Boston hoaxer prankster hipster filmed cops handling “bomb,” said nothing
posted at 3:26 pm on February 6, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
Be outraged all you want. Obviously, you don’t know the first thing about videotape freelance art.
Surveillance cameras caught 27-year-old Peter Berdovsky videotaping officers removing what they thought was a possible bomb.
His lawyer, Walter Prince, said Tuesday: “Mr. Berdovsky didn’t do anything inappropriate.”
Prince said Berdovsky had received a call that morning from a friend who told him there was a bomb threat at the Sullivan Square transit station in Boston. He said Berdovsky grabbed his camera and headed out to the scene, unaware it involved one of the electronic devices that he and Sean Stevens, 28, had hung as part of a guerrilla advertising campaign for Turner Broadcasting, a division of Time Warner Inc.
“That’s what he does. He videotapes things. He’s a videotape freelance artist. He got a call that there was a bomb threat near his house and he went to tape it,” Prince said. “When he got there, he realized what was going on, and he went back to his apartment and called his employer, and they told him they would take care of it. That’s not an inappropriate response.”
Hey, remember when punks were cool?
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 Next »
Nuance
iNeXuS on February 6, 2007 at 3:30 PM
I want to shave his head.
Slublog on February 6, 2007 at 3:31 PM
Those aren’t punks–Joe Strummer and Johnny Rotten were punks. Those guerilla marketing guys are dorks.
Ed Driscoll on February 6, 2007 at 3:33 PM
Why do you want to insults dorks? Dorks are cute and loveable. These guys are wannabes or less.
KelliD on February 6, 2007 at 3:39 PM
I bet Mom and Dad are so proud.
BacaDog on February 6, 2007 at 3:39 PM
Let me just say that all of those who were blasting Boston officials the other day have been officially pwn3d by what happened in Britain this week. 2 LETTER BOMBS HAVE EXPLODED, ONE OF THEM TODAY, INJURING TWO PEOPLE. So go home with your linking to close up (not as normal citizens saw them) media photos of the electronic devices used in Boston saying “does this look like a bomb to you”. As I repeatedly said, “what does a bomb look like”?
RightWinged on February 6, 2007 at 3:41 PM
I want to know why they are so anti-soap.
KelliD on February 6, 2007 at 3:41 PM
They oughta send the EOD over to his house with a few pipebombs … and film it. “Hey, it’s just *art*, man.”
Tony737 on February 6, 2007 at 3:42 PM
Has anyone questioned how they learned about the suspicious package? Is it just a coincidence that these two jokers happened on the scene with sophisticated video equipment when police were investigation a device that they illegally placed? Has anyone wondered who made the first call to police about the suspicious device? Who made the subsequent calls?
Is it possible that the reason Boston reacted as it did, while other cities did not, is because Boston was incited to react by well-timed calls to 911. Could that also be the reason that they went unnoticed for two weeks and suddenly the city wakes up to their existence?
LonelyMassRepublican on February 6, 2007 at 3:43 PM
TINY TIM.
bloggless on February 6, 2007 at 3:51 PM
How can he ‘be unaware” of the fact that the police were responding to a device he planted? Sounds like an attempt to receive free publicity to me.
RedinBlueCounty on February 6, 2007 at 3:51 PM
Obviously, then, we all have to be afraid of everything.
rockhauler on February 6, 2007 at 3:53 PM
I’ve been saying that all along, there was no way he could have made the trip from Arlington to Somerville station within the time frame of the whole episode. It might be a 15 minute drive without traffic but at the hour this was going down (rush hour)it’s virtually impossible.
He was there before the action started and most likely called the devise in himself so he could tape the aftermath.
kiakjones on February 6, 2007 at 3:58 PM
Milk that 15 minutes all you can boyz.
I’m going to have a cigarette now.
Was it good for you?
Kini on February 6, 2007 at 4:01 PM
They’ll be traded like currency in prison.
Mazztek on February 6, 2007 at 4:01 PM
That was never the argument, you dishonest turd.
RightWinged on February 6, 2007 at 4:02 PM
If that’s the case, these two are guilty of inciting terror. Commerce was interrupted, transportation was halted and people were scared. That, by definition is terrorism.
LonelyMassRepublican on February 6, 2007 at 4:03 PM
I don’t understand all those who got so upset because of the reactions of the Boston PD. I would have been upset if they hadn’t taken this seriously. That being said, someone please shave both their heads and make them bathe. I never really knew what a “performance artist” was but now I know.
Catie96706 on February 6, 2007 at 4:05 PM
Why, you’re absolutely right! The StayPuft marshmallow man was supposed to be too harmless-looking to do anyone harm, too, yet he almost destroyed New York City!
James on February 6, 2007 at 4:07 PM
The only fear we have in this day and age are ignorant people who live in la-la land. Thank goodness they are usually so out of touch they can’t get into a position where we might have to count on them to protect us.
Liberals are really conservatives that haven’t been victimized by their liberal fed ignorance yet.
Just remember, we’re all born with a librals heart- some of us, however, were also born with a brain and know how the world really works.
csdeven on February 6, 2007 at 4:08 PM
Wait, I thought he was a “Guerilla Marketer.”
You can’t have it both ways, dude.
NTWR on February 6, 2007 at 4:08 PM
Is that guy flipping ugly or what?
Hilts on February 6, 2007 at 4:13 PM
“Uh huh huh huh huh … huh huh huh huh”
“Hey Beavis, that was cool … uh uh huh huh huh … huh huh huh huh.
“Heh heh … heh heh cool Butthead heh heh .. heh heh .. heh heh”
thirteen28 on February 6, 2007 at 4:13 PM
yea, lets make media martyrs of a couple of otherwise inconsequencial hippies.
GAH! A BOMB!
oops sorry. that was my gary larson desk callender. i’m going to get the da to indicht king features syndicate for this terrorish would-be attack-like incident.
jummy on February 6, 2007 at 4:17 PM
I hope Bubba tapes this twit’s first “command performance”
bbz123 on February 6, 2007 at 4:17 PM
If you see a clock radio, a lite brite, a gameboy, a letter, or any other suspicious device lying out in public, contact the media and the local authorities immediately.
Savage on February 6, 2007 at 4:17 PM
Perhaps it looks like black plastic tape covering what appears to be the same size and shape as a stick of dynamite with wires protruding from the ends and a circuit board that is not lit up (because it is daylight) to show the image of a cartoon character that nobody has ever seen except the nerd who planted the F*@ing devices.
Add to that the power of suggestion, probably incited by these same two idiots, that they appear to be IEDs (which is what was first reported) and you have the makings of chaos in Boston.
LonelyMassRepublican on February 6, 2007 at 4:24 PM
FROOOGGG BAAASEBAALLLLL!!!!!
Kid from Brooklyn on February 6, 2007 at 4:28 PM
Sounds like he is full of that what makes up his dread locks.
Lawrence on February 6, 2007 at 4:32 PM
RedInBlueCountry, Mon you say’d
what makes you tink that, after two weeks of ganja, my mon
Berdovsky is goin’ to e-von ‘member working for Turner? Much less plantin’ dem sparklies?
Catseye on February 6, 2007 at 4:45 PM
The article said
NTWR, You said
Actually he can,man. He markets guerillas to support his art. Dude, wait, what?
Catseye on February 6, 2007 at 4:51 PM
To be clear, I’m completely on your side of this thing LMR, and just want to be sure you didn’t misinterpret my comments. I went ’round and ’round with these blame the police folks the other day, and the entire time they kept arguing that this “cartoon” “lite brite” didn’t “look like” a bomb, to which I repeatedly asked what a bomb “looks like” (in addition to shattering every other weak argument they had). My point today was that there have been two recent letter bombs in Britain, the one today injuring two people.
rockhauler retreats to the ridiculous sarcastic comments, building a strawman by accusing those on our side of saying we should live in fear. ALL we’ve been saying is that the police reacted as they should have when they got 911 calls of pertaining to suspicious devices. They had to investigate each one individually, that’s simply a fact. They couldn’t find one, determine it wasn’t a bomb and then ignore all other calls. These police blamers are confused or just dishonest. NO ONE KNEW it was a marketing campaign until it was all over. So that argument doesn’t wash. And this cartoon has a cult following, it’s not like Garfield or Homer Simpson… Like some cop (yeah, someone who has a job, and isn’t an overgrown stoner who watches the show in an apartment his parents pay for) is going to see one of these and go “oh, this is part of a marketing campaign for a movie of some cartoon, no need to follow-up on other calls about foreign electronic items on bridges, etc.”. No, they’re going to wonder “what is this about, and why are we getting reports of devices all over the city? We have to investigate all calls and keep the public away, because not only is that standard procedure, but we have no idea that this is an obscure cartoon movie’s marketing campaign.”
And again, did the cops/mayor overreact… or did the media?
And as many have raised here… isn’t it odd that this ass clown was there with a camera. And isn’t it odd that calls were coming in all within an hour or two, when it has been repeatedly claimed that these things were there for weeks? Again, the cops were responding the CALLS not finding “lite brites” and causing a panic. STFU you dishonest and/or stupid polie blamers. But again, these calls all coming in at once, no news was made of these devices prior to this, and this kid was there with a camera… coincidence, or desperate attempt to get some coverage/publicity for a failing marketing campaign? (I mean, the cult following of this show would already know about the movie… so why put some character’s image up, with nothing else… no one would make a connection and say “hey, I’m going to go see a movie with that character in it, even though I don’t know what that character is, that it comes from a cartoon, or that it even will be made in to a movie”. Most wasteful marketing ever… until it became a news story because of a bomb scare!)
