Video: The Boston pranksters’ surreal, moronic press conference
posted at 3:18 pm on February 1, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
They frightened thousands, brought a city to a halt, then redeemed themselves with a bit of absurdist tedium that instantly won the hearts of left-wing Internet nerds everywhere.
Pretty gratifying to see the press played for idiots, though.
Exit question: Did the marketing firm that hired tell them to keep quiet?
Update: E.M. can’t for the life of her figure out what these tools have done that’s illegal. Nothing, probably, but a little less dickishness at the presser after having inadvertently caused a terror scare would have been appreciated.
Update: Some of our commenters are objecting that these guys didn’t frighten anyone, the police did by overreacting. It’s more accurate to say they didn’t intend to frighten anyone (which, incidentally, is why they probably committed no crime), but they were the ones hanging little mystery packages hither and yon. You really want to jump ugly with Boston PD here for erring on the side of caution?
Update: Our webmaster, Mark Jaquith, claims that it’s unfair to call them “hoaxers” in the headline since, as I’ve acknowledged, they didn’t intend to hoax anyone. Fair enough; I used it only because it’s how most people coming to the site will recognize them. I changed it to “pranksters” even though that’s not quite accurate either. Anyone got a better term? “Stoners”? That could be inaccurate, I guess, but … come on.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »
Wow, and liberals have to ask why we on the right question what is wrong with people in this country today. I request that the Boston powers that be see to it that these two morons have the maximum fine levied against them. Although it’s highly unlikely to work this way, perhaps it will teach them a lesson or two. You know, like the one’s most of us were taught as kids that your actions have consequences and you better be prepared to pay those consequences if need be.
rayvet on February 1, 2007 at 3:24 PM
The guys are rather moronic, but sheesh… if their attorney told them not to talk, why the h*ll do the reporters keep asking their stupid questions? Fox just kept on airing this ‘press conference’, when it was apparent that these two bozo’s weren’t going to say anything meaningful.
Blow-dried idiot: “Sir, your wife was just dismembered by a serial killer… can you tell us how you feel?”
dalewalt on February 1, 2007 at 3:25 PM
I’m sure they will be quite popular in jail.
KelliD on February 1, 2007 at 3:26 PM
You know, they say don’t judge a book by it’s cover, but does anyone think for a second these two aren’t far left douches?
RightWinged on February 1, 2007 at 3:29 PM
Morons.
I am, of course, referring to the leadership in Boston who flew off the handle without asking if anyone knew what the little cartoon character was.
(Oh, and the guys they arrested are morons too.)
James on February 1, 2007 at 3:29 PM
The dreadlocked one will probably earn lots of cigarettes for some lucky husband.
TugboatPhil on February 1, 2007 at 3:30 PM
The next generation of John Kerrys and Ted Kennedys!
They all have the hair!
As long as you only ask about hair.
Rabbititist
Kini on February 1, 2007 at 3:30 PM
These clowns ought to be in prison for committing an act of terrorism. The fact that the items were not explosives does not mitigate their actions. They demeanor at this “press conference” ought to help get them a harsher sentence, as well.
georgej on February 1, 2007 at 3:32 PM
Makes plenty of sense to me. Why discuss the case at all with the media? They’re following the advice of their attorneys and not talking about the case. That there is any outrage about their behaviour towards the press just underlines how entitled the press seems to feel when they don’t get the typical response (which almost always undermines a defendants chances in court.)
The above quote is from the AP, so take it as you will.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/S/SUSPICIOUS_DEVICES?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2007-02-01-09-05-54
tine on February 1, 2007 at 3:33 PM
Maybe they should call CAIR.
bloggless on February 1, 2007 at 3:35 PM
The biggest problem I have is that having gotten a look at the mini-bilboards, what kind of idiot could mistake them for bombs.
yes there were wires, however the rest of the things consisted of LEDs and Batteries to power the LEDs.
There simply was no room for any signifigant ammount of explosive.
Now I’m not a demolitions expert… but fortunately, by Little Brother is well trained in EOD/Demolitions.
And we agree that the boston bomb squad acted stupidly (Honorable officers that risk their lives and are underpaid, but clearly in sore need of training.)
And once they got a look at the things they should have stopped the “bomb hysteria”.
Jones Zemkophill on February 1, 2007 at 3:36 PM
Apparently, they are working on a mental incapacity defense.
Dusty on February 1, 2007 at 3:36 PM
The lawyer is a fool for allowing them to go on with the ruse. A prison buzz-cut is the only hair style they need to worry about.
Valiant on February 1, 2007 at 3:38 PM
Kos is pissed at the Mayor of Boston, and links to (instead of a news story) this lefty blogger who is willing to abandon their Democrat mayor, and “send money” to a Republican opponent.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/2/1/134130/2086
So they aren’t pissed at what these two losers did, they’re pissed. Another Kos diary is also not pissed at those responsible, but is instead mad about the “culture of fear”
Here’s the deal though folks… Did these two losers, who are undoubtedly still fully financially supported by their parents, mean to cause a terrorism scare? No. But do they not understand what world we live in? Actually, I’m willing to bet the answer to that is no also. I’m sure they, as most lefties, believe there is no terrorist threat. But am I stupid enough to believe that the thought never crossed their mind “hmm… you know, it could cause a huge bomb scare if people start spotting unattended packages all over the city”. While I think Turner ought to pay the financial price here, these kids do need some jail. Not like 20 years for terrorism, but they definitely need to do some time. The only reason I almost want to say they shouldn’t is I can see the media already making them in to victims, and can you imagine the millions of old hippies and college kids taking to the streets. I can see it already.
RightWinged on February 1, 2007 at 3:39 PM
Sorry, but the only morons here are the Boston government officials who shut the city down because of a few lite-brites showing a cartoon character. Funny, none of the other 9 cities shut themselves down when these light panels showed up. Boston is the only one, now they’re so embarrassed that they have to do something about it, rather than just saying they made a mistake about blowing the whole thing out of proportion.
And, how many of us wouldn’t love a chance to mock the media when they’re foaming at the mouth and indignant about a non-issue. I know I would love the chance.
mattshu on February 1, 2007 at 3:41 PM
poster children for an anti drug commercial.
One Angry Christian on February 1, 2007 at 3:43 PM
Exit Question: why isn’t this the thursday stupid?
One Angry Christian on February 1, 2007 at 3:43 PM
You know, I used to be a pretty big fan of the cartoon in question, and I found the whole thing kind of funny with a certain contempt that we here in NYC have for Beantown — there goes Boston acting crazy again — but then I saw the video, and I have to say: it would have been *very* easy to mistake these lighted plaques for something sinister. These guys went out of their way to put them in out of reach places, sometimes obscured by masonry or steelwork. The end result being all you can see are vague blobs of light blinking cheerily away under bridge supports and the like.
Not good, and leading to an understandable mistake. But I was willing to cut them a break. Lousy ad campaign, things went wrong, make your apologies and hope everyone can move on.
After watching their press conference…throw the book at them. Hard.
Il Padrino on February 1, 2007 at 3:44 PM
No, I’m going to say there is no CRIMINAL liability, as the requisite intent doesn’t even exist to prove disorderly conduct. (Littering/grafiti perhaps… probably littering since it wasn’t paint.)
As for Civil Liability… Well the question is one of “Harm”
Clearly the city spent money on overtime. However, it can be easily argued that the majority of economic harm stems from the Police’s inability to distinguish between a bomb and a billboard.
ALSO, the Boston police had the opportunity to conduct a “Live Fire exercise” involving a “Mad bomber senario” and if they are able to study and improve upon their response, then the cost of the search is overridden by the benefit of the city. and while there is “Gross Harm” there is no “Net Harm” to the city of Boston. In fact the city will be better prepared in the future.
(Now, if they had intended this to be a hoax, I would argue that they should be punished, but I can not see punishing people when the bulk of the harm was not their fault.
Jones Zemkophill on February 1, 2007 at 3:45 PM
Frankly I question the timing. Right during the Libby trial? Come on!
BillLalor on February 1, 2007 at 3:46 PM
I’m on dialup so I don’t bother with video.
I don’t care what they said, or how they said it.
This incident proves to me the basic incompetence of Boston administrators, and inept bomb disposal ‘experts’.
It should be illustrative to note that 9 other cities didn’t even notice these very same ‘devices’, nor were they threatened by them if they did notice.
I was also watching Fox, saw one of the devices, and recognized it for what it was; a PCB with LEDs on it, with the LEDs arranged in a pattern of significance, though I did not know the cartoon character.
Fox news coverage fed the hysteria. Shepard Smith at 7pm signed off with a straight face while delivering one of the funniest ‘get off’ lines I’ve heard, and I don’t remember a word of it.
Meanwhile, a reminder:
Orson Welles
War of the worlds, 1938
Have we learned anything yet?
These two guys are being prosecuted because the city administrator, police department, et al have been exposed as incompetent, and they are mad about it.
And the news media LOVES IT.
rockhauler on February 1, 2007 at 3:49 PM
I couldn’t agree more. While this may have been an ill-conceived ad campaign, clearly Boston officials are the ones to blame for bringing the city to a halt and scaring hundreds of thousands of people. Have you seen what these guys put up? They are a few glorified lite-brites with D batteries on the front. It would take all of 3 seconds to realize it is anything but a bomb. These things were up for 2 weeks in 10 different cities and somehow only Boston is crazy enough to shut down the city. What a royal waste of time and money.
If this isn’t proof terrorists are winning, I don’t know what is.
JaHerer22 on February 1, 2007 at 3:49 PM
Im in Boston and these two morons will get a pass, the lib governor lobbie to get a convicted rapist, and your everyday run of the mill rapist(if there is one) out of prison, oh no the reprobate he wanted to get released tortured and raped a grandmother for nine hours before leaving her for dead.. thats Massachusetts.
Viper1 on February 1, 2007 at 3:50 PM
Think of all the new cars that will get sold because of these two clowns. Lawyers are tripping over themselves.
Limerick on February 1, 2007 at 3:54 PM
Is not the frightening of the people of Boston considered terrorism?
Wade on February 1, 2007 at 3:55 PM
Better add Lite Brites to the TSA no-fly list.
James on February 1, 2007 at 3:56 PM
Seriously?
Was this back in your college experimenting with drugs phase?
And I really don’t mean that as an insult. I’ve watched the show while “inebriated” and just do not at all understand the appeal.
It’s a very, very, very strange show. A talking milkshake, meatball and fries…
That’s a good point though. As far as marketing goes, it clearly wasn’t working until someone phoned the cops. I mean how are you going to see something like that when it’s so far away and so small?
It makes me wonder if they’re the ones who called the police. This entire scare has been a ridiculous amount of publicity.
Esthier on February 1, 2007 at 3:58 PM
New cars?
Esthier on February 1, 2007 at 4:01 PM
I can’t believe so many of you are excusing this and blaming Boston authorities… Again, read what I said above, I don’t think these two losers intended to shut down the city the way they did, but they should have known better.
Am I the only one here, who upon seeing one of these out of reach called the local police? And am I the only one who can understand the vast majority of police having absolutely no clue what this cartoon character is? And even if they did, officials are required to take precautions. What if they didn’t? What if this had been some sort of attack? What if someone thought it would be funny to stick a little figure giving the middle finger on a light board before it blew up? What if these were a distraction while a real attack was going on? How would you people blaming Boston officials feel if, knowing that it is required that they check all of these out, a real attack (unrelated to these stupid things) had gone on, and first responders were all tied up and couldn’t get to where they needed to go because the city was in a log jam?
RightWinged on February 1, 2007 at 4:02 PM
3 sets of idiots- the Boston PD, the two dudemen hairstylists, and the press. Marketing genius by Time Warner. They probably paid these clowns a couple thousand in parts and labor and look at the mileage they are getting.
doginblack on February 1, 2007 at 4:02 PM
Were they working for the same jack-wad ad company that produces those thetruth.org commercials?
God, I really hate those. I REALLY, REALLY hate those.
SailorDave on February 1, 2007 at 4:02 PM
Not me. But then again, I don’t feel entirely certain that these guys didn’t want this to happen.
Esthier on February 1, 2007 at 4:02 PM
Settlement money.
Limerick on February 1, 2007 at 4:02 PM
Only if its intentional. Otherwise its “A Mistake”
Jones Zemkophill on February 1, 2007 at 4:03 PM
By the way, does anyone else consider the implications if there is no punishment for this?
RightWinged on February 1, 2007 at 4:04 PM
No. But, like some others have asked, how come it was no big deal in the other 9 cities? Also, unless I have read something that is in error, apparently the things had been in place for days. What set the Boston PD off all of a sudden? Did someone call in a threat?
BacaDog on February 1, 2007 at 4:04 PM
RightWinged, I don’t at all have a problem with any of your logic, however, after seeing one of these things, first responders would have to know it was nothing of consequence
doginblack on February 1, 2007 at 4:04 PM
Esthier –
No, I wasn’t experimenting with drugs…although I guess peer pressure was involved, as I mostly watched it because my brothers thought it was hilarious. I have to admit I do like the New Jersey troglodyte what is Carl. He makes me laugh.
Rightwinged —
Extremely well-put. I don’t think there was any malice involved, but I do think (and I believe the idiotic piece of guerilla theatre they made of their press conference proves) that they were exceedingly negligent.
Il Padrino on February 1, 2007 at 4:05 PM
I think you are right. The frightening of the people of Boston could be considered terrorism. But we must ask, Who actually frightened the people of Boston?
Was it the marketing firm placing lite-brites around the city? No, otherwise all of the 9 other cities who were “terrorized” by these cartoon characters would have had a similar response. That means that the frightening of the people was done by something specific to Boston. That leaves the local incompetent government. They should be held responsible.
Just because these guys look like loser hippies doesn’t mean they’re guilty of anything other than that, looking like loser hippies. Unfortunately for all of us, there is no law against looking like, or being, a loser hippie.
mattshu on February 1, 2007 at 4:05 PM
Well, there goes my theory about the show. Maybe I just never gave it a chance.
