Rolling Stones

  

Despite the inappropriate photo placed as the cover on the Rolling Stones magazine, the article was rich in detail and said a lot about Jahars background information and told a lot about his life.  On April 15, 2013 at 2:49 pm, Boylston Street in Boston Massachusetts had an unforgettable tragedy. The annual Boston Marathon was bombed by a young foreign boy named Jahar Tsamaev and his older brother, Tamerlan. America’s heart had been wounded in this sudden attack. However, shortly after this attack Boston had become “Boston Strong.” People were becoming heroic for chasing the wounded down instead of running for their own lives. It seemed as if this tragedy had brought the city of Boston together. However, the minds of these lowlanders suddenly turned when the famous “Rolling Stone” magazine put out a bizarre article and cover of “The Bomber” himself, Jahar Tsamaev.               

“The Bomber” edition went viral when it was released on July 17. The caption read “How A Popular, Promising Student Was Failed By His Family, Fell Into A Radical Islam And Became A Monster”. This article turned the heads of thousands, including myself. The expression “don’t judge a book by its cover” was the first thing that popped into my head when I heard about this article. The position this article takes follows this saying. People agree stereotypically thinking that because Tsamaev’s ethnicity is Islam that bombing America was in his blood. The Rolling Stones are arguing the opposite stating only what is truth. Tsamaev was “so sweet” and “never picked on anybody” exclaimed friends of the suspect. Rolling Stone stated that “during their first month in America, Jahar and his parents lived in Boston” where Jahar’s friends were a “diverse group of kids from both the wealthier and poorer sections of Cambridge…” Parents called his group of friends “the good kids”, so how can one judge a normal teen?

               My older sister has many friends that attend Umass Dartmouth who were friendly with Jahar. One played soccer, and another had dinner with him the week before it happened. In my mind, he was a normal teen. He was a genuine friend and person from what witnesses have said. Jahar bombed America’s most beloved city so either way he was never getting out easy. He bled on the floor of a twenty-two foot motorboat, dry locked behind a white clapboard house locally in Watertown. Jahar attempted suicide but failed. As he bled on the floor, police took him into custody where justice would then be served.            

    The sources that stated these facts about Jahar were either friends or family. My own sister has friends who were agreeing that he was a genuinely nice teen. These sources are more than reliable. “Don’t judge a book by its cover” was something every person learned by the age they could speak. "There are kids we don’t catch" says Peter Payak, "but this guy was seamless, like a billiards ball." He says that Jahar was not like those kids who fall through, "No cracks at all." Doesn’t it seem so hypocritical of America to be so cruel just because of his ethnicity? But, isn’t it just as hypocritical of “The Rolling Stone” magazine to put out such an article when they should be jumping on the “Boston Strong” bandwagon? These are the questions that we need to ask ourselves. Whose responsibility is it to go against stereotyping and defend a well raised teen that made the biggest mistake of his life? Was this bias of America’s most famous magazine? Or was it “The Rolling Stone” who tried to make the valid point subliminally?            

    Obviously justice will be served and Jahar will suffer for his gruesome, disturbing actions. Personally, I believe that “The Rolling Stone”  magazine was outputting a valid conception that could be strongly argued. This edition was clearly made to turn heads and that is exactly what it did. Jahar himself has become such a controversy around the world. But, didn’t you ever learn to not judge a book by its cover?