RightWinged on February 6, 2007 at 4:57 PM
Naw, he aint a punk, he’s a Spread-Head. He’d be following the Grateful Dead or Phish if they were still around. I be willing to wage a years salary he’s been to more than a few Wide Spread Panic shows.
He likely smokes a lot of weed, and eats mystery-meat-on-a-stick at hippy music festivals.
I know the type.
natesnake on February 6, 2007 at 4:58 PM
Looks like an anarcho peace-punk to me. The worst kind. Not even cool enough to be a crusty-punk. The heaviest thing this guy probably ever listened to was a Michael Moore speech.
Pat Meebles on February 6, 2007 at 5:06 PM
Yes, he did. It wasn’t illegal, but it was inappropriate.
But were they always this ugly?
Entelechy on February 6, 2007 at 5:07 PM
If you don’t like someone, you can point to their mailbox and say, “That’s suspicious.” It will be detonated within the hour and your enemy will be picked up for “hoaxing” the media and police. Ah, ain’t the power of suggestion grand?
Savage on February 6, 2007 at 5:09 PM
Anyone interested in his frame of mind can check out his other work here
Notice this caption from 2005 I wash my tv in fear
kiakjones on February 6, 2007 at 5:20 PM
Bravo, Cateye! It’s like I’m watching “Rockers“…Horsemouth would be proud.
NTWR on February 6, 2007 at 5:31 PM
RightWinged
What does a bomb look like? Anything you want to make it look like.
I did an IED awareness briefing in 1998(and various others up to 2005 when I retired). On the tables around the classroom I had placed various items. Some were innocent objects, some were IEDs. All the IEDs were fitted with a flashbulb instead of a blasting cap. Before the briefing had even started 1/2 of the IEDs had been triggered.
The “IEDs” were 3 books, a pack of cigarettes, a bottle of Pepsi, an aluminum clipboard, a trash can, a box with a button that said “push me”, a cell phone, an electric pencil sharpener, a simple shoe box that had a sign on it that said “do not touch”, a dancing stuffed gorilla, etc. Before I had completed the introduction portion of the briefing all had been triggered. All of them would have been lethal to whomever set them off.
I can make an IED look like anything.
One rule for the bomb squad, once a suspicious package has been identified by the police, the bomb squads are required to treat them as IEDs. That’s the regulations.
What do I know anyway, I only did 24 years in EOD.
You are right to bash the people bashing the Boston Bomb Squad.
Bomb Doctor on February 6, 2007 at 5:34 PM
Is that feces on his head?
rightside on February 6, 2007 at 5:37 PM
I wish him some commercial success: sufficient that he can afford a comb, perhaps even a brush. Natural bristle if he really scores.
Very juvenile stunt.
shaken on February 6, 2007 at 5:40 PM
My spidey sense is tingling. If I were the police, I’d be checking this guy’s phone records.
Matticus Finch on February 6, 2007 at 5:41 PM
And the half fast “marketing company” who told him to keep everything on the “down low”.
Matticus Finch on February 6, 2007 at 5:43 PM
Just be sure you remove the scalp along with the hair.
Please?
Gregor on February 6, 2007 at 5:47 PM
Great now we have surveillance art. Idiots planting strange objects, or setting up phony scenarios so they can film the excitement, choas, fear, or whatever.
Send these goof-balls to jail for awhile and let “Bubba” pound some sense into them. Which end Bubba pounds I don’t care.
right2bright on February 6, 2007 at 5:56 PM
Yeah, because the Aqua Teen Hunger Force signs were letter bombs that blew up. Huh?
Jim Treacher on February 6, 2007 at 5:59 PM
When someone calls in a bomb you obviously treat the suspicious device like a bomb. Then, once it is determined it is not a bomb, you find out what it is and why it was there. You dont say we had a suspicious device which was cleared, since that was a false reports lets go find everything that looks like it! By your own explantion
PM
of how a bomb could like anything, that is a perfectly stupid response.
Resolute on February 6, 2007 at 6:14 PM
Because they could have been bombs. If you keep living in fantasy land, you’re going to wake up one day with the cold blade of reality sawing through your neck.
Scot on February 6, 2007 at 6:16 PM
If anything can be a bomb, do we call the bomb squad whenever we see anything?
Jim Treacher on February 6, 2007 at 6:20 PM
At least these guys did not claim they could build a tunnel on budget.
Mark was here on February 6, 2007 at 6:21 PM
When someone calls in a bomb you obviously treat the suspicious device like a bomb. Then, once it is determined
Would you mind putting that in English?
