« 16 »
  • Reply
Joementum
May 23, 2004


evilweasel posted:

Boston has the type of trash cans specifically designed to minimize the damage by a bomb placed inside them for the subways: I wonder if they just hadn't gotten them for public trashcans because of the cost.

Also likely that there were a bunch of temporary portable trash cans along the race route.

JoelJoel
Nov 4, 2011


Chronojam posted:

What's funny is that you can easily pick out which are the tabloids without even seeing the titles.

You spelled "titties" wrong.

dusty
Nov 30, 2004


Ambrose Burnside posted:

The noted British calm and reserve over terrorism, applied.




("british antiterrorism as a model" hahaha look at Northern Ireland you goddamn idiot)

Yet, the trains were running the next day. - and the IRA bombing campaign in London led to comparitively minimal disruption for the locals.









edit/ Speaking of The Blitz - CNN has definitely calmed down now that Wolf's off air.

dusty fucked around with this message at Apr 15, 2013 around 15:51

Gen. Ripper
Jan 11, 2013


People on other sites already blaming North Korea for this. Their decisive evidence is NK's silence and it being Kim I's birthday.

I'd love a casus belli to get rid of that vile regime, but come on, people. They aren't this mind-numbingly stupid.

Necroneocon
May 11, 2009


Amazing how the shit rag NY Post still says their "source" told them they have a Saudi suspect. It's spreading to blogs and idiots and it's the dumbest thing ever. No other news agency has said this besides NY Post and Fox News because surprised owned by the same person.

ThirdPartyView
Mar 7, 2005


Thought one of my friends may have been one of the injured (or worse) during this tragedy, but he luckily cancelled participating/attending the event today as his wife got sick. He was going to help guide a blind friend in the race, who was missing for a few hours but turned up OK a little while ago.

Paul MaudDib
May 2, 2006


evilweasel posted:

Now, this post actually tries to make a point (unfortunately Americans do not scare any more or less easier than anyone else, bad comprehension of risk is a universal human trait, and the US does not go bonkers after every terrorist event: it "went bonkers" exactly once).

So just to clarify, I don't have to walk through a backscatter Xray machine to get to an airplane because Americans didn't go bonkers because some dude put explosives down his shorts? And I don't have to get my shit metal-detected every time I want to watch a hockey game? And my internet connections aren't being routinely scanned in an intercept room, to say nothing of warrantless wiretapping of phone calls?

Americans very clearly have been bonkers about terrorism ever since 9/11.

Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at Apr 15, 2013 around 15:52

ThePkkKiller
Nov 1, 2012


Bhaal posted:

Sadly I think this will be heavily dependent on the perp(s) once that part is discovered & disclosed. That's kind of why there's this undercurrent all around the internet of people taking bets or stating hopes on one particular demographic or another that belongs to whoever did this, as it will heavily influence the severity of froth that the news/media nutjobs will produce (to say nothing of the national response).

It wont be anytime soon from what I heard from my friends in Boston. Heres the text I got right after.

"Laura and I are good. Most of our friends are accounted for. I'm concentrating on trying to get my boyfriend out of the city and back home at this point. Trains are all shut down and traffic is horrible."

Horrible Traffic just gives a place to hide.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009


Necroneocon posted:

Amazing how the shit rag NY Post still says their "source" told them they have a Saudi suspect. It's spreading to blogs and idiots and it's the dumbest thing ever. No other news agency has said this besides NY Post and Fox News because surprised owned by the same person.
Amazing how you can change the tone of a story when you own 40% of the news media outlets in a country huh

Ambrose Burnside
Aug 29, 2007



Yeah, okay, fine, what about your claim of culture not influencing things like the reaction to terrorism, which you spend an entire sentence on?

quote:

The general reasons it works so well (availability heuristic; extremely bad weighting of probabilities; fear of things 'outside your control' over things 'inside your control') are universal human cognitive failings and I'm not aware of any valid evidence to suggest there are cultural factors involved.

(I have a hard time taking -any- claim of cultural factors not influencing something with a large societal impact seriously, the burden on proof kinda lies with you there, because I don't think it's a controversial claim to say that culture permeates everything up to 2+2=4 Uncontrovertible Objective Statements, and I don't see why stating that effect is diffuse and constant is "handwaving", because that's exactly how culture works?)

evilweasel
Aug 23, 2002


Bhaal posted:

Sadly I think this will be heavily dependent on the perp(s) once that part is discovered & disclosed. That's kind of why there's this undercurrent all around the internet of people taking bets or stating hopes on one particular demographic or another that belongs to whoever did this, as it will heavily influence the severity of froth that the news/media nutjobs will produce (to say nothing of the national response).

Absolutely nothing happened with the Fort Hood shootings, which were done by a Muslim of Palestinian descent and killed 13 people. Basically nothing happened with the first WTC bombing. It's not the case that if it does turn out to be a Saudi or someone else Arabic or Muslim that we are automatically going to treat it like another 9/11. 9/11 is an extreme aberration in responses to terrorist attacks and people need to stop casually assuming this will be treated like 9/11 if it turns out it wasn't domestic.

Warchicken
Jun 9, 2004


So far I'm enjoying my republican friends response of 'this is what happens if you take away guns, they use bombs instead'. So...stupid. Cannot...

evilweasel
Aug 23, 2002


Ambrose Burnside posted:

Yeah, okay, fine, what about your claim of culture not influencing things like the reaction to terrorism, which you spend an entire sentence on?


(I have a hard time taking -any- claim of cultural factors not influencing something with a large societal impact seriously, the burden on proof kinda lies with you there, because I don't think it's a controversial claim to say that culture permeates everything up to 2+2=4 Uncontrovertible Objective Statements, and I don't see why stating that effect is diffuse and constant is "handwaving", because that's exactly how culture works?)

That's not discussing the reaction to terrorism. That's discussing why terrorism works. Each of those things I cite is why terrorism (always at worst a miniscule chance you get killed) matters to people much more than things like a car accident. All of those things are well understood and can (and are) being studied.

ThePkkKiller
Nov 1, 2012


Warchicken posted:

So far I'm enjoying my republican friends response of 'this is what happens if you take away guns, they use bombs instead'. So...stupid. Cannot...

So basically the logic there is, instead of a bombing, this would of been a shooting? How is that any better?

vorebane
Feb 1, 2009


Enkmar posted:

How do we reconcile the idea that humans have a hard time accurately judging what's truly harmful and what is just a tragic anomaly without sounding like a callous piece of shit during times like these? I abhor loss of life so much I just wish it always got the coverage that these infrequent domestic terrorist attacks do.

Maybe it's impossible because in a sense I'm trying to hijack a tragedy to talk about my own cause, which is understandably very problematic. Just feel frustrated because no matter how much screaming I do I can't get people to care about the senseless deaths that happen every day that are both frequent and completely preventable.

I have spent about five minutes trying to say that I like this post and that I would read a thread about this.

Moktaro
Aug 3, 2007


I see that there. posted:

Let me just be absolutely sure here:

4 hours after an explosion goes off in Boston, you're comparing it, directly and literally to the Boston Massacre.

So cool.

No, he's demonstrating our history of tragedies being misreported for propaganda by using a famous incident that happened in the same city.

Paul MaudDib
May 2, 2006


evilweasel posted:

That's not discussing the reaction to terrorism. That's discussing why terrorism works. Each of those things I cite is why terrorism (always at worst a miniscule chance you get killed) matters to people much more than things like a car accident. All of those things are well understood and can (and are) being studied.

Well, isn't it convenient for you that you get to define away the issue?

The reaction to terrorism is why terrorism works in the first place, the whole point of terrorism is to provoke a response. You don't get to just handwave that away (note that playing games with definitions is actual handwaving, as opposed to arguments you disagree with like "reactions to events are informed by social context", which, while difficult to quantify, are generally uncontroversial).

Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at Apr 15, 2013 around 16:04

Rusty
Sep 27, 2001


Necroneocon posted:

Amazing how the shit rag NY Post still says their "source" told them they have a Saudi suspect. It's spreading to blogs and idiots and it's the dumbest thing ever. No other news agency has said this besides NY Post and Fox News because surprised owned by the same person.
I heard an NBC News guy say on MSNBC that police are questioning someone in the hospital that has a student Visa. He's not necessarily a Saudi or a suspect though. I don't necessarily care about all the speculation as it's almost certain someone will want to take credit, and a lot of people will eventually look like fools. Unfortunately, no one will hold them accountable.

CNN once actually broadcast the names of 4 innocent Arab Americans after the Oklahoma City bombing.

http://www.ajr.org/article.asp?id=1980

Northjayhawk
Mar 8, 2008


Gen. Ripper posted:

People on other sites already blaming North Korea for this. Their decisive evidence is NK's silence and it being Kim I's birthday.

I'd love a casus belli to get rid of that vile regime, but come on, people. They aren't this mind-numbingly stupid.

The fact that it happened on April 15th makes it very likely to be a domestic nut, I think.

Ambrose Burnside
Aug 29, 2007


evilweasel posted:

That's not discussing the reaction to terrorism. That's discussing why terrorism works. Each of those things I cite is why terrorism (always at worst a miniscule chance you get killed) matters to people much more than things like a car accident. All of those things are well understood and can (and are) being studied.

So, still, on what basis are you categorically ruling out the influence of culture? What makes claiming that "pseudoscience"? The factors that make terrorism "work" are far more complex than a nervous system limb reaction (like that one poster was saying for some weird reason), the idea that Every Single Factor is reducible to a scientific or medically-observable phenomenon, as opposed to including even a single social or cultural consideration, seems extraordinary to me.

asdf32
May 14, 2010


Wil everybody talking about the predicted U.S. over-reaction shut up. This is't 911 or close too it, we've learned quite a bit from Iraq/Afganistan, and Obama isn't Bush.

greatn
Nov 15, 2006


Northjayhawk posted:

The fact that it happened on April 15th makes it very likely to be a domestic nut, I think.

That is tax day, but this was also Patriot's day and a huge international event, so it would be inappropriate to jump to any conclusions. Like I could easily say "this was a marathon, you know recently the UN cancelled a marathon in Gaza for not allowing women runners, maybe this was the Palestenian authority".

Dusseldorf
Mar 29, 2005


Rusty posted:

I heard an NBC News guy say on MSNBC that police are questioning someone in the hospital that has a student Visa. He's not necessarily a Saudi or a suspect though. I don't necessarily care about all the speculation as it's almost certain someone will want to take credit, and a lot of people will eventually look like fools. Unfortunately, no one will hold them accountable.

CNN once actually broadcast the names of 4 innocent Arab Americans after the Oklahoma City bombing.

http://www.ajr.org/article.asp?id=1980

They probably also questioned every Sikh in the greater Boston area.

TOOT BOOT
May 25, 2010


Rusty posted:

I don't necessarily care about all the speculation as it's almost certain someone will want to take credit, and a lot of people will eventually look like fools.

I'm surprised no one has taken credit, which makes me wonder if it was some Eric Rudolf style lone wolf.

SirFozzie
Mar 28, 2004


WBZ is reporting a possible suspect is being questioned at Brigham and Women's Hospital.

evilweasel
Aug 23, 2002


Paul MaudDib posted:

So just to clarify, I don't have to walk through a backscatter Xray machine to get to an airplane because Americans didn't go bonkers because some dude put explosives down his shorts? And I don't have to get my shit metal-detected every time I want to watch a hockey game? And my internet connections aren't being routinely scanned in an intercept room, to say nothing of warrantless wiretapping of phone calls?

Americans very clearly have been bonkers about terrorism ever since 9/11.

Backscatter x-rays are a reasonable response to an existing flaw in metal detector technology (as well as being a reasonable response to the unfortunate reality that even if the fear of terrorism is irrational it must be dealt with because irrational or not, it's very real). This is fairly normal and When you go to a hockey game the biggest reason they're scanning you is to get weapons out of the hands of potential drunk idiots. And the latter two are the reactions of the government to 9/11.

I mean really, this is exactly what I mean: you haven't stopped to think at all here. You've just spazzed out and reacted without bothering to really think about the topic. None of this is interesting or shows that Americans are "bonkers about terrorism": airline security being a thing long predates 9/11 (because airlines were common targets of terrorism well before then) and it just got stepped back up once it started being actively targeted again. Large sporting events do some anti-terrorism security sure, but the basic need is there to deal with drunken sports fans and managing them. And the warantless wiretapping isn't "americans" being bonkers about terrorism as "americans" didn't even know it was going on for years. Try to actually think about the topic instead of trying to go for a hamfisted "just to clarify" attempt at being clever.

Zeitgueist
Aug 8, 2003


From Guardian Liveblog:

quote:

Summary

Here's a summary of what we know:

• Two large explosions struck near the end of the Boston marathon course at about 2.50pm ET. At least two people were killed and more than 100 were transported to area hospitals. The leading runners had completed the race hours earlier but many runners were still on the course. It is unclear whether runners were among those hurt.

• Video of the explosions and the immediate aftermath is here. The explosions provoked scenes of chaos in downtown Boston, which had been filled with athletes, spectators and merrymakers celebrating Patriots Day, a state holiday.

• "We still do not know who did this or why," President Obama said at a White House briefing three hours after the attack. "And people shouldn’t jump to conclusions before we have all the facts." He referred to "any responsible individuals, any responsible groups."

• White House officials called the blasts an "act of terror," although President Barack Obama did not use the word at a briefing. Both Vice President Joe Biden and Boston Marathon officials referred to "bombing" or "bombs." Boston police walked back an initial assertion that a fire at Boston's JFK library was related to the marathon explosions.

• No individual or group was believed to have claimed responsibility for the blasts, Congressman Bill Keating, a member of the Homeland Security committee, told CNN.

• Boston police received no advance intelligence of the explosions and no suspects were in custody, commissioner Ed Davis said. Hotline numbers were set up for crime tips and for the family members of victims seeking information.

• The FBI, Department of Homeland Security, national guard and state police joined the Boston police and fire departments and other agencies in responding to the incident and conducting initial investigations. President Obama said he had been in touch with Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, and authorities at every level, to ensure them of coordinated federal support.

prefect
Sep 11, 2001


Rusty posted:

I heard an NBC News guy say on MSNBC that police are questioning someone in the hospital that has a student Visa. He's not necessarily a Saudi or a suspect though. I don't necessarily care about all the speculation as it's almost certain someone will want to take credit, and a lot of people will eventually look like fools. Unfortunately, no one will hold them accountable.

CNN once actually broadcast the names of 4 innocent Arab Americans after the Oklahoma City bombing.

http://www.ajr.org/article.asp?id=1980

Back during the Atlanta Olympics, there was a trash-can bombing, and a security guy who wanted to save the day got painted as "we're pretty sure this is the guy who did it" so thoroughly that he won libel-type judgements afterwards. (I don't think he actually got a "libel" judgement specifically.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centen...sely_implicated

Rusty
Sep 27, 2001


prefect posted:

Back during the Atlanta Olympics, there was a trash-can bombing, and a security guy who wanted to save the day got painted as "we're pretty sure this is the guy who did it" so thoroughly that he won libel-type judgements afterwards. (I don't think he actually got a "libel" judgement specifically.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centen...sely_implicated
That was such a sad story. I wish I had the link, but there was a really great article on this, it may have been from Rolling Stone, but it was a great and depressing read.

Fix
Jul 25, 2005


Drudge finally stripped the red front from the SAUDI BEING QUESTIONED headlines, so maybe there's some exhaling going on.

Moktaro
Aug 3, 2007


Paul MaudDib posted:

So just to clarify, I don't have to walk through a backscatter Xray machine to get to an airplane because Americans didn't go bonkers because some dude put explosives down his shorts? And I don't have to get my shit metal-detected every time I want to watch a hockey game? And my internet connections aren't being routinely scanned in an intercept room, to say nothing of warrantless wiretapping of phone calls?

Americans very clearly have been bonkers about terrorism ever since 9/11.

You're confusing the attitude of "Americans" in general with "people who profit from security theatre". I certainly don't recall being asked if I wanted all or any of those things.

EDIT: And people who actually have a legitimate reason to be worried about security, to be fair (like airlines).

Moktaro fucked around with this message at Apr 15, 2013 around 16:13

SirFozzie
Mar 28, 2004


SirFozzie posted:

WBZ is reporting a possible suspect is being questioned at Brigham and Women's Hospital.

Following up, they have sent a SWAT team to Brigham and Women's Hospital.

dusty
Nov 30, 2004


evilweasel posted:

Absolutely nothing happened with the Fort Hood shootings, which were done by a Muslim of Palestinian descent and killed 13 people. Basically nothing happened with the first WTC bombing. It's not the case that if it does turn out to be a Saudi or someone else Arabic or Muslim that we are automatically going to treat it like another 9/11. 9/11 is an extreme aberration in responses to terrorist attacks and people need to stop casually assuming this will be treated like 9/11 if it turns out it wasn't domestic.

The thing that this attack and 9/11 share are a strong visual component endlessly replayed on all channels. I'd guess I've watched the explosions a couple of hundred times already via CNN,MSNBC and Fox so far this mornning.

9/11 was such iconic imagery repeated without end - I think this is why it proved so politically transformative and why responses to terror have been so heightened since. It's been a while since I've read about semiotics - but I think its time to dust off the Barthes.

TOOT BOOT
May 25, 2010


CNN's reporting the bomb was packed with ball bearings.

CommieGIR
Aug 22, 2006


Fix posted:

Drudge finally stripped the red front from the SAUDI BEING QUESTIONED headlines, so maybe there's some exhaling going on.

For Drudge I'm sure its more sigh of disappointment, considering Drudge's usual clientele

Ambrose Burnside
Aug 29, 2007


evilweasel posted:

I mean really, this is exactly what I mean: you haven't stopped to think at all here. You've just spazzed out and reacted without bothering to really think about the topic. None of this is interesting or shows that Americans are "bonkers about terrorism": airline security being a thing long predates 9/11 (because airlines were common targets of terrorism well before then) and it just got stepped back up once it started being actively targeted again. Large sporting events do some anti-terrorism security sure, but the basic need is there to deal with drunken sports fans and managing them. And the warantless wiretapping isn't "americans" being bonkers about terrorism as "americans" didn't even know it was going on for years. Try to actually think about the topic instead of trying to go for a hamfisted "just to clarify" attempt at being clever.

If you're going to outright deny that America has a particular zeitgeist around terrorism and security, I am inclined to ask you where the pod you were evidently very recently birthed from is located, any why you were not briefed more thoroughly for your mission.

Paul MaudDib
May 2, 2006


evilweasel posted:

And the warantless wiretapping isn't "americans" being bonkers about terrorism as "americans" didn't even know it was going on for years.

Do you think that Americans pre-9/11 would just have accepted that the government needed to listen in on phone calls without probable cause (or paper trails) or that we should be holding prisoners for decades without trial? Pre-9/11 that kind of stuff would simply have not been tolerated, there would have been negative reporting and public outcry.

Hell, we STILL barely accepted the backscatter machines (they don't even detect the kind of bomb that guy used), but at this point we've simply gotten used to the idea that we have to deal with overbearing security theater if we want to have nice things like air travel. The same thing for the backbone intercept rooms and warrantless wiretaps, really.

Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at Apr 15, 2013 around 16:15

evilweasel
Aug 23, 2002


Ambrose Burnside posted:

So, still, on what basis are you categorically ruling out the influence of culture? What makes claiming that "pseudoscience"? The factors that make terrorism "work" are far more complex than a nervous system limb reaction (like that one poster was saying for some weird reason), the idea that Every Single Factor is reducible to a scientific or medically-observable phenomenon, as opposed to including even a single social or cultural consideration, seems extraordinary to me.

Because we have a full explanation without a "cultural consideration", and the "cultural consideration" is obvious garbage (americans are dumb and violent). We do not need cultural explanations to understand why it works and cultural explanations are frequently simply the authors biases cloaked in pseudoscientific terms.

It may be trivially true that there are some "cultural considerations" that matter around the margins but when we have solid, verifiable reasons why it works that explain the entire phenomenon of terrorism working without them. The discussion of cultural considerations is not being had to make a full and complete understanding of how they matter on the margins: it's being had to assert that it plays a meaningful role with nothing to back it up beyond "well who are you to say it plays no role!". Compared to the empirically tested universal cognitive flaws that have been demonstrated and tested, there's no room for a discussion of vague theorizing that actually it's all about Americans being dumb without something to actually back the assertions being made up.

FCKGW
May 20, 2006


Warchicken posted:

So far I'm enjoying my republican friends response of 'this is what happens if you take away guns, they use bombs instead'. So...stupid. Cannot...

Got this on my Facebook feed jut now

quote:

Gee I wonder if they will start to try and outlaw explosives now too...oh wait they already did that. Hmm...

...

Exactly! It's just to say that the tighter leash you on people the more they will rebel as if to say, " see what I did". Also if our country would put as much time and energy into securing our borders and also addressing mental health issues. . Some of this stuff wouldn't be happening period!

Ambrose Burnside
Aug 29, 2007


evilweasel posted:

Because we have a full explanation without a "cultural consideration", and the "cultural consideration" is obvious garbage (americans are dumb and violent). We do not need cultural explanations to understand why it works and cultural explanations are frequently simply the authors biases cloaked in pseudoscientific terms.

Man, it's a good thing that's the only possible 'cultural consideration', good for your argument, anyways, especially as it's a terrible one that anybody posting here could knock down, much like one would knock down a frail mannequin, or perhaps a man made of straw??

  • Reply
« 16 »