What’s your point? We can’t point out when people do stupid things unless we explain why the people are stupid?
Am I allowed to say Hitler was evil without doing a complete psychological workup on him? In the absence of this, must I assume he was good?
Can I say it was a mistake for Bush to start a war in Iraq without chronicling his entire life? Need I assume it was a good idea otherwise?
Can I say the Spice Girls sucked without doing a detailed analysis of where exactly they went wrong in their musical training? In the absence of such analysis, do we have to assume they are musical geniuses?
Could someone give me a quick sum-up of what these two guys actually said during their press conference? I have no sound card on my computer (and I live in France, so I won’t see it on TV). All I can gather is that they were talking about 70s hairstyles instead of answering questions…?
Apparently it pissed off a lot of journalists, and I’m quite curious to hear what they actually said.
It may well be that there is some other reason this happened the way it did. It would be nice to know what that was. To simply say they acted stupidly because they acted stupidly is a cop-out.
But I’m not sure what you mean. Do you mean that at around that time, they started doing wacky shit, and that just happens to be, by what would otherwise seem like chance, when the pipes were found?
Not exactly. I’m saying that the pipes themselves likely were what caused the shit to hit the fan. Two things happened in Boston that didn’t happen anywhere else: someone reported one of these ads as a suspicious device then, for whatever reason, someone totally unconnected with the ads started placing dummy pipe bombs. The cops didn’t really go into panic mode until after that first “pipe bomb” was discovered.
I don’t have a transcript, but the jist of it was posted earlier. They basically said they would only answer questions about 70’s hairstyles. When reporters continued to ask questions about the “bomb hoax”:rolleyes:, they pointed out that those questions weren’t about 70’s hairstyles and so they wouldn’t answer them. They accused the reporters of not taking the matter seriously.
The problem is, you’re the only one with a bowl of Jello and a hammer. The rest of us are quite capable of grasping the situation. It’s not that complex.
I’ll buy that. So perhaps it appeared, at that time, that there was some out of control bombing conspiracy going on. Or something wacky like that. I could certainly see how panic buttons would be pressed.
Let’s say that someone in Atlanta reported a Lite Brite bomb. Police investigate, and find it to be nothing, but during that time, more are found. At the height of excitement about this, two seeming pipe bombs are found. Most of these “bombs” are found either under bridges of main arteries or in hospitals. Do you think it’s just possible that officials in Atlanta might have gotten a little freaked out? Had it played out in exactly the same way in any other city, is there any reason to believe that a very similar thing would never have happened?
Because it’s not up to us to explain WHY Boston authorities overreacted, perhaps stupidly. It’s enough to point out that they DID. After that, it’s up to the citizens of Boston to decide if their officials were justified in doing what they did, and if not, what Boston should do about it.
Then wouldn’t it be up to us citizens of Boston to determine if they did something stupid in the first place? Funny how people from the outside feel the duty to pass judgement but none to explain themselves. If you feel this is a local issue, then treat it like one.
Of course, but what would they do once they find that there is no danger? Go after the ones who placed the ads, sue the ad company and/or Turner, sue the jokers who planted the “pipe bombs”, or just say “Thanks for the drill!”?
We don’t know. It hasn’t happened there. We can’t definitively rule out that they would have done something very similar. If it had played out the same way in every city in the US, I’m betting that at least a few would have done so.
We think it’s stupid because no other city faced with these advertisements went overboard like Boston did. Based on that, we can most certainly pass judgement on what happened.
But unless you’re all for, say, Seattle invading Boston to execute some Bush Administration-style regime change, it’s up to Bostonians to either place the blame on their officials, or continue to blame two artists who didn’t make or plant bombs.
