Slashdot Mirror
Police Capture Second Marathon Bombing Suspect in Watertown, Mass.
Police have captured believed Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who was "pinned down" in a boat stored behind a house in Watertown, Massachusetts. You can listen to the live police feed here.
The "lockdown" of Boston is a bit disturbing. But, rest assured the LAPD would have burned the boat to the ground. Boston PD seems to be a bit more professional and restrained.
Let's remember, folks, that until we see actual evidence and he's tried, that he's a *suspect.* I'm all for the consequences if he is proven to be the perpetrator, but let's not all jump on the finger-pointing-based-conviction bandwagon.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but based on the actual information we have (as given by the news media to date), this "monster" may be involved to the degree of anywhere between "mastermind of terrorist bombing operation, detonated the bombs, shot various innocent people in the process" to "forced by actual terrorist brother to hang around him for the time period in question".
I'd like a little more detail (that is, any) as to specific charges and evidence before making such a characterization.
Perhaps not innocent, that doesn't mean he is the right guy.
Proper trials are not only there to make sure that innocent people doesn't get punished. If a rapist gets convicted of murder that means that the murderer goes free.
"Beyond reasonable doubt" isn't only there to protect innocents, it also makes sure that cases doesn't get closed until we know that we've got the right guy.
Iraq wanted us out, so it's their fucking problem now.
You say "Iraq" like it's one thing with a unified want... I think you might be mistaken about that.
Unfortunately for your argument this darkskin person they sanctioned in fact had several bombs in their vehicle which they threw at police vehicles.
A lie can run round the world before the truth can get its boots on. Unfortunately, for your argument.
The "darkskin", as you like to put it - the one whose picture appeared in Rupert Murdoch's newspaper - is the innocent one. People rushed to judgement.
The guys who were throwing bombs and firing off guns right and left were pasty-pale people.
So thank a private business for the initial video of the suspects, and thank an "ordinary" citizen for the observation that led to the second suspect's capture.
Of course, also thank the FBI for identifying the suspects (rather than the misidentification by private citizens and some news organizations), and all the law enforcement officers putting their lives on the line today.
CBS reported that few years back Russians warned FBI about older brother being radicalized. So FBI asked him, he said "nope", they said "ok" and let him go. And they totally forgot about it - he wasn't on the list of suspects... That's "cooperation" alright...
Maybe you would have been happier about 60 years ago in a time when they could lock you away because your neighbor said you might be a communist. The world was a much safer place back then with all those commies being locked away without a trial.
Does a non-anonymous European work better? Here's one.
The US have a great history of meddling with something, noticing that they bit of more than they could chew, then run away from the problem and leave others to pick up the debris. Actually amazing that you didn't fuck up after WW2, that was pretty much the last time when you decided to stick with it and take responsibility.
Yes, Saddam sure wasn't a nice guy (ok, he was a buddy back when he attacked Iran that decided to turn from buddy to Teh Evil practically over night and all those shiny F14s you sent there were now in the hands of those Islamists, but when he dared to attack someone other than what you wanted him to, he turned from buddy to Teh Evil over night). But at least the effin' country was STABLE. It was near impossible for some Islamist to establish a base of power there. Now, you managed to make it easy for them.
Good intentions being the pavement to the road to hell, ever heard that one? Guess it would be adapted as the US foreign policy motto.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Considering my family was stuck in some Soviet-occupied area for quite a while after the war and you didn't lift a finger to change anything about that, well, thank you. Apologies if it doesn't really sound too sincere.
When comparing Communism and Capitalism, I gotta say, the difference ain't that great, though. Does it matter whether you can't buy anything 'cause it's not available or whether you cannot afford it? Does it matter whether you can't go anywhere because you must not leave or because you cannot afford to leave? Does it matter whether you have no choice of your leader because there is no choice or because there isn't any real difference between them? The main difference was that at least you could speak your mind, but we're working on reverting that.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
There is literally not a single part of Christianity that is violent.
Jesus beat the shit out of the moneychangers in the temple.
But really, you've fallen victim to the "no true scotsman" fallacy. Anyone who commits violence in the name of christianity isn't a christian. In my experience, the people who are willing to apply that standard to christianity aren't willing to apply that standard to any other religions.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
What is Slashdot's stance on overreacting to what is obviously a joke?
As a red blooded American let me say, FUCK YOU.
You're an ass. What we did in WWII we did for ourselves. Don't you think for a fucking minute that the "Europeans" owe us a god damned thing because the American sacrifice in WWI and WWII barely pays them back for the French support during the revolutionary war. Millions of French starved and the country went bankrupt because they supported our revolution, again for purely self interested reasons, just like our own reasons during WWII.
Don't get me wrong, the asshole you're replying to is just as big of an ass. Almost every single problem area or hot spot with atrocities going on in the world today is almost directly at the feet of European meddling. From India, Pakistan and Afghanistan having bullshit borders drawn by some British general, to the creation of Israel to the havoc colonialism has wrecked on Africa. Almost every single problem in the "old" world can be traced to bullshit Europeans caused.
Sure the US has it's problems and Bush's meddling and in particular the Iraq war deserve the ridicule they often receive. But no nation in this world has clean hands with regards world relations. Even those Scandinavian countries that have done the least meddling deserve blame for standing silent while their European neighbors raped half the worlds populace.
Americans and Europeans have both fucked up at various times. Rather than confrontational bullshit about claiming one is better than the other why don't we focus on what we both agree on instead of letting our minor (and they are very minor) fucking differences dominate the conversation. We can both help each other be better but not if you jackasses keep pretending one of us is better than the other because it ain't fucking true.
This person is a suspect for the marathon bombings, but was a clear and present danger to the public and to the police during the pursuit, and the police would have been justified in using violence against him. Of course they didn't want to kill him, because they want to question him. But he did not deserve a no-violence arrest because of his actions during the arrest.
Decent people think overthrowing a democratically elected, pro-west government, installing a ruthless dictator and training his hit squads to murder his opponents purely because he's easier to control than a freely elected government is NOT a good thing. Too bad the US did exactly that back in 1953. How were those mental fucking midgets to know that it would turn the country against the US, who they'd then end up kicking the hell out so they could establish a religious theocracy that views westerners as evil, and fund what we in the west consider terrorist groups. I mean hell, that would have taken all of a couple brain cells to have that amount of foresight.
...and now you want a pat on the back for removing the second dictator we empowered. There's not enough derogatory obscenities to adequately qualify what should be the response to that.
Then again, if we empower some other ruthless dictator who hates the new religious theocracy that kicked our asses out after we fucked over their country, we can have him fight a proxy war. Too bad if he's a ruthless dictator killing people (just like the first one we empowered), he's our dictator.. again. Oh wait, he decides he doesn't need us anymore. Now you say we have to go kick his ass out, and we do it because we're "good" people.
Bull fucking shit.
Here's a clue, Rudy. They don't hate us because of our freedoms, they hate us because we've fucked them over every fucking chance we've gotten, and we're generally big fucking pricks. You want to blame someone.. blame the stupid motherfuckers who put those fucking dictators into power in the first place. Oh yeh, that's us in the US, isn't it.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
While I agree with your sentiment I have a slightly different take. As you suggest there really isn't 'paying each other back' in international relations, but the US is a good ally to have, with capable armed forces and I will acknowledge that it is only because of US support that Western Europe did not end up if not occupied by the Soviets then certainly strongly within the Soviet sphere of influence. For that I am thankful to the US and the citizens who paid to keep us safe.
That said US foreign policy is generally speaking a disaster, and not just under Bush. Not because it is too interventionist, I don't subscribe to the Berkely school of 'everything the US ever does abroad is always wrong'. It is a disaster because they pretend to be engaged in realpolitik when they really aren't, or at least are doing it very wrong. Realpolitik in the US seems to mean propping us corporate interests and right wing governments at the expense of democracy and social freedoms. Every once in a while this works (South Korea for instance) because reasonable economic conditions result in an expanding middle class who then demand democracy and social freedoms. But usually what you get is some asshole dictator whose corrupt government squanders any and all gains from having economic freedom. At the same time the US gets the reputation of propping up yet another dictator or of trying to overthrow a nominal democracy.
Venezuela is a good example of the failures of this pollice. Chavez was an idiot and an arsehole. If the US hadn't made him seem under siege he would have been out of office by now. His policies were stupid and Venezuela, while not exactly a paragon of democracy, was democratic enough that it almost certainly would have replaced him. But the US had to strengthen his hand by supporting a coup that was never going to work.
Now this is not to say your point about Europe basically fucking up the entire world isn't a fair cop. Heck I'm British, the TV new could basically be renamed 'a list of places Britain fucked up in some way' and it wouldn't be misleading. And if it wasn't us it was the Belgians or the French or the Spanish or in a few cases the Germans. But while this is a fair cop the scale at which Europe is fucking up right now is generally speaking smaller, partly because we just don't have the resources to fuck up on a grand scale any more.
That said it isn't always easy, and sometimes people are going to accuse you of fucking up even when you do the right thing. Take Libya for instance. The US was instrumental in giving Libya a chance for freedom. In my opinion the US did the right thing there. They prevented what would have been termed 'the rape of Bengahzi' for a start. Even if we end up with a Jihadi state or some fascist dictator I still think the US did the right thing because international politics isn't easy. Same with the early stages of Vietnam before it became obvious the government in the South wasn't going to get it's act together and that the North would win.
When the US fights for economic and social freedom it is a force for good in the world, and it is doing the right thing, even if it doesn't succeed. The problem is that often the US isn't fighting for these things, especially when the CIA is involved. Often the US is fighting not for justice, freedom and democracy, but for corporate interests or out of fear of the latest bogeyman.
Basically what I'm saying is the US need to have more confidence in its ideals.