kinds of people and we watch out for one another.

          @ Gregg The reason I didn’t worry that this terrorist would barge
          into our house was that our house is one among hundreds of houses …
          Why would he choose us? We have no shed or garage, and only a
          preschooler could hide in our bushes. From upstairs windows we can see
          the backyards of 6 houses, and there are no leaves on the trees here.
          Nowhere to hide. No boats, either.

          I was more worried that more innocent people or cops would be killed
          in a violent taking of the suspect. We thought he had a belt of
          explosives like his brother. He could have had another cache of pressure
          cookers. That was what I was worried about, and I never once thought of
          needing a gun. Neither did any of my friends here. It’s a different way of thinking, I guess.

          >>Look, cops trained to use guns had guns and got shot. End of story for me. Guns do not equal safety for me.

      • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

        you never worried they might bust into your house? what would you unarmed neighbors be able to do to help you vs an armed terrorist?

        • nj_v2

          Yes, everyone in the area should have had a gun. Every house, every apartment. Every citizen in the greater Boston area should have been sitting behind their door, or better yet, a family member posted at each door, with a gun, round the clock, just in case the terrorist might burst in.

          Good idea.

          • Gregg Smith

            Who suggested that?

          • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

            it seems like they put a cop at every house and all those cops still did not stop the 7-11 from getting robbed at gunpoint.   If i got instructions from the government to lock myself in my home because armed terrorists were on the loose in the area i would feel a lot better doing so with a firearm. your mocking straw man still did not answer the question of what you would do if an armed terrorist bust down your door? (which would have seemed like a crazy question a week ago but now is now in the realm of possiblity)are you going to stop them with snarky comments?

          • nj_v2

            The level of my snarkyness  barely rises to the level of your inanity.

            Even assuming the HIGHLY unlikely possibility of some lone, random terrorist “bursting” through the front door, let’s assume the homeowner has a gun.

            Where’s the homeowner going to be in the house? Where’s the gun going to be? If there are kids, hopefully locked in a cabinet somewhere.

            What if the cabinet’s in the basement? In another room? Where’s the front door in relation to the inhabitants? Where’s the gun in relation to the owner? How long would it take to get the gun and do anything effective?

            Now go find a story on the Interwebs of someone deterring a burglary with a gun, which will be the one in a half a million instance where the stars aligned and it  did any good owning a gun. Then compare that against all the accidental shootings, kids finding and using guns, etc.

          • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

            one a half million would be 700 times, the anti gun researcher dr kennedy put the number of defensive use of guns at about 100,000 times per year. including “accidental” deaths and murders you get around 10,000 killed by people using or misusing firearms. that looks like 10 times as many guns help people than kill them. the interwebs are great. you should look up how many of those involve rifles of any sort its a hoot.
            all of your questions are important considerations that homeowners consider when they own a gun for home defense.
            where as in general the odds of an armed terrorist busting down your door are exceedingly low at this time in america when there are confirmed sightings of one in your neighborhood the chances of that happening are exponentially higher. 

      • jefe68

        Actually under the circumstances, that Watertown was chock a block with ATF, local cops, SWAT teams and more I would think using a firearm would not be the smartest thing. 

        These gun happy folks have little in the way of commonsense.   

    • hennorama

      Gregg Smith – your words certainly were a “no-brainer”,  just not in the way you meant when you wrote “I thought it was a no-brainer.”

    • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

      this will cause more poeple there to seek LTCs and then put more pressure on BPD to actually issue them.  

      • Gregg Smith

        I would think so. Do you remember the Texas Sheriff who made an PSA encouraging people to arm themselves? It’s common sense.

        • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

          you did not get a text from your local militia about a possible muster?

        • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

          i was living in a city that the sheriff did not issue carry permits and they cut his budget to where he announced that he would be issuing licenses to anyone who was eligable as he could no longer protect them.

    • jefe68

      I feel fine and safe without a gun.
      Speaking of using ones brains, you should try using them instead of posting so much inanity.

      • Gregg Smith

        That one will get you some “likes”.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Amazing account of the gun battle in Watertown.  According to the Watertown police chief Bomber #1 was killed when his brother drover the SUV over him while he was being handcuffed.

    It is amazing no one else was hurt.

     http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/amazing-new-details-chase-boston-bombers_718135.html

    • jefe68

      That’s not what happened. How could he drive over him when he was being handcuffed? 

      He died from his injuries, which covered most of his body according to the surgen that treated him.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        I wonder if we’ll ever find out if he had a suicide vest and if he triggered it.  From the death photo there weren’t obvious explosion trauma injuries to his torso.

  • Gregg Smith

    I don’t buy the notion that assuming Tsarnaev does not have terrorist ties is not speculating. It is. Any time a Muslim is caught committing mass murder it should be the default assumption. Painting all Muslims with a broad brush is not advisable. 

    • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

      do you use water colors or oil?

      • Gregg Smith

        No pastels, vivid bold colors. Truth.

    • hennorama

      Gregg Smith – You wrote

      ”I don’t buy the notion that assuming Tsarnaev does not have terrorist ties is not speculating. It is. Any time a Muslim is caught committing mass murder it should be the default assumption. Painting all Muslims with a broad brush is not advisable.”

      Putting aside the awkward triple negative (perhaps next time you could try “I [believe] that assuming Tsarnaev [has] terrorist ties is not speculating“), please allow me to put things in terms you can relate to, OK?

      First, we’re going to substitute the words “a Morgan” for “Tsarnaev”, and “a horse” for “a Muslim” and then go on from there:

      “I don’t buy the notion that assuming [a Morgan] does not have terrorist ties is not speculating. It is. Any time [a horse] is caught committing mass murder it should be the default assumption. Painting all [horses] with a broad brush is not advisable.”

      Now we’ll substitute “cinchiness” for “terrorist ties”, and “holding its breath“ for “committing mass murder”:

      “I don’t buy the notion that assuming [a Morgan] does not have [cinchiness] is not speculating. It is. Any time [a horse] is caught [holding its breath] it should be the default assumption. Painting all [horses] with a broad brush is not advisable.”

      So, after these substitutions, your sentences mean the following:

      - Assuming a Morgan is cinchy is not speculating

      - Any horse that holds its breath should be assumed to be cinchy

      - Despite the preceding points, it is inadvisable to generalize about all horses

      Presumably, this would mean that any time you are saddling a Morgan, you assume it is cinchy, and give it a knee to its chest, so it stops holding its breath, allowing you to properly cinch up the saddle, preventing the rider from falling off due to a loose saddle.

      Presumably, you only make such assumptions and take such actions when saddling Morgans, and not for all horses.

      A couple of questions arise from your post;

      A. To which “ Tsarnaev”are you referring?

      B. How do you define the term “mass murder”? Is your threshold three victims? Two? Four? Five? Seven?

      FYI, here is a quote from the FBI’s website:

      “Generally, mass murder was described as a number of murders (four or more)occurring during the same incident, with no distinctive time period between the murders. These events typically involved a single location, where the killer murdered a number of victims in an ongoing incident (e.g. the 1984 San Ysidro McDonalds incident in San Diego, California; the 1991 Luby’s Restaurant massacre in Killeen, Texas; and the 2007 Virginia Tech murders in Blacksburg, Virginia).”

      See:http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/serial-murder/serial-murder-1#two

  • Tyranipocrit

    its really good timing this fiasco–perhaps it is financed by the gun-nuts who say quite exhaustively–that people can kill with bombs.  Yes they can–and so bombs are illegal.  As should guns be.  IN addition to my investigation of the FBI and the CIA I would investigate the NRA.  As well as any other leads–such as “radicals”

    • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

      i would point more toward the cispa and whatever else they have been doing in washington while everyone was misdirected. how well is that ban on bombs working out?

