Less Than Four Hours After Boston Bombings, There's a Theory For Whatever You Want

Twin explosions at Boston marathon


boston 2013
Fox News

It could be Al-Qaeda, via the Dallas Morning News:

A trademark of al-Qaeda and its affiliates is to launch attacks in ways that are highly photogenic, guaranteed to inflict maximum casualties and, most important, generate maximum television coverage. Something like 27,000 people run in the Boston Marathon, and thousands more gather along the route, with heavy concentrations at the finish line. The fact that multiple explosives have been found near the Boston Marathon site suggests another trademark of al-Qaeda, which has a preference for attacks in multiple stages, or multiple bombs set to go off all at once in a big blast.

Don't blame Al-Qaeda first, blame right wing extremists, via Esquire:

Obviously, nobody knows anything yet, but I would caution folks jumping to conclusions about foreign terrorism to remember that this is the official Patriots Day holiday in Massachusetts, celebrating the Battles at Lexington and Concord, and that the actual date (April 19) was of some significance to, among other people, Tim McVeigh, because he fancied himself a waterer of the tree of liberty and the like. 

It could've been some kind of inside job, via Foreign Policy:

The fevered ravings on Twitter are diverse: The bombs were planted by the U.S. government, or by Mossad agents, or by conspiracy theory bogeyman the Illuminati! To drive up the price of gold and silver! To justify new gun control laws! Or war in Syria! Or Iran! Or North Korea! Or, based on the timing (today being Tax Day and Massachusetts's "Patriots's Day," commemorating the battles of Lexington and Concord in the Revolutionary War), to crack down on right-wing and libertarian groups!

2013, when all the news can fit your views.

The National Journal provides advice that shouldn't be necessary to reporters, observers and even police (see: JFK electric fire), but sadly is: it's too early to jump to conclusions.

Follow the latest news on this story at Reason 24/7.

NEXT: New Yorkers Vow To Defy Intrusive New Gun Laws

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. It involved time-traveling Romulans. I'm sure of it!

    1. In the Pale Moonlight was prescient.

      1. It's a faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

    2. Let me guess, it also involved brewery-like engineering rooms?

  2. Why all this coverage of a local crime story?

    1. I can think of few lows more pathetic than stealing a tasteless joke from Jennifer Rubin.

      1. I don't know, seeing your name on my screen conjures up plenty of pathetic lows.

        1. That doesn't even rate a zing....just sad face for s o c k p u p p e t.

  3. I thought it was to drive down the price of gold and silver.

  4. Of all those, the Esquire one is the worst simply because whoever wrote acknowledges that eh doesn't know shit then speculates it was the group he hates the most anyway.

    1. I think Esquire is a pretty cool guy. eh makes baseless speculations and doesn't afraid of anything.

    2. It is presidential. The genius king of shitweasels showed Esquire the way. Remember this?

      "I don't know ? not having been there and not seeing all the facts ? what role race played in that, but I think it's fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two that he Cambridge police acted stupidly..."

      First admit that you dont know anything, then make a pronouncement as if it is gospel. Make certain there is no evidence to back up your pronouncement.

  5. Has the SPLC offered its opinion yet?

    1. If it turns out to be "conservative' disgrutleds... we'll be hearing from Morris Dees 24/7 on NPR. Trust me. I'm sure they've already asked him to stand by.

      1. And if it turns out to be radical Islamists, they'll blame Bush and Cheney.

        1. Doesn't make a damn bit of difference; it's the Rethuglicans!

        2. And if it's someone protesting GMOs or Monsanto or something....there'll be a deafening silence.

  6. I blame the hippies!

  7. It's important to act now before they can strike again. Waiting for "all the facts" before we act to protect our country just lets our enemies off the hook.

    1. Well, no matter who the culprit was, it's certainly true that the solution offered will be to put new and more restrictions on our freedom.

      Because that's the solution the government offers for everything.

      1. It is really the only card they have to play in any situation. It is either that or nothing and, as we all know, something has to be done!

