Great going, douchebag. Only someone whose brain was completely eaten away by selfishness and greed could POSSIBLY concieve that yelling about a bomb in a huge crowd would be a good idea.
I hope the authorities find you, but they probably won’t be able to. So I can only pray that you feel some kind of remorse, and that it haunts your every moment until the end of your days.
(Hijack of own post: anyone else find it odd/funny that a Senator in the Phillipines is named “Jaworski”?)
Question-since they don’t know who yelled “bomb!” how do they know it was to speed things up? Not that I’m saying that most likely wasn’t the case, just curious.
Actually, how does he know that someone yelled bomb at all? When there are crowds like this, panic can set it for really no reason whatsoever. The only person who provided that explanation was Jaworski, and I’m not convinced he was correct.
It’s the third world. They generally don’t have large reserves of health care just sitting around. If they funnel ambulances to one place, they are just taking them away from the other. One of the hard truths about life outside of the richest nations is that it’s pretty easy to get killed.
I’d think that the person who I quoted would be qualified to know whether or not it was workable/prudent to have people ready for an emergency, since he was “Philippine Red Cross Chairman Senator Richard Gordon”.
:dubious: Ok, ya got me. I didn’t research his history, or how qualified he is for his job. However, this isn’t GQ. Not everyone in the Red Cross is an incompetent buffoon, and chances are that this fellow actually has a clue, so my point still is plausible. (Even if it isn’t proven or disproven. I don’t see you actually disproving it either. If you want to do so, go for it, have fun. Hope it brings you joy.) Sometimes, I’m actually correct, and often when I am I’m a lot more gracious about it than others. When I’m wrong, more often then not I admit to it.
This is specious and cowardly. To use Michael Brown as an excuse to utterly flip the paradigm on its head–that from now on, anyone in a position of authority (or whatever) should be *presumed *to be unqualified until you have a copy of their resume in your hand–is beyond ridiculous. Sometimes you surprise me, QED.
Don’t whine, it doesn’t become you. I’m not interested in proving or disproving the man’s qualifications; they’re irrelevant, anyway. My point was that one cannot make accurate judgements about a situation from a single, uncorroborated news report. Maybe they could have been better prepared, maybe they couldn’t. I don’t know, you don’t know, and unless he was actually present, I’d wager Mr. Gordon doesn’t really know, either. It’s easy to say “coulda shoulda woulda” after the fact.
This is not what I said. I only said that position is not the same as qualification, period; do you dispute this as a fact? I made no statement about what the presumption of qulification should be, it was merely a statement of fact.
That I’ll grant you, and I am actually waiting to see more news on this. I won’t be surprised to find that it is backed up though, because medical help had to travel to the scene, then get through the panicing crowd. If there had even been some way to help control the crowd and calm the panic, maybe less people would have died.
I’ll take that with a grain of salt, and consider it nearly a compliment.
Well of course the RED CROSS is going to say you need more emergency preparation. Thats all they think about. My dentist just told me to never eat snack food- especially potato chips- again. In his mind this was a perfectly reasonable recommendation. Doesn’t mean it’s at all a practical thing to do.
They’re now denying that it was a bomb; instead, it was kinda like the situation with the Henrico iBook stampede. Here’s the story from a Filipino paper:
Have you ever seen a panicking crowd? I’m not convinced any reasonable amount of preparation would have allowed rescuers to get to the injured significantly faster. Most of the dead were believed to have died right at the scene, which sugfgests to me that their injuries were severe enough to have likely been untreatable, even if help had been immediately available. As you say, I’ll wait to see more information before forming a definite opinion.
Actually even sven, it’s fairly well known worldwide that you should have some kind of emergency staff ready for large venues. Even this somewhat outdated how to guide mentions at least having one person specifically as a “safety officer” there. Riots can happen anywhere there is a large group, and if you are planning an event that will have lots of peope you need to also work out a “what if” plan for that as well. (Especially if you realize there will be high emotions for some reason, like that raffle.) The reason I’m thinking such things might be possible in that country is, don’t they also hold soccer games/championships and such? Those are prone to rioting and I do believe I read about more safety precautions being taken for such events by organizers in a third world country before my comments here. (Don’t recall what country, but reasoned if one can do it, others can as well.) So, emergency preparedness isn’t a new idea, nor is it impossible.
That is my point, they have managed to forestall riots in recent times by preparing beforehand and better managing the crowd to “nip the situation in the bud” at world championship soccer matches. I don’t recall which nation really drew the world press with how succesful they were, but I remember seeing them lauded. (I filed it away as being a third world nation too, but that might be a brain fart.) If they could have calmed the crowd more quickly, there is a decent chance that *less * would have died. It would still have been horrid though.
You used “Michael Brown” as some kind of trump card to dismiss the information provided by Philippine Red Cross Chairman Senator Richard Gordon, simply because he IS the Philippine Red Cross Chairman. This is lazy, and affects the credibility of anything else you have to contribute to this discussion.
