Bomb rocks Jakarta
August 5, 2003 6:03 AM Subscribe
With the trial of the bali bombers underway, a bomb has been exploded in the Marriott Hotel in Jakarta's CBD. Deaths have been reported here on Australian TV at 13, with over 120 injured, although these figures are expected to rise. The BBC is reporting on the experiences of those at the scene.
This is actually the 5th bomb to hit the Indonesian capital this year, although it is the first to cause any injury. Reuters have posted a chronological list of guerilla attacks since September 11 2001, which provides some context to the severity of this attack.
posted by dg at 6:25 AM on August 5, 2003
posted by dg at 6:25 AM on August 5, 2003
Looking at that list of attacks since 9-11-2001, I see there haven't been any attacks inside the US. So the US is winning the war against terrorism, obviously.
Signed, GWB
posted by emelenjr at 7:11 AM on August 5, 2003
Signed, GWB
posted by emelenjr at 7:11 AM on August 5, 2003
DenBeastie Boys!
I love it! You rock matteo!
The crew aboard the USS Clueless are "giving it all the spin they've got" Captain Steven!
What an appropriate name.
posted by nofundy at 7:29 AM on August 5, 2003
I love it! You rock matteo!
The crew aboard the USS Clueless are "giving it all the spin they've got" Captain Steven!
What an appropriate name.
posted by nofundy at 7:29 AM on August 5, 2003
I'm always amazed at the speed with which many MeFites are able to use tragedy as grist for their political mill.
posted by pardonyou? at 7:32 AM on August 5, 2003
posted by pardonyou? at 7:32 AM on August 5, 2003
Well, then it's a good thing I'm no fan of the Bush administration or its practices, or else I'd be a hypocrite. I know, it's crazy, but believe it or not some of us are actually able to take a positions that do not fit the "Either 'Bush is Evil' or 'All Things Dubya'" paradigm. Some of us can see the idiocy on both sides (and I'll let you in on a little secret: it's not too hard).
The bodies are still warm, for fucks sake. How about some acknowledgment of the principal cause of this tragedy; namely, the fuckhead who decided he should drive his explosives-laden car into the lobby of a hotel?
posted by pardonyou? at 7:41 AM on August 5, 2003
The bodies are still warm, for fucks sake. How about some acknowledgment of the principal cause of this tragedy; namely, the fuckhead who decided he should drive his explosives-laden car into the lobby of a hotel?
posted by pardonyou? at 7:41 AM on August 5, 2003
I'm always amazed at the speed with which many MeFites are able to use tragedy as grist for their political mill.
Because, of course, acts of terrorism have no causal relationship with politics.
posted by Epenthesis at 7:41 AM on August 5, 2003
Because, of course, acts of terrorism have no causal relationship with politics.
posted by Epenthesis at 7:41 AM on August 5, 2003
I'm always amazed at the speed with which many MeFites are able to use tragedy as grist for their political mill.
How about some acknowledgment of the principal cause of this tragedy; namely, the fuckhead who decided he should drive his explosives-laden car into the lobby of a hotel?
You are both overlooking the fact that this is a politically motivated attack. Therefore, attempting to fit it into its political context is not only appropriate but necessary.
posted by rushmc at 7:53 AM on August 5, 2003
How about some acknowledgment of the principal cause of this tragedy; namely, the fuckhead who decided he should drive his explosives-laden car into the lobby of a hotel?
You are both overlooking the fact that this is a politically motivated attack. Therefore, attempting to fit it into its political context is not only appropriate but necessary.
posted by rushmc at 7:53 AM on August 5, 2003
Because, of course, acts of terrorism have no causal relationship with politics.
Of course they do. My point was not that discussions about political ramifications should not occur -- it was how instantaneously people can hear about a tragedy and say: "Great! This helps my argument that X" (whatever "X" is -- regardless of ideology).
I also have a real problem with the barely suppressed glee in the arguments:
It's an interesting read for the "we're winning the war on terror" DenBeastie Boys
I love it! You rock matteo!
The crew aboard the USS Clueless are "giving it all the spin they've got" Captain Steven!
posted by pardonyou? at 7:56 AM on August 5, 2003
Of course they do. My point was not that discussions about political ramifications should not occur -- it was how instantaneously people can hear about a tragedy and say: "Great! This helps my argument that X" (whatever "X" is -- regardless of ideology).
I also have a real problem with the barely suppressed glee in the arguments:
It's an interesting read for the "we're winning the war on terror" DenBeastie Boys
I love it! You rock matteo!
The crew aboard the USS Clueless are "giving it all the spin they've got" Captain Steven!
posted by pardonyou? at 7:56 AM on August 5, 2003
So, let me see if I've got this straight.
Enjoying a much deserved slash at Steven Den Beste, who places himself and his ridiculous bullsh*t in the public arena, is the equivalent of applauding Al Queda whenever those bastards kill more people?
Perhaps you should be posting over at the Clueless also.
posted by nofundy at 8:07 AM on August 5, 2003
Enjoying a much deserved slash at Steven Den Beste, who places himself and his ridiculous bullsh*t in the public arena, is the equivalent of applauding Al Queda whenever those bastards kill more people?
Perhaps you should be posting over at the Clueless also.
posted by nofundy at 8:07 AM on August 5, 2003
Life has gotten a bit cheaper in the last couple of years, it's true. We don't take the time anymore to pay respects to the dead. Arguably, though, that's because we see each new tragedy as a chance to forstall the next by making a point with it.
