321–330 of 517 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
yeah - as I commented elsewhere - mcveigh did a whole lot more damage with presumably less explosive (van vs. rv) This really sounds like people playing with stuff they have no understanding of.
OKC bomb was in a Ryder box truck. Not a van.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you think war is not terrorizing/terrorism?
Generally speaking the definitions of terrorism preclude state actors from being included (kind of a cop out, but they literally have carve-outs for the state). See the US legal definition of terrorism: premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents Title 22 Chapter 38 U.S. Code § 2656f Generally speaking, wartime actions by one state…
That’s why pearl harbor is seen more like terrorism, and the rest of the war more like war.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I'm only speculating, it could be quite possible that whoever may have wished to damage or destroy the AT&T building, seriously underestimated what these kind of buildings can take (essentially being disguised bunkers). This certainly wasn't a small explosion, from the looks of it. But taking out a bunker .. unless you have access to weapons specially build for that purpose, good luck. That AT&T still went down…
A guy working in this building told me they had showers to clean off radioactive fallout as the building itself could stand up to a bomb. Guy said “you’d be fucked either way” and laughed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/33_Thomas_Street
I think it's most likely the bomb wasn't meant to target anything, but was just some person's outlet
Edit: i wasn't saying, "nuclear protection probably wasn't the case", i was saying, "the comment I'm about to make probably isn't the case but"... I know it's unclear
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess. I'm just sad I lived to see a second legit terrorist attack on American soil. I remember being in 8th grade when sept11 happened.
I think there have been several attacks of this magnitude or worse since September 11. e.g. The Boston Marathon bombing or the anthrax attacks, or Christopher Dorner (though maybe that's less terrorist and more revenge). There have been lots. I think, so long as this wasn't a test run for a coordinated attack on the telecoms, then this is not a very bad terrorist attack.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AT&T says that their services went down along with the gas & power in the area, as a side effect: the gas shutoff cut off their backup generators. That doesn't sound all that targeted.
While that's true, I think two factors strongly indicate that this was targeted at the ATT building. The first observation is, of course, that the ATT building was the closest to the explosion. A direct witness to the RV broadcasting the evacuation message, who lives across the street, describes this fact: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iag6cTWpgq8 . The second observation is the evacuation message itself. How often…
The building (185 2nd Ave N) the RV exploded in front of appears to host a lot of equipment: https://www.telcodata.us/search-switches-by-zip-code?zip=372...
Considering the FBI recently foiled a plot by a group who was planning to "take out" parts of the energy grid, it seems likely from my experience that this is another set of people executing a similar plan targeting telecoms. I imagine there is a high probability of more incidents like this happening between now and the inauguration, meant to target various infrastructure and "big government" components throughout th…
>between now and the inauguration Why the inauguration? >This attack screams anti-government militia What about it screams anything identifiable? Are you sure your biases aren't creeping into your analysis?
That's allowed on HN, as long as your biases match those of the rest of HN.
For example, when somebody criticizes the FCC's fraudulent spectrum auctions and incumbent-preferential policies for poletop attachments, you get to call them a "5G conspiracist". That's allowed on HN.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder what other crimes have stochastic forms... could violent video games be stochastic murder, if among the thousands of players there is one disturbed person who might be inspired by depictions of violence to act violently? Could songs glorifying violent lifestyles also be called stochastic crime? Folk songs glorifying cartels come to mind. If an unrealistic war movie inspires teenagers to join the army, might…
I dob't think the word "stochastic" means what you seem to think it means.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they're technically capable to make something this sophisticated, surely they'd know that all the 5G conspiracy theories are technically bunk? Although there are 2 variants of 5G weirdoism: the "cancer waves!" one and the "it gives us Covid!" one. The latter is easier to debunk...
The only 5g conspiracy I’ve heard of was that Huawei and ZTE work closely with the CCP and installing infrastructure from those manufacturers may give China a grip over a huge swath of domestic communications.