When it comes to terrorist incidents, sticking to the facts is the hardest thing to do. Conversations naturally boil down to polemics that insinuate motive and reasoning. It's easy to forget, for example, that Muslim terrorists were initially blamed for the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995. Therefore, initial reports that a Saudi national was the prime suspect may prove to be a dead lead.
The facts are limited, but also clear:
1. This was nearly certainly a terrorist attack (even if the President is hesitant to use that word). Some initial reports that it may have been a gas explosion are likely to be unfounded.
2. There were multiple explosive devices. Some reports suggest up to seven, although this could later come to be far too extensive (and is already being noted as such). For 5/7 devices to fail would be significant.
3. There was likely shrapnel in the explosive device. This suggests more of an intent to kill than injure, maim, or elicit terror.
That's pretty much the extent of the facts right now, apart from the casualties. It's too early to label the bombing as international terrorism or Muslim extremism - it could very well turn out to be right-wing extremism and/or domestic terrorism.
For the time being, while the professionals do their work, it's best to help those in need and keep those in Boston in mind.
No comments:
Post a Comment