And the third person killed - Lu Lingzi, a graduate student at BU:

http://m.usatoday.com/article/news/2088825

The FBI has posted the still photos of the two suspects:
http://www.fbi.gov/news/updates-on-i...-boston/photos

Crazy story... a runner in the Boston marathon witnesses the explosions there, then goes home to Texas to see the fertlizer plant blow up..

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/04/18...ant-explosion/

One of the suspects is dead. It has been a crazy night in Boston.

http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2013/04/...-suspect-dead/

Suspect dead, shot by police. One officer left dead. They have completely shut down the city while they are looking for the other suspect.

Suspects are Chechen.

My daughter and her boyfriend are on lock down. She was scheduled to fly out to Vegas today for a bachelorette party. Still don't know if she'll be able to go. Luckily her boyfriend is a chef so she will be able to enjoy some nice meals while they are stuck inside. Living on the other coast leaves me shaking.

DaffyKD

My parents and the majority of my paternal extended family live in one of the locked-down suburbs. Thank goodness for email and FB messages letting us know everyone is safe. Even happier that marathon daughter is in DC this weekend....

Can we get updates on your families? Were they in the same neighborhood?

Pictures from the day's events, including the celebration after suspect #2 was captured alive:

http://news.yahoo.com/photos/suspect.../?format=embed

Interesting.. apparently the older brother was interviewed by the FBI in 2011 at the request of Russia..

http://news.yahoo.com/police-descend...ml?.tsrc=attmp

I don't have any friends/family in Watertown but quite a few live in the adjacent suburbs of Newton, Brookline, and Belmont. Everyone is fine. My oldest went back to Boston today as the school systems return from April Vacation on Monday.

Not quite sure where to post this, but an Arizona Delta Gamma alumna and her husband were badly injured in the bombing; each lost the lower part of the left leg. Wishing them a speedy recovery.

"Are the Boston bombers just douchebags?"

Definitely.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobile...b_3156038.html

One of my co-teachers lives 2 houses away from "the boat". Scary. I was in Aruba. I was completely content to stay there if the area remained on lockdown.

One of my cousin's friends could see the bombers' house from his living room window. How scary to know that you've been living next door to terrorists.

I'm sure most of you have heard about the latest issue of Rolling Stone and the controversy regarding the cover...

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013...the-issue?lite

What do you think, GCers? Is this art and/or a good way to portray how a seemingly "normal" kid turned bad? .. or is it offensive and a slap in the face to those who were directly affected by the bombings?

I personally find it in very poor taste.

I think it was a very poor decision on Rolling Stone's part. It has long been established that mass shooters, killers, etc. may be motivated by the prospect of infamy and notoriety. While I don't think that was what motivated the Tsarnaev brothers, another deranged person might see the magazine and think, "Hey, I can blow up a school/gun down a shopping mall and be on the cover of Rolling Stone too!" If they just had to cover the story, they could have used a less flattering picture (like his mugshot) or better yet a picture of victims. Not to mention the attacks were three months ago- do the people of Boston constantly have to be reminded of what they endured?

I think Rolling Stone will come to regret this choice of cover, as it has already alienated many readers and is bound to cause financial loss for the magazine.

I find it in very bad taste as well. The cover makes the bomber look like a cool, bad boy, rock and roll star. Newsflash: he isn't any of those things. CaseyBat took the words right out of my mouth.

As someone in the advertising industry, I've been very curious about their decision to run that cover from this aspect.

Clearly, this decision was made to get people talking about Rolling Stone. I remember that shortly before I left my old job, I happened to take a meeting with Rolling Stone—my client had previously run in them but we had not ran with them in some time (I don’t know what the old Director on my account was thinking…it was on a paint brand, why would he recommend Rolling Stone?? But I digress…) I don’t know why it sticks out in my memory, because a lot of my meetings with magazine are a blur, but I remember that the first thing he asked me was “When you think of Rolling Stone, what do you think of?” and I said “Music and entertainment”. He went on to say that yes, while that is the foundation of the magazine, they do also cover news, world and political issues, which is something that people forget and something they’re always striving to get their audience to think of when they think of the magazine. I immediately thought of this conversation when I saw the cover.

What I’m interested to know is if advertisers were notified of the cover beforehand. I’m trying to think back to know if there was ever a time where I was specifically notified about who is on the cover if there was not a specific reason I would need to know. (You do find out in some cases if a magazine thinks it might help them sell an ad; when I worked on an retail account, one of the celebrities who had a clothing line at the store was featured on the cover a magazine so they were sure to let us know in hopes that they would get some business as a result). But it doesn’t always happen. I can imagine that they are going to take a hit financially, not from a subscription/sales standpoint but from advertising sales. Every brand I ever worked on has been EXTREMELY sensitive to the environment they’re being placed in. If some advertisers didn’t know what the cover was going to be, I’m sure they were LIVID once they found out. I can imagine that there are quite a few ads being canceled/media planners are removing the magazine from recommendations. I’m just thinking if that happened to my last client…her head would have exploded.

Then again, most of the types of advertisers that run with Rolling Stone tend to know what they’re getting into, but still.

Sorry this is not really an emotional perspective…just some thoughts I had based on my experience.

I was wondering when this was going to come up. There was a pic of him on the cover of I think the NY Post that was similarly flattering, right after the bombing occurred, so this is old news IMO. This is RS's desperate attempt to get their name back in the spotlight. Sucking up to Baby Boomers is not as profitable as it used to be. They jumped the shark a long time ago.

Pretty much. I loved the magazine when I was young and now it's gone the way of MTV.

The article serves the public discourse and goes to show the issues between terrorism are pretty complex as are some of the folks who perpetrate those acts.

That whole concept is just old too. Oooh, guess what, pretty people can do really horrible things. I guess no one's ever seen a picture of Ted Bundy circa 1973 and thought "Yeah, I'd hit that."

Not really where the area of domestic terrorism is concerned. It's a weird thing. I know several people in my local legal community who worked on the defense of Terry Nichols or Tim McVeigh from the OKC bombings. While I know nothing about McVeigh, I've heard Nichols is just the nicest, coolest guy around, except he helped pull a Ryder truck up next to a federal building and killed 168 people, including 19 children.

It's important for the public discussion because we tend to think of these terrorist types as "others," and we don't humanize them.

At least to me, that these kids could possibly be so angry with this country or maybe be so just batshit crazy that they'd do what they did. This shouldn't be so controversial. Mein Kamph is still in print, Quotations of Chairman Mao is still in print. Those guys were responsible for millions of deaths, but people want to know about them.

Interesting that you use the words "domestic terrorism." From what I've heard and read, not too many people are using that term to describe what happened in Boston. Don't get me wrong - I know this is a person who grew up here, lived here, and became a terrorist here in the United States, but the fact is, I don't believe most people look at Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev the same way that they look at Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols.

I think many people see Tamerlan and Dzhokhar as outsiders; foreigners who came here and betrayed the very country that took them in. And of course, in a post-9/11 world, this becomes even more relevant and prominent.

I understand that everyone is interested in the Tsarnaev brothers, but I don't think they're interested for the same reasons that they're interested in McVeigh and Nichols.

IMO, the "humanizing" of Dzhokhar isn't necessary. He doesn't deserve to be classified as such. I don't care so much that he's on the cover, but I AM bothered by the fact that they made him look like a rock star. If you want to make people think about, and understand, and recognize the "change" that occurred in him.. or compare the seemingly normal life he led with the one where he killed 3 people and injured hundreds more, I think there are much better ways it could have been done.

My thought: If they used half of the picture that's on the cover, and half of his mug shot, and combined them into one image (showing his two "sides"), Rolling Stone could have shown us both the innocent, charming teenager and the cynical, evil killer that he turned out to be. I don't know that too many people would have taken offense to that. At least, I don't believe it would have blown up like this has over the last day or two.

They hardly even deserve to be put in the same category as terrorists. Their attack was carried out in a pretty incompetent manner, didn't do a huge amount of damage, but was successful only in that it elicited a highly disproportional response--the mark of a successful terrorist attack.

In response to this attack, we saw a city of millions put on lockdown, saw a major hit to the local economy, and witnessed law enforcement's increasing militarization. Having been part of a community which experienced a much more significant attack, we saw nothing remotely close to what happened in Boston with regard to the military-like response and we still got the guys responsible.

These guys shouldn't be held out as horrific serial killer badasses, they should be held out for what they are--incompetent, misled and immature thugs. I haven't and probably won't read the article, but from the headline, I think we'll get an honest depiction.

This has already been a Law & Order Criminal Intent episode. Just saying.

http://www.tv.com/shows/law-order-cr...ilgrim-205535/

I'm not refuting anything you're saying, just refuting the concept that RS is doing anything new and/or shocking and/or essential to public discourse that hasn't been done before.

I'm not saying this is new either. It's just part of the discourse which should happen and it's a different take from what other news outlets are doing.