Cartoon Network CEO Resigns Over Aqua Teen Scare 710
DesertBlade writes "Jim Samples, CEO of Cartoon Network, has resigned over the bomb scare prompted by the Aqua Teen marketing campaign. Turner (CN's parent company) ended up paying over 2 million in restitution to the city of Boston, and a man with a thirteen year record at the company has lost his job. Though many people have been citing this as 'the ultimate successful advertising campaign', there have obviously been real consequences from the incident." By virtue of the consequences of the campaign, was this now officially a bad idea? Or is your opinion that this is all far too much knee-jerking? Have your say in the comments.
Buck Stops At The Top (Score:1, Insightful)
I think it's cool that he is taking responsibility instead of cleaning house. He can afford to go without a salary for a good while, and the rest of his accomplishments as CEO will probably earn him a nice position once the smoke clears. The marketing guys who would have been sacrificed if he cleaned house instead, are probably just living to the edge of their means on 5-figure salaries. And if his replacement cleans house, at least he's earned them some time to prepare for the axe.
- Greg
Overreaction of course (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:5, Insightful)
We're spewing hippopotamus repellent and then claiming victory because there are no hippos. All 9/11 opened the door for was paranoia and jingoism.
Stop Spreading Terror! (Score:5, Insightful)
America Is Officially Retarded (Score:5, Insightful)
The government has been very successful in scaring the public into thinking that the terrorism threat is real. The fact is, more people have died from lightning strikes in the past fifty years than from terrorist acts on American soil. This is fueled by the new status of new media as entertainment rather than information, which creates a sea of idiotic speculation before any facts are actually discovered. Witness the media trial of the man accused of Jon Benet's murder, or any of the number of bomb scares that have turned out to be simple security breaches.
There's no simple solution, but I think we as a society need to admit first that we have a problem.
Re:Overreaction of course (Score:2, Insightful)
I say they only slightly overreacted. It was a report of a possible bomb in a very public location. Several very public locations. There was no record of what the devices were, and they should not have been there. Their cartoony look could have been an attempt to get someone to play with them to guarantee a kill. They reacted decisively to neutralize any possible threat.
Your linked example talks about a few pipe bombs in an aquaduct that had been drained so that they could look for submerged items. There will be no people there. They reacted correctly in that situation as well.
If you treat cartoony objects as toys and dismiss bomb reports about them, you are guaranteeing that someone will use that disguise for real bombs. You can't simply shrug it off.
Do I think the CEO should have resigned? No. It was stupid and careless, but nobody was hurt (except that $2mil loss) and there was a ton of publicity.
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:5, Insightful)
Good ol' boy politics, nothing ever changes. (Score:5, Insightful)
Did I miss anything?
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:5, Insightful)
The irony is that this is just the sort of person you actually want at the top, and now he is gone.
Most overblown story ever (Score:5, Insightful)
These 38 lighted signs which were mistaken for bombs, never should have made the news. They did not look like bombs in any way shape or form, and had been in place for a considerable amount of time before people started going apeshit over them. People seem to fail to mention the "real" fake bombs which were planted in Boston on the same day (http://news.bostonherald.com/localRegional/view.
Security will never come through "preparedness" against an enemy which doesn't care whether it lives or dies. If terrorists/crazy dictators/serial killers/thugs want to kill you badly enough, they probably will. The only way we will ever be secure is to make people not want to harm us
It happened because it's Boston (Score:5, Insightful)
But other than causing 9/11, what else is Boston known for?
Well, there's always wasting billions of federal tax dollars to bury a highway to improve the city skyline [wikipedia.org], which lead to
crushing a woman [wikipedia.org] when three-ton ceiling tiles that had been glued to the ceiling fell.
Apparently Boston wasted billions of federal dollars, only to glue three-ton concrete ceiling tiles to their tunnel.
If you want to look at government waste and horrible mismanagement, look no further than Boston. The only reason this happened is because Boston is run by incompetent idiots. The part 9/11 had with this is that 9/11 is Boston's most well known failure, one that they're not eager to repeat.
This is what is meant by the expression... (Score:5, Insightful)
Let me see if I have this right... (Score:3, Insightful)
But these guys are getting fined and losing jobs over something that was truly harmless?
Re:That settles it. (Score:2, Insightful)
No (Score:5, Insightful)
They won't be leaving fucking light-brites at the side of the road.
Some things just aren't plausible.
Meanwhile, in a parallel universe (Score:3, Insightful)
COME ON! It's a huge pile of electronics with a display that's giving you the finger! What retard would possibly not know it's a bomb?
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:5, Insightful)
Praise Allah, the batteries were not even connected and the infidels shrieked as if they were set afire with fuel.
Re:They should've given police a heads-up (Score:2, Insightful)
1) made sure they had permission from the landowners before they placed their ads
2) given the police a heads-up along with photos
3) given the major media a "this is not a story but people may call you about it" heads-up, since people tend to call papers when they see things like bombs"
In the post 911 world, terrorist groups would start off small, and make things like this commonplace, so no one would think about them. Pull your head out of your ***.
Plastic devices with flashing lights or timing devices? Tell me you DID not say that.
"Hey Mr. Mayor, we have this cool idea to advertise our crap electroniclally, strapped to
public property...pay no attention to the man behind the curtain..." ONLY an idiot would
espouse such drivel.
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Boston's Response (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Stop Spreading Terror! (Score:5, Insightful)
So if Boston leaders are of the same caliber of leader as Jim Samples: They should accept some responsibility, admit they over reacted, and absolve Mr.Samples of this "heat" which has given him reason to step down. The marketing campaign was not at fault, Boston was.
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:5, Insightful)
I was never suspicious of a Hello Kitty doll, but now that I've chosen to be suspicious of it, I'm doing my part! In fact, cars explode on the streets of Iraq every day, so now I call 911 everytime I see a parked car. Yet, for some reason, I'm being blamed with clogging the system full of rhetoric and empty false alarms. I just don't get it. Cars explode way more often than Hello Kitty dolls, but my vigilent attitude is not being appreciated!
I love Americans, truely, but this is one particular case wher I am absolutely thrilled that I live in a country in which you can't score political points for making a mountain out of a mole hill. Its getting to the point where you can make yourself look good by selling creative, tangential, and obtuse terrorist threats rather than workmanlike every day global occurances that kill and maim dozens to hundreds of people at a time.
You really have to give the 9/11 atrocity commiters some credit. Crash a few planes, and inspire scenarios of exploding C4-laden Hello Kitty dolls. I mean what the fuck, even domestic bombers know that letters, pipes, and cars is really all you need to be successful. If you want to kill lots of people, creativity is the domain of comic books, not reality.
Re:They should've given police a heads-up (Score:5, Insightful)
In a post-Hitler world, should we allow just any idiot with a radical idea to speak freely?
Atlanta Reacted Better (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:They should've given police a heads-up (Score:5, Insightful)
This exact same public advertising campaign took place in nine other cities with enough brain cells to force a fart out of their asses, and not rampantly overreact to OMG!!!! PINK PONIES FLIPPIN' ME THE BOMB PACK BIRD!!1111 In fact, they had enough brains not to react at all.
Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aqua_Teen_Hunger_For
The Boston PD and its authorities are Proof #1 of Einstein's theory that "two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."
Parallel Universe Fallacy (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:No (Score:5, Insightful)
It would be a grave error in judgement to confuse those of us who fear extremists in our governments more than we fear extremists a thousand miles away as merely narcissistic.
Re:No (Score:5, Insightful)
Having a child is the best reason to be cavalier about this. The world is full of risks, and this particular risk (terrorist litebrite bombs) is well on the "might as well worry about being hit by a meteorite" end of the risk spectrum. Yet, tour child is watching your reactions and noting your opinions in order to develop his or her own sense of reasonable.
Furthermore, your child will eventually be living under the heel of the authorities -- the same authorities who are subconsciously but quickly realizing how much control they can take due to incidents like this... and how much fun it is to control others.
So take care when you are tempted to demand a padded world for your child. That kind of safety, at that price, is not a blessing, will not make them usefully safer, and will not cause them to develop fortitude and strength of character.
Re:slow down and think for a minute (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:1, Insightful)
Really, I'm completely and utterly tired of this attitude. First off, can we please dispense with "in this post 9/11 world". If I here that phrase one more time I'm going to stab someone in the eye with a ballpoint pen. September 11, 2001 was probably the scariest day of my life, thinking "How much of the city are they going to take out?" "Are my friends okay?" It was a tragedy.
The only difference between September 10, 2001 and September 11 is our paranoia level. Terrorism was not invented on that day, thousands of extremists didn't suddenly say "Oh, you know this terrorism thing might just work!" it wasn't even the first time Extremist Islamic Terrorists attacked the US. An LED sign of a cartoon character is just as harmless today as it was over five years ago. Just because everyone has this irrational fear of terrorism doesn't change that fact. I've seen the signs. They were LED boards. The only place you really could of packed explosives was... the battery pack? Which was used to light the damn thing! No, this is nothing more than officials trying to pass the buck. So instead of officials fessing up for a mistake, they are blaming the advertisers, cartoon network. For what? The most you could slap them with is unwanted advertising. Since when has a CEO resigned because someone plastered a sign on a private wall? This is paranoia, plain and simple
Another phrase I hate. "[If you think/do/say such-and-such]... the terrorists have already won." I'm going to be a hypocrite here and use it. On September 11, 2001, the US was defeated by terrorism. Using the definition of terrorism as that of an act of violence intended to cause fear for political goals, then it was entirely successful. People have become to horribly terrified it's ridiculous. I don't have to beat a dead horse by listing the results of America's fears. At the risk of ending this on too political a note; giving up everything out of fear has historically not gone over very well. Feudalism, Fascism, Police States - all created because people would rather give up everything in the name of safety.
Re:Stop Spreading Terror! (Score:5, Insightful)
I couldn't agree more. However, I take serious issue witih the first part of your comment...
This kind of attitude is exactly what is wrong with this country right now. Living in fear of LED signs is exactly what the terrorists want. They're called terrorists. They intend to terrorize us. If we can't walk down the street without freaking out when we see some blinking lights, they have achieved their objective.
Just because we're in a "Post 9/11 World" doesn't mean that we have to freak out and assume that everything out of the ordinary is a terrorist plot. Keep your wits about you, think critically, and respond accordingly. People running around freaking out is only going to make us less safe.
The government has been playing the game right out of the Cold War Play Book. An enemy attacks us, they obviously have a goal to conquer or destroy.
Unfortunately, terrorists aren't playing by the same set of rules. Their goal is to destabilize through fear. They launched a single attack almost 6 years ago, and the American response is "Oh my gosh, it's another attack!" We are terrified. We're scared of each other, of the government, and of some vague group on the other side of the world, who don't have the means to stage a traditional war, or even a single battle.
But hey, we're defending ourselves from terrorism, even if it means scaring all of our civilians into believing anything may be the next attack, and reinforcing the idea that the next attack is coming, even though there is no need for a next attack, because the first one is STILL doing it's job.
