I guess there's no need to speculate, but I'm guessing domestic political dissidents.

This is impressive, in a perverse sense: Alex Jones didn't waste any time at all.

Income tax day, in Boston. I'm betting extremists who call themselves Tea Party members. Way to put the final nails in the coffin of that political movement, guys.

New York Post reports that a Saudi national is being held as a suspect:

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/authorities_under_suspect_guard_y2m8cJO29uC2PDGIjYBalO

Of course, it's the Post, so we can expect a bit of breathless eagerness in the reporting. Take it with a grain of salt.

Of course, cooler heads are saying the Saudi national story is a bunch of hooey:

http://www.policymic.com/articles/35367/boston-marathon-suspect-at-large-no-suspect-in-custody

No doubt Alex Jones will cite this in the future as some sort of cover-up...

I was just in Boston for the first time in my life last week. It's such a beautiful city, so rich in history and the roots of our freedom. To see this today, just makes me sad.

> domestic political dissidents.

54 years old, the first time I've ever seen that word used in the United States.

A grotesque —if not (given the source) a wholly unexpected— milestone.

"Dissidents."

Who the fuck is Alex Jones? Why do you care about him?

Live ten minutes from Boston so getting local press conferences. BPD commissioner says no suspect in custody, but NBC has apparently confirmed NY Post story.

In three hours I've heard Saudi national, right wing tax protester (tax day), right wing 2nd amendment protester, and general government/revolutionary protesters (today is Patriot's Day in MA - Battles of Lexington Concord reenactment was held today.)

domestic political dissidents.
--------------------------------------------------
Just FYI everyone, "domestic political dissidents" wrote a couple of famous documents you may have heard of:

The Bill Of Rights

The US Constitution

It is becoming clear that these two "politically incorrect" documents are no longer enforced.

You will very soon find a lot of "domestic political dissidents" starving to death in the FEMA camps which were built in the 1990's.

I find it amazing that people are suspecting the Tea Party and other "right-wing extremists". We don't have much data at the moment. . . but do we know of any groups whose typical M.O. involves bombs in populated areas ???

> NPR's Dina Temple Raston reports that the FBI
> has sent counter terrorism officials to
> the scene.

Great. Feelin' better here.

Many videos

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/aftermath-footage-boston-bombs_716394.html

Anyone seen Bill Ayers? As long as we're speculating without facts, why not? I don't know who is behind it, and history shows there's no need to apologize if you smear anyone you don't like, so, Ayers it is.

Just to be clear, because some misunderstand sarcasm, I don't really believe it was Ayers.

Bostonian posters, please identify yourselves and your sources

Vine

Yeah, but Dina Temple Raston.

(A person with three names on NPR... Imagine!)

Whatever... This figure from NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO affirms that the federal government is taking care of business.

So, I'm totally comfortable.

You too?

No?

Well thank god people are already spouting factless, baseless opinions. It sure would suck if-when something horrible happened-the news people reported only the facts, and the anonymous typists waited to find at least a little something out before giving the world their opinions on whodunnit.

But apparently that's asking too much, patrick.

I'll give my opinion. It was person or persons mentally ill. I love Boston. I feel so bad for all those there.

Well, obviously, Cridsy, since the very mention of his name has you upset, you know who Alex Jones is. So, I won't bore you by explaining that he's a small-time radio personality and rampant conspiracy theorist.

But to answer your question, I don't care what he thinks, having only recently learned who is myself. I just find it fascinatingly sick that someone would, literally within minutes of the event, claim that the government was behind this to harm the Tea Party.

momof4: It was person or persons mentally ill.

Oh, brilliant deduction, Holmes. I stand in awe of the acumen that allowed you to rule out sane people planting bombs to detonate during the Boston Marathon.

Well, the NY post seems to be standing by their story that it is a young Saudi national, and that he is being held at the hospital.

Time will tell, I guess, but somehow, I think Tax day protestors would have bombed an IRS office.

As far as the bomber being mentally ill, I suppose anyone affected with a severe case of fanaticism, is indeed mentally ill.

