Just to be clear, there is no such thing as a terrorist. It is a bullshit marketing term along the lines of “cyber warfare,” “cloud computing,” and “synergy” that is overused to the point of being meaningless. If the incidents are rare or the group behind them is small just stick with “mass murder” or perhaps “heinous crime.” This applies to Boston, London, New York, etc. If attacks are common and part of a larger movement then call it “war” or “total war” if you want to be specific. This applies to parts of the Middle East and Africa.
If you must use the terms “terrorist” and “terrorism” please remember that there are two fairly broad definitions in use. A technical definition: the motive is political and the target is the general public rather than an individual (assassination) or military (war). And a blatantly racist definition: those behind the attack are Arab, Muslim, or what ever other overly broad group of people we feel like dehumanizing and vilifying. Official government statements seem to at least try to stick to the technical definition, the media and people in general seem to prefer to just be racist. If you doubt this then try to explain “they hate our freedom” that I’ve heard so often over the past dozen years. (Hint: no one hates our freedom.)
End of rant…
In other news I’ve got a bunch of photos of some of the various memorial sites that have appeared around Boston to post online soon. Hopefully some turned out well, I found it to be a particularly difficult subject matter to photograph.