Re:Stop Spreading Terror! (Score:3, Insightful)
No, they can't.
The function of a booby trap is to tempt the greedy and the careless into doing something supremely stupid.
It is the big red button that screams "Do Not Touch!"
But the Geek is way too smart to be taken in by anything so utterly ridicuous.
The Geek ---to paraphrase Asimov --- is logical, but not reasonable. He'll accept conspiracy theories that are wildly implausible so long as they are internally consistent.
But madness he cannot understand or accept on its own terms. The Joker in the deck. The man who doesn't play by the rules.
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Let me see if I have this right... (Score:3, Insightful)
The PSP campaign wasn't in the US.
I agree (Score:5, Insightful)
* No source of shrapnel, that plus the odd placing makes them incredibly ineffective as anti-personnel weapons.
* They're WAY too small to cause structural damage, even if the batteries were supposed to be shaped charges. I'm sorry, but I don't see an explosive that size as being able to even scratch a bridge like that.
* No payload -- batteries don't explode (Sony's catch on fire, at most) and even if they did, and even if they were shaped charges, they're oriented completely wrong on the device, so I don't see how they were supposed to cause anti-personnel damage.
* You do NOT call attention to a device like that with blinking lights. SOME of us would know it was a bomb even if it had a cartoon on it and others would assume it was one anyhow. Now, it's true that the IRA used to do something somewhat similar, but what they did was have a small explosion to attract rescue workers & such, then a larger one to kill them. You don't attract people with blinking lights, you'd never be able to properly time the explosion unless you were standing there, waiting to get caught.
So what have we learned here? Hopefully that a terrorist's purpose is to cause terror.
Every time you panic, the terrorists win.
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:5, Insightful)
From the Seattle PI article:
Which one? Bizarro World? :] (Score:5, Insightful)
The kind who knows that real bombs have payloads. The kind that knows that a device that small isn't going to cause structural damage to something like a bridge even if it was 100% high explosive. The kind who knows that they were very, very poorly placed as anti-personnel devices, called unnecessary attention to themselves, and probably wouldn't have been able to kill anyone at all, unless that person had been standing right next to them.
You know, the kind of person who might be found on a bomb squad
--
Every time you panic, the terrorists win.
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:5, Insightful)
Having previously worked in DC at 1700 Pennsylvania Avenue I've seen firsthand how the "authorities" love to play with their toys. "Look, there's a small duffel bag sitting on that newspaper box...it might be a bomb. Let's blow it up because we have the means and it's fun. Crap, it was just someone's work out clothes. Well, at least we got to close down the street, run our lights and sirens, blow something up, and get on TV".
Re:Most overblown story ever (Score:3, Insightful)
What does a bomb look like?
Plastique as mailable as a child's ball of clay? The cartoonist's stock grenade or stick of dynamite? A farmer's truck, weighted down with fertilizer and diesel?
The parcel where there should be no parcels? Movement where there should be no movement? Lights where there should be no lights?
What does a bomb look like?
Re:clarification (Score:3, Insightful)
And it has some choice quotes, like this one:There, proof that both residents and officials of the Pacific Northwest are smarter/less paranoid the residents/officials of Boston.
Re:Stop Spreading Terror! (Score:3, Insightful)
(not to mention that -- if you bolt enough random things to a bridge (which requires that you dig into the concrete), you're going to start weakening the structure, and affecting it's MTBF. )
On the other hand, if Boston authorities had taken 30 seconds to look at what these stupid boxes were doing, they would have realized that it was simply some ghit using public structures as an advertising prop, hunted down the company responsible and charged a couple of executives with public mischief. -- rather than shutting down a bunch of major roadways.
This overreaction shit is stupid. Even with all the bombings in Iraq, drunk drivers are still killing way more people than terrorism, and the tobacco industry is on an entirely different scale.
The reason why the airways are safer has nothing to do with airport security confiscating my jeweler's screwdriver and everything to do with the fact that the next idiot who pulls a weapon in an airliner is gonna do a faceplant after a 6000 foot free-fall.. . Even a clipfull of bullets isn't gonna do you much good when you have 75 passengers taking responsibility for the safety of their aircraft while it's in the air.
If you want America perfectly safe from all terrorist attacks, you're going to have to encase the entire country in a 600 foot thick concrete tomb. Good luck.
Re:No (Score:3, Insightful)
Meta Comment: A Comment About the Comments (Score:3, Insightful)
Its amazing to me how this state of paranoia and fear has not only become so widespread, but ACCEPTED even - as if everything really changed on 9/11. Here's a fact for you: NOTHING CHANGED AFTER 9/11. The ONLY thing that is different in America is the amount of surveillance we are being subjected to and the number of rights that are being eroded before our eyes.
More people die every year from peanut allergies or swimming pool accidents than terrorism. Terrorism IS NOT A BIG THREAT. Beyond that, it is IMPOSSIBLE to completely stop. The war on terror is a FARCE and its SOLE PURPOSE is to subjugate a nation enslaved by comfort and convenience - with their consent.
The people who should have to pay for this are the idiots who overreacted. Did you see those signs? THEY LOOKED LIKE LITE-BRITES and had a CARTOON ALIEN FLIPPING THE BIRD. What muslim extremist would use that as their terrifying logo of doom?!?!
HOW THE HELL DID YOU PEOPLE GET THIS WAY!? AREN'T YOU LOOKING AT THE WORLD AROUND YOU?! Don't you see how absofuckinglutely ridiculous it is to consider the reaction to these HARMLESS and FUNNY signs in any way justifiable?
"Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither" - Thomas Jefferson
Chew on that.