Esthier on February 1, 2007 at 4:07 PM
Also, has no one considered why they didn’t speak up while the chaos was unfolding in Boston? They could have ended it with one quick phone call to Boston PD. For that matter, why weren’t there identifiable marks on the devices themselves? At the very least a logo for their firm?
Il Padrino on February 1, 2007 at 4:09 PM
Indeed. Though I must say that Seth Green’s Robot Chicken is far better. (It’s far superior to Saturday Night Live.)
Jones Zemkophill on February 1, 2007 at 4:10 PM
They were right to mock the fearmongers at their press conference… the whole situation is silly. A light-bright bomb that didn’t explode for 2 weeks?
Anyone else remember the giant Mario “?” boxes that people thought were bombs? I’ve got news for people: terrorists 1) aren’t very creative, 2) have no grasp of American pop culture and 3) have no sense of humor, much less irony. As soon as a terrorist attack is simultaneously a funny pop-culture reference, then we can say the terrorists have finally won.
Lehosh on February 1, 2007 at 4:11 PM
Agreed.
Esthier on February 1, 2007 at 4:12 PM
People have been doing this for years with stickers and posters. But when you switch over to electronic boxes and start placing them on pieces of critical infrastructure, you should not be surprised when it raises suspicion or causes a panic.
Equally, no one but stoners and slackers would easily recognize characters from an idiotic late night cartoon and accept it for the advertising it was. It is not a surprise that those with normal jobs mistook it for something suspicious.
The funniest thing about this case was the look on the face of the dude with the dreds when he heard the charges read off against him in court. Clearly this advertising gimmick was not carefully thought through.
BelchSpeak on February 1, 2007 at 4:12 PM
Lehosh –
You seem to be under the impression that people were aware of these things for two weeks. I do not get that sense (and that more than anything probably displays why this stunt was a total failure before the scare).
As to terrorists recognizing pop culture symbols — so what? I think it’s a matter of *most* people not recognizing the characters. This isn’t exactly Mickey Mouse or Garfield the Cat we’re talking about. Just a couple of obscure characters from an obscure late night cartoon, illustrated in flashing lights that from the distance these things were seen could have been almost anything.
Il Padrino on February 1, 2007 at 4:14 PM
I don’t have a problem with erring on the side of caution and sending an officer or two over to check the device out–that is perfectly reasonable. But have you looked at the pictures? It is 1/4 of an inch thick with LED lights a D batteries on the front…you don’t need to be a ballistics expert or have seen the show to know it’s not a bomb. A few officers could have confirmed this and moved on without shutting down the city.
The city, fueled by media, completely overreacted and now they look like a bunch of bumbling, incompetent fools and they are trying to throw these guys under the bus to save face.
JaHerer22 on February 1, 2007 at 4:16 PM
They did that, but after doing so received reports of several similar items all over the city in key parts of the city. That’s what took so long.
Sure they knew some were hoaxes, but that doesn’t mean they weren’t going to investigate all of them.
Esthier on February 1, 2007 at 4:17 PM
RightWinged, I agree with you 100%. Now, if some Mooselimb terrorists decide they want to blow up some infrastructures, their going to think “HHMMM, let’s use those light bright things those morons used in Boston. There was so much flack taken by the local government, no one will ever dare make a big deal over it for fear of being labeled incompetent, overreactive etc.” Many folks seemed to forget that after 9/11 President Bush and many others made the comments that things will never be the same again here in the good old USA. This stupid prank these asswipes did is a good example of what they were referring to. We can never be too careful again. BTW, what are the laws concerning large multibillion dollar corporations using city infrastructures for advertising purposes. I’d really like to know, because if this is legal and accepted, I’m going to put signs out the wazoo on the local highway for my business. I’ll be sure however, not to have batteries, wires and lights as part of the signage. :)
rayvet on February 1, 2007 at 4:17 PM
JaHerer22 –
I’ve seen the pictures, and they’re actually pretty misleading. The YouTube video — the one the firm released to celebrate the stunt! — makes it clear that there was plenty of room for doubt for what these things were, based on lines of sight and where they were placed. And once you’ve established *one* of them is harmless, do you want to take the risk that *all* of them are? I doubt that’s part of any responsible police procedure.
Il Padrino on February 1, 2007 at 4:18 PM
A good point. I myself am an animation fan, and practiced Intelectual Property law before I switched to Criminal Prosecution. SO I must admit to being in a unique demographic.
Lawyers 25-30 experienced in Intelectual property Law as applied to the Animation industry. (not to mention that I always was a night owl.)
SO looking at this from a wider perspective I can see how older members of the population, or “Early risers” would not get the refrence.
However that does not explain how “Trained” Bomb squad members could believe that the devices were explosive. I believe that Boston PD EOD could use some supplimental training.
