Tuesday, April 16, 2013

Boston marathon prediction

Although it's too early to make imbecilic predictions of "who, how many people, or what organization" is responsible for the multiple bombings at the Boston marathon... since it's all we're going to be hearing about for the foreseeable future, I might as well weigh in.

First.  I was fascinated by the social media response.  I don't do twitter, but I did monitor facebook.  It amazed me how many people instantly wrote stuff like "prayers to Boston" and "who would do such a thing?"  Many seemed to have this natural inclination to further "break" the story.  In this day of social media, everyone wants to "be" the news.  I'm guessing about half of them do it instinctively, without a second thought.  The other half seek to empathically aggrandize their stake in this world - hoping that others will know they're actively concerned about world events and humanity.

Second.  The big question - is this a foreign or domestic terrorist attack.  I noticed that Obama, in his initial address to the nation, made sure not to use the terrorist label.  Smart.  Here's why.  Although the media hasn't proposed the possibility, I think there's a strong chance that the bomber is a disgruntled American, probably an Iraq or Afghanistan war veteran.  My hunches tell me it's someone who has served multiple tours and was likely a bomb technician or actively investigates situations in the aftermath of improvised explosive devices.  Someone with real world knowledge and experience.   There are some eerie parallels with what happened in Boston yesterday and what happens everyday in our war zones.

It's amazes me how everyone is grief stricken by the death of this 8 year old boy.  And we're all worried about that single elderly runner who fell due to the concussive blast.  NEWS FLASH - this stuff has been happening almost daily for the last 10 years.  Maybe the mainstream media should start showing REAL news from the war zone, like I don't know... images from Al Jazeera and the fringe alternative media.

If this act was perpetuated by a "mentally disturbed" (and I use that term very loosely, because I think about half of Congress is delusional) war veteran, Obama using the word "terrorist" could very well come back to bite him in the ass.  After the "we stand united/we're all Americans love fest" subsides (AND IT WILL), the elements of the opposition party would crucify him for having sold out our abandoned veterans.

For years, we've heard about the extreme backlog of cases in the Veterans Administration.  The paperwork, the stalling techniques, the intrinsic methodology that all government agencies use to bureaucratize claims and benefits... I'm talking about the human toll that could drive a person to the brink of insanity.  And that's after having served multiple tours, having your entire life disrupted, your spouse leaves you, your compensation is a joke, your house is in foreclosure, your pet died, your kids spit on you, your car broke down... and all you see is that the ONLY thing Americans care about is...

this idiot >>>

this dipshit's haircut >>>

or Glitzy (Honey Boo-Boo's pet pig) >>>

These three alone could very well drive a SANE person to commit an act of terrorism.  And people have the audacity to ask, "who could perpetrate such an act?"


sonofsaf said...

One more observation - if there's a disconcerting element at work... the person or people that did this reflect badly on the nation or the Obama administration, they're going to have a tough time covering it up.

Too much coverage and exposure, too many cell phones and eye witnesses, cameras, all kinds of first responders - and most importantly, too many agencies already involved with different agendas and motivations (FBI, Dept of Homeland Security, state and local police and their investigative arms).

Anonymous said...

Well said.
Something wicked this way comes!

Anonymous said...

You were the first person that I thought of when I heard the news of the bombs. I wondered how long it would take you to weigh in. I am very curious to see how this all shakes out.


sonofsaf said...

I'm looking at the casualty and injury totals. 3 dead, 183 injured (at 9:02pm the following day).

Usually, it's around a 1/6 to 1/9 ratio in dense crowds with IEDs. Ours right now is around 1/60.

Of course, the area was flooded with emergency responders and the EMT people were already on hand. And we have vastly superior medical facilities. Maybe it's not that high a ratio after all. And it's the United States. And there were two bombs.

Perhaps the current figures are not as "inflated" as I originally thought. I guess what I'm saying here... is that I totally changed my mind while I was typing this comment. Hardly the first time.