Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Boston.com)   Boston police sergeant who distributed the Tsarnaev-arrest photos is relieved of duty for not allowing state legislators to release the photos and take all the credit   (boston.com ) divider line
    More: Followup, Tsarnaev, Boston, state legislators, Boston magazine, Massachusetts State Police, American Justice, arrests  
•       •       •

5223 clicks; posted to Main » on 19 Jul 2013 at 10:03 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



187 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-07-19 09:01:26 AM  
That's a lot of butthurt. I wonder if submitter was the Police Sergeant who got fired for violating department policy and pretending to be the PIO for a major incident.
 
2013-07-19 10:05:26 AM  
Meanwhile, at the Rolling Stone HQ....

"Our marketing plan is working perfectly! People now remember we still exist! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA"
 
2013-07-19 10:06:39 AM  
I love how ever single photo of the bomber, you can clearly make out the laser dot on his head.
 
2013-07-19 10:07:44 AM  

Publikwerks: I love how ever single photo of the bomber, you can clearly make out the laser dot on his head.


And not just like a tiny little dot, its obvious there is at least a dozen pointed at his head
 
2013-07-19 10:08:04 AM  
Maybe because that cop had a camera in his hands and not his gun
 
2013-07-19 10:08:52 AM  

hardinparamedic: That's a lot of butthurt. I wonder if submitter was the Police Sergeant who got fired for violating department policy and pretending to be the PIO for a major incident.


Yeah, clear breakdown of procedure and he should have seen this coming a mile away.
 
2013-07-19 10:09:03 AM  
I still don't understand how the Rolling Stone glamourizes him. Every time I see him, no matter how he looks, I immediately think "Farking asshole terrorist who is going away for a long long time".

But hey, I guess if this is the worst thing people are getting outraged about, maybe we live in a pretty good society with no real problems.

/Just kidding, of course we have real problems.
//We just like to ignore them all and focus on petty bullshiat instead.
///Thanks newsmedia!
 
2013-07-19 10:10:40 AM  
A State Police sergeant, incensed by the controversial Rolling Stone magazine cover...

Well, there's your problem right there Mr. Sergeant Cop. You get really angry over trivial, meaningless shiat. This is what happens when you can't control your emotions like a normal person and worry too much about stupid things that don't actually matter.
 
2013-07-19 10:10:55 AM  
In other words, it this shiat again:

i1214.photobucket.com

/DRINK!
 
2013-07-19 10:13:13 AM  

Aarontology: Maybe because that cop had a camera in his hands and not his gun


... meaning he was brave enough to be in the presence of an armed, desperate cop-killer without the ability to defend himself? Yeah, sounds like a really big pussy there...
 
2013-07-19 10:13:17 AM  
It's called "chain of command" and apparently this sergeant had never heard of it.
 
2013-07-19 10:14:33 AM  
So that's what it takes to get a cop fired.
 
2013-07-19 10:15:30 AM  
umm.. how are those photos shocking or anything?  its like two pics of a kid from a very far distance away that you cant really tell anything other then he is apparently Hindu and his third eye glows in the dark.
 
2013-07-19 10:17:01 AM  
Public records.  How do they work?
 
2013-07-19 10:17:24 AM  

hardinparamedic: That's a lot of butthurt. I wonder if submitter was the Police Sergeant who got fired for violating department policy and pretending to be the PIO for a major incident.


The butthurt initiated from the US Attorney's Office, which means anyone from the Commonwealth level (State Police or politicians) are going to have zero impact on getting this guy reinstated.

Fox News is going to go into full Nancy Grace orgasm mode in the days to come.
 
2013-07-19 10:18:03 AM  
Nice attempt at making the story all about you, sarge.
 
2013-07-19 10:19:59 AM  

OtherLittleGuy: The butthurt initiated from the US Attorney's Office, which means anyone from the Commonwealth level (State Police or politicians) are going to have zero impact on getting this guy reinstated.


cdn.pjmedia.com
 
2013-07-19 10:20:42 AM  

rubi_con_man: Aarontology: Maybe because that cop had a camera in his hands and not his gun

... meaning he was brave enough to be in the presence of an armed, desperate cop-killer without the ability to defend himself? Yeah, sounds like a really big pussy there...


Oh goodness, what a dreamboat of a man.

I doubt that fact that he was accompanied by a paramilitary police force had anything to do with it.
 
2013-07-19 10:22:16 AM  
He was "relieved of duty for one day".

Sounds more like an atta-boy than an actual punishment.
 
2013-07-19 10:22:31 AM  

Publikwerks: I love how ever single photo of the bomber, you can clearly make out the laser dot on his head.


And that's just the snipers.  Had he reached for something, I have no doubt he'd have well over 100 bullets in him.
 
2013-07-19 10:23:03 AM  
Well, can you blame him??? Someone had to right the terrible wrong that Rolling Stone has committed.
 
2013-07-19 10:23:36 AM  

Alphakronik: It's called "chain of command" and apparently this sergeant had never heard of it.


Yea this. I don't blame him but he should have known better
 
2013-07-19 10:24:02 AM  
A State Police spokesman said Thursday night that Murphy had been relieved of duty for one day and will be subject to an internal investigation. "His duty status will be determined at a hearing in the near future," said spokesman David Procopio.

"Relieved of duty" for one day, on a Friday. He was probably ordered to turn in his gun and badge and pick up a fishing rod and a case of beer.

More important question though... Remember, for several days, Tsarnev couldn't talk because he had been shot in the throat?
c.o0bc.comDon't most people who get shot in the throat bleed a bit from the throat?

Either he's a vampire, or they shot him after he was in custody.
 
2013-07-19 10:25:29 AM  

Theaetetus: More important question though... Remember, for several days, Tsarnev couldn't talk because he had been shot in the throat?
[c.o0bc.com image 850x567]Don't most people who get shot in the throat bleed a bit from the throat?

Either he's a vampire, or they shot him after he was in custody.


Dude it's one picture. The other ones that were released show half his head covered in blood. He was laying on his left side, and in this picture that side is obscured by a shadow
 
2013-07-19 10:25:41 AM  
better RS cover?
cdn.bostonmagazine.com
 
2013-07-19 10:26:04 AM  

Theaetetus: More important question though... Remember, for several days, Tsarnev couldn't talk because he had been shot in the throat?


In the court room his jaw was wired, he could have gotten a glancing round in the teeth on his left side which wouldn't show in that pic
 
2013-07-19 10:26:24 AM  

rubi_con_man: Aarontology: Maybe because that cop had a camera in his hands and not his gun

... meaning he was brave enough to be in the presence of an armed, desperate cop-killer without the ability to defend himself? Yeah, sounds like a really big pussy there...


Being "brave" is a small consolation when my taxes have to pay his medical records when he takes a bullet in the line of duty because he couldn't put down the Nikon.

As a Bostonian I wanted to know every goddamned armed person on that scene had their gun drawn and was ready to pull the trigger if he was wired to blow or put another person in danger....not document it for "posterity."  He's a farking cop....not Ansel Adams.  We pay him to do a job that does NOT involve taking pics.
 
2013-07-19 10:26:33 AM  

Theaetetus: Either he's a vampire, or they shot him after he was in custody.


Or you know, that you can only see half of his neck and there are other pictures of him showing the gash on neck. But don't worry, I'm sure that won't hurt your police beating sexual fantasies.
 
2013-07-19 10:26:52 AM  

Theaetetus: "Relieved of duty" for one day, on a Friday. He was probably ordered to turn in his gun and badge and pick up a fishing rod and a case of beer.


It's also 100 degrees out, which means his punishment might mean "not standing at the BU Bridge rotary for 8 hours directing traffic"
 
2013-07-19 10:26:52 AM  

Theaetetus: Don't most people who get shot in the throat bleed a bit from the throat?


Depends on where they were shot. But most people with throat injuries that can compromise the trachea do end up getting intubated prophylactically. And those pieces of plastic do interfere with talking.

He's also wearing a black shirt that covers his neck, and is angling his chin downwards. Which makes it hard to see.
 
2013-07-19 10:28:27 AM  

MithrandirBooga: I still don't understand how the Rolling Stone glamourizes him.


Because American media has become so over-saturated with "analysts", pundits and other mostly useless talking heads that we're so accustomed to our "news" being presented in an opinion format that these sorts of things simply can no longer be viewed objectively by a large number of people.

There's nothing inherently wrong with the cover. It's a picture of Tsarnaev that he took and posted. It has been posted elsewhere. But because it's not tinted to make him look evil or doesn't have some negative slur plastered over it in huge font people are "outraged". If it doesn't make a bad man look bad, the "thinking" goes, it must mean it makes him look good because god knows it can't just be an objective image of a person as he appeared before we became aware of him.

The ridiculous poutrage over the Rolling Stone cover is an incredibly sad commentary on just how farked up most of this country has become when it comes to social and political news. There is no neutral position for facts in our media anymore. It really is the "with us or against us" mentality as applied to objective reporting and it's actually kind of scary.
 
2013-07-19 10:29:11 AM  
i.imgur.com
 
2013-07-19 10:29:27 AM  

Skarekrough: As a Bostonian I wanted to know every goddamned armed person on that scene had their gun drawn and was ready to pull the trigger if he was wired to blow or put another person in danger....not document it for "posterity."


Yeah, there were dozens of them, they had it covered. Have you considered photo evidence might be useful down the road?
 
2013-07-19 10:29:54 AM  

WTF Indeed: Theaetetus: Either he's a vampire, or they shot him after he was in custody.

Or you know, that you can only see half of his neck and there are other pictures of him showing the gash on neck. But don't worry, I'm sure that won't hurt your police beating sexual fantasies.


Not sure whats wrong with fantasizing about the police beating this guy.  pretty sure its a common fantasy.
 
2013-07-19 10:30:15 AM  
How is it when others ran this same pic there was no outrage?  The Boston Herald , The NYT and others ran it with no problems whatsoever.
 