If (no, when) there's another American terror attack on the scale of the last one, I hope the response of the Democrats is an immediate, angry, totally partisan "Why was this allowed to happen again?" If they don't, nothing will change.
posted by Epenthesis at 8:09 AM on August 5, 2003
If (no, when) there's another American terror attack on the scale of the last one, I hope the response of the Democrats is an immediate, angry, totally partisan "Why was this allowed to happen again?" If they don't, nothing will change.
posted by Epenthesis at 8:09 AM on August 5, 2003
We don't take the time anymore to pay respects to the dead.
Why should we "respect" the dead? That's such an odd expression. Dying is (all too) easy; it isn't something that should arouse respect and admiration. Now sympathy for the dead...that's something else entirely. But it doesn't accomplish a whole lot, either. Examining the cause(s) of death in an attempt to understand them in order to make changes to try and forestall their recurrence, now that's a positive and potentially productive response.
Bodies don't care what you say about them, warm or cold.
posted by rushmc at 8:17 AM on August 5, 2003
Why should we "respect" the dead? That's such an odd expression. Dying is (all too) easy; it isn't something that should arouse respect and admiration. Now sympathy for the dead...that's something else entirely. But it doesn't accomplish a whole lot, either. Examining the cause(s) of death in an attempt to understand them in order to make changes to try and forestall their recurrence, now that's a positive and potentially productive response.
Bodies don't care what you say about them, warm or cold.
posted by rushmc at 8:17 AM on August 5, 2003
So, let me see if I've got this straight.
Enjoying a much deserved slash at Steven Den Beste, who places himself and his ridiculous bullsh*t in the public arena, is the equivalent of applauding Al Queda whenever those bastards kill more people?
No, you don't have it straight at all.
But seeing as how I am apparently the only person bothered by this kind of opportunism, I'll leave this thread for the rest of you to backslap each other with more contributions the interminable series of "Bush sucks" posts.
posted by pardonyou? at 8:19 AM on August 5, 2003
Enjoying a much deserved slash at Steven Den Beste, who places himself and his ridiculous bullsh*t in the public arena, is the equivalent of applauding Al Queda whenever those bastards kill more people?
No, you don't have it straight at all.
But seeing as how I am apparently the only person bothered by this kind of opportunism, I'll leave this thread for the rest of you to backslap each other with more contributions the interminable series of "Bush sucks" posts.
posted by pardonyou? at 8:19 AM on August 5, 2003
no, a true partisan would have linked to something like this, for example:
President Bush was warned in a more specific way than previously known about intelligence suggesting that al Qaeda terrorists were seeking to attack the United States, a report on the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks indicated yesterday. Separately, the report cited one CIA memo that concluded there was "incontrovertible evidence" that Saudi individuals provided financial assistance to al Qaeda operatives in the United States.
But it's not strictly related to a discussion of today's attack.
I understand that trying to change the topic is a classic tactic when the facts are against you, but today's attack demonstrates that terrorist networks are alive and well, happily hitting soft targets (and American interests, again) very harshly. Only three days ago, "in rare remarks about Islam and terrorism, Megawati Sukarnoputri told Indonesia's parliament in an annual progress report such a threat had to be cut off at its roots". That's the answer. Cut off at its roots my ass.
NOT to mention that movements like Hizbullah have now a potential global reach (one of the factors, supposedly, for action -- not necessarily military -- against Syria and Iran, among the sponsors of the group). If you hit terrorist networks somewhere, they've demonstrated their capability to strike back somewhere else.
The "no attacks on American soil after 9-11" argument is particularly weak: the first attempt to bring down the WTC was in 1993. They did it again 8 years and a half later and we all know that they've been successful. It doesn't take Anthony Cordesman to figure out that, as this nice elderly gentleman, (who knows one thing or two about slaughtering innocent civilians) so ably explained,
... they're gonna strike again, I'll put money on it. And it's going to be damned dramatic. But they're gonna do it in their own sweet time
"In their own sweet time". Taking better care of airport screenings, air marshals, sea cargo screenings et al would be a good idea. Cutting air marshals service, on the other hand, among other things looks like bad policy.
I also have a real problem with the barely suppressed glee in the arguments:
I have a problem with the repulsive bad faith of the "dissent = terrorism" tactics, but what can you do. It's not glee, it's realism, but you can't teach a bear to eat his salmon using sterling silver flatware, can you
"DenBeastie Boys"?
unfortunately I'm not the first to use it -- all credit is due to holgate
posted by matteo at 8:19 AM on August 5, 2003
President Bush was warned in a more specific way than previously known about intelligence suggesting that al Qaeda terrorists were seeking to attack the United States, a report on the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks indicated yesterday. Separately, the report cited one CIA memo that concluded there was "incontrovertible evidence" that Saudi individuals provided financial assistance to al Qaeda operatives in the United States.
But it's not strictly related to a discussion of today's attack.
I understand that trying to change the topic is a classic tactic when the facts are against you, but today's attack demonstrates that terrorist networks are alive and well, happily hitting soft targets (and American interests, again) very harshly. Only three days ago, "in rare remarks about Islam and terrorism, Megawati Sukarnoputri told Indonesia's parliament in an annual progress report such a threat had to be cut off at its roots". That's the answer. Cut off at its roots my ass.
