« 16 »
  • Reply
Chamale
Jul 10, 2010


JT Jag posted:

Ok, I've given it some thought, and the point I think dusty is trying to get across here is that the best way defeat terrorism is to grit your teeth and move on, with life being changed as little as possible as from before. After all, the point of terrorism is to terrorize you and make you change your everyday routine out of fear. And I understand the concept. I have, for one, always been of the opinion that the United States should have just rebuilt the Twin Towers exactly as they were as a big fuck you to Al Queda, but instead they got bogged down in this mess that is the Freedom Tower, which took fucking forever to begin to work out.

This is true, but it's not appropriate to tell grieving and shocked people 6 hours after the attack to get over it.

Got it, Dusty?

menino
Jul 26, 2006


It's not a bad idea to advise caution. What is a bad idea is to display the knee-jerk inferiority-complex-borne "Americans are like X, but we're like Y" bullshit you get from some corners of the non-US Anglophone world.

Tatum Girlparts
Sep 8, 2011


Also legitimately no one gives a shit what you think about the hypothetical reaction to come down the line based on nothing at all.

I see that there.
Aug 5, 2011


He's obviously trolling. Drop it.

KOTEX GOD OF BLOOD
Jul 6, 2012


Vladimir Putin posted:

But, remember that it took almost a month or more for Al Queda to formally take responsibility for 9/11. I agree with you that I don't think it's Al Queda, but for different reasons.
Al Qaeda and their associates are far, far different today than they were around 9/11, and 9/11 was an outlier in terms of terrorist attacks. They waited to take responsibility in part to manage the consequences of the situation. No one will be invading countries over this attack (if it is a foreign attack after all.)

Today's Islamist terrorists / militants / jihadis / fucking whatever etc are far more concerned with propaganda, something that developed post-9/11.

KOTEX GOD OF BLOOD fucked around with this message at Apr 15, 2013 around 19:12

JollyGreen
Aug 23, 2010


I can see where Dusty is coming from. This was a terrorist act, meant not to kill two people, but two strike fear and damage the morale of a country. This isn't a war, where the bomber is trying to defeat an enemy. The bomber could care less if he killed two or two hundred.

Dusty is saying shut the hell up about it and move on, because making the front page and gaining notoriety is all the bomber ever wanted.

Also yes, this is a tragedy. It's not unique, but the attention this will gather certainly will be.

VideoTapir
Oct 18, 2005


Found a picture of one of the duds.

Ardennes
May 12, 2002


quote:

Their actions might seem "nuts" but this terrorist - whoever he is - is operating with a coherent (although sick and twisted) inner logic that has split the world into good and evil. The terrorist believes himself to be a freedom fighter who is fighting evil. He's an avenging angel out to purify the world of corruption and filthiness. That's the basic profile.

Granted, plenty of non-terrorists think this way as well, maybe more as time goes on. The lines become blurred quite easily at times, especially when the rest of the world is painted in black and white.

I don't think the motive for the bomber either way will be understandable, but it doesn't mean he is crazy necessarily but that his world became so closed that it seemed like the best idea.

Granted, if the guy does have severe mental health issues, it isn't likely going to matter as far as the response.

Cabbit
Jul 18, 2001


JollyGreen posted:

I can see where Dusty is coming from. This was a terrorist act, meant not to kill two people, but two strike fear and damage the morale of a country. This isn't a war, where the bomber is trying to defeat an enemy. The bomber could care less if he killed two or two hundred.

Dusty is saying shut the hell up about it and move on, because making the front page and gaining notoriety is all the bomber ever wanted.

Also yes, this is a tragedy. It's not unique, but the attention this will gather certainly will be.

There are far less adversarial, smugly superior, and ultimately constructive ways to phrase that sentiment. It's advice that deserves to be given in a manner that doesn't suggest you have borderline disdain for people for having the unmitigated gall to react to a bomb going off, because it's not bad advice-- just advice poorly given.

I worry this is inching dangerously close to arguing tone, though, so I'm checking out.

JollyGreen
Aug 23, 2010


Chamale posted:

This is true, but it's not appropriate to tell grieving and shocked people 6 hours after the attack to get over it.

Got it, Dusty?

He's pointed out the absurdity of this thread** - no one here is remotely connected to anyone hurt in this terrorist attack*. I can understand emotion and remorse in the homes of those that were actually injured. Demanding remorse from people on a forum in the internet though?

He started out simple and there was a spirial downwards when he went to defend himself. I need to step out before I fall into the same trap.

*Probably. If you are connected to anyone that was killed, what the hell are you doing here?

**By 'this thread' I mean the current conversation between Dusty and the rest of SA - the topic about terror in the US, whodunit, and the ramifications are much more important.

JollyGreen fucked around with this message at Apr 15, 2013 around 19:31

Tatum Girlparts
Sep 8, 2011


Also 'why is the media reporting it, THAT'S WHAT THEY WANT' is the dumbest reaction to this stuff. Yea, the media reports on when a bunch of bombs go off or small children get slaughtered, that's news, people want to know what's going on, it's a pretty big deal.

oldswitcheroo
Apr 26, 2008


Tatum Girlparts posted:

Also 'why is the media reporting it, THAT'S WHAT THEY WANT' is the dumbest reaction to this stuff. Yea, the media reports on when a bunch of bombs go off or small children get slaughtered, that's news, people want to know what's going on, it's a pretty big deal.

Exactly. Just ignoring terrorism isn't the best response. Just like we can't ignore Newtown, Columbine, and Virginia Tech; we can't just ignore this.

asdf32
May 14, 2010


oldswitcheroo posted:

Exactly. Just ignoring terrorism isn't the best response. Just like we can't ignore Newtown, Columbine, and Virginia Tech; we can't just ignore this.

What is? I think ignoring it is actually one of the best options. Unfortunately we're incapable of doing that. Which is a major reason it keeps happening - it works.

mintskoal
Oct 24, 2006


asdf32 posted:

What is? I think ignoring it is actually one of the best options. Unfortunately we're incapable of doing that. Which is a major reason it keeps happening - it works.

A couple bombs went off at a major sporting event, killing 3 and wounding over 100. I'd say that qualifies it for news coverage.

e: If by ignoring it you mean not going crazy and implementing a whole bunch of knee jerk regulations like removing shoes, then I agree.

dusty
Nov 30, 2004


Not trolling - just debating with people like EW who announced that there's nothing unique about US culture and US terror-response - as though the post-911 mentality and associated clusterfuck were all a fever dream. EW seemed to be making the preposterous claim that culturally all countries are identical as all humans ascertain risk the same way.

Now we've worked out what he meant by the word "culture" things are clearer. I'm not sure on the legitimacy of limiting his use of the word so to divorce it from a society's ethnic, religious, political and institutional constructs - but whatever, I'm no sociologist or forum mod. It certainly made for some bad posting and was a dickheaded move to respond to an informal post like he did.


And the war on terror effects us all: yesterday the Prime Minister of NZ announced sweeping new changes to our spy legislation to more easily spy on citizens and residents. Because New Zealand is a terrorist source for weapons of mass destruction and cyber-terror - it's not and he's lying and seeking to expand spy agency powers in order to surveil the usual ragtag bunch of environmentalists, leftists and indigenous peoples under the guise of war on terror. Sadly, this attack the day after his ridiculous press conference comes politically at the worst possible time for freedom and liberty in my country.



For those criticizing me - go fuck yourselves. I assumed that the GBS thread and the D&D thread would be different - perhaps if you are grieving and shocked then maybe you shouldn't be in this thread. Go take a walk.

dusty fucked around with this message at Apr 15, 2013 around 19:50

Tatum Girlparts
Sep 8, 2011


asdf32 posted:

What is? I think ignoring it is actually one of the best options. Unfortunately we're incapable of doing that. Which is a major reason it keeps happening - it works.