2013-07-19 10:30:21 AM  
Theaetetus: Derp.

I don't think any further snark is required. This entirely and accurately a complete summation of your statement.
 
2013-07-19 10:31:07 AM  
Of all the things cops do to warrant getti g fired, and don't, this is what will get em.....wow wow wee wow
 
2013-07-19 10:32:22 AM  
I didn't really care about this whole outrage but a radio guy this morning made a good point, the other recent mass killers (Aurora theater, Sandy Hook) actually killed more people but they were never on the cover of Rolling Stone. Typically artists and actors are on the cover, a almost hero worship. Why does this kid get that treatment? Take away the headline and he looks like he's in an indie band. It just seems really odd that they'd choose to do so.

From what I hear though, the article is well written. I f*cking hate Rolling Stone so I'm holding my judgment until I read it myself.
 
2013-07-19 10:32:26 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: Yeah, there were dozens of them, they had it covered. Have you considered photo evidence might be useful down the road?


That's not the issue. The issue is he released material pertaining to an active investigation to the media and public without getting department permission or running it by the assigned Public Information Officer for that incident, which he was not authorized to release.

What if it was not the Boston Bomber, but a person completely innocent?

You don't freelance on a major incident, and you don't release information unless you're the designated media contact for that, or you have permission of someone high on the command chain.
 
2013-07-19 10:32:27 AM  

WTF Indeed: Theaetetus: Either he's a vampire, or they shot him after he was in custody.

Or you know, that you can only see half of his neck and there are other pictures of him showing the gash on neck. But don't worry, I'm sure that won't hurt your police beating sexual fantasies.


[Citation needed]. The only ones I've seen are after he was in custody, which doesn't contradict what I hypothesized above.
 
2013-07-19 10:33:00 AM  

Hobodeluxe: How is it when others ran this same pic there was no outrage?  The Boston Herald , The NYT and others ran it with no problems whatsoever.


It's mainly a media slap fight from what I can tell. Though I await the announcement of a "you hurt our feelings" lawsuit from the victims.
 
2013-07-19 10:33:37 AM  

Skarekrough: As a Bostonian I wanted to know every goddamned armed person on that scene had their gun drawn and was ready to pull the trigger if he was wired to blow or put another person in danger....not document it for "posterity." He's a farking cop....not Ansel Adams. We pay him to do a job that does NOT involve taking pics.


Yes because obviously the 300 bullets from the other hundred people with trained guns trained on him wouldn't had been enough

Had he tried anything, he would have been reduced to a bloody lead filled mush of flesh
 
2013-07-19 10:33:42 AM  

WTF Indeed: Meanwhile, at the Rolling Stone HQ....

"Our marketing plan is working perfectly! People now remember we still exist! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA"


Damn marketing department of a magazine, marketing their product in full public view.
 
2013-07-19 10:34:19 AM  

Theaetetus: [Citation needed]. The only ones I've seen are after he was in custody, which doesn't contradict what I hypothesized above.


http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/18/us/gallery/tsarnaev-arrest/index.html? hp t=hp_t1
 
2013-07-19 10:34:22 AM  

hardinparamedic: HotWingConspiracy: Yeah, there were dozens of them, they had it covered. Have you considered photo evidence might be useful down the road?

That's not the issue. The issue is he released material pertaining to an active investigation to the media and public without getting department permission or running it by the assigned Public Information Officer for that incident, which he was not authorized to release.

What if it was not the Boston Bomber, but a person completely innocent?

You don't freelance on a major incident, and you don't release information unless you're the designated media contact for that, or you have permission of someone high on the command chain.


What I was quoting wasn't addressing that.
 
2013-07-19 10:34:35 AM  
State Police photographer releases bloody Tsarnaev photos to Boston Magazine
Freakin limeys
 
2013-07-19 10:34:37 AM  

Theaetetus: WTF Indeed: Theaetetus: Either he's a vampire, or they shot him after he was in custody.

Or you know, that you can only see half of his neck and there are other pictures of him showing the gash on neck. But don't worry, I'm sure that won't hurt your police beating sexual fantasies.

[Citation needed]. The only ones I've seen are after he was in custody, which doesn't contradict what I hypothesized above.


i.huffpost.com

There shut up
 
2013-07-19 10:34:42 AM  

hardinparamedic: Theaetetus: Derp.

:P


Glad that's over with. Now can we get back to an actual discussion?
 
2013-07-19 10:35:51 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Take away the headline and he looks like he's in an indie band. It just seems really odd that they'd choose to do so.
From what I hear though, the article is well written. I f*cking hate Rolling Stone so I'm holding my judgment until I read it myself.


You should read it, then the cover makes sense. It's a well written article about how a lone kid with all the blessings in the world has the rug pulled out from underneath him and his descent into extremism and paints a perfect picture on how easy it is for these groups to recruit disaffected youth towards their ill causes.
 
2013-07-19 10:36:24 AM  

Theaetetus: [Citation needed]. The only ones I've seen are after he was in custody, which doesn't contradict what I hypothesized above.


Yes. He was shot after the police arrested him. That's why no one but random people on the internet have been saying that. Not his lawyer. Not him. Not anything.

a.abcnews.com

See that green thing? That's an israeli trauma bandage. It's used for gunshot injuries. It's also being applied to the side of his neck obscured by the shadow and shirt in your picture.
 
2013-07-19 10:36:27 AM  

nekom: Publikwerks: I love how ever single photo of the bomber, you can clearly make out the laser dot on his head.

And that's just the snipers.  Had he reached for something, I have no doubt he'd have well over 100 bullets in him.


Doubt very strongly that it was snipers with lasers. The entire point of being a sniper is not to be seen, a great way to tell the bad guy he's about to have a bad time would be to put a laser on him.
 
2013-07-19 10:36:27 AM  

IdBeCrazyIf: You should read it, then the cover makes sense. It's a well written article about how a lone kid with all the blessings in the world has the rug pulled out from underneath him and his descent into extremism and paints a perfect picture on how easy it is for these groups to recruit disaffected youth towards their ill causes.


I might one day, I just really really really f*cking hate that magazine
 
2013-07-19 10:37:14 AM  

HideAndGoFarkYourself: Doubt very strongly that it was snipers with lasers. The entire point of being a sniper is not to be seen, a great way to tell the bad guy he's about to have a bad time would be to put a laser on him.


Yea snipers wouldn't use lasers
 
2013-07-19 10:38:20 AM  

WTF Indeed: Theaetetus: [Citation needed]. The only ones I've seen are after he was in custody, which doesn't contradict what I hypothesized above.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/18/us/gallery/tsarnaev-arrest/index.html? hp t=hp_t1


Tat'dGreaser: Theaetetus: WTF Indeed: Theaetetus: Either he's a vampire, or they shot him after he was in custody.

Or you know, that you can only see half of his neck and there are other pictures of him showing the gash on neck. But don't worry, I'm sure that won't hurt your police beating sexual fantasies.

[Citation needed]. The only ones I've seen are after he was in custody, which doesn't contradict what I hypothesized above.

[i.huffpost.com image 850x566]

There shut up


I don't see a gash on his neck there, do you?

Perhaps you both are confused about what I'm saying. I'm not saying he was entirely uninjured. I'm not saying he didn't have blood on his forehead. I'm not saying that his hand didn't have blood on it. I'm saying, specifically, that he doesn't appear to have a throat injury prior to being taken into custody. And that picture of yours certainly doesn't dispute that.

What's with this whole "you must believe every single word the authorities said or you're a derpy terrorist sympathizer" dichotomy? I expect that from WTF, but not you, Tat.
 
2013-07-19 10:39:03 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: I might one day, I just really really really f*cking hate that magazine


I share your hate, but set it aside yesterday and was pleasantly surprised.
 
2013-07-19 10:39:15 AM  
i141.photobucket.com
 
2013-07-19 10:39:27 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: I didn't really care about this whole outrage but a radio guy this morning made a good point, the other recent mass killers (Aurora theater, Sandy Hook) actually killed more people but they were never on the cover of Rolling Stone. Typically artists and actors are on the cover, a almost hero worship. Why does this kid get that treatment? Take away the headline and he looks like he's in an indie band. It just seems really odd that they'd choose to do so.

From what I hear though, the article is well written. I f*cking hate Rolling Stone so I'm holding my judgment until I read it myself.


This is notable because were talking about a kid who by all outward appearances was as normal and everyday as everyone else ended up radicalized without ever leaving U.S. soil.  Were not talking about someone who went to Syria or Lebanon or Afghanistan or Iraq or somewhere else and got convinced he should do this, this is someone who was by all appearances as normal as anyone else and ended up radicalized without leaving U.S. soil.

The "normalcy" of the picture drives that point home.

This is something that should terrify the living shiat out of anyone in this country and it is very worthy of a cover story.
 
2013-07-19 10:39:30 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: I didn't really care about this whole outrage but a radio guy this morning made a good point, the other recent mass killers (Aurora theater, Sandy Hook) actually killed more people but they were never on the cover of Rolling Stone. Typically artists and actors are on the cover, a almost hero worship. Why does this kid get that treatment? Take away the headline and he looks like he's in an indie band. It just seems really odd that they'd choose to do so.

From what I hear though, the article is well written. I f*cking hate Rolling Stone so I'm holding my judgment until I read it myself.



I think that's bullshiat. That is your (probably influenced by what you've already read or heard from others) opinion.
like it or not that is what he looked like. the rest you've applied to it yourself.

seemeggierun.com
 
2013-07-19 10:40:18 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: HideAndGoFarkYourself: Doubt very strongly that it was snipers with lasers. The entire point of being a sniper is not to be seen, a great way to tell the bad guy he's about to have a bad time would be to put a laser on him.

Yea snipers wouldn't use lasers


There was a cat in the yard, they love lasers.
 
2013-07-19 10:40:36 AM  

hardinparamedic: Theaetetus: [Citation needed]. The only ones I've seen are after he was in custody, which doesn't contradict what I hypothesized above.

