Explosion at the Boston Marathon

[metallicat]

They're talking on CNN about pictures being circulated amongst law enforcement of two people of interest. I wonder if they're of the same people the Internet was working on?

[Minnie]

This is interesting - shows location of every domestic attack in the US from 1970 - 2011. All 2631 of them. Once it finishes loading you can click on each little yellow circle to see where, when, group responsible and the target.

Link

[Dan02]

interesting what criteria they used for "attacks", in my brief lookthrough apparently setting some evergreens on fire and gluing shut the locks of a business both qualify.

[Cowperson]

Officials to release today clear images of two suspects they are looking for.

http://www.boston.com/metrodesk/2013...rcJ/story.html

Obvious question . . . . . . what are they waiting for?

Cowperson

[worth]

They need to draw some MS Paint circles around the suspects.

[Flames89]

I think people's offence to the profiling going on is a bit holier-than-thou, which is surprising given CP'ers normal hatred of all things overly politically correct.

If I was there, was unshaven, or bald, wore a hoodie up, wore sunglasses and had a backpack - I would expect to be circled and questioned.
I am sure if I was a brown guy, was in the area of the bombs, and had a backpack - I would think "great, the cops will be blowing down my door any second. Thanks for the bad rap Osama".

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

Officials to release today clear images of two suspects they are looking for.

http://www.boston.com/metrodesk/2013...rcJ/story.html

Obvious question . . . . . . what are they waiting for?

Cowperson

I'd imagine its a combination of things, but mostly Id guess they're trying to ID the suspects themselves first so that they can attempt to arrest before they can flee once their identities become known publicly. Police generally like to keep their progress private as long as possible before they end up having to turn to the public and show their hand.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Flames89

I am sure if I was a brown guy, was in the area of the bombs, and had a backpack - I would think "great, the cops will be blowing down my door any second. Thanks for the bad rap Osama".

Pretty easy to say when you aren't actually a brown guy living in the United States, being pulledover for driving too nice a car, watching passengers squirm when you board an airplane, or being asked for proof of citizenship when you stroll down the street in Arizona. Oh yeah, I nearly forgot being suspected of mass murder for attending a sporting event.

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by Ducay

I'd imagine its a combination of things, but mostly Id guess they're trying to ID the suspects themselves first so that they can attempt to arrest before they can flee once their identities become known publicly. Police generally like to keep their progress private as long as possible before they end up having to turn to the public and show their hand.

Or they're watching them now and want to see if they start running or if they lead to other co-conspirators or stashes of evidence.

Cowperson

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

Or they're watching them now and want to see if they start running or if they lead to other co-conspirators or stashes of evidence.

Cowperson

This is huge.

They want to be sure this is isolated to the two that they're talking about. Other then that if they identify them, they'll stay in the weeds and follow them, listen in on their phone conversations. See if theres a bigger element to this.

To be honest the authorities have all the time in the world to make an arrest, they just have to be sure.

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by Flames89

I think people's offence to the profiling going on is a bit holier-than-thou, which is surprising given CP'ers normal hatred of all things overly politically correct.

If I was there, was unshaven, or bald, wore a hoodie up, wore sunglasses and had a backpack - I would expect to be circled and questioned.
I am sure if I was a brown guy, was in the area of the bombs, and had a backpack - I would think "great, the cops will be blowing down my door any second. Thanks for the bad rap Osama".

Being bald indicates suspicious behaviour? Who knew?

[KTrain]

Originally Posted by Reaper

Being bald indicates suspicious behaviour? Who knew?

Pretty sure he means white supremacist bald, not bad genes bald.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Flames89

I think people's offence to the profiling going on is a bit holier-than-thou, which is surprising given CP'ers normal hatred of all things overly politically correct.

If I was there, was unshaven, or bald, wore a hoodie up, wore sunglasses and had a backpack - I would expect to be circled and questioned.
I am sure if I was a brown guy, was in the area of the bombs, and had a backpack - I would think "great, the cops will be blowing down my door any second. Thanks for the bad rap Osama".

http://www.timwise.org/2013/04/terro...-of-whiteness/

As the nation weeps for the victims of the horrific bombing in Boston yesterday, one searches for lessons amid the carnage, and finds few. That violence is unacceptable stands out as one, sure. That hatred — for humanity, for life, or whatever else might have animated the bomber or bombers — is never the source of constructive human action seems like a reasonably close second.

But I dare say there is more; a much less obvious and far more uncomfortable lesson, which many are loathe to learn, but which an event such as this makes readily apparent, and which we must acknowledge, no matter how painful.

It is a lesson about race, about whiteness, and specifically, about white privilege.

I know you don’t want to hear it. But I don’t much care. So here goes.

White privilege is knowing that even if the Boston Marathon bomber turns out to be white, his or her identity will not result in persons like yourself being singled out for suspicion by law enforcement, or the TSA, or the FBI.

White privilege is knowing that even if the bomber turns out to be white, no one will call for your group to be profiled as terrorists as a result, subjected to special screening, or threatened with deportation.

White privilege is knowing that if the bomber turns out to be white, he or she will be viewed as an exception to an otherwise non-white rule, an aberration, an anomaly, and that he or she will be able to join the ranks of Tim McVeigh and Terry Nichols and Ted Kaczynski and Eric Rudolph and Joe Stack and George Metesky and Byron De La Beckwith and Bobby Frank Cherry and Thomas Blanton and Herman Frank Cash and Robert Chambliss and James von Brunn and Robert Mathews and David_Lane and Michael F. Griffin and Paul Hill and John Salvi and James Kopp and Luke Helder and James David Adkisson and Scott Roeder and Shelley Shannon and Wade Michael Page and Byron Williams and Kevin Harpham and William Krar and Judith Bruey and Edward Feltus and Raymond Kirk Dillard and Adam Lynn Cunningham and Bonnell Hughes and Randall Garrett Cole and James Ray McElroy and Michael Gorbey and Daniel Cowart and Paul Schlesselman and Frederick Thomas and Paul Ross Evans and Matt Goldsby and Jimmy Simmons and Kathy Simmons and Kaye Wiggins and Patricia Hughes and Jeremy Dunahoe and David McMenemy and Bobby Joe Rogers and Francis Grady and Demetrius Van Crocker and Floyd Raymond Looker, among the pantheon of white people who engage in politically motivated violence meant to terrorize and kill, but whose actions result in the assumption of absolutely nothing about white people generally, or white Christians in particular.

And white privilege is being able to know nothing about the crimes committed by most of the terrorists listed above — indeed, never to have so much as heard most of their names — let alone to make assumptions about the role that their racial or ethnic identity may have played in their crimes.

White privilege is knowing that if the Boston bomber turns out to be white, you will not be asked to denounce him or her, so as to prove your own loyalties to the common national good. It is knowing that the next time a cop sees you standing on the sidewalk cheering on runners in a marathon, that cop will say exactly nothing to you as a result.

White privilege is knowing that if you are a student from Nebraska — as opposed to, say, a student from Saudi Arabia — that no one, and I mean no one would think it important to detain and question you in the wake of a bombing such as the one at the Boston Marathon.

And white privilege is knowing that if this bomber turns out to be white, the United States government will not bomb whatever corn field or mountain town or stale suburb from which said bomber came, just to ensure that others like him or her don’t get any ideas. And if he turns out to be a member of the Irish Republican Army we won’t bomb Dublin. And if he’s an Italian American Catholic we won’t bomb the Vatican.

In short, white privilege is the thing that allows you — and me — to view tragic events like this as merely horrific, and from the perspective of pure and innocent victims, rather than having to wonder, and to look over one’s shoulder, and to ask even if only in hushed tones, whether those we pass on the street might think that somehow we were involved.

It is the source of our unearned innocence and the cause of others’ unjustified oppression.

That is all. And it matters.

[valo403]

Nice work NY POst, f'in scumbags. Run a picture of two innocent guys (the same picture posted here yesterday) on the cover accusing them of being the perpetrators.

http://deadspin.com/the-boston-bombi...-kid-476001019

[transplant99]

What a load ^^^^

[Senator Clay Davis]

Its the NY Post, most dogs won't even take a dump on it because its such a rag.

[neo45]

That's pretty much a libel suit in the bag for those guys

[Flames89]

Originally Posted by Makarov

Pretty easy to say when you aren't actually a brown guy living in the United States, being pulledover for driving too nice a car, watching passengers squirm when you board an airplane, or being asked for proof of citizenship when you stroll down the street in Arizona. Oh yeah, I nearly forgot being suspected of mass murder for attending a sporting event.

So you don't think they profile themselves at all?
Vigilantism, false accusations by media, etc are all wrong. Speculation based on profiling is not such a crime.
If you have a back pack, look sketchy or fit a profile, and you were standing NEAR where the bombs went off you deserved to be questioned. Likely before the granny with a back pack or the young mother with her daughter and a back pack.

[onetwo_threefour]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

This is huge.

They want to be sure this is isolated to the two that they're talking about. Other then that if they identify them, they'll stay in the weeds and follow them, listen in on their phone conversations. See if theres a bigger element to this.

To be honest the authorities have all the time in the world to make an arrest, they just have to be sure.

I wouldn't say all the time in the world, there are both public safety and public expectations issues associated with delaying arrests that can't be ignored even if you think that following your suspects around for a while might be a good idea. As soon as the public gets wind that there are suspects, I think the political pressure to make arrests rises exponentially.

[Street Pharmacist]

Having free speech on a large pulpit like a newspaper is not only a right, but a privilege. If such dangerous assumptions are passed on with credibility lent to it by a large newspaper it shakes the viability of free speech. If free speech is used consistently without diligence it can't continue.

For that reason I think exceptions to free speech MUST be made. Free speech is not a magical blessing. It's a tenuous but ultimately beneficial tenet to a successful society. To protect it outweighs any need for a complete adherence to an ideology.


Shut that newspaper down