Bomb Doctor on February 6, 2007 at 6:22 PM
The fantasy was that we were going through another 9/11.
Savage on February 6, 2007 at 6:26 PM
Only if it is out of place, the fact of the matter is no one would have noticed them in the first place if he and his buds weren’t calling them in so they could get footage for his next “video” most likely going to be called I wash my TV in fear 2 A performance/presentation focused on the words and images that news media use to induce a state of fear in the viewers.
Sound familiar? just look at his sight and please come back and tell me he didn’t have anything to do with inciting panic to get footage; it’s part of his concept.
kiakjones on February 6, 2007 at 6:27 PM
sorry, meant site not sight.
kiakjones on February 6, 2007 at 6:31 PM
Thank you for backing me up on this. I’m stunned that these people haven’t fully faded away. Now they’re left with only the “oh, then we should just fear everything” sarcasm, which is obnoxious because they were the ones shouting that these things didn’t “look like” bombs to begin with (as I’ve said before, apparently bombs only look like black balls with a fuse coming out or red stick dynamite like in the cartoons to some people). The only reason we point out that bombs can “look like” anything, is to answer their ridiculous crap in the first place. And they take the classic liberal bait and switch move by then building this strawman, as if we’ve said to live in fear, when ALL WE’VE BEEN SAYING is that the police reacted properly to 911 calls, that in light of the newest revelation seem even more suspicious.
I think covered just about everthing here – RightWinged on February 6, 2007 at 4:57 PM
Any of you attacking the police, just reread that post. You have absolutely nothing.
RightWinged on February 6, 2007 at 6:40 PM
You just gave an in depth explanation of how a bomb can look like anything.
Once an unknown device is confirmed to not have been a bomb, it makes zero sense to follow up by closing the city in order to look for devices that look exactly like it. If you think this is because I’m advocating a “don’t worry” aproach you are wrong. It is because this makes no logical sense. What if there were real bombs? The response just showed they would be missed because officals are easily fooled and distracted by even the most minor diversion.
Resolute on February 6, 2007 at 6:41 PM
That is why it is best that you are not a cop or on the bomb squad.
The word for today is discernment.
right2bright on February 6, 2007 at 6:47 PM
This reminds me of how so many journalists now and in the past have treated war and the military.
“I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the armed forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.”
That is the oath one must take to become a US citizen. Yet you find people like this moron that sees it more fit to look out for himself much like Spinner of the WaPo.
“I didn’t become a journalist to serve my country; I became a journalist to serve the story. Dying for my country was not as noble as dying for the truth.”
Or how about Mike Wallace and his comment: “Don’t you have a higher duty as an American citizen to do all you can to save the lives of soldiers rather than this journalistic ethic of reporting fact?” Ogletree asked. Without hesitating Wallace responded: “No, you don’t have higher duty…you’re a reporter.” (1987)
What a wonderfully patriotic point of view. And it would seem if it applies overseas in a war, why would it not apply in Boston, right?
mdconservative on February 6, 2007 at 6:52 PM
More like the word of the day is “alarmism.”
Savage on February 6, 2007 at 6:52 PM
Good idea, we will put out three identical false bombs, call them in, then we put three real bombs that look like the fales ones and no one will check them. I think that is called a decoy.
Read Rightwinged posts and you can learn all you need to know, and if you are still confused study the word for today on my previous post.
right2bright on February 6, 2007 at 6:54 PM
RightWinged
No need, you are correct.
Resolute
Really? A old friend of mine was killed in Irag 3 weeks ago, because he followed your line of thinking.
It’s real simple, decoys, fakes, and devices like this are used to make bomb techs complacent. Once they “think” they “know” it’s a fake, they die.
Bomb Doctor on February 6, 2007 at 6:59 PM
Tell that to the cops and bomb squads in the other 9 cities.
Jim Treacher on February 6, 2007 at 7:05 PM
A pwning of epic proportions has taken place on the internets today. Tonight, at 7:05 PM, right2bright was truly r0xx0r3d by one Jim Treacher – and he did it in the span of a single sentence. It was simultaneously beautiful, yet horrifying, to see someone’s ad hominem so utterly destroyed so swiftly. The image will be burned in my brain forever, and just as I lament that the ROFLs will never stop, the LMAOs will never pack up and go home, and the last LoL will never be uttered inside my head, I lament that no one sent a poet to this string of comments.
Savage on February 6, 2007 at 7:27 PM
Oh im in Boston, I got my eye open for that one, i got my cordless shears with me too… hehehe..
Hey its just art..
Viper1 on February 6, 2007 at 7:32 PM
The response, as it was carried out, just PROVED that they can be distracted by decoys and put no real world thought into checking the devices. If the same policy is followed in the future then terrorist have fool proof plans of how to plant bombs undetected.