NOT to mention that movements like Hizbullah have now a potential global reach (one of the factors, supposedly, for action -- not necessarily military -- against Syria and Iran, among the sponsors of the group). If you hit terrorist networks somewhere, they've demonstrated their capability to strike back somewhere else.
The "no attacks on American soil after 9-11" argument is particularly weak: the first attempt to bring down the WTC was in 1993. They did it again 8 years and a half later and we all know that they've been successful. It doesn't take Anthony Cordesman to figure out that, as this nice elderly gentleman, (who knows one thing or two about slaughtering innocent civilians) so ably explained,
... they're gonna strike again, I'll put money on it. And it's going to be damned dramatic. But they're gonna do it in their own sweet time
"In their own sweet time". Taking better care of airport screenings, air marshals, sea cargo screenings et al would be a good idea. Cutting air marshals service, on the other hand, among other things looks like bad policy.
I also have a real problem with the barely suppressed glee in the arguments:
I have a problem with the repulsive bad faith of the "dissent = terrorism" tactics, but what can you do. It's not glee, it's realism, but you can't teach a bear to eat his salmon using sterling silver flatware, can you
"DenBeastie Boys"?
unfortunately I'm not the first to use it -- all credit is due to holgate
posted by matteo at 8:19 AM on August 5, 2003
is the equivalent of applauding Al Queda whenever those bastards kill more people?
When did pardonyou say that? I think what he's (understandably) saying is that some of you seem almost overjoyed when news like this happens because it gives the opportunity to lambaste those who disagree with you politically. It's as bad as the folks gloating when we supposedly found WMDs in Iraq back in May (as reported by Faux News).
I know, it's crazy, but believe it or not some of us are actually able to take a positions that do not fit the "Either 'Bush is Evil' or 'All Things Dubya'" paradigm. Some of us can see the idiocy on both sides (and I'll let you in on a little secret: it's not too hard).
Nail on the head. I don't think some of you realize how much you resemble your perceived adversaries.
posted by dhoyt at 8:29 AM on August 5, 2003
When did pardonyou say that? I think what he's (understandably) saying is that some of you seem almost overjoyed when news like this happens because it gives the opportunity to lambaste those who disagree with you politically. It's as bad as the folks gloating when we supposedly found WMDs in Iraq back in May (as reported by Faux News).
I know, it's crazy, but believe it or not some of us are actually able to take a positions that do not fit the "Either 'Bush is Evil' or 'All Things Dubya'" paradigm. Some of us can see the idiocy on both sides (and I'll let you in on a little secret: it's not too hard).
Nail on the head. I don't think some of you realize how much you resemble your perceived adversaries.
posted by dhoyt at 8:29 AM on August 5, 2003
It's as bad as the folks gloating when we supposedly found WMDs in Iraq back in May (as reported by Faux News).
no, no, no, no, no. they had all reason to cheer, to gloat, to spike the ball, whatever. after all, the argument behind the divisive, UN-busting, terribly risky unilateral attack was the "45 minutes" thing, right, Saddam was sitting on a Kilimanjaro made of WMD's and was going to blow up the world in 45 minutes. Gloating after the discovery was cool, I was OK with that if that were the case.
Unfortunately 4 months after Baghdad fell, the weapons don't have the good manners to show up, so that little thing got some of us worried, maybe that war (remember the ratio: the inspection process was supposedly too slow)wasn't really necessary, maybe inspections could have done the trick. now of course the White House and their RNC-talking-points hacks (who are in varying states of denial) are trying to spin it differently with the "the US had to create an oasis of democracy in Iraq to change the whole Middle East, leading by example", the DenBestial argument
anyway, terrorist networks in Asia are made up of scary fuckers like Abu Sayyaf and Jemaah Islamiah and this guy
Nail on the head. I don't think some of you realize how much you resemble your perceived adversaries
oh, I don't know, the equivalency thing is getting tiresome, I mean, we've been reading for almost 2 years all those lame pieces about the similarities between Bush and Bin Laden's background (the rich daddy, the "I'm doing God's work" thing, the obsession with weapons vs having actually never fought etc, ad nauseam) that I'm really not interested
posted by matteo at 8:57 AM on August 5, 2003
no, no, no, no, no. they had all reason to cheer, to gloat, to spike the ball, whatever. after all, the argument behind the divisive, UN-busting, terribly risky unilateral attack was the "45 minutes" thing, right, Saddam was sitting on a Kilimanjaro made of WMD's and was going to blow up the world in 45 minutes. Gloating after the discovery was cool, I was OK with that if that were the case.
Unfortunately 4 months after Baghdad fell, the weapons don't have the good manners to show up, so that little thing got some of us worried, maybe that war (remember the ratio: the inspection process was supposedly too slow)wasn't really necessary, maybe inspections could have done the trick. now of course the White House and their RNC-talking-points hacks (who are in varying states of denial) are trying to spin it differently with the "the US had to create an oasis of democracy in Iraq to change the whole Middle East, leading by example", the DenBestial argument
anyway, terrorist networks in Asia are made up of scary fuckers like Abu Sayyaf and Jemaah Islamiah and this guy
Nail on the head. I don't think some of you realize how much you resemble your perceived adversaries
oh, I don't know, the equivalency thing is getting tiresome, I mean, we've been reading for almost 2 years all those lame pieces about the similarities between Bush and Bin Laden's background (the rich daddy, the "I'm doing God's work" thing, the obsession with weapons vs having actually never fought etc, ad nauseam) that I'm really not interested
posted by matteo at 8:57 AM on August 5, 2003
I don't think some of you realize how much you resemble your perceived adversaries.
Now, now, don't get personal with me. I look nothing like Rush or any other angry white male Rethuglican knuckle dragger.
is the equivalent of applauding Al Queda whenever those bastards kill more people?
Tsk, tsk, tsk. Try for at least the entire sentence. You know, like, don't take words out of context dude. Here you go:
Enjoying a much deserved slash at Steven Den Beste, who places himself and his ridiculous bullsh*t in the public arena, is the equivalent of applauding Al Queda whenever those bastards kill more people?
Exactly what I did. Exactly what I wrote. See? I did NOT demean the deaths of anyone contrary to the assertions made by pardonyour manners! I did NOT make any remarks regarding Dear Leader (Duhbya) or his own ridiculous bullsh*t.
[Bones taps communicator pin on chest]
"Jim, Operation Divert Thread and Blame the Messengers is a success."
[Captain Clueless responds]
"Nice work fellow simians. Now let's warp the hell out of this place before we assimilate a clue."
Yeah, its' enjoyable to poke fun at DenBeste. But it has nothing to do with the supposed "outrage" over some supposed "insensitivity" to the deaths in Indonesia. In the words of the above mentioned simians "Get over it."
posted by nofundy at 8:59 AM on August 5, 2003
Now, now, don't get personal with me. I look nothing like Rush or any other angry white male Rethuglican knuckle dragger.
is the equivalent of applauding Al Queda whenever those bastards kill more people?
Tsk, tsk, tsk. Try for at least the entire sentence. You know, like, don't take words out of context dude. Here you go:
Enjoying a much deserved slash at Steven Den Beste, who places himself and his ridiculous bullsh*t in the public arena, is the equivalent of applauding Al Queda whenever those bastards kill more people?
Exactly what I did. Exactly what I wrote. See? I did NOT demean the deaths of anyone contrary to the assertions made by pardonyour manners! I did NOT make any remarks regarding Dear Leader (Duhbya) or his own ridiculous bullsh*t.
[Bones taps communicator pin on chest]
"Jim, Operation Divert Thread and Blame the Messengers is a success."
[Captain Clueless responds]
"Nice work fellow simians. Now let's warp the hell out of this place before we assimilate a clue."
Yeah, its' enjoyable to poke fun at DenBeste. But it has nothing to do with the supposed "outrage" over some supposed "insensitivity" to the deaths in Indonesia. In the words of the above mentioned simians "Get over it."
posted by nofundy at 8:59 AM on August 5, 2003
Not to diminish the fact that terrorism is up (way up) since the Bush Doctrine has been in effect, but I think Israel/Palestinean terrorism should be stricken from that list to make it more fair. International terrorism is very different from the kind of civil war going on in Isrealistein.
And I just love the sudden sanctimonious crap we get from the right when people point out the rather obvious fact that none of this wouldn't have happened if you hadn't been such fools. The right's always telling you "I told you so", now when it's their turn they're all "Jesus, people, you're all so mean. Why are you all such big meanies? People died! Shut up with your 'finding the cause' bullshit. Let's just pray in silence for a while."
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 9:58 AM on August 5, 2003
And I just love the sudden sanctimonious crap we get from the right when people point out the rather obvious fact that none of this wouldn't have happened if you hadn't been such fools. The right's always telling you "I told you so", now when it's their turn they're all "Jesus, people, you're all so mean. Why are you all such big meanies? People died! Shut up with your 'finding the cause' bullshit. Let's just pray in silence for a while."
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 9:58 AM on August 5, 2003
(Civil war indeed. You get credit for misspelling the "Israel" part AND the "Palestine" part.)
posted by coelecanth at 10:13 AM on August 5, 2003
posted by coelecanth at 10:13 AM on August 5, 2003
coelecanth - Doh. My bastardization reads more like a Shelley novel.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 10:53 AM on August 5, 2003
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 10:53 AM on August 5, 2003
That's OK. Once, a long time ago, I misspelled "coelacanth." :-)
posted by coelecanth at 10:59 AM on August 5, 2003
posted by coelecanth at 10:59 AM on August 5, 2003
The BBC link above:Are you in Jakarta? Were you affected by the blast? Send us your experiences.
Interesting comments.
posted by thomcatspike at 10:59 AM on August 5, 2003
Interesting comments.
posted by thomcatspike at 10:59 AM on August 5, 2003
Let me get this straight.
Islamic suicide bombers (presumably) blow up a symbol of the US, the Mariott hotel. Just like they did in a nightclub a year ago.
The comments here then reflect that the war on terror is not succeeding, due to an overwhelming number of these attacks, (c.f. Matteo's handy timeline) and the war in Iraq.
Not a single one of you addresses the fact that all of these attacks were perpetuated by Islamic fundamentalists, rather, the comments address the perceived safety of American interests overseas since the Bush Doctrine went into effect, take a few personal swipes at Stephen DenBeste and some others, and completely ignore the actual criminals in the attack. Instead, it's lambaste bush, lambaste bush's lambasters, and then lambaste each other.
Do you people hear yourselves?
If I mention that this attack like virtually every other one since September 11, was perpetrated by Islamic "Militants" (or, in laymans terms, either murderers or terrorists) then will you next brand me a racist? Wait, I know - I'm an Little Green Football Drone, blaming the innocent Islamists for their little adventures in blowing up Westerners.
