[NEWS] Explosions near Boston Marathon Finish Line (UPDATE: MIT/Watertown shootout w/ suspects)

McVeigh got busted driving without a license plate. We were lucky.

 

English is my second language and I got 5's on all AP English tests and got a 770 on the SAT verbal. I can write that stupid sentence.

 

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>RT @<a href="https://twitter.com/gregpmiller">gregpmiller</a> CIA wanted Boston bombing suspect added to terror watch list more than a year before the attacks. <a href="http://t.co/PMXY75w8LH" title="http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/biden-lashes-out-at-twisted-perverted-terrorists-in-eulogy-for-slain-office/2013/04/24/652b987a-acf8-11e2-a8b9-2a63d75b5459_story.html?hpid=z1">washingtonpost.com/national/biden…</a></p>&mdash; Noah Shachtman (@dangerroom) <a href="https://twitter.com/dangerroom/status/327167707025920002">April 24, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

God damn it. This stupid post is what I waste my 3000th post on.

 

MARATHON BOMBING: ISSUES TO WATCH

By J.M. Berger

The Boston Marathon bombing will have consequences in the weeks, months and years to come. I plan to write about some of these points at more length, as time allows, but I wanted to briefly outline a couple of the most significant issues raised by the attack so we can start thinking and talking about them.

*Budgets: Most people working in counterterrorism studies have seen training and research money dry up pretty significantly over the last two years in the United States, especially relation to Islamist and Al Qaeda-inspired terrorism. The Boston bombing may or may not herald a change in the tempo, effectiveness or essential nature of the homeland terrorist threat, but will it change the budget dynamics? Should it?

*Focus: Not unrelated to the first point, many people who study terrorism and extremism have, over the last two years, refocused on the prospect of domestic right-wing terrorism as the "next big thing." This was reflected in the widespread speculation about right-wing attribution of the attack in the early hours and well into the week. We were only beginning to see a commitment to the study of non-Muslim domestic extremism from academia, credible NGOs and the private sector. Will those studies -- which I think are important -- be sidetracked by the attribution of this attack? If they continue, will they continue to be confined only to "right wing" extremism? Or will all of this remain a cobwebbed corner of the research world until something terrible happens, and everyone asks why nobody saw it coming?

*Attribution and the definition of terrorism: The question of attributing the Marathon bombing ran hot last week, with a lot of rampant speculation in the media based on little or no information, blaming a number of possible motivations and even speculating the bombing was not political. With a suspect captured alive and additional information flowing in rapidly, it looks like we'll get some answers to these questions in the weeks ahead, but we still haven't figured out how to handle cases where attribution is weak or absent -- for example, the 2012 Sikh temple shooting in which an avowed white supremacist carried out a mass shooting against non-whites, but without leaving a statement of his purpose or any particular clues as to his motivation (aside from being a white supremacist). Given the events of the last 18 months, it's increasingly clear we need to define what is terrorism and why, so that we can craft consistent policy responses.

*The definition of Al Qaeda: Sorry to be a broken record on this, but we still haven't fixed the problem I've been talking about for years now -- what is Al Qaeda, what isn't, and how do those definitions affect policy and counterterrorism strategy? News coverage and speculation about the attacks this week highlighted this continuing problem, and it was further emphasized as the media rushed to try to figure out exactly what a Chechen jihadist is and whether it has to do with Al Qaeda. We need a clear consensus definition of Al Qaeda, so that we can craft consistent strategies and policies. Until then, we will continue to flail around every time a counterterrorism issue arises.

*The mainstreaming of conspiracy culture: We entered a brave new world last week when a reporter from the conspiracy Web site Infowars trolled CNN's live coverage with a bullhorn and crashed not one but two press conferences related to the bombing with questions about whether the attack was a "false flag" (meaning it was staged by the government to justify draconian security measures). Infowars and sites like it are increasingly driving chatter and defining world views among domestic extremists on both the right and the left, but there's very little study of this issue and very little understanding of how conspiracy theories, whether specific or generalized, do or do not relate to extremism and the prospect of violence. It's time to start shining a light on this issue.

http://news.intelwire.com/2013/04/marathon-bombing-issues-to-watch.html

 

I fail to understand how someone who is around ESL people constantly can take such a hard-line stance on something as subjective as the English skills of Syrian civilians half a world away. In fact, from my experience being around people who have learned the Queen's English, they have a much more verbose style of speaking and writing than the vast majority of Americans.

Also, the fact that not only was it confirmed to be real, but there was an American response to the banner should be a clue as to the validity of the picture.

 

I am taking a stance on all ESL speakers. not Syrians.

 

#mambablood #realtalk

 

Looks like the flag of Luxembourg to me...

 

tallonvor, why do you need to take something that promotes peace and turn it around to make it an issue about the capabilities of different races?

 

Your Own Personal Jihadi?

--
April 25th 2013 - The Boston Attack and what we know about it at this point doesn't exactly turn conventional wisdom of the terrorism research community upside-down: vulnerable young men, a vacuum to fill, a family falling apart, a personal re-invention, ties to a homeland and a region affected by bloody conflict, perhaps a radical friend, perhaps a lot of radical video consumption, perhaps a fatal journey abroad, a bit of Inspire... And yet, there are a few aspects in this case I am still chewing on. To put it another way: Maybe we should call in the psychologists.

It's mainly these points that strike me as possibly significant when trying to draw conclusions from the Boston attack:

1.- While this is obviously not even remotely the first terror attack in which brothers took part, it's still different from most others that I am aware of in that we have reason to believe that Tamerlan was the driving force and that Dhzokhar submitted to his idea. We have a lot of indication of a radicalization of Tamerlan, but as of now very little, if anything at all, that would suggest that Dhzokhar even was a committed Jihadist when he signed up for it. In what sort of capacity, and for which reasons did he take part? They may lie in a sphere to which political scientists, Arabists, journalists or whatever else most of us may be don't necessarily have the best understanding of and access to. What I mean, to put it bluntly: What if this was an attack that meant something different to each of the perpetrators? I am aware that there are other instances in which one participant exerted undue influence over others. And yet, if we are trying to take it from here and to assess what may be coming next, we should probably bear in mind that apparently even a jihadist terror attack may be something that someone can be drawn into even though his "real" motivation may much rather be that he doesn't want to be the one left behind or the one leaving someone else behind.

2.- There is one other dimension to this attack that I can't get out of my head: This was two excelling sportsmen attacking a sporting event. Why the Marathon? Only because it was the biggest event that fit the schedule? Perhaps. But maybe this is also something that other professions have interesting perspectives on. I personally find it distantly but oddly reminiscent of school shootings: Going back to something you were once part of and maybe experienced humiliation at.

I am no psychologist and I feel bad even trying for a second to think like one. But it is exactly this discomfort that makes me wonder if I have sufficient analytical tools at my disposal to see all important dimensions in this attack.

To elaborate a little: My background, for example, is in Arabic and Islamic Studies and Political Sciences and I work as a journalist. I tend to stress the importance of ideology. For example, I made great efforts trying to explain to people that what may look like illogical and arbitrary targets to "us" are in many cases perfectly reasonable targets from a Jihadist perspective if you are acquainted with their sources and ways of thinking. But the more attacks by "lone wolfs" or self recruited Jihadists we see, the higher the chance is that they might mix personal with ideologically prescribed considerations. Since no-one is leading them (in many cases), no-body gets to "correct" them. So with Jihadism becoming more individual, it also may become more personalized. And that would perhaps mean we have to take into consideration additional or slightly different factors in order to do risk analysis or threat assessment, etc.

This is just a blog post, not an academic paper, not a newspaper editorial, not a conference contribution. Please take it as such. It is just a few thoughts that I have been developing over the past few days. They may be absurd, already proven wrong or considered solved. But then, what's a blog for if not (also) for throwing thoughts at people to see what they have to say.

http://abususu.blogspot.de/2013/04/personalized-jihad.html?m=1

 

The Arabic is way too good. Obviously fake.

 

you're ignorant as hell saying not a single esl speaker is capable of writing a sentence like that. But why the hell does it really matter where they got that sentence from? Am I missing something?

 

English is my second language...I have no accent (at least I dont think I do) when I speak english. I also have no problems communicating or writing. My family that has lived in Iran their entires lives speak english with an accent, but their vocabulary is just as advanced as mine. Therefore, if they are writing, you would never think that they have never lived in the states. It's not an uncommon thing, there are millions and millions of people that can communicate in an eloquent manner, even with their 2nd language.

 

never said that. SAid they wouldn't. Screaming 'ignorance' is pretty weak.

Spoiler

exactly. it doesn't

Oh good grief. learn 2 read. Maybe you are joking. Not sure.

 

Anyone else think the older brother's wife looks like a homeless man's version of Katherine Heigl?

Terrorist's Wife

Spoiler

Katherine Heigl

Spoiler

amirite?

 

yarite!

 

Good news for me.:grin:

 

A 4-page argument about ESL breaks out in a thread about a terrorist attack.

Gotta love Clutchfans!

 

Officials confirm al Qaeda magazine linked to bombs