2013 Boston Marathon

[howard]

Don't get me started on this little asshat.

[rass]

The guy fatally shot by the FBI last week while being interviewed about Tsarnaev-related activities was apparently unarmed at the time of the shooting.

One law enforcement official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation, said Wednesday that Todashev lunged at the agent and overturned a table. But the official said Todashev did not have a gun or a knife. A second official also said Todashev was unarmed.

An official said that according to one account of the shooting, the other law enforcement officials had just stepped out of the room, leaving the FBI agent alone with Todashev, when the confrontation occurred.

[Steve of phpBB]

The guy fatally shot by the FBI last week while being interviewed about Tsarnaev-related activities was apparently unarmed at the time of the shooting.

One law enforcement official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation, said Wednesday that Todashev lunged at the agent and overturned a table. But the official said Todashev did not have a gun or a knife. A second official also said Todashev was unarmed.

An official said that according to one account of the shooting, the other law enforcement officials had just stepped out of the room, leaving the FBI agent alone with Todashev, when the confrontation occurred.

Didn't they show that scene in The Americans a couple months ago?

[rass]

Didn't they show that scene in The Americans a couple months ago?

Spoilers!!!



The father of the guy killed by the FBI in Florida held a press conference in Moscow today, and displayed pictures he says are of his son in the morgue. Six shots to the torso and one to the back (top?) of the head.

[P.D.X.]

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and his fangirls

Twitter fare has included such sentiments as "I hope to meet him one day" and "i wonder what jahar is thinking about right now." The ultimate online heartthrob site may well be the Free Jahar page on Tumblr, where photos of the mop-headed bombing suspect alternate with such weeper sentiments as this Mother's Day message: "Let your next prayers go out for a young man sitting alone in his prison cell with nothing but himself and his sorrows, who doesn't get the opportunity to see his mother."

[ZMan]

I like the way the author tried to drag obamacare into the discussion, as if the age 26 limit on covering children is the reason for "extended adolescence"

We've been giving passes to "kids" over 20 since the 90's (remember when that poor little 22 yr old Monica Lewinsky was too young to realize that sucking the dick of a very married president was wrong), but yet "obamacare" is the reason. That reporter is either grinding an axe, or is clueless of history.

[Steve of phpBB]

Hell, George Bush got a pass on drug use and irresponsibility on the ground that he was young and stupid - when he was 40.

[Scottie]

The shoe-horning of politics aside, that "Free The Terrorist" bullshit is is growing. Fortunately, the kids that are doing it have short attention spans and typically they ultimately only care about themselves. A new J*stin B**ber DVD release should dustbin it all.

But if you don't like that article, here's one from a leftie wingnut rag for you that pretty much says the same thing.

Injecting politics or faulty armchair amateur psychology into stories that are ultimately about stupid girls that think a terrorist is a cutie pie is poor journalism. Then again, at an increasingly frustrating growth, more and more formerly serious news agencies seem to think "what's trending on Twitter" is worthy of front page news. This is the result, most likely, of their reporters spending all day on Twitter.

We can safely chalk this Junior Jihadist fixation up to the simple fact that far too many human beings are simply idiots.

There's something not dissimilar happening in Canada as we speak. Omar Khadr, a convicted Al-Qaeda terrorist who, among other crimes murdered an American soldier, who had been in Gitmo for years before being transferred back to Canada, has had a girlfriend for years. She's a teacher in Edmonton. Khadr was transferred today to, you guessed it, a prison in Edmonton. This woman, a born-again Christian of some variety, has been writing love-letters to Omar Khadr for years, laced with cryptic sexual references (his mail is reviewed, likely with mild censorship, of course). Worse, she started a class project for her students; writing to Khadr to tell him how much he's loved and how big his "family" is in Edmonton.

Some people might describe that sort of behavior as compassionate. I don't. All I see is pure idiocy.

[Steve of phpBB]

We can safely chalk this Junior Jihadist fixation up to the simple fact that far too many human beings are simply idiots.

I can't remember ever agreeing with you more about something.

[howard]

I like the way the author tried to drag obamacare into the discussion, as if the age 26 limit on covering children is the reason for "extended adolescence"

We've been giving passes to "kids" over 20 since the 90's (remember when that poor little 22 yr old Monica Lewinsky was too young to realize that sucking the dick of a very married president was wrong), but yet "obamacare" is the reason. That reporter is either grinding an axe, or is clueless of history.

Saddling 22yo with six-figure college debt, then offshoring millions of jobs so young adult unemployment/underemployment is rampant, and those college grads are forced to return to their parents' house might have a little more to do with extended adolescence. Yeah there are other reasons, but you don't really want me to continue, do you?

[sancarlos]

Now, Rolling Stone puts Tsarnaev on the cover, looking like a rock star. They are making him into a celebrity. Sheesh.

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and his fangirls

Twitter fare has included such sentiments as "I hope to meet him one day" and "i wonder what jahar is thinking about right now." The ultimate online heartthrob site may well be the Free Jahar page on Tumblr, where photos of the mop-headed bombing suspect alternate with such weeper sentiments as this Mother's Day message: "Let your next prayers go out for a young man sitting alone in his prison cell with nothing but himself and his sorrows, who doesn't get the opportunity to see his mother."

[brian]

Now, Rolling Stone puts Tsarnaev on the cover, looking like a rock star. They are making him into a celebrity. Sheesh.

...Except that the exact same photo was used on the front page of the New York Times. Was the old gray lady "making him a celebrity" also?

[sancarlos]

Now, Rolling Stone puts Tsarnaev on the cover, looking like a rock star. They are making him into a celebrity. Sheesh.

...Except that the exact same photo was used on the front page of the New York Times. Was the old gray lady "making him a celebrity" also?

Except, I'd opine that the Rolling Stone's ability to create celebrity dwarfs that of the NY Times.

[brian]

Now, Rolling Stone puts Tsarnaev on the cover, looking like a rock star. They are making him into a celebrity. Sheesh.

...Except that the exact same photo was used on the front page of the New York Times. Was the old gray lady "making him a celebrity" also?

Except, I'd opine that the Rolling Stone's ability to create celebrity dwarfs that of the NY Times.

You gotta be kidding me with that. Rolling Stone is barely relevant. The New York Times is still the The New York Fucking Times. You're grasping at straws with that. Read the link I posted. They're hardly making him a rock star.

[A_B]

Ima have to side with Brian on this one. Times much more relevant these days. Last time I saw a rolling stone it was in a doctors office and had justin bieber on the cover.

[P.D.X.]

Yeah I haven't read RS in like a decade but still associate the cover as being culturally iconographic.

Hell, there was even a song about it.

[brian]

Even if true, someone's still going to have to explain to me how Rolling Stone gets killed for using the picture, while the Times gets a pass.

[P.D.X.]

Even if true, someone's still going to have to explain to me how Rolling Stone gets killed for using the picture, while the Times gets a pass.

Maybe because if he's on RS cover he's being lumped in with the likes of Bieber and other celebutards whereas if he's on the cover of the Times it's just part of the news? (Just spitballing here, never saw the Times cover or the angle they played.)

[sancarlos]

Even if true, someone's still going to have to explain to me how Rolling Stone gets killed for using the picture, while the Times gets a pass.

Maybe because if he's on RS cover he's being lumped in with the likes of Bieber and other celebutards whereas if he's on the cover of the Times it's just part of the news? (Just spitballing here, never saw the Times cover or the angle they played.)

PDX's explanation makes sense to me. And, maybe it's because I'm an old dude who remembers when Rolling Stone was "cool", but this one also hits home with me:

The layout, which is being described as "shocking" and "offensive," resembles any number of rock star images that have graced the magazine over the years... and that's exactly the problem. Many people feel that the photo the editors chose makes Tsarnaev look like a smoldering teen heartthrob and not the accused murderer and terrorist that he is.

A few people have pointed out that the magazine has featured plenty of villains and criminals on its cover in the past, including Charles Manson in 1970. And the magazine (like other publications) only has a few photos of the man to choose from, which is why we've actually seen this image in several other places before, including The New York Times (and this website.) But the combination of Tsarnaev's casual, glamorous appearance with the famously "cool" magazine's attitude just isn't sitting well with most people.

[brian]

If so then Rolling Stone is damned if they do and damned if they don't. I've not read it in years, but it's not like it's People or US Weekly. They've covered politics and hard news ever since the magazine was founded. They employed Hunter Thompson, ferchristsakes. It would be one thing if RS doctored the photo or something like that, but they're just using the exact same photo that countless news outlets have already used.

[sancarlos]

If so then Rolling Stone is damned if they do and damned if they don't.

I don't think they would have been "damned if they don't", if they just left his face off the cover.

[Gunpowder]

They don't have to make him a celebrity...he already is one, at least based on amount of people who know who he is. Who cares? I certainly don't give an f.