Jones Zemkophill on February 1, 2007 at 4:19 PM
From LGF:
This incident started at about 9:00am in Boston and finally ended around 4:00pm. Interference, Inc. knew what was going on and told the “artist” to keep quiet. He did. They all deserve jail time.
IrishEi on February 1, 2007 at 4:21 PM
RightWinged
Have you noticed that terrorist in Iraq often use ‘car bombs’?
Have you noticed any parked cars near where you live that might be ‘car bombs’?
Have you ever thought about notifing ‘the authorities’ about ’suspcious vehicles’ in your area, and suggesting to those ‘authorities’ that they should send the bomb disposal experts out and detonate those possibly dangerous car bombs before someone gets hurt, just to be on the safe side?
rockhauler on February 1, 2007 at 4:21 PM
They still had to exercise caution in all cases, and again look at my extended answer… What about things being used as a distraction. I mean, put yourself in the mind of a cop, even if you did find it and determine it wasn’t a threat… You’ve got to be like “that doesn’t mean the others aren’t, who knows what this is?” If I found some things with a picture of something flipping me off as a cop, I would be very worried about what was to follow as other reports of suspicious packages rolled in.
Terrorists aren’t creative? Is that the lesson we learned on 9/11? They spent years formulating an incredible plan, something no one expected?
Pop culture? I would be willing to bet that 95-98% of the public has absolutely no idea what this cartoon character was. You’re flawed thinking imagines a cop approaching one of these devices and laughing in to his radio “haha, oh it’s just Ignignokt from Aqua Teen Hunger Force… everybody back to the station, no need to take precautions”
RightWinged on February 1, 2007 at 4:22 PM
What a week: Logan, Arkin and now these guys.
Malpaso on February 1, 2007 at 4:23 PM
Cars belong parked on the streets and don’t look suspicious. Electronic devices featuring an image of something that the vast majority of the public isn’t familiar with being attached to bridges, etc. IS SUSPICIOUS.
RightWinged on February 1, 2007 at 4:24 PM
Two morons and the useful-idiot press in full flower.
Reminds me of flies buzzing around a freshly-laid stool.
What’s that smell…?
CliffHanger on February 1, 2007 at 4:25 PM
Ted sues Boston. Boston sues Ted. Dredlocks sues Boston and Ted. Rosie and Donald argue over it and sue everyone. It’s all good. Lots and lots of Boston taxpayer money will end up ensuring that everyone has the ability to pay for their health insurance. Court stenographers will get overtime. Cartoon network will get ratings. It is all good people. Everyone wins!
Limerick on February 1, 2007 at 4:25 PM
What’s really amusing is that this is the exact kind of hairbrained marketing campaign Shake would devise to promote the movie.
Nethicus on February 1, 2007 at 4:26 PM
Lite brite, Lite brite,
Turn on the magic of shining lights!
Savage on February 1, 2007 at 4:27 PM
Couldn’t have said it better.
I’ve already addressed this fully, but to address you specifically.. as I understand it we were looking at suspicious packages. Were some of these not just a “quarter inch thick” thing attacked to something? I’m actually pretty sure I saw one sitting in a box during yesterday’s coverage. My point is unless you were there, you don’t know what they looked like.
RightWinged on February 1, 2007 at 4:30 PM
I don’t know I think these two guys gave all the respect due to their charges and the press conference.
They should have just held up one of their signs with the little cartoon guy giving the finger.
It’s the most ridiculous nonsense I’ve ever heard of. I have to assume at this point that the management at the BPD is entirely void of common sense.
bj1126 on February 1, 2007 at 4:32 PM
have you seen these things? anyone who would imagine that they are weapons of some sort would have the same reaction to a newspaper box. honestly, it wasn’t a bundle of hotdogs strapped to a cellphone. this is dumb, and they were right to mock it.
jummy on February 1, 2007 at 4:32 PM
So,
every time you drive passed a bridge that has a new blinking light on it, different from the last time you passed by, you call the police to report a suspicious blinking light under the bridge, that wasn’t there the last time?
So every time you see electronic device with wires coming out of it, abandon in a public place, you call the police to report a suspicious device, that might be a bomb?
What looks suspicious to you?
Every time you see someone put a box into a refuse container you call the police to report a suspicious package, that might be a bomb?
rockhauler on February 1, 2007 at 4:33 PM
Two words….Beavis, Butthead!
soulsirkus on February 1, 2007 at 4:33 PM
Farce made flesh.
Limerick on February 1, 2007 at 4:36 PM
in any case, it figures that people from massachussetts would be afraid of bright flashing lights.
jummy on February 1, 2007 at 4:38 PM
Everyone is making the same mistake: the devices are obviously innocuous when seen close up. The problem is that this is not how the devices were initially seen.
Too many people on this thread are addressing the matter with perfect hindsight — of course they’re harmless, only a fool would think otherwise!
But if you glanced up and saw a vague pattern of blinking lights stuck to, oh, say, an overpass support column, would you dismiss it out of hand? That’s where the panic really came from. And once the devices were removed, however unthreatening they appeared to be, their unknown provenance or meaning required they be dealt with as threats.
It bears repeating: these things were not obvious in their initial placement. In fact, the Interference video plainly shows their creators placing them using long poles, settling them in corners where they were partly obscured, and so on.
Why did other cities not notice them? Because these guys are horrible at what they do, apparently. And if I were a Massachusetts D.A., I’d be positively salivating after the lack of concern they displayed at their presser.
Il Padrino on February 1, 2007 at 4:38 PM
I can’t be entirely objective on this one, as someone else who watches ATHF. (Hey, you pull enough 12-hour night shifts, you’ll end up watching some Adult Swim, because there isn’t crap else on.) I recognized the character immediately, so it’s hard for me to put myself in the shoes of someone who saw it and thought “WTF?”. That being said, law enforcement should always err on the side of caution when dealing with possible terrorism, because the consequences of overreacting and being wrong are miniscule compared to the consequences of blowing it off and being wrong. It’s easy to second-guess officials now, with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, and rag on them for being stupid. It’s a hell of a lot harder being the guy on the firing line who has to make the call based only on the limited information he has right at that moment. The cops played it safe with the lives of Bostonians, which was the right call to make. Being scared beats the sh*t out of being dead. This sure as hell won’t be the last time something like that happens, and some of them will be for real. Welcome to the world the Israelis live in every day.
Some–certainly not all–of you armchair bomb experts are clearly making the assumption that if terrorists are going to place bombs around the city, they’re going to obviously look like bombs. Which–sorry to break it to you–is just f*cking stupid. They’ll look like anything but, because the terrorists are a lot better at this than you are.
ReubenJCogburn on February 1, 2007 at 4:39 PM
Please. It was great. I love to see the holier-than-thou press given a hard time, the people who think they’re powerful because they get away with asking offensive questions to politicians without the fear of getting smacked in the mouth.
Why FOX decided to show this “live” though makes absolutely no sense, unless they were doing it to be subversive and mock the MSM. If that’s the case, the people at FOX are Gods.
asc85 on February 1, 2007 at 4:39 PM
both sides are morons,, the 2 dumbasses.. and the cops were baffled by a moonite.. the moonite has 100x the brains of all..
retired on February 1, 2007 at 4:40 PM
They F’d up my and my wife’s commute. Like jumpers that pull suicide runs at rush hour, they get NOOOOOO sympathy from me.
Alden Pyle on February 1, 2007 at 4:41 PM
Rightwinged,
I would argue that the BPD and city officials exercised about as little caution as they possibly could. A very, very small percentage, probably less the 1%, of bomb threats and suspicious packages actually contain bombs. I’m not saying they shouldn’t be investigated, but police know the odds are overwhelming that it will turn out to be a false alarm. That said, by creating this media frenzy and whipping the city into a panic the city and the BPD needlessly frightened the citizens and put them in unnecessary harm.
Who needs terrorists when the police and mayor do the terrorizing for them?
JaHerer22 on February 1, 2007 at 4:42 PM
Oh, please. This paranoia is getting to the point of being afraid of friggin’ digital alarm clocks. If you’re scared to death of a lite brite, you need a beer. And I’m sick of all these people who seem willing to land on the cops’ side no matter what. There are idiots and jerks in every field, and positions of authority in society are especially not exempt. Dance to the media’s fiddle, puppets. I’m sure they enjoyed the ratings spike because they successfully freaked you out.
Savage on February 1, 2007 at 4:43 PM
True story. When he was about 12 or so, a cousin of mine and a friend of his were goofing around in his friend’s basement with some electrical wire, pieces of metal and wood, old ceramic, and a soldering iron. They cobbled together some kind of weird-looking contraption that my cousin put in a shoe box and took home it with him. As he walked home, he thought that he really didn’t want the thing and he just dropped it alongside the road.
The next morning, there was a picture of it in on the front page of the paper. Someone found it walking home from the bus stop, thought it looked like a bomb, and called the police. The story said that the police closed off a three-block area and had to call in the bomb squad to remove it.
That was 50 years ago. It still upsets my cousin when anybody brings it up.
What I think? If there is a bunch of lighted electronic gizmos put together, skillfully or otherwise, and hanging on the underside of a bridge, next to a building, or anywhere that seems vulnerable, I don’t care if you can or can’t tell the difference between and LED or an IED or an IUD, if it looks like something that may go off, then whoever finds it should have a reason to be concerned and call the police.
Gottafang on February 1, 2007 at 4:45 PM
I’m in NYC now and we didn’t panic even though there were more of the terrible blinking space invader bombs here then in Boston. This is not going to be a popular theory, but is it possible the people of Boston are retarded hillbillies?
Not that I think New Yorkers are smarter or anything.
But seriously, isn’t the bigger issue the failure of Boston’s Intel division, and the media who’ve all but admitted they knew before the police that this was a character from Aqua Teen? And though Turner owes Boston some money, how is putting two losers who likely got this gig on Craigslist going to do anything but cost Boston even more money and make the commies over at Kos repeat the whole sorry gimmick “in protest” of our over reaction?
Boston P.D. should plant a couple of dime bags on those two, give them community service and then make Turner pay for it all.
Rob Taylor on February 1, 2007 at 4:47 PM
Again, really, if this was no big deal, just a publicity thing, then why were their signs so horrible for publicity before being considered bombs?
Wouldn’t it make more sense to make signs of a normal size, ones large enough to be seen by the naked eye? Wouldn’t it make more sense not to put them under bridges?
Esthier on February 1, 2007 at 4:47 PM
give me a break. together we can and mumbles both, when you get right down to it, shut down the city of boston because they mistook LEDs for IEDs.
Morons, both of them.
triple on February 1, 2007 at 4:48 PM
You are a lib aren’t you? You throw out one thing, a ridiculous “car bomb” comparison, I smash it, and you move on to try something else? Classic lib move.
It depends on the locations for starters. If some suspicious electronic thing was attached to my front door when I got home, I’d be less concerned than if I saw the same thing on the steps of city hall, or on the bridge coming over the river. A “blinking light” set up for a purpose where it belongs, is a little different than out of reach random unfamiliar electronics.
I’m never going to get through to you, so at least read this comment
Also this:
You just called the police terrorists, the same way Kerry called US troops in Iraq terrorists.
That said, have you ever seen the daily bomb scares in different cities? They get the robot out there to detonate the thing, evacuate the area, etc. Now take that scenario, and consider how you need to deal with it when there are reports of 10 suspicious packages turning up all over a city?
RightWinged on February 1, 2007 at 4:49 PM
Another good point.
RightWinged on February 1, 2007 at 4:52 PM
Ah, but normal sized signage and advertisements are just too square for the likes of Adult Swim. Apparently in the land of guerilla marketing, the harder it is to see your product the better.
I heard a rumor that the real reason Boston went crazy is that there was a bomb threat made against the port shortly before the first device was found. Anyone know if that’s true? I’d like to see a cite.
Il Padrino on February 1, 2007 at 4:54 PM
Well, if I were a terrorist I know what I’d make my bombs look like now!
All in all, a stupid prank. Aren’t permits required for any type of advertisement placed on structures? What about the law about not yelling “fire” in a movie theater? It seems it would be applicable in this case.
NTWR on February 1, 2007 at 4:55 PM
JaHerer22 on February 1, 2007 at 4:56 PM
These guys need to be heavily prosecuted for terrorism and locked up for at least 10 years – Why?
1) I don’t buy the idea for one second that this was NOT intended to cause a massive public bomb scare – If this were a “PR” stunt, Why the HELL would you HIDE your “advertisements” in inaccessible places, if you are trying to generate PR? The others were all “hidden” in other cities as well – and they INTENDED to advertise and reach a market like this? Bullshit.
2) These things were plenty big enough to hold enough C4 to bring down a large bridge.
3) Wires, batteries, electronic components are all consistent with basic IED assembly methods – BPD’s JOB is to assume the worst – A FREAKIN BOMB – and take the necessary precautions to protect public safety.
4) As for “Damages” – how many business appointments were broken, missed, deliveries not made in time, medical appointments missed, etc – due to the gridlock? How many paychecks are going to be short this week, how many bills are going to be overdue, and how many late charges will people pay? How many millions of gallons of gas were burned idling in stopped traffic emitting those scary greenhouse gases to further pollute Boston?
Damn hippies. No responsibility asshat dilletantes.
Benthoven on February 1, 2007 at 4:57 PM
It was a guerilla marketing campaign designed to be cool and underground…not too look like a giant billboard. The whole idea was they were supposed to be kind of mysterious and hidden and people would see them and tell their friends and it would create a buzz. Viral advertising…come on, you post on a blog, you should be up to date with this kind of stuff.
JaHerer22 on February 1, 2007 at 4:59 PM
Damn, you stole the words right off my keyboard!
thirteen28 on February 1, 2007 at 4:59 PM
So Reuben, what you are saying is:
a real terrorist, who CONCEALS a real explosive device, under a bridge, with the intent of destroying the bridge will put a BLINKING LIGHT on it, to reveal the explosive device to anyone who is looking for it? Because they are smarter then the rest of us?
Oh, yes, since you are the expert here, would you tell the rest of us the required quantity of the explosive of your choice needed to bring down the bridge?
rockhauler on February 1, 2007 at 4:59 PM
*wild applause and standing ovation*
NTWR on February 1, 2007 at 5:05 PM
Now do you see the type of morons I have to suffer with on a daily basis in this once great city? Honestly, these idiots need some jail time just to knock the stupid out of them.
As NTWR put so succinctly, any type of advertisement in public require permits from the City Hall. Hell I can’t even stand in Boston Common with a sign saying “Jesus Saves” without prior approval. (Not that I do that BTW)
kiakjones on February 1, 2007 at 5:06 PM
“…a real terrorist, who CONCEALS a real explosive device, under a bridge…will put a BLINKING LIGHT on it…?”
that’s the “reasoning” in a nutshell. but hey, better hyterical and tilting at windmills than safe. or…sorry…or something. “sorry is supposed to fit in there somewhere, but i don’t see how a scenareo involving a litebrite could end in someone being sorry.
I don’t think these guys will be sorry, and i hope they sue the s**t out of the boston city government.
jummy on February 1, 2007 at 5:06 PM
So, there’s gonna be an Aqua Teen movie? SWEEEEET!
robblefarian on February 1, 2007 at 5:07 PM
Whoever claims that there wasn’t enough space to stick in enough explosives is a jerk. Sorry. not.
No one recall the letter bombs? Too young? Too short a memory? These things were plenty big enough to blow off a policeman’s hand. That’s terror, too. You don’t know what you’ve got until you can open them up and look inside. We’re not talking supermen, with x-ray vision, just policemen. If they collect 30 of them and the 31st one was a real one and blew up in the hands of a five year old, who’d be blamed? The police.
naliaka on February 1, 2007 at 5:12 PM
Were these lite-bright gizmos placed on private property without the owner’s consent? And on City bridges? And I’m sure lights of any kind must have violated city ordinance(s)…
Trivial as these matters might be, they do violate the law…
The authorities did not over-react. I would do the same if I drove under a bridge and saw lights and wires stuck above me…critics either say we don’t do enough (when something bad does happen) and we over-react (when it’s not something bad)
JetBoy on February 1, 2007 at 5:13 PM
No, you didn’t ’smash’ the argument. You don’t even know what this argument is even about. What you did is ignore the real problem. The real problem being how does one differentiate between an ordinary, innocuous object, and something that is a real threat.
That is the substance of this entire argument. The bomb disposal ‘experts’ FAILED, completely FAILED to communicate to the general public that these ‘devices’ were harmless.
To compound this grievous error, they are now prosecuting these two clowns to cover up their failure.
rockhauler on February 1, 2007 at 5:13 PM
I’m not saying that at all. I’m saying don’t make stupid-ass assumptions that a bomb is going to obviously appear to be a bomb, which some people around here are clearly doing.
ReubenJCogburn on February 1, 2007 at 5:13 PM
20 bucks says these two are already fielding calls from talk show producers.
The Ugly American on February 1, 2007 at 5:24 PM
no, there was no threat called in, from what I understand someone saw it on a bridge support that holds up I 93, there were no blinking/flashing lights (it was not supposed to do that in the daylight, only at night).
Big deal? I say yeah, the people that hijacked the planes on 9/11 flew out of Boston, so tention is heightened here anyway, and when police saw these things they saw a circuit board and wires w/ bundled up batteries, no blinking lights.
What really ticks me off is that the Turner people didn’t call Boston officials until the afternoon. I wonder if that was before or after officials found 2 pipe bombs (according to a press conference on NECN last night) while looking for these advertising things.
I’m glad they handled things cautiously until they knew there was no real threat.
These two shmucks are lucky that no emergency vehicles, like ambulances, were hindered from doing their jobs, possibly delaying treatment for someone and potentially causing even more harm, when the roads were closed.
I would love to have been at the Charlestown court house for the press conference and smacked the smiles off of these two turds faces. But unlike those two “performance artists” I have two jobs that keep me very busy.
Laura02420 on February 1, 2007 at 5:24 PM
There are two levels of douchebagitude going on here.
1. The douches who planted these devices. Not for the planting but for the idiotic press conference. Hopefully this will trigger “special circumstances” at their trial.
2. The douches in Boston government who freaked out and panicked the city over nothing. Not so much for freaking out, but for their (and most other govt agencies’) foisting the veneer of security upon the public rather than doing the hard work of providing some semblance of ACTUAL security.
Now, thanks to these incompetent clowns, terrorists worldwide have the idea to put bombs into innocent guerilla art.
RC2 on February 1, 2007 at 5:26 PM
Okay, so I take it you don’t like Aqua Teen Hunger Force, but isn’t that a little harsh? If they’d put up signs saying “Allah Akbar” that would be one thing, but it’s a little video-game character giving the finger.
If that were the case, the Colts would have been thrown in jail a couple weeks ago.
Jim Treacher on February 1, 2007 at 5:29 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »