CNN reports that Jakarta has been bombed.
September 9, 2004 12:02 AM Subscribe
CNN reports that Jakarta has been bombed. Here's the explosion cloud rising. Here's a shot of Plaza 89 after the explosion, and here's another from a different perspective. Has flickr beaten textamerica in the race to beat CNN? Are ma_girl and fauzanazmi so different that they must use moblog services to suit their personalities or is it something else? How much specialization and differentation can we expect in the moblog arena? Will there be moblog streams of current events like this bombing in Jakarta? Will tagging suffice for such a task? Or is this just another terrorist bombing in Jakarta, I'm up late, and found a photo from a bombing before the story even broke on any of the major news sites? Ennui.
> breakingnewsfilter
Looks like plenty more to me. So back off, Bob.
posted by SteelyDuran at 12:25 AM on September 9, 2004
Looks like plenty more to me. So back off, Bob.
posted by SteelyDuran at 12:25 AM on September 9, 2004
okay, is it just me, or is this post more than a little jaded and dispassionate? I mean, yes, there's lots of coverage, but it's a fucking bombing, and a nasty one at that, not an excuse to exercise journalistic one-upsmanship.
posted by Parannoyed at 12:36 AM on September 9, 2004
posted by Parannoyed at 12:36 AM on September 9, 2004
filchyboy, c. 2001:
"so, the world trade center has been bombed. You can view it from this webcame here, but the refresh rate is disappointingly slow. Don't you think that with today's modern technology we could have webcams that refresh more than once every 15 minutes?"
posted by Space Coyote at 12:49 AM on September 9, 2004
"so, the world trade center has been bombed. You can view it from this webcame here, but the refresh rate is disappointingly slow. Don't you think that with today's modern technology we could have webcams that refresh more than once every 15 minutes?"
posted by Space Coyote at 12:49 AM on September 9, 2004
Caveat: I'm drunk.
Now, what I don't understand is... why Jakarta? Maybe my geography knowledge is far too limited but why would anyone bomb IT. I can understand NY, Toronto, LA, or other places that represent (to some extent) things that aren't, you know... but Jakarta? I mean, wtf? Isn't that tantamount to beating up the wimp on the playground? I mean, do these people really think that bombing an 'easy target' demonstrates their might? (note: I understand there is an Australian embassy there but still, I mean... please.)
In essence, what do these groups have against Australians? The ones I've met were all very nice and didn't even come close to the stereotype. In May of '97, I spent a lovely month there with a little Miss I met on IRC... I can't see what anyone could have against these people. What am I missing?
(Sorry flichyboy, but I'm too intoxicated to understand the whole moblog thing to comment on it... but I think I appreciate that this isn't solely a "bombing" newsfilter post.)
posted by dobbs at 12:55 AM on September 9, 2004
Now, what I don't understand is... why Jakarta? Maybe my geography knowledge is far too limited but why would anyone bomb IT. I can understand NY, Toronto, LA, or other places that represent (to some extent) things that aren't, you know... but Jakarta? I mean, wtf? Isn't that tantamount to beating up the wimp on the playground? I mean, do these people really think that bombing an 'easy target' demonstrates their might? (note: I understand there is an Australian embassy there but still, I mean... please.)
In essence, what do these groups have against Australians? The ones I've met were all very nice and didn't even come close to the stereotype. In May of '97, I spent a lovely month there with a little Miss I met on IRC... I can't see what anyone could have against these people. What am I missing?
(Sorry flichyboy, but I'm too intoxicated to understand the whole moblog thing to comment on it... but I think I appreciate that this isn't solely a "bombing" newsfilter post.)
posted by dobbs at 12:55 AM on September 9, 2004
Parannoyed: It's not jaded and dispassionate. For the Metafilter crowd it's extremely relevant.
Many of us are either using/consuming or creating non-traditional information streams. Probably just about as many people here are very interested in bankrupting and/or abolishing the traditional publication streams, especially if we can increase the speed, accuracy, objectiveness and human perspective of said streams, and otherwise eliminating the entirely useless "celebrity" component of media and journalism.
Seeing "personal", non-professional photography and journalism about the incident just drove it home for me in a way no sanitized CNN photo ever would.
If you want "dispassionate" "news" that's not from a tech/blog focus, maybe you should try something else?
posted by loquacious at 12:59 AM on September 9, 2004
Many of us are either using/consuming or creating non-traditional information streams. Probably just about as many people here are very interested in bankrupting and/or abolishing the traditional publication streams, especially if we can increase the speed, accuracy, objectiveness and human perspective of said streams, and otherwise eliminating the entirely useless "celebrity" component of media and journalism.
Seeing "personal", non-professional photography and journalism about the incident just drove it home for me in a way no sanitized CNN photo ever would.
If you want "dispassionate" "news" that's not from a tech/blog focus, maybe you should try something else?
posted by loquacious at 12:59 AM on September 9, 2004
> but the refresh rate is disappointingly slow.
Whoa there. I think it's significant that news could be received first from a "raw" source such as those, rather than pre-packaged and pre-interpreted (and pre-linked to al Qaeda) through CNN. I'm perfectly able to view the photos and feel the fear and outrage on my own, thanks. And perhaps even moreso when looking through the eyes of the first incredulous witnesses -- what they choose to focus on.
Maybe that's not what you're dismissing. But i sure comes off that way.
posted by SteelyDuran at 1:03 AM on September 9, 2004
Whoa there. I think it's significant that news could be received first from a "raw" source such as those, rather than pre-packaged and pre-interpreted (and pre-linked to al Qaeda) through CNN. I'm perfectly able to view the photos and feel the fear and outrage on my own, thanks. And perhaps even moreso when looking through the eyes of the first incredulous witnesses -- what they choose to focus on.
Maybe that's not what you're dismissing. But i sure comes off that way.
posted by SteelyDuran at 1:03 AM on September 9, 2004
I thought it was cool. Thanks. Just shows how cameras are everywhere and move faster than the mainstream press. Can you define moblog for us not in the know?
posted by stbalbach at 1:06 AM on September 9, 2004
posted by stbalbach at 1:06 AM on September 9, 2004
> Can you define moblog for us not in the know?
"moblog" splices together the words "mobile" and "weblog". There's a history at Joi Ito's site and a bunch of useful info and links at Wikipedia.
posted by SteelyDuran at 1:13 AM on September 9, 2004
"moblog" splices together the words "mobile" and "weblog". There's a history at Joi Ito's site and a bunch of useful info and links at Wikipedia.
posted by SteelyDuran at 1:13 AM on September 9, 2004
Agreed, SteelyDuran.
I actually clicked on the main Fox News link I emedded in my last comment (and yeah, I feel dirty) and the photo they chose to run is some low-res piece of crap with the bombed buildings in the deep background with a ring of police-type persons in the well focussed foreground.
Pretty standard - and lame - last century human-interest-centric textbook photojournalism. (Mind, I understand the need for human-centric journalism, but disdain the blanketed and formulaic application of it. I don't want to see a bunch of uniforms and a blurry building, I want to see real details. Such obvious manipulations and machinations by the established press are growing seriously tiresome.)
Whereas the flickr mo/blogged images are of a decent resolution (no damnable copyright/license issues as money isn't involved) and they actually show a bit more of the buildings and the scale and detail of the damage.
posted by loquacious at 1:25 AM on September 9, 2004
I actually clicked on the main Fox News link I emedded in my last comment (and yeah, I feel dirty) and the photo they chose to run is some low-res piece of crap with the bombed buildings in the deep background with a ring of police-type persons in the well focussed foreground.
Pretty standard - and lame - last century human-interest-centric textbook photojournalism. (Mind, I understand the need for human-centric journalism, but disdain the blanketed and formulaic application of it. I don't want to see a bunch of uniforms and a blurry building, I want to see real details. Such obvious manipulations and machinations by the established press are growing seriously tiresome.)
Whereas the flickr mo/blogged images are of a decent resolution (no damnable copyright/license issues as money isn't involved) and they actually show a bit more of the buildings and the scale and detail of the damage.
posted by loquacious at 1:25 AM on September 9, 2004
Hmmm. The lack of EXIF data on the Flickr image makes me think that photo was snagged from another source rather than taken by the Flickr image. In which case it's more likely a local news source beating CNN, which isn't all the surprising.
posted by nthdegx at 1:36 AM on September 9, 2004
posted by nthdegx at 1:36 AM on September 9, 2004
"taken by the Flickr image"
...takeb by the Flickr user, sorry.
posted by nthdegx at 1:37 AM on September 9, 2004
...takeb by the Flickr user, sorry.
posted by nthdegx at 1:37 AM on September 9, 2004
dobbs> Indonesia's chock full of weapons, Muslim extremists in possession of those weapons, and Australian sex tourists. Oh, and it's got shitty security protecting things.
Remember Bali? Evidently, neither does anyone else.
posted by Pseudoephedrine at 1:41 AM on September 9, 2004
Remember Bali? Evidently, neither does anyone else.
posted by Pseudoephedrine at 1:41 AM on September 9, 2004
It was the Australian embassy that was bombed.
ABC News Report
There's your explanation.
posted by cheaily at 2:05 AM on September 9, 2004
ABC News Report
There's your explanation.
posted by cheaily at 2:05 AM on September 9, 2004
Also.... Australia was key in helping East Timor gain independence a couple of years ago. My guess is that there's some terrorist groups who are still holding a grudge.
posted by cheaily at 2:08 AM on September 9, 2004
posted by cheaily at 2:08 AM on September 9, 2004
I can't see what anyone could have against these people. What am I missing?
The Australian government's support for the Iraq war, which would not be looked on kindly by Indonesian extremists? Long-standing mutual mistrust between elements of the Indonesian and Australian populations, despite reasonably good government-level relations? Worsening government-level relations since the current Australian government took office in 1996, over things like Australia's support for East Timor during its struggles for independence in 1999? The fact that there's an Australian election on October 9th?
posted by rory at 2:10 AM on September 9, 2004
The Australian government's support for the Iraq war, which would not be looked on kindly by Indonesian extremists? Long-standing mutual mistrust between elements of the Indonesian and Australian populations, despite reasonably good government-level relations? Worsening government-level relations since the current Australian government took office in 1996, over things like Australia's support for East Timor during its struggles for independence in 1999? The fact that there's an Australian election on October 9th?
posted by rory at 2:10 AM on September 9, 2004
> The lack of EXIF data on the Flickr image makes me think that photo was snagged from another source rather than taken by the Flickr image.
There's some processing going on behind the scenes to provide various sizes and to make the flash applet work. Naturally, to save bandwidth and processing time, you can bet they omit the EXIF data, including any embedded thumbnails left by digital cameras and phones. While there's always a possibility that a given photo was nicked, I wouldn't consider the lack of EXIF data to be even remotely suspicious unless you really are looking at the original file. Even then it's possible that someone purposely stripsheader data to speed up an upload on suddenly overburdened lines, or in uncertain situations where batteries, time, or the connection to the world are fast running out.
posted by SteelyDuran at 2:14 AM on September 9, 2004
There's some processing going on behind the scenes to provide various sizes and to make the flash applet work. Naturally, to save bandwidth and processing time, you can bet they omit the EXIF data, including any embedded thumbnails left by digital cameras and phones. While there's always a possibility that a given photo was nicked, I wouldn't consider the lack of EXIF data to be even remotely suspicious unless you really are looking at the original file. Even then it's possible that someone purposely stripsheader data to speed up an upload on suddenly overburdened lines, or in uncertain situations where batteries, time, or the connection to the world are fast running out.
posted by SteelyDuran at 2:14 AM on September 9, 2004
Don't forget the oil. Though of course, East Timor is sovereign now (just like Iraq).
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 2:17 AM on September 9, 2004
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 2:17 AM on September 9, 2004
I note also that it's two days short of September 11th in this timezone. Not a coincidence, I wouldn't imagine. Nasty.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 2:45 AM on September 9, 2004
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 2:45 AM on September 9, 2004
The dispute over the oil seems to have been largely settled.
The bomb left a 3 metre deep hole outside the Aussie embassy and shattered windows 15 floors up on surrounding buildings. On the current affairs show I'm watching discuss it now, they are debating whether it could be an attempt to influence either the upcoming Indonesian elections, or the Australian elections.
posted by Onanist at 2:51 AM on September 9, 2004
The bomb left a 3 metre deep hole outside the Aussie embassy and shattered windows 15 floors up on surrounding buildings. On the current affairs show I'm watching discuss it now, they are debating whether it could be an attempt to influence either the upcoming Indonesian elections, or the Australian elections.
posted by Onanist at 2:51 AM on September 9, 2004
Steely, uploaded flickr images generally do include EXIF data. I think you can elect not to, but this is seldom used. To me this is a strong sign that the image was snagged.
posted by nthdegx at 2:52 AM on September 9, 2004
posted by nthdegx at 2:52 AM on September 9, 2004
For example, here's the EXIF data taken by Flickr from my last photo. This is linked to on the photo's page by default.
posted by nthdegx at 2:56 AM on September 9, 2004
posted by nthdegx at 2:56 AM on September 9, 2004
The dispute over the oil seems to have been largely settled.
Apologies. I haven't been keeping track of recent developments there. It was a bit of a derail anyway. Good on the Aussies!
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 3:06 AM on September 9, 2004
Apologies. I haven't been keeping track of recent developments there. It was a bit of a derail anyway. Good on the Aussies!
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 3:06 AM on September 9, 2004
This chap, on the other hand, is a Flickr user that visited the scene after the incident.
posted by nthdegx at 3:13 AM on September 9, 2004
posted by nthdegx at 3:13 AM on September 9, 2004
"Last Friday, Australia warned that "particular caution should be exercised in Jakarta, including the central business and embassy districts," and said that security at its embassy in the capital remained at a high level."
Well, so much for security.
posted by acrobat at 3:23 AM on September 9, 2004
Well, so much for security.
posted by acrobat at 3:23 AM on September 9, 2004
"Last Friday, Australia warned that "particular caution should be exercised in Jakarta, including the central business and embassy districts," and said that security at its embassy in the capital remained at a high level."
Actually, that is pretty much toe standard diplomatic advice for Indonesia and has been for several years now (way before 9/11, in fact).
Actually, the warnings received by the Australian government from their friends in the CIA were specifically that an attack on western hotels in Jakarta were planned and extra security was in place in these locations.
The attack could have been much worse except for the security in place at the Embassy, which stops any vehicle being left near the building unattended, meaning that the bomb had to be placed further away than would be ideal for maximum effect.
The news here has been drawing parallels between the bombings in Spain prior to the election there and the fact that we are facing a similar situation here at the moment - an election looming, with the current government committed to our presence in Iraq and the opposition promising to bring the troops home at the earliest possible date. Speculation is that the bombing is intended to influence the election and bring about a change in government to one that is not quite as supportive of the war on terror when it involves Australians actually getting their hands dirty instead of just giving moral support.
The reason terrorists would attack in Jakarta seems simple - the attack seems to be against Australia, but it is much easier for them to attack closer to their support base and without the problems of operating in an environment where security is easier to maintain. I would not like to be the person in charge of trying to stop car bombs being used in Jakarta - not for all the money in the world.
The worst part of this is that, in an attack on Australia (technically an attack on Australian soil, being the Embassy), only Indonesians were killed.
posted by dg at 3:54 AM on September 9, 2004
Actually, that is pretty much toe standard diplomatic advice for Indonesia and has been for several years now (way before 9/11, in fact).
Actually, the warnings received by the Australian government from their friends in the CIA were specifically that an attack on western hotels in Jakarta were planned and extra security was in place in these locations.
The attack could have been much worse except for the security in place at the Embassy, which stops any vehicle being left near the building unattended, meaning that the bomb had to be placed further away than would be ideal for maximum effect.
The news here has been drawing parallels between the bombings in Spain prior to the election there and the fact that we are facing a similar situation here at the moment - an election looming, with the current government committed to our presence in Iraq and the opposition promising to bring the troops home at the earliest possible date. Speculation is that the bombing is intended to influence the election and bring about a change in government to one that is not quite as supportive of the war on terror when it involves Australians actually getting their hands dirty instead of just giving moral support.
The reason terrorists would attack in Jakarta seems simple - the attack seems to be against Australia, but it is much easier for them to attack closer to their support base and without the problems of operating in an environment where security is easier to maintain. I would not like to be the person in charge of trying to stop car bombs being used in Jakarta - not for all the money in the world.
The worst part of this is that, in an attack on Australia (technically an attack on Australian soil, being the Embassy), only Indonesians were killed.
posted by dg at 3:54 AM on September 9, 2004
Or is this just another terrorist bombing in Jakarta,
[sarcasm]
Oh, yes, just another bombing. How two years ago..
[/sarcasm]
If you want "dispassionate" "news" that's not from a tech/blog focus, maybe you should try something else?
Yes, because anyone who dares question loquacious's view of the world must be a FoxNews watching fascist.
Nice to know how you think, buddy.
posted by jonmc at 1:13 PM on September 9, 2004
[sarcasm]
Oh, yes, just another bombing. How two years ago..
[/sarcasm]
If you want "dispassionate" "news" that's not from a tech/blog focus, maybe you should try something else?
Yes, because anyone who dares question loquacious's view of the world must be a FoxNews watching fascist.
Nice to know how you think, buddy.
posted by jonmc at 1:13 PM on September 9, 2004
So people are still wanking over the "why do they hate us" question? They want a nice, tidy, politically-motivated reason, like "we resent your previous actions in East Timor" or "we resent that you're helping rebuild Iraq" or "we previously had some minor issues over oil in Southeast Asia" or other such twaddle? Listen, the people who would blow up innocent people with a truck bomb do not live in this world where there is a point-counterpoint of political thought. They are beyond that, and have been for a long time. Or, to quote from the very CNN article linked in the FPP:
This is not exactly a debate over land rights, or quibbles with a particular government. These people want a Caliphate. From wikipedia:
"In October 2002, 202 people were killed in the resort island of Bali, many of them Australians.October, 2002--that's before intervention in Iraq.
Jemaah Islamiyah (JI), a militant group with ties to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network that is trying to set up a pan-Islamic state in Southeast Asia, has been linked both those blasts.
This is not exactly a debate over land rights, or quibbles with a particular government. These people want a Caliphate. From wikipedia:
"Hambali wanted a large Islamic caliphate to be established across Southeast Asia, incorporating Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, the Philippines, Brunei, Cambodia, and Thailand. Such a state would have a population of about 420 million (using CIA World Factbook population counts). It would have a strangle-hold over the South China Sea shipping lanes which are a gateway between parts of Asia and the Indian Ocean. It would also have a significant air-space and would potentially affect trade between India, Africa, and Australia."Want more?
"Jemaah Islamiyah (J.I.) is a militant Islamist group active in several Southeast Asian countries that's seeking to establish a Muslim fundamentalist state in the region...posted by Asparagirl at 1:24 PM on September 9, 2004
What attacks has Jemaah Islamiyah been linked to?
The group—or individuals affiliated with it—is thought to be tied to several terrorist plots. Among them:
- The August 2003 car bombing of the J.W. Marriott hotel in Jakarta that killed 12 people.
- The October 2002 bombing of a nightclub on the predominantly Hindu island of Bali that killed 202 people, most of them foreign tourists from Australia and elsewhere. Amrozi bin Nurhasyim, a 41-year-old mechanic from east Java, was convicted on August 8 for buying the vehicle used in the main explosion and buying and transporting most of the chemicals used for the explosives. He was the first of 33 suspects arrested for the bombings to be convicted.
- A December 2000 wave of church bombings in Indonesia that killed 18. Asian and U.S. officials say Hambali had a hand in these attacks, and Indonesian officials arrested J.I. leader Bashir for questioning in connection with this anti-Christian campaign.
- A December 2000 series of bombings in Manila that killed 22. The State Department says Hambali helped plan these attacks. Fathur Rahman al-Ghozi, a Bashir follower, reportedly confessed to a role in the bombings. In April 2002, he was convicted in the Philippines on unrelated charges of possessing explosives.
- A 1995 plot to bomb 11 U.S. commercial airliners in Asia that, the State Department says, Hambali helped plan.
- Jemaah Islamiyah has also been linked to aborted plans to attack U.S., British, and Australian embassies in Singapore."
Actually nthdegx that chap is one of those I linked to in the FPP. He's taken more pics since then though.
posted by filchyboy at 2:04 PM on September 9, 2004
posted by filchyboy at 2:04 PM on September 9, 2004
Asparagirl, buying into the idea that it is impossible to understand those who oppose you makes you a monster. Makes you inhuman by dehumanizing your enemy.
Amrozi, that little fucker who set the bomb that killed my best friend in Bali? I understand him, even if I hate him. Throwing up my hands that 'he do(es) not live in this world where there is a point-counterpoint of political thought' doesn't help anyone.
So, you know, pull the other one.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:22 PM on September 9, 2004
Amrozi, that little fucker who set the bomb that killed my best friend in Bali? I understand him, even if I hate him. Throwing up my hands that 'he do(es) not live in this world where there is a point-counterpoint of political thought' doesn't help anyone.
So, you know, pull the other one.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:22 PM on September 9, 2004
I'd add that if you're so proud of the 'point-counterpoint of political thought' you haven't read many PoliticsFilter threads here lately, and you sure as hell aren't paying attention the American election campaign.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:28 PM on September 9, 2004
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:28 PM on September 9, 2004
dobbs, Maybe it was one of the millions of online retailers that have had up to hundreds of thousands of dollars of merchandise stolen by people in Indonesia using fake credit cards? :-)
posted by shepd at 5:18 PM on September 9, 2004
posted by shepd at 5:18 PM on September 9, 2004
and i wish you guys would be cleverly snide to eachother, you know wit and sarcasm, instead of flinging shit and acting like bitches.
posted by Satapher at 5:38 PM on September 9, 2004
posted by Satapher at 5:38 PM on September 9, 2004
What's necessarily wrong with wanting to utterly annihilate something you may 'understand?'
posted by shoos at 6:18 PM on September 9, 2004
posted by shoos at 6:18 PM on September 9, 2004
Nothing, if you presuppose that 'utterly annihilating' people (and let's no mince words, huh? It's people we're talking about, not things) is acceptable. And simply annihilating people will never annihilate an idea or a system of belief, no matter how spurious and unpleasant it may be.
One assumes that the enemies of America and Australia and all the rest understand us at least as well as we do them.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:19 PM on September 9, 2004
One assumes that the enemies of America and Australia and all the rest understand us at least as well as we do them.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:19 PM on September 9, 2004
ok, some more dispassionate analyzing of what occured without geopolitical explaination...
by the way, the real tragedy here is going to be felt by those occupants of the building next to the embassy. if you look closely at the picture that shows the embassy you'll notice that the embassy windows have not been even fractured while the sourrounding buildings have tons of broken glass. Embassies are the closest things to modern keeps that exist, they may look like a normal building but they are typically fortresses (at least the US ones are).
The problem is that all of the sourrounding buildings are still normal construction and therefore suffer the price of proximity to the blast. While dg is right that the distance to the bomb (technically referred to as "standoff" ) is important, in this case it looks like the area is pretty urban...whcih to me implies that it wouldn't be likely to get over 20 to 50 feet of standoff (which is still a very good starting point). If the 3m depth for the crater size is accurate (which i'm actually guessing is a 3m diameter) then it's likely that the bomb was somewhere in the same range as that used in the oklahoma city bombing (ok, self link). This fact relates back to the question of why bomb in jakarta. If one is wanting to be able to pull 4000 lbs of tnt equivalent up in front of a building one needs to be able to obtain the material and deliver it...which is a hell of allot easier when your a native (as mcvey was).
I'm sure the majority of the injuries are going to be not to australians but to other indonesians who work in the neighboring buildings (that's an alwful lot of broken glass). Of course this is nothing new with terrorist bombings. probably the best example of terrorist attacking one target but only managing to really kill thier own people is the ufundi house. Of course it doesn't help that the urban area only helps the blast reflect off buildings and therefore be even more powerful. I'm never sure wether to be happier that they're targeting embassies because at least these buildings are hardened...or if it would be better for them to target trains or other public facilities as they'll use smaller weapons (in the end it would be best if the shitheads didn't target anything of course, plus i'd be out of a job :) )
Of course all of this will have an effect on the architecture of embassies. Allready embassies are moving out to the burbs and are becoming more castlelike. Eventually the urban embassies are probably going to go the way of the dodo...which may be for the best because then at least they'll be moving at least one target away from the vulnerable bystanders. But then again, considering the increasing numbers of banks and hotels (jakarta again) getting hit, we're just going to have to get used to living with the threat of terrorism and get over it.
posted by NGnerd at 7:59 PM on September 9, 2004
by the way, the real tragedy here is going to be felt by those occupants of the building next to the embassy. if you look closely at the picture that shows the embassy you'll notice that the embassy windows have not been even fractured while the sourrounding buildings have tons of broken glass. Embassies are the closest things to modern keeps that exist, they may look like a normal building but they are typically fortresses (at least the US ones are).
The problem is that all of the sourrounding buildings are still normal construction and therefore suffer the price of proximity to the blast. While dg is right that the distance to the bomb (technically referred to as "standoff" ) is important, in this case it looks like the area is pretty urban...whcih to me implies that it wouldn't be likely to get over 20 to 50 feet of standoff (which is still a very good starting point). If the 3m depth for the crater size is accurate (which i'm actually guessing is a 3m diameter) then it's likely that the bomb was somewhere in the same range as that used in the oklahoma city bombing (ok, self link). This fact relates back to the question of why bomb in jakarta. If one is wanting to be able to pull 4000 lbs of tnt equivalent up in front of a building one needs to be able to obtain the material and deliver it...which is a hell of allot easier when your a native (as mcvey was).
I'm sure the majority of the injuries are going to be not to australians but to other indonesians who work in the neighboring buildings (that's an alwful lot of broken glass). Of course this is nothing new with terrorist bombings. probably the best example of terrorist attacking one target but only managing to really kill thier own people is the ufundi house. Of course it doesn't help that the urban area only helps the blast reflect off buildings and therefore be even more powerful. I'm never sure wether to be happier that they're targeting embassies because at least these buildings are hardened...or if it would be better for them to target trains or other public facilities as they'll use smaller weapons (in the end it would be best if the shitheads didn't target anything of course, plus i'd be out of a job :) )
Of course all of this will have an effect on the architecture of embassies. Allready embassies are moving out to the burbs and are becoming more castlelike. Eventually the urban embassies are probably going to go the way of the dodo...which may be for the best because then at least they'll be moving at least one target away from the vulnerable bystanders. But then again, considering the increasing numbers of banks and hotels (jakarta again) getting hit, we're just going to have to get used to living with the threat of terrorism and get over it.
posted by NGnerd at 7:59 PM on September 9, 2004
Good thing there is no misunderstanding. I plead ignorance here. I saw this as an opportunity to hear from others who know far more than me about moblogs and the encroaching power of indy media to usurp the breaking news cachet so long held by the major media. Instead I see a thread to vent anger about terrorism. To all involved I say please forgive me. On the other hand if some here have links to scintillating commentary on the role of moblogs in the fast evolving media environment please post them so I can learn more.
posted by filchyboy at 8:07 PM on September 9, 2004
posted by filchyboy at 8:07 PM on September 9, 2004
OK, you caught me mincing. I was trying to come off as a good guy - not as some nut (like I am) who would countenance the utter annihilation of an actual human being. After all human = good, right? Hooray for everybody!
posted by shoos at 8:15 PM on September 9, 2004
posted by shoos at 8:15 PM on September 9, 2004
The latest reports are saying at least nine people have died and 182 have been injured.
NGnerd, just fyi, the police and the Australian Prime Minister are saying the blast left a crater 3 metres deep with a diameter of about 1.5 metres.
posted by Onanist at 8:53 PM on September 9, 2004
NGnerd, just fyi, the police and the Australian Prime Minister are saying the blast left a crater 3 metres deep with a diameter of about 1.5 metres.
posted by Onanist at 8:53 PM on September 9, 2004
jonmc said: "Yes, because anyone who dares question loquacious's view of the world must be a FoxNews watching fascist.
Nice to know how you think, buddy."
Erm, pardon me? I was attempting to help explain and support my percieved reasons for this thread's post being written the way it is, y'know, perhaps as an alternative viewpoint to the gazillion others sources that'll be covering this, y'know, dispassionately. I don't believe I ever connected Fox News with Fascism, or anything like that.