Will any of you address the issue of who committed the crime? Or the crime itself? Or will you merely continue to take some perceived moral high ground which is neither moral nor high?
posted by swerdloff at 11:48 AM on August 5, 2003
Islamic suicide bombers (presumably) blow up a symbol of the US, the Mariott hotel. Just like they did in a nightclub a year ago.
The comments here then reflect that the war on terror is not succeeding, due to an overwhelming number of these attacks, (c.f. Matteo's handy timeline) and the war in Iraq.
Not a single one of you addresses the fact that all of these attacks were perpetuated by Islamic fundamentalists, rather, the comments address the perceived safety of American interests overseas since the Bush Doctrine went into effect, take a few personal swipes at Stephen DenBeste and some others, and completely ignore the actual criminals in the attack. Instead, it's lambaste bush, lambaste bush's lambasters, and then lambaste each other.
Do you people hear yourselves?
If I mention that this attack like virtually every other one since September 11, was perpetrated by Islamic "Militants" (or, in laymans terms, either murderers or terrorists) then will you next brand me a racist? Wait, I know - I'm an Little Green Football Drone, blaming the innocent Islamists for their little adventures in blowing up Westerners.
Will any of you address the issue of who committed the crime? Or the crime itself? Or will you merely continue to take some perceived moral high ground which is neither moral nor high?
posted by swerdloff at 11:48 AM on August 5, 2003
Point taken.
Matteo, could you modify your timeline to include the Oklahoma City bombing,
the bombing of all the family planning clinics,
the Atlanta Olympics bombing,
and all the other Christianist fundamentalist terrorism acts?
We really need the balance, if only for swerdloff's benefit and the LGF Islamist crowd.
It's waaay too convenient to find a scapegoat to blame for our own intolerance and stupid foreign policy mistakes. Kill those eaters of monkey meat! It's all their fault! They're not a civilized tribe!
posted by nofundy at 12:12 PM on August 5, 2003
Matteo, could you modify your timeline to include the Oklahoma City bombing,
the bombing of all the family planning clinics,
the Atlanta Olympics bombing,
and all the other Christianist fundamentalist terrorism acts?
We really need the balance, if only for swerdloff's benefit and the LGF Islamist crowd.
It's waaay too convenient to find a scapegoat to blame for our own intolerance and stupid foreign policy mistakes. Kill those eaters of monkey meat! It's all their fault! They're not a civilized tribe!
posted by nofundy at 12:12 PM on August 5, 2003
Swerdloff, I think it's natural that people look at the elements they can control (we live in a democracy, and can thus replace leaders we think are doing an ineffectual job at controlling terrorism) rather than the ones they cannot control (religious extremists bent on doing destruction, whose motivations and methods are difficult to fathom).
Also, since it's almost universally acknowledged that killing innocent civilians is morally wrong, there's only so much time you can spend on the crime itself before it's natural (and healthy) to start asking questions about what might actually be done to combat this problem. I believe that the issue of who perpetrated the crime is important, but only so far as it helps one devise a solution. And I think posters who advocate solutions (even if the solution is merely a change of government tactics) are far more valuable than people sitting around discussing the evil of the perpetrators, which is more or less a forgone conclusion.
posted by cell divide at 12:14 PM on August 5, 2003
Also, since it's almost universally acknowledged that killing innocent civilians is morally wrong, there's only so much time you can spend on the crime itself before it's natural (and healthy) to start asking questions about what might actually be done to combat this problem. I believe that the issue of who perpetrated the crime is important, but only so far as it helps one devise a solution. And I think posters who advocate solutions (even if the solution is merely a change of government tactics) are far more valuable than people sitting around discussing the evil of the perpetrators, which is more or less a forgone conclusion.
posted by cell divide at 12:14 PM on August 5, 2003
Will any of you address the issue of who committed the crime?
Sure. Militant Islamic fundementalists. Ok. Now what?
Or the crime itself?
Terrible. Awful. Lots of blood and limbs everywhere. People crying for their lost ones, families destroyed, hopes quashed.
And now...?
What? That's is? Just discuss the first two parts, but for God's sake, don't address any root causes. Hey, while we're at it, I'm sure a black man killed someone in the inner city. Let's talk about how sad that is.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 12:39 PM on August 5, 2003
Sure. Militant Islamic fundementalists. Ok. Now what?
Or the crime itself?
Terrible. Awful. Lots of blood and limbs everywhere. People crying for their lost ones, families destroyed, hopes quashed.
And now...?
What? That's is? Just discuss the first two parts, but for God's sake, don't address any root causes. Hey, while we're at it, I'm sure a black man killed someone in the inner city. Let's talk about how sad that is.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 12:39 PM on August 5, 2003
for God's sake, don't address any root causes.
Funny, I hadn't noticed nofundy and the usual nitwits addressing any causes, so much as they were making lame cracks, writing dopey prose and otherwise gloating.
posted by dhoyt at 12:52 PM on August 5, 2003
Funny, I hadn't noticed nofundy and the usual nitwits addressing any causes, so much as they were making lame cracks, writing dopey prose and otherwise gloating.
posted by dhoyt at 12:52 PM on August 5, 2003
I'm with dhoyt.
