07:40 – There doesn’t appear to be a lot of hard information available yet about the Boston Marathon bombings. After watching video of the event, my first impression is that this is very unlikely to be state-sponsored terrorism. Although so far no group has claimed responsibility, I think it’s more likely to be domestic terrorists like a lunatic-fringe anti-abortion group or white separatists. From the appearance of the explosions, the bombs appear to have been small and crude, perhaps something as simple as a kilo or two of black powder surrounded by ball bearings. The brilliant white flash one expects from a detonation of high explosives was missing, and there was far too much smoke. If I’m right, these devices could have been built by almost anyone, using materials they could have purchased at a Home Depot.
07:59 – I’m surprised that we haven’t yet heard any demands for new bomb-control legislation.
I disagree. I’m just speculating off the top of my head, but I think it was someone who was just crazy. Who would target the Boston Marathon? A group of lunatic-fringe anti-exercise activists?
A lunatic-fringe anti-abortion group would target an abortion clinic, and I think white separatists would probably more effectively target non-whites. McVeigh targeted a Federal Building.
Nutcases often choose targets based on news value rather than because the target has any particular connection to their cause. If it was anti-abortion zealots, bombing one more abortion clinic would get them limited coverage. Bombing a whole bunch of random people at the Boston Marathon or a football stadium or whatever buys them much broader and longer-lasting coverage. I still wonder why no group has claimed responsibility.
And the thing that really gets me is comments like “the blasts are believed to be an act of terrorism”. As opposed to what?
Don’t forget that the attack also happened on Patriot’s Day. The Marathon just filled the streets with people, including children. McVeigh backed the truck up in front of a daycare, mostly filled with the children of the workers in the Federal building, children being favorite targets for the morally coward.
Speaking of which I just caught an episode of Billy’s Connolly’s Route 66 last night, and he visited the site in Oklahoma. The city has built a very nice memorial, with chairs set out for each victim with their name. The children’s chairs are smaller. Heartbreaking to watch.
As opposed to accidental blasts, such as natural gas or propane. One of the most terrible tragedies to ever happen in Boston was caused by molasses, with 21 dead and 150 injured. Not every disaster requires the action of a terrorist.
I’d define a terrorist act as a violent act done with the intent of furthering an agenda. If the person who did this was simply insane, I would say it was not a terrorist act. Was the Aurora, Colorado movie theater shooting a terrorist act? Was Columbine a terrorist act?
Or the explosion in the Richmond Hills subdivision. One would think it was either a terrorist act or an accident. It was way too big for an accident. It turned out to be arson for profit by incompetent morons.
No, no. I’m not talking about accidental versus intentional. I’m talking about people using that phrase after it’s already clear that an explosion was not an accident. People who already know that someone set off a bomb intentionally in a crowd of random people and yet question whether to call that intentional bombing an act of terrorism.
Ah, then that’s just stupid people talking on TV. I try not to listen to those people. I suspect they mean something more like “International Terrorist” as opposed to the home grown kind. I actually think that they’re over-using “terrorist” in general. We are becoming immune to it. And by “those people”, I mean all people who talk on TV news.
Columbine, the Colorado theater shootings, et al, are all “terrorist” acts. They might not have an agenda like the Taliban or Al-Qaeda, but the intent was to cause terror, and to raise the esteem of the pathetic prick pulling the trigger. We used to call them “bullies”, but bullies is too weak of a word when they have guns.
By insisting that a “proper” terrorist have an agenda is accepting that terrorists may have a just cause.
In watching the footage, the one thing that really surprised me was that so few people threw themselves flat on the ground. Instead, they’re all running this way and that or just standing around looking. Many of them were actually running *toward* where the bomb went off. If an explosion occurred in my vicinity when I was standing in the middle of a street, I’d be flat on the ground without taking time to think about it.
Re dropping to the ground: most people are brainless sheep and deserve to die. (Why, yes, I’m basically fed up with my species today. Why do you ask?)
I will note, though, that appropriate emergency behavior is difficult to turn on and off. Also, most urban Americans have never heard the explosion of a bomb or grenade. Sitting here, watching news feeds of an explosion, we can easily say that the best thing is to drop immediately. Milling around in a crowd and hearing a boom, you don’t know if it’s fireworks, a car backfire, or what.
bgrigg, I would agree with you on what defines acts of terrorism, but then we’d both be wrong.
I’m surprised that we haven’t yet heard any demands for new bomb-control legislation.
I suspect we will also see power given to the police to allow them to search any backpack, purse, camera bag etc. that is capable of carrying more than a tube of lipstick without probable cause or search warrant. You walk down the street with a camera bag and soon you are surrounded by a swat squad, lying prone on the ground while some four thumbed knuckle dragger fondles the innards of your expensive camera. It’s all for the children.
I’d be flat on the ground without taking time to think about it.
There is a risk you may just get trampled by others that are running away. I agree that getting on the ground reduces your exposure to flying particles but the pounding feet may be more of a threat.
The former head of the FBI Bomb Analysis group said that the white smoke is indicative of an improvised device, possibly using TATP, or certain commercial explosives (like smokeless or black powder). Military and industrial explosives have black smoke. I expect that by now they know what it was. I don’t think that points in any particular direction for who did this.
Milling around in a crowd and hearing a boom, you don’t know if it’s fireworks, a car backfire, or what.
ESPN had an interview with a woman that was near the finish line, heard the explosions, and thought they were cannons being fired for Patriot’s Day. Then she saw the smoke ahead ….
As it seems to be turning out, though, a lot of people got hit in the legs, lower extremities, probably from whatever metal and glass shrapnel material; lying flat may not have been the best position there. (Actually in that situation there is no “best” position; it’s luck of the draw when the explosion occurs; best spot is behind a solid barrier of some kind away from the blast. A big truck or van would have been good.
People get stunned, shocked; one blast, OK; a second, also close by, and you start wondering how many more and where; will running help? In which direction? Standing still sucks, too? Lying flat and you get the full brunt of low-level shrapnel instead of just losing your legs? It sucks to be in the vicinity, period.
As for nooz accounts here, there have been additional reports of more devices found and eliminated via controlled detonation by EOD personnel and more snippets about a second Saudi national, both on-camera with backpacks, etc., and those snippets disappear from the MSM almost instantly. Someone is carefully controlling the nooz output on this, as they have with the previous incidents we have observed.
And there’s more days I agree with SteveF on the mendacity and hopelessness of our fellow human beings, but then we have this, as always:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9997305/Boston-Marathon-heroes-Kindness-and-humanity-amid-the-carnage.html
Oh, I’m not necessarily saying that being flat on the ground is optimal; just that if a large explosion occurred I would have ended up flat on the ground without thinking about it.
bgrigg, the OKC bombing memorial is really something to behold in person. If you ever have the chance, try visiting on a spring morning – much like the morning of the bombing. Not much chance of moving through without being both moved to tears and angered to shaking.
Yeah, I wasn’t trying to argue with ya; just pointing out that in this case it probably wouldn’t have helped and may have even been worse; normally, before working for Uncle, that would have been my instinctive move, too, and would remain so if it was small arms fire. Since then, due to the various situations I found myself in, I’d probably be either heading for better cover in the event of further blasts, and/or grabbing anybody else I could help along the way. Depending on how close one is to the explosion, you may lose some or all of your hearing, too, and may not even hear any other blasts.
But I am by no means trying to second-guess anyone who was there, civilian or emergency services; you do the best you can, hopefully, and many folks clearly stood up and did the right thing, repeatedly.
When TATP detonates, the products are primarily ozone and acetone, with smaller amounts of water vapor and carbon dioxide. Not much smoke. I say that from experience during my misspent youth.
Black powder and substitutes like Pyrodex produce clouds of white “smoke”, most of which is actually aerosolized solid combustion products. Smokeless powder is, well, smokeless, or largely so. What smoke it does produce is generally grayish.
The amount and color of smoke produced by unary military explosives depends on the type. Blends are common, and in blends the amount and color of the smoke produced depends on the individual types and amounts of explosives that make up the blend, and whether that blend is oxygen-rich, oxygen-poor, or balanced.
“Not much chance of moving through without being both moved to tears and angered to shaking.”
My exact experience on visiting The Wall in Mordor in very early 1989; white-hot rage to the point of mindlessness, stunning in its intensity; I hope not to ever feel like that again. If someone had handed me a button to push that would have wiped out the State Department, DOD, etc., down there at that moment, I would have done it without blinking, even though I would have gone up, too.
“I’m surprised that we haven’t yet heard any demands for new bomb-control legislation.”
The mentally ill should not be allowed to purchase ball bearings until they are cured. However, there is no record of any mental illness having been cured.
I suspect we will also see power given to the police to allow them to search any backpack, purse, camera bag etc. that is capable of carrying more than a tube of lipstick without probable cause or search warrant.
Never let a crisis go to waste. Count on it, the TSA (or some other, equally evil organisation) will may hay while the smoke clears.
The FBI has taken over much of the investigation. Why isn’t this a matter for the local and State police forces? Why should the feds involve themselves? Much as I think most police forces are incompetent in the face of (the thankfully rare) competent criminals, the FBI compounds incompetence with arrogance. See this Popehat post for a reminder.
Jerry Rivers blames all you homegrown anarchists, Bob:
http://twitchy.com/2013/04/16/geraldo-rivera-blames-boston-marathon-bombing-on-homegrown-anarchists/
The FBI has taken over much of the investigation. Why isn’t this a matter for the local and State police forces? Why should the feds involve themselves?
Since it a terror attack, it’s the FBI’s domain. Also, the FBI and ATF have the best expertise and labs for figuring out what happened.
The mentally ill should not be allowed to purchase ball bearings until they are cured. However, there is no record of any mental illness having been cured.
And pressure cookers. And by the time they get the federal mentally ill list finished, there will be a one to one correlation between the lists and the USA population.
FBI? FBI Special Agents? Why have I never heard of an FBI Regular Agent? Puffery?
“… a one to one correlation between the lists and the USA population.”
I disagree. It will be one to one for HALF the population; the half that supports the other half and then has the colossal gall to bitch about it, constantly. We’re clearly mentally disturbed and bear close watching.
“FBI Special Agents?”
IIRC, that goes back to that frigging power-mad pervert, Hoover. He and his guys were SPECIAL, you see, as distinguished from the run-of-the-mill peasant riff-raff law enforcement departments.
I sit corrected; evidently there are legions of them throughout Leviathan’s coils:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_agent_(United_States)
Just don’t ever ask a Special Agent where are the Regular Agents, if any, and if none, why not? Never! Ever! No way!
Hell, maybe it goes back to Pinkerton.
Yeah, have as little contact with any of Leviathan’s agents as possible, none if possible. Always bad news.
Do you realize that if one wants to use a disguise that there is only one that really works? And then, only in one place?
An Elvis disguise in Las Vegas!
Yep, Special Agents. Closely related to Special Education.
(I was going to relate an anecdote in which I was being a dick and saying something like the above to a special agent or special investigator, but the details have been confused with some of the other times I was being a dick. One of the perils of being a dick so often, I suppose. All I remember is that he got really annoyed and was threatening me with arrest for harrassment or some BS like that.)
Just don’t ever ask a Special Agent where are the Regular Agents
The best advice when questioned by any federal agent is to say nothing.
I haven’t been able to locate a definitive link yet but it’s starting to look like the phrase “special agent” may have originated with our Postmaster General in 1801.
The best advice when questioned by any federal agent is to say nothing.
That’s what Martha Stewart learned the hard way.
When in doubt, a visit to Wikipedia is often fruitful.
Within the U.S. government, the title of ‘special agent’ is used to specifically describe any federal criminal investigator in the GS-1811 or Diplomatic Security Service FS-2501 job series as so titled according to the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) handbook.
I’d go further. The best advice when questioned by any government employee is to say nothing without your attorney present.
I’ve told Barbara that if she’s ever stopped by the cops she should do what they tell her to do but not volunteer any information. If they ask her permission to do something she should tell them that she refuses to give them permission to do anything that they are not legally entitled to do without her permission. I told her that if a cop rings the doorbell she shouldn’t invite him in; she should step out onto the porch to talk to him. Same goes for any government employee at any level.
Bob, I’m shocked you would give such incomplete advice. You left the most important point out. If you ever get read you rights, you need to shut up and call an attorney.
I mean literally shut up.
A lawyer (or law professor) made a video that’s floating around the net that literally says that! He even went so far as to give a police detective equal time to respond. The police detective said the exact same thing.
Not to be a dick like SteveF but I’ve said all this many times here before; STFU when read your rights and get an attorney, period. STFU anyway, and only answer questions as minimally as possible, volunteer nothing.
OFD has been on both sides.
That’s basically all correct. Even if you are not read your rights simply tell them you wish to seek the advice of an attorney. Then shut up. Stand your ground and hope they don’t get rough. Put your arms back if they ask. But shut up.
My sister the defense attorney says that it’s very important to remember three things when being questioned by any ‘Agent of the State’.
1. Be Quiet.
2. Don’t Say Anything.
3. SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!!
And if you *really* want to offend an investigator, bring your own recording device to the interview and place it on the table.
Barbara knows that. She works for a law firm.
This from George Takei today (formerly Lt. Sulu on Star Trek):
“George Takei
When tragedies strike, heroes rise to meet the challenge: the first responders seen sprinting toward the blast site, the runners who changed course to run to local hospitals to donate blood, and the fine citizens of Boston who at once opened their homes to marathoners in need of a place to stay. When we come together, we cannot be brought down.”
George is good people.
And if you *really* want to offend an investigator, bring your own recording device to the interview and place it on the table.
Will they let you do that? Or will they smash the recording device and tell you that it is illegal to record their conversations without their permission?
Cops around here really do express extreme displeasure when people pull out their phones to capture some video for YouTube. Their communication fees at work.