Boston History Lesson: Stop Classifying Criminal Anarchist Violence as Acts of War

Kurly’s Kommentary
“Bringing common sense back to political commentary”

Huffington Post A Lesson of the Boston Bombings: Stop Classifying Criminal Anarchist Violence as Acts of War

         Published in The Huffington Post & The Florida Squeeze




The Boston bombing as a terrorist act without viewing it in a historical context will, in the end, lead to justification of the depreciation of individual liberties, all in the misguided name of national security.”

Yet, even if Bloomberg is right, I don’t want him or any government leader to limit 

Back in the early 20th century, “terrorists” were referred to as “anarchists” (basically the same thing) and carried out what would be termed these days as “acts of war.”
by Steven Kurlander


With all the considerable news coverage and analysis of the twin April 15 bombings that left three people dead and 282 others injured, including 16 who lost limbs, there’s been practically no reference to the plentiful examples of similar violence in our nation’s history, sadly.


The Boston bombings are being reported on and viewed strictly in the context of a “war on terror” started by President Bush in the aftermath of the World Trade Center bombings and continued with vigor by the Obama administration, an imprudent war that has always lacked any true definition of enemy or purpose.


The lack of reference to American historical precedent over the last two centuries, which is replete with similar instances of mass violence and bombings resulting from unabated reverence for political and/or religious teachings, incorrectly builds the significance of the Boston bombings.


In fact, the only historical reference really made was mention of Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City bombings, a terrorist attack on the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in downtown Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995, which was the most destructive anarchist bombing act in American history if correctly framed in purely anarchist terms.


If there’s a lesson to be learned from Boston, it is that we need to, on the one hand, frame the “war on terror” as a fight against an organized Islamist-fascist enemy abroad, which has so far been avoided, in deference to political correctness and misguided internationalism, and, on the other, define individual acts of anarchy on American soil as such in traditional terms and not in warlike terms that encompass unwise references to acts of war and treason.


Unlike the attack on the World Trade Center in 2001, the recent Boston bombings are just the latest of criminal bombings, or, in today’s lingo, “acts of mass destruction,” that Americans have dealt with since the inception of the nation. And our lack of knowledge and reference to these historical precedents continues to wrongfully guide both our government’s lack of will to differentiate between war and domestic anarchy and our citizens’ acquiescence to a reduction of our constitutional rights.


Back in the early 20th century, “terrorists” were referred to as “anarchists” (basically the same thing) and carried out what would be termed these days as “acts of war.”


President McKinley was assassinated by one such anarchist, Leon Czolgosz, in 1901 in Buffalo, N.Y. Between the years 1919 and 1920, anarchists led by Luigi Galleani, an immigrant from Italy, mailed bombs to banks, government offices and other institutions and carried out assassination attempts on prominent American businessmen and politicians. That led to the Red Scare that resulted in substantial illegal searches and seizures, unwarranted arrests and detentions and the deportation of several hundred suspected radicals and anarchists.


Much like the government actions in the Red Scare, the tragic events in Boston, framed as an act of war, could continue to allow the federal government to violate and decrease our constitutional rights and individual liberties in the name of fighting terrorism.


Sure, there’s been some debate and significant questions raised by the Obama administration’s decision to administer the reading of Miranda rights to the younger, surviving Tsarnaev brother; some are calling for him to be declared an “enemy combatant,” which would suspend his constitutional rights and due process. But framing such debate in any other context, like characterizing the bombings as an act of political or religious violence or purely in criminal terms, not only would decrease the Boston bombings’ newsworthy significance but would diminish the symbolic magnitude of its destruction as an act of war and international terrorism.


In fact, the issue surrounding trying Tsarnaev as a criminal or as a treasonous terrorist soldier was strictly framed in the perspective of how to punish, and hang, average Americans citizens acting as terrorists in alleged wartime conditions.


And it was silly, because any confession garnered from Tsarnaev would probably have been superfluous given the massive amount of evidence already amassed by the FBI against him, much of it from witnesses using social media and camera surveillance of public places in Boston.


Referring to the question of whether the Tsarnaev brothers were “homegrown” or “international” terrorists, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) stated, “This is Exhibit A of why the homeland is the battlefield.”


The conduct of all war, whether propagated by individuals, rogue groups or nations, is pure and simple acts of terror, organized or not.


The Boston bombing as a terrorist act without viewing it in a historical context will, in the end, lead to justification of the depreciation of individual liberties, all in the misguided name of national security.


The Tsarnaev brothers were nothing more than immigrant anarchists carrying on a tradition of political violence, this time framed in religious fervor.


And we should not get carried away in exaggerating the significance of their attack, in light of our historical past. On April 15, Boston and America were truly not another battlefield in the “war on terror.”




Steven Kurlander, Esq. is an attorney and communications strategist from Monticello, N.Y. He blogs at Kurly’s Kommentary and for the The Florida Squeeze. He can be emailed at


Click & Buy Today
Read Kurly’s First Novel! Buy the Google eBook Version of The Dog Days of September by Steven Kurlander for only $3.03. It’s a novel about a

father who dies in the 9/11 World Trade Center attack, a son who goes to fight to avenge his death and how this Iraq War Veteran who comes home after two tours of duty, but never leaves the battle behind him. 
Like The Dog Days of September Facebook Page Too! Like us on Facebook

Kurly’s Latest Quora Question: In context of American History, was Boston Marathon Bombing truly a criminal act and not a terrorist act of war?

Click & Answer


Tweet of the Week

Is #syriancivilwar going to go down in history for @BarackObama  as lack of US action did in  #Rwanda did for @billclinton?  #genocide


 Sign up to receive updates from The Florida Squeeze by email.




Latest Writer’s Workshop of Sullivan County:



Chan Lowe’s Latest Cartoon and Blog: Barbara Bush says we’ve had enough Bushes


If You Want To Be Removed From Kurly Kommentary Subscriber List, email me

Like me on Facebook Follow me on Twitter Find me on Google+

Steven Kurlander, Communications Strategist, 390 Broadway, Monticello, NY 12701
(845) 796-8948 –
Copyright © 2013, Steven Kurlander

Like us on Facebook Follow us on TwitterView our profile on LinkedInFind us on Google+Visit our blog



Bazzo 04/29/13

This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s