The Bishop and the Butterfly: Murder, Politics, and the End of the Jazz Age

    Tsarnaev opens strong with Full Keanu

    By erica20 on Tue, 04/23/2013 - 4:41pm |

    I had been trying to decide how D. Tsarnaev would describe his activities in his discussions with authorities and the press. I thought he'd be quiet for a few days but apparently he's already begun to talk with authorities. I'll post a link as soon as I find a good rundown.

    Update: Regarding that link posting business, I'm very skeptical about the articles discussing Tsarnaev's "initial interviews" as released by "government sources, and am not going to post them. The kid spoke one word yesterday, and it was "no" in response to the question of whether he could afford a lawyer. So I strongly suspect that these "initial interviews" are not what they seem. With that giant salt lick delivered, here are my thoughts.

    So my theories were:

    The Zhivago defense: It was always about Chechnya.

    The Half Keanu: Bodie made me do it

    The Other Half Keanu: I was trying to do the right thing but I got confused about what the right thing was, because it seemed like the right thing was the wrong thing, man. Ride the wave.

    It looks, at this point, like Tsarnaev has decided to go Full Keanu. His brother talked him into it, AND America has done some bad things, and it seemed like a bad thing was the only good thing to do. Oh, and outlaws, man. Freedom fighters gotta stick together versus the man. (We'll talk about Chechny later, if we have to.)

    This approach represents, oddly, Tsarnaev's best shot at keeping himself alive if that's his goal, and creating maximum political turmoil, if he leans in that direction. Now that John Stewart has said what we were already thinking by admitting that Tsarnaev is hotter than Georgia asphalt and by that I mean the kind that's near Russia, I feel ok about saying that it could potentially be a challenge for the government to keep this case from veering off into Old West territory and being turned against law and order itself. Every generation has its Butch and Sundance, and its Mad Max, where you may not know exactly what you're fighting for, but at least you're doing something.

    Round one: Tsarnaev. Well played, sir, assuming that you know what you're doing. And if not, beginner's luck, dude.

     

    PS if Tamerlan Tsarnaev were still alive the movie would be Rocky except with even worse wardrobe. Either way, Mila Kunis should play the girlfriend.

     

    Comments

    I am mostly curious to learn the reasoning for attacking a runner's marathon of international participation (if there is any reason, of course, or were they just being the stoopids about targeting?) Given that I don't see much ideological connection between it and "Amerika," or even the culture of "the West," given that Africans are often the winners of these things. (I heard tell that even devout Muslims might be wont to participate in such a race, but maybe I was just falling for secularist propaganda.) Is it all the bare arms and legs, or what? And if so, why is boxing ok? A baseball game, that would be a much clearer fit.


    by artappraiser on Tue, 04/23/2013 - 5:31pm

    I'm curious about that myself. You're right that a baseball game would have been a better fit. But don't most sports stadiums have watchers at the doors, if not actual searches? With those heavy backpacks, it would have looked like they were bringing in alcohol and they would have been stopped. So I guess if you're looking for a crowd, and an event that would have some national/international recognition, the Boston Marathon would be a good choice.

    (Regarding boxing, Tamarlan gave it up, supposedly because it wouldn't be good for a Muslim to punch another man in the face. Or maybe it was another Muslim. I'll bet Jeff Baumann would rather have been punched in the face than have his legs blown off.)  :^(


    by erica20 on Tue, 04/23/2013 - 5:42pm

      My own guess would be that they bombed the marathon because no one would have expected it to be a target--there would have been more security at the obvious targets.


    by Aaron Carine on Tue, 04/23/2013 - 6:27pm

    Well in that case they showed virtually no understanding of what terrorism is used for. They just wanted to find a venue where they could easily kill people and thereby turn nearly the whole world against them? That was the goal? No known terrorist organizations or jihadis  or anarchists want to have anything to do with their act so far, none of them seem to see attacking a major marathon as a cool or smart thing to do at all. There's no coherent message in the act, and no enemies, real or symbolic, in the event and its participants.


    by artappraiser on Tue, 04/23/2013 - 6:54pm

    Logistically possible doesn't equal, in this case, ideologically smart.

    There's a lot of story to be filled in here--and even when/if we know everything, some of it might make far more sense to the attackers than it ever will to the rest of us.


    by erica20 on Tue, 04/23/2013 - 7:20pm

    Maybe their financiers saw the two perps pictures, just as we did on the news and to take the heat off of a murder for hire crime  and those who paid for it, the powers to be, told the two; "you botched the perfect crime now do something to separate the buyers of your service". Rob a store to make it appear it wasn't originally a hit job for money? Highjack a car and rob the guy of $800.00, MAKE sure the victim knows you were the bombers, this acting would prove you werent paid handsomely for your deeds, as though you're nothing but petty crooks to boot. ......  Does it take priviledge, to be seated or standing that close to the finish line? Who are the victims and who would want them killed?.....Ps. I just read at CNN.com that the police are reopening the killings of the oldest brothers friends, who had their throats cut, with money and drugs planted. Maybe the bombing was revenge?


    by Resistance on Tue, 04/23/2013 - 9:10pm

        There was no more and no less of a message than in other terrorist attacks. For them, there were real enemies present; all Americans are the enemy.


    by Aaron Carine on Tue, 04/23/2013 - 9:24pm

    Disagree - Chechens in particular chose high profile but often non-bloody kidnappings & commandeerings as way to highlight their situation. That the Russians often overreacted, killing many of their own citizens in doing so, is to be expected. Which is how they left Chechnya in rubble, calling that a victory over an obvious ethnic independence movement. The Chechen rebel Basayeven even became famous for arranging the peaceful release of 1000 captured hospital workers, a while before his dysfunctional occupation of Beslan.

    The Chechnyans have been fighting against the Russian invaders since the 1400s, even converting to Islam to get Ottoman support, and finally occupied by Russia at the end of the 1700s/early 1800s. The Chechens did not go willingly, and have fought Russian rule ever since - including the 60 year Caucasian War, ethnic cleansing & deportations by Stalin, and the secessionist wars of the 90's. If they were Greece, the British would have helped them to independence, but they're too far east and too close to Russian supply lines, so they've been left to deal with it, bad as it is.

    Here's a good synopsis of Russian terror and the screwed up occupation of Beslan, noting Putin's use of violence against Chechnya to win the presidency, his storming the school to the horror of the Ossetian parents, and his demagogic blame of Al Qaeda and Russian victimhood to pull all the usual strings of sympathy for the Russian people at the expense of Christian Ossetia and Muslim Chechnya. Kind of similar to our overuse of victimology, even though the Russian actions are much more egregious and destructive than ours (but ours still leave a trail of damage and outraged citizenry, despite our attempts to sanitize our actions and proclaim us the eternal just defenders of peace, democracy and the American way (tm)).


    by PeraclesPlease on Tue, 04/23/2013 - 10:32pm

    Yes, and because runners are finishing a 26-mile run, there would be people waiting for them with backpacks full of clothing, snacks, fresh shoes, etc. 

    Some of those backpacks might be left lying about while somebody went over to the finish line to take a photo, etc.  People might not report such a thing if they thought the person would be right back....

    Sigh.


    by erica20 on Tue, 04/23/2013 - 6:55pm

    Re: Update: Regarding that link posting business

    Before you posted this update, I did a quick check looking for what you were talking about and it appears this story "from a U.S. government official" originates with Michael Pearson @ CNN. If they are being misled again, their name is gonna be mud. One would think "once burned, twice shy," but you never know...


    by artappraiser on Tue, 04/23/2013 - 5:26pm

    I also saw Jake Tapper. Did you see that name too? I will check out the Pearson stuff. 

    The more I think about it, the more I think it is highly unlikely that Tsarnaev said, or wrote, or even nodded in agreement to any of the things he supposedly said. They had to wake him up for the initial hearing--"You can rouse him" is in the transcript.


    by erica20 on Tue, 04/23/2013 - 5:45pm

    Now the New York Times has published a story of what Dzhokhar has been saying today; source: law enforcement officials with 3 reporters on it. I think it's a pretty sure thing now that these are things those who have access to the accused are saying. Whether they have some kind of agenda is another thing (like prompting someone else out there to talk.)


    by artappraiser on Tue, 04/23/2013 - 5:53pm

    Well, if it's in the Times....

    There's another detail about which I'm curious, and the info may be out there by now--was a gun confiscated from Tsarnaev on his capture, or found in the boat afterward? I haven't seen anything concrete about it.


    by erica20 on Tue, 04/23/2013 - 6:11pm

    This guy will be convicted, and get the death penalty. This is not Butch and Sundance.

    In 'the Old West' he would've been lynched the same day he was caught.


    by NCD on Tue, 04/23/2013 - 6:29pm

    I believe he will be convicted. You are probably correct about the death penalty, but depending on how it all goes, there may be factors that will change that.

    I'm talking more about the approach to the case, how the case plays out in the public eye, and what its ultimate significance will be.


    by erica20 on Tue, 04/23/2013 - 6:51pm

    If this event had occurred earlier than even the Butch /Sundance era and the intended target would have been Lord Charles Cornwallis, they'd have been proclaimed a hero by some.  These idiot/losers deserve nothing but scorn. What did their innocent victims do to them?  Now they've punished a nation of working class people, to constant surveillance, all in the name of protection. Who the heck were they working for? ..... I sure hope this isnt Janet's Homeland Security' "Fast and Furious" mindset, as they seek to garner more authority?  .........Whats next; more video cameras? This is the same Janet N. who gave Arizona; Photoradar, to supplement Arizonas deficit projections and  increase State revenues. I wonder if she has a sweet heart deal with Redflex, to put their cameras everywhere now? Except on the Border ?


    by Resistance on Tue, 04/23/2013 - 7:40pm