Throwing out my own theory about the meaning behind the Boston Marathon attack

Jeff Bauman lost both legs

Now that the police have dismissed as a suspect the Saudi man originally being questioned, the perpetrator behind the atrocity at the Boston Marathon is swathed in mystery.  Although Muslims distinguished themselves in a disgusting way by celebrating the bombing, no group has stepped forward to take responsibility for what happened.

We know that the bombs were pressure cooker bombs filled with ball-bearings that could have been made in anyone’s kitchen.  Muslim extremists have tried to use them before (the thwarted Times Square bomber, for example), but anyone can go on the internet to make them.  So that doesn’t point the finger anywhere specific.

We know that the bombs went off at an iconic American event, in an iconic American city, which is kind of al Qaeda-ish.  al Qaeda, after all, is nothing if not showy.

We also know that the bombs went off on April 15, a day no American likes, but that anti-government individuals especially dislike, so that’s kind of a neo-Nazi or crazed Ted Kaczynski thing.  Or, according to the MSM, a Tea Party thing.  As to that, the same people who pick up all the mess after rallies would never do anything as hideously messy and destructive as a bomb.

We know that, since the mid-7th century, Muslims have been going after the West, with flare-ups during the Moorish occupation of Spain, the years preceding the Crusades, the fall of Constantinople, the Siege of Vienna, and the years since the revolution in Iran in 1979.  We also know that these attacks have accelerated wildly since 1993, when the first World Trade Center bombing took place.  Since then, the list of al Qaeda (or other Islam-inspired) attacks is long, really long.  The ones that stand out in my mind are 9/11, the Madrid train bombings, the Bali nightclub bombings, the London Underground/Bus bombings, the Marine headquarters in Beirut bombings, the Mumbai attacks, the Fort Hood attack, the abortive Portland attack, the abortive Times Square attack, and the U.S. embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania.  Those are just the famous attacks.  Around the world, Islamists kill Westerners and Muslims they deem apostates with gleeful abandon.  Whenever the bombing is showy, significant numbers of Muslims around the world celebrate.

We also know that, in 1995, Timothy McVeigh (and perhaps someone else) committed the dreadful Oklahoma City bombing for lone-wolf reasons.  Americans of all political stripes were revolted.  In 1996, Eric Rudolph, acting alone to advance his anti-abortion views, decided to protest the killing of innocents by killing innocents at the Atlanta Olympics.  Again, with only sick, fringe exceptions, Americans were disgusted — and no group more than the pro-Life cadre in America.

Today we learned that David Sirota, who writes at Salon and is apparently desperate for publicity, is hoping that it was a white male — a la McVeigh and Rudolph — who planted the bombs at the Boston Marathon, because nasty Americans have this peculiar habit of thinking that is the Muslims who are responsible when things get blown up.  He wants us to know that white people blow up things too (and kill — white people do kill).  Wascally Amewicans!  We’re so dumb that we actually make a distinction between lone white crazies who are rejected by the political class they claim as their own, and whose killings are thankfully small in number, and Islamic crazies, who function as part of a large network, who are celebrated by their religious compatriots, who are encouraged by their religion (and their clerics) to kill as much as possible, and who actually have carried out more than 20,000 terrorist attacks around the world since 9/11.

Frankly, looking at the above, I’m coming to believe that everyone is over-thinking the bombing.  If we just step back and ignore historic trends, iconic locations, modus operandi, and such other things, there are two things that are very clear:  the bomb was meant to sever limbs (report after report emphasizes severed legs) and it took place at a race.  Apply Occam’s Razor, and its obvious that the dark-skinned man now being sought (sorry David Sirota:  it’s not a white guy) hates runners.  Probably he ran the marathon once and lost, and has never recovered from that psychic injury — so he planted a bomb that would cause the greatest possible injury to runners.  This horror was an anti-running terrorism attack.  The appropriate response is mental screening for all runners and non-runners alike.

That’s my theory and I’m sticking to it.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments

  1. JohnC says

    It could be anyone.
    I can’t help feeling that, as a white male who is a Tea Party sympathizer and belongs to both the NRA and GOA, the current administration and the MSM would love to make the bombing my fault.

  2. Charles Martel says

    I get so sick and tired of pointing out the indelible racism of haters like David Sirota. The dimwit apparently believes that no Muslim on earth is white. I’m sure all the Turks, Serbs, Chechens, Syrians, Lebanese, and other white Muslims will be pleased to know that Sirota has kicked them out of the skinhood.
     
    What’s so amusing here–actually, pathetic–is how the left subscribes to a Nazi-like definition of whiteness. Only northern European whiteness really counts, with honorary status reserved for Mediterranean whites. (Kind of like when Hitler made the Japanese honorary Aryans.)

  3. jj says

    It’s a good theory, but it doesn’t help the left.  The last time a white American won the Boston Marathon was 1983, so I suppose it’s possible there are thirty year’s worth of disgruntled guys out there, but it doesn’t seem likely.  When was the last time a white American had a realistic enough chance of winning that not doing so could be seen as a disappointment rather than an inevitable outcome?  Well… right now, in fact.  Two days ago American white guy Jason Hartmann finished fourth in fact – a really good American white guy showing.
     
    These things, as everybody forgets, are world-class races – for the world-class runners.  For everybody else it’s a nice outing.  26,000 runners started the race, 25,980 of them knew going in they had no chance to actually “win” the thing.  The part we refer to as a “race” was held strictly among the twenty or so elite athletes who showed up with serious intent, as they do every year, and genuinely, seriously compete.  They’re the ones with a real chance to win, who actually know what they’re doing.   And one of them does win, every year.  They’re using it as a tune-up for – in Olympic years – the Olympics; or they’re cementing their spot on their national team – or making a case to be moved up to their national team; or nailing down their scholarship to the University of Oregon or some other big track school.  They’re not playing.  Everybody else is playing – and unless they’re idiots they know it.
     
    So it’s not a disgruntled American white guy who failed to win – unless it’s Hartmann, which I somehow doubt.  With him in fourth and Craig Leon tenth, American white guys did better than they have in years this year.  (Daniel Tapia, who finished ninth, is an American guy, but he’s not your stereotypical white one.)  You could wonder a bit about the timing, too, because the bombs went off two hours after the marquee runners had crossed the line, had a shower, and were out having lunch somewhere.  Most of the finish-line crowd had dispersed by then – which turned out to be a very good thing: this could easily have been a lot worse had the timing been better. 
     
    So unless it’s a disgruntled white guy who expected to win sometime between 1984 and two days ago, the media’s doomed to disappointment.  They’ll have to stick to not covering the Gosnell trial.  And though I like your theory, well over 99% of the people who ever entered one of these things knew when they registered to run they were in with zero chance.

Trackbacks

Leave a Reply