      2. It's important that they pass new legislation tomorrow. The "Day After Tomorrow" will be too late. They can read the bill to find out what's in it at a later date.

      3. As long as it creates overpaid/over-entitled jobs that will never be excised despite their obvious wastefulness, solutions will be proffered.

      4. "It's time for a national conversation about explosives."

  8. Saw that Esquire said something retarded.

    Assumed it was Charles Pierce.


    It was Charles Pierce.

    Charles Pierce is a moron.

  9. Where were DA JOOS during all this?

    /B- Troll

    1. My understanding is the joos don't bomb shit, they just own everything... or something.

      1. It was so thy could buy more gold at a lower price!!

    2. Tman| 4.15.13 @ 6:36PM |#
      "Where were DA JOOS during all this?"

      Did they all stay home from the race???!!!

  10. You'd think they could wait until a suspect was identified or even vaguely described.

    1. But then they accusations they could make might be limited!

      1. That's true--you got me there. What would they talk about if they couldn't blame it on someone they hate, like, I dunno, Richard Jewell?

        1. Does anyone know where Sarah Palin was during all this?

          1. Watching the Ruskies for her hooossse.

          2. Chuck Dove| 4.15.13 @ 6:46PM |#
            "Does anyone know where Sarah Palin was during all this?"

            Has anyone *ever* seen Guy Laguy and Chuck Dove in the same room?

    2. No ProL, you do not understand. This type of early, baseless speculation allows them to imply what they want and thereby gets it into impressionable people's heads. Remember: never let an as-of-yet-no-suspect atrocity go to waste. There are aspersions to cast!

      1. See also: the extremely successful smearing of Zimmerman.

      2. Well, if you think about it, the biggest audience they get in this coverage is right now. So if they want to get a message out, regardless of the facts, now's the time to do it.

        1. Now you're thinking like a media talking head scumbag, ProL!

          1. It's a new kind of logic that I shall call. . .flawgic.

        2. It's called the Ratchet effect. It works.

    3. Then people would only focus on that specific subject and the fact pattern as presented rather than the larger more important narrative.

  11. My theory is that it's going to be some lone lunatic with an all-over-the-map manifesto who, in twenty years, will get a teaching job at the University of Illinois at Chicago and be very influential in politics.

    1. That could never happen!

    2. Fist, it can't be a random nut. If it was a random nut, we wouldn't be able to do something. And we need to do something.

      1. We can always do something.

    3. Never! NYU or Columbia would outbid them!

    4. My theory is that it's going to be some lone lunatic with an all-over-the-map manifesto

      Unless he has a two-paragraph-long list of his favorite porn actresses, a la Dorner, I'm not interested.

  12. Imagine its a commie nutter out to get Gomez.

  13. Reverse vampires. In league with the RAND corporation.

    We're through the looking glass here, people.

    1. I remember that episode...does that make me old?

      1. Yes, we are old.

      2. shit, i remember the Tracey Ullman show. And im in my prime, so youre just a snot nosed whippersnapper punk. Old? Pshaw! We can't bust heads like we used to, but we have our ways. One trick is to tell 'em stories that don't go anywhere - like the time I caught the ferry over to Shelbyville. I needed a new heel for my shoe, so, I decided to go to Morganville, which is what they called Shelbyville in those days. So I tied an onion to my belt, which was the style at the time. Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days, nickels had pictures of bumblebees on 'em. "Give me five bees for a quarter," you'd say.

        1. I remember when Marge was on Rhoda

          1. well, y'all can just kiss my grits

  14. Somebody should see if the Beliebers had anything to do with this.

    They've been mad as hell lately.

    1. They've been mad as hell lately.

      And you're suggesting they're not going to take it anymore?

      1. I was reading about them earlier today.

        Apparently, they sometimes make death threats to people they consider anti-Bieber.

        Tweens are friggin' dangerous, and with all the criticism direct at Bieber over what he wrote in the Anne Frank house guest book, they must be seeing red.

        1. You know who else saw red?

    1. Now the police really will act stupidly.

    2. We will find out who did this. We'll find out why they did this. Any responsible individuals, any responsible groups will feel the full weight of justice.

      I'm impressed. He used the word "Justice" with no modifiers, and he didn't make it about himself. He cleared my low bar.

      1. Just give his speech writers a few more hours.

        1. I know, I know, he will probably fuck it up at some point, but for an initial reaction speech, it was decently low-key, dignified and non-aggrandizing.

      2. Yeah, I saw those quotes. Not quite clear if federal jurisdiction applies here?

      3. It's the most conviction and clarity of purpose I've ever heard from him.

        And it scared the shit out of me.

  15. And don't forget Dina Temple-Raston of NPR who has not missed an opportunity to mention that it's "tax day," "Patriot Day" and remind us of the danger of "lone wolf" terrorists. The last one isn't specific to any particular ideology, of course.

    1. In all seriousness, it's hard to believe that what I said above isn't true--that they do all of this to smear whoever they want while all eyes are on them. Later, when the furor has died down, they can play like "real journalists."

      1. Of course they do it on purpose.

        1. Good thing people don't listen to them then, right?

    2. They'll have to shed that last bit if there's any hope of pinning this on the tea party.

  16. The left really wants its violence fantasies about the Tea Party to be true, doesn't it?

    1. It's all projection, dude.

    2. Seriously, the way they cream their pants when this shit happens is fucking disgusting.

    3. Fantasies? The reality based community doesn't want to wait around for someone to actually get hurt when the teabaggers launch their concentration camps.

    4. I know somebody who lives in SF who was breathlessly predicting "right-wing Tea Party race riots" if Obama lost his reelection. He was extremely convinced of this, too.

      1. Whoops, if Obama won his reelection, I mean.

        1. I parsed it out, Corp. I'm also halfway drunk which is like 4000% drunk for most mortals.

          1. God I envy you right now. This has been a shitty day.

            1. Of course it's shitty. That's why I'm trashed. I'm going to puke up blood soon because this shit just exemplifies the pointlessness of doing anything. Ever. Where the hell are my barbituates godddakndnmsandnmds,nqdasdasda

              1. No, my day was extra shitty because it included firing people, some of whom I like and am friends with.

                1. Firing or laying off?

                  1. They were asked to leave immediately. I guess that's "firing".

                    I wasn't the one who had to lower the boom (thank Jeebus), but I did have to agree to it. And then I got to feel sick all day.

                    1. They were asked to leave immediately. I guess that's "firing".

                      Oooh, yeah, that's rough, especially when they're your friends. Sorry dude. Layoffs are layoffs, and your friends will always be your friends through that, but when security is asked to escort them from the building, that's tough.

                    2. Luckily we're super small so there's no embarrassing security baloney.

                    3. "I wasn't the one who had to lower the boom (thank Jeebus), but I did have to agree to it. And then I got to feel sick all day."

                      I had to fire someone when I was all of 23; hardest thing I'd had to do until then and when I had to do it later (fortunately only twice) it didn't get easier.
                      It's amazing the number of people who think others take pleasure in doing so.

                2. Well, Epi...the least you could do is let them you liked them in that case. Frankly, I don't even see how that keeps you from giving a recommendation. It's bad news of course, but someone has to dish it out... god ... I'm blasted. It's like octoberfest had an angry diseased hatechild with post-breakup angst or something. Jesus...

                3. Ugh, that is awful. Maybe you should have a drink - do keep it less than Drax level consumption.

                  1. Ie keep the BAC down below 1.88

                  2. Oh, rest assured I will be getting loaded. I even have a party to go to after work.

                    1. How can you go to a party at a time like this?

                4. Epi - Sorry, Bro.

        2. I recall people predicting (demanding) them if he lost, too, because "obviously" a loss would have "proved" that "they stole the election".

          Some people just want mayhem.

          1. (To clarify, predicting race riots, but not from the right, naturally.)