Yes. He was shot after the police arrested him. That's why no one but random people on the internet have been saying that. Not his lawyer. Not him. Not anything.

[a.abcnews.com image 640x360]

See that green thing [being applied after the police arrested him]? That's an israeli trauma bandage. It's used for gunshot injuries. It's also being applied [after the police arrested him] to the side of his neck obscured by the shadow and shirt in your picture.


Again, maybe you're confused. I'm  not saying he had no throat injury. I'm suggesting that maybe it didn't occur as early as the police claim, and that appears to be supported by the pictures. The fact that he later had a throat injury doesn't in any way contradict what I'm saying.
 
2013-07-19 10:41:07 AM  

Theaetetus: I don't see a gash on his neck there, do you?


You enjoy the abuse you get from this thread, don't you? This is sexual for you.
 
2013-07-19 10:41:17 AM  

Theaetetus: Perhaps you both are confused about what I'm saying. I'm not saying he was entirely uninjured. I'm not saying he didn't have blood on his forehead. I'm not saying that his hand didn't have blood on it. I'm saying, specifically, that he doesn't appear to have a throat injury prior to being taken into custody. And that picture of yours certainly doesn't dispute that.


You're right! It all makes sense if you think about it! Obviously they shot him on the ground, hoping to eliminate is ability to speak so he couldn't tell the masses that this was a false flag operation by the CIA and Obama's PAC to force baseball parks around the country to play "Sweet Caroline" for two weeks.
 
2013-07-19 10:43:02 AM  

Theaetetus: Again, maybe you're confused. I'm  not saying he had no throat injury. I'm suggesting that maybe it didn't occur as early as the police claim, and that appears to be supported by the pictures. The fact that he later had a throat injury doesn't in any way contradict what I'm saying.


And now, a blast from the past. Your claim was that he was shot after he was taken into custody.I've asked you to cite proof for your claim. Even a statement from Tsaronev himself, or his lawyers. Multiple people are even providing you with photographic evidence to the contrary.

Stop attention whoring. Put up or shut up.
 
2013-07-19 10:43:21 AM  

skozlaw: MithrandirBooga: I still don't understand how the Rolling Stone glamourizes him.

Because American media has become so over-saturated with "analysts", pundits and other mostly useless talking heads that we're so accustomed to our "news" being presented in an opinion format that these sorts of things simply can no longer be viewed objectively by a large number of people.

There's nothing inherently wrong with the cover. It's a picture of Tsarnaev that he took and posted. It has been posted elsewhere. But because it's not tinted to make him look evil or doesn't have some negative slur plastered over it in huge font people are "outraged". If it doesn't make a bad man look bad, the "thinking" goes, it must mean it makes him look good because god knows it can't just be an objective image of a person as he appeared before we became aware of him.

The ridiculous poutrage over the Rolling Stone cover is an incredibly sad commentary on just how farked up most of this country has become when it comes to social and political news. There is no neutral position for facts in our media anymore. It really is the "with us or against us" mentality as applied to objective reporting and it's actually kind of scary.


Why doesn't Fark let me push the "Smart" button repeatedly for posts like this?
/Vote that sucker up!
 
2013-07-19 10:44:05 AM  

skozlaw: There's nothing inherently wrong with the cover. It's a picture of Tsarnaev that he took and posted. It has been posted elsewhere. But because it's not tinted to make him look evil or doesn't have some negative slur plastered over it in huge font people are "outraged". If it doesn't make a bad man look bad, the "thinking" goes, it must mean it makes him look good because god knows it can't just be an objective image of a person as he appeared before we became aware of him.


Here's the problem: it's one thing to do what RS did in 1970 and run a cover story on Charlie Manson, but back then Manson was the main story on the cover, with one other vague blurb about another story that you'd have to look inside to figure out. Like so.

www.mediabistro.com

If this had been what RS did with Tsarnaev there would've been no ethical problem, but instead they gave Tsarnaev the Tiger Beat treatment. They did tart up the photo a bit, like he's Taylor Swift or something, under the guise of improving its resolution, and then ran the sidebar trying to plug all the other stuff in their magazine. The cover treatment makes the Tsarnaev piece into just another entertainment story.

Look at it this way: how stupid would it have looked in 1970 if RS had run the Manson cover with a sidebar featuring John & Yoko talking macrobiotics, a Linda Ronstadt photo spread, and a preview of that hot new band Led Zeppelin?

/yes, linda ronstadt was unspeakably hot back in the day, but that's not the point
//and it won't be the point until i get to my bunk
 
2013-07-19 10:44:06 AM  

hardinparamedic: Theaetetus: I don't see a gash on his neck there, do you?

I can't respond to any of your points, and acknowledge that my picture doesn't show what I claimed it did, so I'm going to just insult you personally and hope no one notices.

 
2013-07-19 10:44:25 AM  

Theaetetus: I don't see a gash on his neck there, do you?

Perhaps you both are confused about what I'm saying. I'm not saying he was entirely uninjured. I'm not saying he didn't have blood on his forehead. I'm not saying that his hand didn't have blood on it. I'm saying, specifically, that he doesn't appear to have a throat injury prior to being taken into custody. And that picture of yours certainly doesn't dispute that.

What's with this whole "you must believe every single word the authorities said or you're a derpy terrorist sympathizer" dichotomy? I expect that from WTF, but not you, Tat.


Just because you don't see it in that picture doesn't mean it's not there. Plus look at the one where they are giving aid to him, they're treating any injury on his throat.

Me?!?! Dude I'm in the process of becoming a police officer
 
2013-07-19 10:45:47 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Just because you don't see it in that picture doesn't mean it's not there. Plus look at the one where they are giving aid to him, they're treating any injury on his throat.

Me?!?! Dude I'm in the process of becoming a police officer


Don't let facts and logic get in the way of a good tinfoiling! Run away from the light of common sense!
 
2013-07-19 10:45:51 AM  

Skarekrough: The "normalcy" of the picture drives that point home.

This is something that should terrify the living shiat out of anyone in this country and it is very worthy of a cover story.


Hey I said that I frankly don't care about the cover photo, just repeating what someone said.

Those other mass killers also should scare the sh*t out of you since no one seemed to see them coming. That's their point
 
2013-07-19 10:46:00 AM  

ipsofacto: better RS cover?
[cdn.bostonmagazine.com image 850x566]

cdn.bostonmagazine.com


shiatter's full....

 
2013-07-19 10:46:26 AM  

hardinparamedic: Theaetetus: Again, maybe you're confused. I'm  not saying he had no throat injury. I'm suggesting that maybe it didn't occur as early as the police claim, and that appears to be supported by the pictures. The fact that he later had a throat injury doesn't in any way contradict what I'm saying.

And now, a blast from the past. Your claim was that he was shot after he was taken into custody.I've asked you to cite proof for your claim. Even a statement from Tsaronev himself, or his lawyers. Multiple people are even providing you with photographic evidence to the contrary.

Stop attention whoring. Put up or shut up.


Maybe the double negative of "I'm  not saying he had  no throat injury" confused you? Allow me to help: I'm suggesting that the cops gave him the throat injury after he was taken into custody. Proof of this is the picture from before he was taken into custody that appears to show an uninjured throat, and the picture after he was taken into custody that shows them applying a trauma bandage to his throat. No one has shown any pictures other than those two, so stop trying to claim otherwise.
 
2013-07-19 10:46:32 AM  
My oldest son said that Adidas tracksuits were so common on the bad guys in Afghanistan that it almost seemed like a uniform.

The picture reminded me of that.
 
2013-07-19 10:47:16 AM  

Theaetetus: hardinparamedic: Theaetetus: I don't see a gash on his neck there, do you?

I can't respond to any of your points, and acknowledge that my picture doesn't show what I claimed it did, so I'm going to just insult you personally and hope no one notices.


I just responded to your points. Other FARKers have posted pictures which directly contradict what you claim.

i.huffpost.com
a.abcnews.com

"If personally insulting you" is calling your argument ludacris and asking you to back up your claim by even one statement from Tsaronev himself is impossible, then yes. I am insulting you, cupcake.
 
2013-07-19 10:47:16 AM  

WTF Indeed: Don't let facts and logic get in the way of a good tinfoiling! Run away from the light of common sense!


I'm all for a good crazy-as-f*ck conspiracy theory, but come on!

How about the fact that the only injury he has is the one he gave himself? Boston PD needs to go back to the gun range
 
2013-07-19 10:47:18 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Me?!?! Dude I'm in the process of becoming a police officer


Watch out, Tat'd. Theaetetus might add you to his police beating fantasies now.
 
2013-07-19 10:47:57 AM  

IdBeCrazyIf: Tat'dGreaser: Take away the headline and he looks like he's in an indie band. It just seems really odd that they'd choose to do so.
From what I hear though, the article is well written. I f*cking hate Rolling Stone so I'm holding my judgment until I read it myself.

You should read it, then the cover makes sense. It's a well written article about how a lone kid with all the blessings in the world has the rug pulled out from underneath him and his descent into extremism and paints a perfect picture on how easy it is for these groups to recruit disaffected youth towards their ill causes.


Drew, some Farker's trying to make sense and have a well-reasoned discussion over here!

/Mama just told on you.
 
2013-07-19 10:48:22 AM  

WTF Indeed: Watch out, Tat'd. Theaetetus might add you to his police beating fantasies now.


STOP RESISTING
 
2013-07-19 10:49:01 AM  

rubi_con_man: Aarontology: Maybe because that cop had a camera in his hands and not his gun

... meaning he was brave enough to be in the presence of an armed, desperate cop-killer without the ability to defend himself? Yeah, sounds like a really big pussy there...


He was unarmed in the boat.
 
