BOSTONSTRONG

First off, Rolling Stone magazine is disgusting.  If you're one of those people who are defending it by saying freedom of speech and thats what journalism is- stop reading because you won't like what I say and I couldn't care less what you have to say either. 

Who picked that picture? Give me a break.  I get the whole trying to show terrorists don't have a specific look but just say that.  Don't throw that asshole up on a cover looking all chill.  Why not use the picture of him carrying his backpack with a bomb??  He looked like a regular kid in those pictures.  

Under his picture is the caption: "How a popular, promising student was failed by his family..." Failed by his family? First let me state the obvious.  This asshole is the one who rode over his own goddamn brother fueling terrorist 1 to be nicknamed "speed bump."  HE was walking behind his brother on their way to drop the bombs. His family didn't fail him.  He didn't have to follow.  Not for nothing but  no ones family is perfect.  Everyones family drives them crazy in some sense, but not everyone runs out and uses that to be a psychotic terrorist.  No one can be blamed for someone else's actions.  No one.

In a statement the writer of the article said they wanted to explore and find out what made him do what he did.  That's a job for a psychologist, not a writer of a magazine.  Don't analyze anything.  Just state the facts: he killed and hurt innocent people.  Then ran.  Then ran over his brother  Then ran again.  Then hid.  He had an entire city on lockdown, putting BFD, BPD and countless armed forces in danger.  Let a licensed mental health professional analyze what made this kid a terrorist.  I find it also disgusting that after so many people, especially the victims families expressed their dislike of the cover, Rolling Stone changed their cover photo on facebook to that picture.  Gross.  I don't care if the best, most informative article ever to be published, the way it was put out disgusts me so much I will never ever read it.

For those people posting on Facebook and elsewhere saying that people cannot boycott a magazine, especially if they don't have a subscription, let me teach you something dumbass.

A boycott is an act of voluntarily abstaining from using, buying or dealing with a person, organization, or country as an expression of protest, usually for social or political reasons.  Sometimes, it can be a form of consumer activism.

So yes, the people of Boston and anywhere else who find the cover disrespectful can boycott.  By not buying the magazine, not reading it online, and no longer going onto their website.  Furthermore, US weekly has the same ownership as Rolling Stone, so one can cancel their subscription to that. [ I love my US weekly just as much as the next girl, but I cancelled.  I'd rather support any other magazine.]

So, for those people complaining that people shouldn't be upset because it's freedom of speech, and it's a good article- shut up. Grow a set and show some loyalty.  If you can't do that, just shut up and go lay down.  Fore everyone else just as outraged, keep showing your support of our amazing city, the people and those affected by this disgusting terrorist dbag: BOSTONSTONG.  

Oh, and Rolling Stone, Jay Z doesn't use a hyphen in his name anymore.  You're welcome.