That is the most intriguing part to me at this stage- no mention of the person who did this.
As to the second bomb/not bomb that could easily be an example of first reports being inaccurate- it actually could be the squad doing a precautionary detonation of a back-pack or whatever. Now- if there really was another device and they're covering- that's really disturbing. Hard to know at this point.
As to the second bomb/not bomb that could easily be an example of first reports being inaccurate- it actually could be the squad doing a precautionary detonation of a back-pack or whatever. Now- if there really was another device and they're covering- that's really disturbing. Hard to know at this point.
I haven't read to the end yet...maybe this has sorted itself out by this time, and I should start reading from the end of the thread, but I'm thinking along the same lines.
I understand wanting to notify the Next of Kin first, but if the person isnt Middle Eastern, you'd think they would have said something generic about a young man from 'heartland USA' or something to help stop the inevitable speculation.
I remember on 9/11 hearing some reports that the State Department was attacked - then it wasn't. First reports aren't always completely accurate for many reasons.
OTOH, it seems as if the media are at the very least spinning this a bit...Bomb is no longer a word in use apparently, and you would think that they'd be on this like vultures. They run stories out of LA/Katrina that were inflammatory and inaccurate. Why so suddenly responsible?
Time will tell.