They do, however, have a long history of doing social stories, usually with a liberal slant, but not always. For instance, PJ O'Rourke, an avowed libertarian, ran their Foreign Affairs desk for over a decade.
I do enjoy Matt Taibbi's explanations of the marriage between government and Wall St, although they are rather long and snarky. BTW, Obama has not gotten a pass from him at all.
My niece and nephew (12 and 10) got me a one year subscription to RS about two years ago as a Christmas gift. I did renew it last year, it was really cheap. I think less than 15 bucks. Eventually, probably not long, the print mag will go under.
Once more, I think the glamor cover was in bad taste.
Now, to the article (which I read online, haven't received it yet). There is nothing really new here. It just describes in greater detail what we already have heard.
I'll give my synopsis, far shorter than the article itself, which is loaded with anecdotes from those who knew him.
To all who knew him, this Jahar kid was a well adjusted, well liked Americanized immigrant. However, there were family problems. In fact the article focuses much on a divide between the father and older brother as to who was the acting 'patriarch'. The father comes off in the piece quite like the Uncle, who condemned the boys immediately after the bombing. Just a hard working guy trying to make a go of things, but without the same financial success. The Mom, however, seems quite dominant. The older boy was the apple of her eye, and with his boxing success, the family 'Golden Child'.
The older boy never assimilated like Jahar seemed to, and clearly had a few issues all along. I would almost equate him to a heavy smoker who quits himself, then becomes a pain in the ass to every smoker on the planet. Quite frankly, he's the author of his own mess. His own big mouth derailed his boxing prospects, and out of anger embraced radical Islam. He remained the family 'stud', with the exception of the Father, who didn't like it at all. The Mother, in turn, nurtured this. She, BTW, seems like a bit of a nut herself. Very outspoken, once upon a time into extreme American fashion, then following the son into radical Islam, yet arrested for shoplifting clothes, then running out on the charges. A real extreme personality.
In fact, this is essentially the point of the article, I believe. This entire family was chock full of 'all or nothing' personalities. They were either totally for something, or completely against things, irrationally so.
Driven by anger, even rage. Jahar seemed to be the exception, but clearly wasn't
The article does make the casual connection to the older one being involved in a homicide, which, if so, seemed to be a result of his friend 'dissing' Islam. They also point to growing evidence this man was quite well known as a radical in his native land, and the Mom is likely the same.
In the end, this Jahar appears to have been fully committed for quite some time, yet adept at hiding it. I equate it to the 9/11 terrorists, who were at titty bars one day, on planes slashing peoples throats the next. It seems the tragedy came together quickly. I get the idea the brother said "OK, it's time now", and that's all there was to it. Jahar just flew right into action as his own belief system told him to.
It doesn't so much sympathize at all with this kid. The scariest part is, the article's intention is to find out where this mans head was at, and can't come up with any rational answers. He fooled everybody.
BTW, much is made in the article of Jahar assimilating seamlessly into adolescent life in Cambridge, noted for it's liberalism and diversity. It's also worth noting the article hints these were nothing more than malcontents who used radical Islam as their 'Avenue' to vent their anger.
No comments:
Post a Comment