Nice to know I nearly got you to go Godwin over it, though.
posted by loquacious at 10:27 PM on September 9, 2004
Nice to know how you think, buddy."
Erm, pardon me? I was attempting to help explain and support my percieved reasons for this thread's post being written the way it is, y'know, perhaps as an alternative viewpoint to the gazillion others sources that'll be covering this, y'know, dispassionately. I don't believe I ever connected Fox News with Fascism, or anything like that.
Nice to know I nearly got you to go Godwin over it, though.
posted by loquacious at 10:27 PM on September 9, 2004
OK, you caught me mincing. I was trying to come off as a good guy - not as some nut (like I am) who would countenance the utter annihilation of an actual human being. After all human = good, right? Hooray for everybody!
Oh, dear. Bit touchy there, shoos. Your response is quite surprisingly vehement in comparison to my comment, which I thought was quite dispassionate.
You misrepresent (or merely misunderstand) me. I am firmly of the opinion that human = bad, for the most part. What I was hinting at, and tends to annoy me, though, mildly, is not the taking of human life so much as the certainty that some have that their reasons for doing it are somehow more sanctified than anyone else's. Killers for god and country are no better than killers for Allah. You can take the fact that hypocrisy bothers me almost as much as murder in any way you please, but 'Hooray for everybody!' would be pretty far off base.
Now go drink something.
I think I just may, thank you, and given your vehemence, I invite you to do the same. It's Friday in the Republic, and the beer is a-chilling. Your attempt at being insulting has failed, I'm afraid. But I invite you to try again, if you have the urge.
I saw this as an opportunity to hear from others who know far more than me about moblogs
filchyboy - I suspect that asking about these neato moblog thingies (the buzz over which has, I reckon, already jumped the proverbial shark) while the blood was still wet on the ground might have been a bit of a miscalculation. I'd suggest that it's a bit disingenuous of you to suggest that you had no idea that that might be the case.
I agree with you, for what it's worth, that pics showing up on the most excellent Flickr before the Big Media gets their elephantine asses in gear is a fascinating development, but right now, right here, may (sadly -- I'm with you here) not have been the best place to expect a dispassionate discussion of it. Such is the MeFi of today.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 11:18 PM on September 9, 2004
Oh, dear. Bit touchy there, shoos. Your response is quite surprisingly vehement in comparison to my comment, which I thought was quite dispassionate.
You misrepresent (or merely misunderstand) me. I am firmly of the opinion that human = bad, for the most part. What I was hinting at, and tends to annoy me, though, mildly, is not the taking of human life so much as the certainty that some have that their reasons for doing it are somehow more sanctified than anyone else's. Killers for god and country are no better than killers for Allah. You can take the fact that hypocrisy bothers me almost as much as murder in any way you please, but 'Hooray for everybody!' would be pretty far off base.
Now go drink something.
I think I just may, thank you, and given your vehemence, I invite you to do the same. It's Friday in the Republic, and the beer is a-chilling. Your attempt at being insulting has failed, I'm afraid. But I invite you to try again, if you have the urge.
I saw this as an opportunity to hear from others who know far more than me about moblogs
filchyboy - I suspect that asking about these neato moblog thingies (the buzz over which has, I reckon, already jumped the proverbial shark) while the blood was still wet on the ground might have been a bit of a miscalculation. I'd suggest that it's a bit disingenuous of you to suggest that you had no idea that that might be the case.
I agree with you, for what it's worth, that pics showing up on the most excellent Flickr before the Big Media gets their elephantine asses in gear is a fascinating development, but right now, right here, may (sadly -- I'm with you here) not have been the best place to expect a dispassionate discussion of it. Such is the MeFi of today.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 11:18 PM on September 9, 2004
Now let's all go drink something.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 11:21 PM on September 9, 2004
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 11:21 PM on September 9, 2004
So people are still wanking over the "why do they hate us" question? They want a nice, tidy, politically-motivated reason, like "we resent your previous actions in East Timor" or "we resent that you're helping rebuild Iraq" or "we previously had some minor issues over oil in Southeast Asia" or other such twaddle? Listen,
Listen, Asparagirl, hectoring people with tirades which start 'listen' is tiresome.
dobbs asked 'What do these groups have against Australians? The ones I've met were all very nice...' and I and a few other Australians answered. Of course there are a lot of nice Australians. There are a lot of nice Indonesians, too; I've studied and worked with some. But nice people can hold views you disagree with, or belong to a religious or political or economic grouping you oppose, and that can make you see them as 'the enemy' and maybe even want to attack them.
Saying that terrorists could be bombing Australian embassies because of our involvement in the Iraq war or East Timor or any number of other reasons doesn't mean approval of their actions. Australia is seen by Muslim extremists as a Christian country, even though most Aussies would find that idea hilarious—or maybe they see us as a godless country, which by and large we are—and Australia's support for East Timor would be seen, in that light, as support for Christian separatists. Of course that makes such people see Australia as an enemy. That's obvious.
And saying that October 2002 was 'before intervention in Iraq' is beside the point. Even leaving aside that the US government was already talking of going into Iraq (with UK and Australian support) in October 2002, it's now September 2004, we've been there for 18 months, and that won't have escaped the attention of any terrorists trying to set up pan-Islamic states.
posted by rory at 2:32 AM on September 10, 2004
Listen, Asparagirl, hectoring people with tirades which start 'listen' is tiresome.
dobbs asked 'What do these groups have against Australians? The ones I've met were all very nice...' and I and a few other Australians answered. Of course there are a lot of nice Australians. There are a lot of nice Indonesians, too; I've studied and worked with some. But nice people can hold views you disagree with, or belong to a religious or political or economic grouping you oppose, and that can make you see them as 'the enemy' and maybe even want to attack them.
Saying that terrorists could be bombing Australian embassies because of our involvement in the Iraq war or East Timor or any number of other reasons doesn't mean approval of their actions. Australia is seen by Muslim extremists as a Christian country, even though most Aussies would find that idea hilarious—or maybe they see us as a godless country, which by and large we are—and Australia's support for East Timor would be seen, in that light, as support for Christian separatists. Of course that makes such people see Australia as an enemy. That's obvious.
And saying that October 2002 was 'before intervention in Iraq' is beside the point. Even leaving aside that the US government was already talking of going into Iraq (with UK and Australian support) in October 2002, it's now September 2004, we've been there for 18 months, and that won't have escaped the attention of any terrorists trying to set up pan-Islamic states.
posted by rory at 2:32 AM on September 10, 2004
> Asparagirl, buying into the idea that it is impossible to understand those who
> oppose you makes you a monster. Makes you inhuman by dehumanizing your enemy.
Welcome then, stav, to the world of monstrous inhuman dehumanizers, the only world that's available to any of us homo saps apart from your (very) occasional fully-enlightened bodhisattva.
You'd think blowing your enemies up would be a more telling sign of, uh, dehumanizing the other than just saying "I can't understand these lethal weirdos."
> The worst part of this is that, in an attack on Australia (technically an attack
> on Australian soil, being the Embassy), only Indonesians were killed.
Hey, if you can't kick the dog that bit you, might as well kick yourself in the shins. Tantrum's no fun if you don't get to kick anything.
posted by jfuller at 4:29 AM on September 10, 2004
> oppose you makes you a monster. Makes you inhuman by dehumanizing your enemy.
Welcome then, stav, to the world of monstrous inhuman dehumanizers, the only world that's available to any of us homo saps apart from your (very) occasional fully-enlightened bodhisattva.
You'd think blowing your enemies up would be a more telling sign of, uh, dehumanizing the other than just saying "I can't understand these lethal weirdos."
> The worst part of this is that, in an attack on Australia (technically an attack
> on Australian soil, being the Embassy), only Indonesians were killed.
Hey, if you can't kick the dog that bit you, might as well kick yourself in the shins. Tantrum's no fun if you don't get to kick anything.
posted by jfuller at 4:29 AM on September 10, 2004
Welcome then, stav, to the world of monstrous inhuman dehumanizers, the only world that's available to any of us homo saps apart from your (very) occasional fully-enlightened bodhisattva.
That's way too fucking complicated for me, mate.
You want to spell it out in words of one syllable for me?
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:32 AM on September 10, 2004
That's way too fucking complicated for me, mate.
You want to spell it out in words of one syllable for me?
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:32 AM on September 10, 2004
Why shore. We all have way too much angry-monkey DNA to expect understanding to be the default. Reacting to opposition with blind monkey-rage is being human--though having more conciliatory second thoughts is (sometimes) also human. Then we (sometimes) say we're sorry and go pick up the body parts.
Those for whom understanding is the default are so rare we universally count them as walking miracles, and tend to report that they had halos and walked on water and stuff.
Ergo, it's a bit extreme to go calling "inhuman" on asparagirl, when "inhumanity" (= failing to understand the more extremely different forms of other) is the human norm.
posted by jfuller at 5:06 AM on September 10, 2004
Those for whom understanding is the default are so rare we universally count them as walking miracles, and tend to report that they had halos and walked on water and stuff.
Ergo, it's a bit extreme to go calling "inhuman" on asparagirl, when "inhumanity" (= failing to understand the more extremely different forms of other) is the human norm.
posted by jfuller at 5:06 AM on September 10, 2004
OK, we agree.
But I didn't call Asparagirl inhuman. I was just sayin'.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:19 AM on September 10, 2004
But I didn't call Asparagirl inhuman. I was just sayin'.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:19 AM on September 10, 2004
« Older eyeball it | Pliestocene Park? Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by bob sarabia at 12:11 AM on September 9, 2004