The logic you are following is that if a carbomb is detected then check every car. If a letter bomb is detected then check all mail. if an unattened briefcase is detected then check every briefcase.
This is a plan for failure, all they have to do is plant 1 decoy disgusied as a houseplant and make sure it is found meanwhile the bomb squad checks all the house plants and real bombs that were disguised as fake dog doo all go off. Bomb doctor with your desciptions of how easy it is to make dozens of differently looking bombs, I think this would be clear.
You should investigate every device that is in any way suspicious, not every device that resembles some previously device. Im sorry if you lost a friend in Iraq but if you want to use that as an example say you found a tire on the side of the road packed with explosives. Do you now become suspicious of devices you find on the side of the road or of all tires, and spend all your time in your own base examining friendly vehicles becauase they resemble the bomb you found? That is the Boston PD response.
Resolute on February 6, 2007 at 7:35 PM
Now I remembered why I don’t post here much.
Bomb Doctor on February 6, 2007 at 7:35 PM
Berdovsky looks like the Wiccan weirdo who hangs around in my favorite coffeeshop, playing “Vampire: the Masquerade” with his weird buddies.
Kralizec on February 6, 2007 at 7:37 PM
We’re just having a discussion, it’s not Worlds of Warcraft or something.
Jim Treacher on February 6, 2007 at 7:39 PM
No, but you are required to investigate every device that has been called in to 911. What part of the BPD receiving multiple calls concerning the same devices when no description of “ANY” of them was reported in the local media for hours after the first one was found don’t you get.
kiakjones on February 6, 2007 at 7:47 PM
True, but your observation was just so precise, to the point, and glaringly obvious that I couldn’t stop laughing at how these folks have been ignoring it.
Savage on February 6, 2007 at 7:49 PM
kiakjones- I feel so dirty having clicked on this choad’s link. I think I’ll have to buy some RID. Don’t give him any traffic-he’s using us!
He reminds me of the semi-deranged dudes who would hit on me when I worked at the Hempshak in college…
ugh.
NTWR on February 6, 2007 at 7:56 PM
Sorry NTWR I was simply trying to point out that this type of media stunt is part of his “conceptual art”. It speaks volumes into his motivation and while “circumstantial” at best it is pretty obvious (even to a casual observer)that his part in causing the panic was planned and most likely part of his next visual display.
kiakjones on February 6, 2007 at 8:03 PM
Somebody better tell this moron, then. And this one.
Pablo on February 6, 2007 at 9:45 PM
OMG! I just went visit this waste of sperm and egg’s website and checked out some of his “video art”….dude is freaking possessed! Freaking demonic…
lsutiger on February 6, 2007 at 9:53 PM
Tell me, were cops in other cities recieving dozens of 911 calls reportins suspicious packages?
Savage, let’s not talk about being “pwned”, because you’ve been getting “pwned” all over every thread on this topic.
Anyway Jim, you have to consider what our in house bomb squad expert said above (which should be obvious to anyone with an ounce of common sense in the first place), that the cops have to check out each individual reported device. Is your argument that after the first call, when the cops found one odd foreign electronic device with no resemblence to anything other than an obscure cartoon with a cult following, mainly made up of college pot heads, that they should not follow-up and check out all 911 calls on suspicious packages? Should they say “yeah, we have absolutely no idea what this random weird thing is that we picked up… but because it doesn’t explode, that means we shouldn’t check out all of these other packages being reported”.
(Here’s where you predictably turn to the “but they didn’t have to shut down the city argument) But did they shut down the city? Or did they respond to each individual incident that was called in, by taking in to account public safety and keeping the public at a distance? Perhaps the “shut down the city” business comes from media hype, but is that reality? Did it screw up commerce across the east coast? Were there neighborhoods full of unsupervised kids running wild because parents were stuck locked in their offices all night? Etc. etc. Or were some people delayed because there were 911 calls made about “packages” located on some people’s routes home?
And in reality, what does it matter? The cops were there, not you. That is enough to end your argument completely. For all you know there is information being held for a court trial. While leaks are the name of the game, not everything is always leaked.
Again, most of all of your side’s pathetic arguments can be slayed here: RightWinged on February 6, 2007 at 4:57 PM, and in the earlier threads.
What’s interesting now is that with this new information, our side has more to work with. Since we know the cops were responding to 911 calls, NOT randomly shutting down a city, and supposedly these things were there for weeks and in other cities, and received no 911 calls, you have to wonder where those calls all came from, no? When you’ve got one of these losers there filming the police activity!?
