Disney Count support may be spotty from here. We apologize for the inconvenience.

What's going on in NY? Big explosion..

I hope this is not a bomb.

http://www.news24.com/News24/Gallery/Home/0,,galleries-1-4390,00.html
Permalink Bluebeard 
July 19th, 2007 5:21am
"New York - ***********************************************************An underground steam pipe explosion <---- Look Here *********************************************************tore through a Manhattan street near Grand Central Terminal on Wednesday, swallowing a tow truck and killing one person as hundreds of others ran for cover amid a towering geyser of steam and flying rubble in scenes reminiscent of the panic after the September 11 terrorist attack.

*********************************************************
Mayor Michael Bloomberg said the explosion was not terrorism,  <--- OVER HERE ********************************************************* though the blast caused a brief panic about a possible attack."
Permalink worldsSmallestViolin 
July 19th, 2007 5:30am
Oh thank god I'm not flying through JFK today.
Permalink Send private email Philo 
July 19th, 2007 5:40am
I know this is obvious, but it's really REALLY fucking sad that EVERY disaster, man-made or otherwise, is now referred to in the news as either Terrorism or Not-Terrorism.

Holy fuck.  People are sheep.  Or at least, the media are all sheep and too many people get in line behind them.
Permalink Send private email muppet 
July 19th, 2007 8:06am
One of my coworkers said yesterday that we have to give up civil liberties to protect ourselves against terrorism.

I said, "what are we preserving then?"  He didn't get it.  Par for the course; he's an ex-Secret Service agent.
Permalink AMerrickanGirl 
July 19th, 2007 9:07am
"ex-Secret Service agent"

I don't believe there exists such a thing
Permalink Send private email Locutus of Borg 
July 19th, 2007 9:53am
> One of my coworkers said yesterday that we have to give up civil liberties to protect ourselves against terrorism.

You can defeat domestic terrorism with 98% of Americans giving up nothing.

You only need to target, restrict or expel the 2% who are muslims.

Yes, that is extremely harsh on the majority of muslims who have done nothing wrong, and never would do anything wrong.

But if defeating terrorism was really the national priority, more important than any other issue, worth paying any price for, that is what would be done.

The reality is that terrorism isn't anything like that important, or considered anything like worth paying that price for... engendering fear of terrorism might be the Republican/administration priority, but that's a wholly different issue.
Permalink s 
July 19th, 2007 10:24am
> "You only need to target, restrict or expel the 2% who are muslims."

Really? Is it that easy?
Please humor me and anaylse you domestic terrorism. How many of the terrorists involved were moslim and living in the US?
Permalink Send private email Locutus of Borg 
July 19th, 2007 10:28am
> You only need to target, restrict or expel the 2% who are muslims.

I dunno. The American Muslims who I know were very unhappy with the administration have left. The others have staid. To a large degree there aren't a lot of disgruntled American Muslims around.
Permalink Send private email strawdog soubriquet 
July 19th, 2007 10:37am
>Holy fuck.  People are sheep.

Do you really think there's no possibility of another terrorist attack in New York City? The majority of the people of NYC despise the current administration and their policies, and they realize that it legitimately does make a lot of people really hate the US. The possibility of more attacks is hardly beyond possibility.
Permalink DF 
July 19th, 2007 11:20am
Sure it's possible.  Do we need assurances that electric signs hung on bridges are not bombs?  Really?

This is the same sort of thing.  Accidents do happen and have always happened and happen in a much greater abundance than terrorism ever has or will.
Permalink Send private email muppet 
July 19th, 2007 11:21am
>Accidents do happen and have always happened and happen in a much greater abundance than terrorism ever has or will.

This had the appearances of being far more than an accident -- gigantic plumes of smoke enveloping city blocks, a gigantic blast...How often does stuff like that happen on Manhattan?
Permalink DF 
July 19th, 2007 11:24am
OK granted in this instance a little concern might be warranted, but I guess I'm weary of EVERYTHING being "Terrorism or Not-Terrorism", including electric Lite Brites, baseball players' single engine plane accidents, briefcases left on benches...
Permalink Send private email muppet 
July 19th, 2007 11:29am
I was in the upper floors of a skyscraper nearby when the baseball guy smacked into a building, and the attitude there was definitely nonchalant about that incident...people were much more interested when it came out that it was a baseball player, as it was leading into the playoffs.
Permalink DF 
July 19th, 2007 11:31am
saw the plume of smoke in the sky. yes it made me anxious and turn on the news. I'd be damn inhuman not to be.
Permalink Send private email heartsheep 
July 19th, 2007 12:19pm
There are miles and miles of steam pipes under Manhattan. It's an amazing system. Some of the pipes are very old and steam has a lot of explosive energy. It is most likely that one of the pipes broke for non-sinister reasons.
Permalink Send private email bon vivant 
July 19th, 2007 12:37pm
It was Lord Voldemort, you fools!!!!
Permalink MICHIKO KAKUTANI 
July 19th, 2007 12:39pm
yeah, happens all the time:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/07/18/nyregion/19explode01.jpg
Permalink hearthsheep 
July 19th, 2007 12:43pm
So is your argument that terrorism is so commonplace that it's the logical go-to explanation?
Permalink Send private email muppet 
July 19th, 2007 12:45pm
me?

what was the goto explanation? was there one? or with lack of knowledge were people juggling between alternative explanations till they obtained more info? what's wrong with that?

No government official said it was terrorism. Bloomberg specifically said it was a blown pipe.
Permalink hearthsheep 
July 19th, 2007 12:49pm
No but "they" had to SPECIFICALLY STATE that it was not terrorism, which implies that Terrorism IS the go-to explanation given a lack of information.
Permalink Send private email muppet 
July 19th, 2007 12:51pm
the scale of the explosion was large, and it was in a high density area (ie, good target), so it would be dumb NOT to consider terrorism as one of the possible causes until further info.

how many times in the last 20 years have steam pipes exploded 12 stories into the air? how many times were there terrorist attacks in those 20 years? fear is proportionate to experience.
Permalink hearthsheep 
July 19th, 2007 12:56pm
They're just softening us up for the "terrorist" attack that will allow the Bush administration to further erode our civil liberties in the name of homeland security.

Guaranteed, before the November 2008 elections, there will be some reprise of 9/11 which will scare the crap out of everyone and cause them to forget all about the administration's fuckups.  Cheney and Rove have the blueprints all ready.

I'll betcha.
Permalink AMerrickanGirl 
July 19th, 2007 1:04pm
> Please humor me and anaylse you domestic terrorism. How many of the terrorists involved were moslim and living in the US? 

100% of AQ-affiliated terrorists are muslims.

Stop muslims from entering [country-of-your-choice] and expel all existing, and there can be more AQ-affiliated attacks within the [country-of-your-choice].  The same could be said for any [country-of-your-choice]: USA, UK, Spain, Italy, etc.

I'm not advocating this policy.  Personally, I'd rather live with the risk of AQ terrorist attacks.  But if the risk of AQ terrorist attacks is an unacceptable as the governments claim, and if it was worth preventing AQ terrorist attacks whatever the cost - then the government ought to be advocating this policy.  Why aren't they?  Answer: They're lying to you.


> I dunno. The American Muslims who I know were very unhappy with the administration have left. The others have staid. To a large degree there aren't a lot of disgruntled American Muslims around.

BS. Substitute American with British for example: Your same theory should prove they are no British muslims plotting terrorist attacks.

Aside from the fact, every intelligence agency believes there are several AQ sleeper cells in the US.
Permalink s 
July 19th, 2007 1:18pm
> BS. Substitute American with British for example:

It's BS to make the substitution (did I say I knew any British Muslims?). It would be more interesting to ask why American and British/European Muslims act differently. One explanation is that American Muslims haven't been in the states long enough to become disillusioned.
Permalink strawdog soubriquet 
July 19th, 2007 1:25pm
Aside from the issue of terrorism, - you don't believe there are any disgruntled muslims among the 5 to 7 million in the US?
Permalink s 
July 19th, 2007 1:31pm
See, I think, to make a suicide bomber takes a LOT of lies about the US. 

If you live and work in the US, and watch television, the lies start to be defused.  The US can't be the "Great Satan", we can barely keep our Presidents from tripping over their shoes or choking to death on a pretzel.

And our women aren't scantily clad (ie not wearing a chadour) to trap men into loveless marriages.  They're scantily clad because it's more comfortable that way.

So while Moslems in the US may be disgruntled, I think it's quite rare that they're disgruntled enough to want to kill themselves (along with lots of people standing around at the time).
Permalink SaveTheHubble 
July 19th, 2007 1:46pm
Yes there are disgruntled Muslims in the US. Disgruntled Koreans, disgruntled Hispanics, disgruntled whites.

Life never promised us a rose garden.
Permalink heartsheep 
July 19th, 2007 1:55pm
> So while Moslems in the US may be disgruntled, I think it's quite rare that they're disgruntled enough to want to kill themselves (along with lots of people standing around at the time).

I agree it's rare.But even if it's so rare as to be 1 in 100,000 or 1,000,000, there are a few potential suicide bombers in the US.

The argument however, is not whether it's rare, but whether it's non-existent.  Because unless it's completely non-existent, there are a few potential suicide bombers in the US.
Permalink s 
July 19th, 2007 2:11pm
Ah, the perfection argument again.  Fourth time this week.

Oh, yes, if we can't GUARANTEE that there are NO disgruntled Moslems who are disgruntled to the point of suicide bombing, then we are IN DANGER! 

You really enjoy scaring yourself that way?  You really prefer the kind of police state that state of mind encourages you to support?

We do have police, FBI, even the CIA from time to time.  There are gun checks, metal detectors in lots of places.  And since we don't have a monthly Islamic Terrorist Incident being detected or defused or arrested, or even "going off", I'm going to guess that the number of suicidally disgruntled Moslems in America is slightly less than -- oh -- one in 400 million?  Maybe one in a billion?

So in a population of slightly more than 300 million, really the ones we need to worry about are those who've recently entered the country.  Now THOSE guys can be bug-shit crazy from the lies fed to them in their Madrassa by some power-mad lunatic who just HAPPENS to be using the Koran to justify his lunacy.
Permalink SaveTheHubble 
July 19th, 2007 2:19pm
Read what I wrote in my previous posts.

Admitting the possibility that some suicide bombers are in the US, is not the same as favoring a police state.

You are speaking like a moron when you conflate the 2 positions.
Permalink s 
July 19th, 2007 3:28pm
Even if there are a few. I'd rather them blow some more stuff up and kill more people andlet the rest of us get on with living as we always have.

No reason to let them have an impact. They can only suicide bomb something once.
Permalink Send private email JoC 
July 19th, 2007 3:32pm
"I think, to make a suicide bomber takes a LOT of lies about the US. If you live and work in the US, and watch television, the lies start to be defused."

I don't know. All the 9/11 guys were living here a long while, going to nudie bars, having a nice time.

Likewise, the physician terror bombers in the UK a few weeks back.

The argument that they are ignorant or poor or not well educated seems to not be true.

You also have the cases of Earth Liberation Front members blowing up things, and the Symbionese Liberation Army killing people, all wealthy, well educated people who lived here.

There doesn't seem to be any connection between not being educated or aware and a wish to commit violence against innocent people.
Permalink Practical Economist 
July 19th, 2007 3:46pm
s's statement, that banning all muslims from the US would reduce the threat from sleeper cells is actually true.

That reality should be separated from whether doing so is the best course of action.

It's possible for example it could make a lot of muslims mad.

It's also possible that it would just make other sorts of attacks, like nukes coming in on a chinese freighter, more likely.
Permalink Practical Economist 
July 19th, 2007 3:49pm
As far as it being unfair to muslims, why would you give a shit? The Patriot Act, the wire taps, the detainment compounds, the extraordinary rendition, none of that shit is fair to any of us affected by it, so why draw the line at muslims?
Permalink Practical Economist 
July 19th, 2007 3:50pm
Today Muslims, tomorrow the rest of us.

Which is why it's bad to be complacent about losing civil liberties, because one of these days ... they'll come for you.
Permalink AMerrickanGirl 
July 19th, 2007 4:08pm
As has been point out in previous thread.  Slippery slope is a fallacy.  For example, there's simply no reason to target non-muslims ("come for"), if the goal is to remove all potential AQ suicide bombers.

There are plenty of good arguments against going after muslims, but slippery slope isn't one of them
Permalink s 
July 19th, 2007 4:36pm
It's not a slippery slope.

The goal is for security. There is no reason why Chinese or Japanese won't be kicked out.
Permalink Rick Zeng 
July 19th, 2007 4:40pm
As long as they keep dry cleaning our pants, it won't be a problem!!
Permalink heartsheep 
July 19th, 2007 4:41pm
"There is no reason why Chinese or Japanese won't be kicked out."

What is this, 1942? 

Besides, they're the ones lending us the money to fight the A-rabs.
Permalink AMerrickanGirl 
July 19th, 2007 4:43pm
Hey. You never know!
Permalink Rick Zeng 
July 19th, 2007 4:44pm
What are you worried about, anyway?  You're in Canada.
Permalink AMerrickanGirl 
July 19th, 2007 4:45pm
Especially because I am from Canada, because of its history.

I am just a general nice guy and care about you American :)
Permalink Rick Zeng 
July 19th, 2007 4:48pm

This topic is archived. No further replies will be accepted.

Other topics: July, 2007 Other topics: July, 2007 Recent topics Recent topics