Failed car bomb in Times Square

DC said:
and when you look how many blow up stuff and how many are living peacefully, one can indeed asume Islam is a religion of peace.

*snip*
Click to expand...

Sorry, but no. There is no such thing as a religion of peace. Just, no.

And even within this category of mental illness, religion, there are gradations of bat ****. A molester priest is wicked, but the fault does spread out just a tad. The parents, after all, are the ones who shoveled off their kid to learn 'morality' from some stranger and some out-dated book. Way to go mom and dad. But, some authentic healing, love, and care just might help that altar boy live with and above the trauma.

The kamikaze nouveau suicide bomber on the other hand, while also wicked and with his parents [having been the ones who shoveled a different brand of bat **** in his head] taking some fault as well - err, there is no amount of "authentic healing, love, and care" that will piece back together dismembered new york tourists.

This makes Islam at the very least just as wicked as Catholicism.


Wait. Did I just campaign for the well-being of tourists?
 
I heard a very interesting story this morning on NPR about how the media & some loose-lipped cops screwed up the investigation into this case at an early stage :boggled:

How Media Coverage Crimped The Times Square Case
The virtually wall-to-wall coverage of the Times Square bombing investigation was a problem for investigators trying to solve the case.

It all began at dinnertime last Saturday night, when a suspect drove an SUV rigged with a homemade bomb into Times Square, set the car in park, turned on the detonator and left — hoping for destruction.

A little more than two days later, law enforcement arrested a man believed to be responsible: Faisal Shahzad, a 30-year-old Pakistani American. He allegedly has admitted to the crime. But what hasn’t been apparent until now is how news coverage of this story fundamentally changed the investigation. ...
Click to expand...

Geez... knowing this I'd say that we're lucky "the system" worked as well as it did. Not that I'm complaining, I'm glad they caught the guy - I just wish our gotta-have-it-NOW media cycle would chill the frak out.
 
Humanists Harbor said:
So I find out this guy works in finance. I myself work in recruiting for a financial services company in NYC. So I check our database today and - yeesh, here's Faisal Shahzad's resume from when he applied for a few positions a while back. "Objective: To work in a high-energy and challenging business environment that will promote professional and personal growth while adding significant value to my employer." Totally creeped me out to find it.
Click to expand...

As Wildcat said, that is standard resume BS.
 
MattusMaximus said:
I heard a very interesting story this morning on NPR about how the media & some loose-lipped cops screwed up the investigation into this case at an early stage :boggled:

How Media Coverage Crimped The Times Square Case


Geez... knowing this I'd say that we're lucky "the system" worked as well as it did. Not that I'm complaining, I'm glad they caught the guy - I just wish our gotta-have-it-NOW media cycle would chill the frak out.
Click to expand...

I keep on hoping the Media will show a LITTLE reponsibility, and hold back on reporting some stuff during an on going investigation, but I have given up on that.
The cop should be suspended at least, and probably fired.
 
dudalb said:
As Wildcat said, that is standard resume BS.
Click to expand...


Sheesh, it wasn't the wording on the guy's resume that freaked me out - it was the fact that we had it, and that he seemed like a normal dude and if things had gone differently we could have hired him or something.

Plus, the resume was written with the blood of infidels.
 
"Objective: To work in a high-energy and challenging business environment that will promote professional and personal growth while adding significant value to my employer."
Click to expand...
I am a little unused to resumes, and slightly curious, am I correct in assuming that the above is meaningless filler?
 
barrymore said:
Current Pashto speech recognition is less than 50% accurate (and other northern Pakistani languages even less so).
Click to expand...

Nothing prevents us from programming the system to specifically look for key words and known or possible code words. You don't actually need to build a system that will translate everything perfectly. It's not like we're conducting business. We are simply trying to flag suspicious calls for a closer look. Nevertheless.

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/business2/business2_archive/2007/02/01/8398978/index.htm

March 15 2007

… snip ...

VoxTec International's Phraselator, a handheld gadget about the size of a checkbook, listens to requests for a phrase and then spits out a translation in any of 41 specified languages; it's currently being used by U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan to provide on-the-fly translations in Arabic, Pashto and other local tongues.
Click to expand...

And even if the accuracy is currently as low as you claim (have a source for that, btw?), don't expect it to stay there for long … especially if the need is there. And it is. Hence efforts like this ...

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/02/darpa-c3po/

February 16, 2010

… snip ...

Now, the Pentagon’s trying to fast-track a solution that could be a kind of proto-proto-prototype to our favorite gold fussbudget: a translation machine with 98 percent accuracy in 20 different languages.

Darpa, the military’s experimental research agency, is launching the Robust Automatic Translation of Speech program to streamline the translation process.

… snip …

In 2008, Darpa awarded $5.6 million to BBN Technologies for Madcat, an automated system that works on a laptop or PDA device to do quick text translations — anything from sidewalk graffiti to scribbled notes — in a war zone. Darpa’s made quick progress with Madcat, and they want RATS to accomplish equally impressive feats with speech. Much like Madcat can translate even the sloppiest, most illegible writing, Darpa wants RATS to pull speech out of “noisy or degraded signals,” with 99 percent accuracy at distinguishing spoken words from background noise. The system should also be able to identify, with 98 percent accuracy, the language spoken — with special emphasis on Arabic, Farsi, Pashto, Dari and Urdu.
Click to expand...
 
dudalb said:
Then he was not paying attention during class, or the quality of instruction at the Al Qaeda camps has really gone to hell considering how inept he was.
Click to expand...

Lucky for us. But should we count on that luck next time?
 
Do YOU have a source for the government being able to actively monitor telephone calls to and from Pakistan spoken in a low resource language possibly being in code?

After all, you are the one that posited its existence in some way or another.
 
ponderingturtle said:
Except for the lack of explosives this was a dangerous car bomb.
Click to expand...

Not lack of explosives. The 10 gallons of gasoline, three tanks of propane and the various fireworks were certainly explosive materials. Inside a metal and glass container. What the bomb lacked was an effective detonator. Police later said it could have produced a significant fireball and sprayed shrapnel with enough force to kill. And Kevin Barry, a retired NYPD bomb squad supervisor (and head of the International Association of Bomb Technicians and Investigators), said (http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/05/04/2010-05-04_came_close_to_disaster_says_expert.html ) that "several hundred" people could have been killed or maimed just by the fireball had the detonator functioned correctly. He said the fireball would have caused horrific lung damage and hair/facial damage to anyone within a 50 yard radius (and you know how crowded Times Square was that day at that particular location). And the shrapnel from the car would have undoubtedly killed and injured many more. You make a serious mistake downplaying this incident in this manner. Why would you do that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom