When #IfTheyGunnedMeDown Happens in Print: 

Section from the Rolling Stone profile of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, one of two brothers who committed the Boston Marathon bombings vs section from the New York Times profile of Michael Brown, who was shot and killed by Ferguson, Missouri police officer Darren Wilson. 

H/T to @daviddtss 

A Muslim 19-year old suspect becomes the “Boston Marathon Bomber”, is chased by the military, put in solitary confinement before trial, and is ridiculed by all mainstream media—yet there’s no viable evidence.

A white police officer undoubtedly kills an innocent child solely for the color of his race, gets paid time off work, doesn’t face indictment and is justified by all mainstream media— regardless of clear evidence.

This system only serves justice if you’re white.


This video came up as the advertisement to a video I was watching and I noticed that it was titled "American Ignorance" and that got my attention so I decided to watch it instead of skipping it. It was published in March of this year and he speaks so much truth in this video. If other people got this as the ad in the videos that they were watching hopefully they took the time to watch. It’s very interesting.

I also thought it was kind of weird that a regular video from a normal YouTube channel was the ad… I’m not sure if that usually happens.

My copy of Rolling Stone finally arrived in the mail today. (We have a different version of this magazine in Australia so I had to hunt down a copy on eBay).

After reading the article I have to say I don’t understand what all the fuss was about… It seems like all the people hating on Rolling Stone for “insulting” victims of the bombing never actually took the time to read what the article had to say. Personally I thought the most “offensive” thing about the magazine was the numerous full-page ads for cigarettes it contained. (Coming from Australia, where cigarette advertising is banned, this gave me a bit of culture shock). I find it hard to comprehend why Rolling Stone’s decision to run a cover story about Jahar warranted a massive boycott of the magazine, but on the other hand no one seemed to be upset about the magazine’s repeated glorification of smoking… which has killed more Americans than terrorism ever has.

Anyway, overall I thought that it was a fairly balanced piece, and I don’t think it glorified Jahar or his alleged actions in any way. The author spent two months interviewing Jahar’s friends and people acquainted with the Tsarnaev family in an attempt to give readers a little insight into the family’s background and try to put together some of the pieces of a life that is now so irreversibly shattered.

Even if Jahar is found guilty of every charge that has been thrown at him, this wont change the fact that he, too, is a victim in all of this. The destruction of this otherwise promising life is - in its own way - also a tragedy, and it should not be seen as an insult to the Boston marathon bombing victims and their families to admit this to ourselves.

For Jahar’s sake, for the Tsarnaev family, for the people of Boston, and for any potential Tamerlans and Jahars of the future, we need to be having a conversation about what happened, who was involved, how it happened, and, most importantly, why it happened. Regardless of which side of the fence you sit on in regard to Jahar’s guilt/innocence, let’s not demonize the journalists at Rolling Stone for trying to contribute to that conversation.

I know we’ve all seen this picture 100 times but I was thinking about something that Jahar’s mom recently said.  She said that Jahar’s arm was badly broken from being shot multiple times.  Someone asked her in a message which arm it was and she said that it was his left.  Wouldn’t there then be blood all over his arm/dripping down his hand in this picture?  Unless of course he was shot after surrendering (since there is no visible blood on his clothes or face in this pic either.)  Don’t huge inconsistencies like this phase people that think he’s 100% guilty in the least?

I Wrote A Poem about the case (It's not a creepy love poem, it's what I think needs to be said)

The Whole Story

Two men who came to our country

Went to our schools, walked our streets

Accused of a crime that sickens the stomach of all

Three dead  and so many injured

Countless lives forever changed

Yet let us not forget in the heat of angry

In the grip of grief, fear and hatred

That accused doesn’t mean guilty

If the teenager in the courtroom

Is guilty of this horrific act

May our jails hold him for life

I am not standing and screaming

“Dzhokhar is innocent!”

But I am also not announcing

“Dzhokhar is guilty!”

What I am saying, screaming, begging

Is that we allow the courts to decide

Is that we judge this boy

Not by our emotions

But by the evidence

Because it is no justice to them

A little boy with a life

Stretched out in front of him

Then cut short by horror

Hatred and tragedy

So young and innocent

Two young women

 Both beautiful

With hopes and dreams

All three dearly missed

By family, friends, and

kind strangers

To railroad a man

To a death penalty

Before hearing the whole story

Every angle, every perspective

Every shred of evidence

If that says he is guilty

May he grow old and die in prison

But let’s not convict him

Before he has even had a trial

Justice is about human rights

Rights stolen from three people

As the city of Boston stood stunned

Rights that even the most hated criminals have

If we taken those rights from them

Then we are no better

To all the people saying that he’s innocent because he was such a good person and was nice to everyone, have you heard people talk about serial killers and mass murderers before? Pretty much the first thing they say is “they were such a nice guy” or “he was quiet” or “she wouldn’t hurt a fly” Just because he acted nice doesn’t make him a saint or innocent.

A secular perspective on the death penalty...

A disturbing number of people are happy that Jahar faces the death penalty, because they want him to suffer for what he [allegedly] did. To me, this is logically inconsistent, because in order for one to experience suffering, one needs to be conscious of their suffering… and therefore one must be alive to suffer for their wrongdoings.

As an atheist, I do not believe in life after death. I do not believe that there is a “Heaven” or “Hell” awaiting Jahar. I do not believe that there is a God who will ensure that any “sins” he committed in this life will be punished in the next. Therefore, I cannot philosophically support the idea that the death penalty is an appropriate punishment for Jahar’s alleged actions.

The only people who would truly be “punished” by Jahar’s death are the loved ones he would leave behind. His family, friends, classmates, teachers, colleagues, team-mates, etc., are the people who would really suffer as a result of the death penalty being carried out. It would hurt innocent people who had no more to do with the bombing than you or I did… And for what purpose? The guy isn’t going to be able to feel remorse if he’s dead.

If you want people to be sentenced to “Hell” for committing heinous crimes, then sentencing them to life in a supermax prison (such as ADX Florence) is about as close to that as you’re realistically going to get. In comparison, killing them wont achieve anything apart from putting them out of their misery (in a euthanasia-like way it actually seems more humane).

anonymous asked:

I want to write to Dzhokhar Tsarnaev eventually, maybe closer to trial (I know he can't respond though) and I have his correct contact information, but when I look him up on the Devens inmate locator, it says there's no such inmate.. Like even if I search by his register number, he doesn't come up. I would think a well known criminal like him would come up though. Is it weird that he doesn't?

It’s really not that weird at all.  He wasn’t on there before either.  There is a lot going on with him right now, and I’m just going to tell you to wait until he’s sentenced.  He is indeed in Devens, and he’s getting his mail, but it would be plain stupid for him to respond to ANYthing right now.  So just wait until he’s sentenced. 

Explains things:

Could you please explain what Councel Judy Clark means by: “Thus even were this not a potentially capital case, the magnitude of the task confronting Mr. Tsarnaev’s attorneys would be daunting.” Capital Case? Does she mean his innocent?
She is saying that even if Jahar’s alleged crimes were not punishable by death the task of defending Jahar would be really hard for just the current defense team to take on. copied from fuckcnn blog.
So You can’t read into what the extra lawyer means beyond needing extra help, because Judy Clarke covers all angles in the request and gives nothing away.