2013-07-19 10:49:33 AM  

WTF Indeed: Theaetetus: Perhaps you both are confused about what I'm saying. I'm not saying he was entirely uninjured. I'm not saying he didn't have blood on his forehead. I'm not saying that his hand didn't have blood on it. I'm saying, specifically, that he doesn't appear to have a throat injury prior to being taken into custody. And that picture of yours certainly doesn't dispute that.

You're right! It all makes sense if you think about it! Obviously they shot him on the ground, hoping to eliminate is ability to speak so he couldn't tell the masses that this was a false flag operation by the CIA and Obama's PAC to force baseball parks around the country to play "Sweet Caroline" for two weeks.


Or someone twitched as he was climbing off the boat and shot him in the throat, and rather than face any questions over whether the cops should've had their fingers off their triggers, the official story became that he tried to commit suicide on the boat.

But hey, forget Occam's Razor or logic or what you see with your own eyes in that picture of him climbing off the boat. It's much better to simply accept that that's all a lie and what the authorities have said is completely true in every aspect. Because otherwise the terrorists win or something.
 
2013-07-19 10:50:28 AM  
Can't recall; was there any butthurt about this?
www.washingtonpost.com
 
2013-07-19 10:50:32 AM  
much butthurt over nothing. I find it rather silly myself. Evil doesn't always look like a monster. That's the lesson to be learned here.
 
2013-07-19 10:52:01 AM  

Skarekrough: rubi_con_man: Aarontology: Maybe because that cop had a camera in his hands and not his gun

... meaning he was brave enough to be in the presence of an armed, desperate cop-killer without the ability to defend himself? Yeah, sounds like a really big pussy there...

Being "brave" is a small consolation when my taxes have to pay his medical records when he takes a bullet in the line of duty because he couldn't put down the Nikon.

As a Bostonian I wanted to know every goddamned armed person on that scene had their gun drawn and was ready to pull the trigger if he was wired to blow or put another person in danger....not document it for "posterity."  He's a farking cop....not Ansel Adams.  We pay him to do a job that does NOT involve taking pics.


Perhaps if you read the article:
"The pictures, taken by Sergeant Sean Murphy, a State Police tactical photographer"....

Sounds to me like he WAS doing his job.
 
2013-07-19 10:52:45 AM  

hardinparamedic: Theaetetus: hardinparamedic: Theaetetus: I don't see a gash on his neck there, do you?

I can't respond to any of your points, and acknowledge that my picture doesn't show what I claimed it did, so I'm going to just insult you personally and hope no one notices.

I just responded to your points. Other FARKers have posted pictures which directly contradict what you claim.

[i.huffpost.com image 850x566]
[a.abcnews.com image 640x360]


Showing a picture from  after he was taken into custody does not contradict the possibility that he was injured while in custody. I really don't understand why you can't admit that. It's like you don't understand the passage of time: things that occur later in time do not retroactively change things that occurred earlier. Stop watching Primer.
 
2013-07-19 10:53:00 AM  
ADIDAS means "All Day I Dream About Sex"
 
2013-07-19 10:54:08 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: IdBeCrazyIf: You should read it, then the cover makes sense. It's a well written article about how a lone kid with all the blessings in the world has the rug pulled out from underneath him and his descent into extremism and paints a perfect picture on how easy it is for these groups to recruit disaffected youth towards their ill causes.

I might one day, I just really really really f*cking hate that magazine


You are Courtney Love? Or the bus driver that killed Cliff Burton?
 
2013-07-19 10:54:17 AM  

Gulper Eel: The cover treatment makes the Tsarnaev piece into just another entertainment story.


I have no comment on the actual quality of RS's reporting, I'm just saying that the reason people are so pissy about it is because it isn't presented in the form of an opinion they agree with. God forbid he should look anything like a decent human being, because clearly the ONLY way he ever looked was like a monster.

As for the bookending with the other stories and the image manipulation, that's just how the media works these days. I'm just pointing out what I think the problem is that leads to the whining, I'm not saying Rolling Stone isn't a part of it.
 
2013-07-19 10:54:41 AM  

Theaetetus: Or someone twitched as he was climbing off the boat and shot him in the throat, and rather than face any questions over whether the cops should've had their fingers off their triggers, the official story became that he tried to commit suicide on the boat.


Well if I remember correctly, the whole thing happened live on tv right? If an officer "twitched" and shot him, other officers would respond by shooting considering how high the tension was.

A lot of attempted suicides do not end with the person succeeding. He was probably nervous, not fully committed in doing it. Those make more sense then one round just barely hitting his throat when they fired a couple hundred rounds earlier and hit nothing.
 
2013-07-19 10:54:56 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Theaetetus: I don't see a gash on his neck there, do you?

Perhaps you both are confused about what I'm saying. I'm not saying he was entirely uninjured. I'm not saying he didn't have blood on his forehead. I'm not saying that his hand didn't have blood on it. I'm saying, specifically, that he doesn't appear to have a throat injury prior to being taken into custody. And that picture of yours certainly doesn't dispute that.

What's with this whole "you must believe every single word the authorities said or you're a derpy terrorist sympathizer" dichotomy? I expect that from WTF, but not you, Tat.

Just because you don't see it in that picture doesn't mean it's not there. Plus look at the one where they are giving aid to him, they're treating any injury on his throat.


Yes, they are. They quite clearly are treating an injury on his throat, at time Y. However, the first picture of him coming off the boat, at earlier time X, does not appear to show an injury. Therefore, something must have happened between X and Y, right?
 
2013-07-19 10:55:05 AM  

mama2tnt: Drew, some Farker's trying to make sense and have a well-reasoned discussion over here!


But it's too early to start drinking

Tat'dGreaser: STOP RESISTING


Watch out, keep it up and you send Theaetetus into orgasm
 
2013-07-19 10:55:09 AM  
I love the manufactured outrage. Rolling Stone took the best photo they could find and ran with it. Do you think they sat around saying "Hmmm, no, no. We need to have a worse photo that's more smudged so it looks like it was taken by a three-year-old using an old phone."

His outrage that anyone who has ever been in a uniform should be offended by the Rolling Stone cover is weird. I think this is pretend outrage over a non-issue.
 
2013-07-19 10:55:30 AM  

Theaetetus: WTF Indeed: Theaetetus: Perhaps you both are confused about what I'm saying. I'm not saying he was entirely uninjured. I'm not saying he didn't have blood on his forehead. I'm not saying that his hand didn't have blood on it. I'm saying, specifically, that he doesn't appear to have a throat injury prior to being taken into custody. And that picture of yours certainly doesn't dispute that.

You're right! It all makes sense if you think about it! Obviously they shot him on the ground, hoping to eliminate is ability to speak so he couldn't tell the masses that this was a false flag operation by the CIA and Obama's PAC to force baseball parks around the country to play "Sweet Caroline" for two weeks.

Or someone twitched as he was climbing off the boat and shot him in the throat, and rather than face any questions over whether the cops should've had their fingers off their triggers, the official story became that he tried to commit suicide on the boat.

But hey, forget Occam's Razor or logic or what you see with your own eyes in that picture of him climbing off the boat. It's much better to simply accept that that's all a lie and what the authorities have said is completely true in every aspect. Because otherwise the terrorists win or something.


I'd trust authorities that have been known to lie once in awhile over a raving lunatic transparently scrambling to make up their own narratives.
 
2013-07-19 10:57:44 AM  

big pig peaches: He was "relieved of duty for one day".

Sounds more like an atta-boy than an actual punishment.


Hell, he gets a long weekend out of the deal.
 
2013-07-19 10:58:03 AM  

Gulper Eel: skozlaw: There's nothing inherently wrong with the cover. It's a picture of Tsarnaev that he took and posted. It has been posted elsewhere. But because it's not tinted to make him look evil or doesn't have some negative slur plastered over it in huge font people are "outraged". If it doesn't make a bad man look bad, the "thinking" goes, it must mean it makes him look good because god knows it can't just be an objective image of a person as he appeared before we became aware of him.

Here's the problem: it's one thing to do what RS did in 1970 and run a cover story on Charlie Manson, but back then Manson was the main story on the cover, with one other vague blurb about another story that you'd have to look inside to figure out. Like so.

If this had been what RS did with Tsarnaev there would've been no ethical problem, but instead they gave Tsarnaev the Tiger Beat treatment. They did tart up the photo a bit, like he's Taylor Swift or something, under the guise of improving its resolution, and then ran the sidebar trying to plug all the other stuff in their magazine. The cover treatment makes the Tsarnaev piece into just another entertainment story.

Look at it this way: how stupid would it have looked in 1970 if RS had run the Manson cover with a sidebar featuring John & Yoko talking macrobiotics, a Linda Ronstadt photo spread, and a preview of that hot new band Led Zeppelin?

/yes, linda ronstadt was unspeakably hot back in the day, but that's not the point
//and it won't be the point until i get to my bunk


"improving its resolution".. did you write for CSI?
 
2013-07-19 10:59:09 AM  

Skarekrough: Tat'dGreaser: I didn't really care about this whole outrage but a radio guy this morning made a good point, the other recent mass killers (Aurora theater, Sandy Hook) actually killed more people but they were never on the cover of Rolling Stone. Typically artists and actors are on the cover, a almost hero worship. Why does this kid get that treatment? Take away the headline and he looks like he's in an indie band. It just seems really odd that they'd choose to do so.

From what I hear though, the article is well written. I f*cking hate Rolling Stone so I'm holding my judgment until I read it myself.

This is notable because were talking about a kid who by all outward appearances was as normal and everyday as everyone else ended up radicalized without ever leaving U.S. soil.  Were not talking about someone who went to Syria or Lebanon or Afghanistan or Iraq or somewhere else and got convinced he should do this, this is someone who was by all appearances as normal as anyone else and ended up radicalized without leaving U.S. soil.

The "normalcy" of the picture drives that point home.

This is something that should terrify the living shiat out of anyone in this country and it is very worthy of a cover story.


He was born in Europe. He has definitely been outside of USA
 
2013-07-19 11:02:13 AM  
Anyone who is getting there cultural and politcal news or reporting from Rolling Stone needs to get that pony tail cut off their head and grow up.
 
2013-07-19 11:02:26 AM  

These would have been better cover photos.

And this will be the second time today I've agreed the cop did nothing wrong.

 
2013-07-19 11:03:45 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Theaetetus: Or someone twitched as he was climbing off the boat and shot him in the throat, and rather than face any questions over whether the cops should've had their fingers off their triggers, the official story became that he tried to commit suicide on the boat.

Well if I remember correctly, the whole thing happened live on tv right?


Nope... the press was well back, about two blocks away from the yard with the boat. There were a bunch of live shots of media standing around behind a police line, looking at twitter on their phones. No one could directly see what happened in that yard.

If an officer "twitched" and shot him, other officers would respond by shooting considering how high the tension was.

Yep, and right before they said he was in custody, there were multiple shots heard on the TV feeds. At the time, we all thought they were filling the boat full of lead.

A lot of attempted suicides do not end with the person succeeding. He was probably nervous, not fully committed in doing it. Those make more sense then one round just barely hitting his throat when they fired a couple hundred rounds earlier and hit nothing.

Of course, if so, then he would've had a gun on the boat.
 
2013-07-19 11:09:11 AM  

Gulper Eel: skozlaw: There's nothing inherently wrong with the cover. It's a picture of Tsarnaev that he took and posted. It has been posted elsewhere. But because it's not tinted to make him look evil or doesn't have some negative slur plastered over it in huge font people are "outraged". If it doesn't make a bad man look bad, the "thinking" goes, it must mean it makes him look good because god knows it can't just be an objective image of a person as he appeared before we became aware of him.

Here's the problem: it's one thing to do what RS did in 1970 and run a cover story on Charlie Manson, but back then Manson was the main story on the cover, with one other vague blurb about another story that you'd have to look inside to figure out. Like so.

[www.mediabistro.com image 358x482]

If this had been what RS did with Tsarnaev there would've been no ethical problem, but instead they gave Tsarnaev the Tiger Beat treatment. They did tart up the photo a bit, like he's Taylor Swift or something, under the guise of improving its resolution, and then ran the sidebar trying to plug all the other stuff in their magazine. The cover treatment makes the Tsarnaev piece into just another entertainment story.

Look at it this way: how stupid would it have looked in 1970 if RS had run the Manson cover with a sidebar featuring John & Yoko talking macrobiotics, a Linda Ronstadt photo spread, and a preview of that hot new band Led Zeppelin?

/yes, linda ronstadt was unspeakably hot back in the day, but that's not the point
//and it won't be the point until i get to my bunk


Not to mention the Manson photo properly portrays him as a horror villain. If RS really wanted him on the cover they could have had their graphics people do something with false color to emphasize that they weren't suggesting this kid is somehow a sexy, misunderstood philosopher who was led into too-deep waters by his big brother and our cruel, cruel, Islamophobic society.
 
2013-07-19 11:10:50 AM  

skozlaw: The ridiculous poutrage over the Rolling Stone cover is an incredibly sad commentary on just how farked up most of this country has become when it comes to social and political news. There is no neutral position for facts in our media anymore. It really is the "with us or against us" mentality as applied to objective reporting and it's actually kind of scary.


This.  The only people that partisans attack harder than their opponents are the neutral and objective folks.  It's basic animal instinct; lions don't chase the antelope furthest from them, they go for the ones they think they can catch.
 
2013-07-19 11:11:18 AM  

HideAndGoFarkYourself: nekom: Publikwerks: I love how ever single photo of the bomber, you can clearly make out the laser dot on his head.

And that's just the snipers.  Had he reached for something, I have no doubt he'd have well over 100 bullets in him.

Doubt very strongly that it was snipers with lasers. The entire point of being a sniper is not to be seen, a great way to tell the bad guy he's about to have a bad time would be to put a laser on him.


Police / SWAT have sharpshooters, not snipers. Either way, they'll turn your head into a canoe ("Tombstone").
 
2013-07-19 11:11:44 AM  

WTF Indeed: Theaetetus: [Citation needed]. The only ones I've seen are after he was in custody, which doesn't contradict what I hypothesized above.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/18/us/gallery/tsarnaev-arrest/index.html? hp t=hp_t1


And actually, this shot shows them applying pressure to... maybe a wound or something like it... on his neck. Hmmm...
 
2013-07-19 11:11:48 AM  
This police officer had no right to release these photos. He took it upon himself because he felt Rolling Stone was 'wrong'. Now we have a police officer with feelings. Shame on him.

He took the law into his own hands and will now cause more violence on streets because of his 'feelings'. He should be fired immediately for trying to think for himself.
 
2013-07-19 11:11:56 AM  

Theaetetus: Of course, if so, then he would've had a gun on the boat.


What about all the blood in the boat?
 
2013-07-19 11:13:07 AM  
So why is it ok for Boston Magazine to use his image to sell copies and clicks?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/19/dzhokhar-tsarnaev-boston-ma ga zine-unseen-photos-capture_n_3622982.html

This is just another type of glamorization.
 
2013-07-19 11:13:31 AM  

The My Little Pony Killer: WTF Indeed: Theaetetus: [Citation needed]. The only ones I've seen are after he was in custody, which doesn't contradict what I hypothesized above.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/18/us/gallery/tsarnaev-arrest/index.html? hp t=hp_t1

And actually, this shot shows them applying pressure to... maybe a wound or something like it... on his neck. Hmmm...


Yes, after he was in custody, they're applying pressure to a wound on his neck. What happened before he was in custody? Hmmm?
 
2013-07-19 11:14:15 AM  

Skarekrough:
As a Bostonian I wanted to know every goddamned armed person on that scene had their gun drawn and was ready to pull the trigger if he was wired to blow or put another person in danger....not document it for "posterity."  He's a farking cop....not Ansel Adams.  We pay him to do a job that does NOT involve taking pics.


I'm pretty sure they shoot for "trial" and not "posterity." I can can tell by having provided a lot of crime scene photos in my time.
 
2013-07-19 11:14:53 AM  

Theaetetus: Yes, after he was in custody, they're applying pressure to a wound on his neck. What happened before he was in custody? Hmmm?


Man, they'll give law degrees out to anyone these days, won't they?
 
2013-07-19 11:15:53 AM  

Theaetetus: hardinparamedic: Theaetetus: [Citation needed]. The only ones I've seen are after he was in custody, which doesn't contradict what I hypothesized above.

Yes. He was shot after the police arrested him. That's why no one but random people on the internet have been saying that. Not his lawyer. Not him. Not anything.

[a.abcnews.com image 640x360]

See that green thing [being applied after the police arrested him]? That's an israeli trauma bandage. It's used for gunshot injuries. It's also being applied [after the police arrested him] to the side of his neck obscured by the shadow and shirt in your picture.

Again, maybe you're confused. I'm  not saying he had no throat injury. I'm suggesting that maybe it didn't occur as early as the police claim, and that appears to be supported by the pictures. The fact that he later had a throat injury doesn't in any way contradict what I'm saying.


Is this close enough to proof for you? You know, if you spend all of your time complaining about what you don't see instead of taking five seconds to click through a very short slideshow, don't be surprised when you constantly get your ass handed to you for continually not understanding.

/click to the very very last image in that slideshow
//and then please share with the class what you see there
 
2013-07-19 11:17:31 AM  
I thought he was Muslim? I think he might actually be Hindu with the red dot on his forehead in every picture.
 
2013-07-19 11:18:56 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Theaetetus: Of course, if so, then he would've had a gun on the boat.

What about all the blood in the boat?


pixel.nymag.com 
They shot up the boat, and he was hit elsewhere. Hence the blood on his hands and forehead in that second picture, and the medical reports of multiple gunshot injuries.

I'm not saying he was uninjured. I'm saying that his  throat doesn't appear to have a gunshot wound prior to when he was in custody, and then he clearly has one after he's been in custody a while. Therefore, it's likely something happened between those two times that resulted in the injury.
 
2013-07-19 11:21:18 AM  

Theaetetus: I'm not saying he was uninjured. I'm saying that his  throat doesn't appear to have a gunshot wound prior to when he was in custody, and then he clearly has one after he's been in custody a while. Therefore, it's likely something happened between those two times that resulted in the injury.


Wait a minute, let me get this straight. You're saying he wasn't shot in the throat until he was in custody as in laying on that lawn handcuffed? So they just decided to not shoot him in the face, but to wound him in the neck and then give him first aid while taking pictures of the whole thing?
 
2013-07-19 11:21:31 AM  

The My Little Pony Killer: Theaetetus: hardinparamedic: Theaetetus: [Citation needed]. The only ones I've seen are after he was in custody, which doesn't contradict what I hypothesized above.

Yes. He was shot after the police arrested him. That's why no one but random people on the internet have been saying that. Not his lawyer. Not him. Not anything.

[a.abcnews.com image 640x360]

See that green thing [being applied after the police arrested him]? That's an israeli trauma bandage. It's used for gunshot injuries. It's also being applied [after the police arrested him] to the side of his neck obscured by the shadow and shirt in your picture.

Again, maybe you're confused. I'm  not saying he had no throat injury. I'm suggesting that maybe it didn't occur as early as the police claim, and that appears to be supported by the pictures. The fact that he later had a throat injury doesn't in any way contradict what I'm saying.

Is this close enough to proof for you? You know, if you spend all of your time complaining about what you don't see instead of taking five seconds to click through a very short slideshow, don't be surprised when you constantly get your ass handed to you for continually not understanding.

/click to the very very last image in that slideshow
//and then please share with the class what you see there


I see medics treating him after he was in custody. The caption supports this:
Police tend to Tsarnaev after his detainment.

Now, would you please tell the class how that photo or caption shows that, at a period  prior to his detainment, he was injured?
 
