Save Boston!
February 10, 2007 5:39 PM   Subscribe

Save Boston from the Mooninites! Be sure to play this with the sound on. via
posted by cerebus19 (28 comments total) 2 users marked this as a favorite
 
lol mundanes dont recognize a poorly animated character from an obscure show on an obscure channel and err on the side of caution
posted by keswick at 5:43 PM on February 10, 2007


piss off keswick
posted by bob sarabia at 6:05 PM on February 10, 2007


Lame, they should have used Mooninite quotes, not stereotypical bostonian sayings.
posted by blasdelf at 6:06 PM on February 10, 2007


lol mundanes dont recognize a poorly animated character from an obscure show on an obscure channel and err on the side of caution extreme, pathological paranoia

Fixed that for you.
posted by Mitrovarr at 6:08 PM on February 10, 2007


Hey, bob, that's a convincing argument.
posted by Richard Daly at 6:08 PM on February 10, 2007


Peanuts Comic explains the Mooninite crisis (via boingboing)
posted by isopraxis at 6:16 PM on February 10, 2007 [1 favorite]


As someone who spent several years living in Boston, I'd go on record as saying that Boston doesn't deserve to be saved.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 6:16 PM on February 10, 2007




piss off keswick

Im in ur cartoonz hating ur America
posted by Benny Andajetz at 6:53 PM on February 10, 2007


I want my 5 clicks back.
posted by furtive at 7:09 PM on February 10, 2007


Ditto blasdelf.
posted by evilcolonel at 7:54 PM on February 10, 2007


That was awesome, blasdelf.
posted by Bugbread at 8:09 PM on February 10, 2007


Let me 'splain. They put the fukkn things under bridges and under highways. How were they not supposed to be suspected as IEDs?
I just don't understand the whole Boston got PWoned thing. They were under our bridges with wires and batteries!
posted by Gungho at 8:12 PM on February 10, 2007


Gungho : "They put the fukkn things under bridges and under highways. How were they not supposed to be suspected as IEDs?"

Yeah! And the homeless folks down there, they coulda been terrorists! After all, they were hanging out under bridges and highways! How are you supposed to know they aren't rigging up charges to bring them down?

Because it's pretty fucking obvious. Nobody in any of the other cities had a problem with 'em. One person in Boston (yes, the police got "a call", not "multiple calls from many scared people") couldn't tell a lite-brite from a bomb, and once he/she'd placed the call, it was no longer a question of whether "they" suspected them to be IEDs, but following their regulations about how to handle that type of call. In summation: No, Boston is not dumb for mistaking these for IEDs, because in all likelihood Boston as a whole didn't. One idiot in Boston is dumb for mistaking these for IEDs.
posted by Bugbread at 8:25 PM on February 10, 2007


I have no idea what the fuck anyone here is talking about, and I don't even care enough to google, yet, I feel compelled to leave this sparkling comment.
posted by serazin at 8:52 PM on February 10, 2007


Serazin:

Quick rundown: There's a cartoon on TV called "Aqua Team Hunger Force". Turner Broadcasting hired two artists to do some guerilla marketing, which consisted of making lite-brites of one of the characters and putting them up in various places in Boston, New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Atlanta, Seattle, Portland, Austin, San Francisco, and Philadelphia. A few weeks after they were installed, some dolt in Boston saw one and thought "hey, it's got wires, and batteries, and a big LED display of an alien giving the finger...it must be a bomb!", reported it to the police, and then standard procedure took over (bomb squad detonated one, investigated them, etc.) Boston brought charges against the artists, but later dropped them after coming to an agreement with Turner Broadcasting entailing that Turner pay $2 million.

My personal favourite response was from the head of the King County sherriff in Seattle: "To us, they're so obviously not suspicious ... We don't consider them dangerous....In this day and age, whenever anything remotely suspicious shows up, people get concerned - and that's good. However, people don't need to be concerned about this. These are cartoon characters giving the finger."
posted by Bugbread at 9:36 PM on February 10, 2007


bugbread, there were credible pipe bomb threats made in Boston that day as well. A guy brings what he SAYS is a pipe bomb into a hospital and then the cops start getting calls about devices all over the city? Damn right I'd react.

And the charges have NOT been dropped against anyone.
posted by mkb at 4:55 AM on February 11, 2007


I think they should execute those two terrorartists. Especially the funny-looking one.
posted by BeerFilter at 5:15 AM on February 11, 2007


So all the hip folks think it's funny, despite the fact that probably 80% of the population didn't know what the fuck those things were. What if the resulting traffic jam prevented a family member from reaching the hospital in time ?...not so funny. Maybe the next one will be set up by a homegrown nutcase, and one of the hip people say " Hey look, a Mooninite that wasn't removed, let's take it home" ! BOOOM...not so funny. Viral marketing is fine, go ahead and make your phony YouTube characters, or your low-light porn, but electronic devices ? ...sorry, that was over the top !

/ end old guy rant
posted by lobstah at 6:47 AM on February 11, 2007


lobstah:

I understand your frustration, but doesn't this illustrate that it's impossible to be protected from terrorists. No matter how many rights we take away. One or two determined people is all it takes. The smartest and most effective approach may be to behave like a country that doesn't deserve to be attacked. Not that any country deserves to be attacked.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 7:05 AM on February 11, 2007


"What if the resulting traffic jam prevented a family member from reaching the hospital in time ?...not so funny."

Yes, and the media who were greedy for ratings and the authorities who overreacted should be held accountable.
posted by Eideteker at 9:35 AM on February 11, 2007


>One or two determined people is all it takes.

And has now been proven in todays 'everything has changed' climate - they don't even need to obtain explosive, chemical or biological agents to shutdown a city.

A few wires, a few batteries...

Terrorism is not about killing people - it's about creating an atmosphere of terror, if you can lockup a city with a few electronic signs, then "they have already won".
posted by jkaczor at 10:25 AM on February 11, 2007


Look, I'm not saying it was handled well, but I'd still rather have 1000 "over" reactions, than 1 "under". The media did what media does...it was a story. None of us wants to live in fear, but I suspect that many do, thanks to all the fear mongering. I don't worry about terrorist attacks at all. I do, however, realize that it is a possibility. It was a foolhardy thing to do, and blaming those who reacted is missing the point.
posted by lobstah at 10:35 AM on February 11, 2007


Really? You'd rather have a city constantly locked down, with traffic being daily brought to a halt, disrupting commerce, people dying because they're unable to get to hospitals and whatever other stuff you mentioned in your rant? There's something falsidical in your saying: "Let's always overreact!"

What should have happened:
1. Devices were found.
2. Identifying markings were analyzed.
3. Turner broadcasting was contacted.
4. Turner explains the nature of devices.
5. Devices are removed.
6. Littering fine levied against Turner/ad agency to cover the cost of cleanup.

1-4 should have taken about 30 minutes. No political posturing, no media agenda, nobody trying to look like a hero and a defender of freedom.

Besides, we all know Boston was just acting out to seem important.
posted by Eideteker at 12:45 PM on February 11, 2007


Hey thanks for playing " Strawman" If I ever need my words interpreted, (especially with made up ones) , I'll give you a call.
posted by lobstah at 1:29 PM on February 11, 2007


I'm just following your hyperbolic statement to its logical conclusion.
posted by Eideteker at 1:31 PM on February 11, 2007


I stand corrected... falsidical is indeed a word, however obscure it may be, but the strawman part still applies.
posted by lobstah at 1:35 PM on February 11, 2007


I'm not saying it was handled well, but I'd still rather have 1000 "over" reactions, than 1 "under".

You should probably avoid using your computer. After all, you could shock yourself to death. Sure, it doesn't happen too much, but better to over-react than to under-react.

Me, personally, I figure people should aim for "reacting appropriately", and skip both the "over" and "under" reactions. Sure, in some cases that can be hard, but in this case, the lite-brights were installed in multiple extremely large cities for weeks without a single person reporting one. We're obviously not talking "easily mistakable" here.

Hell, the guy may as well call in anyone wearing a backpack on the subway to the police, because, well, it may be an overreaction, but better have 1000 "over" reactions than 1 "under".
posted by Bugbread at 3:52 AM on February 12, 2007


« Older "Coined the term 'weblog', never made a dime"   |   Guide to the Danish Golden Age Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments