A question of "mass", of violence, and of justice.
"Mass" hysteria
Or how they gnashed and wailed, and inflated the bomb
Oh come on, US! When did a pressure cooker bomb amount to a "weapon of mass destruction"? Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the surviving one of the two brothers alleged to have perpetrated a double bombing at the Boston marathon in April this year, has appeared in US Federal Court, today, on charges of 30 counts of using a weapon of mass destruction, amongst others. There was a time when the term meant nothing less than a nuke! And there seems to be something of an arithmetic discrepancy here, too. I can understand the authorities wanting to throw the book at him, but how does two bombs equate to 30 charges of use? I am puzzled.
Granted the bombing of the Boston marathon was a horrific affair, and it is tragic that even three people should have died, but London and the rest of the UK endured worse IRA bombs for well over a decade (bombs which it might be noted were in part funded by blissfully naive American Noraid contributers, an organisation which had a strong base of support in the city). I can't help but find it a little curious how a country perfectly willing to further its own interests by sponsoring dubious regimes and applying its own violence is suddenly insensed when it finds it in its own garden.
Have some sense of proportion. This is no laughing matter. Charge him with terrorism, by all means - but a weapon of mass destruction? That would be comical if it weren't so appalling.
