Question Everything You Hear About the Boston Marathon Bombing

From Oklahoma City to 9/11 to Newtown, the aftermath of major tragedies is rife with misinformation.


Shortly after Monday’s bombing near the finish line of the Boston Marathon, rumors began to fly about what exactly happened and who was behind it. The New York Post, citing an unnamed federal official, claimed 12 people were dead and that a “Saudi Arabian national” was a suspect.But it soon became clear that the initial death toll was two people (later updated to three), and by the following morning law enforcement officials said that they had identified no suspects yet. As for the Saudi national in question, federal law enforcement officials said on Tuesday that he was a witness to the bombing, not a suspect.

Indeed, it’s a perpetual lesson of past tragedies: Don’t trust what you hear or read early on. Here are eight instances of early information from past attacks that turned out to be wrong:

Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building bombing, Oklahoma City, April 19, 1995:

Claim: Jordanian American Ibrahim Ahmad and three other Arab Americans were responsible for the truck bombing that killed 167 people and injured 759 more.

The truth: American Timothy McVeigh carried out the attack on the Alfred P. Murrah Building as a response to the federal government’s raids at Waco and Ruby Ridge. McVeigh was aided by two other men, Terry Nichols and Michael Fortier.

 

Centennial Olympic Park bombing, Atlanta, July 27, 1996:

Claim: Security guard Richard Jewell was suspected of bombing the main square at the Atlanta Olympics that killed one person and injured 111.

The truth: Eric Robert Rudolph, captured nearly seven years later in North Carolina, masterminded the Atlanta bombing. Jewell, in fact, had saved lives by trying to move people away from the suspicious green bag that contained the bomb before it detonated.

 

9/11 terrorist attacks, Washington, DC, September 11, 2001 (Part I):

Claim: CNN reported on the morning of the attacks that there was a fire on the National Mall, stoking further fears in the nation’s capital.

The truth: There was no fire on the Mall; the only site of an attack in the Washington area that day was the Pentagon, where 125 employees were killed and 64 more people died on the airliner.

 

9/11 terrorist attacks, Washington, DC, September 11, 2001 (Part II):

Claim: News outlets reported that a car bomb exploded outside the US State Department on the morning of September 11.

The truth: There was no car bombing.

 

9/11 terrorist attacks, New York, September 11, 2001 (Part III):

Claim: News outlets reported that the FBI had arrested two people near the George Washington Bridge driving a truck with “enough explosives…to do great damage to the George Washington Bridge.”

The truth: There was no explosive-filled truck headed for the GW Bridge.

 

Norway bombing and massacre, Utoya Island and Oslo, July 23, 2011:

Claim: Reporters and bloggers suggested the killer (or killers) was Muslim. The Weekly Standard‘s Thomas Jocelyn wrote that “in all likelihood the attack was launched by part of the jihadist hydra.” The British Sun tabloid used the headline “Al Qaeda Massacre: Norway’s 9/11.” A Wall Street Journal editorial on the massacre mentioned jihadists in the first paragraph.

The truth: The killer was Anders Behring Breivik, a white Norwegian man and right-wing extremist who loathed Muslims. He acted alone.

 

Movie theater massacre, Aurora, Colorado, July 20, 2012:

Claim: ABC’s Brian Ross suggested on national TV that a man named Jim Holmes, a member of the tea party in Colorado, might have been the Aurora shooter. “There is a Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colorado, page on the Colorado Tea Party site as well,” Ross said. “Talking about him joining the Tea Party last year. Now, we don’t know if this the same Jim Holmes. But this is Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colorado.”

The truth: The actual Aurora shooter, named James Holmes, was another person. Ross later apologized for the mistake.

 

Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre, Newtown, Connecticut, December 14, 2012:

Claim: News outlets reported that a young man named Ryan Lanza, who lived in New Jersey, carried out the killing. In the immediate aftermath, his Facebook page was inundated with hateful messages.  

The truth: Adam Lanza, the younger brother of Ryan Lanza, committed the horrible acts at Sandy Hook.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate