Thanks for pointing that out. I've updated my description of the bombs.
> ... omitting the rather significant context ...
That's kind of my point. The terrorists chose to plant the bomb at a marathon rather than, say, a deserted wilderness, to maximise the reaction.
Do you think the presence of dozens of video cameras was a factor in the bombers' calculations?
> As for a city shutdown, that could just as easily be interpreted as 'whole city cooperates to catch bombing suspect.'
And this is where I disagree. Much of the shutdown was, in one way or another, directed from the top.
Do you think the presence of dozens of video cameras was a factor in the bombers' calculations?
Of course, but what are we supposed to do - impose a news blackout as China does in Tibet?
directed from the top
I feel fine about that. Coordination isn't the same as coercion, and there was no curfew or mandatory aspect to this.
Actually, I don't keep any gunpowder under my sink. Why are you deliberately mischaracterizing the inciting incident, and omitting the rather significant context that it involved multiple detonations at a public event?
OUTPUT: front page headlines around the world; whole city gets shut down
Front page headlines - so what, we should censor the news now? As for a city shutdown, that could just as easily be interpreted as 'whole city cooperates to catch bombing suspect.'