2013-07-19 11:24:09 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Theaetetus: I'm not saying he was uninjured. I'm saying that his  throat doesn't appear to have a gunshot wound prior to when he was in custody, and then he clearly has one after he's been in custody a while. Therefore, it's likely something happened between those two times that resulted in the injury.

Wait a minute, let me get this straight. You're saying he wasn't shot in the throat until he was in custody as in laying on that lawn handcuffed?

while he was on the boat, either in a suicide attempt as they claimed, or while they were shooting up the boat.

So they just decided to not shoot him in the face, but to wound him in the neck and then give him first aid while taking pictures of the whole thing?

As I said earlier in a post you replied to, someone may have been twitchy. At which point, yes, they would give him first aid and take pictures, and make up a cover story about a suicide attempt  with a disappearing gun.
 
2013-07-19 11:24:33 AM  

hardinparamedic: Theaetetus: hardinparamedic: Theaetetus: I don't see a gash on his neck there, do you?

I can't respond to any of your points, and acknowledge that my picture doesn't show what I claimed it did, so I'm going to just insult you personally and hope no one notices.

I just responded to your points. Other FARKers have posted pictures which directly contradict what you claim.

"If personally insulting you" is calling your argument ludacris and asking you to back up your claim by even one statement from Tsaronev himself is impossible, then yes. I am insulting you, cupcake.


The word is ludicrous and his name is Chris Bridges, serious actor now (like Dwayne Johnson)
 
2013-07-19 11:25:36 AM  

Theaetetus: As I said earlier in a post you replied to, someone may have been twitchy. At which point, yes, they would give him first aid and take pictures, and make up a cover story about a suicide attempt  with a disappearing gun.


Then my question is, who the f*ck cares?
 
2013-07-19 11:26:17 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Theaetetus: As I said earlier in a post you replied to, someone may have been twitchy. At which point, yes, they would give him first aid and take pictures, and make up a cover story about a suicide attempt  with a disappearing gun.

Then my question is, who the f*ck cares?


Apparently, a lot of people, considering how angrily people are calling me names for suggesting this is a possibility.
 
2013-07-19 11:30:42 AM  

Theaetetus: Tat'dGreaser: Theaetetus: As I said earlier in a post you replied to, someone may have been twitchy. At which point, yes, they would give him first aid and take pictures, and make up a cover story about a suicide attempt  with a disappearing gun.

Then my question is, who the f*ck cares?

Apparently, a lot of people, considering how angrily people are calling me names for suggesting this is a possibility.


Possible? Yes. Retarded? Also, yes.
 
2013-07-19 11:32:10 AM  
Alright, Fark snipers:

Why aim for the head - particularly when it's (presumably) multiple snipers? That seems a bit theatrical. Why is nobody going for center-mass?
 
2013-07-19 11:33:41 AM  

BigNumber12: Why aim for the head - particularly when it's (presumably) multiple snipers? That seems a bit theatrical. Why is nobody going for center-mass?


Possible body armor on an otherwise slow moving target?
 
2013-07-19 11:36:57 AM  

BigNumber12: Alright, Fark snipers:

Why aim for the head - particularly when it's (presumably) multiple snipers? That seems a bit theatrical. Why is nobody going for center-mass?


Because they know someone else in the group is aiming center-mass
 
2013-07-19 11:37:23 AM  
"If personally insulting you" is calling your argument ludacris and asking you to back up your claim by even one statement from Tsaronev himself is impossible, then yes. I am insulting you, cupcake.

I believe the word you are looking for is Ludicrous.

This is Ludacris:
images.starpulse.com
 
2013-07-19 11:39:18 AM  

BigNumber12: Alright, Fark snipers:

Why aim for the head - particularly when it's (presumably) multiple snipers? That seems a bit theatrical. Why is nobody going for center-mass?


Just a supposition - at that point, he hadn't lifted up his shirt to show that he wasn't wearing an explosive vest, and you may not want to shoot a mass of explosives.
 
2013-07-19 11:39:39 AM  

Theaetetus: most people who get shot in the throat bleed a bit from the throat?

Either he's a vampire, or they shot him after he was in custody.


I was wondering the same thing. He does not appear to have been shot in the throat.  Also, in the court drawings (since they haven't provided any photos of him since he was taken into custody, there was only mention of a bandage on his arm).

I'm usually not like this, but something about this story absolutely reeks.  And I suspect the lack of the throat wound in these photos may be why it's a big deal that they were released.
 
2013-07-19 11:40:50 AM  
Tat'dGreaser:

, or they shot him after he was in custody.

encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com
 
2013-07-19 11:44:52 AM  

Gulper Eel: If this had been what RS did with Tsarnaev there would've been no ethical problem, but instead they gave Tsarnaev the Tiger Beat treatment. They did tart up the photo a bit, like he's Taylor Swift or something, under the guise of improving its resolution, and then ran the sidebar trying to plug all the other stuff in their magazine. The cover treatment makes the Tsarnaev piece into just another entertainment story.


If they ran that Manson cover today, people would argue the yellow in the image looks too much  like a halo or something. People desperately want to be offended, and they will find a way, no matter what.
 
2013-07-19 11:48:42 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: BigNumber12: Alright, Fark snipers:

Why aim for the head - particularly when it's (presumably) multiple snipers? That seems a bit theatrical. Why is nobody going for center-mass?

Because they know someone else in the group is aiming center-mass


Oh - the guys on the ground with pistols. Got it.
 
2013-07-19 11:50:16 AM  

SuburbanCowboy: This is Ludacris:


I'll never forgive Ludacris for what he's done to the English language.

/or his performance in F&F
 
2013-07-19 11:56:46 AM  

Gulper Eel: If this had been what RS did with Tsarnaev there would've been no ethical problem, but instead they gave Tsarnaev the Tiger Beat treatment. They did tart up the photo a bit, like he's Taylor Swift or something, under the guise of improving its resolution, and then ran the sidebar trying to plug all the other stuff in their magazine. The cover treatment makes the Tsarnaev piece into just another entertainment story.


Exactly. I rate this new, horrific, anti-American, terrorist appeasing scandal at no less than SIX Benghazis. I
 
2013-07-19 12:02:15 PM  

BigNumber12: Oh - the guys on the ground with pistols. Got it.


Those laser dots aren't from snipers though
 
2013-07-19 12:02:52 PM  
Come to think of it, those lasers could be from tasers
 
2013-07-19 12:10:09 PM  
This thread has been fun.

Theaetetus: BigNumber12: Alright, Fark snipers:

Why aim for the head - particularly when it's (presumably) multiple snipers? That seems a bit theatrical. Why is nobody going for center-mass?

Just a supposition - at that point, he hadn't lifted up his shirt to show that he wasn't wearing an explosive vest, and you may not want to shoot a mass of explosives.


You're actually right on this one. Plus a shot to the head, ostensibly to the temple angled downwards at a 45 degree angle or forehead angled at 60 degrees, would sever the brain stem and result in instant loss of muscle tone.
 
2013-07-19 12:12:41 PM  

Tat'dGreaser: Come to think of it, those lasers could be from tasers


I always keep my taser lasers in the glove box of my blazer, next to my razor.
 
2013-07-19 12:16:18 PM  

Tat'dGreaser: Come to think of it, those lasers could be from tasers


This is the worst Dr. Seuss story ever.
 
2013-07-19 12:17:40 PM  

hardinparamedic: This thread has been fun... You're actually right on this one.


Thanks.
 
2013-07-19 12:19:23 PM  
Not signed up yet? Not to worry - it's still FREE!
IIRC, Fark has a policy of not linking to articles that do that.  That policy has been in place for several years.  So why is it still not being enforced?
 
2013-07-19 12:22:58 PM  
A shark with a friggin laser beam on his head!
 
2013-07-19 12:27:20 PM  

Theaetetus: hardinparamedic: This thread has been fun... You're actually right on this one.

Thanks.


i.imgur.com
You're welcome for being told you were right on one thing that wasn't related at all to the conspiracy theory you posted earlier in the thread.
 
2013-07-19 12:32:41 PM  

hardinparamedic: Theaetetus: hardinparamedic: This thread has been fun... You're actually right on this one.

Thanks.

You're welcome for being told you were right...


Thanks again.
 
2013-07-19 12:34:06 PM  

Theaetetus: hardinparamedic: Theaetetus: hardinparamedic: This thread has been fun... You're actually right on this one.

Thanks.

You're welcome for being told you were right...

Thanks again.


Theaetetus: Glad that's over with. Now can we get back to an actual discussion?

 
2013-07-19 12:37:32 PM  

Theaetetus: Either he's a vampire, or they shot him after he was in custody.


Your lawyering skills are slipping.   The photo you are utilizing doesn't clearly show one side of his throat.  I can just as easily assume he has an injury or doesn't because one side of his neck is obscured by the shadows in this picture.

Add to that, he is definitely pretty well covered in blood.  Where are his other injuries that created all that blood?

I feel like you're just trying to have an argument because its too hot in the NE and you're bored at work.
 
2013-07-19 12:38:30 PM  

SmellsLikePoo: I feel like you're just trying to have an argument because its too hot in the NE and you're bored at work.


th00.deviantart.net
 
2013-07-19 12:45:18 PM  

KierzanDax: HideAndGoFarkYourself: nekom: Publikwerks: I love how ever single photo of the bomber, you can clearly make out the laser dot on his head.

And that's just the snipers.  Had he reached for something, I have no doubt he'd have well over 100 bullets in him.

Doubt very strongly that it was snipers with lasers. The entire point of being a sniper is not to be seen, a great way to tell the bad guy he's about to have a bad time would be to put a laser on him.

Police / SWAT have sharpshooters, not snipers. Either way, they'll turn your head into a canoe ("Tombstone").


Except that 95% of the policies for those SWAT team "sharpshooters" come from the American SNIPER Association, which provides expert testimony and training to those "sharpshooters."

Nevermind the National Tactical Officers Association puts on Basic and Advance SNIPER courses.