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, I saw a benign interpretation for benign event. It's not like it was an unknown, bomb looking device, that had a countdown running. While I might expect a bomb to be disguised, I certainly wouldn't expect it be disguised as a cartoon figure that will DRAW attention. I also think any terrorists will choose a less attention drawing method. I certainly would. Hell, I'd stuff a bicycle frame with explosives and shrapnel and then park and lock it up in the most densely populated pedestrian traffic area I could find. Having said that, I certainly can't argue that the powers that be in the US state and federal governments might want extreme paranoia as a means for further control of the populace...ouch, I think you might have made my tinfoil hat a little tighter.
Re:Which one? Bizarro World? :] (Score:5, Insightful)
Mod parent up.
I live in Boston. The city screwed up, badly. Pretty much everyone I know thinks city officials made us look completely ridiculous. This was not a case of reasonable precautions, even, as they say, in a post-9/11 world.
All these people keep saying "But it could have been a bomb, you don't know!" or "Well if it had been a bomb, you'd be glad they responded the way they did!"
No. I agree wholeheartedly with the parent here. It couldn't have been a bomb. Literally, physically, something that looks like those devices could not possibly be an explosive device of any serious power, nothing that poses any danger to any structure or even any human who wasn't essentially holding them in his hands.
An ordinary person off the street might not know this. That's fine. But a bomb squad member damn well better know this, and it terrifies me that the bomb squad members in our city apparently don't. What the hell are they going to do if there is a real bomb, and they have to try and disable it without blowing up anything important? If they don't even have the basic grasp required to know there should be a payload, what exactly do they know about the construction of bombs? Seriously, I'm not nearly as bothered by the possibility of some terrorists planting a bomb as I am knowing that if there is a bomb, our trained professionals whose job it is to handle that sort of thing won't be able to do anything about it, even if they know where the bomb is and have plenty of extra time. What the hell is the bomb squad for?
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:3, Insightful)
What exactly are cops supposed to look for when looking for bombs? The nature of bombs is that they are fairly easy to hide. Put them inside a computer, a cardboard box, a large melon, hello kitty dolls, inside a car, under your clothes, whatever. To try to find bombs based on what they look like is therefore largely futile and a waste of everyone's time. But on the other side, the benefits of allowing people to put crazy shit in random places is huge. In order for society to be able to grow and flourish, people (and yes, soulless entertainment corporations) need to be free to be as weird as they want as long as they aren't being explicitly harmful. Perhaps Cartoon Network could have known better, but in that this was a campaign that went across many cities and Boston only reacted the way they did after a few weeks of the ads being out, I think it's reasonable to say that the risk of this happening was fairly low, and thus that Cartoon Network can't be held too responsible for bad luck.
Him taking the fall is understandable and probably a good PR move, but it should be pointed out that his position at the top is debatable. Cartoon Network is wholly owned by Turner Broadcasting, which in turn is wholly owned by Time Warner. He has plenty of bosses.
Re:...a tiny correction (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:3, Insightful)
Exactly, the point is not to "take one for the team", the point is to stand up and fight until the end.
Patton said it best:
"The object of war is not to die for ones country, its to make the other poor bastard die for his"
This isn't just applicable to war. It's also a lesson about life. What's better than taking the heat for someone else? Fixing the broken system and making the world a better place.
Quitting isn't always the best solution.
Re:Most overblown story ever (Score:5, Insightful)
Utter failure of threat assessment (Score:5, Insightful)
Anybody who's ever been stuck in traffic can understand the knee-jerk "those bozos should pay" response.
But anybody who cares about national security and terrorism should be sobered by what happened in this case: an utter failure of threat assessment. Our ability to survive terrorism is not just reliant on the ability to detect and respond to threats: it's crucial to be able to detect the lack of threats and not respond to them.
What Boston demonstrated is that they are ripe for terrorism. After all, terrorism is about creating terror, not about inflicting actual damage. Boston showed you can terrorize them with some children's toys and no explosives at all.
Of course, the knee-jerk conservative reaction will also include the phrase "abundance of caution" and "we can't take any chances". The problem is if you have an abundance of caution and can't take any chances, then a real terrorist action can have you dancing all over the place trying to respond to decoy threats and missing the real action.
Correctly assessing situations that are not threatening is just as important to security as correctly assessing situations that are.
Re:No (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe, if you really are that fucking scared that your child is going to become a victim of a terrorist attack, you should lock them in a room in your basement, and feed them by sliding trays under the door. Because, and I suppose you didn't know, along with the near zero probability of your child being killed in a terrorist attack, there are also other, much more probable ways for your children to die, that do not involve malice on the part of anyone at all. What a concept, eh?!
I hope, so very, very much, that our society does not continue down the path that you obviously want to lead it down, because I will blame you, along with the rest of the people that let this neo-"Red Scare" get the best of their common sense, if my son must live in a United States of America that is completely transformed, from the environment that I grew up in, into some sort of Orwellian, locked down nanny-state in which everyone questions everyone else, and the slightest thing that is deemed abnormal is rejected and destroyed.
I sound pissed off, and it is because I am. Very much so. Because I've got a kid, too, and if a little common sense, context, and commitment to life and liberty is the difference between my son leading a fulfilling life or being the next Winston Smith, then I am all for the common sense, context, life, and liberty.
Massachusetts attorney general quote (Score:5, Insightful)
I think this quote, by the Attorney General [state.ma.us] of the State of Massachusetts, Martha Coakley, sums up the overreaction and the unwillingness to look at the situation rationally:
(My source for that quote is a Boston Globe article [boston.com].)
Oooooooh! Batteries and wires!! Run away!
My feeling is this: if I lived in the state, I'd damn well make sure I stayed away from Radio Shack, because I'm likely to get caught in the crossfire when someone buys a few electronics components and the SWAT team comes in to take out the "terrorist" with a storm of bullets. Have these people never, ever seen a homemade electronics project before!? For God's sake, MIT [mit.edu] is located in their state!
Where to draw the line? (Score:5, Insightful)
The truth is that a car parked underneath a bridge is a much more realistic and simple solution for a terrorist. However, the city isn't calling out the bomb squad for every car parked under a bridge. In fact, I cannot think of more than one case that I've heard about where such an event has happened. I wonder why this hasn't happened more?
Really, the line should be drawn somewhere, and I think that line is 'common sense'. I think that this is a case of misunderstandings. The artists were too naive, they underestimated the stupidity of other people. The city reacted based on THEIR OWN concerns. This was not a hoax, the devices were not bombs, they weren't intended to look like bombs. Could some people mistake them as bombs? Apparently. However, I do not believe that one should be legally responsible for the mistaken actions and responses of another. The artists did break some laws, but nothing more than vandelism, trespassing, or littering.
Is this the result of the last presidental elections when Kerry was called a 'flip-flopper'? You know, sometimes people make mistakes. Maybe the city of Boston should realize that and consider changing their stance. Sometimes it is better to admit mistakes and correct one's actions, rather than carry a bad idea forward just because you're afraid of a little change. For that matter, I'd rather have a "flip flopper" as president than one that can't admit that they were mistaken in their judgements and decisions, and continues to drive our country forward like a Lemming off a cliff.
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:5, Insightful)
i think the fact that numerous signs posted in other cities caused no disruption or panic is a sure sign that boston's reaction was NOT the correct ex-ante expectation of what would happen.
Re:They should've given police a heads-up (Score:1, Insightful)
I live in Boston. On Massachusetts Avenue (a major thoroughfare, after Tremont, Huntington, Boylston, Commonwealth, etc.). There was no panic. There was no particular congestion. I didn't even hear about it until someone called me and told me to watch the news.
If you think the Boston PD is stupid for calling the bomb squad in when they find electronic devices they're unfamiliar with UNDER A BRIDGE, then I don't know what to say to you.
Hindsight is 20/20. What would you have said if they HAD been bombs and the Boston police had left them alone... because of why? Because they looked like Spongebob? Because they were flipping you off? What one of those reasons would be satisfactory for you to excuse the PD of ignoring a suspicious-looking device?
I KNOW I don't even look like a bomb, but I've been stopped by the police for hanging out under bridges. They're sensitive places. Don't be a douchebag just because 9 other cities didn't do their jobs.
Bottom Line (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe it was, indeed, a bone-head idea to "tag" public spaces, but the government and media need to quit making stories out of nothing. There's plenty of stupidity to go around on this one.
The clue phone is ringing:
Boston, Line 1:
Your anti-terror "heroes" went all Barney Fife over nothing. You guys just need to chill the f**k out and learn to triage terror from shennanigans. If you go the full-monty everytime some paranoid citizen dials the bomb-squad over flashing light and some wires, you're gonna have to figure out a way to pay for that kind of over-kill out of your own budget instead of drama-queening your way into restitution.
Viral Marketers, Line 2:
WTF? Maybe go for something a little less obscure the next go-round, eh? Only about 1 in 5,000 people driving by those signs had any kind of clue what the hell those bird-flipping little dudes were anyway. Way to spook the natives, dorks. Don't forget to include some useful information about your "product" next time. Seriously, this is like the corporate version of "JACKASS."
Bottom Line: Two stupid parties did two stupid things. One was the government the other wasn't. Guess which one wins?
I think Meatwad summed it up like this:
I'll touch 'em all the way to the trash can is what I'll do...
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:2, Insightful)
I wish I shared your faith. I have traveled extensively, and have worked in many different fields, and my experience with The Population of Earth is that unfortunately they are either too myopic, too uneducated or too busy to worry about governments' machinations. That too, is a tinfoil hat cry; That people are too myopic to see reality is a situation engineered by the masters of the mass media. That people are ignorant of politics is an engineered situation by those in charge of education. That people are too busy just making their mortgage payments is a situation engineered by the financial sector. All corporates have a similar goal: To sell stuff. A compliant, constantly consuming, politically disenfranchised public is the kind of public most willing to allow wealth to flow uphill without resisting. The corporate sector is deliberately engineering a system that people are unable to fight without catastrophic loss to themselves in the form of mortgage defaults, bankruptcy or outright criminalization under ever broadening crime and terrorism legislation. Time to invade another country, this time over tin, because I just used up the national inventory!
Re:I agree (Score:2, Insightful)
And the reason you'd make IEDs out of flashing colored lights instead of, say, a garbage can would be?
And, let's just ask ourselves one actual serious question here: How many bombings have there actually been in public like this? The Olympic bomber guy, and, well, that's about it. (And Atlanta, of course, didn't react to the signs at all.)
Terrorists.win == True (Score:4, Insightful)
They won.
America the brave. It is to laugh.
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:4, Insightful)
"...the morons who thought that an LED cartoon character giving the finger could be a bomb."
It only looks like an LED cartoon character if you're actually familiar with the character. Otherwise it just looks like a panel of randomly placed LEDs. I believe the people who mistakenly thought it could be a bomb did so with the most earnest of intentions. It would be like throwing round red capsules that explode in a puff of smoke into subway tunnels, then being surprised that no one understands it's a pokemon marketing ploy.
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:2, Insightful)
If the boxes really were part of an organized campaign of planted explosives, the government would be cheered for its foresight and training. When it's nothing, people like you shrug it off because it didn't turn out tragic this time. That's the price the authorities pay for protecting the people as the people demand.
Re:clarification (Score:2, Insightful)
Pffft, it's not just the Pacific Northwest.
Atlanta didn't freak out, and Atlanta has actually been bombed repeatedly by a terrorist, namely, Eric Robert Rudolph, who, started with the 1996 Olympics, then proceeded to bomb an abortion clinic and a lesbian nightclub, then moving over to Alabama for the last attack. The Olympic attack was, in fact, 'leave an unattended napsack in public'. I don't know what the others were.
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:No (Score:3, Insightful)
No, it's not. The only 'container' it had was just big enuf for 4 D batteries. And with the 4 D batteries in it, there was no other room for your "explosive charge and projectiles".
Your answer is to have someone mess with it as people walk by. If you're wrong and it explodes, the person messing with it definitely dies.
By all means, if you really think it suspicious, have the bomb squad clear the area and check it out. Personally, I think it's an over-reaction, but....
The problem came after the bomb squad check out the first one, confirmed it WAS NOT a bomb, and they continued to freak out about the others. That's why everyone thinks Boston (Officials, not the entire city) is stupid- they continued to over-react to things that had already been proven harmless.
Put yourself in the position where if it is a bomb, but it gets anyone, you're on the rack. If it isn't, but you've inconvenienced people, you're on the rack.
I'll choose "It's not a bomb, but I have it checked out. Once it's determined to be safe, I STOP FREAKING OUT."
Re:No (Score:2, Insightful)
I cannot mention any of them here because I would be moderated troll, since they are unacceptable.
Let me guess - genocide is the solution to all our terrorist problems?
I understand who the enemy really is, and what needs to be done to them.
No you don't. The worst atrocities in history have been perpetrated by people who were certain they were right, and proceed to treat their "enemy" as sub-human.
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Stop Spreading Terror! (Score:3, Insightful)
I forgot to mention your irony. Well, not exactly irony, but you've spelled it out well. The terrorists used one action to set in motion their real goal. The US has been destabilized for almost 6 years. People trust their government less, and a couple kids putting light-brights around town can cripple one of America's largest cities due to the fear. Oh my gosh Martha, what shall we do? There's a light bright! It must be the bad guys finally back to get us.
I guess I see the problem though. There is a strong Christian following in our administration. This is a running theme in Christianity. Something bad happened 2,000 years ago, and (theoretically) we know he's coming back for more. I'm not all that into christian mythology, but I think it's Revelations, or something of that sort? I guess if we follow in the current trend, we'll be playing this game for a long, long time.
You mention the damage WWII caused through Europe, and to those of foreign descent in the US. There are wrongs that go back a lot farther. I usually refer to "Thanksgiving" as "the celebration of the white man's conquest of the Indian lands". But hey, whatever. In the end, they got casino's and radioactive desert. We got
It's a great country we live in.
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:5, Insightful)
Time to burn some Karma......
I am sorry, but if you dumbfucks in the USA think that giving up all of the freedoms you held dear because 2,000 people died when thousands die yearly from more foolish causes in your country, then your brilliant marketers and others that actually show intelligence, will be jailed as enemies of the state or have their lives ruined in some other way. Any individual that ever thinks independently is going to end up jailed in your 'post 9/11' world. The only thing that truly died on 9/11 was your freedom.
Post 9/11.... What's different? More state control? Less Freedom for Amercians in their own countries? The terrorist attacks of 9/11 were what Ronald Reagan dreamed of, yet Georgie let it happen. The great country of 'America' is dead and lost to the fascists. (yes, I'll say it). Autocratic Conservatives controlled by Corporations. Short Form.. Fascists. I used to look up to you in the US, now I pity you.
I'm sorry for the swearing and all this, but damn this is absolutely ridiculous. An incredible marketing campaign gets several million dollars worth of fines and the guy at the top fired??? Hello!!!
Post 9/11 world. If I hear that phrase again I'm gonna puke. Post 9/11 world .
If any American on this forum actually thinks that a situation like this should just be chalked up to a 'Post 9/11 world', read your fucking constitution, feel half of the outrage that I'm feeling right now, and do something other than put new programs in your Tivos. Your 'Post 9/11 world' is as much a fiction as the Simpsons.
Peace out to those that are outraged about this. Not from an ATHF point of view, but a what is wrong with the US point of view. This is not a slag to the parent, which is actually a thoughtful post, but a absolutely gut-wrenching reaction to 'Post 9-11 world'. The World did not change on 9-11, you did.
Re:Stop Spreading Terror! (Score:3, Insightful)
The devices were not large enough to cause significant structural damage and neither contained the shrapnel nor were placed correctly to be antipersonnel weapons.
Anything could be a bomb, but the question is, what would be effective as a bomb. It's far easier to make an effective bomb out of a trash can or a parked vehicle - we have, in fact, seen both in this country in multiple high-profile incidents. The ATHF signs had neither the size nor correct placement to be particularly effective.
Why the hell would you place a booby trap 10 feet off the ground, where no one can touch it? It makes sense for the police to excersize caution when they investigate it, just as they would with an unattended bag in an airport or a suspicious package in the street. But caution doesn't mean paranoia.
This, of course, has nothing to do with anything. We would be happy to have "mad" terrorists - no, it is the calculating, methodical terrorists that pose a real threat. A madman will run into a restaurant with a bomb and kill a few people. Someone who spends years planning an attack can kill thousands.
For those of you who live with this "Post 9/11" mentality, consider this: about 6800 people die in the US, every day, from a variety of causes. It's just a matter of when and from what. So, the question is, how do terrorist attacks rank against other causes of death in the US? They aren't even a blip on the radar.
Heart disease kills about as many people every two days as the attacks of 9/11 did. So where's the "war on heart disease"? Why aren't we banning fatty foods? After all, we have to be safe!
Motor vehicle accidents kill about as many people every two weeks as the attacks of 9/11 did. We're willing to spend billions on defense against terrorist attacks, yet we can't seem to require (what should be) basic safety equipment like side airbags and stability control. If an $8000 Kia (in fact, every new Kia) can have side airbags, why can't they be standard on every vehicle?
Terrorists want us to fear their attacks. But, when you look at it in context, terrorists just don't kill very many people. Being prepared makes sense - suspicious packages should be investigated, bomb threats should be taken seriously, and, yes, we should probably secure our borders. But being prepared doens't mean being afraid. Most homeowners have fire insurance, but they don't worry every minute about a fire burning down their house.
Of course, you're far more likely to die in a fire than you are to be killed by a terrorist attack. But that's not the impression you would get by listening to the news.
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Stop Spreading Terror! (Score:2, Insightful)
Unfortunately, most Americans are completely oblivious to what the "terrorists" want. Their activities only serve to heighten our fear and anger directed towards them. Their objectives, meanwhile, remain almost completely unachieved...
Re:I agree (Score:3, Insightful)
Considering Boston was the only city out of a dozen or so to even bat and eye at this let alone through down a gauntlet and put the entire city under seige is proof enough for the rest of us that they overreacted on a whole new level.
Those stupid things were here in Seattle too and people thought they were an intriguing gimmick. I think it's sad that innocent people are suffering by getting arrested and charged for criminal action and a company had to shell out big cash all because smug politicians have zero humility and cannot admit they freaked out. Excuses out the wazoo only make them look more inept.
Dumb dumb dumb (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:They should've given police a heads-up (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:3, Insightful)
Obvious counter-counter-argument: The examples you describe are all rather ordinary events. The lightboards were anything but, being crude electrically-powered devices of no apparent use or reason for being there. Barring other logical explanation, the authorities were right to treat the devices with suspicion.
My Conclusion: Everyone involved should be ashamed of their lack of forethought and moderation. The bomb squad really needs to learn to chill out and better analyze the situation before saturating it with a bomb-proof material apparently consisting partially of shredded reprocessed post-consumer cash. The marketing company really needs to learn to think through the possible consequences of their actions, take reactionary idiots into account, and to provide reassuring factors in advance... say, a label saying who placed the device (hell, even a front-company name and an 800 number leading to a concerned-sounding recorded message and a voice-mailbox routed to
My bonus, director's cut, generalized offtopic rant: Personally, as both a marketer and a citizen, I'm annoyed by all these "guerrilla advertising" tactics of marketers who knowingly and willingly paste, post, and plaster their advertisements all over public property-- it's like the corporate version of uninspired felt-marker taggers, adding nothing worthwhile, just pissing on hydrants for their own pleasure.
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:5, Insightful)
Please, don't provide any encouragement or validation to this flawed line of reasoning. As a free and open society with limited resources, we have to be prepared to accept a certain amount of risk. "Erring on the side of caution," (i.e. maximum panic-mode) for such an obviously low-risk situation is irresponsible, expensive, and counterproductive.
Rather than live in a fantasy world where Bostonians are applauded as heroes because they disarm lite brites filled with imaginary explosives, we need to rationally think about this. Otherwise, there's no end to this madness.
Anything could be a bomb. Can you ever rule out the possibility of "the terrorists" surgically implanting bombs within their abdominal cavities? Or what if evil terrorist surgeons implanted bombs into unknowing patients? In which case... maybe YOU could be a bomb! Maybe I'm a bomb! What if they've been at work since we were all born. Maybe... we're all bombs! So, in light of this, what should we do now? Surgically operate on everyone--just to be sure? My God! We'd be heroes, the saviors of a very thankful nation if we were right!
So, the question is then: why should we discard my obviously silly possibility but still consider the similarly ridiculous killer lite-brite scenario?
-Grym
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:1, Insightful)
Re: Oh come on you can't be serious. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:1, Insightful)
Tell ya what, give me your address and I'll personally drop off a package at your front door. Then you can try and figure out whether it's got explosives in it or not. For added fun, you can also try and figure out whether it's wired to a pressure or mercury switch that'll set it off if you try to move it. Maybe one of your kids will see it first, before you even get home. Then you'll have the pleasure of explaining to the media how happy you are that your kid was the one who detonated it, instead of those silly cops over-reacting and sending in the bomb-squad.
This kind of action is only considered an "over-reaction" when it turns out to be a false alarm.
Terrorists won (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:2, Insightful)
You, me and everyone else with an opinion has debated whether this device could or should be interpreted as a possible threat. You say it is understandable that it would be seen as a threat, other's say the opposite, but I haven't really seen anyone answer, or even ask, the most important question. This event is over, so we're looking at it with hindsight, but the more important question is how do we determine what is acceptable in the future?
When I hear people say that it "had wires and lights" and that it had a box attached that "could have been full of explosives," I picture an amazingly high number of devices that fit those descriptions. When I hear that the police "couldn't take any chances," I picture each of those devices being confiscated and deactivated. When I hear "the company should have know better" than to place something that could "obviously" be considered a threat in public, I picture all the things that me or my friends do and I have no choice but to wonder what exactly we need to be more careful about to avoid this kind of reaction?
It's an important question. People use words like "obvious," but it is not so obvious to me what is right and what is wrong here.
If we decide based on actual threat significance, all of our cars are going to be confiscated. Not only are they capable of holding a very large amount of explosives, but they've been on the short list of terrorist-preferred bomb delivery methods for quite some time. Since they have the capability plus an actual history of danger, we should be very worried about them, right?
I think most people would see this argument as absurd. We need our cars, and cars are common. We can't just go around labeling every car as suspicious. It's just common sense. At least that's what I hear everyone saying in my head, but that gets me to my second potential criteria for deciding whether something could be considered a threat. Is it unusual, does it have a compartment big enough to house a bomb, and does it have some electronic gear attached. That seems to be what many of these people are labeling "suspicious."
I routinely carry around a cell phone and I often have a portable game console with me. Sometimes I have a laptop. Most people would recognize these as common, and they would not cause suspicion. They're also arguably too small to house a bomb. Like many people, I have a couple of game consoles at home as well, but I don't commonly carry them with me and they're never turned on with a batter pack and slung under my arm. If I did this, for example to play a game on a small LCD in public, would it be unusual enough to get attention? Should I take some precautions to let people know the device is ok? In the groups of people I tend to associate with, this would be slightly unusual, but immediately recognized as innocuous. To an elderly woman, such a box might go unrecognized and cause alarm.
But what if I wasn't carrying a PS2(full sized old one), but an unusual computer of about the same size. It's a mini-itx in a clear case with two hard drives, a battery pack and plenty of lights. It's basically a fancy DVR that I jazzed up a little to make it look "cool" including hiding the drives and batter behind a metal shelf for a clean appearance. It's only recognizable as a computer by someone fairly knowledgeable about such things, and even then only if they take a moment to look a little closer. Basically, until further inspection, it's just a box with a bunch of lights and electronics with a boxed off area plenty big enough to house a bomb. It is very unusual compared to what people are used to seeing on a daily basis, but it's really just a common computer on the inside. Should it be "obvious" to me that people might become alarmed and should I take special precautions to warn them that it's not dangerous? If I accidentally leave it at the bus stop, should I expect th
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:3, Insightful)
"The illusion of due diligence" (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:4, Insightful)
The evil genius of Osama bin Laden was to realize that there is a "critical switch" in American psychology that he could flip. He doesn't have to take us down himself, just set the process in motion and watch as the government and society slowly destroy themselves.
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:3, Insightful)
Since you're such an explosives expert, why don't you outline what changes should be made to bomb-squad policy in order to avoid these incidents in the future? Hell, I've got an idea! Next time they have a bomb threat, they can just call up you and the other slashdot nerds! Your linux experience will come in real handy while you're on your hands and knees, with your face inches away from what could be a live explosive. Then you can show all those dumb comps what a joke their job really is!
Re:Terrorists.win == True (Score:3, Insightful)
People who spout off empty platitudes like "All they wanted was to incite fear and massive panic amongst the people of the USA. They won," are only helping the world to continue to not understand what's happening. This is not ALL "they" wanted. They certainly want more than just that. The word "they" suggests a monolithic organization that does not actually exist. Each participant has their own motivations and goals. Treating them all the same and ascribing to their actions the vague and abstract goal of only wanting to make people afraid is ludicrous.
I'm not saying that everyone just needs nurturing and sympathy and then we'll magically have world peace and brotherly love. I'm saying understand them -- know your enemy.
Find out what turned those people who are against you into enemies, and act to stop that from happening to more people, so that in time there will be fewer people who want to be your enemy. If you do not understand how the enemy thinks, if you do not know what he wants or understand how he most likely will try to achieve his ends, you are at a hopeless disadvantage.
Take away your enemies' motivations for hating you.
Understand their true goals so that you can thwart them properly.
Or shit your pants every time a couple of pothead cartoon marketers stick up a couple of lite brights in public areas. The choice is yours.
Globalization forced him to resign (Score:2, Insightful)
The U.S.A. is full of hysterical ninnies whose sense of being American does not extend beyond cheap slogans invented by our British imperial enemy. That's why they can't see the enemy within: they have nothing left in their minds that is truly American that they can compare with Cheney, to reveal that he is totally un-American, and Bush, too, by implication, because he does everything Cheney tells him to do.
9-11 was orchestrated by the enemy within, and that enemy's agenda is globalization, the new imperialism. The Economist magazine, based in London, just released a special, boasting of the revival of the British Empire through globalization! Where is the spirit of 1776? Where is the rigorous scientific method of Benjamin Franklin, not just in his electrical experiments, but in his political intelligence and political leadership. Never satisfied with judgements based on appearances, he always sought to uncover the principles governing all the action.
Apply Franklin's method to "terrorism". Look at the vote fraud in 2000, the bigger vote fraud in 2004, the pre-inaugural rush in late 2000- early 2001 to nominate John Ashcroft for Attorney General. What is the more probable motive for 9-11: to make the U.S. submit to the rule of Osama bin Laden, or to establish a police state under Bush and Cheney, or to allow Bush and Cheney to loot the U.S. until the U.S. Treasury is no longer able to sell bonds, putting our government totally in the hands of the financial circle behind Cheney & Bush?
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:There is such a thing as bad publicity (sort of (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Buck Stops At The Top (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, me neither. You're not very good at it.
Listen, when YOU have a job that involves risking your life on a regular basis, THEN you can comment.
Ah, the old "you can't complain about the food unless you're a chef" chestnut. Pay attention, idiot: When it's my money paying for the food, or when I have to wait two hours for it while it gets cold because some jerkoff like you thinks it might be a bomb, I have every right to comment.
Welcome to anarchy (Score:3, Insightful)