SM777: Just FYI everyone, "domestic political dissidents" wrote a couple of famous documents you may have heard of:

The Bill Of Rights

The US Constitution

Just FYI, SM777, the Bill of Rights is part of the Constitution. Two list them as two separate documents is like citing "The Torah and the book of Genesis."

And the Framers of the Constitution did not merely dissent; they broke from it.

Income tax day, in Boston. I'm betting extremists who call themselves Tea Party members. Way to put the final nails in the coffin of that political movement, guys.

Patrick, hate-government types certainly aren't above setting off bombs to kill people (see Timothy McVeigh) but I would think that, as with McVeigh, their target would be some government building or government employees, not runners and spectators in the Boston Marathon.

In any case, what a sad and terrible day for everyone affected.

...the Bill of Rights is part of the Constitution.

They were initially separate.

The Bill of Rights is composed of the first ten amendments to the Constitution; these amendments were ratified as part of the Constitution in December 1791.

The Constitution went into effect in March 1789.

And, there was considerable debate as to whether a Bill of Rights was needed. Some thought that an enumeration of rights would be used to limit them, so it was not only not necessary, but dangerous to add a Bill of Rights. Others argued an enumeration of rights was necessary to curb the power of the new federal government over individuals.

Hamilton discussed his opposition to the Bill of Rights in Federalist 84. Robert Yates countered Hamilton's arguments in Anti-Federalist 84.

This figure from NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO affirms that the federal government is taking care of business. ... So, I'm totally comfortable.

But, but, she's got three names.

I'm betting extremists who call themselves Tea Party members.

You and Michael Moore together in a rush to judgement. Not good company to keep, Patrick.

And, calling themselves Tea Party members doesn't make it so.

Well, the NY post seems to be standing by their story that it is a young Saudi national,

That seems much more plausible to me than a domestic hate-government type.

I was just in Boston for the first time in my life last week. It's such a beautiful city, so rich in history and the roots of our freedom.,/i>

Glad you felt that way about Boston, Sara. I've been there many times and love it. Boston and San Francisco are my two favorite U.S. cities.

> you know who Alex Jones

No clue.

> he's a small-time radio personality

Looming large in your nine-year-old imagination, apparently.

> and rampant conspiracy theorist.

This from a child who prattles about "dissidents"?

> And the Framers of the Constitution did not
> merely dissent; they broke from it.

Linguistically crippled, ideologically drunken. They "broke" from dissent?

You literally don't know who your friends are.

So - do contestants now need a patdown by a TSA agent to compete?

They could be smuggling bomb materials into the venue!

Conan: And, calling themselves Tea Party members doesn't make it so.

Which is why I said, "...who call themselves Tea Party members." As opposed to just calling them "Tea Party Members."

I don't think I need to be chided for suggesting that they were Tea Party members when I made it abundantly clear that these unknown terrorists might have called themselves Tea Party Members.

Do you?

Didn't think so.

Although this convenient attitude of disowning those in your number when they do things you don't like is so very...Christian.

If some professed Christian commits a ghastly murder, for instance, the Christians self-righteously claim that these people weren't truly Christian, since murder is such a horrible sin in Christianity. (See Paul Hill and Scott Roeder. Oh, what the hell...I can't resist. See Timothy McVeigh while you're at it.)

But let some Muslim try the same trick by pointing out that suicide is prohibited in Islam. "Oh, yes, they were Muslim!" scream the Christians. "They were! They were! They were!"

No clue.

At least you admit it.

Jesus Christ, are you out of grade school?

Which commenter is Jesus Christ and why do you think he's in grade school?

See Timothy McVeigh while you're at it. -- Patrick at April 15, 2013 5:57 PM

Per Wiki:

McVeigh was a registered Republican when he lived in Buffalo, New York in the 1980s, and had a membership in the National Rifle Association while in the military,[84] but voted for Libertarian Party candidate, Harry Browne, in the 1996 presidential elections.[85] McVeigh was raised Roman Catholic.[86] During his childhood, he and his father attended Mass regularly.[87] McVeigh was confirmed at the Good Shepherd Church in Pendleton, New York, in 1985.[88] In a 1996 interview, McVeigh professed belief in "a God", although he said he had "sort of lost touch with" Catholicism and "I never really picked it up, however I do maintain core beliefs."[86] In the 2001 book American Terrorist, McVeigh stated that he did not believe in Hell and that science is his religion.[89][90] In June 2001, a day before the execution, McVeigh wrote a letter to the Buffalo News identifying as agnostic.[91] Before his execution, McVeigh took the Catholic sacrament of the Anointing of the Sick.[92]

Connecting McVeigh and religion is like connecting Amy or me with with religion. Yes, we were nominally brought up with faith, but it impinges on our actions as a general don't be a bitch or a bastard, not I'm doing this for God® or Jesus™.

An agnostic is not a non-believer. An agnostic merely holds the view that the existence of God is unknown and unknowable. In that respect, although I am a believer, I am also agnostic. I understand that God's existence cannot be proven, but I choose to believe nonetheless.

Now that about twelve hours have passed with no one claiming responsibility, it is probably a domestic terrorist attack.

You know Al-Qaeda would have had a friendly demonstration in the Arab streets by now.

So now it is a U.S. criminal matter. But before anyone jumps on the Saudi national (a'la Richard Jewell) what would you be taught if you grew up in Saudi Arabia. Probably it would be "If you hear an explosion and can run, get as far away as you can from the center as fast as you can." So burns are no indication of involvement other than being there.

I went to a seminar on how to react to a shooter event. One of the pictures showed a soldier in an Iraqi marketplace, in full combat gear, turning toward the event as everyone else was running away. The next picture showed a kid that was a half foot behind the soldier using him as a shield.

The Saudi probably decided "away" was a good place to be.

Boston.

Crid,

Thanks I needed that. I just sent it to my uncle an MIT grad who loves Boston.

An agnostic is not a non-believer. -- Patrick at April 15, 2013 6:53 PM

I'm not arguing that. My argument is that associating Paul Hill and Scott Roeder with Timothy McVeigh motivations is like comparing spaghetti and Alfredo sauce. Both go over noddles nicely but the flavor has no association.

Which is why I said, "...who call themselves Tea Party members." As opposed to just calling them "Tea Party Members." -- Patrick at April 15, 2013 5:57 PM

I'm making the same distinction.

The end of the Boston marathon is not a good choice to commit a crime where you want the perpetrator to go undetected.

There were probably enough cameras trained on the end of the race, that some footage will show who planted the explosives and how.

I don't think lumping terrorism into foreign or domestic is particularly helpful here since it has been done for political reasons in the past, rather than as a way to identify the motivations and organizations of an individual terrorist.

I agree with Isabel. I think there is so much computer recording of transactions and transportation that there's no way this monster is going to get away

I don't think I need to be chided for suggesting that they were Tea Party members when I made it abundantly clear that these unknown terrorists might have called themselves Tea Party Members.

You weren't being chided. Maybe you should have been.

You do like to take left-handed shots at the Tea Party (and all things on the political right) and then pretend you didn't; and get defensive when called on it.

And the proof of it is that of all the things I wrote, this is the one about which you chose to feel persecuted.

Income tax day, in Boston. I'm betting extremists who call themselves Tea Party members. Way to put the final nails in the coffin of that political movement, guys.

Reminds me of the NYT, Krugman, and pretty much the entire left following the Giffords shooting.

Reminds me of the NYT, Krugman, and pretty much the entire left following the Giffords shooting.

Reminds me of the DC sniper episode too. Until some evidence comes in showing I'm wrong, I'm going to assume one of the perpetrators was named Mohammed, just based on the historical record.

On the subject of getting defensive:

You weren't being chided. Maybe you should have been.

You do like to take left-handed shots at the Tea Party (and all things on the political right) and then pretend you didn't; and get defensive when called on it.

And the proof of it is that of all the things I wrote, this is the one about which you chose to feel persecuted.

No, Conan, I don't feel persecuted at all. I just have no use for those who feel the need to insert corrections where none are needed. Maybe in some people, it gratifies their ego to come in all pompous and lordly to say, in essence, "You are wrong. This is what you should have said to be right. You are indeed fortunate to have me around to correct you."

I said that these terrorists, considering the coincidence of the day and the location, might have been extremists calling themselves members of the Tea Party. You respond by suggesting that they aren't Tea Party members, despite what they might consider themselves.

I made that abundantly clear when I said they might "call themselves Tea Party members," as opposed to saying "Tea Party members."

I wonder if you'll be so generous if the left ever feels the need to disown one of their own. Time will tell.

Isn't it amazing how soon the commentary shifted to be about the commenters, rather than the incident?

Now - rush off and buy some more fear. You don't have enough of it, because you're not clamoring for bomb control laws now.

I said that these terrorists, considering the coincidence of the day and the location, might have been extremists calling themselves members of the Tea Party. ~ Patrick

You could have left it at extremists, but you had to get that little dig in at the Tea Party by including them in your statement about extremists and terrorism (guilt by association) - even as you inserted language to insulate yourself from outright accusing them of the crime.

We get it, you hate the Tea Party. I hate Illinois Nazis, but until the evidence is in, I'll won't make blanket statements on their involvement (real or implied) in this crime.

In the spirit of your original post: Income tax day, in Boston. I'm betting extremists who call themselves members of Occupy Wall Street.

See what I did there, I didn't actually accuse OWS, but I made sure it's in your mind that it could have been them.

====================

I wonder if you'll be so generous if the left ever feels the need to disown one of their own. ~ Patrick

Tell you what, when the Left disowns (or even just mildly censures) Bernadette Dohrn or Bill Ayers, two confessed domestic terrorists still active in left-wing politics and still at large, I'll try to be generous.

> Isn't it amazing how soon the commentary
> shifted to be about the commenters, rather
> than the incident?

When you say commenters, do you mean "dissidents"?

So burns are no indication of involvement other than being there.

This. The fact that a guy was running from the scene of a bombing doesn't make him a terrorist. Running is a logical thing to do.

The TSA Grope will forthwith be applied at all concerts and sporting events. That is all I know for certain at this point.

The TSA Grope will forthwith be applied at all concerts and sporting events. That is all I know for certain at this point. -- bmused at April 16, 2013 12:54 PM

I hope you're wrong, but fear you're right.

The only way this will break is when one too many ball park has to impose local blackouts for non-attendance. Enough people will say I won't go through the shit. Then the sheeple will get it. By then it will be too late.

Conan writes:

You could have left it at extremists, but you had to get that little dig in at the Tea Party by including them in your statement about extremists and terrorism (guilt by association) - even as you inserted language to insulate yourself from outright accusing them of the crime.

We get it, you hate the Tea Party.

Not really. I was looking forward to the real possibility of a third party. And one who's premise was merely to balance the budget and are tired of rampant overspending and bailouts seemed like a welcome addition to the playing field.

It's too bad they allowed ideology completely irrelevant to this pragmaticism to creep into their ranks. Hating the Tea Party would actually mean I consider them a viable force. I don't. They're dead in the water. They just don't know it yet.

Shame, too. They had a real chance of becoming a legitimate third party, as opposed to say, the Green Party.

In the spirit of your original post: Income tax day, in Boston. I'm betting extremists who call themselves members of Occupy Wall Street.

See what I did there, I didn't actually accuse OWS, but I made sure it's in your mind that it could have been them.

So, what? It could very well have been someone who considers himself a member of Occupy Wall Street (if you consider this an organization with an actual membership; something I never did).

Far from making me consider what a terrible I supposedly did by making an association between Boston, income tax day, and the Tea Party, I'm now wondering why this has your panties in such a twist.

If it does turn out to be some malcontent who considers himself a Tea Party member, I will not consider myself vindicated, since I don't need to be vindicated of anything. Nor will I consider myself censured if it turns out to be a member of Occupy Wall Street.