Two bombs go off at the Boston Marathon

[Baz]

Question for you folks....should this photo be publicized or not in news stories of the bombings....do you think there is a benefit or would it simply be a senseless violation of this man's privacy? Maybe he should be asked the question. It's quite gruesome but I also feel we as a nation need to be exposed to the dirty details when we are attacked...

Here's the link to the photo.....don't click on it if you are sensitive to graphic images.
http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2013/04/photos-of-the-boston-marathon-bombing/100495/

Opinions?

[Head416]

There's no difference in posting it originally and reporting it later. I was intentionally not clicking on links to graphic photos. I would have preferred not to see that, and wast expecting it in this thread, since it went several pages without anything like this.

[Gogar]

I wonder the same thing. Personally I think that the media already sensationalizes events like this SOOOO much that the last thing we need is more sensational pictures.

But the media just can't help themselves.

Someone at The Atlantic knows that leaving that gory picture up will direct more traffic and attention to their outlet.

But, they blur the man's face "for privacy." WHAT privacy? Such a lame attempt at pretending to care.

If they care about the man's "Privacy", then lose the picture altogether, A**holes.


I found it interesting that other larger outlets did not blur the man's face, but cropped the picture. Maybe for the 'privacy' of what used to be his leg, or something.

[scottbombedout]

Sorry, but I don't think it is up to you to post that photograph.

Is it ok if my kids caught sight of it?

[dyusem]

Agreed...very bad taste to post that photo and it would be greatly appreciated if you use a bit of discretion and perhaps go back and edit the post.

[aigel]

I am glad I clicked on "go to last post" and missed any graphic pictures. Please take it down. I don't need to see that. Like others, I purposely did not view the footage. I know what a bomb does to people, it will not make it better if I see the pictures.

G

[Rot 911]

Damn, I've seen lots of tramatic amputations in real life. I don't need to see any more pictures of it. Poor taste to post. I'm sure not clicking on this thread again.

[motion]

Unsubscribed. Thanks for ruining my day, Baz.

[Baz]

Sorry folks - I took it off - I apologize. You answered my question.

[Baz]

So I just left the link there with a warning - again I apologize for using poor judgement - I truly meant no offense.

[DanielDudley]

We know you didn't Baz. I wouldn't want my wife to see it though.

Twits over in PARF are already joking about it. Why don't you post it for them, so we can all have a laugh.

[HardDrive]

I went and looked at the photo. Doesn't bother me. I guess I've been a bit desensitized from hunting.

Knowing that parents lost their little boy to some monsters evil? Yeah, that hurts me way more than a bloody photo.

[aap1966]

I have no problem with the photo, provided there is a " graphic photo" warning.
The public needs to see what these bombings do, in reality, not in the abstract.
There is also a photo of a 2 yo that was thrown 6 foot, (survived, head injuries) posted with the fathers permission.
I see these photos as having dual value:-
- this is what those bastards have done, this is the sort of "people" they are,
- this may be what you've done to us, but you still will never win.

[Baz]

In retrospect I should have had that "graphic photo" warning and just a link - I guess I thought everyone had seen that photo by now.

Again I am truly sorry to those who were offended.

[rusnak]

Baz, we are all adults. I think your apology is very classy, and so it your edit.

I was looking at the photos, and just in awe of how ordinary people stepped up to help. They are heros in my book.

[scottbombedout]

Originally Posted by HardDrive

I went and looked at the photo. Doesn't bother me. I guess I've been a bit desensitized from hunting.

Knowing that parents lost their little boy to some monsters evil? Yeah, that hurts me way more than a bloody photo.

I don't have to loook at a photo to be devastated at the loss of the little boy.

People for all sorts of reasons don't want to look at stuff like that without a warning. I have seen similar first hand. Stuff like that can catch you off guard. I had tears when I saw that and it wasn't only for the guy in the photo.

So perhaps you are desensitized.

[craigster59]

Originally Posted by Baz

In retrospect I should have had that "graphic photo" warning and just a link - I guess I thought everyone had seen that photo by now.

Again I am truly sorry to those who were offended.

That's okay, you're forgiven. Your punishment is you can't post any ABBA, Little River Band or Air Supply videos in the "What Music Are You Listening To Today" thread for a week.

[rusnak]

Mr. Bombed out, where were you yesterday and have you ever owned a pressure cooker?

...just trying to make you laugh....

[greglepore]

I've not been able to find anything on the web re a fund for the family that lost their son and whose daughter lost her legs...anyone know anything?

Was out on a bike listening to NPR interview a Boston columnist on this and I couldn't help myself, pretty much broke down.

[intakexhaust]

I've said enough already and really appreciate getting ripped for it. Move on and one can read from the O.P. and see my sincerity. But god forbid why do some think just a hope will save us and it doesn't happen again? Blood in a photo... OK and what was someone's point? One victim or thousands, an 8 year old or an 80 year old widow, it's the same.

The damage was done, so now what? In their mind, the deranged individual or group has succeeded. Yes, I said it... have succeeded, in their own mind. It doesn't matter if they blew themself(s) up, caught, or prosecuted... THE WHACKS DON'T CARE. Do Americans get that? Apparently not.

We certainly have a different type of war on that also happens to be on our turf. To start understanding I suggest to read or watch a few good documentaries on terrorism. Could these reads or documentary save a life or lives? Maybe but don't count on your government. One is about a real hero Rick Rescorla, a distinguished Nam Vet later in a position with security at Morgan Stanley WTC. Another is John P. O'Neill, former FBI specialist in terrorism (and snubbed by the agency!), appointed chief of security at the WTC two weeks prior of the tragedy. Those fellows may be gone but they left us with vast knowledge and an insight of how these terrorist think. By chance, I recently caught the HBO first episode called Vice. They interviewed firsthand of captured suicide youth militants and worth seeing. (online stream of that episode is avail.)

Nobody needs to be obsessed or worry a life away but I feel Americans still don't have a grip or real understanding of what were up against. Too bad a few hours of studying terrorism isn't required in high school history classes. Might raise a better awareness of anti-culture / cult sectors and reality check for the future gen. Schools teach kids what freedom means but exclude discussion of religion. Ridiculous. A curriculum should be including recognizing the dangers of 'freedom of religion' and where some brain washed up bringing beliefs has infiltrated a country's violence.

Back to Boston - what's up with the lack in security preparation at that event? There's no perfect solution, surely realize nor expect to fully cover a 26 mile route but the perimeter or a few blocks around the staged / primary happenings could have been much better. A specific block(s) should have been primary secure areas with checkpoints. Runners in and an exit is not difficult to patrol either. The primary target of a terrorist is a public and or symbolic structure or event and the Boston event is a prime example. Not only that, its an International event - RED FLAGS! Sorry, but security failed. (No different than those going to Times Square on New Year Eve. All go thru various checkpoints and backpacks, large purses, etc. are NOT PERMITTED.)
Someone mentioned here like - "I hope in the future we don't have to deal with pat downs". Are you kidding? I would think it very appropriate to do so if at the main or any large events, especially at that Boston marathon primary area. And whenever I go to major event like an NFL game, I can't believe how idiotic some behave when told to leave or refused with a backpack. Having dog-sniffers around obviously didn't work. The individual or individuals must have known or timed it right avoiding dogs. Thats why ALL in a high visibility event should be banned of large bags, containers of any sort. Accept it.

Also no covered trash cans, mail boxes (probably long gone by now in Boston), stupid props like the MM thing, inflatable characters or other . (Smartly Chicago didn't allow covered containers during the G8 and NATO summits.) BTW- Those props could easily be plants before or during any event so simply ban them. I also watched some video clips brought into news highhlights on CNN and other. The one with an FBI specialist during the interview was vague and in amazement, I noticed the vid clips running in the background CLEARLY showed LACK of concern for security preparation. Nobody mentioning this? Jeez.