Twin Bomb Explosions Shatter Boston Marathon Finish Line

[keemapoot]

An interesting angle on this tragedy. Will this help thaw the ice between the U.S. and Russia on so many issues now?

Boston bombings: a chance for U.S.-Russia cooperation

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin may have been tempted to tell U.S. President Barack Obama "I told you so" when U.S. officials blamed two ethnic Chechens for the Boston Marathon bombings.

He has long said the United States underestimates the security threat posed by Islamist militants inRussia's volatile North Caucasus, and has rejected criticism that Moscow's use of force in the region has been heavy-handed.

But the Kremlin leader has kept silent in public since Tamerlan Tsarnaev died after a shootout with police, and his younger brother, Dzhokhar, was captured after a manhunt in a Boston suburb. Both are ethnic Chechens who had been living in the United States.

Instead, he and Obama made positive statements about cooperation on counterterrorism in a phone conversation on Friday, suggesting both sides see an opportunity to improve strained relations between their countries.

http://news.yahoo.com/boston-bombings-chance-u-russia-cooperation-000900613.html

[NeverSure]

These guys were cowards. They didn't plan to get caught or to die. They planned to leave some bombs, kill and maim men, women and children, and then skate away. They weren't suicide bombers.

I'll have to wait and see what the various feds figure out about what they were. I'm betting they had help and training along with indoctrination and encouragement. They had a variety of bombs, some of which they threw at pursuing police. They had a mega stash of what was probably black gun powder.

The feds' job #1 right now is to find out who else was involved and that's why no Miranda reading. I'm happy they took this guy alive which they obviously took some risks to do. I hope he lives to find out he has to spill his guts about what happened.

---------------

About powder. Most explosions have black smoke, and as the news pointed out, this was white smoke indicating either smokeless gun powder or black gun powder. Black is the old powder that many people used to make themselves for use in muzzle loaders. It can still be purchased by those who like to shoot antique guns or replicas of them. But it isn't used by that many people and not in those quantities.

Black powder burns at a much faster rate than modern smokeless powder, more like an explosion and it is the powder of choice for bombs. So the hunt is on for the purchaser(s) of all of the components of those bombs, and the brands and types of all components will be known.

It will be known no only who manufactured that powder, but if it was commercial, what batch it was. Some retailer may blow the whistle about a large purchase, and it may be someone other than these perps.

The real investigation hasn't even really started. It took about 10 years to pin the 9/11 killings on Osama Bin Laden and track him down and kill him.

This kid is a coward. He will talk for a plea bargain to save his life. As the late great Karen Carpenter sang, "We've only just begun."

The pressure cooker method was reportedly intended to amplify the blast by containing the pressure briefly until it built up to very high PSI. Reportedly - the second blast was weaker because the lid was not secured tightly enough. This report is not verified.

Go and get it verified, stupid. It's like suggesting to contain an exploding nuke with tin foil. A pressure cooker is designed for 15 or so psi, but a gun powder explosion produces millions of psi.

"The tightly sealed pot makes easier-to-obtain but weaker explosives faster and stronger, amplifying the blast and the carnage"

http://news.yahoo.com/pressure-cooker-bombs-suspected-boston-blast-014502296--spt.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/16/fbi-boston-marathon-bombing-investigation_n_3089106.html

In kitchens, they prepare food faster, but pressure cookers by their very nature help make good bombs, amplifying the blast and the carnage.

http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/event/article/id/264487/

Googling or 'Binging' "

but weaker explosives faster and stronger,

amplifying the blast" produces hundreds of hits published by dozens and dozens of news sites where the publishers seemed to believe the veracity of the claim. I suppose some want a professional test document from a forensic lab but you will have to find it yourself.

OK, Maybe I wasn't clear enough. Of course gun powder must be contained to build enough pressure to be a bomb. If I take the powder out of a gun cartridge and throw it into the camp fire, it will just make a flash and little sound and do no harm. If I throw the whole cartridge, bullet, casing, primer, powder and all into that fire it will have to get hot enough to ignite the powder. It will contain the pressure a little bit before either the primer or the bullet is pushed out, and then it will make quite a "pop" but may not hurt anyone.

But, If I put that viable round into the proper gun chamber and close the bolt, the only way out for the bullet is down the barrel, and when the primer is struck and explodes, the powder burns fast enough to build a lot more pressure.

In a pressure cooker, there is containment. Yes it isn't a lot but it holds a lot of powder. My pressure cooker is 6 quart, but it holds 6 1 quart jars. I have no idea how much free powder it would hold. I have an 8 pound container of rifle powder right here and no way would it fill my pressure cooker. Just looking, a wild guess says I'd get maybe 12 pounds in my cooker.

I use 25 grains of powder in a 5.56 Nato (.223, AR-15, M-16) cartridge, and there are 7,000 grains in a pound. Do the math for 8 pounds, or 56,000 grains divided by 25 per round of standard military ammo. That's how much powder "could" have been in one pressure cooker, just eyeballing it.

Now, if we switched to black powder instead of this smokeless rifle powder, we'd get a faster burn and quicker pressure build resulting in more violence. We're talking about miniscule fractions of a second faster, but with powder, it matters.

It is said that two such bombs exploded and at least one failed to explode. We talking about perhaps 200,000+ grains of powder.

I hope they find out where those guys got that much powder, or even 1/2 that much. I've never seen that much powder in my whole life in one place, except maybe a store's complete stock of various types of powder in different sized containers. Usually it is sold by the one pound container; different types for different sized rifles and others for pistols and maybe a little bit of black powder for the diehard muzzle loaders.

[geriatrickid]

My concern here has been the willingness to accept the abrogation of some very basic rights granted in the U.S. Constitution that this event has allowed. It was unnerving to watch police officials searching homes without a warrant and to curtail freedom of individual movement. . There is just cause when lives are at stake, but this was a house by house search with no indication that lives were in danger in those homes. I look on in amazement at Senator Graham who was steadfast in his opposition to the President's proposed gun licensing proposal on the grounds that it violated the U.S. constitution and yet he has no issue with the basic constitutional rights of the accused being circumvented and has actually encouraged such action.

The aftermath of the Boston murders has been a media circus, and it gives me the impression that the fears of the general public were fanned by the media and the government. The erosion of some basic civil liberties once taken for granted are justified in the name of the fight against terror. This event will provide lots of ammo for the zealots like Alex Jones et al and the extreme right wing that accuse the government of trampling over once fundamental rights of U.S. citizens. I have previously held such people in disdain and contempt, but I can now see why they have concerns.

Make no mistake, I believe the Boston murders to be wrong and horrific. It was wrong. However, the terrorists win when we are reduced to fear and allow our rights to be trampled on. My concern with the media promoted hysteria is that no one has questioned the ramification of the suspension of individual legal rights, even if only for a short time. A civilized society must be based upon the rule of law. That law must be reliable and cannot be twisted about when it is politically expedient. I wish to consider my society strong enough and possessing of moral values to the extent that the rule of law prevails tempered by compassion, and mercy.

[geriatrickid]

An interesting angle on this tragedy. Will this help thaw the ice between the U.S. and Russia on so many issues now?

Boston bombings: a chance for U.S.-Russia cooperation

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin may have been tempted to tell U.S. President Barack Obama "I told you so" when U.S. officials blamed two ethnic Chechens for the Boston Marathon bombings.

He has long said the United States underestimates the security threat posed by Islamist militants inRussia's volatile North Caucasus, and has rejected criticism that Moscow's use of force in the region has been heavy-handed.

But the Kremlin leader has kept silent in public since Tamerlan Tsarnaev died after a shootout with police, and his younger brother, Dzhokhar, was captured after a manhunt in a Boston suburb. Both are ethnic Chechens who had been living in the United States.

