Since a lot of posts I saw in the MPSIMS thread were political, I think it would better if there was a thread here to debate the more controversial aspects of the Boston Marathon bombing.
The most obvious controversial question is who was behind the bombings? While Islamists are IMO pretty much the default go-too guys in terrorist attacks and attempts and some reports in the New York Post seem to support that view. However, I admit, there is a lot of circumstantial evidence indicating it is a far right-wing attack: to-day being Tax Day along with Patriot Day, the significance of Boston, the imminence of a gun control bill being taken up in Congress, it being close to the anniversaries of the Waco standoff, the OKC bombing, and the birthday of Adolf Hitler, and past incidencies when right wing extremnists bombed sports events (during the Atlanta Olympics). Either way I’m more inclined to think this is a lone-wolf radicalized (like most recent Islamist plots or Tim McVeigh or anti-abortion terrorists) rather than any attack planned by a group.
Either way I’d caution not to jump to conclusions as initital speculation during the Times Square bombing plot in 2010 and the Tucson shootings and Oslo attacks of 2011 were mistaken (in the last instance I was mistaken myself).
The deal here seems to be that police are questioning a Saudi national who was near the bombs when they went off. There’s no known evidence that the guy was involved, so it’s not much to go on. I could believe pretty much any motivation at this point because there are very few facts.
Whatever my nationality, I’m getting away from where things are exploding. Now, if the person was seen running away from the point of detonation before it happened,well… And yes, radicalized individuals or freelance small groups, whatever the inspiration, are IMO likelier than grand plots just from recent statistics.
Also, Qin, I suppose we can use this thread as well to discuss such things as how in another forum there was the question asked “What rights and freedoms will get restricted as a result of this” and a poster here on the Dope commented something to the effect of “Take the freedoms away then”.
To which I say, yes, 8 year olds should enjoy a sports event without fear of getting killed; however the notion that we should happily accept *any *burden it takes to prevent it is not self-evident. That said, though, at the same time reasonable, rational security provisions, having to check your bag when entering crowded events, being on camera when out in the public street, not having your finish line in the middle of a commercial street but at a dedicated sports facility so you can control access, are not quite onerous burdens - mere inconvenience is not opression, ease is not indispensable to freedom.
We’re all on camera constantly anyway, at least if we live in a large city. I’ll admit to worrying major cities will start looking more like the UK, which to my understanding has much more of this kind of monitoring. I don’t want to see that. If there are fewer trash cans at events like this, that’d be annoying but understandable. I’m not sure what an increase in checkpoints would look like, although I expect it’d be a big inconvenience.
If this is domestic terrorism, I hope it turns out to be a Commie terrorist for once. Just to prove they still have some life in 'em, this long after the 1970s.
For the reasons already said, and the apparent crudity of the bomb I think we’re probably looking at a right wing terrorist. Either acting alone, in a small group, or if from a larger group isn’t using their resources in order to provide plausibly deniability for the larger movement (which has been claimed of McVeigh).
I’ve seen it pointed out that if it’s necessary, we can just use Kevlar reinforced trash cans, which already exist and are used in places like airports. They’re more expensive, but we could just rotate them between special occasions that make for good targets rather than trying to upgrade the trash cans of the whole nation.
It’s way too soon to speculate on who did this. They’ll find out, there will be photos of the guy planting the device and/or prints on a piece of shrapnel and/or records of someone buying the components of the bombs. Let’s let the agencies do what they do and save the finger-pointing to when there are people to point them at.
I think this is a bit of a stretch. In any event, what little right-wing domestic terrorism that has taken place in the United States has almost universally been directed at government, not civilian, targets.
The coordinate dual-site nature of the attack seems more sophisticated than “lone wolf” attacks are (which, of course, is “being arrested at the materiel purchasing phase”).
For at least the last fifteen years, three leading purveyor of terroristic activity in the West has been Al Qaeda and its affiliates/successors. They should remain the prime suspect here.
[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
For the reasons already said, and the apparent crudity of the bomb I think we’re probably looking at a right wing terrorist, Either acting alone, in a small group, or if from a larger group isn’t using their resources in order to provide plausibly deniability for the larger movement (which has been claimed of McVeigh).
[/QUOTE]
What do you base your assertion that it’s a ‘right wing terrorist’ on, since, afaik, there is exactly zero evidence at this point one way or another? I agree, it’s probably a loner or maybe a small group, but why a…
Oh, never mind. It’s you after all, so of course you would jump to that conclusion based on zero evidence. :smack:
[QUOTE=Qin Shi Huangdi]
The most obvious controversial question is who was behind the bombings? While Islamists are IMO pretty much the default go-too guys in terrorist attacks and attempts and some reports in the New York Post seem to support that view. However, I admit, there is a lot of circumstantial evidence indicating it is a far right-wing attack: to-day being Tax Day along with Patriot Day, the significance of Boston, the imminence of a gun control bill being taken up in Congress, it being close to the anniversaries of the Waco standoff, the OKC bombing, and the birthday of Adolf Hitler, and past incidencies when right wing extremnists bombed sports events (during the Atlanta Olympics). Either way I’m more inclined to think this is a lone-wolf radicalized (like most recent Islamist plots or Tim McVeigh or anti-abortion terrorists) rather than any attack planned by a group.
[/QUOTE]
My WAG would be either someone who is a wanna-be Islamic terrorist but who is acting alone, or maybe some kids who have decided that going on a rampage with a bag full of guns is passe and have decided to see what they can do with explosives and crowds. I suppose it could be some right wing nutter, though the irony of attacking Boston on Patriot Day is pretty fucking ironic.
Not much meat to debate at this point, it’s all pure speculation and going to say more about the poster and their world view than it will about the subject.
Looking elsewhere on the Internet, I see the “it’s a government false flag operation” conspiracy types are already at work.
That’s doubly not true. There’s been plenty of right wing terrorism, and plenty aimed at civilians. Everything from the anti-abortion terrorists to the activities of the Klan in their more violent days. If anything the main difference is that we refrain from labeling an attack “terrorist” most of the time if a right winger does it.
I meant that a small bunch of amateurs or a lone lunatic isn’t going to be as good at bombings as a large organization that’s been doing it for years.
It looks like it was a more sophisticated attack than first thought. They are saying that ball bearings were used, and that they were trying a fairly sophisticated flush and kill tactic in the timing of the bombs (or, could be that they just wanted to cause a lot of maiming and the timing was luck).
They were on the job right away. That stuff starts immediately these days. But I’d rather not spend any more time thinking about it; I had to unfriend some people on Facebook over Newtown bullshit.