Spam Text Prematurely Blows Up Suicide Bomber

Hugh Pickens writes "A suicide bomber's plan to detonate explosives in Central Moscow on New Year's Eve was foiled when she received an unexpected spam text message that caused her deadly payload to blow up too early. A message wishing her a happy new year came hours before the unnamed woman was to set off her suicide belt near Red Square, an act of terrorism that could have killed hundreds of people. Islamist terrorists in Russia often use mobile phones as detonators. The bomber's handler, who is usually watching his charge, sends the bomber a text message to set off the explosive belt at the moment when it is thought they can inflict maximum casualties."

Comments

Best story ever.

[sidragon.net]

See subject.

Re:Best story ever.

[supertrinko]

I guess it was a happy new year after all.

Oh, I laughed when I read this

[dr_db]

Made me think of Achmed and his 'premature detonation.'

Sad to think this is how people need to express their world view, happy when it turns out like this for them.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Sonny Yatsen]

I think this is the kind of terrorism we can all get behind - where the terrorist blows himself up without harming other people.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[sonnejw0]

I hope the terrorists use AT&T, because my txts get delayed all the time!

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[mangu]

Another funny story about a terrorist bomb premature detonation was one of a car bomb that detonated on a deserted Israeli road.

Comparing the remains of the driver's wristwatch with the clock attached to the bomb in the car's trunk, Israeli experts came to the conclusion that the bomb clock was set to Israeli time, which was in daylight saving mode, and the driver's was set to Palestinian time, which wasn't.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[willda]

May seem a little callous but, here goes...........A NOT so smart bomb!

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Conspiracy_Of_Doves]

It's ok. You're allowed to be callous when you're talking about the death of terrorists.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Anonymous Coward]

I think this is the kind of terrorism we can all get behind - where the terrorist blows himself up without harming other people.

Do you experience this much joy when a US Apache helicopter crashes before it has the opportunity to kill Iraqi civilians?

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[gr8_phk]

Sad to think this is how people need to express their world view, happy when it turns out like this for them.

Just think if they received a text or phone call just after the "handler" had rigged everything.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Anonymous Coward]

They have pills for that. I get the spam email all the time.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[BrokenHalo]

"Do you experience this much joy when a US Apache helicopter crashes before it has the opportunity to kill Iraqi civilians?"

Sure. Why not? Just because you might think God is on your side, that doesn't mean anyone else agrees.

OT: Why oh why does the new version of Slashdot have to break a simple thing like the HTML italic tag?

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Stregano]

That is not true, she had the potential to harm other people in her safe house who thought she was doing a good thing

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Anonymous Coward]

Using the same measure for what I like and what I dislike? You, sir, have obviously never spoken to a human being.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[LordLimecat]

Another funny story about a terrorist bomb premature detonation was one of a car bomb that detonated on a deserted Israeli road.

Its a little sad that you would view someones death by suicide bombing-- even the bomber's-- as funny. Of course during a war / struggle / conflict it is common to demonize the "enemy" in order to make it easier to hate them, but you tend to lose some of your humanity in the process.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[mangu]

It makes me less Christian, perhaps, but perfectly human.

OK, here's another funny story that I read once about a bumbling terrorist. In Pakistan a suicide bomber wore an explosive vest, with the detonator wired to two metal bracelets, one on each wrist, so it would detonate when they were shorted together.

The bomb blew up prematurely when the terrorist rode a bicycle and both bracelets came into contact with the handlebar at the same time.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[bluefoxlucid]

We're talking about people who like blowing up not just school children (shock value), but just regular old normal people in their 20s, 30s, 40s, whatever, hanging out at a restaurant getting something to eat, having a business meeting, talking about saving the environment, talking about destroying the environment, getting ready to proposition someone for steady dating, etc. People whose intent is to bring the death of non-combatants, not soldiers who have put themselves in a position to be a target. They gain nothing but the glory of killing innocents that they don't like for some reason. These people are honorless cowards and they are serving honorless cowards. Their lives are worth nothing.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[mysidia]

I think this is the kind of terrorism we can all get behind - where the terrorist blows himself up without harming other people.

What's even better than this... is, now, a spammer can go to jail for involuntary manslaughter.

Yes, the only person slain was a terrorist, but the spammer did not know that.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[tunapez]

Hey, it worked for Bouazizi, look at Tunisia now!
It appears to be working in Egypt and elsewhere, too.

Bummer for the fear-mongering war machine executives, how do you save the masses from themselves????

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently a 1999 Darwin award winning entry, and I found a CBS news article that mentions it. But even stranger is the fact it wasn't one person involved, but two "coordinated" car bombings -- and both of them detonated an hour early.

Combo-fail!

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[xaoslaad]

No, I'm pretty sure I am human when I am happy to see someone who wishes to cause others harm kill themselves before they get the chance. Being enlightened before they decide to do it is a good choice too, but death works just as well.

People like you who try to empathize with evil people are no longer human. They are wrong. Period. They want to KILL people. KILL. OTHER. PEOPLE. Which one of those words don't you understand. I am HAPPY, THRILLED, ECSTATIC, that they did not get the chance. 10's, dozens, possibly hundreds of others get to live now. That brings me JOY. A tear to my eye. ELATION.

You can say what you want about the US government and its military, but we don't intentionally target civilians, we don't kill indiscriminately even people who may be on our side, etc. etc. There are accidents, friendly fire casualties, bad apples, and a lot of other bad shit that happens, but it is war and it is chaotic. We try our best not to harm the innocents or our own.

These monsters walk right into the biggest pile of innocent civilians they can find and detonate themselves.

So while people like you sit idly by and think of the children, there are some people who work hard to prevent it, and get a little joy when the enemy screws up. You're wrong, not them. Get off your pedestal.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[casca69]

I couldn't agree more.
It is sad she died, but she was already planning that.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[undecim]

That is not true, she had the potential to harm other people in her safe house who thought she was doing a good thing

Well if the people she (potentially) harmed would have themselves each killed hundreds of innocents, then how many lives were saved?

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Scrameustache]

mobile phones as detonators. The bomber's handler, who is usually watching his charge, sends the bomber a text message to set off the explosive belt at the moment when it is thought they can inflict maximum casualties

I think this is the kind of terrorism we can all get behind - where the terrorist blows himself up without harming other people.

Why assume the delivery boy knows what he's delivering?

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[casca69]

I agree that it is sad in one respect, that a human lost their life.
That they chose this makes it different.
That they had intended to bring destruction to people they never knew, that had not caused them harm and were not in the military, considering it a military strike, and a gesture of religious faith was the true tragedy.
They had already dehumanized themselves, and I admit, I laughed about both.

Martin Luther King, Jr. found a different and better way.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Anonymous Coward]

i made the walter noise whenever i read it!
bethca can't freakin do it again!

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[casca69]

Don't we all wish!

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[undecim]

I'd say it's at least marginally more humorous than what would happen should said bomber's detonation be on time.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Heretic2]

And I thought it was bad when the clocks on nodes in my clusters drifted apart.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[LordLimecat]

They would likely level similar accusations against us, and who's to say how much of the information they have is correct?

honorless

By honorless, do you mean "their concept of honor is not one I agree with, therefore they have none"? Im sure in their eyes it is quite honorable; it seems pointless do discuss honor from opposite sides of the battlefield. It seems just as "honorless" to sit from the comfort of your home laughing as someone straps a bomb to their chest and takes their own life.

Regardless of that, is it not sad that someone would come to that point, that they would view whatever enemy they envision worthy of such hatred that they are willing to inflict civilian casualties? I see nothing humorous about the situation whatsoever, from their intent to their outcome.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[PingPongBoy]

You can tell by the plastique duct taped to the torso.

But the algorithm is easily debugged: plug in phone at the end

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[LordLimecat]

No, Id say there is equally little humor in both situations.

For all those claiming that it is funny because of the atrocities he tried to commit, do you also chuckle at the "darwin awards"? Is human life of such little value to you, that you think people must earn the right to live? That the loss of a life perceived as unproductive or harmful is thus a joyous thing?

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[LordLimecat]

There are accidents, friendly fire casualties, bad apples, and a lot of other bad shit that happens, but it is war and it is chaotic. We try our best not to harm the innocents or our own.

I do not argue any of this. But to say that "their death is a laughing matter, for they are monsters".... this is likely the very same justification they themselves use as they attack civilian populations. I can understand opposition to them, even deadly, but to laugh about such matters is very disquieting.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[jimbolauski]

Its a little sad that you would view someones death by suicide bombing-- even the bomber's-- as funny. Of course during a war / struggle / conflict it is common to demonize the "enemy" in order to make it easier to hate them, but you tend to lose some of your humanity in the process.

I won't lose any humanity finding the humor/irony in a suicide bomber who was planning on killing innocent people blown up by another scourge of the civilized world, spam. Anytime a suicide bomber blows themselves up and doesn't kill any innocent people it's a good thing.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Dorkmaster Flek]

It has nothing to do with demonizing the "enemy". It's just people killing themselves in dumb ways, like the Darwin awards. I can always applaud stupid people eliminating themselves from the gene pool.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Anonymous Coward]

When someone posts a story of US forces having a bomb explode in their plane which they were about to drop on civilians, and no one on slashdot finds that funny, your point will be valid. I am pretty certain o one finding this story funny is in the position of having killed innocents themselves.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[shaiay]

Actually it wasn't in a deserted road but in Talpiot commercial district in Jerusalem (See this report).
Because of the time difference it blew off an hour early which was (I think) 7:30am instead of 8:30am. 8:30am would have been a very busy time. at 7:30am it was quite deserted.
Also, there was no suicide bomber -- the car was left to blow up with a timer.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[ShooterNeo]

I don't like spammers either, but to charge the spammer with anything you have to show at least some culpability. The spammer had to know there was a non-negligible chance his junk messages could cause direct harm to someone as a result of the message.

The bomb didn't go off as a result of the message - it went off because the bomb builder was an idiot and didn't go to the trouble of writing a simple cell phone app or setting the phone to only ring when messages from a certain sender telephone number arrived at the phone. Any remotely competent and or marginally educated bomb builder would have taken precautions like this.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[ShooterNeo]

You know, when we use a drone aircraft to conduct an airstrike on someone we THINK is bad (but quite often is just innocent people " in their 20s, 30s, 40s, whatever, hanging out at a restaurant getting something to eat, having a business meeting, talking about saving the environment, talking about destroying the environment, getting ready to proposition someone for steady dating, etc")

Using a drone aircraft, we are true cowards - we aren't losing anything but a little money which our civilization produces in abundance.

Sure, we INTENDED to kill bad people (while suicide bombers intentionally target people they know are innocent) but we also intentionally push the button when we know there is a significant chance that innocent people will be killed by the blast.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[paiute]

On Okinawa, the Marines attacking Sugar Loaf Hill were under the threat of surprise attack 24/7. The stress and lack of rest took a toll, and after a week or so the troops were mentally and physically in very bad shape. One squad was cautiously advancing in daylight when two or three Japanese came running and screaming out of hiding. One was arming a grenade - which were activated by striking it against a hard surface. The Japanese were trained to hit them against their helmets. But the grenades had a high rate of failure, and this one went off in the soldier's hand, blowing off his head. His corpse continued on a step or two and then sank twitching to the ground. The Marines, who under normal circumstances would have been horrified by this sight, thought it the funniest thing they had ever seen and were helpless with laughter for quite some time. Luckily the attack on them was not followed up for a while.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Blessed_by_the_Cow]

Oh the dangers of riding a bike.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[theArtificial]

Its a little sad that you would view someones death by suicide bombing-- even the bomber's-- as funny.

Seriously? You're bothered over people making jokes about someone that was killed before they could murder? On behalf of victims everywhere, FUCK YOU.

Of course during a war / struggle / conflict it is common to demonize the "enemy" inorder to make it easier to hate them, but you tend to lose some of your humanity in the process.

Someone trying to kill you is not your enemy? Easier to hate them? This person lost their humanity when they wanted they wanted to murder a bunch of people celebrating new years.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[undecim]

So you are indifferent as to whether or not hundreds of innocents die with him?

Yes, I do chuckle at most Darwin awards, but that doesn't mean that I see little value to human life. People die every second, but we can't go around crying over every single one, or we would die ourselves from neglect of our lives where we put mourning in place of continuing to do what we need to.

In the case of suicide bombers, we can laugh about their failures even more so and share the same regard for their lives as they do themselves. The bomber was going to die either way, and clearly didn't care about it. When she failed, there was no loss of life; in fact, lives were saved.

While it may be sad that this person decided to commit suicide, it is joyous that the other lives were saved. If the situation in which they failed is humorous, all the better.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[c6gunner]

For all those claiming that it is funny because of the atrocities he tried to commit, do you also chuckle at the "darwin awards"?

Of course not!

I Laugh Out Loud. I mean, honestly, who really "chuckles" these days. Is there even an acronym for that?

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Anonymous Coward]

Just go quietly when the men in black SUVs come for you :) .

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Anonymous Coward]

but the terrorist didn't blow himself up. Just his pawn

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[HereIAmJH]

For all those claiming that it is funny because of the atrocities he tried to commit, do you also chuckle at the "darwin awards"?

I find it sad that I am more compassionate than our (US) "don't spend MY money" national political party. And yes, I have NO sympathy for people who die while trying to commit acts of terrorism or from extreme stupidity. I also have no sympathy for people who die due to their own greed. And I would shed no tears for a religious fundamentalist, of any flavor, who causes their own demise. These people put their own desires over society's and I see no reason to respect them when they are 'hoisted by their own petard'. Their last act may be the only positive contribution to society, amusement.
 