The International Tactical Officers Training Association puts on many SNIPER courses.

/SWAT officer here.
//Not a sniper, or a sharpshooter
 
2013-07-19 12:49:00 PM  

BigNumber12: Alright, Fark snipers:

Why aim for the head - particularly when it's (presumably) multiple snipers? That seems a bit theatrical. Why is nobody going for center-mass?


Because separating the brain from the brain stem is the only 100% guaranteed kill shot.  Furthermore, there was, if you recall, concern that the two bombers had suicide vests, in which case, you don't want to shoot center mass.  It's also why they had him lift his shirt up, to ensure there was no vest, or weapon tucked into his waistband.

I'll point out again, that snipers do not use lasers.  Lasers (visible ones) are used for CQB, for quick target acquisition without the need to look through an optic.  Those lasers on him are not from snipers, they're from tactical operators.
 
2013-07-19 12:51:58 PM  

Tat'dGreaser: Come to think of it, those lasers could be from tasers


No way, the effective range for a taser is 25 feet.  The arrest team was well outside that distance, and approaching behind a shield.  If they were going to deploy a less lethal option on this guy, it would have been in the form of a 40mm launcher, or a bean bag round.
 
2013-07-19 12:53:31 PM  

FARK rebel soldier: So that's what it takes to get a cop fired.


Yup. Be the cop showing his hand.
 
2013-07-19 12:57:10 PM  
Wanna see my picture on the cover
Wanna buy five copies for my mother
Wanna see my smilin' face
On the cover of the Rollin' Stone
 
2013-07-19 01:06:21 PM  

gaslight: I love the manufactured outrage. Rolling Stone took the best photo they could find and ran with it. Do you think they sat around saying "Hmmm, no, no. We need to have a worse photo that's more smudged so it looks like it was taken by a three-year-old using an old phone."

His outrage that anyone who has ever been in a uniform should be offended by the Rolling Stone cover is weird. I think this is pretend outrage over a non-issue.


www.troll.me
 
2013-07-19 01:08:10 PM  
So Tiger Beat has a cover shot of him looking "dreamy".

I wonder what RT has to say... never mind.
 
2013-07-19 01:13:37 PM  

MithrandirBooga: I still don't understand how the Rolling Stone glamourizes


Allegedly the photo they ran has been "buffed & fluffed".  So they have literally "glamorized" him.
 
2013-07-19 01:14:48 PM  

Betep: So Tiger Beat has a cover shot of him looking "dreamy".

I wonder what RT has to say... never mind.


The guy happens to be extremely good looking.  It turns out that good looking people can also be accused of crimes, even horrendous ones. They can even actually commit horrendous crimes.  They don't all look like deranged and terrifying old men or what have you.   The juxtaposition may well be why they went that way with the photo.
 
2013-07-19 01:17:34 PM  

Skarekrough: As a Bostonian I wanted to know every goddamned armed person on that scene had their gun drawn and was ready to pull the trigger if he was wired to blow or put another person in danger....not document it for "posterity."  He's a farking cop....not Ansel Adams.  We pay him to do a job that does NOT involve taking pics.


He's not out there for pleasure or to pad his portfolio. He's there to document things. Whether it be for evidence purposes, or to ensure that no police bullshiat goes on.
 
2013-07-19 01:18:44 PM  

Skarekrough: rubi_con_man: Aarontology: Maybe because that cop had a camera in his hands and not his gun

... meaning he was brave enough to be in the presence of an armed, desperate cop-killer without the ability to defend himself? Yeah, sounds like a really big pussy there...

Being "brave" is a small consolation when my taxes have to pay his medical records when he takes a bullet in the line of duty because he couldn't put down the Nikon.

As a Bostonian I wanted to know every goddamned armed person on that scene had their gun drawn and was ready to pull the trigger if he was wired to blow or put another person in danger....not document it for "posterity."  He's a farking cop....not Ansel Adams.  We pay him to do a job that does NOT involve taking pics.


His job, as assigned by the police department, is to document these events on film.  He was doing the duty assigned to him.  Stop being a knob.
 
2013-07-19 01:22:24 PM  
Tommy Moo:
Not to mention the Manson photo properly portrays him as a horror villain. If RS really wanted him on the cover they could have had their graphics people do something with false color to emphasize that they weren't suggesting this kid is somehow a sexy, misunderstood philosopher who was led into too-deep waters by his big brother and our cruel, cruel, Islamophobic society.

Rolling Stone can't win with that picture. If they run the picture as is, which is what I think they did, they get flak for glamorizing Tsarnev. If they did the Manson treatment (or the Time treatment of OJ), they'll get flak for manipulating the image. If RS didn't want any controversy, they should have used an entirely different picture.
 
2013-07-19 01:24:33 PM  
"The real concern is that people will see these new photos and think, 'Oh, he must be guilty,' because why else would he be surrounded by dozens of police and emerging, bleeding, from a boat," said Cavallaro, a former assistant attorney general.


...and THAT ladies and gentlemen is why everybody hates lawyers.

I think people are stupid...but they are not THAT stupid.  For a case the jury never heard about, maybe they can be swayed by a thing like that...but for THIS case?  That's a stupid statement.
 
2013-07-19 01:24:57 PM  

Some Bass Playing Guy: Rolling Stone can't win with that picture. If they run the picture as is, which is what I think they did, they get flak for glamorizing Tsarnev. If they did the Manson treatment (or the Time treatment of OJ), they'll get flak for manipulating the image. If RS didn't want any controversy, they should have used an entirely different picture.


I have yet to see a photo of him where he didn't look good or attractive, aside from the bloodied up ones from the arrest at the boat. If they used one of those on the cover, then it would have been an outrage that such graphic violence was on the cover of a magazine.  Not much they could have done, even though it's the major story in the magazine.
 
2013-07-19 01:34:34 PM  

flondrix: MithrandirBooga: I still don't understand how the Rolling Stone glamourizes

Allegedly the photo they ran has been "buffed & fluffed".  So they have literally "glamorized" him.


Looks exactly like the photo that ran on the front of the NYTimes two months ago (see upthread), just without the borders. It's not like Rolling Stone went to the jail and did a studio photo of him. I think it came off his Facebook Page. Waaaah, he's a good-looking young guy. Waaaahhh.
 
2013-07-19 01:45:31 PM  
encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com
 
2013-07-19 01:48:54 PM  
The Rolling Stone cover, which critics say glamorized Tsarnaev, "was an insult to any person who has ever worn a uniform of any color or any police organization or military branch, and the family members who have ever lost a loved one serving in the line of duty," Murphy said.

What a giant, smoldering pile of bullshiat!
 
2013-07-19 02:16:34 PM  

hardinparamedic: Theaetetus: hardinparamedic: Theaetetus: hardinparamedic: This thread has been fun... You're actually right on this one.

Thanks.

You're welcome for being told you were right...

Thanks again.

Theaetetus: Glad that's over with. Now can we get back to an actual discussion?


Thanks!
 
2013-07-19 02:23:24 PM  

vrax: The Rolling Stone cover, which critics say glamorized Tsarnaev, "was an insult to any person who has ever worn a uniform of any color or any police organization or military branch, and the family members who have ever lost a loved one serving in the line of duty," Murphy said.

What a giant, smoldering pile of bullshiat!


Naw, it's pretty much true.  Dehumanizing people is how they sleep at night.  The world is a lot easier to ingest when you see all criminals or enemies as inhuman monsters who can be disposed of at will.
 
2013-07-19 02:56:38 PM  
Interesting that the governor said he was shot in the throat and unable to talk and the photo shows no throat wound.
 
2013-07-19 03:06:29 PM  
Lotta trolls in this thread with an equal amount of bites.
 
2013-07-19 03:19:45 PM  
Here is the reverse angle of the 'on the ground' photo.  Note the direct pressure being applied to the neck, on the left...which is completely in shadow in the frontal pics...

cdn.bostonmagazine.com
 
2013-07-19 03:22:22 PM  

IRQ12: vrax: The Rolling Stone cover, which critics say glamorized Tsarnaev, "was an insult to any person who has ever worn a uniform of any color or any police organization or military branch, and the family members who have ever lost a loved one serving in the line of duty," Murphy said.

What a giant, smoldering pile of bullshiat!

Naw, it's pretty much true.  Dehumanizing people is how they sleep at night.  The world is a lot easier to ingest when you see all criminals or enemies as inhuman monsters who can be disposed of at will.


Well. it's true from his perspective, which is that of an idiot.
 
2013-07-19 03:32:33 PM  

crow: Here is the reverse angle of the 'on the ground' photo.  Note the direct pressure being applied to the neck, on the left...which is completely in shadow in the frontal pics...

[cdn.bostonmagazine.com image 850x567]


Sadly, that will be missed by the research-averse conspiracy-types who are far more inclined to mindlessly repost the shadowed pic with some variation on "OMG CONSPIRACY!"
 
2013-07-19 03:41:38 PM  

BigNumber12: crow: Here is the reverse angle of the 'on the ground' photo.  Note the direct pressure being applied to the neck, on the left...which is completely in shadow in the frontal pics...

[cdn.bostonmagazine.com image 850x567]

Sadly, that will be missed by the research-averse conspiracy-types who are far more inclined to mindlessly repost the shadowed pic with some variation on "OMG CONSPIRACY!"


Sadly, all of the "we love the authority! Everything they say must be correct or else I'll wet myself!" types will miss the fact that no one in here is claiming Tsarnev was  never injured, and the dispute is merely about  when he received his throat wound.
But that distinction may be too complex for some.
 
2013-07-19 03:43:24 PM  

Deep Contact: Interesting that the governor said he was shot in the throat and unable to talk and the photo shows no throat wound.


Scratch that...  Some people apparently think there was never a throat wound.

/eyeroll
 
2013-07-19 03:46:39 PM  

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: "The real concern is that people will see these new photos and think, 'Oh, he must be guilty,' because why else would he be surrounded by dozens of police and emerging, bleeding, from a boat," said Cavallaro, a former assistant attorney general.


...and THAT ladies and gentlemen is why everybody hates lawyers.

I think people are stupid...but they are not THAT stupid.  For a case the jury never heard about, maybe they can be swayed by a thing like that...but for THIS case?  That's a stupid statement.


This, but the last high-profile capital trial where the jury didn't hear any pre-trial news voted to acquit.
 
2013-07-19 03:57:06 PM  
It continuously surprises me people who 'leak' things have no sense on how to leak anonymously
 
2013-07-19 04:45:46 PM  

crow: Here is the reverse angle of the 'on the ground' photo.  Note the direct pressure being applied to the neck, on the left...which is completely in shadow in the frontal pics...

[cdn.bostonmagazine.com image 850x567]


I'm going to guess that, based on the fact they're bagging him,  he couldn't talk because he had a 7.5mm tube between his vocal cords.
 
2013-07-19 04:46:40 PM  

Theaetetus: Sadly, all of the "we love the authority! Everything they say must be correct or else I'll wet myself!" types will miss the fact that no one in here is claiming Tsarnev was  never injured, and the dispute is merely about  when he received his throat wound.
But that distinction may be too complex for some.


You must enjoy anal play, since you keep pulling so much out of your ass.
 
2013-07-19 05:28:53 PM  

hardinparamedic: Theaetetus: Sadly, all of the "we love the authority! Everything they say must be correct or else I'll wet myself!" types will miss the fact that no one in here is claiming Tsarnev was  never injured, and the dispute is merely about  when he received his throat wound.
But that distinction may be too complex for some.

You must enjoy anal play, since you keep pulling so much out of your ass.


I'm sorry, do you not understand the distinction between "X never happened" and "X occurred, but at a later time than we were told"? Is that too complicated for you?
 
2013-07-19 05:42:44 PM  

Theaetetus: 'm sorry, do you not understand the distinction between "X never happened" and "X occurred, but at a later time than we were told"? Is that too complicated for you?


You don't seem to understand the statement "Not even the accused is claiming what you say". I don't care if you think it happened later or not. What you think and reality don't seem to reflect each other.
 
2013-07-19 07:22:37 PM  
"The real concern is that people will see these [Rolling Stone] photos and think, 'Oh, he must be innocent,' because why else would he be posing for glamour shots to be published in a magazine," said Cavallaro, a former defense attorney. "We have to make sure people don't make decisions based on that because we want his acquittal to be based on a fair proceeding."
 
2013-07-19 07:37:02 PM  

mbillips: Can't recall; was there any butthurt about this?


That's because it's the New York Times and it's one serious news story among other serious news stories. It wasn't on the front page of a Times entertainment section next to a blurb for what the smart set is doing in the Hamptons this summer.

skozlaw: I have no comment on the actual quality of RS's reporting, I'm just saying that the reason people are so pissy about it is because it isn't presented in the form of an opinion they agree with. God forbid he should look anything like a decent human being, because clearly the ONLY way he ever looked was like a monster.

As for the bookending with the other stories and the image manipulation, that's just how the media works these days. I'm just pointing out what I think the problem is that leads to the whining, I'm not saying Rolling Stone isn't a part of it.



When RS has a big story, they've done the single-image cover before and done it really well - I'm thinking of the John & Yoko cover from after his murder, which is about as iconic a magazine cover as there is.

The Tsarnaev cover smacks of somebody in management getting panicky that there's too much blank space on the cover and market research says they have to fill it with whatever wankage-of-the-month will fit. Sucks to be Willie Nelson and the rest of the people whose stories got plugged. Nobody's going to read those.
 
2013-07-19 08:05:43 PM  

BarkingUnicorn: This. The only people that partisans attack harder than their opponents are the neutral and objective folks. It's basic animal instinct; lions don't chase the antelope furthest from them, they go for the ones they think they can catch.


I don't know if that analogy works given that the proverbial antelopes in this case are the only ones in the herd with the capability of killing the lions. I'm not normally a big fan of the "WAKE UP SHEEPLE" mentality, but when it comes to the media, and especially the 24/7 "news" media, I have to believe that the people who consume that crap are pretty dull-witted and easily misled and only education from the people who aren't so dim can correct them.

Gulper Eel: The Tsarnaev cover smacks of somebody in management getting panicky that there's too much blank space on the cover and market research says they have to fill it with whatever wankage-of-the-month will fit.


I dunno, I'd have to call Occam's Razor on that one. I have a harder time believing this was some concerted effort to drum up fake outrage than it was just the usual photo editing. Even if that were true, though, the outrage is still unjustified. A picture of Tsarnaev is no more than a picture of Tsarnaev even if it's been retouched. It only gets imbued with new meaning if people choose to do that so even if there is some conspiracy to drum up attention it's the people that are throwing a fit that should be the most ashamed because they're the ones handing out the rewards for the behavior.
 
2013-07-19 09:16:42 PM  

skozlaw: I dunno, I'd have to call Occam's Razor on that one. I have a harder time believing this was some concerted effort to drum up fake outrage than it was just the usual photo editing. Even if that were true, though, the outrage is still unjustified. A picture of Tsarnaev is no more than a picture of Tsarnaev even if it's been retouched. It only gets imbued with new meaning if people choose to do that so even if there is some conspiracy to drum up attention it's the people that are throwing a fit that should be the most ashamed because they're the ones handing out the rewards for the behavior.


I'm putting it down to garden-variety incompetent obliviousness too, because of the half-assed justification they used - that since Tsarnaev is 19 or whatever he's the same age as lots of RS readers and it'll resonate. Which is arrant bullshiat but even if we accept their premise, then why not also put Adam Lanza on a cover right next to a plug for the new Kanye album?
 
2013-07-19 09:57:02 PM  

Gulper Eel: I'm putting it down to garden-variety incompetent obliviousness too, because of the half-assed justification they used - that since Tsarnaev is 19 or whatever he's the same age as lots of RS readers and it'll resonate. Which is arrant bullshiat but even if we accept their premise, then why not also put Adam Lanza on a cover right next to a plug for the new Kanye album?


Well, because Lanza was a completely unhinged lunatic who just murdered small children for no reason. Regardless of the validity of his actions, at least you could view Tsarnaev's actions through the lens of (self) righteous revolution.

I.e, say what you like about the tenets of radical Islam, Dude, at least it's an ethos.

Also, to be fair to Rolling Stone, Tsarnaev is far more palatable than Kanye West.

/ kidding
// barely
 
2013-07-19 10:07:52 PM  

skozlaw: Well, because Lanza was a completely unhinged lunatic who just murdered small children for no reason.


Which you could just as well say about RS cover subject Charlie Manson, although we could take into account that in 1970 a lot of people really did think the White Album was capable of setting somebody off on a murderous rampage.
 
2013-07-19 11:14:14 PM  

ur14me: "The real concern is that people will see these [Rolling Stone] photos and think, 'Oh, he must be innocent,' because why else would he be posing for glamour shots to be published in a magazine," said Cavallaro, a former defense attorney. "We have to make sure people don't make decisions based on that because we want his acquittal to be based on a fair proceeding."


Cavallaro later died because he forgot to breathe.

The more I see this level of stupidity, the more I wonder what's left for the terrorists to actually fark up!
 
2013-07-19 11:34:20 PM  
Don't put killers on magazine covers. It's the kind of glorification that they want.

This is political correctness as brought to you by the type of people who claim to hate political correctness.
 
2013-07-20 12:54:47 AM  

WTF Indeed: Meanwhile, at the Rolling Stone HQ....

"Our marketing plan is working perfectly! People now remember we still exist! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA"


But hate us, aren't buying our rag, and won't in the future? Genius boss.
 
2013-07-20 12:27:33 PM  

hardinparamedic: Theaetetus: 'm sorry, do you not understand the distinction between "X never happened" and "X occurred, but at a later time than we were told"? Is that too complicated for you?

You don't seem to understand the statement "Not even the accused is claiming what you say". I don't care if you think it happened later or not. What you think and reality don't seem to reflect each other.


I'm amused that you think we've heard absolutely everything he has to say. I bet you also believe Fox News to be a bastion of truth and journalistic excellence. Or MSNBC, for that matter.
 
2013-07-20 12:57:17 PM  

Theaetetus: I bet you also believe Fox News to be a bastion of truth and journalistic excellence. Or MSNBC, for that matter.


Theaetetus. Bravely fighting against the strawman windmills he believes in his head.
 
2013-07-20 01:03:15 PM  

hardinparamedic: Theaetetus: I bet you also believe Fox News to be a bastion of truth and journalistic excellence. Or MSNBC, for that matter.

Theaetetus. Bravely fighting against the strawman windmills he believes in his head.


Hardin, the paramedic who will disbelieve the evidence of his own eyes, if someone in a suit hasn't told him what he's seeing.
 
2013-07-20 01:17:20 PM  

Theaetetus: Hardin, the paramedic who will disbelieve the evidence of his own eyes, if someone in a suit hasn't told him what he's seeing.


None of the evidence supports your claim. You've repeatedly been asked to even link just one statement which makes it not a creation of your own mind/asshole.

You've repeatedly refused to do so. In fact, you've been resorting to the exact personal insults that you accused others of. Yo- wait, no. I'll let your own words do the talking for me.

Theaetetus: I can't respond to any of your points, and acknowledge that my picture doesn't show what I claimed it did, so I'm going to just insult you personally and hope no one notices.

It's pretty apt.
 
2013-07-20 06:48:45 PM  
Blue cuff- King airway.Also pretty sure I saw an image of him in the ambulance with a a nonrebreather on. No reason to knock him down with RSi on this one. Hours old injury, ambulatory, and tactical medics tend to be piss poor on conscious patients. Tac medicine is designed for unconscious shock patients where theu can drill and king and hand off to transport crews.
 
Displayed 187 of 187 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report