      • Tyranipocrit

         Thank you for sharing.  I wasn’t sure what you meant so I looked it up.  You are right.  I think i signed the petitions against it.  The Intenet is no longer a safe harbor.  Big brother is watching, and making a list–he’s checking it twice.  These poor young men–I’m not saying they’re innocent–but I have no trust in the government–none whatsoever.  I wouldn’t doubt they were set up or coerced or framed or manipulated in some way by the government.  Perhaps they just look the wrong way.  They might also be guilty.  But one must consider what drives youth to such destructive acts–should the boys be condemned and not the society that creates them?  What are the roots of terroism?  I think you will find our terrorist government and the capitalism are the seeds of this destruction.

        I believe I will be withdrawing from commercial websites.  Gmail is compromised.  There is virtually nothing left that holds civil liberties sacred.  Just a good reason to bug off the INternet–and take a e-holiday.  The INternet was a big dumb idea anyways.  I miss land lines and the days of no cyborgs.  The next generation is barley human–imprinted to phones, mind vacuumed.  Down with the plutocracy!

  • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

    so despite the dozens of stories about the tragic deaths of 5 people there has been no coverage of the cispa on wbur

  • Tyranipocrit

    Why is that a lone bomber requires so much news coverage and revenge a war and speeches of hate and victory but when nutty americans go and shoot up people with NRA guns–we call for caution and and more guns in schools and the same gun nuts who see themselves as heroic call for the bllod of bombers.  Five people dead.  How many in the batman theater?  How many children in the school?  I think you people are twisted.  Vampires cant see their own reflection.

    • brettearle

      I understand your point.

      But 9/11 tell us that there is a possible global Jihadist movement.

      And post 9/11 incidents, before the Marathon, told us this, as well.

      Regardless of where you and I stand on gun control, you can’t deny that.

      People in our country can be “lone bombers”–but can STILL be emboldened, spiritually, by such Ideology.

      While the Right may be working on a double standard, from your point of view, it seems to me that you and I–who might not agree with the Right on gun control–need to address issues individually, without compromising our own standards and values.

      Because the Right is worried about a global threat doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be as well.

      Analyzing gun statistics, and their relationship to actual violence, are EASIER to debate than predicting when the next foreign terrorist incident will take place.

      • Tyranipocrit

        On your first point–i can deny that–why cant I? Why is there no room for this debate? Your premise implies we all must agree on a fundamental lie–or truth. It’s like saying–we can not go forward in this discussion unless all agree there is a god. You cannot deny that. Good, now that we’ve established there is a god…

        The threat is manufactured and embellished.
        I dont know the facts behind 911–none of us do. we were denied those facts and everything is surrounded in so much secrecy it reeks of deception–somehow someway and everything after is now known to be a lie–as usual. Yet we continue to participate in these dog and pony shows.

        Your third paragraph is convoluted–deliberately i guess. you should write with brevity if you want to be heard. And skip lines or indent.

        The global threat is environmental destruction, pollution, contamination, environmental terrorism–such as not in my backyard and BP…the global threat is melting ice caps and rising oceans and dead zones in the ocean…temperature changes in the ocean…the global threat is America’s predator drone war invasions of imperialism manufactured by the 1%. The global threat is more than 450 US military bases around the world–bring the troops home–defund the military and spend that trillion dollars or more on the environmental threat, poverty, education, health care, infrastructure and a green peace corps encouraging ties in developing nations like Iran and Venezuela and Cuba. Do that–and terrorism–on their behalf will end overnight. a fact. how would you feel if your country was occupied, and had Syrian bases, Egyptian bases, Chinese bases, Saudi Arabian bases, Russian bases occupying your land?–what does that mean?–and then corrupting politics and launching assassinations, and implanting dictators?…how would you feel? You might do something about it? Religion and poverty and hunger, and unemployment and murdered parents by american bombs just makes the problem worse–considering most of those things are indirectly or directly related to American policies.

        The real terrorists are in Washington and corporate board rooms–who do nothing–but continue their terrible onslaught–if it weren’t for them terrorism could not survive or persist–they are the oxygen and wood that fuels the fire. Take out these elements and the fire will be smothered.

        If you don’t know when the next terrorist attack will be–ask the FBI–they might be able to give you a tentative schedule. I don’t think this was an act of terror so much as a dumb criminal prank or explosive temper-tantrum–i am doubtful it was plotted and planned for some sinister purpose or war-effort. Perhaps if the right person got to them sooner–they could have been deterred and steered down the right path–instead sinister elements in the FBI or Black water or some other agency seeking job security got to them first and manipulated them.

    • jefe68

      Because the show is about the this event, and not firearms deaths. Which far out number by the thousands and tens of thousands of people killed in terrorist attacks in this country.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=684448892 Alice LoCicero

    Our book, Creating Young Martyrs (Praeger, 2008), where we report on interviews with kids at risk of being recruited to the Sri Lanka terrorist organization Tamil Tigers (now defeated) addresses questions relevant to the Boston bombings.

    • brettearle

      How so?

      Not all of us can take the time to read all relevant publications.

  • Gregg Smith
    • 1Brett1

      It’s pretty clear that you spend your time searching for articles, websites, and opinion pieces that support your views and bring those to this forum, which is pretty cheesy.  

      And, of course, you’ve got your cheerleader [SH] “like[ing]” your tripe.

      • brettearle

        Cherry-picking is common for all of us.

        But I, as a liberal Democrat, do tend to see the Right as being guilty of that, more than myself or my brethren.

        Maybe I’m cherry-picking when I say that.

      • Gregg Smith

        Once again I’ll engage you as if you are serious and address your points with brutal honesty. 

        That’s not entirely true. I am a consumer of news. I am engaged politically. I have formed opinions over the years. I have expressed them here for a couple of years (I think) and elsewhere for decades. I have been paying close attention for a very long time.

        I have several news gathering sites I frequent, Hot Air, Drudge, HuffPO, NPR, Yahoo, The Blaze, to name a few but certainly not limited to them. The tentacles reach out across the globe. I subscribe to the regional rag of record. I have C-Span on the TV in the mornings and Rush on the radio in the afternoon, then maybe some sports then NPR. I watch CNN, FOX, a little MSNBC and a bunch of C-Span.

        I am not really searching for anything but information. I find it fascinating to see a hearing or debate on C-Span then watch, read or listen to 10 different ways it is spun and by whom. I find it intellectually stimulating to analyze and separate which are agendas, opinions, generalizations, good intentions, sober assessments, politics, lies of omission or plain ol’ lies. That’s what I do.

        When someone else publishes a view that crystalizes a thought or view I have, it certainly gets my attention but no more than one that shatters any pre-conceived notion I might have. I love that! I have a keen interest in pre-conceived notions and try to stay vigilant. Ditto false premises. When I see them here they stick out like a sore thumb because of my obsession. 

        I don’t google up my views. I’m not searching the internet for things that support my views so I can bring them here. But when I come across them (and I will) I may post them. Don’t we all? 

        You gotta love Stilllhere but lots of people click “like”. I do. You are one of about 3 commenters who often reply with some insult or dig. I think its funny when people “like” those ad hominem comments. I am flattered when commenters evoke my name out of the blue just to insult me when I’m nowhere around, or they warn other commenters about me. And when people “like’ those comments … well, it just doesn’t get any better. Could there possibly be anything more shallow and autographed? It makes my job here easier.

        • jefe68

          Just because people click the like button means nothing. Nothing. You keep posting all this bull-dung.

          I live in Boston. I’ve heard a personal story from a friend about one of the victims who is lying in hospital with possible brain damage ( the mother of Martin Richard). And yet I find your posts to be repulsive and in bad taste. Why?
          Because you seem to think it’s all fine and dandy to use this tragic event to forward your right wing political view points.

          Now that’s sick, to use one of your oft used comments when someone posts something you find not to your liking.

          Grow Up.

          • Gregg Smith

            I don’t understand that at all. My heart breaks. I am not using this tragic event to forward squat. 

            And I do think it’s illustrative when some one likes a comment with no other purpose or substance than gratuitous nastiness. It screams “I’m shallow” and they sign their name to it.

          • jefe68

            You posted an article accusing President Obama of creating a false confidence over a terror threat.

            What part of you using this for your agenda don’t you understand?

          • Gregg Smith

            I’ve made the case in painstaking detail for years now. It’s not like I made it up. This article agrees with me. That’s not an agenda, smarty pants.

            Do you actually believe Obama has been straight about the threat?

            “Overseas contingency operations” for the war on terror, “workplace violence” for Ft Hood, close calls thwarted by dumb luck in shoes, underwear and Times Square, “It was a video”, “Al Qaeda is decimated” and on and on.

          • jefe68

            More or less about the same as the previous president. I would say a lot less given that 9/11 happened on Bush’s watch.

            At least he was in charge when they got Osama bin Laden  more than I can say for GW Bush’s tenure.

          • Gregg Smith

            It’s always Bush’s fault… no matter what.

    • hennorama

      Gregg Smith – Mr. Foster’s opinion piece is just that – his opinion.

      Foster’s “logic” is a bit strange, however.

      First, he says, in effect, “We shouldn’t jump to conclusions” about the suspected Boston Bombers, here:

      “It is too soon to be absolutely sure the attacks were motivated by jihadist ideology, but the Islamic videos on the website of the older of the two Tsarnaev brothers point very firmly in that direction.”

      Then, in the very next sentence, he jumps to a conclusion:

      “They bring home the complexity of the global Islamist threat and the fact that it cannot be confined to wars in distant lands, or fought at arm’s length using drones, as the Obama administration has quietly yet insistently led America to believe.”

      Notice his use of the phrase “the fact that”, as if his opinion is fact.

      It is not.

      Notice also that he uses “Islamic videos” and “Islamist threat” without qualification.

      These are mere opinions that should not be taken as fact.

    • jefe68

      Have you no shame at all?

      • Gregg Smith

        I’ve been saying it for a long time.

  • Gregg Smith

    “They were too advanced. Someone gave the brothers the skills and it is now our job to find out just who they were. Agents think the sleeper cell has up to a dozen members and has been waiting several years for their day to come.”

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/boston-bombers-fbi-hunting-12-strong-1844844#ixzz2R6Lqnq4M

    • hennorama

      Gregg
      Smith – One question – since you posted this quote and this link,
      does it mean you are attesting to its accuracy? I didn’t notice any
      disclaimers or “necessary caveats.”

      The
      article used an unnamed “source close to the investigation” and
      ZERO named sources for its headline. It also used the phrase “Police
      believe” without foundation or named source(s).

      Later,
      it also used the odd characterization “Dope-smoker Dzhokhar” out
      of the blue, without foundation in this sentence:

      “Dope-smoker
      Dzhokhar was captured after a Watertown resident called police to say
      the fugitive was hiding in a boat in his back garden.”

      Not
      exactly excellence in journalism.

    • brettearle

      There are no conclusive reports, whatsoever, that these two young men were specifically, and concretely, trained by either radicalized Islamic groups in the United States or abroad.

      They, of course, might very well have been specifically trained by radical Islamic groups.

      BUT there is currently NO evidence to suggest that.

      There is only evidence to demonstrate that suspect #1 had traveled, within the last two years, to Russia and to the Balkanized satellites, including Chechnya. 

      However, this does not mean, of course, that national, regional, and local surveillance should not be aggressively vigilant about individuals, and groups, who are involved in Jihadist movements–with specific procedures, and techniques, and on-site indoctrination.

      And, it does not mean that Tsarnaev should not be up on Federal charges where he could face capitol punishment.

      While the public and law enforcement clearly need to be aware of anything that might specifically suggest subversive behavior and potential violent actions, we CANNOT allow mentality to get out of control where the country falls to over-reactive, zealous McCARTHYISM. 

      • Gregg Smith

        I agree with most of that Brettearle. I am not suggesting McCarthyism. I am also not suggesting McCarthy didn’t have good reason to suspect the commies. Nor am I not. I think you know what I mean.

        However, when Muslims are caught committing mass murder we should exhaust all efforts to look at the big picture. At this point in history we have an Islamic Caliphate that should not be ignored. I thought the opinion of the article is worth noting.

        I fully acknowledge it may be more prudent to charge him criminally than as an enemy combatant.

        • brettearle

          Gregg–

          Our country is STILL somewhat pampered–largely by the sense that we are not vulnerable to attack.

          We STILL are not up to the point of emotional sophistication with the likes of western Europe and eastern Europe–who have the protracted historical benefit of a multitude of wars, sieges, atrocities, scourges, and brutalities on their own soil.

          Americans think that they are STILL safe.

          And we want and we need to feel that way.

          Nevertheless, THAT is NOT necessarily the way of the world–including our world, here, domestically.

          Our mentality needs to grow up so that we can distinguish between wheat and chaff as much as possible:

          We need to recognize that while there is danger nearby us, there always WAS danger nearby us–be it the Cuban missile crisis or superbugs from USDA-approved meat or WMD, via Ebola virus.

          People in this country have a very difficult time handling their Anxiety and their Fear–
          while, at the same time, continuing to be aggressive and vigilant, regarding any threat.   

          The psychology of overreaction carried over onto the front cover of the “New York Post”–for which Murdoch did not apologize (as David Remnick, of “The New Yorker” has bemoaned) but has explained, by saying that his publication followed the lead of the FBI.

          When a major publication, of wide circulation, does not apologize, such absence helps to etch a false belief into impressionable minds (in this case, `impressionable’ means those who seek information).  

          That is simply one small aspect of fallout that can come from an event of this sensational nature.

          • Gregg Smith

            I agree the Post should apologize. 

        • jefe68

          Islamic Caliphate? You should look that up.

          • Gregg Smith

            I guess I worded it a bit sloppy but believe me, I know what an Islamic Caliphate is. 

          • hennorama

            Please, please, tell, tell, us, us, oh redundant one – if “[you, Gregg Smith] know what an Islamic Caliphate is”, please define it for us.

            Also, please tell us about any other sort of caliphates there are, aside from the redundant “Islamic Caliphate” you wrote about.

            Is it like “an American United States of America”?

            Also, please tell us the exact who, what, when, when, how, and why of the phenomenon you describe as:

            “At this point in history we have an Islamic Caliphate that should not be ignored.”

          • Gregg Smith

            If you are just now googling up the phrase then you are woefully ill-informed about the threat. Dictionary definitions will fail you without context but you’re used to it. It’s all about the Islamic Caliphate. I suggest better news sources. 

          • hennorama

            Gregg “I don’t know what the dictionary says” Smith – predictably, you did not answer a single thing.

            Avoiding questions is not part of “open and honest debate”, sir.

          • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

            or like the “magazine clips” oboma is so concerned about

          • Steve__T

            Caliphate, the
            political-religious state comprising the Muslim community and the lands and peoples under its dominion in the centuries following the death (ad 632) of the Prophet Muḥammad. Ruled by a caliph (Arabic khalīfah, “successor”),
            who held temporal and sometimes a degree of spiritual authority, the
            empire of the Caliphate grew rapidly through conquest during its first
            two centuries to include most of Southwest Asia, North Africa, and
            Spain. Dynastic struggles later brought about the Caliphate’s decline,
            and it ceased to exist with the Mongol destruction of Baghdad in 1258.

            Encyclopedia Britannica.

            Please note the last sentence.

          • Gregg Smith

            I understand. They want it back.

            “Established by Usama Bin Ladin in 1988 with Arabs who fought in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union, al-Qa‘ida’s declared goal is the establishment of a pan-Islamic caliphate throughout the Muslim world.”

            http://www.nctc.gov/site/groups/al_qaida.html

    • jefe68

      Really? The Daily Mirror? 
      So Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was really a sleeper terrorist while he was in high school or when he was a mere boy.

      Oh please were do you get this stuff?

      • 1Brett1

        I know, and this comes from the same person who earlier questioned my statement that Federal US courts have done a better job than military tribunals with terrorist convictions. I even provided facts from a government website. My reply to him was that he didn’t have to believe me, that he could Google it for himself. He said, “Google is not truth.” Then he proceeds to post this crap all day.

        • jefe68

          It does make one wonder, does it not?

        • Gregg Smith

          Y’all see for yourself. 

          Brett said: “Historically, our court system does a better job of getting convictions and overall justice than military tribunals, not to mention the whole nether-region of Guantanamo.”

          I replied, “really?”

          He wrote this:

          http://onpoint.wbur.org/2013/04/19/manhunt-for-boston-bombing-suspect#comment-870086636

          Me:

          http://onpoint.wbur.org/2013/04/19/manhunt-for-boston-bombing-suspect#comment-871008905

          Him:

          http://onpoint.wbur.org/2013/04/19/manhunt-for-boston-bombing-suspect#comment-871098792

          And I pointed out. 

          “…as you completely ignore what I wrote. Google is not knowledge.”

          He didn’t dispute a thing I said. I didn’t even say there should be a military tribunal. I’ve said a couple of times it may be better to put him through the legal system. I don’t know at this point. Brett makes up his own debates.

          • 1Brett1

            Dude, get me all out from being all up in your head…don’t let things fester so much; it’s bad for your health. You are not a young man anymore, after all.

          • hennorama

            Gregg “Comment removed” Smith – we have yet another entry for the
            Gregg Smith Response-O-Matic spinning dial:

            [Google is not knowledge]

            Here’s the rest of the list thus far:

            [Cherry picking],
            [Semantics],
            [Obama is destroying ____ (fill in the blank)],
            [It's not about me],
            [Whatever],
            [Your premise is whacked],
            [That's sick]
            [Okie dokie/alrighty then],
            [You've jumped the shark],
            [Get me out of your head].

            Have I left anything else off the list?

          • 1Brett1

            Yep…but, of course there will be other pat retorts of his, we can be assured of that (and if I thought about it for more than a millisecond, which I’m not particularly inclined to do right now, I could add to the list). 

          • nj_v2

            “I think”

            “I heard”

            “I haven’t heard”

            “I wonder”

            “I read somewhere”

            “Maybe”

            “Might have”

      • Gregg Smith

        That’s a silly question, I gave you the link. Or are you talking about what you think I think? KDKA is now reporting the same thing. We don’t know yet. 

        • jefe68

          You list the Daily Mail, which is a conservative tabloid rag that gets sued on a regular basis for printing rubbish.

          What’s silly is your post.

          • Gregg Smith

            Actually, with more arrests being made and the possibility of plans for more attacks, this issue is deadly serious.

          • 1Brett1

            More arrests being been made? Plans were found for more attacks? Sources?

          • Gregg Smith

            Yes, there were more arrest. WFTC linked it above. Did you not know?

          • 1Brett1

            Ah, visiting fringe websites again, I see…shame on you.

          • Gregg Smith

            You don’t believe there have been more arrest? You’re on record. 

          • 1Brett1

            didn’sayt it’s not possible, just that it’s not being reportedbyreputable news, and the link to the suspect has not beenestablished, but conrtinueto engagein speculation/premature reporting/believing the trash you read…

          • 1Brett1

            Worried was careful to say they might not be involved. Something missing by your tabloid approach.

          • Gregg Smith

            They might not be involved.

  • 1Brett1

    My perceptions of the two bombers are that the elder one had become agitated after his father left their home and returned to their origins in Russia, and this is when the elder son began to distort his perceptions. The elder son assumed the role of man of the house at that point and treated his role as being one of strict overseer. He helicoptered, as it were, his sister’s, brother’s and mother’s, behaviors and his own behaviors/views became increasingly traditional, even fundamentalist, in his religious beliefs. He got into arguments with people about the US government’s foreign policy, and over religion. He even supposedly stood up during a sermon by the imam at his Mosque and ranted in opposition of the imam’s comparison between US civil rights leaders and Muhammed. Mosque leaders had a talk with him and there were no further outbursts after that one. 

    The younger brother, while his own person, kind of “followed” his older brother and would often defer to him. The younger brother became a naturalized citizen, but the older brother was denied citizenship status (likely stemming from an earlier assault charge toward a young woman, I believe). This also interfered with his ability to get on the Olympic boxing team, supposedly. 

    The older brother had left home at one point, which upset his mother. The older brother also later married what he termed to neighbors as a good, Christian woman, but that she was converting to Islam. She was seen wearing a hijab on a number of occasions. His wife supposedly left him when he went back to Russia for a time and they supposedly remained separated.

    The older brother could have become radicalized by reading literature from some Muslim extremist group, he could have developed a radicalization/fundamentalization on his own through his own mish-mash of searching, or he could have been working under direct orders from a terrorist cell. The younger borther could have gone along for any number of reasons, also, including simply blindly following his brother. We just do not know at this time.  

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      Hopefully we will find out the truth.

      On side note, there appears to be a common family trait.  I have seen interviews with the Aunt, Uncle, Father and Mother during the past week.  In every case, they were unusually assertive and aggressive with the interviewers.  I find this unusual when your family member was just accused of such a heinous crime.

      • brettearle

        I reject, somewhat categorically, that we can arrive at any conclusion of the suspects’ motives or behavior, based on the, “unusually assertive and aggressive” behavior of family members “with the interviewers.”

        That is unnecessary and, perhaps, biased profiling.

        These family members are either likely devastated and/or are under extreme pressure, from anxiety, for being subjected to such broad attention.

        You might be, too, if it happened to someone in your family.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

          brettearle, I in no way shape of form stated, thought or implied that this should be used as profiling.  It was simply an observation.  I guess we are in a period of hypersensitivity when you can’t make an observation without motives being cast.

          In fact I found their candor and apparent honesty and openness refreshing — even those family members that were in denial.  On further reflection it might have been more of a cultural characteristic instead of a familial one.

           

          • brettearle

            When you state “common family trait” and “unusually assertive and aggressive”, it is not all that difficult–regardless of the hypersensitive `ethos’–to arrive at my stated conclusion. 

          • 1Brett1

            That’s fair, Worried.

      • OnPointComments

        I find it unusual that when the pictures of the suspects were publicized, not one of the family members called the authorities to say I know these men and it couldn’t have been them.

        • SpringHill44

          I heard that their aunt, the lawyer, called in to identify them. On the other hand, the youngest son’s classmates didn’t recognize him, or thought “Oh, that looks like him,” but because it seemed so out of character, they didn’t believe their eyes.

        • Gregg Smith

          The younger one (Dzhokhar) had friends at school too. He partied and smoked pot. He even went back to sleep at the dorm after the bombing. I wonder if any of his friends fingered him. His uncle has been outspoken but only after they were named. Maybe someone did call but we just haven’t heard about it.

          • JGC

            We thought the uncle handled the media crush splendidly as events unfolded quickly late last week. He sounded genuine, composed and had just that bit of underlying exasperation as to, “My no-goodnik brother and his family! We came over here to leave all that war-mongering political crap behind! Just leave us out of it! Freaking losers…”   

          • Gregg Smith

            I thought the same thing but OPC does raise a good point.

          • JGC

            The FBI-released film I saw on TV was not that easy to discern; it was only much later that evening when I was on Reddit that I saw more identifiable close-ups. Maybe the family was in denial or maybe they just were not in the media loop. And, coming as refugees from the Russia/Chechnya wars, they seem hypersensitive to government plots (maybe with good reason.

            One of the paternal aunts is living in Toronto. She seems like a real piece of government conspiracy work. Just like the Krazy Khadr family.

    • brettearle

      What deep fissure in one’s character (and one’s soul, if you will) puts them over the edge–where someone has gone from disenfranchised to violently messianic?

      When does despair turn to blind hatred?

      Every alienated soul has a threshold point.

      No one can predict what that point is.

      Regardless of the family configuration, and family circumstances, every personality is different.

      One thing to point out is that the Father went back to Russia because he apparently was seriously ill and now may be terminally ill (according to one reliable source, “The New Yorker.”)

      • 1Brett1

        It’s difficult to say what the breaking or turning point is that would make a person commit such crimes/hold such bitterness/feel such warped sense of mission, and (as you say) that point would be different from person to person.

        The father’s leaving seemed to coincide with a shift in the elder son’s behavior…the reason is not, and may never be, apparent. 

      • JGC

        If he didn’t have reliable employment and did not have employer-based or private insurance, and was not a U.S. citizen, he would need to take his better health care option which would be Russia… I guess. 

    • Gregg Smith

      You said it, it must be true.

      • 1Brett1

        Aww…did you wake up with a chip on your shoulder this morning?

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    2 foreign nationals with ties to bomber arrested by ICE on immigration violations.

    Were these also UMass students?

    We know the MA Attorney General,Martha Coakley the chief law enforcement official in MA, said: “it isn’t illegal to be illegal in Massachusetts”.

    http://www.wcvb.com/news/local/metro/ICE-arrests-2-in-New-Bedford-tied-to-Boston-Marathon-bombing-case/-/11971628/19834466/-/x5osqb/-/index.html

    Also, they are reported to have a late model BMW with a “Terrorista” license plate.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2312123/Two-owners-Terrorista-1-BMW-believed-friends-surviving-Boston-bombing-suspect-taken-custody-second-time.html

    This leads to another question.  Where did the bombers get their money to live and fund their activities?

    Perhaps they were not involved.  Hopefully, we’ll find out the truth.

    • 1Brett1

      Funding? What, for a couple of pressure cookers, nails, BBs, gun powder, etc.? Yeah, I wonder where they got ALL the money for that stuff…With all due respect, there is a difference between finding out the truth and looking for something to support a belief.

    • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

      i dont follow links is that true about the license plate? it reminds me of the beginning of breaking bad where the kid has the liscense plate with his name on it and the cops are looking for him. by all accounts they were priviledged rich kids.

  • hennorama

    A
    few questions for the members of the forum who do not adhere to
    Islam:

    Do
    you have any personal experience with members of the Islamic faith?

    For
    example, have you ever:

    - spoken
    with a member of the Islamic faith?

    - lived
    with or been a neighbor of a member of the Islamic faith?

    - eaten
    a meal with a member of the Islamic faith?

    - read
    any of the Qur’an?

    - visited
    a country where the majority of the populace are Muslim?

    For
    me, the answers are Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes, and Yes.

    • jefe68

      I’ve had some pretty in-depth conversations with a few Muslims. One in particular I met in a dog park.
      He was an engineer and his wife was a doctor.
      He was Sudanese from Khartoum. I don’t recall where his wife was from. We had a lot of interesting talks about dogs, as he had never owned one and how Muslims consider them to be dirty animals not to be let into the house. Politics was also on the menue.
      As was our different religious backgrounds.

      I’ve eaten a meal with a shop owner from Kenitra Morocco, lunch to be exact. It lasted for about two hours.

      Never read the Qur’an.

      • hennorama

        jefe68 – TY for your response.

    • brettearle

      For you, the answers are Yes…. 

      And, therefore, what?

      • hennorama

        brettearle – TY for your response. My answers themselves are not important. I simply felt it was important to answer, and also to get the ball rolling.

    • Steve__T

       Yes to all but the last.

      • hennorama

        Steve__T – TY for your response.

    • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

      i am sure they are keeping an eye on you

      • hennorama

        Futo Buddy – TY for your response.  Two questions:

        1.  Who are “they”?

        2.  Care to answer the questions in my original post? 

        • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

          i dont know what post this refers to

          • hennorama

            Futo Buddy – TY for your response.

  • corneliaGibbs

    Alyssa
    Lindley Kilzer said she often visited the apartment at 410 Norfolk St. in
    Cambridge, where the Tsarnaevs lived. Kilzer used to get facials from Zubeidat
    at a local spa but, after she was fired, Kilzer began going to her house.

    She wrote
    about her experience on her Tumblr blog and said the staircase was crowded with
    shoes and the house was filled with the noise of arguments, cooking and other
    household chores. It was hardly spa-like but Kilzer thought Zubeidat gave great
    facials.

    But she
    became increasingly uncomfortable going to the apartment because of Zubeidat’s
    growing religious fervor.

    “She
    started quoting conspiracy theories, telling me that she thought 9-11 was
    purposefully created by the American government to make America hate
    Muslims,” she wrote.

    Zubeidat
    told her: “It’s real. My son knows all about it. You can read it on the
    Internet.”

    • JGC

      You can read anything on the Internet.

      • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

        i’m a french model. bonjour

        • JGC

          And I know how to quadruple your investment with absolutely no risk. Just send me a $10,000 deposit now; details later…

  • corneliaGibbs

    Why are they still asking Why did they do this?

    The answer is obvious …. these two brothers have figured it out … the three towers on 9/11 were actually brought down by Controlled Demolitions ~ translation: The Official Story is CANNOT be true.

    Unfortunately, the Media ignores this.  Unfortunately, Tom Ashbrook could not get it.  Unfortunately Jack Beatty dismisses this “without doing any research”. 

    Unfortunately, Alyssa Lindley Kilzer said: “..doubting the Official Story of 9/11 and asking for a new investigation was offensive to Alyssa”.  Zubeidat lost her client, just because she knew things that 99% of us would chose not to look into – just because we were told so.

  • Fredlinskip

    What? 
    We are we not invading Chechnya yet? We know where the bombers are from?
       Or better yet why are we not using it as excuse to invade somewhere else? 
    How about Venezuala? We don’t like them much, do we? 
    How about Mexico?- we can help solve immigration problem same time. 
    Where is the patriotism we had after 9/11? 
    Surely we can distort the truth, lie to American people so the Haliburton’s of world can receive no bid contracts.
     Surely we honor the dead and wounded by entering into fanatical misguidance of the country. Are we not men?
     Man, am I missing those Neocons.

    • brettearle

       Either you’re with us or again’ us….

  • Gregg Smith

    So, on the same day that a U.S. intelligence official said that the U.S. intelligence community had all but ruled out strong connections with al Qaeda and its affiliates, the FBI released a statement acknowledging that a foreign government had warned about Tsarnaev because of concerns that he might well have ties to “unspecified” radical Islamic groups. 

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/don-t-rule-out-anything_718153.html?nopager=1

    • brettearle

      There is no evidence to suggest that the Russians gave the Department of Justice any incriminating evidence from Tsarnaev’s stay in Russia, Dagestan, or Cechnya.

      His apparent growing Jiahdist commitment came from the Web.

      How many individuals, in this country, who visit Jihadi web sites, are monitored by the FBI and are regarded as subversive threats?

      Do people have the right to visit these sites, without the US regarding such digital visits as suspicious?

      Maybe, maybe not.

      But, from now on, will everyone be monitored, who go to these web sites?

      Maybe that’s a good idea.

      But it still rubs me the wrong way–because it gets into ‘warrantless wiretaps’ territory.

      • Gregg Smith

        It does’t rub me the way I’d like either. It’s only assumed it was Russia but that makes the most sense.

      • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

        its too late to debate it they are already monitoring everyone. “derogatory telephone communications”
        big brother is watching

        • brettearle

          Big Brother’s presence is larger than it was.

          But your comment is somewhat of an overstatement.

          • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

            yeah they are just monitoring everyone who uses phones or the internet i should have been more specific

    • hennorama

      Gregg Smith – again, the question one must first ask about your posted quotation and link is:

      Since you posted this quote and this link, does it mean you are attesting to its accuracy? I didn’t notice any disclaimers or “necessary caveats.”

      In the article, Mr. Hayes wrote, and you quoted:

      “So, on the same day that a U.S. intelligence official said that the U.S. intelligence community had all but ruled out strong connections with al Qaeda and its affiliates, the FBI released a statement acknowledging that a foreign government had warned about Tsarnaev
      because of concerns that he might well have ties to “unspecified” radical Islamic groups.“

      There’s just one problem with Mr. Hayes’ words of opinion – they are factually inaccurate.

      The FBI’s statement DID NOT “acknowledg[e] that a foreign government had warned about Tsarnaev because of concerns that he might well have ties to “unspecified” radical Islamic groups.“

      Those words are merely Mr. Hayes’ interpretation of the FBI statement.

      The FBI statement (you can see the full statement below) said:

      “the request stated it was based on information that [Tamerlan Tsarnaev]”

      “was a follower of radical Islam and a strong believer”

      “had changed drastically since 2010 [the request to the FBI was made in early 2011]

      “as he prepared to leave the United States for travel to the country’s region to join unspecified underground groups.”

      NOWHERE in the statement is the word “warned”, nor are the words “radical Islamic groups” found together. Rather the statement says only “unspecified underground groups.”

      Here’s the entire FBI statement (with EMPHASIS ADDED):

      “2011 Request for Information on Tamerlan Tsarnaev from Foreign Government

      Washington, D.C.
      April 19, 2013
      FBI National Press Office
      (202)324-3691

      “The two individuals believed to be responsible for the Boston Marathon bombings on Monday have been positively identified as Tamerlan Tsarnaev, now deceased, and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, now in custody. These individuals are brothers and residents of Massachusetts. Tamerlan
      Tsarnaev was a legal permanent resident and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is a naturalized U.S. citizen. Charges have not yet been filed against Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, and he is presumed innocent.

      “Tamerlan Tsarnaev, age 26, was previously designated as Suspect 1, wearing a black hat. Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev, age 19, was designated as Suspect 2, wearing a white hat. Both were born in Kyrgyzstan.

      “Once the FBI learned the identities of the two brothers today, the FBI reviewed its records and determined that in early 2011, a foreign government asked the FBI for information about Tamerlan Tsarnaev. THE REQUEST STATED THAT IT WAS BASED ON INFORMATION THAT HE WAS A FOLLOWER OF RADICAL ISLAM AND A STRONG BELIEVER, AND HE HAD CHANGED DRASTICALLY SINCE 2010 AS HE PREPARED TO LEAVE THE UNITED STATES FOR TRAVEL TO THE COUNTRY’S REGION TO JOIN UNSPECIFIED UNDERGROUND
      GROUPS.

      “In response to this 2011 request, the FBI checked U.S. government databases and other information to look for such things as derogatory telephone communications, possible use of online sites associated with the promotion of radical activity, associations with other
      persons of interest, travel history and plans, and education history. The FBI also interviewed Tamerlan Tsarnaev and family members. THE FBI DID NOT FIND ANY TERRORISM ACTIVITY, DOMESTIC OR FOREIGN, and those results were provided to the foreign government in the summer of 2011. The FBI requested but did not receive more specific or additional information from the foreign government.”

      See: http://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/2011-request-for-information-on-tamerlan-tsarnaev-from-foreign-government

      Going to the actual source of the “information” contained in Mr. Hayes’ opinion piece is one very important reason one uses various search engines. Accuracy and facts are important. Mr. Hayes words are
      inaccurate and non-factual.

      In this case “Google IS knowledge”, Mr. Smith.

      (However, I did not need to search for it. I had read the FBI statement just after it was released on Friday, as I subscribe to their email updates and regularly visit their website.)

      • brettearle

        hennorama….

        Point of clarification….

        Is your complaint with the issue of literal accuracy?

        While we don’t want national publications to rush to judgement and to display open bias, is it too much of a giant leap of faith to infer that:

        underground groups referred to Islamic-based ones and that the two countries were working together to flesh out potential Al Qaeda sedition; and, therefore, an exchange of information, in effect, is a warning against such radical factions.

        Were you thinking that these underground groups were radicalized Sikhs, instead?

        While you may not be splitting hairs, why aren’t you close to splitting hairs, in a way?

        Or is that you wish to give Mr. smith a sound thrashing for past (and likely, recent) sins?

        • Gregg Smith

          It has nothing to do with the facts. Hayes was correct in his assessment. Henny went all to pieces when I once criticized a link she posted so now she stalks me and makes pointless nasty remarks. I think she assumes I never read the FBI statement which is quite a leap. I’m all over this stuff.

          IMHO the article is of importance. It is rare for a government (especially if it was Russia) to warn us like this. It seem to me
          there is some there there. Henny isn’t going to acknowledge the substance of the article so she writes a book about the word “warned”. If the request was not a warning then I don’t know what was. 

          What did the FBI do to determine there was no risk? I’ve heard reports and they are not that favorable. The FBI obviously got it wrong.

          We don’t agree on many issues Brettearle but you, as I’ve implied before, can actually see the forest and the trees. Honest debate is possible.

        • hennorama

          brettearle – TY for your response. I respect and appreciate your views.

          As to your questions, in order:

          1. Part of my “complaint” is with literal accuracy. The Boston Bombing and its aftermath bring up a number of important issues, and facts have been scarce. This scarcity of factual information has led to significant mistakes made by various members of the press, broadcast media and others, including the misidentification of potential suspects. Speculation has run wild.

          2. It is not unreasonable to “infer” what you wrote, but Mr. Hayes did not do that, did he? He began his piece with his conclusion:

          “But it’s equally important not to avoid conclusions about the motivations of these individuals because such conclusions are discomfiting. And it’s especially important not to explain away facts because they contradict assumptions about the threats we face.”

          Notice that Mr. Hayes wrote “conclusions about the motivations of these individuals” and not “possible conclusions” or “possible motivations”. Hayes also has the thesis of “an apparent eagerness from the Obama administration to minimize or dismiss the possibility of broader ties to international terrorism after attacks or attempted attacks on U.S. Interests” running throughout his piece; presumably these are some of the “assumptions about the threats we face” referred to in his primary conclusion above.

          Hayes further says “Why, then, would U.S. intelligence officials be ruling out ties to jihadist groups – or ruling out anything, for that matter – so early?” This is despite the inconvenient fact that his own earlier quotation of a Daily Beast article indicated otherwise, here:

          “One U.S. intelligence official who was regularly briefed on the investigation told Newsweek that he and his colleagues all but ruled out al Qaeda central or one of its affiliates giving direct and specific instructions for the attack.”

          Note, the phrase “all but ruled out” which is NOT “ruled out”. The quote also discusses only “ al Qaeda central or one of its affiliates” and “direct and specific instructions”. Those phrases obviously leave out the possibilities of other groups that are not affiliated with “al Qaeda central”, and the possibilities of indirect and/or non-specific instructions.

          Ergo, practically nothing at all was “ruled out”.

          In addition, it has been reported that the FBI receives tens of thousands of such requests for information annually. One might consider them “warnings”, but the FBI investigated and found nothing. The statement also pointed out that there was virtually no “exchange of information” (other than a one-way exchange), here:

          “The FBI requested but did not receive more specific or additional information from the foreign government.”

          3. The phrase “underground groups” could refer to criminal groups, separatist groups, spelunkers, or others. I make no assumption about the meaning of this phrase, especially since it was prefaced by the word UNSPECIFIED in the FBI statement.

          4. It makes perfect sense that the foreign government, which has been confirmed to be Russia, would have concerns about potential terrorists, especially potential terrorists who had strong Chechen ties. Violence in the North Caucasus had escalated since 2008, and a variety of attacks were linked to various Chechen separatist groups, including the horrific bombing of a Moscow subway station in March 2010. Note that the request for information came after that incident, “in early 2011”, and that the request indicated “that he [Tamerlan Tsarnaev] had changed drastically since 2010”.

          My point about Mr. Hayes words and Gregg Smith’s quotation of those words is not splitting hairs; it is part of a quest for accuracy and fact, over speculative opinion and supposition.

          5. Mr. Smith’s posts are often inaccurate, and he has posted links from sources that have been proved absolutely false, have been removed due to copyright infringement, etc. He makes contradictory and hypocritical statements, which I have pointed out, as I do with other inaccurate, false, contradictory, and hypocritical statements made by others.

          Thank you again for your response.

          • Gregg Smith

            Liar. If I suspect a link may be inaccurate I say so or post another side as well or both as is the case with this particular hissy fit. I have not ever to my knowledge posted a link that has been removed for copyright infringement which BTW has nothing to do with accuracy. I don’t make contrary statements unless you torture the language and tell me what I think.

            You on the other hand do. You are the one who posted the terrorist essentially saying Bush was a religious zealot going to war in Iraq for God. Your preconceived notions made it easy for you to believe. You did not point out the official denial by others in the room. You probably didn’t know because you were not curious enough to challenge your pre-conceived notion.

            Or the time I showed you Obama saying he did not have the power to end deportation of certain illegals by EO which he later did. I showed it to you out of his own mouth and you weaseled. You don’t want the truth.

            Try all you want to blow smoke up Brettearle’s ass with your ridiculous parsing, fine. Don’t be lying about me.

          • hennorama

            Gregg “Comment removed” Smith – again, you seem to demonstrate worrisome memory lapses. You might want to get that checked out. You probably don’t remember, but I’ve broached this possibility to you before, on multiple occasions.

            You wrote: “I have not ever to my knowledge posted a link that has been removed for copyright infringement which BTW has nothing to do with accuracy.”

            You should re-read your post here:http://onpoint.wbur.org/2013/04/08/jobs-and-the-sequester#comment-856928842

            When one opens the second link in your post, here:http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2011/02/10/surprise_cbo_confirms_obamacare_will_kill_800,000_american_jobs and then clicks on the video, there is the following notice:

            “The YouTube account associated with this video has been terminated due to multiple third-party notifications of copyright infringement”

            Here’s a portion of a post informing you of this:

            [Gregg “April Fool” Smith – you not only continue to demonstrate your lack of knowledge, you cite as evidence of your unsupportable claims a source whose YouTube account “has been terminated due to multiple third-party notifications of copyright infringement” - (http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2011/02/10/surprise_cbo_confirms_obamacare_will_kill_800,000_american_jobs)

            Well done, sir. Your continued use of “reliable sources” clearly demonstrates how you are all for “open and honest debate”.]

            See:http://onpoint.wbur.org/2013/04/08/jobs-and-the-sequester#comment-857065354

            Is that sufficient proof for you, sir?

            Care to retract? Or are you going to hide behind the phrase “to my knowledge” or perhaps your hilarious “I didn’t read all of that”?

            One must also note that you did not dispute that you have posted links from sources that have been proved absolutely false. The most recent example being the link to the the website I refer to as TheDimness.com, which passed on the false claims and front page photos from the NY Post.

            You inaccurately qualified your link by writing “Supposedly these are the perpetrators” which was completely inaccurate. Even your beloved TheDimness.com said in its original story

            “… the New York Post has released photos claiming to show two men that investigators are looking for. Neither the Post, nor the email it obtained regarding the pictures, called the men “suspects.”

            You may wish to consult a dictionary about the noun “perpetrator” before you use it again.

            One realizes that you clearly do not view any of your own statements as inaccurate, false, contradictory, and hypocritical, despite multiple occasions of this being pointed out to you. This is the main reason I suggested a new moniker for you, involving the four words thick, brick, skull and wall.
            ———-
            You also wrote “If I suspect a link may be inaccurate I say so or post another side as well or both …”

            This is hardly a standard, as it is prefaced on your suspicion, in advance, which in itself would be odd. Why would one EVER post a link if one, in advance, “suspect[s] a link may be inaccurate”? Would such posting be in line with “open and honest debate”? One would expect that if you consider a link to be suspect or inaccurate, that you would investigate the link and what it contains further, before posting suspicious information.

            Unless you merely wish to speculate, of course.
            ———-
            In addition, you wrote – “I don’t make contrary statements unless you torture the language and tell me what I think.”

            Putting aside the fact that I wrote “contradictory” and NOT “contrary” (again, you may wish to consult a dictionary to discover the difference), allow me to refresh your recollection about your writings, sir, from the topic “A Second Look At Capitalism” from April 10, 2013, in this forum:

            You wrote the following in sequence:

            [Gregg Smith] Supply comes first.

            Later:

            [Gregg Smith] There is always demand for something even if it doesn’t exist …

            One must therefore conclude that demand comes first, unless a thing can be in supply without also being in existence, that is. This contradicts your earlier statement.

            You went on further:

            [Gregg Smith] When someone in the private sector identifies a demand, puts their own money at risk in hopes of a profit and manufactures a product to meet the demand …

            Again, demand is identified first, then supply is created through manufacturing. This also contradicts your earlier statement.

            You went on even further:

            [Gregg Smith] The supply creates the demand.

            Which contradicts your other statement that indicates demand is identified first, then supply is manufactured.

            Please, if you are able, reconcile these sequential statements:

            First you say “Supply comes first.”

            Then you write that “There is always demand for or something even if it doesn’t exist …”

            You then confirm the ‘demand before supply’ sequence when you write “someone in the private sector identifies a demand, puts their own money at risk in hopes of a profit and manufactures a product to meet the demand …”

            Then you conclude with the contradictory “The supply creates the demand.”

            You may have blotted all of this out of your memory, but I pointed these contradictions out to you, here:

            http://onpoint.wbur.org/2013/04/10/capitalism#comment-860232879 and here:

            http://onpoint.wbur.org/2013/04/10/capitalism#comment-860254844

            ———-
            If you wish to reargue other topics, feel free. If you believe you can point out an instance of a lie, feel free. Please be specific, unless of course you think this is “homework” or something.

            Oh, yes – please also address your prior profanely libelous statements, if you care to apologize. Not that one expects such a clearly honorable person as yourself to do so, of course. You will likely say something along the lines of [Your premise is whacked] or some other of your Gregg Smith Response-O-Matic “gems”.

          • Gregg Smith

            Just so you know, I didn’t read a word, i don’t care. Maybe later but I doubt it. Address the  reply I just made regarding the warning (you can’t) and I might read and reply to this one.

          • hennorama

            The Gregg Smith Response-O-Matic is spinning ….. wait for it ….

          • Gregg Smith

            You just can’t fess up when cornered and caught lying.

            It’s too bad nobody cares because you are making a fool of yourself. Anyone can see that, look at the contortions everybody!

          • hennorama

            Dear, dear … the Gregg Smith Response-O-Matic is reeeeeally slow today …

            [Whatever]
            [It's not about me]
            [Your premise is whacked]

            Hoo boy … a triple. This thing really needs to be checked out.

        • hennorama

          brettearle – some further thoughts on the topic:

          The FBI statement stated that “in early 2011, a foreign government asked the FBI for information about Tamerlan Tsarnaev.”

          One could more accurately characterize this as “alerting” the FBI about this individual rather than “warning” them. Here’s what I mean:

          ALERT: “Please find out as much as you can about this guy for us. We think that there is a possibility that he may be a bad guy because he ________ , and we’re a little worried about him because he might be coming over here. We’re trying to figure out exactly how worried we should be.”

          WARNING: “Please find out as much as you can about this guy for us. We know he is a bad guy because he ________. You definitely should watch out for him and arrest him if you get the chance. We are going to arrest him if he sets foot on our soil, and we’re very worried about him because he might be coming over here soon. We know exactly how worried we should be based on his past actions.”

          The above is similar to the differences between NOAA or the National Weather Service issuing a “Severe Weather Potential Statement”, a weather “Watch”, or a weather “Warning”.

          A Severe Weather Potential Statement “is designed to alert the public and state/local agencies to the potential for severe weather up to 24 hours in advance.”

          A Watch “is used when the risk of a hazardous weather or hydrologic event has increased significantly, but its occurrence, location, and/or timing is still uncertain.”

          Finally, a Warning “is issued when a hazardous weather or hydrologic event is occurring, is imminent, or has a very high probability of occurring.”

          See:http://w1.weather.gov/glossary/index.php?letter=w

          As you can see, there are significant differences between an alert and a warning.

          • Gregg Smith

            “Please find out as much as you can about this guy for us. We know he is a bad guy because he ________. You definitely should watch out for him and arrest him if you get the chance. We are going to arrest him if he sets foot on our soil, and we’re very worried about him because he might be coming over here soon. We know exactly how worried we should be based on his past actions.”

            Please refer to NOAA (terrorism experts) for the definition of watch. You can’t even get your own definitions straight.

            NOWHERE in the statement is the word “warned”…

            These are your crazy rules.

          • hennorama

            Gregg
            “I don’t know what the dictionary says” Smith – you are
            confusing the intransitive verb “watch out” and the noun “watch”.
            Not that one is surprised by this, of course. You can look them up,
            assuming you might actually  want to “know what the dictionary
            says”, here:

            http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/watch%20out

            http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/watch?show=0&t=1366655398

            These
            are not “crazy rules” – they are these silly things called
            “definitions”. You can look that word up too, here:

            http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/definition

          • Gregg Smith

            I don’t care what the dictionary says. A foreign government (probably Russia) warned us about this guy. 

            Your own example did not use the word “warned”. By your crazy rules your own example of a warning was not a warning. I call you on it and you ignore it and go off on another tangent.

            “NOWHERE in the statement is the word “warned”…

            But now you want to talk about the definition of watch.

            Look at you. You wrote something like 35 paragraphs over 3 post without addressing the topic at hand. You’ve written about everything else but the subject. Do you think you are making the case we were not warned? Really?

          • hennorama

            Gregg “I used to not know what the dictionary says but now I don’t care either” Smith – You are truly hilarious, sir. I guess you missed the capitalized word “WARNING” in my post.

            Perhaps your obvious memory issues have also affected your eyesight. You may want to get that checked.

          • Gregg Smith

            I knew you’d try this. Where did you put the quotation marks? “WARNING” was not in them. Why did you use a  colon?  

            Shakespeare said: “To be or not to be”. 

            So did I just say Shakespeare said “Shakespeare said”?

            Don’t insult my intelligence. Your making yourself look silly.

          • hennorama

            Round and round, the Gregg Smith Response-O-Matic spins ….. wait for it ……… hold on …. the response will appear in the window in a moment .. be patient …

          • Gregg Smith

            Checkmate.

          • hennorama

            Sheesh … the GS R-O-M is creeping along here …

            [Semantics] [Smarty pants]

        • Tyranipocrit

          I think it is a leap since the FBI is concerned about activists of any kind–environmental, peace, earth first, human rights, constitution advocates…and breaches in our bill of rights exist in part to destroy these people–or render them impudent.  The plutocracy doesnt want peace or a green world–or jobs in America and they certainly dont want anything that reeks of equality, justice, or democracy.  Anyone organizing to reach critical mass in green democracy will be pursued and neutralized–it happens everyday.  COuntless things would make someone “radicalized”–not just narrow mypopic idealisms like religion.  All one has to do is look at the state of america and the world–se eits lean towards fascism and the manufacturing of war and economic collapse–the robber barons shitting in our faces laughing all the way to the bailed out banks and people get pretty fed up.  ANyone who seeks change is a threat.  Some of these people might snap ang go belligerent and do something stupid or be set up by the FBI to do something stupid–because the “radical” is stupid, vulnerable, weak, naive…but he is a victim. we all are–and not because we got bombed at the finish line.

    • donniethebrasco

       You sound like a right winger.  If we have information from a foreign government, we should lock up the person.

  • JGC

    I heard a discussion on the new Fox television show “Hannity and Tyranipocrit”, that one little-known complaint of the former Kyrgystan citizen Dzhokhar was “the wanton and indiscriminate use of vowels” in American society. 

    • Tyranipocrit

      you make no sense.  Do you now how to write or form a thought? Maybe your meaning would be more clear if your did.

  • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

    have we found out if these guys had watched “the Town”? lets blame hollywood

  • corneliaGibbs

    Why are they still asking “Why did they do this?”
    The answer is obvious …. these two brothers have figured it out … the three towers on 9/11 were actually brought down by Controlled Demolitions ~ translation: The Official Story is CANNOT be true.
    Unfortunately, the Media ignores this. Unfortunately, Tom Ashbrook could not get it. Unfortunately Jack Beatty dismisses this “without doing any research”.
    Unfortunately, Alyssa Lindley Kilzer said: “..doubting the Official Story of 9/11 and asking for a new investigation was offensive to Alyssa”. Zubeidat lost her client, just because she knew things that 99% of us would chose not to look into – just because we were told so.
    Google: CNN Alyssa 9/11
    Google: WTC7 Foreknowledge

  • Gregg Smith

    ..

ONPOINT
TODAY
Jul 24, 2014
Youths seen playing basketball through bars on a window at the Wisconsin Department of Corrections Ethan Allen School in Wales, Wis. (AP file)

The cold hard facts about juvenile prisons. And the case for shutting them all down. Plus: former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is with us.

Jul 24, 2014
Orchid (Galileo55/Flickr)

We’ll look at the new science of what plants feel, smell, see – and remember.

RECENT
SHOWS
Jul 23, 2014
Actor Wallace Shawn attends special screening of "Turks and Caicos" hosted by Vogue and The Cinema Society at the Crosby Street Hotel on Monday, April 7, 2014 in New York.  (AP)

From “The Princess Bride” to “My Dinner with Andre “and “A Master Builder,” actor and writer Wallace Shawn joins us.

 
Jul 23, 2014
In this Saturday, July 12, 2014, photo, migrants walk along train tracks and boxcars after getting off a train during their journey toward the US-Mexico border, in Ixtepec, southern Mexico. (AP)

Crisis at the US border. What do Latinos on this side of the border have to say? We’ll ask our special roundtable.

On Point Blog
On Point Blog
Where Did Nickel Creek Go?
Thursday, Jul 24, 2014

The Nickel Creek interview originally scheduled for Thursday, July 24 is rescheduled for an as-of-yet undetermined later date. We explain why.

More »
Comment
 
Our Week In The Web: July 11, 2014
Friday, Jul 11, 2014

As we prepare for a week of rebroadcasts, we reflect on Facebook posts, misplaced comments and the magic of @ mentions. Internet, ASSEMBLE!

More »
Comment
 
Two Former Senators, One Fix For US Democracy?
Thursday, Jul 10, 2014

Former US Senators Tom Daschle and Olympia Snowe joined us today with a few fixes for American political inaction.

More »
Comment