51
   

Explosions at Boston Marathon - A2K Runners, Check In Please

 
 
Miller
 
  -4  
Reply Wed 17 Apr, 2013 08:59 am
@ossobuco,
ossobuco wrote:

... the saudi guy (geez, what an ordeal, being in a new country, dealing with school, running in fear and then nabbed by people thinking you did it) .


Tough sh!t! Sure beats having your child murdered or your legs blown off.

Let these foreign guys go to England if they want to "learn English", not come to Boston.

Walter Hinteler
 
  4  
Reply Wed 17 Apr, 2013 09:29 am
@Miller,
Miller wrote:

Let these foreign guys go to England if they want to "learn English", not come to Boston.

Just to get it right: he is there "on a Saudi scholarship to study at a university in the Boston area".

But you're correct: let all those foreigners study elsewhere .... and tourists have enough to look at outside the USA, too!
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Wed 17 Apr, 2013 09:32 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
n 2010, the Yemen-based al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula's Internet magazine carried an article with a step-by-step guide that included the use of a pressure cooker.


I just look at this terrorist magazine vol 1 Inspire and it does give directions for a bomb using either a pipe or better a pressure cooker and match heads and sugar of all things.

Using ball bearings or nails glue to the inside of the pipe or cooker and a small broken open low voltage bulb to set if off.

The first safety precaution it list in working on this device is to "1. Put you trust in Allah and pray for the success of your operation. This is the most important rule."........!!!!!!!!!

WARNING.............

In some countries such as the UK do not download copies of this magazine as just having it can and have resulted in a numbers of years in prison.

maxdancona
 
  2  
Reply Wed 17 Apr, 2013 09:33 am
@Miller,
And... if it turns out it was a American Tea party idiot who did this....? Where do we send them?
maxdancona
 
  4  
Reply Wed 17 Apr, 2013 09:39 am
@Miller,
Speaking as a resident of Boston (and I think most of us feel this way), we are not backing down on our values based on your prejudice and fear. We are an open, international, liberal city that believes in rights.

This event isn't going to change that.
Miller
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 17 Apr, 2013 09:40 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:

And... if it turns out it was a American Tea party idiot who did this....? Where do we send them?


They can keep Whitey Bulger company...
0 Replies
 
Lordyaswas
 
  2  
Reply Wed 17 Apr, 2013 09:42 am
It's quite natural for groups to be targeted after such an atrocity. Immediately after the tube bombings, every asian male carrying a bag or rucksack in london was either given a wide berth or more usually surrounded by people and challenged.
In the late seventies, anyone with an Irish accent stayed off the streets for a day or two after each bombing, because emotions were running so high.

Not fair maybe, but basic human nature will out at times.

0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 17 Apr, 2013 09:43 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:

Speaking as a resident of Boston ... we are not backing down on our values ..


Speaking as a proper Bostonian, I've never backed down. So don't worry about me. Take care of your own ass.
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  3  
Reply Wed 17 Apr, 2013 09:55 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:

Quote:
But it does make logical sense why you would investigate him. They found he wasn't involved and that's it. Better to be cautious and investigate anyone that could be remotely involved than to have others bombed.


With all due respect, this is bull. The only reason that people are so willing to have this guy investigated because of his religion is because it isn't their religion. Let's see them single out a Conservative Christian or an NRA member and see how people react.

A very small percentage of terror attacks in the US (e.g. unabomber, Oklahoma city, Atlanta Olympics) have to do with Arab immigrants. Our willingness to jump on brown-skinned muslims is not being "cautious", it is succumbing to prejudice.

If we are so willing so sacrifice our nations values-- "All men are created equal" because of irrational prejudice, then what's the point.

Singling out people because of their religion or the color of their skin is not OK under any circumstance. I don't care how afraid you are.



It seems that investigators acted on a private citizen's report that the Saudi man was "behaving suspiciously" at the scene. The private citizen may have acted out of prejudice, but the investigators had an obligation to follow up on the report.

The public is being asked to report suspicious behavior and this is always a danger because of stereotypes. However, investigators must follow up on all reports.
Miller
 
  -3  
Reply Wed 17 Apr, 2013 09:59 am
Quote:
The public is being asked to report suspicious behavior and this is always a danger because of stereotypes


Yes, we're all looking for the guy who had his pants blown off by the blast and left the area wearing only his underwear.