Instead, he and Obama made positive statements about cooperation on counterterrorism in a phone conversation on Friday, suggesting both sides see an opportunity to improve strained relations between their countries.

http://news.yahoo.com/boston-bombings-chance-u-russia-cooperation-000900613.html

The government that alerted the FBI to its security concerns has not been named. I would expect it to be Russia. Why won't anyone mention the country's name? Curious.

Putin called Obama to express his condolences, but it would be interesting to know just what else was said.

The Chinese government has been circumspect in its comments following the murder of one of its nationals. China has been facing a quasi Islamic insurgency of its own and has been condemned by the west and the USA in its approach. It will be interesting to see if the US tempers its public statements now.

[Morden]

Uhm, everything, all evidence and everything is pointing to Islamic whacko crap. Nit sure where your info comes from . . . Dude went off deep end after introduction to an extremists in 2009ish, forced his American wife to drop out of college and convert and wear garb, was pegged by Russia as an extremists in FBI bulletin, spent 9 months in Russia with extremists, prayer routine according to wife's family was nothing short of bizarre. Dude was just another whacked Islamic radical looking to exact pain and death on innocents.

Please show your sources for that information.

[Morden]

My concern here has been the willingness to accept the abrogation of some very basic rights granted in the U.S. Constitution that this event has allowed. It was unnerving to watch police officials searching homes without a warrant and to curtail freedom of individual movement. . There is just cause when lives are at stake, but this was a house by house search with no indication that lives were in danger in those homes. I look on in amazement at Senator Graham who was steadfast in his opposition to the President's proposed gun licensing proposal on the grounds that it violated the U.S. constitution and yet he has no issue with the basic constitutional rights of the accused being circumvented and has actually encouraged such action.

The aftermath of the Boston murders has been a media circus, and it gives me the impression that the fears of the general public were fanned by the media and the government. The erosion of some basic civil liberties once taken for granted are justified in the name of the fight against terror. This event will provide lots of ammo for the zealots like Alex Jones et al and the extreme right wing that accuse the government of trampling over once fundamental rights of U.S. citizens. I have previously held such people in disdain and contempt, but I can now see why they have concerns.

Make no mistake, I believe the Boston murders to be wrong and horrific. It was wrong. However, the terrorists win when we are reduced to fear and allow our rights to be trampled on. My concern with the media promoted hysteria is that no one has questioned the ramification of the suspension of individual legal rights, even if only for a short time. A civilized society must be based upon the rule of law. That law must be reliable and cannot be twisted about when it is politically expedient. I wish to consider my society strong enough and possessing of moral values to the extent that the rule of law prevails tempered by compassion, and mercy.

Isn't that down to the PATRIOT Act?

[jamhar]

Borrowed from a Facebook friend: Dear Boston Bombers.

You came to our country from a war ravaged hell hole and asked for asylum. We generously gave you and your family sanctuary. We fed you, clothed you and housed you when no one else would. We paid to have you educated at some of our finest schools; schools that are out of the reach of the vast majority of our own native born children. We gave you opportunity, prosperity, and freedom. You have repaid our hospitality with an act of murderous savagery directed at the same innocent people who welcomed you as one of their own. This is a violation of some of the most ancient laws and customs of of every religion and culture on the planet and we would be well within our rights as a people to subject to you and immediate and final sanction; much as we have done with your murderous degenerate brother.

However we are a civilized people and now that you have been captured for your crimes you will come to know a different form of our hospitality. Don't worry we will still ensure that you have food, clothing, and a place to live...in prison where you shall only lack freedom. I am sure your new neighbors will be just as welcoming as the people of Boston whom you have betrayed in that I am certain that they will embrace you as "one or theirs" or at least one of their possessions. Indeed I hope that you will spend many long years with your fellow inmates getting to know you regularly in a very deep and intimate way.

