Skip

Terrorism on the Georgia Tech Campus.
October 11, 2005 9:32 AM   Subscribe

Terrorist attack on Georgia Tech campus. A bomb explodes on the East Campus of Georgia Tech within a mile of the Centennial Olympic Park where Eric Rudolph , in another act of terrorism, set off an explosive device during the 1996 Summer Olympics. This is a terror attack on one of America's leading research institutions supporting the War on Terror. This a terror attack on the institution designing safer cars against roadside bombs for the military. This is a terror attack on an institution whose security services are closely aligned with the Department of Homeland Security. This is a terror attack on the first university in the deep south to admit African Americans without a court order. This is a terror attack on institution whose freedom loving football team is struggling to recover from two consecutive losses after a 3-0 start. It is an act of terror on American soil. Where is George?
posted by three blind mice (106 comments total)

 
In earlier times, this would have been considered a very unfunny prank.... now it has become An Act Of Terra. *sigh*.

Fear and spectacle, fear and spectacle.
posted by Malor at 9:34 AM on October 11, 2005


What makes their football team "freedom loving" and what do they have to do with this?
posted by trey at 9:34 AM on October 11, 2005


Wha?
posted by jokeefe at 9:36 AM on October 11, 2005




Arrest the Chemistry department.
posted by Faint of Butt at 9:39 AM on October 11, 2005


I fear it was a dumb freshman that did this. Not a international terrorist of any sort, or even someone trying to cause terror necessarily. However this COULD be something bigger than that.

It was not by a research building, it was in the residential portions of the campus, by the dorms freshmen stay in. As details of the bomb itself come out, we'll have a better clue as to what the creator's aim was.
posted by gte910h at 9:40 AM on October 11, 2005


After reading the posted news story, this sounds like over reaction. Somebody is playing a really bad joke, from the description of the device (plastic container with chemicals) and the description of injuries (ringing ears), it does not sound like anybody was in life-threatening danger save for getting a taste of the contents of those bottles (harsh drain clog remover if I remember correctly, and other household chemicals are enough to make a loud bang in a 2-liter pop bottle.), and perhaps the worst that could have happened to the building was a nasty acid stain. Maybe one of the drains would be unstopped too.

Honestly, this sounds more like a chem-student-bored-with-gen-eds attack. If they find the parties involved, I would wadger that they are probably young and stupid, instead of mean and stupid.

Best wishes to the janitor. ringing ears is a real bummer.
posted by chibikeandy at 9:46 AM on October 11, 2005


Um, t_b_m, have you any evidence that this bombing has anything to do with Eric Rudolph, research supporting the War on Terror, safer military vehicles, Homeland Security, African-Americans or college football? Or is your point simply alarmist advocacy for a more powerful "Gestapo"?
posted by davy at 9:48 AM on October 11, 2005


Press Release from Georgia Tech.

No mention of actual terror or even -ists.
posted by grabbingsand at 9:48 AM on October 11, 2005


Football is fucked up.
posted by mrgrimm at 9:49 AM on October 11, 2005


This post is a terror attack on any reasonable sense of proportion.

Someone please keep TBM away from the panic button. Thanks.
posted by ToasT at 9:51 AM on October 11, 2005


Quick! Somebody blame the Muslims! Or the Jews! Or the North Koreans! Or the Iranians - who is it we want to attack next?
posted by cleardawn at 9:52 AM on October 11, 2005


A white guy did it, right?

Then it isn't terror.
posted by wakko at 9:54 AM on October 11, 2005


Hysteria
posted by CynicalKnight at 9:56 AM on October 11, 2005


Sorry, I was running around in a blind panic, so didn't have time to read the memo. What was it a terror attack on?
posted by veedubya at 9:59 AM on October 11, 2005


Obviously a fundamentalist UGA supporter is working to bring awareness to the plight of the Bulldog, and will later file a list of demands including better BBQ access on North Avenue.
posted by dwivian at 10:00 AM on October 11, 2005


Um, t_b_m, have you any evidence that this bombing has anything to do with Eric Rudolph, research supporting the War on Terror, safer military vehicles, Homeland Security, African-Americans or college football?

Yeah, tbm. Could you elaborate on this post a little? It sounds like hastily strung together bits of blather framed as a potent political statement. Only, there isn't one.
posted by dhoyt at 10:01 AM on October 11, 2005


Reminds me of a story from my college (Stevens Tech) from last year. One of the projects for engineering students during their freshman or sophomore year (I forget which) is to build a heat pump.

Which apparently looks a lot like a bomb, if placed in a trash can in a nearby park.
posted by Godbert at 10:04 AM on October 11, 2005


great. research institutions leading the war on terror. that's just great. keep up the good work.
posted by 3.2.3 at 10:04 AM on October 11, 2005


Metafilter: hastily strung together bits of blather framed as a potent political statement.
posted by spacewrench at 10:05 AM on October 11, 2005


hastily strung together bits of blather framed as a potent political statement.

Yeah. Irony sort of looses it's punch when you have to explain it spacewrench.

Remember last week the the NY City subway was said to be facing a similar threat of boming. That threat coincided with a speech by Bush defending his War on Terror and claimed to "have disrupted at least 10 serious al Qaeda terrorist plots since September 11, including three al Qaeda plots to attack inside the United States. We've stopped at least five more al Qaeda efforts to case targets in the United States or infiltrate operatives into our country."

And remember on the same day, as if by coincidence, the NY City Subway was said to be threatened by a terror threat that "originated in Iraq.

And remember how CBS News revealed the details. "Those arrested had received explosives training in Afghanistan, the law enforcement official said Friday. They had planned to travel through Syria to New York, and then meet with operatives to carry out the bombings."

Remember that? Remember how Mayor Bloomberg defended it.

But this turned out to be entirely bogus.

Remember that?

Well here is a bomb going off in the middle of a major American city. The police label it a "terrorist act." If so then it represents a failure of the President to protect the nation from terror. A pipe bomb in Atlanta or on the NY Subway, the threat to the public is about the same, but since the spectre of one supports a wider political agenda that the other does not, it's not news. I bet you that this won't make the national news of even be remembered in four weeks.
posted by three blind mice at 10:11 AM on October 11, 2005


So there were six attacks?
posted by furtive at 10:13 AM on October 11, 2005


hastily strung together bits of blather framed as a potent political statement

Whoa, that's the best definition I've heard for a Weapon of Mass Destruction.
posted by fandango_matt at 10:14 AM on October 11, 2005


Wow. We have terrorists attacks like this in my lil suburb all the time. Mostly upon mailboxes.
posted by Smedleyman at 10:22 AM on October 11, 2005


Of what strategic importance is Georgia Tech? Could the terrorists hate us enough to try and kill the Bulldogs? That's pretty low.

I'm guessing this was a disgruntled kid who did a little research on the internet and made himself a little eff-bomb.
posted by fenriq at 10:26 AM on October 11, 2005


Can we stop using "terror" as a modifier now?
Constructs like "terror attack" not only sound stupid, they actually are.
posted by signal at 10:28 AM on October 11, 2005


You're not as clever as you think you are.
posted by smackfu at 10:33 AM on October 11, 2005


I blame WREK radio and their Weapons of Mass Distraction
posted by shoepal at 10:34 AM on October 11, 2005


not on CNN yet...you'd think it would make the front page, being a terrorist attack in a major city....um, right? wait, what? oh, the guy's ears are ringing? oh. like in a concert? no? um...
posted by NationalKato at 10:35 AM on October 11, 2005


freedom loving football team

dude wtf.
posted by poweredbybeard at 10:35 AM on October 11, 2005


This "incident" seems minor. And the political baggage being stapped onto it in this post is a bit... aggresive.

I think the Muslim suicide bomber who tried to enter the OU football game only to be turned back to avoid a search and ended up exploding in the parking lot is bigger news, but, as far as I am aware, hasn't recieved a mention until this thread.
posted by dios at 10:38 AM on October 11, 2005


I regret having wasted my time on this FPP.... There is enough seriously bad news each day...when I see something like this on Meta I check the article, because I trust the folks that post here..

I don't see the humor, I don't see the need to make an FPP out of this, especially worded as actually important news...

When someone blows up your mailbox with one of these, we really don't need to know about it...
posted by HuronBob at 10:38 AM on October 11, 2005


More importantly, Georgia Tech's football team is the Yellow Jackets. The Bulldogs are University of Georgia's team over in Athens, GA, which is about 70 miles due east.
posted by JParker at 10:39 AM on October 11, 2005


Indeed, this post is a gross over reaction to the event discussed. Regardless of the great work GT is doing, don't you think that, from a terrorist's perspective, going from the Twin Towers to a tech college campus would be, I don't know, a bit small fry? You'd think they would pick something that would be more publicly visible, and they'd do it in a way that was a lot more memorable than what it sounds like this event has been.

I have a feeling that if that UW-Stout student who set off all those mailbox bombs in the Midwest a few years back had done that today instead of pre-9/11, TBM would have done a post about the incredible work America's heartland is doing to feed our soldiers, and how much terrorists hate our grains. Just because something explodes doesn't mean the dark people that hate us are involved.

Bad post.
posted by baphomet at 10:41 AM on October 11, 2005


I thought the post was funny, and intentionally so. It's an attempt to replicate the hysteria propogated by the authorities every time they yell "terror" with little or no reason. It's satire, right tbm?
posted by goatdog at 10:41 AM on October 11, 2005


Good lord, three blind mice, talk about mountains and molehills.
posted by graventy at 10:43 AM on October 11, 2005


dios: yeah, I'm not sure why I haven't heard much mention of it in the news. It seems like something many people would be interested in, but I've not been able to find many details.
posted by sonofsamiam at 10:46 AM on October 11, 2005


fenriq: Yellowjackets, not Bulldogs
posted by oraknabo at 10:48 AM on October 11, 2005


"The police label it a "terrorist act.""

Yes...but they're asshats.

I'm not disputing your point three blind mice.
The information from the media seems to waiver between highly distorted and outright lie.

As in your example we have this synergistic relationship between the stage managed terrrr dog & pony show and how people percieve and relate actual events.

Folks who want to ‘get ahead in life’ tend to imitate their ‘betters’. So they adopt their speech, mannerisms and methodologies and even world view.

This affects how raw data is analyzed and related.
So you get a distorted picture of reality. Which many of us realize, so we try to get an accurate picture. In doing so we get into arguments with those who adhere to the party reality picture (pick any political MeFi thread).

The desire to achieve some sort of goal perverts all information not designed to achieve the same goal.
For example - spam, search engine hit adverts, etc. etc. all aim to sell something and interfere with at the very least one’s attention to the topic at hand; I want to research Herman Melville’s work, I’m not seeking a penis implant.
In the same way, I’d like to know when an actual terrorist attack occurs as opposed to pop bottle bombs going off.
But the folks near the event want to justify their jobs and make them seem more important (getting ahead). People relating the information want it and thus themselves to seem more relevent so they defend that perspective.

Meanwhile reality slips further from our grasp every day and we creep closer to actual danger, blinded by the false warning lights going off all round us.

So - asshats.
posted by Smedleyman at 10:48 AM on October 11, 2005


...
So Henny Penny joined Chicken Little and they went along and went along as fast as they could.
...
posted by caddis at 10:52 AM on October 11, 2005


in addition:

"this post is a gross over reaction to the event discussed"

I think that's the point folks.
posted by Smedleyman at 10:55 AM on October 11, 2005


Ah, it's a parody of newsfilter...

"I think the Muslim suicide bomber who tried to enter the OU football game only to be turned back to avoid a search and ended up exploding in the parking lot is bigger news, but, as far as I am aware, hasn't recieved a mention until this thread."
Umm... Maybe that's because according to the news reports that I've seen on it, they don't know the identity (even the gender) of the suicide bomber. So despite the brainwaves sent to you from satellites into your fillings, the idea that it was a Muslim student who was attacking a football game seems a little premature to put forth...
posted by klangklangston at 10:58 AM on October 11, 2005


Agreed. My snark was directed at 11alive, not TBM.
posted by caddis at 10:58 AM on October 11, 2005


I guess the leads in Iraq were good: just got the New York/subway part wrong. And the date too. I'm glad we invaded Iraq. Whew!
posted by NewBornHippy at 11:00 AM on October 11, 2005


I think that's the point folks.

That's hard to buy when the poster follows up with:

A pipe bomb in Atlanta or on the NY Subway, the threat to the public is about the same, but since the spectre of one supports a wider political agenda that the other does not, it's not news. I bet you that this won't make the national news of even be remembered in four weeks.
posted by probablysteve at 11:00 AM on October 11, 2005


hastily strung together bits of blather framed as a potent political statement

Whoa, that's the best definition I've heard for a Weapon of Mass Destruction.
posted by fandango_matt at 11:01 AM on October 11, 2005


In summary:

Not enough viable content for a serious post, and not enough sarcasm for a snark post. We can do better, people. Let's all reflect on what we've learned here today.
posted by ToasT at 11:04 AM on October 11, 2005


I think the Muslim suicide bomber who tried to enter the OU football game only to be turned back to avoid a search and ended up exploding in the parking lot is bigger news,


From KOTV news:
"A completed review of University of Oklahoma stadium surveillance tapes by the FBI did not spot Joel Henry Hinrichs III trying to get inside.

Hinrichs died Oct. 1 when explosives _ made of hydrogen peroxide _ strapped to his body detonated while he sat on a park bench about 100 yards from the stadium.

After a week of investigation, the FBI and OU continue to treat the death as a suicide by a troubled loner, rather than a failed terrorist plot.

Joel Hinrichs III doesn't sound like the name of a Muslim to me, and it appears he never tried to enter the game.
posted by hall of robots at 11:10 AM on October 11, 2005


Not enough viable content for a serious post, and not enough sarcasm for a snark post.

