Two explosions at Boston marathon finish line

[Bruce Dazzling]

edit: of course it's conjecture! what isn't??

Eyewitness accounts. Photographs. Video. Fingerprints. DNA.

Sure, but do you have many of those? If so, where do they come from? What does it say to you that the FBI didn't want anyone to even look at any photos other than the ones they sanctioned? I like photos and video, but they can be doctored no matter where they come from (which is why I like to look closely at the earliest of photos and videos posted, and I like to ask questions about them, cross check them, compare to video etc)

You are not the first person to bring that up. You keep acting like some of the questions you're asking and points you're making are things that other people have neglected, and if only we didn't then we'd see everything exactly like you do. Hate to break it to you, but you are not the only skeptic on the board. There are many of us. In fact, pretty much everyone. And, most of us are better at being skeptical, than you are. Frankly, you suck at it. Until you get better at it, you should do us all a favor and please just shut the fuck up as you take time to improve your critical thinking skills. Or, contribute less of That Which Fucking Sucks, and more of Good Thinking. Try it. Be better. Thanks.

Eyewitness accounts can be accurate or inaccurate. They can be lies. The only hope is to look at a cross section of first hand accounts and compare them to videos/photos early media coverage, etc.

Here's an eyewitness for you to consider, if you haven't already. Ali Stevenson, as Mac keeps trying to introduce: http://www.local15tv.com/mostpopular/story/UM-Coach-Bomb-Sniffing-Dogs-Spotters-on-Roofs/BrirjAzFPUKKN8z6eSDJEA.cspx
everyone's ignoring this as if it's insignificant. is it insignificant? How can we tell if we don't look at it. Someone ought to REALLY interview this fella and try to find others who might have heard the same thing. Why isn't media doing that?

Who the fuck are you talking about? Not us, for sure. Think better. We aren't stupid. We know as much as you do. We are quite intelligent, actually. Most of us smarter than you, apparently. And, actually, we know more than you do. So, sit down, shut the fuck up, eat some humble pie, and get back to us when you're better at this.

See, "non conjecture" puzzle pieces lead directly to conjecture. that's how it goes - and not just here (but where better than here or similar places where we haven't got anyone's future in our hands?) in police forces and crime labs, in the FBI and on the grand chessboard. Conjecture based on evidence is all there is, really.

Conjecture based on evidence.

Fourth Base,

See above for personal attacks that you just made.

I really am getting tired of the cycle of warning you, suspending you, and warning you again, and again.

If I have to interrupt this thread (or any other) one more time in order to deal with any more infractions on your part, you'll be suspended again, and this time there won't be a get-out-of-jail-early card.

[FourthBase]

Bruce, I thought I was being half-assaulting and half-helpful. I don't know what the rules are regarding personal attacks. I am confused. Because there are personal attacks here all the time, and every day, from many people, against many people. Today I was told that I believe the official story every time. That may not be a personal attack in the non-RI world, but we all know what it means here. It basically stands for, "Sucker", or worse. I feel I am being singled out for not being passive-aggressive enough in my personal attacks, not for the attacks themselves. Please explain what it is that separates a kosher personal attack from the kind I keep getting warned about. If there's a link to such an explanation, then please just provide me the link.

[compared2what?]

edit: of course it's conjecture! what isn't??

Eyewitness accounts. Photographs. Video. Fingerprints. DNA.

Sure, but do you have many of those? If so, where do they come from? What does it say to you that the FBI didn't want anyone to even look at any photos other than the ones they sanctioned? I like photos and video, but they can be doctored no matter where they come from (which is why I like to look closely at the earliest of photos and videos posted, and I like to ask questions about them, cross check them, compare to video etc)

What do you make of these?

Eyewitness accounts can be accurate or inaccurate. They can be lies. The only hope is to look at a cross section of first hand accounts and compare them to videos/photos early media coverage, etc.

Here's an eyewitness for you to consider, if you haven't already. Ali Stevenson, as Mac keeps trying to introduce: http://www.local15tv.com/mostpopular/story/UM-Coach-Bomb-Sniffing-Dogs-Spotters-on-Roofs/BrirjAzFPUKKN8z6eSDJEA.cspx
everyone's ignoring this as if it's insignificant. is it insignificant? How can we tell if we don't look at it. Someone ought to REALLY interview this fella and try to find others who might have heard the same thing. Why isn't media doing that?

I don't know. But as long as we're evaluating accounts for accuracy and limiting our conjecture to the evidence, should we consider that Mac erroneously believes that Stevenson said loudspeaker announcements were made and that he not only explicitly said there had been a drill but imparted enough information about it to justify concluding that it was the (actually very exceptional) kind in which crisis actors are routinely used?

Here's what Stevenson said when someone did REALLY:interview him:

At the start line this morning, they had bomb-spotters on the roof of the buildings, and they had bomb sniffing dogs coming up and down at the start line, and [my wife] said they were bomb sniffing dogs at the finish line" ... "They kept making announcements, saying to the participants, 'do not worry, it's a training exercise'. Evidently I don't believe they were having a training exercise, I think they must have known, they must have some kind of threat or suspicion called in."

While it's not clear what the hell he means, it's certainly not unthinkable that a person who hadn't been primed to think he was talking about a certain kind of drill would conjecture that he was talking about a training exercise for the dogs.***

So that's one conjectural explanation, although I can see others. :

WRT the "is it insignificant?" part of the inquiry, statistically, yes: Colloquially, maybe not. The thing is that (as you say):

Conjecture based on evidence is all there is, really.

You've got a guy who says he heard announcements about a training exercise and saw dogs and bomb-spotters, from which he concluded (conjecturally) that a bomb threat had been received.

Unless you're just trolling the news looking for stuff to repurpose in another context of your choosing, and what you infer from that is that there was a drill suggestive of a fake event, there are an awful lot of things there that you're not taking into account. And an equal number that aren't that you are.

That's the problem. There's nothing wrong with conjecture based on evidence.
_______________

***ON EDIT: And before anyone says something like that it beggars belief that I'm arguing there was a training exercise for dogs or words to that effect:

I'm not. I don't know what he means. My point is that if crisis actors performing a drill qualifies as conjecture based on that evidence, a training exercise for dogs certainly does too.

[Bruce Dazzling]

Bruce, I thought I was being half-assaulting and half-helpful. I don't know what the rules are regarding personal attacks. I am confused. Because there are personal attacks here all the time, and every day, from many people, against many people. Today I was told that I believe the official story every time. That may not be a personal attack in the non-RI world, but we all know what it means here. It basically stands for, "Sucker", or worse. I feel I am being singled out for not being passive-aggressive enough in my personal attacks, not for the attacks themselves. Please explain what it is that separates a kosher personal attack from the kind I keep getting warned about. If there's a link to such an explanation, then please just provide me the link.

The Posting Guidelines are here.

Here's one of the guidelines:

Please refrain from personal attacks, and keep arguments issue-based.

Perhaps it could be a bit more detailed and descriptive, or even include an example. Maybe going forward we'll use one of yours as the example.

Frankly, you suck at it. Until you get better at it, you should do us all a favor and please just shut the fuck up as you take time to improve your critical thinking skills. Or, contribute less of That Which Fucking Sucks, and more of Good Thinking. Try it. Be better. Thanks.

Most of us smarter than you, apparently. And, actually, we know more than you do. So, sit down, shut the fuck up, eat some humble pie, and get back to us when you're better at this.

Either of those would be sufficient examples of personal attacks. Maybe we'll enshrine them for all to see in the Posing Guidelines.

This is in the Posting Guidelines as well:

Members can help maintain the health of the board. If you see something that you think needs attention, please pm myself or a moderator with the link, or use the alert button.

In fact, I've said, on a multitude of occasions, that we (the mods) aren't here all of the time, and don't read every word that's posted, so if you see something that you feel needs moderator attention, let us know via PM. So, if you feel as if you, or anyone else, has been personally attacked, let the mods know, and we'll deal with it.

If you have anything else to say regarding this matter, do it via PM. If you disrupt this or any other thread with another off-topic post, you will be suspended.

[semper occultus]

Maybe we'll enshrine them for all to see in the Posing Guidelines.

...blimey are there posing guidelines aswell now.....?

okaaaay...how's this....good for you BD ?

[Bruce Dazzling]

Alright, this is the final interruption, as I can't let Semper's post go without one of these.



Ok, now get back on topic, please.

[MacCruiskeen]

How predictable, and how convenient.

Not only will no one ever see Dzhokhar Tsarnaev again; no one will ever see Tamerlan Tsarnaev's body again -- if it is in fact his body. There will be no second autopsy, no DNA testing or visual identification by the parents, no independent confirmation of either the body's identity or the cause of death:

Tsarnaev Family Fears Russia Would Even Reject Boston Suspect's Ashes

By KIRIT RADIA (@KiritRadia_ABC)
MOSCOW, May 8, 2013

If burying the dead Boston bombing suspect in the United States is proving difficult, his family is finding it might be impossible in their native Russia.

That is because, according to legal experts here, Russia has a policy of not giving the bodies of terrorists, or even suspected terrorists, back to their families for burial for fear the grave would become a shrine. Instead, they are usually buried anonymously by the government in an undisclosed location.