So just relax to the "pressures" of you new life; as after all you are now on your way to a place where every night is valentines day in the cell block and desire falls like rain in the showers.

OUCH!

[NeverSure]

My concern here has been the willingness to accept the abrogation of some very basic rights granted in the U.S. Constitution that this event has allowed. It was unnerving to watch police officials searching homes without a warrant and to curtail freedom of individual movement. . There is just cause when lives are at stake, but this was a house by house search with no indication that lives were in danger in those homes. I look on in amazement at Senator Graham who was steadfast in his opposition to the President's proposed gun licensing proposal on the grounds that it violated the U.S. constitution and yet he has no issue with the basic constitutional rights of the accused being circumvented and has actually encouraged such action.

The aftermath of the Boston murders has been a media circus, and it gives me the impression that the fears of the general public were fanned by the media and the government. The erosion of some basic civil liberties once taken for granted are justified in the name of the fight against terror. This event will provide lots of ammo for the zealots like Alex Jones et al and the extreme right wing that accuse the government of trampling over once fundamental rights of U.S. citizens. I have previously held such people in disdain and contempt, but I can now see why they have concerns.

Make no mistake, I believe the Boston murders to be wrong and horrific. It was wrong. However, the terrorists win when we are reduced to fear and allow our rights to be trampled on. My concern with the media promoted hysteria is that no one has questioned the ramification of the suspension of individual legal rights, even if only for a short time. A civilized society must be based upon the rule of law. That law must be reliable and cannot be twisted about when it is politically expedient. I wish to consider my society strong enough and possessing of moral values to the extent that the rule of law prevails tempered by compassion, and mercy.

The police don't need a warrant in an emergency. Link If people were home they probably got permission. Telling people to stay in their homes may or may not have been legal with no proof the perp was around, but it was prudent. No one was arrested for disobeying, which would trigger the court case.

They sure as heck didn't need a warrant to approach the boat in the back yard. They had probable cause and an immediate threat.

You're right this was horrific. It set a lot of things in motion, and job well done IMHO. We can have a friendly difference on this because I'm 100% pro liberty, but I see the emergency in action and waive it off. Killings and attempted killings were still taking place after the bombings, as long as the perps were on the loose.

Peace.

[lomatopo]

Worst getaway vehicle ever:

(I think he was wounded in the previous evening's gun battle, and fully discharged his weapon from within the boat, so maybe he had no bullet left for himself?)

[Credo]

One of my best friends in school was a very calm person. He had never been in a fist fight. He was liked by everyone. He was quiet and well-mannered.

One day while driving between two small towns, he was stopped for speeding. He pulled out a rifle and shot the two police officers. I believe he is still in prison.

The point is, that no amount of checking probably would have determined what these two guys were capable of.

Hindsight is 20-20.

[jamhar]

Borrowed from a Facebook friend: Dear Boston Bombers.

We paid to have you educated at some of our finest schools; schools that are out of the reach of the vast majority of our own native born children.

Interesting . . . I wonder if it is true

No, but it makes it easier to beat one's chest and scream for revenge.

If this was 100 years ago, the injured accused would have been lynched by now.

You're saying that the suspects did not attend public schools and such?

[Ulysses G.]

I have neither seen nor heard any evidence yet to the effect that this was a religiously motivated act. At least one of the brothers felt out of place in the US. The design of the bombs is probably available on the internet. They showed themselves as rank amateurs by exposing their faces to cameras and hanging around until after the bombs went off. Their arsenal of weapons suggests that they had a grudge but more needs to be known before it can be said that they were Islamic extremists.

They are Muslims who posted jihad videos and Nazi propaganda on their social media sites and the vast array of explosives they had made strongly suggests that they had training in making them. It is pretty darn obvious what motivated them.

Please show your sources for that information.

Maybe you need to a little reading before commenting on these issues. It is all over every newspaper and TV network.

Edited April 21, 2013 by Ulysses G.

[ZhouZhou]

Borrowed from a Facebook friend: Dear Boston Bombers.

We paid to have you educated at some of our finest schools; schools that are out of the reach of the vast majority of our own native born children.

Interesting . . . I wonder if it is true

No, but it makes it easier to beat one's chest and scream for revenge.

If this was 100 years ago, the injured accused would have been lynched by now.

And thank goodness we have moved on from that, especially as so many Western lives have been sacrificed for the alleged reason that brutal execution is abhorrent.

I have neither seen nor heard any evidence yet to the effect that this was a religiously motivated act. At least one of the brothers felt out of place in the US. The design of the bombs is probably available on the internet. They showed themselves as rank amateurs by exposing their faces to cameras and hanging around until after the bombs went off. Their arsenal of weapons suggests that they had a grudge but more needs to be known before it can be said that they were Islamic extremists.

the mob does not need more information. it just like the same like 100 years ago.

he was seen at a mosque, his face book say he is Muslim.

[Ulysses G.]

His Facebook that he wrote.

[chuckd]

Police don't need a search warrant if the occupants agree to the search.

I seriously doubt any resident of Boston would have refused entry to the police in this situation.

[uptheos]

We all make choices in life. The apologists will say that the bombers were oppressed, but they were not. They were not repressed either, but they were conditioned by their culture and religion to do exactly what they did. However, behind all that conditioning was a choice. The choice was that they could have become Americans and lived a good life, but instead they chose to become Muslim terrorists.

[Morden]

We all make choices in life. The apologists will say that the bombers were oppressed, but they were not. They were not repressed either, but they were conditioned by their culture and religion to do exactly what they did. However, behind all that conditioning was a choice. The choice was that they could have become Americans and lived a good life, but instead they chose to become Muslim terrorists.

Bombers, certainly, but their motivation has yet to be established.

[uptheos]

Until recently there were a lot of people on the left wing, who were sort of holding out some hope that this might be a white male bomber, another Timothy McVeigh. They would have preferred anything other than a Muslim. Now that it is confirmed that the Boston bomber is a Muslim, the spinners will be frantically trying to spin the story in a politically correct direction.

[Steely Dan]

We all make choices in life. The apologists will say that the bombers were oppressed, but they were not. They were not repressed either, but they were conditioned by their culture and religion to do exactly what they did. However, behind all that conditioning was a choice. The choice was that they could have become Americans and lived a good life, but instead they chose to become Muslim terrorists.

Bombers, certainly, but their motivation has yet to be established.

The elder brother posted a song on his youtube playlist called "I dedicate my life to Jihad" Try spinning that one, though I note CAIR already try to spin the meaning of Jihad with their 'MyJihad' adverts.

[Jingthing]

Evidence is now showing Tamarlan starting to get very Jihad style radicalized in 2011. The same year the Russians red flagged him. The same year that his supposed "best American friend" (he said BEFORE THAT he never had any ... confusing) was found brutally murdered. The gym owner noticed a direct timing link between that murder event and Tamarlan starting to go off the deep end. He thought it was a traumatic reaction to the news. Of course, if he was the murderer in that unsolved triple murder case, that would change that theory.

Edited April 21, 2013 by Jingthing

[jamhar]

We all make choices in life. The apologists will say that the bombers were oppressed, but they were not. They were not repressed either, but they were conditioned by their culture and religion to do exactly what they did. However, behind all that conditioning was a choice. The choice was that they could have become Americans and lived a good life, but instead they chose to become Muslim terrorists.

Well said bro

[Ulysses G.]

We all make choices in life. The apologists will say that the bombers were oppressed, but they were not. They were not repressed either, but they were conditioned by their culture and religion to do exactly what they did. However, behind all that conditioning was a choice. The choice was that they could have become Americans and lived a good life, but instead they chose to become Muslim terrorists.

Bombers, certainly, but their motivation has yet to be established.

After Tamerlan’s visit to Dagestan and Chechnya, signs of alienation emerged. One month after he returned to the United States, a YouTube page that appeared to belong to him was created and featured multiple jihadist videos that he had endorsed in the past six months. One video featured the preaching of Abdul al-Hamid al-Juhani, an important ideologue in Chechnya; another focused on Feiz Mohammad, an extremist Salafi Lebanese preacher based in Australia. He also created a playlist of songs by a Russian musical artist, Timur Mucuraev, one of which promoted jihad, according to the SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors statements by jihadists. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/21/us/boston-marathon-bombings.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

[Jingthing]

Whatever their motivation, and it is worth knowing their motivation, and most probably both individuals had somewhat different motivations, there is NO rationalization for their actions. Both of them.

Edited April 21, 2013 by Jingthing

[geriatrickid]

My concern here has been the willingness to accept the abrogation of some very basic rights granted in the U.S. Constitution that this event has allowed. It was unnerving to watch police officials searching homes without a warrant and to curtail freedom of individual movement. . There is just cause when lives are at stake, but this was a house by house search with no indication that lives were in danger in those homes. I look on in amazement at Senator Graham who was steadfast in his opposition to the President's proposed gun licensing proposal on the grounds that it violated the U.S. constitution and yet he has no issue with the basic constitutional rights of the accused being circumvented and has actually encouraged such action.

The aftermath of the Boston murders has been a media circus, and it gives me the impression that the fears of the general public were fanned by the media and the government. The erosion of some basic civil liberties once taken for granted are justified in the name of the fight against terror. This event will provide lots of ammo for the zealots like Alex Jones et al and the extreme right wing that accuse the government of trampling over once fundamental rights of U.S. citizens. I have previously held such people in disdain and contempt, but I can now see why they have concerns.

Make no mistake, I believe the Boston murders to be wrong and horrific. It was wrong. However, the terrorists win when we are reduced to fear and allow our rights to be trampled on. My concern with the media promoted hysteria is that no one has questioned the ramification of the suspension of individual legal rights, even if only for a short time. A civilized society must be based upon the rule of law. That law must be reliable and cannot be twisted about when it is politically expedient. I wish to consider my society strong enough and possessing of moral values to the extent that the rule of law prevails tempered by compassion, and mercy.

The police don't need a warrant in an emergency. Link If people were home they probably got permission. Telling people to stay in their homes may or may not have been legal with no proof the perp was around, but it was prudent. No one was arrested for disobeying, which would trigger the court case.

They sure as heck didn't need a warrant to approach the boat in the back yard. They had probable cause and an immediate threat.

You're right this was horrific. It set a lot of things in motion, and job well done IMHO. We can have a friendly difference on this because I'm 100% pro liberty, but I see the emergency in action and waive it off. Killings and attempted killings were still taking place after the bombings, as long as the perps were on the loose.

Peace.

Unfortunately, there were a number of incidents involving disagreements with the police tactics. These will most likely not be reported in the mainstream press which has doubled as a cheerleader for the police response. The authorities did indeed have the right to do a stop and search of vehicles. One could argue, they had a duty to conduct a thorough search. I think they did. However, there are already a number of dissenting opinions in respect to the treatment of the 4th Amendment in the manhunt when it comes to the entry onto private property. There is a large segment of the US population that takes property rights has a holy right and it is to be expected that in the coming weeks, this vociferous group will speak out.

At the time that homes and property were being searched, there was no firm indication that a dangerous person was present, nor was there an emergency at the premises being entered. The fact that either you or I would have welcomed a "welfare check" or approve is irrelevant, as there are a great many people who would not.

In respect to the apprehension of the accused in the boat, the discovery came as the police were scaling down the manhunt and the home restriction lifted. The State Police helicopter was running low on fuel and police officers needed a break as many had been going since the night before. The police responded to a 911 call from the homeowner. As such, they did not need a warrant and were responding to a crime in progress - the trespass of a bloodied person. However, prior to this, the manner in which the police were approaching doors and kicking on them does not bode well for the respect of the 4th Amendment. It is a slippery slope when police agencies can act in such a manner. Not all police agencies have personnel capable of using good judgement.

It is fortunate that the FBI hostage unit was in command of the boat apprehension as it was its negotiator that arranged the surrender and took command of the arrest. Listening to the scanner, the local Boston cops were over juiced and had to be continually ordered to respect the perimeter, to stop lighting up the area and to hold fire. It is fortunate that as the police were swarming Watertown earlier in the day that no one was mistakenly shot.

[jamhar]

Interesting account of the younger brother running over his older brother

rat bastard runs over his rat bastard brother

""[Tamerlan] all of a sudden comes out from under cover and just starts walking down the street, shooting at our police officers, trying to get closer," Deveau said. "Now, my closest officer is five to 10 feet away, and they're exchanging gunfire between them. And he runs out of ammunition -- the bad guy -- and so one of my police officers comes off the side and tackles him in the street.

"We're trying to get him handcuffed. There's two or three police officers handcuffing him in the street -- the older brother. At the same time, at the last minute -- they obviously have tunnel vision, it's a very, very stressful situation -- one of them yells out, 'Look out!' and here comes the black SUV, the carjacked car, directly at them. They dive out of the way, and he (the younger brother) drives over his brother and drags him a short distance down the street."

[Jingthing]

Suicide bombers show bravery. Acts don't have to be 100 percent cowardly or 100 percent brave. They can be a mix. Bottom line, it doesn't matter. Their actions are what matters and the results.

Edited April 21, 2013 by Jingthing

[geriatrickid]

We all make choices in life. The apologists will say that the bombers were oppressed, but they were not. They were not repressed either, but they were conditioned by their culture and religion to do exactly what they did. However, behind all that conditioning was a choice. The choice was that they could have become Americans and lived a good life, but instead they chose to become Muslim terrorists.

Well said bro

Timothy McVeigh was a self described "patriotic" American. It can be argued that his culture and religion caused him to do exactly what he did.

I am not an apologist for the Boston murderers and I shed no tears over the death of the older brother who it seems was one nasty piece of business. However, it is simplistic to look for one single factor as the cause.

[theblether]

Suicide bombers show bravery. Acts don't have to be 100 percent cowardly or 100 percent brave. They can be a mix. Bottom line, it doesn't matter. Their actions are what matters and the results.

Sophistry.

The act is cowardly.........to walk up behind innocent civilians at any time and set off a bomb is not an act of bravery.

Bizarre that you would suggest it.

[geriatrickid]

Suicide bombers show bravery. Acts don't have to be 100 percent cowardly or 100 percent brave. They can be a mix. Bottom line, it doesn't matter. Their actions are what matters and the results.

<deleted>? C'mon. As you well know, many of those suicide bombers are kids, or mentally disabled people. Often they are marginalized or depressed people carefully recruited by the terrorist organizations. I do not consider it an act of bravery to have someone explode in a crowd of civilians many of whom are children. The older brother that died strikes me as the typical bully type. Marginalized and blaming others for his failures and inadequacies. I think his uncle summed him up succinctly: Loser.

[NeverSure]

My concern here has been the willingness to accept the abrogation of some very basic rights granted in the U.S. Constitution that this event has allowed. It was unnerving to watch police officials searching homes without a warrant and to curtail freedom of individual movement. . There is just cause when lives are at stake, but this was a house by house search with no indication that lives were in danger in those homes. I look on in amazement at Senator Graham who was steadfast in his opposition to the President's proposed gun licensing proposal on the grounds that it violated the U.S. constitution and yet he has no issue with the basic constitutional rights of the accused being circumvented and has actually encouraged such action.

The aftermath of the Boston murders has been a media circus, and it gives me the impression that the fears of the general public were fanned by the media and the government. The erosion of some basic civil liberties once taken for granted are justified in the name of the fight against terror. This event will provide lots of ammo for the zealots like Alex Jones et al and the extreme right wing that accuse the government of trampling over once fundamental rights of U.S. citizens. I have previously held such people in disdain and contempt, but I can now see why they have concerns.

Make no mistake, I believe the Boston murders to be wrong and horrific. It was wrong. However, the terrorists win when we are reduced to fear and allow our rights to be trampled on. My concern with the media promoted hysteria is that no one has questioned the ramification of the suspension of individual legal rights, even if only for a short time. A civilized society must be based upon the rule of law. That law must be reliable and cannot be twisted about when it is politically expedient. I wish to consider my society strong enough and possessing of moral values to the extent that the rule of law prevails tempered by compassion, and mercy.

The police don't need a warrant in an emergency. Link If people were home they probably got permission. Telling people to stay in their homes may or may not have been legal with no proof the perp was around, but it was prudent. No one was arrested for disobeying, which would trigger the court case.

They sure as heck didn't need a warrant to approach the boat in the back yard. They had probable cause and an immediate threat.

You're right this was horrific. It set a lot of things in motion, and job well done IMHO. We can have a friendly difference on this because I'm 100% pro liberty, but I see the emergency in action and waive it off. Killings and attempted killings were still taking place after the bombings, as long as the perps were on the loose.

Peace.

Unfortunately, there were a number of incidents involving disagreements with the police tactics. These will most likely not be reported in the mainstream press which has doubled as a cheerleader for the police response. The authorities did indeed have the right to do a stop and search of vehicles. One could argue, they had a duty to conduct a thorough search. I think they did. However, there are already a number of dissenting opinions in respect to the treatment of the 4th Amendment in the manhunt when it comes to the entry onto private property. There is a large segment of the US population that takes property rights has a holy right and it is to be expected that in the coming weeks, this vociferous group will speak out.

At the time that homes and property were being searched, there was no firm indication that a dangerous person was present, nor was there an emergency at the premises being entered. The fact that either you or I would have welcomed a "welfare check" or approve is irrelevant, as there are a great many people who would not.

In respect to the apprehension of the accused in the boat, the discovery came as the police were scaling down the manhunt and the home restriction lifted. The State Police helicopter was running low on fuel and police officers needed a break as many had been going since the night before. The police responded to a 911 call from the homeowner. As such, they did not need a warrant and were responding to a crime in progress - the trespass of a bloodied person. However, prior to this, the manner in which the police were approaching doors and kicking on them does not bode well for the respect of the 4th Amendment. It is a slippery slope when police agencies can act in such a manner. Not all police agencies have personnel capable of using good judgement.

It is fortunate that the FBI hostage unit was in command of the boat apprehension as it was its negotiator that arranged the surrender and took command of the arrest. Listening to the scanner, the local Boston cops were over juiced and had to be continually ordered to respect the perimeter, to stop lighting up the area and to hold fire. It is fortunate that as the police were swarming Watertown earlier in the day that no one was mistakenly shot.

OK, points well taken. I need only to wait and see if there are official complaints including but not necessarily to courts about entry and search. I don't know, but I haven't heard of anyone saying their home was searched without permission, or that they object.

Also, I posted a Link above where it would be up to a judge to decide if the searches were an "emergency." My hunch, but I don't know, is that a judge would think it was.

We had a lot going on - the main bombing, a killed officer at a school, a carjacking, the running over in the street of the brother probably actually killing him, bombs being thrown at police in pursuit, lots of shots fired, worry about even more bombs including perhaps a vest bomb...

A murderous act was committed by Islamic terrorists on US soil. We.don't.put.up.with.that. We will find out who was behind this and get them.

I thought all of America was cheering that night. I was proud to be an American.

I still am.

Edited April 21, 2013 by NeverSure