Too crazy for Boy's Town, too much of a boy for Crazy Town.
posted by kirkaracha at 11:12 AM on October 11, 2005


That's hard to buy when the poster follows up with: A pipe bomb in Atlanta or on the NY Subway, the threat to the public is about the same,

A pipe bomb is a pipe bomb. "Even though they may be simple, because (they) are homemade, they are sloppy, and sloppy can make it very, very dangerous." If "preventing terror" is the objective of the War on Terror it should not matter if it was an Islamo-facist freedom hater or a disgruntled student who planted it. The President failed to protect that patch of American soil from a terrorist attack. He should be held to account, but it will not even be noticed. It is not news because it does not fit the story line or the cast of characters.
posted by three blind mice at 11:14 AM on October 11, 2005


Joel Hinrichs III doesn't sound like the name of a Muslim to me, and it appears he never tried to enter the game.

Oh well, then, nevermind. Doesn't count.
posted by all-seeing eye dog at 11:15 AM on October 11, 2005


ToasT, kirkaracha, What? No snark points for the sensational BUT TRUE leader? Made you look.
posted by three blind mice at 11:18 AM on October 11, 2005


The explosives were made up of chemicals placed inside plastic bottles and could have seriously injured someone, officials said.

Did anyone else, on reading this, think of that scene in National Lampoon's Vacation where Clark Griswold tries to hold John Candy hostage with a pellet gun, and says "It can give you a nasty welt!"
posted by shmegegge at 11:20 AM on October 11, 2005


It is not at all clear whether or not the OU student was a Muslim, I've read reports that say he was and reports that say he wasn't.

Not that that has any bearing on anything.

Since the investigation has not linked him to any known terrorist groups, it doesn't matter whether or not he was motivated by apocalyptic Christian, Muslim, or what-have-you rhetoric.
posted by sonofsamiam at 11:20 AM on October 11, 2005


The President failed to protect that patch of American soil from a terrorist attack.

Yes. The prez should have been in Atlanta that day, investigating non-existent data on student terrorists & frisking students with his own two hands. I can only imagine the cries of 'FaSciSm!' and 'Pedophile' which would have followed.

Nat'l security: damned if you do, damned if you don't.
posted by dhoyt at 11:22 AM on October 11, 2005


tbm: I was simply pointing out that your post was not satire or parody as some had been arguing.
posted by probablysteve at 11:27 AM on October 11, 2005


The best thing to do in an argument is to set up a false dilemma and throw up your hands in mock despair.

Anyone can do it, even if you can't handle logic, this simple technique will exasperate your opponents and win you the respect of your peers.
posted by sonofsamiam at 11:29 AM on October 11, 2005


"Even though they may be simple, because (they) are homemade, they are sloppy, and sloppy can make it very, very dangerous."

As opposed to neatly-made and well-built pipe bombs, which are completely safe.
posted by fandango_matt at 11:29 AM on October 11, 2005


fwiw, an explosive device was found at UCLA last Friday.
posted by ryoshu at 11:30 AM on October 11, 2005


dhoyt: Seriously. How could Bush be personally responsible for preventing this? I think jumping to conclusions about a student bomber is a bit hasty at this point (agree it's the most likely scenario, but the facts aren't in yet), but this is obviously not a coordinated terrorist attack. I'm not a fan of Bush but holding the guy personally responsible for the work of what appears to be an overzealous prankster is completely absurd. TBM, what exactly were you expecting Bush to do about stuff like this?
posted by baphomet at 11:33 AM on October 11, 2005


(runs around screaming hysterically with hands in air,
slams head into wall, falls down, faints and pisses self)
posted by Peter H at 11:35 AM on October 11, 2005


Oh, are universities the hip new targets for terrorism? I guess the bomb-in-the-baby-carriage subway threats are out of vogue.
posted by fandango_matt at 11:37 AM on October 11, 2005


If we outlaw Georgia Tech prank bombings, only the terrorists will have Georgia Tech prank bombings.
posted by Peter H at 11:37 AM on October 11, 2005


I think the point TBM is trying to make about Bush is, where are the calls for vigilance when it comes to domestic hate groups and columbine style nutters? No passionate calls for renewed patriotism to combat the rise of non-Muslim extremism... But still, maybe this FPP is a bit of a stretch to make that point.
posted by all-seeing eye dog at 11:48 AM on October 11, 2005


Yeah but if he's trying to make a point, he should get a blog.
posted by smackfu at 11:49 AM on October 11, 2005


Yeah but if he's trying to make a point, he should get a blog.

smackfu - You've been here long enough to know - Back before the War on Terrorism, Metafilter was actually considered a blog (for and by the people! democracy in action, bullshit, etc)
posted by Peter H at 11:53 AM on October 11, 2005


where are the calls for vigilance when it comes to domestic hate groups and columbine style nutters?

Shouldn't the 'calls for vigilance' be commensurate to the sheer numbers of said terrorist attacks? If the world sees 200 suicidal terror attacks by, say, Muslim jihadists around the globe in a year, and say, five of the same kind by lone, unconnected wannabes a year, wouldn't it seem kind of forced and phony if the president condemned those rare, lone nuts? Especially when there doesn't appear to be any far-reaching religio-political message behind it, or suggest a greater threat?
posted by dhoyt at 11:58 AM on October 11, 2005


phony if the president condemned those rare, lone nuts

True, also hypocritical of him.
posted by Peter H at 12:03 PM on October 11, 2005


smackfu - You've been here long enough to know - Back before the War on Terrorism, Metafilter was actually considered a blog

actually still says "community 'blog" up at the top of every page.
posted by all-seeing eye dog at 12:10 PM on October 11, 2005


Things are just starting to heat up. Time for roasted marshmallows. Anyone have any beer?

posted by caddis at 12:14 PM on October 11, 2005


five of the same kind by lone, unconnected wannabes a year, wouldn't it seem kind of forced and phony if the president condemned those rare, lone nuts?

Thanks to the efforts of all those lone, unconnected wannabes, my wife and I were recently forced to sneak around after hours and feel like criminals just in order for her to have a perfectly legal and medically necessary procedure--all because the doctors who used to perform those procedures have been cowed into submission by clinic bombers. We literally had to go out of town and sneak into the clinic after hours. For my money, we've got plenty of freedom-hating terrorists here at home to contend with, before we go off on half-cocked crusades to conquer all the freedom-haters abroad.
posted by all-seeing eye dog at 12:17 PM on October 11, 2005


actually still says "community 'blog" up at the top of every page.
OTOH, there's a reason we have GYOBFW.
posted by smackfu at 12:20 PM on October 11, 2005


I'm sorry to hear about your troubles, allseeingeyedog. But...

For my money, we've got plenty of freedom-hating terrorists here at home to contend with, before we go off on half-cocked crusades to conquer all the freedom-haters abroad.

I know this sounds crazy but why don't ALL OF US, at home & abroad, work to stop ALL the zealots in question instead of saying, "I know our neighbors' shopping malls & tourist resorts are being bombed by maniacs, and tens of thousands are dying every year, but I've got problems of my own"?
posted by dhoyt at 12:24 PM on October 11, 2005


ALL OF US, at home & abroad, work to stop ALL the zealots in question

Hey, I couldn't agree more. Let's get all the Zealots! Now! C'mon boys! Let's round up a posse and get 'em and string 'em up! (Oh crap--I just became a zealot myself, didn't I?)
posted by all-seeing eye dog at 12:30 PM on October 11, 2005


So what have you done to stop terrorism lately?
posted by baphomet at 12:30 PM on October 11, 2005


posted by baphomet So what have you done to stop terrorism lately?

Me? I went shopping!
posted by fandango_matt at 12:41 PM on October 11, 2005


"Shouldn't the 'calls for vigilance' be commensurate to the sheer numbers of said terrorist attacks? "

See all-seeing eye dog's post at 12:17 PM PST on October 11.

In short - no.

Vigilance should be focused on prevention not anticipation or presupposition.
For example: screening for ‘Muslims’ or any other preconceived notion of ‘terrorist’ can be circumvented because there is a pattern. (Random search = no pattern)
Pundits like to counter argue that ‘it’s mostly Muslims doing it so more focus should be on them’ which is why they are shitheads on t.v. instead of, y’know, doing counter-terrorism work.
The objective is to prevent violence done to achieve political ends. Unfortunately we’ve lost coherence on that definition and now all sorts of violence is pointed to as terror.
Certainly one can focus resources in any area that generates leads. And I would concede that some groups are more apt to use terrorism as a means than others.
However you follow where the trail leads, not vice versa.
One of the main reasons terrorism has lost a sharp definition is that it is also being used for political ends by this administration.

Doing this, instead of the methodical detective work required, quite literally, creates an enemy.
(Albania in “Wag the Dog” comes to mind)

In addition, the number of terrorist attacks is irrelevant. Only efficacy matters.
(the Cole vs. 9/11 for example - one had far more political impact than the other)

A pipe bomb in Georgia is equal to one on the NY subway but they have different political impact; (as previously pointed out), one planted by a white Christian anti-abortion bomber is not politically equal to one planted by a brown Muslim bomber.

This is due to the use of terrorism as a bogeyman to further an agenda by this administration.

Vigilance then should be equal. Devoid of political content. Precisely because a difference in political gravitas gives different reasons, different incentives, whether to bomb or not to bomb. And it recieves different weight in the press.

Simple enough.

If you’re killed outside an abortion clinic, are you really going to care if the bomber is brown, white or red? You just want it stopped.
It’s stupid. We don’t treat crime this way. We don’t treat any other form of mass murder this way. We simply seek to prevent it.
But because this particular type of act perpetrated by these particular type of people serve “X” ends by the Feds, it gets the focus. And in many cases undeserved focus while other injustices go on unobserved.
posted by Smedleyman at 12:53 PM on October 11, 2005


"...why don't ALL OF US, at home & abroad, work to stop ALL the zealots in question..."

I'd agree with this sentiment. But again, politics often gets in the way of doing the job.
posted by Smedleyman at 12:55 PM on October 11, 2005


So what have you done to stop terrorism lately?

I refused to participate in it myself, for one (an approach that can make a big difference, if you care to do the math), then I went on to decline to whip others into an ideological frenzy by making snide remarks on community blog sites.
posted by all-seeing eye dog at 12:56 PM on October 11, 2005


Vigilance then should be equal. Devoid of political content. Precisely because a difference in political gravitas gives different reasons, different incentives, whether to bomb or not to bomb. And it recieves different weight in the press.

Smedleyman rules. The above sums it all up nicely.
posted by all-seeing eye dog at 1:00 PM on October 11, 2005


Joel Hinrichs III doesn't sound like the name of a Muslim to me, and it appears he never tried to enter the game.

Dear God people can't you see what this means?!? Al Qaeda has developed mind-control technology, and they're using it to force sad and confused but otherwise red-blooded American boys to nearly disrupt Division I football!

The president, reached on vacation in Crawford, Texas, where he'd just finished 18 holes with John Daly, told the Associated Press, "There's just no way we could've predicted terrorists would use depressed frat boys as weapons."

A short time later, reporters uncovered a presidential daily briefing dated Sept. 20, 2005, with the headline: "Bin Laden Determined To Strike Inside Big Twelve."

At a hastily assembled press conference, Secretary of Defence Rumsfeld called for "an immediate and overwhelming preemptive strike" on Azerbaijan, while an emergency session of Congress pledged $12.8 million to bolster security outside the stadium of 0-8 Baylor University in Texas.

posted by gompa at 1:00 PM on October 11, 2005


one planted by a white Christian anti-abortion bomber is not politically equal to one planted by a brown Muslim bomber.

No. It's not. For the simple reason anti-abortion crusaders are not killing in sheer numbers, globally, almost indscriminately, anywhere close to the violent accomplishments of their 'brown' (as you put it crudely) counterparts. When they are, no doubt they will earn the same kind of political equivalence. For now, it is up to moderates in the Muslim community to loudly, consistently & clearly articulate condemnation for those who continue perverting an otherwise (like Xtianity) peaceful religion.
posted by dhoyt at 1:01 PM on October 11, 2005


Hinrichs died October 1 when explosives made of hydrogen peroxide strapped to his body detonated while he sat on a park bench about 100 yards from the stadium.
Well, had he survived, at least his wounds wouldn't have become infected. Could this be considered a "clean bomb?"
posted by nlindstrom at 1:02 PM on October 11, 2005


dhoyt: dafur springs to mind, if you want to talk sheer numbers. how do you blame that on islamofascism? where were you guys when that went down?
posted by all-seeing eye dog at 1:05 PM on October 11, 2005


For the simple reason anti-abortion crusaders are not killing in sheer numbers, globally, almost indscriminately, anywhere close to the violent accomplishments of their 'brown' (as you put it crudely) counterparts.

If you cared about numbers, you'd care that we've accidentally killed more innocent people than the pathetically weak ISLAMIC MENACE has killed on purpose.
posted by sonofsamiam at 1:09 PM on October 11, 2005


where were you guys when that went down?

I was posting on it, while the rest of the MeFi sheep were in an adjacent thread obsessing over whether Bush choked on a pretzel because he was drunk or not, and gibbering about whether Wellstone's plane was shot down.
posted by dhoyt at 1:10 PM on October 11, 2005


the rest of the MeFi sheep were in an adjacent thread obsessing over whether Bush choked on a pretzel because he was drunk or not,

Ah ha--so this isn't really about politics at all, is it? It's about good old fashioned self-satisfaction and hate. Well, keep on hatin' on your fellow Americans then, pal. Obviously your hate is more appropriately directed than those other guys' hate...
posted by all-seeing eye dog at 1:13 PM on October 11, 2005


It's about good old fashioned self-satisfaction and hate.

You asked what concern I had for Darfur. I provided a link. You got flustered and dismissed it all as 'hate', and then compared me to "those other guys", aka terrorists. I know you've got a better response than that.
posted by dhoyt at 1:24 PM on October 11, 2005


I was posting on it, while the rest of the MeFi sheep were...

Whoa, dhoyt, first and finally, youre Charlton Heston image is fully formed!
posted by Peter H at 1:26 PM on October 11, 2005



posted by Peter H at 1:27 PM on October 11, 2005


"Joel Hinrichs III doesn't sound like the name of a Muslim to me"

Neither does Henry Yee, and for all I know there're Muslims someplace named Moishe Lebowitz, Patrick McCready or UmmaGumma. But no, not every bomb has to be a terrorist attack, and not every terrorist attack has to be by Muslims.
posted by davy at 1:29 PM on October 11, 2005


“For now, it is up to moderates in the Muslim community to loudly, consistently & clearly articulate condemnation”

They have been.

“For the simple reason anti-abortion crusaders are not killing in sheer numbers, globally”

I could care less what happens globally. It’s not my concern how many Spanish folks get killed by Al-Kayduh other than how it may impact Americans or American interests.
One could argue that since we are ostensibly engaging ‘terrrsts’ in Iraq and our erstwhile ‘allies’ (France, Germany, et.al) have chosen not to join us, they should then be left on their own.
The military focus on ‘terrrist’ groups makes as much sense as sending the Templars after the the Hashashim or the Romans after the Picts. You do not fight guerrillas with main force troops. You fight them (to quote from Breaker Morant) under article .303.
The Boer Wars are a great example though, politically and militarily.

We should fight external threats with methods similar to those we use in fighting internal threats. To put political emphasis on certain groups gives them exactly what they want - power to change policy through publicity and scare tactics.

Numbers don’t enter into it. You do not want the terrorists to gain that noteriety whether they kill a few or many.

I feel like a broken record saying this but anti-terrorist units are secret for, in part, those reasons.

Just as you don’t want to give a gang credit for doing “X” crimes. It is not correct to say gang “X” is more dangerous than gang “Y” and therefore gang “X” should get the emphasis.

dhoyt, you said yourself we should work to “stop all the zealots in question.”

We can debate resources, and I suspect I’d agree with you on that count, but publicity is another animal entirely.

In this case - to use the gang analogy - you have a Mayor telling the press he’s sending the police into one neighborhood because gang “X” is just so dangerous. As it so happens doing this serves the agenda he and the city council has worked out. Meanwhile he (publicly) ignores gang “Y.”
Any street cop will tell you that would be a huge mistake and would lead to massive increases in recruitment levels in gang “X”.
posted by Smedleyman at 1:33 PM on October 11, 2005


three_blind_mice, it's clear to me that you that that way simply to confuse ME!
posted by davy at 1:36 PM on October 11, 2005


"three_blind_mice, it's clear to me that you that that way simply to confuse ME!"

And you also brainwaved away my proofreading ability!
posted by davy at 1:37 PM on October 11, 2005


and dismissed it all as 'hate', and then compared me to "those other guys", aka terrorists

Well, you gotta admit, you're comment did come across as harboring a bit of bitterness and resentment... And I think what I did was "contrast" you with those other guys, whose sense of moral outrage is clearly inferior to yours. But you're right. I could do better. Not today though, I'm afraid...
posted by all-seeing eye dog at 1:54 PM on October 11, 2005


um, that is "your comment."
posted by all-seeing eye dog at 1:55 PM on October 11, 2005


Well, you gotta admit, you're comment did come across as harboring a bit of bitterness and resentment

And your comment rang of disdain & suspicion ("where were you guys when that went down?" -- I don't even know what 'you guys' is referring to), so you can understand why I'd be a little defensive when pointing out I had, in fact, made a point of linking to Darfur stories more than once. So that said, I think the question of "where were you?" pertains to MeFites other than myself.
posted by dhoyt at 2:06 PM on October 11, 2005


fair enough, dhoyt. still waiting to hear you declare your support for the War on Ethnic Tension, though...
posted by all-seeing eye dog at 2:11 PM on October 11, 2005


(But this is all getting off topic anyway, so let's just move on now, please...)
posted by all-seeing eye dog at 2:15 PM on October 11, 2005


I don't even know what 'you guys' is referring to)

On review, dhoyt, sorry for unreflectively lumping you in with some imagined collective of like-minded individuals. I forgot that that sort of inflammatory and patently dishonest rhetoric has to be strictly reserved for Islamofascists.
posted by all-seeing eye dog at 2:27 PM on October 11, 2005


I forgot that that sort of inflammatory and patently dishonest rhetoric has to be strictly reserved for Islamofascists.

I keep wanting to meet you in the middle here, allseeing, but your explanations/apologies sound more like potshots. All I'm saying is that when news of Darfur surfaced, I thought it was troubling, and linked to it, and yes, it was a little disturbing bloodshed like that went unnoticed on MeFi while petty Bush stuff did not -- that's not too irrational a feeling is it?
posted by dhoyt at 2:36 PM on October 11, 2005


Islamofascist...heh heh...still makes me laugh.
(Why no Catholofascism? Protestafascism?)
I grant it’s come to mean any form of totalitarianism, but the corporatism connotations combined with the tenets of Islam just makes me laugh.

It’s funnier still to think that Bushco thinks - or is trying to put over - that there are huge Islam-controlled corporate blocs attempting to control things.

Irony is lost on zealots of whatever stripe.
posted by Smedleyman at 2:37 PM on October 11, 2005


Just FYI: It was a student prank, and a freshman was responsible at that.

Text from the little campus e-mail that went out:
To the Georgia Tech Community:
A Georgia Tech student has indicated his involvement in the Oct. 10 incident involving a crude bottle explosive found on east campus. The incident was not in any way the work of a "terrorist" group.

The student turned himself in to Georgia Tech police the morning of Oct. 11 and confessed to his involvement. He's facing charges for possession of a destructive device (a felony under Georgia Law) and reckless conduct (a misdemenor under Georgia law).

The freshman engineering student has been temporarily suspended pending a student judiciary ruling.

Georgia Tech Police and the Atlanta Police Department are still investigating the incident. The contents and exact nature of the bottle explosives has not been determined and is still under investigation.

While this incident unfortunately was frightening for many of our students, faculty and staff, it turned out to be an excellent test of Tech's emergency preparedness program. All emergency response efforts functioned exceedingly well, and we have every confidence that would be the case if such an incident occurred in the future.


So go about your business, and stuff.
posted by Mercaptan at 3:51 PM on October 11, 2005


I should add that nobody here on campus considered it to be some major attack. If nothing else, the news slowly trickled through campus and most people's reactions were along the lines of "What a dumb prank."
posted by Mercaptan at 3:57 PM on October 11, 2005


I read some scrolling headlines on CTV 24hr news, and noted that the NY Subway Bomb Threat ended up being a hoax.
posted by five fresh fish at 6:47 PM on October 11, 2005


I keep wanting to meet you in the middle here, allseeing, but your explanations/apologies sound more like potshots. All I'm saying is that when news of Darfur surfaced, I thought it was troubling, and linked to it, and yes, it was a little disturbing bloodshed like that went unnoticed on MeFi while petty Bush stuff did not -- that's not too irrational a feeling is it?

You're right, dhoyt--it's not at all irrational to get frustrated when the others around you let you down (but developing a martyr complex about it isn't necessarily healthy, either).

I really am sorry for taking potshots at you; on review, it's definitely fair to say that's what I was doing. But in a weird twist, acknowledging this fact only convinces me that much more that there's some validity to my last point about unreflectively (and unfairly) lumping individuals into groups without their consent...

I mean, didn't it make you feel defensive and angry when I lumped you in with some rhetorical group of like-minded individuals and took the liberty of defining your beliefs for you without letting you speak for yourself? Hell, that's probably the main reason I did it, now that I'm being totally honest with myself about it: To try to get your goat. It sure seemed to get under your skin a little. And I know it gets under my skin, too, whenever some idiot does this to me.

So if this kind of thing aggravates normal guys like you and me--who aren't even religious fanatics--imagine how much more it aggravates zealots! I mean, on the one hand, who cares about aggravating a few zealots, eh? (They've got it coming, right? Serves 'em right for being so--well, so damn zealous!). But in reality, aren't aggravated zealots the kind most likely to go around blowing things up? Leave the zealots to go about their zealotry in peace (with some institutionalized safeguards--like separation of church and state--in place) and odds are, they'll give you the same courtesy--even if, all the while, they know in their smug, zealous little hearts that you'll one day burn in the lake of fire along with all the other non-believers.

But this entire FPP is really worn by now, and our little siderail isn't at all related to the original topic (it's really just a response to comments I've seen you make on previous occasions), so to sum up: Please forgive me, dhoyt, for taking a couple of ill-tempered pot-shots at you, but it's been a long, crappy day.
posted by all-seeing eye dog at 8:03 PM on October 11, 2005


« Older THE TRUE FIGHT WILL BEGIN FROM NOW!!   |   ...woiyt! pop! ...woiyt! pop! Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post