Are the Tsarnaev brothers white?
Whatever their racial status, they seem to resemble young American mass murderers more than al-Qaida members
BY JOAN WALSH
In the wake of David Sirota’s hot-button essay last week, “Let’s Hope the Boston Marathon Bomber Is a White American,” conservatives swarmed to trash Sirota and Salon. I’m not here to defend or criticize Sirota’s piece – I get in enough trouble on these issues myself — but the storm it provoked was revealing, especially once we learned the identity of the two suspects: Tamarlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, ethnic Chechens who grew up in Russia and came legally to the U.S., who were also Muslim.
Hate mail and punditry targeting Salon and Sirota declared that Sirota was not only morally wrong in hoping the terrorists would turn out to be white — but that he was proven spectacularly incorrect, because the Tsarnaev brothers are not white. “Sorry David Sirota, looks like Boston Bombing suspects are not ‘white Americans,’” wrote the folks at Newsbusters. “Is David Sirota crying uncontrollably because the Boston bombers weren’t whites??” one conservative emailed Salon. There was a lot of other email in the same tedious vein.
But are we sure the Tsarnaevs aren’t white? They are quite literally Caucasian, as in from the Caucuses: Rebecca Eisenberg helps with this handy map. And ethnically in this country, we count Americans of Russian descent, as well as Chechens, as white. Dzhokhar was a naturalized American citizen; Tamarlan had applied for citizenship but reportedly didn’t get it because of FBI concerns about his possible ties to Islamic radicals.
So why are the Tsarnaev brothers not white, at least to right-wingers? Is it only because they’re Muslim? Muslim immigrants? Or is it because they’re “bad,” and whiteness must be surrendered when white people are bad?
full column
http://www.salon.com/2013/04/22/are_the_tsarnaev_brothers_white/
= new reply since forum marked as read
He probably looked more like Yassar Arafat than someone from the Caucasus region.
McVeigh and other disaffected crazy, often middle class, white youth, versus al Qaeda terrorists. I suspect a large number of people were thinking along those lines as well.
So that they turned out to be white and disaffected youth was true, but so apparently is the extremist Muslim jihadist true.
Imo, we were all half-right and on the right track with our speculation 
The Right wingers because the perps are Muslim and Sirota because they are indeed white. Those on the right who do not consider Russians white are plain ignorant.
Um, first they said that Black Hat had not become a person of interest until after his death. That's when we learned he'd been in Russia for six months.
Now this. Which is it? If his ties were known beforehand, why wasn't he stopped?
edit: As to the question of color, I would sublmit that, at this point, Black Hat is blue. 
No correlation to these three in general, or to events in Boston, but to the general question of race. The last one is Reeva Steenkamp, if she lived here in America, would she be an African American?
President Obama's mother was white, born and raised in Kansas. His father was black, born and raised in Kenya. So is he white, black, bi-racial?
Scumbag Zimmerman, has a Peruvian mother and a white father, does that make him Hispanic, white? The news reported him as a white.
When this first happened, I shook my head as people were saying its gotta be a brown Muslim, or, its a white militia tea party guy. The biggest question is, does it really matter? To some, who would want to divide and cause trouble, yes (media, racists, etc). I think, and this may be my naivete (sp?) is that it doesn't really matter to the majority of us.
