representative peter king:
during that period after the bombing but before we knew who did it, david sirota wrote a column titled "Let's hope the Boston bomber is a white American." sirota's point was that brown muslim attackers are always assumed to be part of some larger conspiracy whereas "white Americans" are assumed to be acting alone. sirota has been mocked both before and after we learned that tamerlan and dzhokhar tsarnaev were the perps.
putting aside the issue of whether a muslim from the caucasus is "white", it's become pretty clear to me that david sirota was right. a lot of people keep insisting there is some larger plot here when all the actual evidence points to two guys acting alone, although perhaps inspired by people they met or read on the internet. the difference between how those two are being portrayed and, say timothy mcvey, is really striking.
peter king happens to be one of the bigger clowns in congress (especially when we're talking about issues that involve muslims). but he's hardly the only figure on the right claiming that the two brothers must have been plugged into a larger al qaeda-like conspiracy.
i guess we will never know how the country would have reacted if the perpetrator ended up being a non-muslim american who was born in this country and had a name that didn't look strange. so i guess this only shows that sirota was half right. that is, half right and the other half indeterminate, with no points in the wrong column by my count. the people currently mocking him are saying more about the own prejudices than anything else.
It’s very difficult to believe that these two [the tsarnaev brothers] could have carried out this level of attack with this level of sophistication and precision acting by themselves, either without training from overseas or having at least facilitators here at home.why is that so difficult to believe? the only sophisticated thing about the boston marathon bombing was the bomb itself, which they seem to have made by following instructions posted on the internet. everything else about their operation was pretty inept.
during that period after the bombing but before we knew who did it, david sirota wrote a column titled "Let's hope the Boston bomber is a white American." sirota's point was that brown muslim attackers are always assumed to be part of some larger conspiracy whereas "white Americans" are assumed to be acting alone. sirota has been mocked both before and after we learned that tamerlan and dzhokhar tsarnaev were the perps.
putting aside the issue of whether a muslim from the caucasus is "white", it's become pretty clear to me that david sirota was right. a lot of people keep insisting there is some larger plot here when all the actual evidence points to two guys acting alone, although perhaps inspired by people they met or read on the internet. the difference between how those two are being portrayed and, say timothy mcvey, is really striking.
peter king happens to be one of the bigger clowns in congress (especially when we're talking about issues that involve muslims). but he's hardly the only figure on the right claiming that the two brothers must have been plugged into a larger al qaeda-like conspiracy.
i guess we will never know how the country would have reacted if the perpetrator ended up being a non-muslim american who was born in this country and had a name that didn't look strange. so i guess this only shows that sirota was half right. that is, half right and the other half indeterminate, with no points in the wrong column by my count. the people currently mocking him are saying more about the own prejudices than anything else.