So what's the way to ignore this right?

I mean, 100 people or so are wounded and 2 are dead, so people are going to talk about it, and post on facebook and twitter and shit about it, do we do full media blackout on it and leave it to them to spread information? Do we go 'hey bombs went off, that's it'?

Red_Mage
Jul 23, 2007


asdf32 posted:

What is? I think ignoring it is actually one of the best options. Unfortunately we're incapable of doing that. Which is a major reason it keeps happening - it works.

I don't know, ignoring people planting bombs in a major urban center seems like it might lead to more people getting hurt. I think there is a reasonable answer somewhere between "keep calm, think of the death toll from cars, carry on" robotic apathy and cartoon "please take my freedoms and don't let the terrorists hurt me" hysteria. It doesn't really matter how people respond, history has shown that acts of terrorism, even when they don't produce the desired result, will continue to be a favored weapon of the insane, the desperate, and the fanatical.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009


mintskoal posted:

A couple bombs went off at a major sporting event, killing 3 and wounding over 100. I'd say that qualifies it for news coverage.
Ok, so that's what will happen. Obviously, tragedies are worth news coverage. Of course, news stations are starved for content, they would never turn down the opportunity to talk about a bomb or a mass shooting.

But what would the be best thing? Is it good for society that we spend so much time moping about introspectively every single time an atrocity happens, and then promptly turn those intense emotions outwards into anger towards the perpetrators? Does acting in this fashion just play in the hands of terrorists? Can something be done? Or is it human nature and are terrorists destined to always win, for each time something bad happens, we end up giving up a little bit of what we once were?

Chamale
Jul 10, 2010


Tatum Girlparts posted:

So what's the way to ignore this right?

I mean, 100 people or so are wounded and 2 are dead, so people are going to talk about it, and post on facebook and twitter and shit about it, do we do full media blackout on it and leave it to them to spread information? Do we go 'hey bombs went off, that's it'?

I think there is too much media coverage of terrorism because it gives notoriety to people who commit terrorist attacks. I'm not saying there should be a media blackout, but it shouldn't be the only story on CNN for several hours. Studies show that media reports of suicide encourage more suicide, perhaps similar studies could be conducted on coverage of terrorist attacks.

JollyGreen
Aug 23, 2010


Tatum Girlparts posted:

So what's the way to ignore this right?

I mean, 100 people or so are wounded and 2 are dead, so people are going to talk about it, and post on facebook and twitter and shit about it, do we do full media blackout on it and leave it to them to spread information? Do we go 'hey bombs went off, that's it'?

Which do you think will cause more terror: The initial attack, or the 24/7 media coverage this will get for the next week?

That's not a judgement hidden in a question, but something I honestly struggle to figure out myself.

(Fun sidebar: Who will profit more - the terrorist, or the MSM who gets to sell adversiting wrapped around the message in the time-span the public still cares.)

KOTEX GOD OF BLOOD
Jul 6, 2012


Politico is reporting that a person of interest, possibly a Saudi Arabian national, is being held in the hospital.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/...0085.html?hp=t1

Pope Guilty
Nov 6, 2006


KOTEX GOD OF BLOOD posted:

Politico is reporting that a person of interest, possibly a Saudi Arabian national, is being held in the hospital.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/...0085.html?hp=t1

Isn't that old and already debunked news?

Geoff Peterson
Jan 1, 2012


Pope Guilty posted:

Isn't that old and already debunked news?

It appears* he's in the hospital because of injuries, but was identified as acting suspiciously at the scene (it's unclear if there was anything more than "looks middle eastern near where a bomb went off" that the civilian who detained him for police saw). He's cooperating with the police and denying involvement-the police have been explicit that they've had conversations with him but he is not at this time considered a suspect, nor is he in custody.

e:*appears from news sources other than TigerBeat on the Potomac

KOTEX GOD OF BLOOD
Jul 6, 2012


They updated it 2 minutes ago, but since it's Politico, I guess I wouldn't put it past them to repost it even if it's been debunked.

