Tsarnaev on the cover of Rolling Stone

Page 3 of 3 [ 42 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

Inventor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,014
Location: New Orleans

22 Jul 2013, 2:28 am

I saw that picture a few times before Rolling Stone.

What I had not seen before were the stolen evidence photos published by Boston Magazine.

The differance is one was public on facebook, the other reserved for the jury. Evidence, he was in the boat. Stealing evidence for private purposes seems a much worse offense than publishing a public domain picture, not related to a crime.

Even worse, the thief claimed to be a Professional Police Officer, ex millitary, and still knows nothing of following orders, protecting evidence, due process, and I guess we were lucky it was was not one of the Non-Professional people he had to work with, who just follow the rules.

The one thing we do not need is anal questioning in the back room with a nightstick, in the name of Justice.

Well, it is Boston. wh***y's crew got away with it for many years. You know he had the City wired, when he had FBI Informants. Is his brother still in Office?

Of all times to not live up to your reputation, now would be a good time. Boston has a right to remain silent, and should use it.

This will get worldwide press, in Islamic countries, and we get enough bad press.

Rolling Stone brings out, The Half Breed Prince. He had lived here since nine, and grew up in America. Unlike the other terror strikes, from people who only came for a visit. His older brother did not fit in, and turned to the old country ways, from a country he never had seen, he left as a small child, and went back, to be seen as "The American."

I know the feeling, when I was ten we moved from the country, to a city suburb, where I never belonged, and going back to the country, was seen as city. He did seem to have a better relation with his family than I did. I had less language problems.

I was never motivated to support anything. Goldwater Republican was as far as it got. His wisdom still stands, nuke them, or leave them alone.

Anyway, not leaving them alone has turned out badly, at least for the millions of dead, and left distrust with the living, those who read History, watch the news, or think they might be next.

The Professional Police Officer and Soldier summed it up, "Rules! We dont need no stinkin Rules!"

The Rolling Stone story brings out the hopelessness, the loss, and and does give a reason to bring it all to one act.

Some people do not like the idea that we might understand why people hate us. Like the ones that bomb people, who need wars and National Security as jobs, paths to power, who have been involved in several domestic terror incidents. They have ignored the Constitution, and spy on everyone. Hi NSA! Watching You!

Now they are alienating Europe, South America, and even their own Contractors. Also Americans, at least the older ones who remember better times. A lot of our young feel lost and hopeless, They tried, it was supposed to work, but the pump dont work cause the vandels took the handle.

We The People are on trial. We are also the Jury.



Kiki1256
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Oct 2012
Age: 27
Gender: Female
Posts: 815
Location: Somewhere...

22 Jul 2013, 7:00 am

ScrewyWabbit wrote:
The article is one thing - putting this man or anyone else on the cover of a magazine like RS glorifies that person, and this is the last person that should be glorified. What the magazine should have done was made the cover a collage of photos of the victims, and used a headline like "how / why did a person who lived among us transform into a person who killed all of these people" - that would have been much more reasonable, and a lot less inflamatory.


I agree. Putting someone on the cover of Rolling Stone is like saying that they're the coolest person on earth. The idea about putting the victims on the cover and the headline--that would have been much better.



Sylkat
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Sep 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 17,425

22 Jul 2013, 12:43 pm

I agree with Kiki1256.

Excellently expressed.

Sylkat



Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 59
Gender: Female
Posts: 20,471
Location: Aux Arcs

22 Jul 2013, 1:20 pm

I don't know about the coolest person on earth,maybe the most controversial face on earth.That's what sells.


_________________
I am the dust that dances in the light. - Rumi


TheValk
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Dec 2012
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 644

22 Jul 2013, 2:41 pm

It would seem (unless I'm being naive here) that most people are already decided on what they think about about Tsarnaev (and the Lamza guy) so he can't be 'controversial' per se.



Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 59
Gender: Female
Posts: 20,471
Location: Aux Arcs

22 Jul 2013, 3:42 pm

^^^^Then why is it all over the news?


_________________
I am the dust that dances in the light. - Rumi


TheValk
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Dec 2012
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 644

22 Jul 2013, 3:50 pm

I just checked the definition of the term and it does include arousing discussion (not only disagreement, though disagreement could be involved in surrounding topics aside from the terrorist's identity and activity evaluation), so you're right.



equestriatola
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 134,617
Location: Half of me is in the Washington state, the other Los Angeles.

25 Jul 2013, 6:20 pm

I have seen the cover, and it is hard to believe that Rolling Stone is going the route that they did with Charles Manson many years ago.

But then again, this move is not without precedence.


_________________
LIONS-STAMPEDERS-ELKS-ROUGHRIDERS-BLUE BOMBERS-TIGER-CATS-ARGONAUTS-REDBLACKS-ALOUETTES

The Canadian Football League - What We're Made Of

Feel free to talk to me, if you wish. :)

Every day is a gift- cherish it!

"A true, true friend helps a friend in need."


naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 69
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,237
Location: temperate zone

27 Jul 2013, 8:38 am

TheValk wrote:
I just checked the definition of the term and it does include arousing discussion (not only disagreement, though disagreement could be involved in surrounding topics aside from the terrorist's identity and activity evaluation), so you're right.


You were right the first time.

The word is "CONTRAversy"

Contra meaning 'counter' - as in counter opinions.

If the person in question inspires a concensus that they are a villian- then they are NOT contraversial. They maybe newsworthy. They maybe talked about. But they are not contraversial because everyone agrees that they are villians. There are no counter opinions about them.



TheValk
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Dec 2012
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 644

27 Jul 2013, 5:41 pm

Disagreement is in the very nature of discussion though. Assume the opposite - a boss is providing instructions to his subordinate who is not in any position to question any of them or subject them to doubt. There is no discussion there.

I do believe that in our specific case disagreement is there. There may be unanimity about Tsarnaev being a villain, but still much room for other related questions, such as what lessons we learn, what we should do, could we have prevented this - somebody even posted pictures that describe the terrorist act as a conspiracy of sorts.

Tsarnaev is more or less understood; but his actions have caused controversy and as such it is not wrong to label him a controversial man I believe (I do understand that I was the one who brought attention to the opposite view).