<p>
</p>
<p>And what’s your evidence that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev intended to disrupt the US government? Not surmise, evidence.</p>
<p>He attacked the FBI, disrupting an investigation, incidentally against himself. This would be grounds for disruption. But his attack against the citizenry in significant force was already enough to classify him as a terrorist.</p>
<p>Terrorism is the systematic use of terror, often violent, especially as a means of coercion. In the international community, however, terrorism has no legally binding, criminal law definition.[1][2] Common definitions of terrorism refer only to those violent acts which are intended to create fear (terror); are perpetrated for a religious, political or, ideological goal; and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants (civilians).</p>
<p>Yes, I know what terrorism is, and I don’t disagree that he’s a terrorist. But you seem to be using “terrorism” and “treason” interchangeably.</p>
<p>Because in this case his act of terrorism was followed by an act of treason in the attempt to flee, disrupt, and attack Federal officials in an ongoing investigation, manhunt, and operation.</p>
<p>Next…</p>
<p>Trying to elude the FBI, in itself, is not an act of treason</p>
<p>But trying to disrupt and attack them during an investigation would be considered government disruption.</p>
<p>OK, time to move on…</p>
<p>Hats off to all the law enforcement agencies for some terrific police work. They did it the old-fashioned way – door-to-door searches, following up on tips, and getting the public involved.</p>
<p>Agreed. And the bits coming out now, from experts in info analysis, security investigation, and legal positioning, is offering some interesting insights. None of this is going to be simple.</p>
<p>Conflicting reports in teh news as to whether the homeowner saw the ladder by his boat, or saw blood, took the ladder and looked under the tarp into his boat and saw the suspect. Yikes.</p>
<p>I cannot imagine the ordeal sunil Tripathi family went through. He was depressed and suicidal and they fear the worst and still hope for his return. On the top of that , he was accused of being bomber for at least 12 hours. That must have been tough for that family.</p>
<p>From the WS Journal:
[Life</a> in America Unraveled for Brothers - WSJ.com](<a href=“http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323809304578432501435232278.html?mod=WSJAsia_hpp_LEFTTopStories]Life”>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323809304578432501435232278.html?mod=WSJAsia_hpp_LEFTTopStories)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I wouldn’t be surprised if the motivation for the bombing was for the older brother to vent frustration for the humiliation of economic stress, rather than to pursue a political agenda.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, it wouldn’t surprise me if they were motivated by pursuing their so called “religion of peace”. Economic stress? I doubt it.</p>
<p>Well, since the authorities were able to catch #2 alive, we will find out the WHY.</p>
<p>^ Unless, perhaps, he had a GSW to the head, whch it does not sound like he does.</p>
<p>GMT, I think you raise a distinct possibility.</p>
<p>The question is, do these people get radicalized into a religion, then develop the rage and emotional ability to murder people; or does their emotional trouble and rage make them vulnerable to being radicalized? </p>
<p>Personally, I vote for the latter. Instead of looking at this as a radical branch of religious belief, I think the closer parallel is to cults that prey on young people. There was a period some years ago when cults were really active in the US. A charismatic leader would go after young people, for power, money or both. Some parents even resorted to kidnapping their children out of the cult. I think the current religious radicals are like the cult leaders. Some are motivated by religious belief, but I’ll bet most are motivated by a lust for power cloaked in religious trappings. Look at Osama Ben Laden - the supposed Muslim fundamentalist, sitting in his fortress - surrounded by his extensive porn collection. Or read the letters of Mohammed Atta: a very tenuous connection to Muslim beliefs.</p>
<p>It is reported that the Youtube channels of both boys contained many speeches (rants) from militant Islamists endorsing jihad. Maybe the younger one was swayed by the older one, but they were certainly on the wrong path.</p>
<p>Why would we let the father back into the US? He sounds crazy. My area has many Russian immigrants who got out of there for good reasons. This guy went back to their corrupt society. I say let him stay there. He will just create a sideshow here, one that the families of the dozens injured and still hospitalized do not need to endure.</p>
<p>Has anyone heard where the mother is? I could tell you the locations of the men’s father, uncles, sisters, cousins and in-laws but I never heard anything about their mother.</p>