    5. As soon as I heard of it happening, I knew that the left were going to try to blame the right. It's like a Pavlovian response, now.

      1. The first I heard of the story was somebody pissing and moaning about how it was obviously a Tea Partier because of the tax day/Boston connection.

      2. Why wouldn't you? They're the ones holding us back from utopia in everything. Health care, education, not being blown up during a marathon, not being shot while going to school, etc.

    6. The left really wants its violence fantasies about the Tea Party to be true, doesn't it?

      Yes, because as I said, it matters who did it.

  17. that this is the official Patriots Day holiday in Massachusetts

    Thank you, Esquire.

    Obviously the probable thesis is that it's them "patriots" blowing up people running a marathon, because it happens that the marathon was on a State Holiday related to "patriots".

    That is the stupidest god-damn thing I've read all day, and that's a pretty high bar.

    1. Hey, what do you expect? It's Charlie "Mary Jo Kopechne would have thanked Ted Kennedy for Medicare if only she'd lived long enough to retire" Pierce.

  18. Cytotoxic got a FOX News job?

    1. This is much better trolling than earlier, where you slipped badly by using the word 'utopia'.

    2. No calls for nuking countries yet, so it's too early to tell.

  19. Honestly, considering the assault on our rights and liberties (especially our gun rights), the ridiculous overspending by the government, the way we're overtaxed, and the outright hostility the mainstream media seems to direct at anybody who protests their favored narrative...

    I'm surprised more of this kind of thing hasn't happened from militia movement types.

    I mean...

    It's possible to do something terribly wrong--for the right reasons. It's just that...just because you agree with someone else's opinion doesn't mean you can't condemn their tactics. And IF IF IF it does turn out to be someone from the right behind this, that doesn't mean their reasons behind it are wrong. ...or that other people who share their opinions are wrong, either. It just means his tactics are wrong, and even IF IF IF whoever did this were a libertarian that agrees with me on every single point of public policy, I'd still condemn him for what he did.

      1. As would I Ken, and I am pretty almost everyone here would.

        I am asking everyone here, but especially the piece of cheese that goes by Tony....

        Has Tony ever condemned the jug-eared shitweasel's blow job buddy Bill Ayers? it is not a rhetorical question, I dont know. I think I can guess the answer though.

        1. I haven't the faintest clue what you're talking about. Can you try speaking English?

    1. It just means his tactics are wrong, and even IF IF IF whoever did this were a libertarian that agrees with me on every single point of public policy, I'd still condemn him for what he did.

      Of course we would.

    2. I am not surprised at all. The militia movements exist pretty well unmolested. They get to blow off steam and do their thing. Why do they need to bomb?

    3. I mean, nothing sets your movement back like killing kids with ice cream cones because of the commerce clause.

      1. How do you use an icecream cone to kill someone?

        1. Chuck Norris can do that.

          Chuck Norris can kill people with just the ice cream.

    4. And sorry, if you blow up a bunch of people standing on the street, you are fucking waste of humanity and a piece of garbage who doesn't deserve to live, I don't care what your politics are.

    5. Non-aggression principle, Ken. Sorry, can't be a true Scotsman.

      1. I can condemn a violent libertarian for being violent.

        I'm not saying they aren't libertarians if they're violent; I'm saying that just because he's a Scotsman doesn't mean I can't condemn him for being a violent Scotsman.

        1. All this talk of libertarians and Scotsmen has left me confused... who set the bombs off in Boston?

          1. Libertarian Scotsmen. Duh!!1!

            1. Thanks for that, Tonio. I needed a laugh on a day like this.

        2. "I'm not saying they aren't libertarians if they're violent;"

          I am.

  20. It is good thing that mutli billion dollar intelligence and information sharing apparatus we built post 9-11 was so effective. No one and I mean no one saw this coming. If this turns out to be the work of a Saudi here on a VISA, oh my God. It is like we never learned anything from 9-11.

    1. This is pretty much what I just said to my wife.

      1. Me too

        1. Not to your wife. To mine.

          1. I said it to your wife as well.

            1. Maybe she'll listen to you

              1. If that works, let me know - I'll have him speak to my wife as well.... it's Paul, the Wife Whisperer.

                1. Paul, the Wife Whisperer.

                  Next on Bravo

    2. No one and I mean no one saw this coming.

      Yeah, we don't know that. They could have had some clues but much like 9/11 they were unable to put enough of the clues together to pinpoint the specifics. I'd in fact be surprised if this was a complete and total surprise to those working counter-terrorism within the DOJ and CIA. Despite what some may assume, they do in fact stop shit like this from happening A LOT.

      /that doesn't mean I believe in the Patriot Act, restricted civil liberties, etc., so save it.

      1. They do. But if there was any anticipation of this, it was buried really deep in CIA or NSA.

        1. Again, neither you nor I nor anyone on this comment forum has enough knowledge to say unequivocally "this attack was a complete and total surprise".

          1. Or if we did have knowledge, we wouldn't be able to confirm such.

          2. argumentum ad ignorantiam

            i mean, we cant be *sure* it was not the preface to an alien invasion. Or spotaneous human combustion. It happens


    3. Memo from DHS to John:

      Shut the fuck up and send more money!

    4. You think people from Saudi Arabia should be denied visas on the off chance they might be a terrorist? There isn't even any reason to think that in this case. The report about a Saudi being in custody wasn't true.

      1. First, I said if. And second, I never said they should be denied VISAs. But maybe we ought to spend our time monitoring groups that actually commit terrorism rather than spending our time and money trying to convince ourselves and the world the real threat of terrorism is the angry white guys.

        1. Muslims may commit most terrorism in the US, but not all of it. And there are white people of European descent who convert to Islam (not to mention the millions of Asian, black, and other non-Middle Eastern Muslims in the world)

      2. I don't think that was John's point. I believe it was the massive post 9/11 national security apparatus being no better than the smaller pre 9/11 one.

        1. Exactly RBS. Whatever they are doing, it doesn't seem to be any more effective.

          1. I agree with that

          2. Just costs a lot more.

    5. "It is like we never learned anything from 9-11."

      Perhaps the point of all the things done since 9-11 have nothing to do with stopping terrorists. Maybe they had some other goal in mind? Maybe?

  21. A FBI sting operation gone awry?

    1. Doubtful, but not impossible. And if it is, we will never know.

  22. It's more than one person. They are going to find something on one or more of the thousands of security cameras that exist throughout the area. Probably within a day or two. We may not know about it for a week or two. The only new info you're going to get tonight is the casualty updates. If that. I don't know who did it or why. I hope they all fry though.

    1. The public, like usual, will never see the security camera footage unless it shows Timothy McVeigh 2.0

  23. So the village idiot went on the news this evening and didn't call this a terrorist attack. I guess he is knows it might or is work place violence.

    1. Why on earth does it matter?

      Terrorism traditionally requires a political motive. We don't know the motive yet.

      If conservatives spent less time shitting their diapers over words maybe they contribute something useful to the world.

      1. And Obama contributes so much hiding out in the situation room trying to dream up ways to blame this on his political opponents.

        And it matters a lot. Words matter and a President who is incapable of being honest is a bad thing.

        1. I am a little surprised by everyone's hesitation to call it a terrorist attack. Someone uses two bombs in innocent civilians...that's pretty much terrorism by anyone's definition.

          Listening to some of these talking heads, I'm not sure they understand what terrorism actually is?

          1. *on

        2. The WH debated whether to call it terrorism in the press conference. They were not unaware of the possibility, and said it definitely looked like an act of terror in a later statement. The whole point is that words matter. I realize everything bad in the world is somehow Obama's fault, though.

          1. You seemed to have no problem blaming Bush for 9-11. So karma is a bitch.

          2. Just answer my earlier question and then do yourself and your side a favor, STFU Tony. You cant do anything on this thread but shoot yourself in the foot you stupid fuckstain. I guess that is true for every thread, but this one especially.

          3. Tony| 4.15.13 @ 8:43PM |#
            ..."I realize everything bad in the world is somehow Obama's fault, though."

            Oh, poor wittle shithead! His wah-wah gets bwamed for things! Poor wittle shithead!

  24. Of course this is just pure speculation. Hard to say if the POS that did this even thought this through. Who is going to be at the finish line after four hours? People who don't normally run marathons. Your most likely going to be someone local, at the very least American who has running a marathon or running the Boston marathon as some fitness goal or list of things you want to do. Your not going to be some international marathon runner. They would be finishing long before that. Are you going to travel to another country to run your first marathon? So seems like the target would be ordinary Americans, if there was a specific target? They may not have cared who they killed but maybe security had thinned out near the end?

    1. However, with multiple bombs set to go off it seems like they would have had a specific time in mind.

  25. So seems like the target would be ordinary Americans, if there was a specific target?

    That's the plot of a Columbo, if I remember correctly. Blow something (a bus, I think) up and kill a bunch of people so the cops think "terrorists", when it was actually a plot to kill a specific person on the bus. This being Columbo, it was probably a plot designed by some ungrateful, playboy nephew to kill his rich, prudish aunt or uncle.

    1. I had thought of that too but I was thinking more along the lines that they were specifically targeting Americans as opposed to targeting the international runners and their families.

      1. I know. But in my life, it all comes back to Columbo.

        I'm off to go drinking with my wife and some other hotties! Have a good night y'all.

        1. Remember the pics!

    2. If Columbo taught me anything, its that rich people in LA are total dicks.

  26. The Atlantic on the New York Post's IDing of the "suspect".

    For a while, the L.A. Times was also in the NYP's "It was a Saudi" camp, but that's gone down the memory hole it seems.

    1. Why would you print that unless it was 100% verified? And how the hell did they get such information? Either they had a guy or they didn't. I don't see how anyone could be mistaken about that. Really weird.

      1. The NYP also reported hours ago that 12 people died, but as of now, there's still only two deaths confirmed

        1. I can't believe that they would just make shit up. They got the information from somewhere. The best guess is that someone just trolled them and they were too desperate and careless to check it out.

            1. Then it must be true. No way would they fuck it up twice.

              1. It's weird though, no other news outlet is reporting those details. Why would the NYP have such an exclusive scoop?

                In other news, this is how CBS ends it's article on the bombing:

                The Boston Marathon honored the victims of the Newtown, Conn., shooting with a special mile marker in Monday's race.

                Boston Athletic Association president Joanne Flaminio previously said there was "special significance" to the fact that the race is 26.2 miles long and 26 people died at Sandy Hook Elementary school.

                Fuck you and your pareidolia, CBS.

                1. It is like the Greeks made the race 26 miles long knowing there would be 26 victims these thousands of years later.

                  Wow are people fucking stupid.

                  1. Worse, John, it's like the Attic Greeks deliberately chose to fight Darius at the plain of Marathon, knowing the messengers would have to run 26 miles back to Athens to deliver the news...

                    1. Kilometers. Whatever.

                      /Obviously not a *&^%$#@! runner

                    2. Miles is correct.

                    3. Damned Athenians.

                  2. John| 4.15.13 @ 8:25PM |#
                    "It is like the Greeks made the race 26 miles long knowing there would be 26 victims these thousands of years later."

                    And "Lincoln" is seven letters while "Kennedy" is seven letters and it's April and...

  27. April 15, 1920, the day the bank was robbed in South Braintree, Massachusetts, for which the anarchists Sacco and Vanzetti were charged.

    Both Occupy Wall Street and Anonymous have been very active in the Boston area, not only with hacks, but with personally stalking and harassing law-enforcers and prosecutors in vengeance over the Aaron Swartz case and over the break-up of Occupy Boston. Some of the most radical and weird people were in Occupy Boston. You have to look at those groups as much as white militias or Al Qaeda or any known operatives who might use bombs -- and maybe for the first time, which is why it didn't go off when the first people crossed the finish line but hours later.

    1. Interesting points. They did catch the OWS guys trying to blow up the bridge in Cleveland. Well if it was OWS guys, they can look forward to a few years in prison followed by tenure somewhere. If Muslims or right wingers did it, they are going to supermax and then the death chamber.

      1. I don't doubt that they're loony enough but I would be surprised those lazy assholes would be willing to do any actual work to accomplish it. Seems like they would just sit around and talk about how great it would be.

        1. Yeah. And even if they had tried it, chances are they would have blown themselves up making the bomb.

        2. Seems like they would just sit around and talk about how great it would be.

          Much like SDS was in the '60s and it spawned the Weather Underground.

          And there are a lot more Occutards than there ever were SDSers. It's not hard to imagine a couple of them might be more than the incoherent lazy morons we all saw at the protests.

      2. John| 4.15.13 @ 8:02PM |#
        ..."They did catch the OWS guys trying to blow up the bridge in Cleveland."...

        Yeah, but they couldn't find the tail-pipe to blow into.
        I guess it's possible, but OccupyX folks seem every bit as effective as shithead; noise, stink, not anything like effective action.

        1. I know. But it only takes one guy with some brains. If it is OWS, the stunned silence and the calls to move on from this incident in the media are going to be hilarious.

      3. They didn't really "catch them", as much as "convince them to bomb a bridge".

    2. The other thing is that...if it were a right-wing group, I'd expect the target to be an abortion clinic or a government entity of some kind.

  28. If we just had passed sensible gun control laws...

    1. Not gonna lie, while scrolling down, for a second I thought your screen name was Tony, and for a moment I was extremely confused

      1. As long as hes not from Finland, he's welcome. And if he is... we'll let jesse and Doctor Whom and Tonio handle that situation.

        1. Droll, Goldy, very droll.

        2. No, I'm not from Finland. The argument for gun control is ridiculous anyway. I just find some irony of the destructive force that was not a firearm at the end of the marathon and close proximity of the 26 mile mark that was dedicated to the victims of Sandy Hook.

          Outlaw guns and only outlaws will use explosives.

  29. My dad mad an interesting point. This should show people that we should be glad people just shoot each other in this country instead of throwing bombs at each other, which is what they do in a lot of places.

  30. The NY Post as of 19:55 is claiming that a suspect has indeed been identified and is in custody per LE sources.


    1. Even the Post couldn't fuck it up twice. So I guess the Saudi story is true.

      1. They say the suspect is "cooperative" and "denies involvement."

        1. After Richard Jewel, I am inclined to believe him. If he were a jihadist, he would be bragging about it.

          1. It's looking to be more of a Richard Jewel situtation, unless the Obama administration is that cowardly and venal...

          2. Yeah, if he admits it he is, and if he denies it he is. Brilliant.

  31. Bolo issued...CNN

    Dark skinned man, dark backpack and sweatshirt.

    1. How long before the Boston police shot a light skinned Asian woman walking a dark haired dog?

      1. Officer safety.

      2. John| 4.15.13 @ 8:18PM |#
        "How long before the Boston police shot a light skinned Asian woman walking a dark haired dog?"


  32. Also an APB is out for a rental truck that claimed to be delivering medical supplies to the disaster area but sped off when the driver was questioned.

  33. FACT: JOOS are the least athletic race.
    FACT: Today is 4/15. 4+1+5 = 10, same as the 10 Commandments (JOOISH law).

    I think it's obvious what happened here. /derp

    1. PS: Obvious parody should be obvious.

    2. Hey! Sandy Koufax would like a word with you.

    3. Xenocles| 4.15.13 @ 9:29PM |#
      "FACT: JOOS are the least athletic race.
      FACT: Today is 4/15. 4+1+5 = 10, same as the 10 Commandments (JOOISH law)."

      Didn't we cover this in another thread?
      I mean how many JOOOZE stayed home for this race?!
      How many JOOOZE didn't get killed by the bomber?!
      Connect the dots, people!

  34. I guess those folks in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, et., al., who are drone victims probably have no way to make over here. But they seem like likely suspects.

  35. Let me be clear...

    If this really was a right-wing job? Then maybe Obama should take this as an opportunity--to not say the provocative shit he usually says.

    1. Well, remember, terrorism only has root causes when it's Muslims or lefties doing it.

    2. But still, at least in Oklahoma City, it was payback aimed the the people responsible for Waco.

      What possible reason could this be? Marathon runners in Boston? It's just so random seeming.

      Might be an anti-abortion type, like that Olympic bombing. But in general I would give right wing terrorists more credit in at least trying to target the government, not just random people.

      1. JeremyR| 4.15.13 @ 10:03PM |#
        "But still, at least in Oklahoma City, it was payback aimed the the people responsible for Waco."

        Pretty sure Janet Reno is still among the living.

        1. True. But it was at least aimed at the FBI.

          But who decides what is rational?

          Why is it more rational to use drone strikes against a funeral of a guy who doesn't like the US but lives in Pakistan, than to bomb the headquarters of a paramilitary organization (FBI)?

          Simply because the government says its rational, really. And enough people are willing to agree.

      2. I wasn't thinking about the Olympic bombing.

        I was thinking it might not be right wing since the target wasn't the government or a clinic, but the Olympic bombing wasn't one of those either.

        It's probably silly to try to look for rational explanations for crazy behavior.

        1. "It's probably silly to try to look for rational explanations for crazy behavior."

          I'm was telling myself that.

          1. I tell myself that about the drone strikes.

            We're supposedly rational, yet nations commit atrocities all the time.

            Sometimes they are arguably justified. But drone strikes to me seem killing just for the sake of killing.

  36. Heh. Had a halfway amusing thought.

    What's the bet that there's some schlub/analyst at one of the alphabet soup agencies that's been assigned to read through comments on 'libertarian/separatist/anti-government' sites looking for someone claiming credit.

    The thought of that dude having to read through all of the comments here, and worse elsewhere, is about the first amusing thought I've had today.

    1. I am sure there is some poor dude whose entire job is reading comments on some horrific place like Stormfront.

      And all of those 13-year-olds would be ecstatic to know they were being monitored by the government.

    2. I would suspect that the process is automated at this point, fate, at least at the puzzle palace. I can still see somebody in J Edgar's shop detailing agents to read sites like H(amper)R.

  37. "Obviously, nobody knows anything yet, but I would caution folks jumping to conclusions about foreign terrorism....."

    .... not to get in the way of Eqsuire juming to their own conclusions.

  38. As of drive time this AM, NPR's Dina Temple-Raston is no longer mentioning tax day or patriot day, but she did mention "white supremicists." Now, while I have no respect for those clowns, I can't recall them doing any bombings....well, ever.

    Yesterday, given the question as to whether it was AQ or an anti-tax group, I opined (purely speculatively, without evidence) that it was AQ or an affiliated group. Given their history of claiming responsibility and doing so quickly after an event, it now seems unlikely that this was them.

    1. Actually bombings by the Klan used to be quite common but they've been pretty rare since the sixties.

      1. Thanks, Isaac.

  39. I don't know if it's been said yet but I'm honestly surprised IED's haven't been more prevalent in the west over the last decade or so. It's cheap, effective, easily concealable and can't be stopped. Even in places like Bagdahd and Kabul, locked down by military, they can't prevent every single one from happening. Plus we have no shortage of minority groups looking to influence the politics of the majority and willing to use violence.

  40. Over at the Washington Post forums, people are literally asploding all over themselves at the very idea that the perpetrator(s) might not be white gun enthusiasts, survivalists, or "anti-government Patriot groups." I posted a link to the CNN report that they're looking for a black dude with an accent. I've never been called a racist for linking to CNN before...

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.