View Story | 465 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
...is irresponsible.
Don't be like the wingers who blamed Oklahoma City on Arab terrorists.
The revolution will not be televised, but we'll analyze it to death at The Next Hurrah.
by DHinMI on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:04:56 PM PDT
[ Parent ]
is the worst thing to do in this kind of situation.
"The Irish were not wanted here. Now an Irishman is President. There is no question that in the next forty years, a Negro can achieve the same position." - RFK
by Matisyahu on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:06:45 PM PDT
that this guy is a radical liberal, given all the speculation here.
Remember, God is ironic, and has a sense of humor.
by Delaware Dem on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:14:10 PM PDT
And you are enjoying saying that way too much. I don't know why.
My choices: 1. Obama. 1. Edwards. ... 9,999,999. Hillary.
by blue vertigo on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:16:03 PM PDT
And believe me, I am not enjoying it. But it has been my experience that usually the exact opposite of speculation happens.
by Delaware Dem on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:31:53 PM PDT
by voltayre on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:43:20 PM PDT
A suicide bomb threat at a campaign office. Whatever the guy's motivations actually are, this is the new post-9/11 terrorism politics.
--Is RINO a good thing?
by anonymous coward 8 on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:32:10 PM PDT
Terrorism is designed to instill fear in people, not to get attention. If this were a terrorist attack the media would have been reporting about a bomb going off in a crowded place, not a man with a possible bomb with a couple of hostages.
To hell with independents... I'll stick with the party that brought us social security, civil rights, and environmental protection.
by dianem on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:44:06 PM PDT
Threatening to kill hostages with a bomb unless they comply with your wishes is a fear-inducing (terrorist) act.
If you are talking about the strategery of terrorism that Bush is fighting with his sham "Global War On Terrorism", this certainly isn't that. Fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them over here isn't going to stop domestic bomb threats.
by anonymous coward 8 on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 02:48:11 PM PDT
Let's not inflate every nutcase who does something stupid to get attention into a terrorist. Sometimes people do stupid things to get attention. Terrorism is much bigger than that - it's designed to instill terror in an entire society, in a large group of people. This was just some guy who was a bit off balance.
by dianem on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 04:34:35 PM PDT
Attention getting might be mooning Hillary on camera.
I'd rather not inflate terrorism beyond a tactic for instilling fear. With your definition, it isn't any new highfalutin strategy: the Blitz, Dresden, Shock-n-awe, and the big H were also aimed at instilling terror in entire societies.
Bush's global war on terror has made suicide bombers part of the American experience. Now people on the edge of sanity can now choose that as an attention-getting tactic that might get them on the news.
I'm not saying the guy was an agent of Al Qaida or the VRWC, or anything more than the voices in his head. The tactic is terrorism, whether it is employed by one guy, the Columbine shooters, Blackwater, thugs with tasers, Al Qaida, or a whole country.
by anonymous coward 8 on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 07:14:26 PM PDT
define the type of incident. I used to teach a basic crisis negotiations class, and have negotiated incidents, mostly domestic violence. Here are the types and usual demands in a nutshell:
Types of Hostage Takers Terrorist - Usually demands political or religious change Criminal - Usually demand money, car or freedom Emotionally ill - Demands are changeable and often irrational A person in crisis - Usually no demands Corrections - Usually demand change in prison conditions
Types of Hostage Takers
Terrorist - Usually demands political or religious change Criminal - Usually demand money, car or freedom Emotionally ill - Demands are changeable and often irrational A person in crisis - Usually no demands Corrections - Usually demand change in prison conditions
Since we don't know what his demands are, it's not really possible to figure out what type of hostage taker he is.
"A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." Mark Twain
by Shaniriver on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 01:05:22 PM PDT
Apparently the hostage-taker wants to talk to Clinton.
From other reports, it seems like "emotionally/mentally ill" is the right category here.
With Blue skies ahead, yes I'm on my way... And there's nowhere else I'd rather be
by DarthParadox on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 01:32:26 PM PDT
It's possible he wants to talk to her to coerce some sort of action or change. I'm assuming that he was planning to make his demands to her, so him wanting to talk to her isn't necessarily his primary goal. It may be just a means to that goal. Does that make sense?
To clarify, he needs to speak to someone on the outside to make his demands known. He chose HRC.
It's very doubtful he will be allowed to talk to her given that one of the cardinal rules of crisis negotiations is that people other than police personnel should not be introduced into the situation, especially if the suspect asks for them.
The reports of his mental illness give an indication that he may be number 3.
Either way, I feel sorry for the negotiator. Negotiating with mentally ill and/or drunk people is HARD WORK, and there is definitely no guarantee of success.
by Shaniriver on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 01:56:02 PM PDT
I agree that classifying hostage takers on the basis of their demands is reasonable for the negotiator.
Whether or not the guy is emotionally ill and wants Hillary to wave a magic wand and get the alien probe out of his brain, or debate her on political issues, this is going to have fear-based consequences for this election. Didn't Barack Obama already close his Rochester office? Are the other HRC offices going to be just a little bit more suspicious about strangers who walk through their doors? Is a door-to-door canvasser going to be a little more leery of knocking on the wrong door? Are Hillary haters going to denounce this guy?
Right now, anything involving Hillary is political. Bomb threats are terrorism, even if they don't kill anybody. And it is political to choose to attack/lay seige to a political campaign office, especially if your demand is to speak to the candidate.
by anonymous coward 8 on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 02:37:23 PM PDT
All of the blogs have it as top stories and none of them have useful information. Since the majority of blogs are analytical and not "reporting/journalism" based, DHinMI is like CNN trolling for useless stories to fill 24 hours.
If you have no new information and no real analysis to provide, why the fuck are you writing 2 diaries about it instead of letting CNN do it's job?
These are the types of stories the MSM rarely get wrong. So all the political blogs "covering" this story have basically taken up space reciting the same bare bones set of facts a properly trained monkey could recite.
by puunjab on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:17:44 PM PDT
it's our "space" to take up with whatever the hell we want, so like it or lump it, brother (see recent highly dubious posting history)
God bless our tinfoil hearts.
by aitchdee on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:28:09 PM PDT
...and if he wants to write that it's inappropriate, then he should be able to do so without fear of trollrating.
by dianem on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:45:27 PM PDT
second, yeah it's his space too, however he doesn't get to behave abusively ("why the fuck" and "trained monkey") without rebuke. That's probably why he got TRed.
Virtually all of his comments thus far are along the same lines: you're diary is lame, your post is naive, you think you're funny but you're not, you've got your head up your a**, etc. He is consistently and blatantly ill-behaved. Why shake your finger at me? Frankly I think your indignity is misplaced.
by aitchdee on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 01:01:14 PM PDT
... then only people with TU status will be able to enjoy the site because so many threads will simply disappear.
by dianem on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 01:52:14 PM PDT
and, once again, I didn't troll rate him.
cheers,
by aitchdee on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 01:55:01 PM PDT
01-20-09: THE END OF AN ERROR
by kimoconnor on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:28:15 PM PDT
now there's an oxymoron if I've ever heard one! Why don't you take a fucking pill and relax. Its friday........
by heywho on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 01:24:55 PM PDT
You're right. Nobody knows yet.
on strike.
by daria g on Fri Nov 30, 2007 at 12:12:23 PM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 465 comments