[brian]

If so then Rolling Stone is damned if they do and damned if they don't.

I don't think they would have been "damned if they don't", if they just left his face off the cover.

Sorry, still just not buying it. You're saying that Rolling Stone can't cover a story the same way the New York Times or Boston Globe can, which is bullshit in my opinion. It's just a photo and a photo that has been widely distributed already at that. If they had done a story in 2002 about Osama bin Laden, would they be trying to make OBL a "rockstar". Only because this dipshit is young and good-looking does anyone give a fuck, which says more about us as a society than it does Rolling Stone's editorial decisions.

[sancarlos]

I don't disagree at all with your last point.

[Johnnie]

Maybe it's just me, but a newspaper and its intent is a little different than a magazine and its intent. If this were Time or Life with a track record of indexing historical actions, I get it. But Rolling Stone is an entertainment magazine. It seems like such an unlikely cover. I thought they were about music first and everything else second. But having read the link and looking at the juxtapositions (most notably Charles Manson), I can see the point they were trying to make. I had no idea of that previous cover.

But overall, it's a shitty magazine anyway as evidenced by AB's note that Bieber was on the cover.

[Gunpowder]

All of those Taibbi articles that Howard links are from Rolling Stone. They had the article about South Florida water control recently that was good. They are not just some music magazine.

[brian]

Yeah, they cover politics and news very extensively. Though they usually do save their covers for entertainment types (presumably because that's what sells magazines).

So I admit it's somewhat incongruous for them to do a cover like this, but I have to give them the extreme benefit of the doubt because of their history covering serious news topics. If they were mostly an entertainment magazine like People or US it would be a completely different story (no pun intended) in my opinion.

[Johnnie]

All of those Taibbi articles that Howard links are from Rolling Stone. They had the article about South Florida water control recently that was good. They are not just some music magazine.

Yea, I follow the Taib-Blog. I forget where he was previous to Rolling Stone, but I should have realized that they do go beyond just music. But also too, does Maxim, FHM, Playboy...etc. Ultimately, it doesn't bother me. But my friends/family from Boston are all pissed right now.

I kinda want to ask rhetorically but not really if everyone got this mad when Charles Manson was on the cover.

[Scottie]

The Manson cover was heavily doctored. And look at the title. "The incredible story of the most dangerous man alive" Sheesh, hyperbole much? Although it did force the Stone to push back their doubtlessly riveting "continuing coverage of the apocalypse".

Not much has changed. Where there is tragedy, there will be profiteers.

I don't see how depicting a terrorist as a teen idol type "falls within the tradition of journalism" (as tRS stated it does) unless that journalism is, by its nature, sensationalist.

Covers:

...

[howard]

Which publication gives Lloyd Blankfein rock-star coverage? Seems the Times is quite effective in puffing that criminal's image and popularity.

And wtf is all this about journalism? Both publications clearly care about selling issues far more than anything having to do with journalism. Both are in the entertainment business; no more, no less.

Otoh, which publication has a stronger record on truth and accuracy lately? I'll put my money on RS getting Bieber's favorite color over the NYT giving us accurate economic coverage.

[degenerasian]

Couldn't he, hypothetically, sue Rolling Stone for labeling him as "The Bomber".
Everyone knows he did it, but isn't there still a law that they always have to say "Alleged" Bomber? Innocent until proven guilty.

[Jerloma]

Nah, I think you can call someone whatever the hell you want in this country. It'd be like if they had a Bieber cover titled, "The Douchebag." I'm pretty sure he can't sue for that.

[Joe K]

Couldn't he, hypothetically, sue Rolling Stone for labeling him as "The Bomber".
Everyone knows he did it, but isn't there still a law that they always have to say "Alleged" Bomber? Innocent until proven guilty.

He would have to prove that calling him "the bomber" was false in order to successfully sue RS for libel. Good luck with that.

And in Jerloma's scenario, Bieber would have to prove that he isn't a douchebag -- also a tall task.

[Jerloma]

Herculean, if you will.

[Ryan]

According to ABC News, the note that Tsarnaev allegedly left inside the boat reads as follows:

"The U.S. government is killing our innocent civilians, but most of you already know that... I can't stand to see such [bullet hole] go unpunished," says the handwriting captured in the image obtained by ABC News from a law enforcement official in Massachusetts. "We Muslims are one body. You kill one of us, you hurt [bullet hole] us all."

I have a couple favorite parts of this, but feel free to post yours here.

[Rex]

Some strange names in this race.