And now we discuss, having addressed the crime itself, punishment of those who perpetrated it (fundamentalist islamists in this instance, but not the rest of the Islamic world, despite my charicature as an islam-hating LGFer) and future prevention.
And nofundy - your addition of the okc bombing etc is well taken, except that it doesn't fit with Matteo's initial stance, which was the attacks since September 11th.
And of course, please add the recent $20 million Earth Liberation Front arson to the list of terrorist acts.
posted by swerdloff at 1:09 PM on August 5, 2003
And now we discuss, having addressed the crime itself, punishment of those who perpetrated it (fundamentalist islamists in this instance, but not the rest of the Islamic world, despite my charicature as an islam-hating LGFer) and future prevention.
And nofundy - your addition of the okc bombing etc is well taken, except that it doesn't fit with Matteo's initial stance, which was the attacks since September 11th.
And of course, please add the recent $20 million Earth Liberation Front arson to the list of terrorist acts.
posted by swerdloff at 1:09 PM on August 5, 2003
And of course, please add the recent $20 million Earth Liberation Front arson to the list of terrorist acts.
It doesn't fit. All the terrorist attacks listed above were intended to kill people while the ELF arson was intended to destroy property without harming anyone physically. It certainly was a crime, and should be investigated and prosecuted, but it wasn't terrorism. We're starting to see everything from making meth to posting links getting labeled as terrorism. It's inappropriate and only confuses the effort to fight real terrorists, like the bombers in Jakarta.
posted by homunculus at 2:29 PM on August 5, 2003
It doesn't fit. All the terrorist attacks listed above were intended to kill people while the ELF arson was intended to destroy property without harming anyone physically. It certainly was a crime, and should be investigated and prosecuted, but it wasn't terrorism. We're starting to see everything from making meth to posting links getting labeled as terrorism. It's inappropriate and only confuses the effort to fight real terrorists, like the bombers in Jakarta.
posted by homunculus at 2:29 PM on August 5, 2003
The Bush Doctrine does play some part in this: many Islamists in Indonesia are angry at the US attacking two muslim nations. But I think this is primarily an internal ideological quarrel, like the one in Saudi Arabia, but Indonesia is a far easier environment for terrorists to opperate in. Blaming this bombing on Bush doesn't make any sense to me, and I am hardly a fan of his policies. These people have been angry about Western influences in Indonesia for a long time. What DenBeste might have to do with any of this is beyond me.
posted by homunculus at 2:36 PM on August 5, 2003
posted by homunculus at 2:36 PM on August 5, 2003
And of course, please add the recent $20 million Earth Liberation Front arson to the list of terrorist acts.
Yeah, sure, since there was no intent to murder anybody or anything. The ELF is a criminal organization, but I'd stop short of the Ashcroftian label of 'terrorists.' Members of the ELF should be tried as arsonists, not terrorists. To equate the burning of logging trucks with the violent murders of human beings devalues the very lives the government claims to be defending.
I realize that's this is off topic, but that just toasted my buns.
The War on Terror® is doomed to fail just as the War on drugs™ did (take notes kids: The drugs won.) By calling it a war the Bushies elevated the terrorists to holy warriors, instead of treating them like the criminals they are. We should be coordinating with other nations to arrest and put to trial those responsible for these crimes. Instead the Bushies are using this wave of bombings to rationalize "total war" and to consolidate their own power in American political life.
posted by elwoodwiles at 2:39 PM on August 5, 2003
Yeah, sure, since there was no intent to murder anybody or anything. The ELF is a criminal organization, but I'd stop short of the Ashcroftian label of 'terrorists.' Members of the ELF should be tried as arsonists, not terrorists. To equate the burning of logging trucks with the violent murders of human beings devalues the very lives the government claims to be defending.
I realize that's this is off topic, but that just toasted my buns.
The War on Terror® is doomed to fail just as the War on drugs™ did (take notes kids: The drugs won.) By calling it a war the Bushies elevated the terrorists to holy warriors, instead of treating them like the criminals they are. We should be coordinating with other nations to arrest and put to trial those responsible for these crimes. Instead the Bushies are using this wave of bombings to rationalize "total war" and to consolidate their own power in American political life.
posted by elwoodwiles at 2:39 PM on August 5, 2003
"Two scientific brains behind the October 12 bombings in Bali, Azahari Husin and Dulmatin, are still at large - and are likely to be prime suspects for yesterday's blast in Jakarta."
posted by homunculus at 3:34 PM on August 5, 2003
posted by homunculus at 3:34 PM on August 5, 2003
To assume that this was targeted solely at the US is, in my opinion, typical of the American point of view that the US is the centre of the world and that no other country is important enough to warrant an attack. This attack seems to be aimed at not the US, but the western world in general and related to the Bali bombing. The Marriott in Jakarta is a popular lunchtime gathering for westerners, being located in the centre of the city, near where many overseas embassies and consulates are located. Surrounding countries, as well as Indonesia, have condemned the attack.
If any of those posting above have ever been to Jakarta, you will be aware of the gulf that separates the locals from the foreigners. If you look out the windows of any major hotel in Jakarta, you are looking down on slums where people live in desperate poverty and incredible filth, with raw sewerage flowing into the rivers directly from the back of homes put together from discarded building materials. This, right next to 5 star hotels where Indonesian nationals are unwelcome to even walk through the driveway unless they are obviously rich or are driving a taxi. Is it any wonder that militant groups are able to recruit young people to fight for their cause against what they see as the deplorable western influence in their country? These attacks are not against the US, they are against those who have plundered a country's resources and taken their profits overseas.
I guess I should have known that posting about this would lead to the thread being hijacked by the "everything wrong with the world is George W Bush's fault" crowd.
posted by dg at 3:38 PM on August 5, 2003
If any of those posting above have ever been to Jakarta, you will be aware of the gulf that separates the locals from the foreigners. If you look out the windows of any major hotel in Jakarta, you are looking down on slums where people live in desperate poverty and incredible filth, with raw sewerage flowing into the rivers directly from the back of homes put together from discarded building materials. This, right next to 5 star hotels where Indonesian nationals are unwelcome to even walk through the driveway unless they are obviously rich or are driving a taxi. Is it any wonder that militant groups are able to recruit young people to fight for their cause against what they see as the deplorable western influence in their country? These attacks are not against the US, they are against those who have plundered a country's resources and taken their profits overseas.
I guess I should have known that posting about this would lead to the thread being hijacked by the "everything wrong with the world is George W Bush's fault" crowd.
posted by dg at 3:38 PM on August 5, 2003
I guess I should have known that posting about this would lead to the thread being hijacked by the "everything wrong with the world is George W Bush's fault" crowd.
straw man building is still alive and well.
I don't see posters here blaming excessive summer heat or scarcity of good Thai restaurants in the Midwest on Bush, what I see is people having second (and third and fourth) thoughts on the White House's strategy in the war against what for brevity we'll call "Al Qaeda".
Not "everything wrong in the world". We're blaming Bush for a lame, probably misguided war on terrorism. The fact is, terrorists are alive and well, they're hardly shitting their pants just because the Taliban and Saddam got their asses kicked, and the terrorists are freely and gleefully kicking innocent people's asses (now, they're killing in places far from the US and Europe, tomorrow who knows).
The point, since you need to have it spelled out in block capital letters, is that those who are still pathetically trying to pretend that "we're winning" are either seriously misguided or in bad faith, because less than 2 years with no major attacks on American (or European) soil hardly mean anything -- as said above, 9-11 took years to prepare, these guys aren't exactly in a hurry.
After 9-11 George W Bush took the leadership in the global war against terror, ignoring the Nato allies and the UN itself. His performance on the anti-terrorism job is there for the world to judge.
Many have doubts about his strategy, his vision, his modus operandi. And many more doubt even his good faith (i.e., the constant spin of politically motivated, bad intelligence that led to a maybe useless -- in the war against terror -- incredibly expensive and risky war that killed many civilians, almost 200 American soldiers and will almost certainly kill many more during a very difficult, badly prepared and organized occupation).
And again, dissent is neither unpatriotic nor terrorist, it's a vital part of a democratic system -- it's sad that in the post-911 political spectrum we even need to argue this simple, crystal-clear point.
posted by matteo at 4:53 PM on August 5, 2003
straw man building is still alive and well.
I don't see posters here blaming excessive summer heat or scarcity of good Thai restaurants in the Midwest on Bush, what I see is people having second (and third and fourth) thoughts on the White House's strategy in the war against what for brevity we'll call "Al Qaeda".
Not "everything wrong in the world". We're blaming Bush for a lame, probably misguided war on terrorism. The fact is, terrorists are alive and well, they're hardly shitting their pants just because the Taliban and Saddam got their asses kicked, and the terrorists are freely and gleefully kicking innocent people's asses (now, they're killing in places far from the US and Europe, tomorrow who knows).
The point, since you need to have it spelled out in block capital letters, is that those who are still pathetically trying to pretend that "we're winning" are either seriously misguided or in bad faith, because less than 2 years with no major attacks on American (or European) soil hardly mean anything -- as said above, 9-11 took years to prepare, these guys aren't exactly in a hurry.
After 9-11 George W Bush took the leadership in the global war against terror, ignoring the Nato allies and the UN itself. His performance on the anti-terrorism job is there for the world to judge.
Many have doubts about his strategy, his vision, his modus operandi. And many more doubt even his good faith (i.e., the constant spin of politically motivated, bad intelligence that led to a maybe useless -- in the war against terror -- incredibly expensive and risky war that killed many civilians, almost 200 American soldiers and will almost certainly kill many more during a very difficult, badly prepared and organized occupation).
And again, dissent is neither unpatriotic nor terrorist, it's a vital part of a democratic system -- it's sad that in the post-911 political spectrum we even need to argue this simple, crystal-clear point.
posted by matteo at 4:53 PM on August 5, 2003
after instigating (and now ending) this jerkfest, do u feel better matteo? have u cum already or do u more need help?
posted by poopy at 5:12 PM on August 5, 2003
posted by poopy at 5:12 PM on August 5, 2003
no thanks poopy, I'm fine -- you know, unlike you, my sex life involves the company of actual living persons, instead that of my right hand. or are you a lefty?
posted by matteo at 5:21 PM on August 5, 2003
posted by matteo at 5:21 PM on August 5, 2003
i agree with your POV matteo, just not necessarily in the way u whipped it out.
or are you a lefty? well, yes, how did u know? or were u peeking?
posted by poopy at 5:29 PM on August 5, 2003
or are you a lefty? well, yes, how did u know? or were u peeking?
posted by poopy at 5:29 PM on August 5, 2003
Apologies if this isn't strictly on-topic but:
both sides of the "argument" (if I may dignify it that way) in this thread are making, in my opinion, a basic error: they refer to "terrorists" as if they were one object, one organization that could be defeated or that could defeat the US.
