Skip to main content

I don't like where the aftermath of the Boston Marathon seems to be heading.

Estoy muy cansado ya. In fact, too tired to really recap the news of this morning and last night that has resulted in cities around Boston being shut down (no rail, bus, or taxi serivce). You can find that info in excellent threads on this site -

Here

or

Here

Two days ago a man was shot & killed at a local bar. My son told me about it. This week there was the horrible bombing in Boston. That was heart-breaking. Then there was the carnage (10+ dead) in Texas. Seemd like a bad week already...then the events of today & last night.

I know a bit about fear, & terror-inspired fear. I was in Guatemala in the '80s when the government were terrorists & the indigenous population the targets. I was in the skies flying across this country on 9/11 in a plane filled with panic when we heard the news. A few years back I had to move out of a house after it was shot up as collateral damage by nieghbors who began a fued with another family living nearby. Then last year my  neighbor put on body armor  & shot up the local elementary school. Came home, knocked on my door, & then sat outside it waiting for me to answer. The police got him in time. Three months later my other neighbor had minor breakdown & spent days running around claiming people were coming here to kill him.

Two different neighbors in one-year had breakdowns & succumbed to fears.

I don't want any of that.

I don't want to go through the whole 12-year drama since 9/11 all over again.

I don't want to hear about the need to hold Chechnya accountable for the actions of 2 idiot brothers here. I don't want to hear about how we have a right to send agents to Chechnya to collect info on who aided these two murderers.

I don't want another 9/11.

I don't want us to relive the stupidity of Austria-Hungary in the lead-up to World War One. You remember that one? Serb terrorists assassignated Archduke Franz Ferninand. Austria insisted Serbi let Austrian police in to investigate. Serbia refused. Remember that little war? I don't want any of that either.

No, I don't want the terrorists to win.

I don't want them to shut down American cities. I don't want them deny transportation to 1.3 million citizens. I don't want to see 9,000 to 10,000 police to descending on cities regularly to hunt down lone wolf terrorists, even those armed with pressure-cooker bombs. We had that today. I don't want any more of it.

I want the terrorists that commit acts of terror to be arrested. I don't want to hear for months on end how we need to change our way of life (but never our foreign policy) in order to beat them.

I don't want to hear that we need to hit any country that may've trained the brothers, nor any countries that supposedly shielded them. I don't want to hear about Chechyna developing WMDs. I don't want any of that.

I want the remaining brother caught & tried. I want him punished for any crimes he committed.

I don't want us to punish ourselves for the actions of his brother & he. I don't want us to punish Chechnya. I don't want us to punish Kazakistan. I don't want imbroglios with Russia over this. I don't want further extensions on the GWOT.

I don't want another aftermath of 9/11.

I don't want any of that.

Martin Richard wrote, "No more hurting people. Peace"

I want some of that.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (179+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Meteor Blades, wtpvideo, Actbriniel, Lady Libertine, One Pissed Off Liberal, dance you monster, joanneleon, Dave in Northridge, Agathena, Glen The Plumber, stevie avebury, blueoregon, kimoconnor, blueoasis, mommyof3, anodnhajo, Wreck Smurfy, hubcap, limpidglass, Dale, kerflooey, zozie, NormAl1792, Rizzo, surfbird007, detroitmechworks, Nada Lemming, Mlle L, glitterlust, Raggedy Ann, northsylvania, Norm in Chicago, Sylv, pateTX, GeorgeXVIII, skip945, AZ Sphinx Moth, Bisbonian, FindingMyVoice, Alma, Glacial Erratic, petulans, bsmechanic, I Lurked For Years, dksbook, eagleray, where4art, FG, ChemBob, Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse, cherish0708, filby, paradise50, Fresno, lunachickie, RageKage, berko, remembrance, blue in NC, Onomastic, pragmaticidealist, PapaChach, Debby, opinionated, pat bunny, Heart of the Rockies, gloriana, scott5js, radarlady, side pocket, RubDMC, timethief, poco, collardgreens, Ed in Montana, high uintas, WheninRome, SaraBeth, 4CasandChlo, Silvia Nightshade, RFK Lives, asterkitty, MKinTN, dradams, beverlywoods, Cofcos, middleagedhousewife, camlbacker, Hammerhand, Trendar, Bluesee, Dark UltraValia, navajo, cardboardurinal, Yellow Canary, YucatanMan, MrSandman, gypsytoo, nailbender, profundo, artisan, praenomen, PeterHug, Rhysling, Hatrax, sow hat, Batya the Toon, JBL55, wader, zerelda, maryabein, TheDuckManCometh, Preston S, albrt, MikeBoyScout, karmsy, legendmn, mmontanaman, Sybil Liberty, lastxwriter, shaharazade, Alfred E Newman, texasmom, Kentucky Kid, TexDem, Christin, KibbutzAmiad, elziax, Eileen B, citizenx, TealTerror, petesmom, Late Again, roses, Matt Z, mimi, doingbusinessas, bluesheep, geph, greengemini, Betterthansoap, annan, Sam Sara, ZhenRen, jnhobbs, sap, stevej, noreaster88, Kevvboy, triv33, Its a New Day, silence, deha, HudsonValleyMark, dinazina, emal, Simplify, Raven in Philly, BusyinCA, citisven, rlochow, dharmasyd, claude, Chaddiwicker, pdx kirk, joe shikspack, pcl07, tgypsy, BlueDragon, Shippo1776, Panacea Paola, lissablack, Joy of Fishes, barkingcat, Sara R, carpunder, CuriousBoston, andalusi, rubyr

    America's greatest political dynasty...the Ka'an

    by catilinus on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 05:50:40 AM PDT

    •  Totally with you on this, catilinus (32+ / 0-)

      War is not the answer.  Big Brother is not the answer.  Police state is not the answer.


      "Justice is a commodity"

      by joanneleon on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 06:43:57 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  What IS going on? (7+ / 0-)

        I have to be exceedingly careful of my tone here so as not to give the wrong kind of vibe.

        Is this the new reality? I don't at all want to minimize this b/c it is certainly real and tragic for the victims, that I understand certainly.

        This is essentially a murder - a public, random murder of 3 people and then police victims in the aftermath.

        I don't know how to say this. . . .

        Is anyone else worried that there will be a lot of copy cat type people out there amazed at the level of attention that they can get? Attention without pilot lessons, visas, international support or a complex, diabolical plan to kill thousands?

        I am just terrified that we are feeding a beast that thrives on this kind of attention and fear. . .

        Peace.

        Blessed are the peacemakers, the poor, the meek and the sick. Message to Repug Fundies: "DO you really wonder "what would Jesus do?" I didn't think so.

        by 4CasandChlo on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 09:17:55 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  This is what most of the world (11+ / 0-)

          has dealt with for decades if not longer. The US had a special place of ignorance for a long time and thought it was free from these sorts of retaliations. We thought that drones meant no consequences. We thought that our money could buy us safety. We thought that we could kill with impunity and the only casualties would be our morality and the mental health of our soldiers.

          We were wrong.

          This is what eternal war looks like. Unless we do something to stop it.

          Look at the response of Americans to this and ask what it would be if this sort of thing was a weekly occurrence. Because in Afghanistan and Iraq it is. And we can't just sit back this time and wait for things to calm down and talk about this rationally, because that's clearly not going to happen.

          This is happening because of our actions overseas. This is happening because we have killed tens if not hundreds of thousands of civilians in Muslim countries and supported dictatorships that torture and kill with impunity in other Muslim countries.

          You reap what you sow. And unfortunately those most responsible are those who are least likely to end up injured. Same as always these days. The more responsible you are for something the less of the down side you have to deal with.

          If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

          by AoT on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 09:54:26 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  it's always been the reality. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Sam Sara, catilinus, dharmasyd
          Is this the new reality?
          from the moment we crawled out of the sea, this is what humans do.
          can you name a period that humans walked the earth that was peaceful and non violent?
          i'm never sure what people mean when they say the world has gone crazy.
          it's always always been this way.
          this country was founded on genocide of its natives.
          so this place is actually nicer than it used to be.

          guns, germs, and steel. not an easy read.
          but sheds some light on it.

          We consume the carcasses of creatures of like appetites, passions and organs with our own, and fill the slaughterhouses daily with screams of pain and fear. Robert Louis Stevenson

          by Christin on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 09:56:31 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  A major city effectively being placed under siege (9+ / 0-)

            in order to find 1 terrorist is a new development for us.  The complete and utter militarization of what formerly would've been a law enforcement operation is new, too.

            Yes, I know that Malcolm X said that violence is as American as apple pie.  Bill Maher spoke of our love affair w/ war a week ago.  MLK spoke about his govt being the greatest purveyor of violence in the world.  We're not exactly innocent.

            We did, however, historically maintain a barrier between military and law enforcement w/in our borders.  That barrier has been steadily eroded for the past 12 years, and it's totally breached now.  It's an obvious cause for concern.

            Some men see things as they are and ask why. I dream of things that never were and ask why not?

            by RFK Lives on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 10:13:06 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Just the opposite (4+ / 0-)

              A major city responding to the possibility that it is under siege, and that while it searches for one known (suspected) criminal there may be others hoping to take advantage of the situation.

              Or that the one man they're hunting and his now-deceased brother could have used the past few days to plant surprises around the city.

              And while we have indeed historically maintained a barrier between law enforcement and the military on our own soil, it's hardly been impermeable. The National Guard and even military units have been called out on myriad occasions to deal with extraordinary events beyond the ability (or in some cases, the willingness) of local law enforcement to handle. A couple of terrorists attacking crowds and throwing bombs at police seems to qualify reasonably well.

              There are plenty of reasons to question our nation's current policies and overall approach to law enforcement, anti-terror efforts, and the inherent tension between these things and individual liberties. Let's not start seeing them where they don't really exist.

              "Do it in the name of Heaven; you can justify it in the end..." - Dennis Lambert & Brian Potter

              by pragmaticidealist on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 10:43:08 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  This is pretty unprecedented in (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Sam Sara, 4CasandChlo, catilinus

                modern times. I see the justification for it, but let's not pretend like it's a thing we want to see happen regularly. Obviously that means the bombings, but if we're going to shut down a city because of one suspect on the loose then I'm never going to be able to go anywhere. Not that anyone is going to bomb Oakland.

                If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

                by AoT on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 10:45:59 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Detroit. 1967. (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  poco, catilinus

                  I watched the glow on the horizon from my suburban backyard as the city burned. My best friend sat beside me, knowing that the neighborhood his family had moved out of not long before was one of the ones burning.

                  National Guard troops and Army units were dispatched to stop the rioting and restore order. The police simply couldn't do it.

                  Want more examples? Watts. Wallace on the schoolhouse steps. Any major disaster relief effort in recent memory.

                  Is it common to shut a city down? Of course not. But it's not unheard of to do so, either, or to send in military units to do a job law enforcement can't. And so far, it hasn't destroyed the Union.

                  I hope you're right, and that no one is going to bomb Oakland. But if there's ever a bomb-planting, explosive-throwing nut/zealot/whatever running around, I would expect the city and its officials to respond in the way they think will most quickly contain and neutralize the threat. Why would anyone not expect that?

                  "Do it in the name of Heaven; you can justify it in the end..." - Dennis Lambert & Brian Potter

                  by pragmaticidealist on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:01:45 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  One person, not a riot (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    4CasandChlo, RFK Lives, catilinus

                    That's why this is so unprecedented.

                    And the situation is also unprecedented, to be sure.

                    If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

                    by AoT on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:05:09 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I didn't say there are no unique aspects. (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      AoT

                      All I said is that there is ample precedent for authorities to use extraordinary measures, including military involvement, to respond to extraordinary threats to the public welfare. Which is what you seemed to be claiming was in fact unprecedented.

                      Technology advances and the evolution of tactical understanding has changed the playing field. It is now possible for one man (or, in this case, at least two) to create a situation wherein a single fugitive poses sufficiently grave and wide-spread a threat that authorities must respond with force that a few decades ago would have quelled a riot. But that's not the fault of the authorities; it's the downside of progress.

                      "Do it in the name of Heaven; you can justify it in the end..." - Dennis Lambert & Brian Potter

                      by pragmaticidealist on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:19:11 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Nothing this guy is doing would have been (0+ / 0-)

                        significantly more difficult 50 years ago. All they would have had to have done is put a timer on the bombs instead of the cell phone detonator. It's not like the weaponry is especially dangerous. Everything they used to build these bombs has been around for quite a while.

                        If anything the technological advantage is on the side of the authorities. They've got cameras everywhere, they're always in contact, they're better armed than police ever have been.

                        Like I said though, the whole situation is pretty unprecedented.

                        If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

                        by AoT on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:40:25 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Actually, timers would be quite different (0+ / 0-)

                          Once they're set, they're out of the bomber's control.

                          And I never suggested that the authorities fail to keep pace with changing technology. On the contrary, I expect them to do so.

                          But if, indeed, "they've got cameras everywhere, they're always in contact" etc., they'd already have the suspect in custody. Technological sophistication is not (yet) equal to omnipresence or omnipotence.

                          Sorry, but I'm done arguing this with you.

                          "Do it in the name of Heaven; you can justify it in the end..." - Dennis Lambert & Brian Potter

                          by pragmaticidealist on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:45:15 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

              •  I've never seen anything like this before (5+ / 0-)

                I know that calling the Guard in to quell riots became almost routine in the 60's.  I've never seen APC's swarming a major city or a city being placed under lockdown to catch 1 guy, however.  Hell, I don't recall the entire cities of LA or Detroit being placed under daytime lockdown during riots when dozens of people were killed and entire blocks were on fire.  

                I never saw cops use identical paramilitary tactics to crush unarmed protestors in a series of cities like we saw w/ Occupy in 2011-12.   9/11 changed everything.

                Some men see things as they are and ask why. I dream of things that never were and ask why not?

                by RFK Lives on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:01:30 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Actually, Detroit was a lot more restrained. (0+ / 0-)

                  There were military snipers on rooftops for days even after the rioting was over. I'd much prefer being asked to stay home for the day, both for my own safety and to stay out of the way, than be informed that stepping outside any time in the next several days could get me shot, at the discretion of a nervous 20-year old two blocks away.

                  When the military moved in, it was with 8,000 Guardsmen and 4,700 members of the 82nd Airborne.

                  So, you may not have seen it, but by historical standards the level of force in play here is not only easily within precedents, it's comparatively tiny. Heck, if you're dealing with a bomber who may have left IEDs in his wake, why would you not use APCs?

                  Now, the response to Occupy is another thing altogether. I've been defending this specific response to a very real threat to public safety. I didn't then, don't now, and can't imagine ever supporting the use of force to disperse peaceful protesters on public land.

                  9/11 most assuredly did not change everything. I'm used to hearing right-wingers make that statement, because it gives them access to power. But it bothers me far more when progressives make it, because therein lie the seeds of capitulation. Fear and hatred only win if reason and compassion pack up and go home.

                  "Do it in the name of Heaven; you can justify it in the end..." - Dennis Lambert & Brian Potter

                  by pragmaticidealist on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 01:49:01 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Militarized police (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    AoT, dharmasyd

                    That is unprecedented.  Never before have local police forces been armed and equipped like this before.  Some of those guys in camo are police, not military.  Do some research on the Pentagon's program for giving "surplus" equipment to state, county and local police departments.  Do some research on Homeland Security grants to law enforcement.  

                    Police departments didn't have Lenco Bearcats before.  There are small sheriff departments with these things now and police departments.  Just look at the marketing for that thing and the cultural change is bleeding obvious. This is one of their marketing videos.  It got a lot of attention a year of so ago. Those guys are not military. They are police, militarized.

                    We didn't even have a Homeland Security department before.

                    We didn't have extensive counterterrorism units, fusion centers, the surveillance and intelligence shared across all of these agencies and police departments before.

                    Please.


                    "Justice is a commodity"

                    by joanneleon on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 02:47:41 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  The militarized police mindset worries me (0+ / 0-)

                      (I apologize in advance for the length of this response, but I want to give full weight to your critique -- and I want to respond today, which means I can't take my usual lengthy pause while my mental editor figures out what to cut.)

                      I thought you were concerned about the presence of the military in Boston; that's why I responded as I did. But to an extent, my answer is similar. The "unprecedented" militarization of today's law enforcement does indeed follow precedent.

                      There's no question that police have been increasingly militarized, starting with the introduction of SWAT back in '67. The original idea -- that the increasingly risky challenges posed by ever-more-heavily armed criminals, hostage rescue, etc. required a new kind of police unit -- has always been controversial. The progression since then, and particularly in the last couple of decades, whereby ordinary police officers are routinely armed and armored like the SWAT teams of old, is even more controversial.

                      On the one hand, I can see the logic: you can't ask police officers to face crooks with more firepower than they have themselves. And there's no question that today's criminals (and not just the terrorists, though they're a large part of the justification) can bring a whole lot more firepower into play than could their predecessors of just a few years back.

                      And don't get me started on the whole "Homeland Security" nonsense.

                      Not that long ago, it was the norm for beat cops to go essentially unarmed; a truncheon was all they needed or wanted. As criminals moved to greater violence and heavier weapons, so too did the police. Truncheons gave way to guns. Eventually, they added Mace and pepper spray and tasers. Right or wrong, the intent was to give the police the ability to respond with the most appropriate level of force to maintain the peace or ensure public safety when faced with increasing levels of criminal violence.

                      My biggest concern isn't that the police are being given weapons on a par with those they're expected to combat. It's not even that they're often bringing much heavier firepower, with the reasoning that an overwhelming mismatch will either lead to a less violent solution ("Look at those things! I'm giving up!") or at least a faster resolution, posing less danger to innocents and the police themselves.

                      My worry is that we're shifting how police are trained, from being members of the community they're supposed to protect to being paramilitary occupiers of enemy ground. It's a change in mindset far more than it is of firepower, and the effects have at times been horrifying. The intelligence units and counter-terror units and high-tech surveillance units and such are both a symptom and a further cause of this transformation.

                      To me, the APCs and assault rifles and all aren't the problem in and of themselves. It's that they represent a change in how police officers are being trained to think of us all, criminal and innocent civilian alike. Increasingly, we're not those they have sworn to "protect and serve" but simply enemies, potential enemies, and potential casualties.

                      NOTE: I do NOT believe that most police officers think this way, or that the vast majority of those who do are aware of it. It's a change that's crept into how we train law enforcement officers, and it's insidious. So far, I don't think we've reached a point of no return, or even necessarily a tipping point, but if we don't fix the problem fairly soon, we may get there.

                      "Do it in the name of Heaven; you can justify it in the end..." - Dennis Lambert & Brian Potter

                      by pragmaticidealist on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 03:18:53 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  The Progressive City of Berkeley, (0+ / 0-)

                      ...previously called "the People's Republic of Berkeley,"just went in with the University of California and the City of Albany to buy something like these bearcat APC thingies.  

                      The Berkeley PD even sends it's personnel to Israel for training with the Israeli Defense Force in tactics for crowd (read: 'Palestinian') control.

                      The liberal, progressive City of Berkeley no longer exists.  

                      Welcome to the New World Order!

                      "The war against Bradley Manning is a war against us all." Chris Hedges

                      by dharmasyd on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 04:31:40 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

          •  So true. Founded on genocide & slavery...& still (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            dharmasyd

            in denial about it...& with much of the same mindset always purcolating just below the surface.

            America's greatest political dynasty...the Ka'an

            by catilinus on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 02:30:41 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  I think you have some factual things wrong. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          4CasandChlo, AoT

          This was not a murder.  It's an ongoing attack.  They have planted more bombs and explosives around their apartment building, and continue to detonate them when cornered by police.  

          •  That is a good point. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            AoT

            I agree and it is not a small difference.  I was struggling for language that didn't minimize it while also wondering if the "attention" (for lack of a better term) was. . . .

            I don't know. It was well said above, it is unprecedented that one person (or say 2 or 3 more) could shut down an entire metro area - and I am not saying its not warranted, who I am to say.

            My worry is that someone out there - already unstable - is motivated by the amount of attention this has gotten.

            Good point

            Blessed are the peacemakers, the poor, the meek and the sick. Message to Repug Fundies: "DO you really wonder "what would Jesus do?" I didn't think so.

            by 4CasandChlo on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:15:10 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  It depends upon the question (10+ / 0-)

        From the purposes of the Security Industrial Complex ("SIC"--wonder what Ike would say about it were he alive today), they're exactly the answers.   We live in a visibly different country than that which existed 12 years ago.  The distribution of power is vastly skewed in favor of continuing the expansion of the SIC as contrasted w/ restraining the SIC.

        The causes of this visible skewing are many.  Cable news is an obvious culprit--how many purported "experts" have we seen on CNN and MSNBC* the past few days?  The visuals of an entire city effectively being placed under siege in order to find 1 admittedly dangerous terrorist have an even more powerful effect.  Most every big city police dept. has armored personnel carriers and other militarized features these days, and today serves as an advertisement for their purported efficacy.

        Our political system is essentially broken.  A Congress that eagerly passed and renewed the Patriot Act w/ won't even seriously consider gun control legislation.  An assault weapons ban that passed the Senate 61-38 in '94 could only muster 40 votes this time.  Meanwhile unaccountable billions are appropriated for the SIC every year.

        It's not like there's a peace lobby out there that can throw big fundraisers for MOC's and marshal advocates to swarm the Hill.  We can't give cable news networks programming that will glue millions of eyeballs to TV sets the way that they're being glued now.  We don't have experts to put on air or public officials to advocate our perspectives.

        Since the initial dramatic course shift in the fall of '01, we've seen equally pernicious slow but steady changes in how we organize our society.  Those changes will almost be inevitably accelerated as a result of this week's events in Boston.  No other competing vision is getting serious attention, and no other set of policies can muster poweful advocates on its behalf.

        While I hope that the perpetrators are all brought to justice, I worry about how the SIC will seize upon the opportunities that the perpertrators granted it.

        *I refuse to watch Fox.

        Some men see things as they are and ask why. I dream of things that never were and ask why not?

        by RFK Lives on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 09:22:21 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Unless the question is how do we shoot ourselves (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        joanneleon, dharmasyd

        in the mouth while at the same time re-branding catfood for grandma as freedom fries.

        Thanks again for being an org genius on the blogathon.

        America's greatest political dynasty...the Ka'an

        by catilinus on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 02:24:28 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  It is great to see you here again (17+ / 0-)

      Hope you are doing well.

      Right on with this diary. Can we learn lessons in this country? Time will tell.

      Where ignorance is our master, there is no possibility of real peace. - Dalai Lama

      by kimoconnor on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 07:36:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  In honor of you & in solidarity with your diary .. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dharmasyd

      ... I changed my signature line.

      Peace be with you.

      "War is not the answer, for only love can conquer hate." ~ Al Cleveland & Marvin Gaye (1970)

      by JBL55 on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 09:58:19 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I fear overreaction more than terrorism now (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rlochow, claude, poco, catilinus, dharmasyd

      "See? I'm not a racist! I have a black friend!"

      by TheHalfrican on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:33:45 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Nah (13+ / 0-)

    But I suspect it'll be the excuse used by the GOP to gut immigration reform.

    "What do you mean "conspiracy"? Does that mean it's someone's imaginings and that the actual polls hovered right around the result?" - petral

    by conspiracy on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 06:32:05 AM PDT

  •  Law enforcement worked (34+ / 0-)

    Just like with the first bombing at the World Trade Center. Faster in fact. No, this should not and CANNOT be another 9/11.

    -7.75, -8.10; . . . Seneca Falls, Selma and Stonewall (h/t cooper888)

    by Dave in Northridge on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 06:43:49 AM PDT

    •  Yes...what has transpired over the past couple (6+ / 0-)

      of days is a complete exoneration of John Kerry, who was evicerated by the rightwing in this country when running against Bush the war criminal in 2004 after stating that terrorism in this country should be a law enforcement problem.

      I am getting gay-married in Maine!

      by Rumarhazzit on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 09:18:56 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  What about going after bin Laden? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        lungfish

        Was it appropriate to use a military unit?  I personally think it was, but I get the feeling that I might be in the minority around here (which is cool), so I'm curious what others here think.

        •  Was there any other way? (0+ / 0-)

          He was in a foreign country most likely under the tacit protection of a faction of their military and heavily armed. I don't know how else they really could have nabbed him. Of course, if we had captured him it would have been better.

          If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

          by AoT on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:53:03 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Extralegal (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          dharmasyd

          It was a hit, one mafia boss taking out another. Complete with the guy swimming with the fishes.

          Legally, there's criminal law for people and groups, and there's a declaration of war for countries. If we want to go making up scenarios in which the people in the executive branch of government can kill out of their own volition, then we should have the public debate, amend the Constitution, and pass the law. (Not that I'd support it, in that form.) Anything else is fiat.

          Legitimate government power is only what the law provides. The 10th Amendment is there to back that up.

          Government and laws are the agreement we all make to secure everyone's freedom.

          by Simplify on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 12:13:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I always thought the military (0+ / 0-)

          was the wrong tool to use in identifying and capturing what was a criminal gang and its leader, to prosecute them for a heinous crime.  Start with the premise of a police action, and give those police extraordinary resources if they need them,  like the US Military, to get that job done.

          Turning our response into a "war"  against something as nebulous as "terrorism" was a mistake,  as the ongoing results have shown.  Led by the Boy Bush into hysteria and drastic over-reaction, we have really blown it.

          don't always believe what you think

          by claude on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 01:04:30 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  It's already headed in that direction (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      catilinus, Dump Terry McAuliffe

      for reasons I outlined in a comment above.  The purported need for and efficacy of expanded use of force is being both visibly and subtly being advocated as we speak.  

      Some men see things as they are and ask why. I dream of things that never were and ask why not?

      by RFK Lives on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 09:24:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  There are too many $ at stake for it to NOT (2+ / 0-)

        head in that direction.  Plus, as I noted the other day, violence is deeply ingrained in our society.  Words cannot describe how I wish it were otherwise.  

        Some men see things as they are and ask why. I dream of things that never were and ask why not?

        by RFK Lives on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 09:27:57 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I quite agree (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        RFK Lives, AoT, rlochow, poco, claude

        I am enormously disturbed by the trends to both militarize the police AND police-ize the military.  That road ALWAYS leads to the same place--and it is a place we should not want to go.

        I am equally disturbed by all the voices here either making excuses for it or outright cheering it.  I remember when progressives used to OPPOSE a militarized national-security state, not advocate for its construction.

        We have learned nothing at all from 9-11.  We are once again, as a nation, losing our goddamn minds, over-reacting in the most silly ways, and will now proceed to voluntarily and enthusiastically dismantle what remains of our democracy.

        Sad to see.

         

  •  Absolutely agree. (13+ / 0-)

    Too many in this country feel the Constitution should include the 2nd Amendment. And nothing else.

    by blueoregon on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 07:18:25 AM PDT

  •  thank you catilinus (15+ / 0-)

    for expressing my sentiments as well.

    If I can't dance I don't want to be part of your revolution. ~ Emma Goldman

    by Lady Libertine on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 07:22:05 AM PDT

  •  catilinus, I so agree with .... (18+ / 0-)

    ... your heartfelt plea.  May little Martin's wish come true:

    No more hurting people. Peace.
    You mention 100+ dead in TX.  According to current news reports, the known death toll is 12.  Is there an information source I'm missing?    

    Dwell on the beauty of life. ~ Marcus Aurelius

    by Joy of Fishes on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 07:47:32 AM PDT

  •  exactly. if there is a lesson from that (18+ / 0-)

    you don't punish a country for the act of an individual.

    Nor do you turn a police action into a war.

    •  what if a country's government is harboring (0+ / 0-)

      terrorists that have attacked you multiple times and are planning and training for more attacks in said country under protection of said government?

      •  what if I have a roommate who robs a bank? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AoT, poco, claude

        Do I go to jail for "harboring" him?

        The Taliban did not have anything to do with 9-11.  They didn't plan it, didn't pay for it, didn't do any of the logistical work for it, had no members carrying it out, and didn't find out about until the very same time we did. And indeed the Al Qaeda camps were in portions of the country that the Afghan government barely even had any control over (and still doesn't today).

        It was precisely this sort of vengeful silliness that led to the debacles of two unnecessary wars.  

        We as a nation have learned nothing at all. Nothing.

      •  If your understanding of these issues (0+ / 0-)

        is based on info culled from fox news I can't help you.

      •  you send in the commandos, (0+ / 0-)

        acting under the authority of the police carrying out the investigation with all the backup they need, get the bad guys and leave.  You don't try to take over the whole damn country.  Kind of what Obama did. Should have been done 10 years sooner.

        Eyes on the Prize:  crime, cops, justice.

        Bin Ladin was a fucking evil mastermind.  He knew our country and guessed correctly that we would react as we did,  and furthered his goals (world-wide Jihad) immensely with our blundering heavy-handedness.

        don't always believe what you think

        by claude on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 01:23:38 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Let me the first to say I will protest ANY war. (21+ / 0-)

    That the media tries to sell using this.

    Don't care if it's the war on terror, or the war on some country to be named later.

    Going out and killing people is not the solution to this.

    I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

    by detroitmechworks on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 07:59:44 AM PDT

  •  Let's all take a breath (7+ / 0-)

    Let's all love ourselves
    Let's all love one another
    Breathe in the love
    Breathe out the hate

    being mindful and keepin' it real

    by Raggedy Ann on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 08:09:47 AM PDT

  •  they've put the entire city of Boston (27+ / 0-)

    on lockdown while they hunt down the remaining suspect, evidently he is so dangerous that they have to turn the whole city into a war zone and go door to door looking for him. This is  of course, more or less what our soldiers did in Iraq.

    We are so used to being at war, that we think it's OK that an entire city has to be put more or less under martial law, and the populace forced to cower in their homes, while the police, wearing combat gear and armed to the teeth, go and do their thing.

    The crime was heinous and horrific, but does that justify the military tactics being used to combat it? This is what a police state looks like.

    OK, maybe they don't do too much damage this time. But there will be a next time, and a time after that. They may not be so lucky. And that's assuming they will always have the best  intentions toward the citizenry--and who knows how long that will be the case or if it's even the case now?

    It's already too late. The War on Terror is ubiquitous and eternal. It's poisoned the very soul of America. Everywhere is now a war zone, everyone a potential enemy. If someone gets caught in the crossfire, they're just collateral damage. They give 'em a Band-Aid and move on, searching for the next target. Anything goes in the name of security. I mean, any. Thing.

    We've long since gone through the rabbit hole and are well on the other side. And it's a long, hard road back.

    "In America, the law is king." --Thomas Paine

    by limpidglass on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 08:14:36 AM PDT

    •  Last Time I Was In The US (7+ / 0-)

      I couldn't believe the changes.

      Fear and tension and suspicion. People waiting on endless lines to be scanned, holding onto their shoes.

      They used 1984 as a roadmap.

    •  ayuh (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Apost8, AoT, Matt Z, annan, rlochow
      We've long since gone through the rabbit hole and are well on the other side. And it's a long, hard road back.
      I don't think there is any going back.  We are going through, into something new. Hopefully we can hold onto our humanity
      and expand it along the way.
    •  A police state locks down for unrest, not safety (25+ / 0-)

      I did my graduate work at BU and an internship in Watertown, so I have at least a shadow of insight into how very surreal and invasive this must be to the folk living there.

      But I can understand the need for the "shelter in place" status. There have been widespread reports of "suspicious packages" all over the city. The police have got to be hearing about a lot more, from frightened people who are just trying to help as well as from cranks and publicity-hounds. Even knowing most if not all of these are going to be false alarms, they have to consider the possibility that each one could be real.

      By locking everything down, they serve two purposes -- both vital to the whole "protect and serve" ideal. They limit the potential damage should one or more of the devices prove to be real. And they limit the flood of distractions pouring in that force them to pull resources away from a massive manhunt for a man who has shown himself to be willing and able to use massive violence against both law enforcement and the civilian population.

      Given that, I can understand why officials shut the city down. It's far more response than the extent of the likely threat requires -- but it's the only response they have to the extent of the potential threat, which duty requires them to consider, and the most effective means of keeping their focus where it must be: on finding and apprehending a heavily armed and very dangerous suspect.

      There are plenty of aspects of the "War on Terror" that are reprehensible, abusive, and just downright silly. I don't honestly think this is one of them. It's just law enforcement using the tools available to deal as quickly as possible to a shocking and horrifying series of crimes.

      "Do it in the name of Heaven; you can justify it in the end..." - Dennis Lambert & Brian Potter

      by pragmaticidealist on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 08:57:42 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Good post. As I alluded to in my previous comment (8+ / 0-)

        a police state locks down the people because the people are suspect.  Here, they tell them to stay home...I don't even know if it's enforceable...for the same reasons they tell people to stay home in a weather emergency.  It's not safe, they don't want to save you, they don't want you in the way.  

        That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

        by Inland on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 09:03:00 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  That is what a Meteorologist State looks like (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          pdx kirk

          The horror, the horror.

        •  I suspect that it is not enforceable with either (0+ / 0-)

          detention or charge; having said that, if someone goes for a stroll down Somerville Av. today, odds are they're going to have an interaction with the police, a polite interaction but an interaction where said pedestrian is pretty strongly advised that they should go home if they want to be able to continue walking next week without medical aid.

          Having said that, most snow-heavy states, including Mass, do have means by which to declare a state of emergency such that motorists are no longer about to lawfully drive unless they are driving to, from, or during an emergency/essential services job.  I'd venture to say that it's invoked perhaps once every other year.  I've never read or interacted with that law and I don't know if it requires winter weather to be made effective; if it instead requires a generic emergency rather than a weather emergency, it's certainly possible that Gov. Patrick could have invoked it, and given the recent chaos and carnage, I would have trouble disputing any invocation of said emergency law.  If this isn't a public safety emergency, I don't know what is.

          But from the language I've heard over the news so far, this has largely been simply a request - a strong request, but a request.    Given all of the gunfight and bombs of the last few days, I suspect that the vast majority of citizens are following that advice.

          "The first drawback of anger is that it destroys your inner peace; the second is that it distorts your view of reality. If you come to understand that anger is really unhelpful, you can begin to distance yourself from anger." - The Dalai Lama

          by auron renouille on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 02:56:53 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Is there really a difference? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        limpidglass, maryabein, stevej

        Basically, it's just a huge show of force to show they're in control.

        A first step to what will happen as blowback from the US foreign policy becomes more and more pervasive and ubiquitous over the coming years.

        The "new normal" IOW.  But as long as it can be justified by rational-sounding people, no harm done really.

        •  Who thinks that? (6+ / 0-)

          There's one guy they can't find who fought off cops with homemade bombs and guns.  You really think the lesson from this is that the cops control everything?  Holy RKBA echoes, batman.

          That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

          by Inland on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 09:59:33 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  That's what they're trying to prove (0+ / 0-)

            by shutting down the entire city for what you dismissively call "one guy they can't find"

            IOW, a massive over-reaction.  But Bostonians are probably conditioned for this type of thing  - after all this is not the first time this year they've been told to stay home for their own "safety"

            That's quite the change from Bostonians of old:

            "Any people that would give up liberty for a little temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin
            link
            •  wow (3+ / 0-)

              I really don't think this is what Ben Franklin had in mind.

              Election protection: there's an app for that! -- and a toll-free hotline: 866-OUR-VOTE
              Better Know Your Voting System with the Verifier!

              by HudsonValleyMark on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 10:23:12 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Huh! (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              kefauver, Quicklund

              And here I thought they shut down the entire city to keep people out of the line of fire and allow law enforcement to keep its resources more tightly focused on the manhunt than they could be if the city were operating normally.

              And that they did so despite the fact that it involves considerable cost and inconvenience, not just to the hapless masses, but to the government itself and the business interests I'm pretty sure you'd argue they're allied with.

              How could I not have seen the truth?

              Guess it's time to get new tin foil. Mine seems to have stopped working.

              "Do it in the name of Heaven; you can justify it in the end..." - Dennis Lambert & Brian Potter

              by pragmaticidealist on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 10:31:18 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Yeah, like one person can put an entire (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                AoT

                city in the line of fire:

                And here I thought they shut down the entire city to keep people out of the line of fire
                but to couple that with "I thought" is nicely humorous to be sure.  Bravo on that!
                •  Yeah, he can (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  kefauver

                  He's had several days at large, and clearly possesses both the knowledge and expertise to build explosive devices. There is reason to believe that he knows how to use remote control to detonate them.

                  Modern technology and dense population centers make it disturbingly easy for a sufficiently knowledgeable and committed individual (or a small number of them) to imperil a very large number of the rest of us. The fact that it's unlikely that this has occurred doesn't free public officials from the necessity to assume that it has.

                  Look at the alternative: They don't lock down the city. Law enforcement thins out its manhunt because it has to cover all the myriad things it has to do in a working city on a normal day. There is a bomb, maybe more, and people get hurt. The public officials who failed to assume that the threat existed and take steps to minimize its potential for harm would be held completely accountable for that failure -- and rightly so.

                  Nuts or zealots with bombs can force us to do extraordinary things to keep vulnerable people safe until we neutralize the threat. If we assume that the folk we've hired to maintain the peace are all would-be tyrants, all we do is ensure that (a) they can't effectively keep the peace and (b) the ones who aren't would-be tyrants will start leaving in disgust, with the WBTs then filling the vacuum.

                  "Do it in the name of Heaven; you can justify it in the end..." - Dennis Lambert & Brian Potter

                  by pragmaticidealist on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 10:54:38 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  If that reasoning applied to "ordinary" (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    AoT

                    nutcases with guns who kill close to 100 people a day (often themselves, but whatever) in America the country would be on permanent lockdown.

                    But we don't do that.

                    There's no more reason to do it now than any other time.

                    •  Of course there's more reason. (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      pragmaticidealist, kefauver

                      He's not caught, he's in the area, and he plants bombs to kill randomly, possibly with a group.

                      You find an analogous situation.  

                      That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

                      by Inland on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:02:12 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  Sure there is. (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      kefauver

                      A nutcase with a gun -- a nutcase with 100 guns -- can only hurt the people he can reach.

                      A nutcase with a few days and some remote-control explosives can hurt people miles away.

                      You have to respond to the threat you face, not the one you wish you faced. And it's officialdom's job to assume that they face the worst threat they can reasonably see from the information at hand. It's not pretty, but it's the job.

                      "Do it in the name of Heaven; you can justify it in the end..." - Dennis Lambert & Brian Potter

                      by pragmaticidealist on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:11:54 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  again, if you're going to deal in hypotheticals (0+ / 0-)

                        like suggesting that this guy has control over remote control explosives - well, that could be the situation all over the country if somebody decides that's the case.  IOW, authorization to shut down a city, county, or state on a whim, as soon as the general population becomes conditioned to believing these pronouncements.

                        That aside, I'm curious how keeping people locked down makes them any safer from remote controlled explosives?  

                        What if they're locked down where the explosives are? In that case, oh gee, if only they had been allowed to go someplace else . . ..

                        •  Reasonable concerns (0+ / 0-)

                          Let's see:

                          The bomb fragments at the marathon site include elements readily identifiable (and very familiar to hobbyists) as having come from RC remote control devices.

                          One of the suspects was seen in video footage making a cell phone call at about the time one of the bombs went off.

                          Conclusive proof that there are remotely controlled bombs planted around the city? Of course not.

                          Reasonable cause for concern that there might be, and to act as if there were to ensure public safety? I think most people would say so.

                          The initial attack was on a public gathering place. Of the two spots I've seen reported as having received particular police attention (i.e., places suspicious packages have been reported/found), both are public spaces. So yes, keeping people in their homes is in high probability keeping more of them out of harm's way than letting them congregate in exactly that sort of spaces around the city.

                          And I'm sorry, but recognizing that an exceptional situation has required an exceptional response is NOT training a population of sheep to accept tyrannical power grabs whenever. Look up the definition of "exceptional" if you need more on this subject.

                          "Do it in the name of Heaven; you can justify it in the end..." - Dennis Lambert & Brian Potter

                          by pragmaticidealist on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:40:20 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Seriously, even NYC wasn't this batshit (0+ / 0-)

                            crazy - sure they shut down their bridges to vehicular traffic and their public transportation -but they still let their people walk around freely

                            And that was after a WAY worse attack than this.

                            This is just paranoia run rampant.

                            Either that or Big Brother taking intrusiveness to a whole new level I didn't expect to see in this country for another 7 or 8 years at the earliest.

                          •  They also weren't running a manhunt (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Quicklund, Inland

                            since all known suspects were conveniently dead.

                            That's kind of my point. Responses need to fit their situations.

                            And, with this, I will cease (for now) arguing the obvious with the obdurate.

                            "Do it in the name of Heaven; you can justify it in the end..." - Dennis Lambert & Brian Potter

                            by pragmaticidealist on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:53:54 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I guess I should be praising the authorities (0+ / 0-)

                            for not putting this lunacy into place immediately following the bombings

                            Because they should have based on your criteria of the suspects being alive!

                          •  that's not the criterion (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            pragmaticidealist, AoT
                            Responses need to fit their situations.
                            Yes, one corollary of that is that one shouldn't mount a manhunt for dead people. But it actually isn't very hard to understand why authorities shut down the T today, but not on Sunday or any day in between -- even if you disagree, in whole or in part, with their actions today.

                            Election protection: there's an app for that! -- and a toll-free hotline: 866-OUR-VOTE
                            Better Know Your Voting System with the Verifier!