Homeless Friend
Jul 16, 2007


Tatum Girlparts posted:

Also 'why is the media reporting it, THAT'S WHAT THEY WANT' is the dumbest reaction to this stuff. Yea, the media reports on when a bunch of bombs go off or small children get slaughtered, that's news, people want to know what's going on, it's a pretty big deal.

While there is no problem with news organizations reporting on news, I don't think its too controversial to be opposed or at least disgruntled with the manner in which they cover events to garner to most attention possible. They don't do it so that people can be informed a but to make it into a circus and profit from it. I live in San Diego, do I really need to have this event recounted repeatedly if I decide to watch certain channels in which they've bought out all the airtime?

Homeless Friend fucked around with this message at Apr 15, 2013 around 19:47

Tatum Girlparts
Sep 8, 2011


JollyGreen posted:

Which do you think will cause more terror: The initial attack, or the 24/7 media coverage this will get for the next week?

That's not a judgement hidden in a question, but something I honestly struggle to figure out myself.

(Fun sidebar: Who will profit more - the terrorist, or the MSM who gets to sell adversiting wrapped around the message in the time-span the public still cares.)

In the connected world as it is, I feel very secure in saying if it was just 'bombs went off, some are dead, more are injured' and we had only Twitter and forums and shit to go on for the majority of the time we'd have a lot more fear being spread.

mintskoal
Oct 24, 2006


They're actually checking something out in Revere. Suspicious guy driving past the barricade they have set up.

link

JollyGreen posted:

Which do you think will cause more terror: The initial attack, or the 24/7 media coverage this will get for the next week?

That's not a judgement hidden in a question, but something I honestly struggle to figure out myself.

I have a hard time figuring out the right course of action too. I think it will end up taking a while (if ever) to break the 24/7 BREAKING NEWS NOW mentality where every waking moment after a tragedy like this one ends up being filled with talking heads speculating about 100% invented bullshit while they wait for more information to come out.

I mean it's an absolute circus right now. I'd say the media is doing more harm than good by breathlessly reporting on how Tom from down the street came out and saw a dark man running away or Kevin has a suspicious neighbor. It gets people fired up and fills the mediums delivering good information with baseless speculation and hearsay. They want a new narrative to pick up on so badly and really want to be the first ones to report it. That's the harmful part.

Grundulum
Feb 28, 2006


Several people posted:

Good responses to me

Thanks for all the food for thought, people. The last time I read a real current-events thread in D&D was for the Newtown shooting, and obviously counterarguments to the "maybe he was just crazy?" thing didn't come up.

dusty
Nov 30, 2004


Tatum Girlparts posted:

So what's the way to ignore this right?

I mean, 100 people or so are wounded and 2 are dead, so people are going to talk about it, and post on facebook and twitter and shit about it, do we do full media blackout on it and leave it to them to spread information? Do we go 'hey bombs went off, that's it'?

Charlie Brooker's newswipe gets a lot of coverage in terror school shooting threads like this one:

http://youtu.be/PezlFNTGWv4



I shudder to think of how many times CNN has played footage of the explosion and aftermath - blood bodies and terror. It was on every time I turned it on. They'd window the talking head and just leave this massive terror montage playing full screen hour after hour. I suspect that this might not be helpful.

dusty fucked around with this message at Apr 15, 2013 around 19:59

duck monster
Dec 14, 2004


Pro-tip: Posting "ignition" from Bostons third album on your facebook 2 hours after the explosion is not a good way to win friends and influence people.

I'll have to remember that next time vv

Also, I note the conspiracy theory loons are already out in full force.



SedanChair
May 31, 2003


KOTEX GOD OF BLOOD posted:

They updated it 2 minutes ago, but since it's Politico, I guess I wouldn't put it past them to repost it even if it's been debunked.

You just repeated misinformation from the mainstream media that furthers a racist and xenophobic agenda. The "scoop" prevails over truth or accuracy. Yet another example of causing more harm than crank media.

Umph
Apr 25, 2008


dusty posted:

For those criticizing me - go fuck yourselves. I assumed that the GBS thread and the D&D thread would be different - perhaps if you are grieving and shocked then maybe you shouldn't be in this thread. Go take a walk.

dusty posted:

You cunt.

Yes typically in D&D you don't call people who disagree with your terrible opinions cunts or tell them to go fuck themselves.

Umph fucked around with this message at Apr 15, 2013 around 20:04

Red_Mage
Jul 23, 2007


JollyGreen posted:

Which do you think will cause more terror: The initial attack, or the 24/7 media coverage this will get for the next week?

That's not a judgement hidden in a question, but something I honestly struggle to figure out myself.

This came up during Newton, and apparently China is attempting to find out. They have been basically reporting as little as possible and actively censoring forum discussions during certain types of spree killings there. So far its hard to say if it has any effect, as school slashings in the style of the first heavily reported one have continued, but its unlikely anyone could say for certain this early (this has only been going on for 2 or so years).

Personally I think it is mostly (though not entirely) a bugbear so people don't have to worry about the underlying issues, since the underlying issues cannot be easily discerned right away, and often after they are discerned, they cannot be addressed or agreed upon. Being told "there's not a solution right now" when people are desperately asking "how can we prevent this in the future" is tough. Looking toward the people who directly benefit from human tragedy mere minutes after it happens is only natural.

H
Jul 15, 2005


Number 1: That's terror
Number 2: That's terror...

KOTEX GOD OF BLOOD
Jul 6, 2012


SedanChair posted:

You just repeated misinformation from the mainstream media that furthers a racist and xenophobic agenda. The "scoop" prevails over truth or accuracy. Yet another example of causing more harm than crank media.
Okay? Can you point out where I say that crank media causes more harm than mainstream media, or have you been too busy spouting shrill hyperbole to read the posts you're ostensibly responding to?

Boogaleeboo
Sep 12, 2011


JT Jag posted:

But what would the be best thing?

Matter of factly report what happened, tell people what they can do to help, move on. As far as the news goes anyway, people can deal with the personal ramifications in their own good time. Talking heads crawling up their ass to debate the meaning of it all 24/7 for a week or three is, yeah, probably not helpful.

cafel
Mar 29, 2010


Just gonna to post this here because I know some people expressed concern about the older runner who collapsed when the first bomb went off.

http://blogs.seattletimes.com/today...-theyre-saying/

He's fine, seems to have the level of endurance and stubbornness you'd expect from a 78 year old marathon runner.

VideoTapir
Oct 18, 2005


http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...rathon/2085539/

quote:

Boehner ordered American flags to be lowered outside the U.S. Capitol to half-staff Monday evening.

I see this and I just wonder how long until Freep et al start asking why Obama didn't order it.

EvilElmo
May 10, 2009


This story seems bigger than 20 kids getting shot.

Probably be front page longer as well.

ReindeerF
Apr 20, 2002


Shooting up schools is shocking because KIDS, but getting to be old hat. Look how fast everyone stopped being outraged about Newtown, for example. I mean they're unhappy about it, but it's off the fridge whiteboard to-do list. Blowing up marathons, though, that's new and exciting. Definitely going to stay in the press if only because it's a whole new thing for all the opiners to opine endlessly about.

I'm sure the "What's Next? Spartan Races? 10Ks? How To Protect Your Next Athletic Event." segments are already being slotted. We go live to Peter Bergen, terrorism expert. Peter, how can Americans protect themselves from threats like these? Is it time to quit running marathons altogether or should they occur indoors where we can monitor them more closely? Should people lock themselves and their children in their homes for eternity?

ReindeerF fucked around with this message at Apr 15, 2013 around 22:32

  • Reply
« 16 »