This is wrong, this is why so many mocked the term "War on Terror". You can't make war on abstract nouns, there is no organization called "terrorists" who you can defeat in one fell swoop.
There is no KAOS, the US is not CONTROL.
"Terrorists" will always exist. The War on Terror can have no real end. It is pointless to try to tally up deaths on each side to see who is winning.
Tangent: The "terrorist attacks" list is sorely lacking Israeli attacks on Palestines and Russian attacks on Chechyens, but of course when the State does it it's not Terrorism, it's "keeping the peace".
posted by signal at 5:54 PM on August 5, 2003
both sides of the "argument" (if I may dignify it that way) in this thread are making, in my opinion, a basic error: they refer to "terrorists" as if they were one object, one organization that could be defeated or that could defeat the US.
This is wrong, this is why so many mocked the term "War on Terror". You can't make war on abstract nouns, there is no organization called "terrorists" who you can defeat in one fell swoop.
There is no KAOS, the US is not CONTROL.
"Terrorists" will always exist. The War on Terror can have no real end. It is pointless to try to tally up deaths on each side to see who is winning.
Tangent: The "terrorist attacks" list is sorely lacking Israeli attacks on Palestines and Russian attacks on Chechyens, but of course when the State does it it's not Terrorism, it's "keeping the peace".
posted by signal at 5:54 PM on August 5, 2003
this war on terror is starting to remind me of the israel vs. palestine mess. terrorists attack the us in retaliation for something, the us retaliates against that, the terrorists retaliate against that etc. sort of like trying to get rid of dandelions with a fly swatter.
posted by mcsweetie at 9:34 PM on August 5, 2003
posted by mcsweetie at 9:34 PM on August 5, 2003
somehow, deep down, I already knew he was a big fella with a gross beard, no wife, and into jazz.
posted by mcsweetie at 8:09 AM on August 6, 2003
posted by mcsweetie at 8:09 AM on August 6, 2003
"TERRORISTS claiming responsibility for the Jakarta bombing have sent a chilling warning that they will kill more Westerners if Bali bomber Amrozi is sentenced to death today."
posted by homunculus at 1:30 PM on August 6, 2003
posted by homunculus at 1:30 PM on August 6, 2003
« Older Move over Segway! | Solid Space - Old School Web Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
It's an interesting read for the "we're winning the war on terror" DenBeastie Boys
let me quote:
2002
Mar 9 - A suicide bomber kills 13 people and injures more than 50 by blowing himself up in the crowded Moment Cafe in Jerusalem near Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's residence.
Apr 11 - A truck explodes near the ancient Jewish shrine of El Ghriba synagogue on the southern Tunisian island of Djerba, killing 14 Germans, five Tunisians and a Frenchman.
May 7 - A suicide bomber kills 14 other people and wounds 60 in an Israeli billiards club at the town of Rishon Letzion near Tel Aviv.
May 8 - A suspected suicide bomber in a car kills himself, 11 French navy experts and three Pakistanis outside the Sheraton hotel in the southern Pakistani city of Karachi.
June 14 - A car bomb outside the U.S. consulate in Karachi kills at least 11 Pakistanis and injures a further 45.
Oct 6 - An explosion rips through the French supertanker Limburg, when sailing into Aden port of Mina al-Dabah off the coast of Yemen. One crew member is killed on the tanker which was carrying 400,000 barrels of crude oil. Yemen suspects a remote control device was used to ram an explosives-laden boat into the tanker.
Oct 12 - Bombs explode outside Sari nightspot in Kuta Beach nightclub district of Bali in Indonesia, killing 185 and injuring hundreds. A third bomb explodes near the U.S. consulate in Sanur near Kuta, no one is hurt.
Nov 21 - A suicide bomber blows himself up and kills 11 others on bus in the Jerusalem suburb of Kiryat Menahem. At least 49 are wounded.
Nov 28 - At least 15 people killed in car bomb attack on hotel frequented by Israeli tourists in Kenyan port of Mombasa as two missiles miss Israeli airliner taking off from the city.
2003:
May 12 - Suicide bombers in vehicles shoot their way into housing compounds for expatriates in Saudi capital Riyadh as residents sleep. Death toll 35, including nine Americans.
May 12 - Two suicide bombers drive a truck full of explosives into a government complex in northern Chechnya, in Znamenskoye. At least 60 are killed and 100 are wounded.
May 16 - Suicide bombers using cars or explosive belts set off at least five blasts in Morocco's biggest city Casablanca. At least 43 people killed including 12 suicide bombers and about 60 wounded.
June 11 - Seventeen people are killed when suicide bomber blows up a bus near an open-air market in central Jerusalem's Jaffa Road. At least 100 are injured. Hamas claims responsibility.
July 5 - Two Chechen women suicide bombers kill 14 other people when they blow themselves up at an open-air rock festival at Moscow's Tushino airfield. 60 are injured. A 15th person dies on July 24.
Aug 1 - A truck packed with a huge load of explosives explodes at a Russian military hospital in North Ossetia near Chechnya killing at least 50 people.
Aug 5 - A huge bomb kills 10 people and wounds dozens more when it rips through the Marriott Hotel in Indonesian capital Jakarta.
posted by matteo at 6:21 AM on August 5, 2003