                            by HudsonValleyMark on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 12:36:04 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                •  Well, if you know where the one guy is (3+ / 0-)

                  and where any bombs are, so they can narrow it down, feel free.  Then you can provide something besides being irked by people cooperating with police.

                  That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

                  by Inland on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 10:57:47 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  If they shut down cities every time (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Roadbed Guy

                there was a murderer on the loose I'd never be able to go anywhere.

                If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

                by AoT on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 10:51:30 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Yup. A bomb-wielding terrorist and a thug (0+ / 0-)

                  with a Glock require exactly the same response from law enforcement.

                  "Do it in the name of Heaven; you can justify it in the end..." - Dennis Lambert & Brian Potter

                  by pragmaticidealist on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:23:29 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  There is no evidence he is a terrorist (1+ / 1-)
                    Recommended by:
                    poco
                    Hidden by:
                    Quicklund
                    •  This needs an HR (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      pragmaticidealist

                      I know I've engaged you. But this level of denial just requires the conversation be shut off and terminated.  

                      Setting off two bombs in public crowds meets the common concept of terrorist. And yeah, several deaths  missing limbs are entered into evidence.

                      •  Terrorism - by US Federal Government (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        poco

                        prosecuting guidelines require evidence that the deed was done to further social or political goals.

                        Terrorism is defined in the Code of Federal Regulations as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives” (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85).
                        that's given in this diary

                        Do you have any evidence that these acts were done in furhterance of political or social goals?

                        I think not.  Therefore by definition it's not terrorism.

                        So it's you and your blatant disinformation that * really * needs to be hide rated.

                        But it's nice that you've so nicely outed yourself as one of those fearmongers that cry "terrorism" at every drop of the hat.

                        •  You just wallow in your minutae (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          auron renouille

                          Three dead at the race, scores injured, a dead police officer, IEDs and explosive vests add up to a shitload more than "zero evidence" nor a "drop of a hat".

                          Pathetic.

                          •  Again, it doesn't matter how many (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            poco

                            times you say it - words have meaning (well, not to you clearly, but in theory they do at least) - and terrorism has a necessary component of pursuing a political or social goal.

                            Now it * might * be possible that these guys met that criteria and actually were terrorists, but up to now I have seen absolutely no evidence of that.  And I note the you opted to not supply any such evidence when I suggested it.  So you seem to agree in that respect and just re-iterate a bunch of nonsense.

                            In any event, it seems much more likely that they were just a couple of completely fucked up nutcases.

                          •  Give it up. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Quicklund

                            Anyone who chooses not to grasp the difference between a definition for the purposes of a specific law and the general use definition of the same word in conversational English isn't interested in discussion. From the rest of the thread -- and I've engaged with him repeatedly as if he were intending to be rational -- it's clear that he just wants to see whether he can keep the rest of us from doing something more important than arguing with a rock.

                            It's not worth the annoyance.

                            "Do it in the name of Heaven; you can justify it in the end..." - Dennis Lambert & Brian Potter

                            by pragmaticidealist on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 12:46:06 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You are of course entirely correct (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            pragmaticidealist

                            In addition to your sound advice ... Now that I have issued an HR, site rules say I should not engage him further. Based on both sources, I will comply.

                            Getting harder to find wine among all the dregs in the DKos cask these days. Thanks for providing me a refreshing glass.

                          •  My pleasure! (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Quicklund

                            I'm tempted to make some silly joke about how long it's been since I've been drunk, but I'll restrain myself, and just thank you most sincerely.

                            "Do it in the name of Heaven; you can justify it in the end..." - Dennis Lambert & Brian Potter

                            by pragmaticidealist on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 01:27:11 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                      •  I think the "terrorist" label should be reserved (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        poco

                        for those acting to further a political or possibly theological agenda or ideology, in concert with others,  as opposed to deranged individuals acting out some personal agenda with a one (or two)-person crime-wave.

                        The theory goes that a "terrorist" acts deliberately to terrorize a population in order to sway it politically, towards the "terrorists'" goals.  I would grace neither the CO movie theater shooter nor the Sandy Hook shooter with that label. They were each random crazies, not part of some "movement".  

                        We don't know yet what the Boston guys had going for an agenda, what was driving them.

                        don't always believe what you think

                        by claude on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 01:59:59 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                •  Can the police EVER do the right thing (0+ / 0-)

                  in your world?

              •  That's it; I think that basically everyone with a (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                pragmaticidealist

                badge and active LEO duties east of Worcester is being tasked to this issue.  They simply do not have the time to deal with a tourist whose pocket was picked on Tremont, etc.

                "The first drawback of anger is that it destroys your inner peace; the second is that it distorts your view of reality. If you come to understand that anger is really unhelpful, you can begin to distance yourself from anger." - The Dalai Lama

                by auron renouille on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 02:58:51 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  How DARE the governor tell people (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              kefauver, Quicklund, liz

              not to drive in a snowstorm!!!  Someone call the ACLU!

            •  They found a bomb (0+ / 0-)

              outside a public transportation station. They feared that these guys had been planting bombs, and wanted to keep people away.

              "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

              by happy camper on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:29:40 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Dear Genius (0+ / 0-)

              Boston citizens are being asked to remain home, not detained at gunpoint. If a citizen wants to out outside,

              they go outside.

              No "liberty" is being sacrificed.

              •  If that is the case, why is the word (0+ / 0-)

                "lockdown" prominently feature in every headline?

                So, right back at you genius, what does the word mean if not what every internet dictionary tells me?

                •  Headlines define facts eh? (0+ / 0-)

                  Never heard of headline writers have you? Well, they work for news orgs, not for law enforcement orgs. I presume in your imagination there is a shotgun-toting guard forcing every resident to stay inside. Not, you know, just a general request put out to the public.

                  Keep up the genius-level reasoning.

        •  Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar dude n/t (0+ / 0-)

          "See? I'm not a racist! I have a black friend!"

          by TheHalfrican on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:36:15 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Yep, "just" (0+ / 0-)

          The cops aren't even looking for the suspects. The dead cop killed by the suspects? He's not really dead. Just a media lie.  Yep, the police are not doing anything but just running around making people afraid of the police.

          Who says DKos has sunk to a new nadir?

      •  I think that fifteen years ago, (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        shaharazade, poco, dharmafarmer

        people would have realized just how crazy this is. Now we're so accustomed to it that we don't even blink.

        They've shut down the police scanners and are requesting that people stop tweeting about the incident, and have set up a perimeter to keep the media out. You will say, of course, that the suspects might be following social media to evade police, the media will stir the pot and frighten people with fragmentary and sensational information, etc.

        One can argue whether that is enough of an advantage to allow one guy to overcome a thousands-person strong police department with millions of dollars' worth of equipment, but it doesn't change the fact that there is now a black hole of silence in Boston, where no one but the police know--or will ever know--just what is going down.

        If they accidentally shoot someone walking across the street to get some ice cream, there will be a great temptation to cover it up and spin it to make the police look good. That's what institutions do--cover their asses.

        Because they have complete control over the flow of information, they will be tempted to use it to control the narrative in ways that may not be conducive to the public interest. The culture of American policing has become so militarized and trigger happy that creating a zone in which police have total freedom of action, without any oversight, is deeply troubling to me.

        It's just law enforcement using the tools available
        But you can always say that, no matter what the tools are. And more and more tools are always made available. And there will always be shocking and horrifying crimes to justify ever-more-extensive uses of those tools.

        The invasion of Iraq was totally justifiable if you bought into the premise that we needed to do absolutely everything possible to stop Saddam.

        So what if we were 99% sure that Saddam didn't actually have WMD? There was a 1% chance that he had. He had, in fact, had chemical weapons, even used them on his own people. He started two wars. He was a bad guy, a killer, just like this guy.

        Bush was just using the tools available. Who cares if the UN inspectors didn't see the threat--he did. And he acted, even if those inspectors didn't.

        It's always "for our safety." That's what they ALWAYS say. And we never get to see whether we're actually being made safer or what they actually did. They just do what they like, then we all have to "move on".

        At some time we will have to take a good look at where this all is going. Because it's headed nowhere good, let me tell you.

        "In America, the law is king." --Thomas Paine

        by limpidglass on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 09:31:25 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Much of what you say is true (6+ / 0-)

          We do have to be vigilant against the creeping edge of tyranny, especially at a time when so many are willing to sacrifice freedom for the illusion of safety. And it is quite possible for the best-intended law enforcement effort to spin off the pavement and wind up axle-deep in absurdity.

          But you're also overstating your case, and that undermines your argument. At this point, "they" do not have "complete control over the flow of information." Indeed, you point out that officials have requested that folk refrain from real-time chronicling of events via social media; they haven't simply shut down Internet access or cut power to server farms. "They" have remarkably limited control for autocratic bogeymen.

          And I'm sorry, but even an aggressive door-to-door search for a clearly dangerous man (who was, according to witnesses, willing to drive over his own brother to get away from police) is not analogous to the invasion of Iraq.

          There does not appear to be any intent -- much less any possibility -- that the current situation in Boston will extend beyond the manhunt. If there were any rational reason to think it would, then it would be sensible to raise calm, specific concerns. But there isn't, and you're not. You're conflating a short-term police effort with long-term national policy and international aggression. And that doesn't serve your purpose, which is (I believe) to warn the community that there are those who pose very real threats to its freedom, and they don't all use bombs or come from overseas.

          Is the current situation sensible? Is it an abuse? Is it over-reaching? Prudent? Commendable? Vile? In the heat of the moment, we're probably not in the best position to judge. So why not take a moment, calm down, give the folk we've hired a chance to do their jobs as best they can, accept for the moment both their professional judgment and their good intent, and hold off on proclaiming calamity until we can actually see what transpires.

          If in the clear light after the manhunt is over, after folk have had a chance to forget that they're afraid and feeling vulnerable, a careful analysis of the situation indicates that things should have been handled differently, then let's work to make the necessary changes to help ensure that's the way it gets handled in the future (god forbid it should have to be).

          One of the greatest assets progressives have is the simple fact that our positions can be rationally defended. Let's make sure don't lose that vital asset -- or even give others an opportunity to claim that we have lost it.

          "Do it in the name of Heaven; you can justify it in the end..." - Dennis Lambert & Brian Potter

          by pragmaticidealist on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 10:20:57 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  thank you. first sensible comment here today. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Matt Z, pragmaticidealist, kefauver

        Too late for the simple life, too early for android love slaves - Savio

        by Clem Yeobright on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 09:45:41 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Thank you very much for being a voice of (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        pragmaticidealist, kefauver

        reason.  People seem to be struggling with the concept of keeping people inside to oppress vs. keeping them inside so they don't get blown up by a madman.  

        •  It's an atmosphere of fear (0+ / 0-)

          and that can do things to people's judgment. I get that, and I'll even give folk a lot of latitude on account of it. But yeah, it's not really that hard a distinction to make.

          "Do it in the name of Heaven; you can justify it in the end..." - Dennis Lambert & Brian Potter

          by pragmaticidealist on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:31:40 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Pffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffft. (11+ / 0-)

      I don't see how you can both complain about a lockdown and also complain that there's a lack of concern about people caught in a crossfire.  

      They aren't telling people to stay in their homes because the people are suspect, like in a police state; they are telling people to stay in their homes because they are either in the way or in danger or both.  

      It's pretty much the same as the declaration during a weather emergency.  

      I would say that looks like martial law as much as a police action looks like a police state.

      evidently he is so dangerous that they have to turn the whole city into a war zone and go door to door looking for him.
      I can tell you don't know what a war zone is like; but appearently you don't know what "go door to door" is like, either.   Never trick or treated?
      The crime was heinous and horrific, but does that justify the military tactics being used to combat it?
      Okay, I'll bite.  What military tactics?  
      evidently he is so dangerous
      Him, or co-conspirators.  Why not give the police half a chance to find out if he is "just" a premediated murderer terrorist by letting them do their job?

      That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

      by Inland on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 08:58:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The fact that we have this mass of militarized (0+ / 0-)

        police forces is really concerning. Obviously it has come in handy in this case, but I think there's a larger point to be made here. Most of the time when these para-military forces are used it is not in any sort of situation like this. It's for drug arrests and other things. I don't know that this is a police state yet, but all the pieces are in place and all it will take is the right person(or wrong person as it were) to make it happen.

        Okay, I'll bite.  What military tactics?
        The tactics used in Iraq and Afghanistan. City wide lock down and house to house searches by forced armed with military weaponry. I guess people don't really want military weaponry off the street.

        If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

        by AoT on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 10:11:24 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Not In This Case (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          AoT, dharmafarmer
          Obviously it has come in handy in this case, but I think there's a larger point to be made here.

          I agree (here and in plenty of other posts) with the larger point that militarized police cause more trouble (and violence, and crimes) than they help. But it is precisely because in this case that military backed police "have come in handy" that this case is the worst time to make the case against them.

          The case against them in this case is that they killed one suspect and let the other get away without getting any info from them. This case makes the argument that the entire approach we've funded and ceded liberties to is worthless and worse.

          We need less military, and more intelligence. Both in police and Federal support in cases like this (and in this case), and in the many other cases we're misusing our military for. A vastly smaller military, and a focused and accountable intelligence service, would actually protect us.

          "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

          by DocGonzo on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:34:42 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I think you just made the case (0+ / 0-)

            against a militarized police force perfectly.

            The case against them in this case is that they killed one suspect and let the other get away without getting any info from them. This case makes the argument that the entire approach we've funded and ceded liberties to is worthless and worse.

            We need less military, and more intelligence. Both in police and Federal support in cases like this (and in this case), and in the many other cases we're misusing our military for. A vastly smaller military, and a focused and accountable intelligence service, would actually protect us.

            I wish I could put it so well.

            If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

            by AoT on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:46:16 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I Agree (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              AoT

              After I thought about your last reply to my last post, I realized you were right. I talked myself through it, though I hadn't noticed by the time I posted. I changed my own mind, but I wouldn't have without your perspective.

              Thanks.

              "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

              by DocGonzo on Sat Apr 20, 2013 at 09:55:12 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  hmmm... (0+ / 0-)

          The "pieces" have always been "in place" for  "police state".  The only way for that not to be the case is to have no military.  And no armed police force.

          And it's not like abuse of state power is anything new.  FDR put Americans in interment camps once, after all.  And he was much more wrong to do so than anything that's happened in dealing with these Marathon bombers.

          These guys attacked an international event, killed multiple people, maimed hundreds for life, killed cops with guns, bombs, and grenades, held up convenience store, and hijacked cars.  And we don't know if they were working alone or are part of a cell or what. The authorities are taking steps they think are required to apprehend the suspect and protect the public.

          I'm not scared of our government.  And the authorities' requesting (not even actually enforcing) that people stay in their homes and shutting down mass transit (which is run by the government to begin with (cab service has been restored)) are not going to make me scared of our government or give me the willies about an oppressive police state.

          Judging by your and others' comments, lots of progressives are as frightened of our government as the right wing paranoid nutjobs are.

    •  Martial law? (0+ / 0-)

      Are people being arrested and prosecuted for going outside? Are they even really protesting? Most of the frustration I've seen is with the bombers who caused this scare, not the government that is seeking to protect people.

      It just seems a little extreme to me to call it "martial law." Rather, the city (seemingly led by local government and law enforcement but in conjunction with other military and law enforcement assets nationwide) has gone into "lockdown" for the safety of its citizens. Didn't it do that for a blizzard recently?

      I live in a hurricane state. When a hurricane is hitting, it is "illegal" (meaning you'll get fined at worst, not thrown in jail) to go out and about for your own safety and the safety of others. This is commonplace for many natural disasters. In the case of known bombers who have already had a firefight in the streets, thrown explosives, and may have planted more, a city going into lockdown may be a NEW use of this but it doesn't seem unreasonable or without any kind of precent to me.

      The police want to be able to do their job as safely as possible and the city wants to keep its people safe. "We're asking the people of the city to please sit tight and not open their doors to anyone but law enforcement" isn't exactly martial law to me. It's public service.

    •  What a foolish diatribe (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      HudsonValleyMark
      This is what a police state looks like.
      23 recommends for this tripe? Really, people?
      •  yeah, it's a bit odd (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Quicklund

        Look at it this way: if today became routine, then it would look like a police state.

        I think probably some people are reccing this comment to say that we should not hurtle into madness. And some people are reccing it from the standpoint that we're already in the belly of the beast.

        Election protection: there's an app for that! -- and a toll-free hotline: 866-OUR-VOTE
        Better Know Your Voting System with the Verifier!

        by HudsonValleyMark on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 12:10:13 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Either way it's not rec-worthy (0+ / 0-)

          The police are asking peole to remain home for purposes of safety.

          No one is being detained.

          This is not what a police state looks like, nor are we hurtling to one.

          This comment and its recs are, however, what melodrama is.

          •  my guess is (0+ / 0-)

            that some people are reacting to the images of armored vehicles, etc.

            I don't think the comment is rec-worthy either. I'm just saying that different people recced it for different reasons, and I have more in common with some of them than with others, as usual. :)

            Election protection: there's an app for that! -- and a toll-free hotline: 866-OUR-VOTE
            Better Know Your Voting System with the Verifier!

            by HudsonValleyMark on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 12:42:08 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  the one factor I see that (0+ / 0-)

      justifies the level of police activity and getting the populace off the street in this moment while this guy, supposedly in an explosive vest, is on the run:  any group of civilians becomes a target or hostages,  not to mention private cars being available for him to carjack.  I would guess that is the reasoning behind what's going on, keeping people out of the way.

      They are not going to be able to justify it for much longer, and it will have been worth it only if they actually get the guy.  If he gets away, there will be a shit-storm of bitching about the cops not doing their job right.

      don't always believe what you think

      by claude on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 01:38:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Me neither. I won't live in fear. (8+ / 0-)

    I already had to HR one hyperventilating post today accusing the NRA of arming terrorists. When I challenged the poster to state which background check two Muslim brothers should have failed, he got cold feet and refused to respond.

    I don't want to go back to racial and religious profiling. I don't want to suspect everyone around me with a funny name of being a terrorist. I don't want to strip civil rights from all foriegners. Living in fear of the Other is not an option.

  •  I'm sick and tired of the damned (11+ / 0-)

    stoking of fear of our media.

    I've turned the shit off the telly. We can get "news" without being terrified to death. There is a faction of our government (of the Red State variety) who take these unrelated incidents and then build narratives around them which allows them to stir up fear on purpose. Next thing you know, it's used as a justification to start dropping bombs somewhere.

    Those bastards are dying to start another war, and anyone paying attention for the last 20 years knows that. It pisses me off-you watch, they will point to all the innocent people hurt and killed this past week, and try to use them as props as a run-up another illegal war.  

    Speculative? Sure. But take a look at history.

    "The “Left” is NOT divided on the need to oppose austerity and the Great Betrayal. The Third Way is not left or center or even right. It is Wall Street on the Potomac."--Bill Black

    by lunachickie on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 08:32:57 AM PDT

  •  Agreed, and it seems we are getting a totally (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    high uintas, AoT, greengemini, catilinus

    different vibe today than after 9/11.  That's very good.

    That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

    by Inland on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 08:47:04 AM PDT

  •  I don't want any of those things either, (3+ / 0-)

    but I also don't want liberals to renounce the use of military force to deal with terrorism.  

    Also, you mention American foreign policy, but I don't see how changing foreign policy has much to do with this; for one thing, we don't know if the terrorists even had that as a motive yet (heck, we're not even 100% sure yet that these even are the terrorists, let alone knowing their motive).  In any case, the main oppressor of Chechnya is Russia, not the United States.  

    "Optimism is better than despair." --Jack Layton, the late Canadian MP, liberal, and Christian.

    by lungfish on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 08:50:37 AM PDT

    •  The Indiscriminate Use of Military (6+ / 0-)

      that the US has engaged in causes terrorism.

      And, it IS terrorism also.

    •  So you don't think that killing civilians (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BradyB

      with drone strikes has anything to do with terrorist attacks? Or our history in various Muslim countries?

      The historical ignorance in the country is astounding.

      If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

      by AoT on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 10:25:16 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  We have no idea if it has anything to do (0+ / 0-)

        with THIS attack.

        •  We don't know 100%, true (0+ / 0-)

          and unless this kid is caught and not killed then we never really will know for sure, but let's be fair here, these are two brothers who identify as Muslims, one of whom was most likely radicalized and politicized. There's a really good chance that two men who identify as Muslims killing a bunch of people are probably in some way angry about our killing Muslims.

          Saying that we have no idea seems hopelessly naive.

          If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

          by AoT on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:29:29 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  You can be against those things (0+ / 0-)

        but also think that it sounds like blaming the victim to argue that they justify terrorist attacks here in America.  

        "Optimism is better than despair." --Jack Layton, the late Canadian MP, liberal, and Christian.

        by lungfish on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:27:24 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I never argued that they justify attacks (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          BradyB

          But you said that you think our foreign policy had nothing to do with that, and I find that to be terribly unlikely to the point of absurdity. These attacks didn't happen in a vacuum. The people killed certainly didn't have anything to do with our actions in Afghanistan and elsewhere, one was a Chinese national for god's sake, but when our military targets civilians on a regular basis then it's hopelessly naive to think that it won't have some repercussions domestically beyond some moral turpitude.

          If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

          by AoT on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:33:20 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  In fairness, perhaps you didn't (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AoT

        intend it to sound that way, but I still think that it's not a totally unreasonable interpretation of your comment.  Also, I don't think my comment was representative of the "historical ignorance in the country;" I'm well aware of all kinds of negative things in our history.  

        "Optimism is better than despair." --Jack Layton, the late Canadian MP, liberal, and Christian.

        by lungfish on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:36:58 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I hate the fact that I have to constantly (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          BradyB, lungfish

          tell people that I don't think an eight year old boy didn't deserve to die. Can I get a little benefit of the doubt here?

          If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

          by AoT on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:43:57 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  maybe it has more to do with torrorists (0+ / 0-)

        using civilians as human shields.  They put those civilians in harm's way.  On purpose.

        Btw, Al aqueda has attacked lots of non-Americans.  For example, Al Queda killed dozens of Ugandans that had gathered in a theater to watch the 2010 World Cup on a big screen.  So we can stop pretending that all of their attacks are a result of US policy.

        •  You made the jump from (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          poco

          me saying that terrorism against the US is entwined with our history of violence to saying that all terrorism is our fault. I didn't say that. In the case of al Qaeda we did play a role in their creation in the late seventies and the eighties, so lets not pretend like our hands are clean there. We obviously didn't intend for them to spiral out of control and attack us, but that's beside the point.

          If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

          by AoT on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 12:34:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  It's like waking up to a crazy Kafka world every (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    high uintas, AoT, DrTerwilliker, catilinus

    day lately. I don't want to watch the news/I can't stop watching the news. It's like that old Dorothy Parker line, "What fresh hell is this?"
    But we can't invade Russia like we did Iraq. And Bush isn't POTUS. So maybe clearer heads will prevail...

    "Let's stay together"--Rev. Al Green and President Obama

    by collardgreens on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 08:57:24 AM PDT

  •  My first thought, catilinus. (8+ / 0-)

    I want to take the feeling of unity and strength that Bostonians showed and use it do good for our nation.

    I want the perps caught and true justice to prevail.

    I don't want to take this and turn it into another stupid war.

    I don't want this to gin up xenophobia.

    I want the people of Boston to be able to heal.

    Peace

    "The scientific nature of the ordinary man is to go on out and do the best you can." John Prine

    by high uintas on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 09:00:01 AM PDT

  •  Exaclty. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    shaharazade, petesmom

    Thank you for writing this. Shared on Facebook.

    curious portal - to a world of paintings, lyric-poems, art writing, and graphic and web design

    by asterkitty on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 09:03:35 AM PDT

  •  Well.... (0+ / 0-)

    I don't think it will manifest in anything like the way it about Al Qaeda and the Middle East problem in 2001-02.  But on the other hand, I think like 9/11 this will have consequences- though they likely won't be as material.

    Thing is, what 9/11 did was get the U.S. involved in and committed to a resolution of conflicts in the primary crisis region of the Earth of the times- West Asia.  U.S. military power got involved in two of the subregional conflicts- in Afghanistan in the South Asian wars, and in Iraq in the desert Middle Eastern ones.

    But West Asia is biigger than these subregions.  The U.S. stayed out of the Caucasus conflicts (though we came close during the Georgian-Ossetian war in late 2008) and Central Asian-Sinkiang-Tibet sets of conflicts.  The first primarily because of charity of sorts toward the Russians, the second because of the immaturity of the conflicts and the sensibilities of the Russians and the Chinese government.

    I think the long term outcome of this atrocity here in Boston, though not that large in scale, is that the U.S. will get increasingly involved in and take a harder diplomatic line on the conflicts in the Caucasus and Central Asia.  

    The easy and first American politics will be right wing War On Terror idiocy.  But in the longer term I think the major culprit/problem will be viewed, with a left-liberal analysis, as Putin and the weird Slavic Russian nationalism that hates and fears the Muslim native groups of territories held by Russia.  But at the same time refuses to give these groups their sovereignty, proper borders, and/or a just and decent settlement of their grievances.

    So as awful as this bombing was, I think it may achieve the bombers' hope of getting the U.S. involved in seeing to rectification of the problem in faraway lands that drove them to frustration and violence.

  •  John McCain (6+ / 0-)

    are others sens are working on a new and expanded AUMF to authorize the killing the U.S. is already doing. Look for this event to (mis)inform that debate.

  •  i would love to see him caught (0+ / 0-)

    not because he doesn't deserve to die, but because we need as much information as possible. However, we can't afford to let a person like this escape, it's too great a liability to society. So, if they have to kill him so be it.

  •  I didn't want the bombers to be Muslim... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Dead Man, AoT, poco, catilinus

    I had hoped this would not turn out to be a muslim terrorist.  Not because I have any special affinity for Muslims nor do I have any aversion towards them either but because it will just promote more violence and killing and stock piling of weapons and so on and so on.  

    I was actually hoping that the perpatrator would have been just another crazy person, irrationally afraid of people different from himself, wanting to instigate a fight or make some stupid political point. If that were so, maybe we could have spoken in a unified voice that violence has to stop.

    Unfortunately, these lives lost and the images of these mangled survivors from this horrific event will only serve to promote more violence and more hatred and more weapons.  

    I was hoping that from the ashes of this tragedy, something good would arise from the price these unfortunate victims paid.  Instead, we, as a society, will use their sacrifice as justification for more of the same.

    Peace is not impossible, but it is hard.  It is hard to look at such a horrific event and not want blood in return.  It is hard to watch innocent children and young men and women blown to pieces and think about peace and forgiveness and love for humankind.

    I was hoping that this sickening tragedy would make people sick of violence and war and hatred but instead, it is just going to exaserbate it.  I want peace and love in a world addicted to war and hate.

    I hate that I hate these two young men.  I hate that these victims suffered at all, let alone that their suffering is for nothing.  I hate that tomorrow or next week or next month, this tragedy will be eclipsed by some other senseless tragedy because we, as a global society, will never realize that peace is hard... but it is worth it.

    "Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not YET sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favour..."

    by Buckeye Nut Schell on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 09:13:53 AM PDT

    •  I agree with most of what you are saying, but (0+ / 0-)

      does being Muslim protect from mental derangement? Can't there be Muslim versions of Columbine shooters?

      From Pierce:

      It may be Columbine with a thin overlay of politics. It may be Columbine with Jihadist YouTube videos instead of rambling diaries. It may be Columbine extended over a greater geographical area. But, for the moment, it looks like a couple of young people who went completely off the twig and decided to kill a lot of people.
      Read more: Daily Politics Blog - Charles P. Pierce - Political Blogging - Esquire http://www.esquire.com/...

      And other than a lot of useless chatter on cable tv, everybody speculating like mad, we have no information that would force us to conclusively determine one way or another.

      It's *Gandhi*, not Ghandi

      by poco on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 01:05:22 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I agree with you... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        poco

        I just do not think the the majority of the population will think critically enough about this situation.  The fact they are muslim will be enough to condemn the whole population in a large portion of the country's eyes.

        There will not be a unified calling for peace from this but rather a fragmented calling for peace and blood and deportation and regulations and yada, yada, yada.  

        I was hoping for some kind of positive to be taken from this negative and it doesn't look like that is going to happen.  This just reinforces the stereotype that Muslims are terrorists and seemingly justifies all of the hate over the past 12 years.

        "Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not YET sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favour..."

        by Buckeye Nut Schell on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 01:54:04 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  If they want to fixate (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Buckeye Nut Schell

          on the fact that they are Muslim (if, indeed, that is the case), then maybe they might conclude that it was a lie that we could create "safety" at home by applying belligerent foreign policy?  Doesn't it make a lie out of "we've gotta fight 'em over there..."?  I'm not subscribing to their thinking, but wondering if there's some point we can make to them about how they think...

  •  I woke up and saw images of the streets of Boston (6+ / 0-)

    filled with the same armored vehicles and storm troopers that crowded my street after 9/11.

    I, too, thought, not again but I could taste the beginnings of fear.

    Thank you, catilinus. Beautifully said.

  •  Too late. It's already ingrained and has been (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Roadbed Guy, maryabein, catilinus

    increasing for almost 12 years.  This will just continue it.  

    "I'm an antiwar propagandist as accused by democrats. Not even republicans have called me that."

    by BigAlinWashSt on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 09:21:56 AM PDT

  •  Putin is rubbing his hands together in glee. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Roadbed Guy, leema, catilinus

    You're right, the way they handle this going forward is critical.  Criminal civilian court, Obama, not military tribunal.  And try to take the guy alive, many more questions will be accurately answered that way.

    "Well, yeah, the Constitution is worth it if you succeed." - Nancy Pelosi // Question: "succeed" at what?

    by nailbender on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 09:22:10 AM PDT

  •  Some people in high places (4+ / 0-)

    benefit directly, personally from terror, misery, and desperation in the masses. It isn't always the ones called "terrorists."

    Let's remember that. Let's do what we can to thwart their aims.

    It's here they got the range/ and the machinery for change/ and it's here they got the spiritual thirst. --Leonard Cohen

    by karmsy on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 09:45:26 AM PDT

  •  This will be used to push surveillance state (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    catilinus

    More and more of the US will look like London as far as CCTV goes.  I don't think there's any way to stop that.

    And maybe that's a good thing since it will disabuse people of the notion that there is such a thing as casual privacy anymore.

    "Don't be defeatist, dear. It's very middle class." - Violet Crawley

    by nightsweat on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 09:46:11 AM PDT

  •  i'm amazed how many people in my feed (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    misslegalbeagle

    are offended by the terrorists being killed at the hands of officers. Like really? Apparently certain lefties idealism gets so far out there that we're supposed to magically peacefully detain people who bomb innocents, take hostages and fire upon officers. Gimmie a break.

  •  My cousin e-mailed this to me this morning. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    shaharazade, dharmafarmer, catilinus

    I'm reproducing it in its entirety as she received it via an e-mail which was sent with the intent that its message would be broadcast widely.

    I am not affiliated with CSL but there is awful lot of good herein:

    Practicing peace and understanding amidst fear and violence; A prayer for Boston

    By Rev. Dr. Kenn Gordon, Spiritual Leader
    Centers for Spiritual Living

    Our blessings and our prayers go out to Boston today after, yet again, another senseless act of violence perpetrated on innocent people. I ask that each of us take a moment and pray for those afflicted, and once again, I ask that we pray for our world and our advancement into a peaceful unity and mature response to these heinous and destructive acts.

    It is obvious that the traditional responses that we as a world society have implemented for thousands of years have become, and possibly always were, both ineffective and counter-productive. Violence begets violence! The consciousness of vengeance is contagious. The motivation for much, if not all, of the violence we are experiencing is born from an inane and immature sense of revenge. The perpetrators are seeking revenge for the perceived injustices of their lives and when we react to their actions from a mind-set of vengeance we further feed the act.  

    The common-place violence that we currently are witnessing is a symptom of a much larger cause and the solution has not been found in our traditional way of handling it. It is time that we begin to look for deeper solutions, as opposed to falling back into our traditional response. So, I ask you to remain calm and clear, to practice understanding and love. This does not mean that we condone these inhumane acts, nor does it mean we allow them to go without penalty.

    Centers for Spiritual Living believes that everything in our world begins with a thought, an attitude and a frame of mind. If we live in a violent society, reflecting the vengeance that initiated the act in the first place will do nothing to stop the violence. It may stop the current perpetrators, but it will not end future violence. It is up to us to be proactive and focus our attention on peace and respect for life. It is unrealistic to expect others to do it if we are not prepared to do it ourselves first. It is time that we face the bigger issue, and that is not just what humans will do to other humans but how tirelessly they will justify it.

    A prayer for Boston, a prayer for ourselves

    In this time of sorrow and shock, I consciously bring myself back from that which has occurred to the Divine place of recognition and clarity, understanding that this unskillful act perpetrated in Boston moves now beyond form to a place of unconditional wholeness and peaceful realization.

    I banish any and all sense of retribution and vengeance and allow my mind to rest in the grace and understanding of peace and acceptance, knowing that every act and every action unfolds in Divinity for the highest and greatest good. Right here and right now, I invoke Truth to enter my being, knowing that It abolishes fear and replaces it with faith, dissolves all sense of retribution and replaces it with love, dissipates all negative judgment and replaces it with understanding.

    I know with certainty that goodness comes from this act and I surrender my need to know and understand and stand strong in my faith and optimism.

    I surrender this back to Spirit, trusting and knowing that all that needs to heal, all that needs to be recognized, all that needs to be known, is done and present now.

    I allow myself to live in this Truth.

    And so It is.

    "The fears of one class of men are not the measure of the rights of another." ~ George Bancroft (1800-1891)

    by JBL55 on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 09:46:17 AM PDT

    •  That's wonderful if you're not the (0+ / 0-)

      person whose child was murdered or whose legs were blown off.  Explain to the parents of the 8-year old victim how their child being ripped apart before their eyes was "for the highest and greatest good."  Give me a f-ing break.  

      I dont want to feel "love" or "dissipat[e] all negative judgment" towards the perpetrators of this heinous act.  I want them brought to justice.  

      •  Justice and vengeance two different things. (0+ / 0-)

        Justice is the application of a punishment appropriately applied by a civil society and also serves to further protect society.  Vengeance only perpetuates the cycle of violence.  It was, for instance, the motivator for "we've-got-to-fight-them-there, so-we-don't-have-to-fight-them-here" type of thinking than only exascerbated and escalated the violence.

  •  Its Nothing Close (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    greengemini, Tony Situ, poco, catilinus

    to 9/11, although the media is trying to make it that bad.

  •  I think it's a safe bet we're not going to war (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    catilinus

    ... with Russia.

    Chechnya is a part of Russia. It would be like going to war with Maine.

    •  No "safe bets" are allowed in the GWOT. That said, (0+ / 0-)

      I don't think direct invasion of Russia is a likely event...but speaking of Maine...there are plenty of think tanks who do remember the Maine, so to speak, and whose job seems to be focusing on causi bellis.

      America's greatest political dynasty...the Ka'an

      by catilinus on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 02:03:41 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  What you should want (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Hawkjt, Keone Michaels

    is for people on the left to admit that radical islamic violence is a continuing long term issue that has to be correctly engaged, not ignored or denied.

  •  Agreed (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    catilinus

    But I think you needn't worry about war with Chechnya.  From the events in Boston, our policymakers will draw the obvious conclusion that we must go to war against Iran, North Korea, and Muslims.

    Shirley Chisholm was right. Our Republic is in deep trouble.

    by Big River Bandido on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 10:19:21 AM PDT

  •  Don't fight fire with fire... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    catilinus

    Quench it with water.

  •  Gotta say I am appalled (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    catilinus

    at the authorities for closing the city of Boston and all surrounding towns in order to hunt one man.  If that is not a victory for these punks, what is?  Telling me you cannot conduct a manhunt without closing an entire metropolitan area?  This is homeland security running amok.

    Still enjoying my stimulus package.

    by Kevvboy on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 10:53:36 AM PDT

  •  I absolutely agree with you, BUT (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    catilinus

    I fear we as a nation have already started to shit our pants, run around waving our arms, and scream to dismantle what little remains of our democracy to "protect ourselves" from "those people".

    (sigh)

    Rome is falling all around us.

    •  Well, yes. Except more like (0+ / 0-)

      "Rome is flailing all around us." Pinche Rome took 1,000 years on her downward path, but of course her most crushing loss happened fighting the wrong enemy in the 7th Century. With our focus on Terrorists, we're doing the same shamschnoodle.

      America's greatest political dynasty...the Ka'an

      by catilinus on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 01:55:57 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  those images of heavily-armed military searching (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DrTerwilliker, AoT, catilinus

    the streets for Chechen rebels, look eerily like photos from Russia in the 90's. . . .

    We never learn. We've already militarized the police---now we will police-ize the military.

    Our nation is doomed.  The Roman republic is falling again.

    I fear for the next generation.

  •  I don't know about "police state," but (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AoT, catilinus

    locking down the entire Boston metropolitan area does seem like overreach to me.  

    "Optimism is better than despair." --Jack Layton, the late Canadian MP, liberal, and Christian.

    by lungfish on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 11:39:35 AM PDT

    •  The thought occurred to me that (0+ / 0-)

      when the sniper was plaguing the DC area ten years ago, they never locked down the region, even though it was at least as dangerous a situation.  (That didn't stop Geraldo Rivera from describing it, inaccurately, as "a region in lockdown."  They rightly did do some things, like canceling outdoor recess in the schools, but nothing like this.)

      "Optimism is better than despair." --Jack Layton, the late Canadian MP, liberal, and Christian.

      by lungfish on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 04:18:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  It's different now..... (0+ / 0-)

    ......unlike 9/11, there's a grownup in charge now.

    I believe a sternly worded letter just might be in order here.

    by suspiciousmind on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 12:23:55 PM PDT

  •  Regularly? (0+ / 0-)

    The Boston incident is not a "regular" incident.

  •  I was just wondering this morning (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AoT

    What color is our security at? Than I remembered we have a president whose actually read something other than a coloring book.

    I'm no philosopher, I am no poet, I'm just trying to help you out - Gomez (from the song Hamoa Beach)

    by jhecht on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 12:40:43 PM PDT

  •  Paul Craig Roberts, one of my... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    catilinus

    ...favorite recovering Republicans and writers has this to say about the Bost Bomb Mass:

    Boston Marathon Bombing:  Dear Readers, A number of you have asked me my take on the Boston Marathon Bombing and subsequent events...
    ...snip...
     However, I have not followed closely the Boston event.
    What strikes me about the event is the ease with which authorities were able to lockdown entire metropolitan areas, preventing US citizens from leaving their homes in order to go to their jobs, to doctor’s appointments, to the grocery store, or to walk their dogs. This is a precedent. It sets the stage for martial law, although it is not being called that, and for daylight curfews...
    You can find his full article: Boston Bombing here.

    "The war against Bradley Manning is a war against us all." Chris Hedges

    by dharmasyd on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 07:25:49 PM PDT

Meteor Blades, claude, Renee, Thumb, Ed in Montana, Sylv, Alfred E Newman, Alma, mimi, emal, PeterHug, surfbird007, liz, fugitive, Mlle L, Rachael7, RFK Lives, hubcap, silence, Heart of the Rockies, RubDMC, entlord, opinionated, whenwego, srkp23, Agathena, KMc, stevej, roses, navajo, dksbook, wader, annan, MrSandman, TexDem, pat bunny, astronautagogo, texasmom, zerelda, Sybil Liberty, nailbender, joanneleon, Bluesee, radarlady, sap, Big River Bandido, Simplify, ChemBob, YucatanMan, Laurence Lewis, SaraBeth, Sara R, SBandini, noemie maxwell, Eileen B, zozie, berko, poco, detroitmechworks, Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse, cardboardurinal, profundo, Kimball Cross, Yellow Canary, AoT, blueoasis, triv33, praenomen, PapaChach, joe shikspack, Preston S, middleagedhousewife, blue in NC, blueoregon, shaharazade, BentLiberal, One Pissed Off Liberal, bluicebank, tgypsy, camlbacker, gloriana, karmsy, david mizner, Cofcos, Matt Z, Dave in Northridge, mommyof3, bnasley, artisan, Kentucky Kid, jnhobbs, carpunder, Wreck Smurfy, Rumarhazzit, GeorgeXVIII, cville townie, MKinTN, kimoconnor, limpidglass, Fe Bongolan, filby, petulans, lissablack, ZhenRen, JBL55, legendmn, Rhysling, Glacial Erratic, greengemini, dharmasyd, bsmechanic, maryabein, RageKage, elziax, glitterlust, Dark UltraValia, Lacy LaPlante, citisven, Nannyberry, collardgreens, Raven in Philly, pdx kirk, TealTerror, I Lurked For Years, Lady Libertine, paradise50, albrt, petesmom, Actbriniel, Onomastic, kerflooey, asterkitty, Hatrax, NormAl1792, Fresno, Liberal Mole, stevie avebury, MikeBoyScout, dradams, annecros, BlueDragon, CuriousBoston, anodnhajo, sow hat, barkingcat, Code Monkey, BusyinCA, Rizzo, lunachickie, Glen The Plumber, Kayjay, Bisbonian, AZ Sphinx Moth, ottoveil, Hammerhand, Silvia Nightshade, Blue Bell Bookworm, Chaddiwicker, MishaBrewer, Panacea Paola, Sam Sara, Late Again, remembrance, Neapolitan, Steve in the Library, gypsytoo, aresea, ORswede, marcr22, pragmaticidealist, TheDuckManCometh, eagleray, andalusi

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site