RightWinged on February 6, 2007 at 10:08 PM
You seem to have the mistaken idea im saying dont investigate. Exactly the opposite, I think you guys who advocate that all objects that are similiar must be the threat are being naive about what a bombmaker would do. You are being complacent and not investigating by assuming you know what is the threat. Bombdoctor is exactly missing the lesson that should be learned from his own first hand example.
When there is some kind of a threat they should investigate each device individually, that is exactly what I’m saying. There were only calls on a few of the objects, they should have checked each of those. But they determined that said devices that were called in were not a theat and then searched the city for more of the same objects! This makes sense to who? I dont get it.
Resolute on February 6, 2007 at 10:14 PM
Nope. Why do you suppose that is? Either those other 9 cities messed up, or those packages weren’t suspicious.
I agree that the guys on the ground did their jobs, once it got to that point. I’m just curious about how it got to that point, and why it cost however many millions, which Turner Broadcasting now has to pay.
Also, you need to calm down. I haven’t said anything to insult you.
Jim Treacher on February 6, 2007 at 10:19 PM
Dude, follow the string of reason; multiple calls concerning similar objects being reported throughout the city when no description of the objects were given by the media until more than two hours after the first device was “found”.
Does it take a freakin genius to realize that these idiots were calling in the “suspicious” devices to video tape the resulting chaos? Especially giving the fact that this moron thrives on chaos in his “video art” and was there with his camera?
kiakjones on February 6, 2007 at 10:22 PM
Again I will emphasize the morons own words as he describes his 2005 piece titled “I Wash my TV in Fear”
a performance/presentation focused on the words and images that news media use to induce a state of fear in the viewers
Does that clue you in to the mentality of this moron yet?
kiakjones on February 6, 2007 at 10:33 PM
And again I will say that no one would have noticed these things had it not been for him bringing attention to them.
I probably walked passed the one at Sullivan Station more than two dozen times in the last two weeks and didn’t give it a second thought; had it not been for the fact that “someone” brought the “device” into question.
And it is funny how the “devise” suddenly became “questionable and suspicious” all over the “cities” all at “the same damn time” while they had been up for several weeks.
kiakjones on February 6, 2007 at 10:50 PM
I’m talking about national security and the bad reactions of officials. I have no interest in those dudes. You could tell me it was just discovered they are actual terrorists, it doesnt change the failure of the official response.
You people who claim you are for a robust response fail to acknowlege that they failed to investigate what the devices were. The “official” response was panic and some of you think that is great! It tells me when a real problem hits we are screwed and because these public officials are slower then the general public in figuring out what the danger is.
Resolute on February 6, 2007 at 10:56 PM
Cite your source please. You are putting forth an idea that things went down a particular way. First show your evidence that this is how it went down, countering the idea that they were responding to individual calls, and then we can talk. Show me where just a few calls came in, and in response police shut down the city and went on out “searching” for others.
I’m calm, I’m actually just dealing with these other clowns. Anything that came off as an insult to you personally was unintended, and more directed at the constant dishonest of folks like Savage, Rockhauler, etc. who wanted to go in circles here and in the earlier threads, presenting flawed arguments, having them smashed, and diverting with more, getting smashed, and after a handful of ridiculous arguments going back to where they started. It’s classic liberal stuff and obnoxious, so my annoyance is with them… though I disagree with your comment on other cities(for the reasons stated).
RightWinged on February 6, 2007 at 11:04 PM
These public officials did their job, they went all out in order to protect the public from even the slightest chance of carnage based on the information they received. They are required to take every precaution regardless of how stupid you think the information turns out to be. And now it turns out that the officials could have been clued into the fact that these devices were harmless by the piece of crap who put them up in the first place.
I for one thank all the agencies involved; because had they taken your advice and the devices had turned out to be legitimate explosives my fiancee could be lying in a friggin morgue waiting for me to identify his (partial) remains.
He was commuting to Sullivan Station on the morning in question; shortly before the first device was found.
kiakjones on February 6, 2007 at 11:14 PM
RightWinged: Here’s how you argue. You make a statement, wait for somebody to react, make your original statement again, wait for somebody to explain their position a lot more clearly with every single detail to their thought process drawn out so that even a total idiot can understand it, then you make your original statement again. Talking to you is like talking to a brick wall. Ever notice how many circular arguments you get into? Like, every single one? It’s not because people don’t address your opinion and the facts of the case, it’s because you don’t address theirs in an effort to seek a conclusion that ends your own bias. Your statements of “I already addressed that” and “that argument has already been shot down” and “read the above thread before posting!” smack of equal parts arrogance and idiocy. And if I had a nickel for every time you accused someone on this site of being a liberal spy because they didn’t agree with you, I’d have many a nickel. You’re an embarassment. I can respect someone having a difference of opinion for a logical and clearly stated reason, but not someone who repeats himself over and over again while conveniently looking passed other people’s opinions and points to cling onto a preconceived judgement.
Savage on February 6, 2007 at 11:22 PM
Rightwinged, you are freak. Your theories are working today. If they called the cops, their voice will be recorded. I thought that they were hired to put the devices there. More, they did not make the device. They might have designed it. Basically, they did not invent the contract. If Turner broadcasting corporation took responsibilty, it is stupid to bring up this topic. Somebody might have called them, “Cops are taking down your stuff.” If it was me, I would take my camera with me because my employer would have evidence that I actually placed the device in public.
Ouabam on February 6, 2007 at 11:28 PM
I didn’t respond to Savage because he just isn’t worth it, but thanks.
The fact is, we are at our computers, and the police are on the streets. They have to be a correct as possible, no second guessing, because we will do all of the second guessing for them. The ultimate Monday morning QB.
A strange analogy, but anyone who has refereed a sport game would understand that what happens in front of you, in real time, is different than looking at it on tv, or replay. You see and hear things live that you don’t see on TV and you can see things via replay and cameral postition that you could not see on the field. So it is with this. We now see things we could not (and are told things via the news that may not be accurate), and they saw and observed things we have not seen. They made the best judgement they could, at the time, and we have to go along with that.
The fact that heavy fines are being imposed points (not confirms) but points to the error not being on the police. I think you would have to talk to the police chief and others to see if they “were in a panic”, no one likes to be called names while posting, I do not see calling the police names without all of the facts helps. Being to cautious when dealing with bombs, can’t be too bad of a practice. But being careless or casual would be a bad habit…but a short lived habit.
This would not be the first time Police appeared to over react, look at any of the serial killer investigations, and you will see police forces consumed with intensity (what some would call panic). This post 9/11 has caused an increase in anxiety, no city wants to be the next target. I am glad to be at a computer, and not on the steets fighting criminals and being second guessed by amateur lawmen.
right2bright on February 6, 2007 at 11:30 PM
Wow Ouabam, what a f***ing dumb a$$ and equally devoid of reason response.
er??? What’s your point? They are nonetheless complicit in the construction and implementation of the device whether or not they designed it or made it.
Ummmm… one must take part in the signing of said contract and might be smart enough to afford themselves of one (a lawyer) who could weigh the liabilities vs. the responsibilities of said actions.
Are you inebriated sir? Because your response is certainly devoid of any semblance of coherency.
kiakjones on February 6, 2007 at 11:59 PM
I’m sure nobody thought the WTC was going to collapse either, as police stormed up into it hoping to save stranded civilians. Thousands of us saw it happen right before our eyes and didn’t think for a SECOND that the buildings would fall. Did it “look like” something may be dangerous there? Did the police pay with their lives for rushing to the rescue?
Do you REALLY want them to be more concerned with what may look ridiculous v.s. what may save your sorry a$$?
I’m sorry, but even though I can see the logical validity of saying that Boston PD overreacted, I would be ashamed of scolding them for rushing to protect the public.
Is there much of a leap from police overreaction to troop overreaction? Would you laugh at a marine for mistaking an old sewer pipe for an IED? And if so, would you dare do it amongst a crowd of your peers who hold servicemen and women in the highest of regard?
I think you have some dreadlocks to trim my friend.
unamused on February 7, 2007 at 12:19 AM
Ok, now causing a scare by accident it one thing, this is entirely different. They’ll be cleaning the streets with Boy George in a few days.
- The Cat
MirCat on February 7, 2007 at 12:23 AM
You’re an f**king liar. Not only do I go in to detail on every (non)point you raise, you and your ilk are the ones who repeat your same bullsh** even though it’s been repeatedly torn to sh**. You’re not an idiot, you’re a liar. Notice you just spent that entire post not talking at all about the case, but ranting against me? Oh, now you’ve won me over with your “facts”. And I don’t believe I’ve ever accused anyone of being a “liberal spy”… I call people’s liberal tactics out when I see them, whether they are a liberal or not is not for me to say. On a handful of occassions I’ve address the liberals and those that are likely liberals on this site, as “libs” or “liberals”, but that’s a far cry from accusing them of being “liberal spies”… What kind of a retard are you? Spies? Pssst… we aren’t behind closed doors here… No one needs to “spy”. But there are a handful of out in the open libs, and plenty of others who maintain the ability to post, but only show up on occassion. So again, you’re a liar… I’ve never accused anyone of being a liberal spy. No go back to spying on us you liberal spy… OOOPS! Sorry, I didn’t mean to say that. It was the Boston police and the Mayor of Boston’s fault.
RightWinged on February 7, 2007 at 12:27 AM
RightWinged, don’t get upset; not one of these clowns have had the audacity to debate me on the merits of my “facts”…what makes you think they are going to acknowledge the superiority of your arguments?
Their retorts are superficial at best and ad hominem’s at worst; lacking any realistic substance other than their own depraved version of security.
Each and every one of those who disagree with you could care less about the safety and well-being of anyone (other than themselves) and will hold to their ideological ground until the carnage affects them personally.
They will wake up every day ignoring the dangers that beset them while trying to intellectualize the root causes; believing only “they” are capable of discerning the proper response and spending hours on end trying to convince their opponents how wrong they are.
kiakjones on February 7, 2007 at 1:03 AM
Now I remembered why I don’t post here much.
Bomb Doctor on February 6, 2007 at 7:35 PM
Amen, brother. All these arm-chair experts (you know who you are) “know” more about explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) that you do–a military veteran in the EOD career field. Just because they’re smarter, dontcha know. /sarc
Of course, as an arm-chair expert in politics myself, I’ve been known to behave in the same manner as those who have denigrated the Boston PD’s explosive experts’ actions which are standard to an EOD team (I used to be a USAF munitions maintenance type, so I have a little half-forgotten knowledge in this area). But I’ve always tried to be open to correction from those with more knowledge. Too bad for those here that aren’t so open.
Don’t fret, Bomb Doctor. You civilian counterparts will do again and again what the BPD types did and they will take the cyber-heat from it again (as if they gave a rat’s hairy backside or had time to read this sort of stuff).
Hopefully, the casualty rate will be just as non-existent for all the subsequent incidents as was so for Boston.
That’s all that really matters.
baldilocks on February 7, 2007 at 2:08 AM
You civilian counterparts
er…
Your civilian counterparts
baldilocks on February 7, 2007 at 2:09 AM
You can not be more wrong. The police did not panic, they did as they were trained to do
The police did the right thing. When there is doubt, you MUST assume the worst. If it looks suspicious, then you MUST treat it as if it is dangerous. These are common sense tactics because in the past people have been killed when they didn’t consider something to be dangerous when in fact it was.
Remember the Olympic Park bombing? That bomb looked like a harmless back pack yet it contain pipe bombs. Security personnel were alerted to that backpack, became suspicious, and was in the process of clearing the area of people when it exploded. Two people died, and 111 were injured. Most were injured because they didn’t think the backpack was dangerous. If it LOOKED like a bomb, everyone would have fled the area and few people would have been hurt.
That’s why you will rarely see a explosive devise that looks dangerous, unless it is a military device like an artillery shell. The people that use explosive devices to terrorize want to KILL and MAME people, how can they do that if the device looks dangerous and people avoid it? They can’t, that’s why the design them to look harmless, like perhaps a light-brite set, or maybe a back pack, or even a teddy bear.
The police did not over react, they did their job and they did it well. We should congratulate them for their efforts, not ridicule them because the items in question turned out to be harmless.
RedinBlueCounty on February 7, 2007 at 2:14 AM
If a call is made about a suspicious device, that call must be investigated and that device must be treated as dangerous until it can be determined by physical examination that the device is actually harmless. Any other suspicious item must also be considered dangerous until proven otherwise.
It’s a damn good idea to search for other similar objects for the reason others have stated, mainly the fact that people that make bombs may also make and place similar yet harmless devices in an attempt to confuse and disorganize the police. The police were right to do an orginased search. And when they find something suspicious they have to treat it as a dangerous item.
You can’t make any assumptions when dealing with suspicious devices. You can’t just say something to the effect of “well, it looks like the things we’ve been finding around and they are harmless so this must be harmless too.” That is a foolish assumption to make. People have been killed because of assumptions like that.
RedinBlueCounty on February 7, 2007 at 2:41 AM
All Points Bulletin: If you see this man, contact the bomb squad immediately. Do not approach him and do not engage him. He is considered armed and dangerous.
If you see him leaving things around, secure the area and do not allow anyone to approach, or even to drive by within a half mile radius until the items have been identified and detonated by the authorities. Suspect is believed to be driving a small white truck with red and blue markings from the wrong side of the front seat. Use extreme caution.
Pablo on February 7, 2007 at 5:28 AM
Remember folks: if there’s an alert and it turns out to be harmless, then it’s a panic reaction. If the devices turn out to be real bombs and they go off, then the police SHOULD HAVE DONE SOMETHING!!!!
…and the bomb squads are psychic so they can know which is which. Oh wait, they can’t.
Patrick Chester on February 7, 2007 at 6:50 AM
These guys don’t have any problem that a few good prison gang rapes won’t cure.
madmonaco on February 7, 2007 at 7:43 AM
Is it me or does that guy look like jar jar binks.
vcferlita on February 7, 2007 at 8:09 AM
More importantly, dorks are sincere.
Jaibones on February 7, 2007 at 8:26 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »