For all we know it could have been the Penguin Liberation Front
By Doug Porter
The one thing we know for sure is most of the initial reports following yesterday’s tragedy were factually challenged. Or should I just say wrong?
Rumors flew. They got shot down.
First there were three bombs. Then there were five. Then there was a related explosion at Boston’s JFK library. Twelve people were dead, according to the New York Post. Authorities were questioning a Saudi man as a ‘person of interest’.
All those things turned out to be wrong.
The media’s self generated pressure to be ‘first’ with breaking news was only slightly less ridiculous than the rumors flying over Twitter.
What seems to be true as I’m writing this is that two and only two bombs were set off. Three people are dead, including an eight year old boy from Dorchester, Massachusetts whose mother and sister were injured in the blast. The New York Times this morning says 176 people were treated at area hospitals for bomb related injuries and that 17 were critically injured.
Who Did It?
Again, tons of speculation was spewed, almost none of it factual.
Fox news talking head Eric Rush was one of the first out the gate, reacting to rumors about a Saudi person of interest. In Tweets (later deleted) he said:
“Everybody do the National Security Ankle Grab. Let’s bring more Saudis in without screening them! C’ mon!
“Yes, they’re evil. Let’s kill them all.”
Assorted members of the news media mentioned the possibility that the bombing might have come from a right wing militia group, given that it was Patriot Day in Massachusetts.
Nobody’s claimed credit. For all we know it could have been the Penguin Liberation Front, a group I just (hopefully) invented off the top of my head.
Here’s the best (IMO) analysis I’ve seen in print this morning, from the Los Angeles Times:
Indeed, some terrorism experts said they were puzzled by the selection of the Boston Marathon as a target. The race is a major event that attracts runners worldwide, but it lacks the high international symbolism of some other terrorist targets, including Times Square, the Pentagon and the World Trade Center. That choice may also lend credence to the theory that the attacker or attackers had ties to the Boston area.
“Those previous attempts on Times Square and the New York subway, had they succeeded, would have been substantially more lethal than this,” said Philip Mudd, a former senior CIA and FBI official and an expert in Al Qaeda operations. “Objectively I would say it leads me to question whether there is substantial overseas involvement. You’ve got basic devices without an iconic target.”
Who Didn’t Do It?
There would appear to be a whole cottage industry in the United States of conspiracy theorists, willing to blame just about anything that happens on the government. And those people were out front and center yesterday even before the wounded had reached the hospital.
The Marathon bombings were, they asserted, a false flag government operation designed (mostly likely) to justify seizing guns from Second Amendment loving citizens.
A Google search for “false flag Boston” turns up more than 1.5 million results this morning. I’ve decided not to link to, or even name any of the people pushing this stuff. It’s such obvious crap and a waste of time.
I say it’s highly improbable that the marathon bombings were part of a vast left wing, right wing or Muslim conspiracy. The Islomophobes in the US are sharpening their knives, hoping to gin up fear and loathing wherever possible.
What happened in Boston was a criminal act. I have no doubt that somebody somewhere who has an axe to grind thinks they made a statement yesterday. Whoever set off those bombs needs to be brought to account for their actions. It really doesn’t make any difference what that statement was. Unless we let it.
Why Boston is Different than 9/11
Are we to be defined by fear? That is the question.
The answer to that question is what differentiates yesterday’s acts of terror from those that took place on 9/11.
The reactions of people in Boston and around the country are vastly different. We (most of us, anyway) have learned something over the past decade-plus.
The stories of acts of human kindness, the accounts of the great work of the first responders (that’s why taxes are important!) and the ordinary people who jumped in to rescue their fellow human beings are the story.
Don’t let anybody tell you otherwise.
PS- I will publish a second edition of The Starting Line shortly with more about today’s news. I just wanted to get the Boston story off my desk first.
PPS- My old friend Chip Berlet, who’s spent his life poking around in the dark corners of our society, had these words of wisdom that I’d like to share:
10 Thoughts on the Boston Bombing
More mourning and prayers.
Lot’s of praise for all the first responders.
Less speculation and gossip.
Keep in mind that not all acts of violence are terrorism.
Realize that terrorism can be carried out by individuals, groups, or governments.
Talk to friends and family for support.
Don’t spread rumors or more anxiety in any way.
Confront the attention-seeking conspiracists spreading lies. Their swill is toxic to democracy.
The FBI has not stopped numerous acts of terrorism, they have entrapped numerous hapless people and then busted them for headlines.
Whoever is responsible, do not blame entire groups of people based on their political leanings, religion, or race.
Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to “The Starting Line” and get an email every time a new article in this series is posted!
I read the Daily Fishwrap(s) so you don’t have to… Catch “the Starting Line” Monday thru Friday right here at San Diego Free Press (dot) org. Send your hate mail and ideas to DougPorter@
Doug Porter
Latest posts by Doug Porter (see all)
- Last Call. Last Column. - December 14, 2018
- Which Presidential Candidate Will You Support in 2020? - December 13, 2018
- Mounting the Assault on Big Gay and Other Drivel From SDSU’s Minimum Wage Scrooge - December 12, 2018
Still in Paris, Doug, having just returned from Dublin before heading home. The folk in both cities have reacted sympathetically to those who were killed and injured in the attack. Our bus driver this a.m. on the way to the airport told us, he loves Boston and America.
Thank you for being the thoughtful wet-blanket on all the media speculation. We know people were killed and injured. We know people responded to help. We know the hospitals are taking care of the injured. I know I will pray for all of them.
Now, why don’t we just let the FBI and law enforcement do their thing, wait and see. All the BS speculation and gearing up to hate is not going to make anyone feel any better, bring back the dead or heal the injured.
In Peace, Jack
Timothy McVeigh was an American. And he was a terrorist. He killed 168 people, including 19 kids in Oklahoma City. Just because the denizens of Fox News are frothing at the mouth at the prospect of another “Muslim attack on America” doesn’t mean they’re right.
People from all over get together in Boston to run or watch others running. Two bombs later and in the havoc some of the worst play with their organs on the internet. For every one of these opportunists who play with themselves there are many more acts of courage that can overcome that madness and hatred. Truly virtuous acts pop out of the mayhem, and patience, respect, generosity and honesty can be seen in the more considered coverage of this frightening event.
Let’s remember, too, that on the same day some 53 were dead from bombings in Iraq. It seems to be tougher over there. And we have something to do with that tragedy too.
So well said!
Thanks, Doug. Clear writing as usual.
Spot on!
People close to the two brothers have reacted with utter consternation and disbelief at their heinous crime with one respondent describing the younger brother he knew well as a ” lovely person.” This is shocking but maybe not so surprising. There’s ample precedent and research showing that normal people can be triggered in a narcissistic rage allowing the devils of their souls to take command of societal change that they believe can only be accomplished through violence.
Dr. Rapoport, Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of California and a recognized expert on terrorism and morality, believes the morality of terrorists is driven by the perception their enemies have ” done something bad, so terrible that they can’t get away with it.” Acts of ” rational terrorism” then usually having a political or social goal where the violent means justify the ends … and the end is setting aside one’s own moral code in tune with society’s morality and resorting to violence to achieve a higher moral standard for society as a whole.
The definition of terrorism applied by the U.S. Department, and contained in Title 22 of U.S. Code Section 2656f, defines terrorism as follows:
The term ” terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against non-combatant (unarmed) targets by subnational groups or ‘claudestine agents’ (e.g., the 2 brothers in Boston), usually intended to influence an audience.” In other words, terrorist acts are often part of a larger tendency towards politically inspired violence. Terrorism springs up and/or increases after one party feels victimized by a hidious behavior or an intervention by another party.
For Timothy McVeigh the root causes triggering his stark departure from a decent code of morality were his extremist right-wing anti-government-interventionist values, his freedom fighter mentality where the end justifies the means. Setting him off towards the deep end was the Waco seige where the FBI killed 77 Branch Davidians. He saw this as a violation of America’s core values of freedom, liberty, gun rights, and his hatred of government interventions. The Brady Bill and the Waco event helped triggered his leap into committing a horrible crime against the government and its working people. He rationalized his terroristic and criminal act as justified, “as a form of rightful, retaliatory behavior” — shifting the blame for the bombing to the government and an act restoring individual liberties. In his words,
” When guns are outlawed, I will become an outlaw” …. “The only way they’re (the government people) gonna feel something, the only way they’re gonna get the message is with a body count.” Timothy McVeigh, like perhaps the Boston brothers, undertook a horrible, criminal wrong to make a political statement.
So have the two very well-educated brothers gone from a very normal code of morality to an utterly delinquent, monstrous behavorial pattern.What caused them to neutralize their normal moral values and resort to such terroristic violence? Was it … Vengance? Victimization? Psychoses? Egomania? Radical Islam?
I wouldn’t be surprised the oldest brother radicalized his much younger brother. How the older brother did this and what his political or social grievance and goals were need to be studied carefully. And, of course, who radicalized the older brother? Was there a broader conspiracy at work here?
We must not forget that Internet is flooded with terrorist propaganda. As Dr. Jenold Post of George Washington University said, Internet has given rise to “a virtual community of hatred.”
We must also not forget that what constitutes “terrorism” or a terrorist act varies in the eyes of the beholder. If civilians are casualities of violence against a legitimate target (Al Qaeda) — as is now occurring with U.S. drone attacks — is this act a mistake with inevitable collateral damage in a justified war against terrorism? Or is it in itself a criminal act? From the perpetrator’s (U.S.) standpoint, it’s seen as a terrible mistake. From the innocent victim’s standpoint, it’s a terrorist act. As the NY Times Mark Mazzetti says in his new book, “The Way of the Knife, “To what extent might the drone strikes be creating more terrorists than they are actually killing?
Good comment, Frank. I don’t condone what the two brothers did in Boston. However, is it really any different from what has been done in our name in Iraq, Afghanistan, Korea and other wars where innocent civilians have been killed. In fact as modern wars have progressed the body count of civilians vis a vis combatants has continued to increase. The name of the game for all sides seems to be killing civilians even more so than killing other combatants.
Whether civilians are killed by drones or armed soldiers seems little different in terms of morality. I don’t think anything justifies killing innocents but in modern warfare that seems to be the name of the game. Timothy McVeigh and the Boston brothers have just adopted the morality of sovereign states when they go to war.
“In fact as modern wars have progressed the body count of civilians vis a vis combatants has continued to increase. The name of the game for all sides seems to be killing civilians even more so than killing other combatants.”
John, can you describe for us what uniform and markings of military designation were worn by a single combatant who attacked US forces in Iraq, or the Iraqis they put in place for security, after the first week or so of the invasion?