[...]

The suspect's mother, Zubeidat Tsarnaeva, reportedly told the director of the funeral home that she would now prefer to bring the body back to Russia for burial, even though doing so would cost thousands of dollars.

But there is no guarantee Tsarnaeva would even get a chance to see her son.

Russian authorities could declare Tamerlan Tsarnaev a terrorist and deny his family their right to claim the body, according to the Russian legal experts, including one who is advising the family. The family would be presented only with a certificate stating that he had been buried by the government.

The policy, originally outlined in a 1996 law, is a product of Russia's long and violent struggle against terrorism. The law states that if an individual dies while committing a terrorist incident, or if a suspect is killed during an operation that prevents one, "their bodies are not given, and the place of their burial is not disclosed."

Russian President Vladimir Putin defended the controversial policy last year during an appearance at a summer youth camp.

"I agree that it is cruel," he said. "But the actions of the terrorists themselves are not very kind or tolerant either."

http://abcnews.go.com/International/tsa ... d=19133946

Obama's USA and Putin's Russia, cosily united against "terrorism". How vile it all is. The corpse of Tamerlan Tsernaev has been tried and found guilty in the international court of yahoo opinion.

[compared2what?]

How predictable, and how convenient.

Not only will no one ever see Dzhokhar Tsarnaev again; no one will ever see Tamerlan Tsarnaev's body again -- if it is in fact his body. There will be no second autopsy, no DNA testing or visual identification by the parents, no independent confirmation of either the body's identity or the cause of death:

And yet only one post ago, you were predicting that the family would be allowed to carry out an independent autopsy and DNA testing in their home country, due to the implicitly greater decency on offer there.

If a newspaper had made the same statement one day and reversed itself with the one above the next, without attempting to reconcile them or offering any more proof for most of either than their own say so, you'd say it was serial lying.

I wouldn't, though. A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds, etc. Covers a lot. I am confused, though.

The corpse of Tamerlan Tsernaev has been tried and found guilty in the international court of yahoo opinion.

Is it his corpse or isn't it? What convenience apart from sparing you the trouble of committing to one or the other is being afforded to whom here, exactly? And how is it more convenient than the fully available option of just shipping the maybe-dead, maybe-living bodies of (whomever you think they belong to) to Gitmo and refusing to say another word about it would have been?

__________________

It's terrible beyond words that no one will give that soul a plot of earth in which to rest. Has to be burial in Islam, too. Russia doesn't claim to care much about such things, at least. But we're supposed to honor them as above mundane issues such as terrorism here. Not that the hypocrisy is new. Or unique. But it's still horrible.

[MacCruiskeen]

And yet only one post ago, you were predicting that the family would be allowed to carry out an independent autopsy and DNA testing in their home country, due to the implicitly greater decency on offer there.

Where did do any such thing, or even anything remotely resembling such a thing?

Chapter and verse.

ON EDIT: Spare yourself the trouble. Here's my entire previous post, to which you refer -- complete with the original formatting, including the green ink to indicate heavy sarcasm:

Funeral-home airline service offers to help transport body of suspected Boston Marathon bomber to Russia

Tamerlan Tsarnaev, one of the suspected Boston Marathon bombers, body was brought to Graham Mahoney and Putnam funeral home in Worcester on Thursday evening. (Kevin Koczwara/MassLive.com)

Kevin Koczwara, MassLive.com By Kevin Koczwara, MassLive.com The Republican

on May 07, 2013 at 7:21 PM, updated May 07, 2013 at 8:39 PM

An Indiana airline transportation specialist released a statement today offering to transport the body of suspected Boston Marathon bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev to Russia via an international carrier at no charge.

Eagle's Wings Air, which provides logistical and shipping services to North American funeral homes, has said it will help with moving Tsarnaev's body out of support for the families affected during the bombing that occurred at this year's Boston Marathon, and for Graham, Putnam & Mahoney funeral director Peter Stefan, who took in Tsarnaev's body.

"As a logistics company serving funeral homes nationwide, we've been watching closely this unfortunate series of events unfold. We recognize the challenges faced by Graham Putnam & Mahoney Funeral Parlors of Worcester, MA, the funeral home where the remains of Tamerlan Tsarnaev currently reside, and its funeral director, Mr. Peter Stefan, in finding a final resting place for the remains of Tamerlan Tsarnaev," reads a statement from Frank Kaiser, the president and CEO of Eagle's Wings Air. "At the same time, we empathize with the residents of Cambridge and surrounding communities and their objections to having Tsarnaev's final resting place located near them. Many people in these communities -- and throughout the country -- believe the best solution is for Tsarnaev's remains to be transported out of the country and back to his native Russia.

"Today, as a show of support for Mr. Stefan and his funeral home, the people of Cambridge and surrounding communities, and all affected by this tragedy, we are offering to facilitate the air transportation of the deceased's remains out of the United States on an international commercial flight at no charge to the funeral home, the city of Cambridge or any taxpayers," continues Kaiser.

Tsarnaev's body arrived at Stefan's funeral home in the Main South neighborhood of Worcester last Thursday. Stefan has been trying to find a burial plot for the body but has so far been unsuccessful.

http://www.masslive.com/news/worcester/ ... vie_o.html

Very decent of them. Sounds like an ideal solution. It will also allow the family to carry out an independent autopsy in their home country and to confirm the body's identity by means of DNA testing.

All it requires now is the approval of the Mayor of Boston and of the Russian authorities. What objection could they possibly have?

The corpse of Tamerlan Tsernaev has been tried and found guilty in the international court of yahoo opinion.

Is it his corpse or isn't it?

I DON'T KNOW. NOBODY DOES. That is the blatantly obvious point, for god's sake. (Or are you taking me to court for failing to put his name in scare quotes once? Will I get a fair trial?)

[compared2what?]

And yet only one post ago, you were predicting that the family would be allowed to carry out an independent autopsy and DNA testing in their home country, due to the implicitly greater decency on offer there.

Where did do any such thing, or even anything remotely resembling such a thing?

Chapter and verse.

I understood the bolded line below...

Very decent of them. Sounds like an ideal solution. It will also allow the family to carry out an independent autopsy in their home country and to confirm the body's identity by means of DNA testing.

All it requires now is the approval of the Mayor of Boston and of the Russian authorities. What objection could they possibly have?

...as a prediction and the caveat in the last lines as pro forma color commentary. Because that's what it reads like. So it seemed to me that you were. reflecting on the contrast between their home country and the one he was coming from in terms that were favorable to the former. I just borrowed the "decency" concept from the first line, out of laziness.

If that was reader's error on my part, I apologize. Honest mistake, though.

In the interests of avoiding another such, the questions about whose corpse it is and what convenience greater than other available options it affords for whom still stand. Because I don't understand what exactly you're saying there at all.

[MacCruiskeen]

Is it his corpse or isn't it? What convenience apart from sparing you the trouble of committing to one or the other is being afforded to whom here, exactly? And how is it more convenient than the fully available option of just shipping the maybe-dead, maybe-living bodies of (whomever you think they belong to) to Gitmo and refusing to say another word about it would have been?

It's interesting to hear you admit that such openly fascist options are already readily available in the USA.

But the ongoing hatefest has at least three advantages: 1) It permits the spooks to take a daily measure of the public's temperature; 2) It allows the US government to make a show of pretending the whole thing's out of their hands (vox populi, vox dei); and 3) It confirms the corpse's conviction in the court of angry yahoo opinion, while ensuring that its (putative) brother (who may or may not in fact be still alive) will be fully convicted without any need for any of that evidence nonsense, long before he or even his pastel portrait ever comes to "trial", or more likely to a [semi]-public plea-deal. ("Plead guilty or we'll kill you.")

[compared2what?]

I DON'T KNOW. NOBODY DOES. That is the blatantly obvious point, for god's sake. (Or are you taking me to court for failing to put his name in scare quotes once? Will I get a fair trial?)

You're not being accused of anything. And I'm not putting you on trial. I'm asking you a blatantly obviously fair question about what truth you suspect is being concealed by whom, and how, and why by putting that knowledge out of bounds. In other words: For whom is that convenient, in what way, and why?

Do I need to make that any clearer?

You say it's convenient and predictable. You don't provide any contextual details about who is predictably acting in the interests of their own convenience.

I would like to know them. Hence my question, borne of curiosity fairly prompted by your words. And not by some impulse that I originated and followed all on my own for no reason other than to persecute you. You said:

How predictable. How convenient.

What did that mean? Chapter and verse.

[MacCruiskeen]

I believe my answer crossed your question. (This is like Jules & Jim.)

[Canadian_watcher]

Sorry if this has already been posted:

the cop wasn't shot by Tamerlan or Dzokhar. the cop was shot by another cop.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2013/05/watertown-friendly-fire-cop-shot/64953/

[Jerky]

I believe this was known and admitted weeks ago.

Jerky

Sorry if this has already been posted:

the cop wasn't shot by Tamerlan or Dzokhar. the cop was shot by another cop.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2013/05/watertown-friendly-fire-cop-shot/64953/