We've seen him running off , on TV , at least 1000 times. Why did he run off?
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  2  
Reply Wed 17 Apr, 2013 09:59 am
@Linkat,
Linkat wrote:

Yes, he was targeted because of his religious belief and country.

I heard that he was investigated because his injuries were not consistent with other people being brought in. Is there a link that says it was due to his religion? I'd believe that given his nationality his injuries were analyzed in a more critical light but I haven't seen that it was just his nationality that triggered the house search.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  4  
Reply Wed 17 Apr, 2013 10:03 am
I rarely if ever quote a whole article, but I will with this one -

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2013/04/the-saudi-marathon-man.html

APRIL 17, 2013
THE SAUDI MARATHON MAN
POSTED BY AMY DAVIDSON


A twenty-year-old man who had been watching the Boston Marathon had his body torn into by the force of a bomb. He wasn’t alone; a hundred and seventy-six people were injured and three were killed. But he was the only one who, while in the hospital being treated for his wounds, had his apartment searched in “a startling show of force,” as his fellow-tenants described it to the Boston Herald, with a “phalanx” of officers and agents and two K9 units. He was the one whose belongings were carried out in paper bags as his neighbors watched; whose roommate, also a student, was questioned for five hours (“I was scared”) before coming out to say that he didn’t think his friend was someone who’d plant a bomb—that he was a nice guy who liked sports. “Let me go to school, dude,” the roommate said later in the day, covering his face with his hands and almost crying, as a Fox News producer followed him and asked him, again and again, if he was sure he hadn’t been living with a killer.

Why the search, the interrogation, the dogs, the bomb squad, and the injured man’s name tweeted out, attached to the word “suspect”? After the bombs went off, people were running in every direction—so was the young man. Many, like him, were hurt badly; many of them were saved by the unflinching kindness of strangers, who carried them or stopped the bleeding with their own hands and improvised tourniquets. “Exhausted runners who kept running to the nearest hospital to give blood,” President Obama said. “They helped one another, consoled one another,” Carmen Ortiz, the U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts, said. In the midst of that, according to a CBS News report, a bystander saw the young man running, badly hurt, rushed to him, and then “tackled” him, bringing him down. People thought he looked suspicious.

What made them suspect him? He was running—so was everyone. The police reportedly thought he smelled like explosives; his wounds might have suggested why. He said something about thinking there would be a second bomb—as there was, and often is, to target responders. If that was the reason he gave for running, it was a sensible one. He asked if anyone was dead—a question people were screaming. And he was from Saudi Arabia, which is around where the logic stops. Was it just the way he looked, or did he, in the chaos, maybe call for God with a name that someone found strange?

What happened next didn’t take long. “Investigators have a suspect—a Saudi Arabian national—in the horrific Boston Marathon bombings, The Post has learned.” That’s the New York Post, which went on to cite Fox News. The “Saudi suspect”—still faceless—suddenly gave anxieties a form. He was said to be in custody; or maybe his hospital bed was being guarded. The Boston police, who weren’t saying much of anything, disputed the report—sort of. “Honestly, I don’t know where they’re getting their information from, but it didn’t come from us,” a police spokesman said. But were they talking to someone? Maybe. “Person of interest” became a phrase of both avoidance and insinuation. On the Atlas Shrugs Web site, there was a note that his name in Arabic meant “sword.” At an evening press conference, Ed Davis, the police commissioner, said that no suspect was in custody. But that was about when the dogs were in the apartment building in Revere—an inquiry that was seized on by some as, if not an indictment, at least a vindication of their suspicions.

“There must be enough evidence to keep him there,” Andrew Napolitano said on “Fox and Friends”—“there” being the hospital. “They must be learning information which is of a suspicious nature,” Steve Doocy interjected. “If he was clearly innocent, would they have been able to search his house?” Napolitano thought that a judge would take any reason at a moment like this, but there had to be “something”—maybe he appeared “deceitful.” As Mediaite pointed out, Megyn Kelly put a slight break on it (as she has been known to do) by asking if there might have been some “racial profiling,” but then, after a round of speculation about his visa (Napolitano: “Was he a real student, or was that a front?”), she asked, “What’s the story on his ability to lawyer up?”

By Tuesday afternoon, the fever had broken. Report after report said that he was a witness, not a suspect. “He was just at the wrong place at the wrong time,” a “U.S. official” told CNN. (So were a lot of people at the marathon.) Even Fox News reported that he’d been “ruled out.” At a press conference, Governor Deval Patrick spoke, not so obliquely, about being careful not to treat “categories of people in uncharitable ways.”

We don’t know yet who did this. “The range of suspects and motives remains wide open,” Richard Deslauriers of the F.B.I. said early Tuesday evening. In a minute, with a claim of responsibility, our expectations could be scrambled. The bombing could, for all we know, be the work of a Saudi man—or an American or an Icelandic or a person from any nation you can think of. It still won’t mean that this Saudi man can be treated the way he was, or that people who love him might have had to find out that a bomb had hit him when his name popped up on the Web as a suspect in custody. It is at these moments that we need to be most careful, not least.

It might be comforting to think of this as a blip, an aberration, something that will be forgotten tomorrow—if not by this young man. There are people at Guanátanmo who have also been cleared by our own government, and are still there. A new report on the legacy of torture after 9/11, released Tuesday, is a well-timed admonition. The F.B.I. said that they would “go to the ends of the earth” to get the Boston perpetrators. One wants them to be able to go with their heads held high.

“If you want to know who we are, what America is, how we respond to evil—that’s it. Selflessly. Compassionately. Unafraid,” President Obama said. That was mostly true on Monday; a terrible day, when an eight-year-old boy was killed, his sister maimed, two others dead, and many more in critical condition. And yet, when there was so much to fear that we were so brave about, there was panic about a wounded man barely out of his teens who needed help. We get so close to all that Obama described. What’s missing? Is it humility?

Read more of our coverage of the Boston Marathon explosions.
(see link above)

Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Apr, 2013 10:11 am
@BillRM,
.... adn if you want to send a letter with ricn to someone, just go to FBI-website ...

http://i48.tinypic.com/ern77b.jpg
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  2  
Reply Wed 17 Apr, 2013 10:11 am
@wandeljw,
Sure, the investigators have a duty to follow up on leads.

But we, as a society, have a duty to make sure that prejudice and fear don't cause us to give up our core values. The investigators are accountable for that.

0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  2  
Reply Wed 17 Apr, 2013 10:12 am
@maxdancona,
For such a proud Bostonian, you don't seem to have much faith in your city's police department as you assume that the only reason this Saudi was investigated is the fact that he is a Saudi, and likely a Muslim.

Undoubtedly your international city is teeming with Middle-Easterners and Muslims of all stripes. Do you have any reason to believe they are all currently under investigation?

Since the Boston police didn't immediately round up everyone that looks like an Arab, and the case of this Saudi is the only one reported, it is highly unlikely that the sole reason he became a person of interest is that he looks like an Arab or was known to be a Muslim.

The police of any city would be negligent if, under all circumstances, they disregarded certain characteristics of individuals because for fear of causing offense.

If in the aftermath of a terrorist attack there are one or two reasons to suspect that you may be implicated and you happen to be an Arab, it's rational that the level of suspicion or "interest" would increase.

If five witnesses report that the person who robbed a bank was a white female, the chances are quite low that the police will be looking for black men.

When someone is found murdered in their house, and there are no witnesses, the first people the police look at are family members. Why? Because they hate families? No, because past patterns tell them it's often a family member who is responsible.

I'm quite sure that the FBI and Boston police are investigating the possibility that this was the work of an extreme right-wing group or individual as they should be. I am equally certain they are investigating the possibility that this was the work of an individual or group that can be labelled Islamist, extreme left-wing or just plain crazy.

The only discrimination that is evident so far is the sensible sort involved in good police work.
Miller
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 17 Apr, 2013 10:13 am
Quote:
What’s missing? Is it humility?


According to Boston's best, brightest and hardest working trauma surgeons, it wasn't "humilty" that was missing from the victims of the bomb explosions that happened on Patriots Day.

It was human lives, legs, bones, skin, blood...etc.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Apr, 2013 10:17 am
"When you think about it, the target is not clear," said Mark Potok, a senior fellow at the Southern Poverty Law Center. "What the target was not was the government, or the IRS, or a minority group—black people, gay people, Muslims, immigrants, Latinos, and so on. It wasn't targeted at any sort of specific subgroup."

Mark Pitcavage, the director of investigative research for the Anti-Defamation League, agreed, saying this target didn't feel like the work of extreme right-wing terrorists since it had no clear connection to the government.

"The bottom line is that no domestic extremist movement, just based on their ideology alone, would have a huge reason to attack the Boston Marathon," Pitcavage said. "The prominence of the event could cause anybody from a variety of movements to carry out an attack like that."

Instead of the work of organized movements, the attack could have been the work of a single person, either someone motivated by ideology or someone who is clinically insane. Eric Rudolph, an antiabortion and antigay activist, set off bombs at the 1996 Summer Olympic Games in Atlanta that killed three people to promote his ideology.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  2  
Reply Wed 17 Apr, 2013 10:19 am
Quote:
For many journalists I've spoken with today, this ignorance is tortuous. The identification of the attacker(s) and the reasons for the attack will likely have enormous political (and potentially geopolitical) ramifications, which will vary greatly depending on whether the attacker(s) is domestic or foreign, acting alone or as part of an organization. We're standing on the verge of a very important national conversation about something, and we have no idea what it is.

Others have managed to find solace in this. Over at the American Interest, Walter Russell Mead welcomes the waiting period. "It allows us to treat the horror on its own terms, to see the pure evil of this act divorced from any rationalization or justification," he writes. "Each hour that has gone by since the blast, each new report of heroism among the survivors and responders, each new detail about the identity of the victims clarifies the essential truth of the situation: there is no cause that can justify this deed."

I agree with that last point, but find no similar solace. I want to know the cause -- not because I'm eager to politicize the tragedy, but because I want to know where our national conversation is headed. A great deal of political, financial and emotional capital depends on the answer to that question.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/04/how-long-until-we-know-161833.html
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  2  
Reply Wed 17 Apr, 2013 10:21 am
Quote:
If history is any guide, claims of responsibility are not immediate.

For instance, many may forget the precise sequence of events following the 2001 terror attacks on the World Trade Center. But Osama bin Laden didn't officially take responsibility for the attack until late October 2001 -- almost two months after the assault.

Then there's the 2009 "underwear bomb" attempt by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. That attack occurred on Christmas Day -- a Friday -- but the message by al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula claiming responsibility didn't surface until Monday, three days later. (It had been originally dated Saturday but wasn't published on radical Islamic websites until Monday.)

And how about the Fort Hood shooting in 2009? It took four days for Anwar al-Awlaki to publicly praise his radicalized pupil, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, on his English-language web site for the tragic killing of 13 people in Texas.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but we're only one day out from the bombing of the Boston Marathon. It's perfectly plausible that a claim of responsibility could be forthcoming. This is not to suggest that yesterday's twin bombings weren't domestic in origin -- they may very well be the case. But it's worth acknowledging the potential time lag for claims of responsibility.

In fact, sometimes terrorist groups never claim responsibility. After the attempted Times Square bombing by Pakistani-American Faisal Shahzad in May 2010, Attorney General Eric Holder declared that the "Pakistani Taliban was behind the attack. We know that they helped facilitate it. We know that they probably helped finance it and that he was working at their direction." Though independent reports have confirmed this, the Pakistan Taliban denied knowledge of the foiled bomb plot.


http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/04/16/how_long_does_it_take_terrorist_groups_to_take_responsibility
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Wed 17 Apr, 2013 10:31 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

For such a proud Bostonian, you don't seem to have much faith in your city's police department as you assume that the only reason this Saudi was investigated is the fact that he is a Saudi, and likely a Muslim.
Accorcing to all newspapers, this Muslim Saudi student's home was searched because he was ...
Quote:
viewed by police as a "lead" -- but not a suspect -- in the investigation
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Tragic Terrorist Attack in Boston - Discussion by H2O MAN
Bombings in Boston - Discussion by H2O MAN
Explosions At Boston Marathon - Discussion by firefly
"We are not barbarians" - Discussion by JPB
Boston Explosion & the Texas Explosion - Discussion by johnmarson
Boston Bombing Question - Discussion by johnmarson
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 09:30:54