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[RareButSeriousSideEf]

You could make that argument about literally any point of view. If you buy into moral equivalence, then sure, you could acknowledge and try to understand a concept of honor that glorifies and rewards the intentional mass murder of random civilians.

If concepts of honor are so flexible as to permit that though, then really there's simply no such thing as honor, just a bunch of disparate and conflicting delusions of it.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Anonymous Coward]

And in response to the possible attack, Israeli forces bombed several schools and murdered another 20 palestinian children?

(Because that's how things usually go with the Israelis).

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[craash420]

SILENCE!! I Keeeeel you!

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[ArcherB]

They would likely level similar accusations against us, and who's to say how much of the information they have is correct?

honorless

Using a sneak attack intended to kill the unarmed civilians is both honorless and cowardly by anyone's definition.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Anachragnome]

"I think this is the kind of terrorism we can all get behind - where the terrorist blows himself up without harming other people."

It IS possible that the government was behind this. I cannot think of a single better way to discourage the use of cell phones as bomb triggers than to make them unpredictable, and sending random messages to suspected phones, cheap throwaways of the TracPhone ilk, sounds like a perfect way to do so. The phone companies could simply put automated message functions (Your bill can be viewed at www.so-and-so.come...) on a randomized delivery schedule.

  Clean too...the only collateral damage, if it wasn't a bomber that received the message, would be an annoyed customer.

This article could also be an attempt to cover up something like that, and make it appear that it was accidental. No point in tipping one's hand when there are still terrorist safe-houses to blow up.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[LordLimecat]

If someone could please define honor in clear terms that most reasonable parties could agree to (where reasonable means more than "I like or agree with the fellow"), I would be appreciative. But it does not mean moral so far as I can tell, and to use it to mean "I approve of his actions" is not terribly useful.

I am not entering into moral relativism in the least; I think that the bombing would have been tragic had it occurred properly, but I think that for at least some definitions of "honor" it is "dishonorable" to laugh at a mans death at all, especially given the intent behind it.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[ArcherB]

There are accidents, friendly fire casualties, bad apples, and a lot of other bad shit that happens, but it is war and it is chaotic. We try our best not to harm the innocents or our own.

I do not argue any of this. But to say that "their death is a laughing matter, for they are monsters".... this is likely the very same justification they themselves use as they attack civilian populations. I can understand opposition to them, even deadly, but to laugh about such matters is very disquieting.

The only thing that disturbs me about terrorists killing themselves is that they did not change their ways. There have been failed suicide bombers who have become rehabilitated, but when the alternative is the death of innocents, I will cheer the "mostly harmless" death of a suicide bomber any day.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[ArcherB]

No, Id say there is equally little humor in both situations.

For all those claiming that it is funny because of the atrocities he tried to commit, do you also chuckle at the "darwin awards"? Is human life of such little value to you, that you think people must earn the right to live? That the loss of a life perceived as unproductive or harmful is thus a joyous thing?

When one wants to to forfeit their life to kill several others, the value of their life becomes negative the value of the lives they would have taken, plus one. So when something like this happens, I rejoice at all the lives saved by the bomber's mistake.

Mathematically speaking, assuming all human life is equal, the bombers live is valued at one. Since she failed at her attack, her death is valued at the number of lives she would have taken if she had been successful. Let's call that value X. Since she probably would have killed more than one person, X > 1. She is worth more dead from a failed attack than if she had succeeded.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Anonymous Coward]

Gee... I wonder if she was a MUSLIM, by any chance?

Does the article even mention 'the 'm' word'?

This is getting ridiculous. Muslims are breeding like rabbits in every white nation on Earth, openly calling for 'jihad', and spend every day of their lives reading the insane rantings of a psychopathic mass murderer, multiple rapist and paedophile, and call him 'the perfect man', but because they are non-white, (and therefore 'good'), the insane liberal Left have given them carte-blanche to continue.

When the shit hits the fan, all you moronic, head in the sanders are going to be in for a bloody rude awakening. Every idiot who has been in ANY way responsible for FORCING this hell on Earth onto us (by which I mean, politicians, heads of businesses who have chosen to force 'diversity' and all the other Marxist bullshit onto their staff, 'human resources' staff who delight in ruining people's lives by 'catching them not being marxist enough' and subjecting them to kangaroo courts), is going to be killed, either by the white side, or the muslim side. BOTH sides are going to kill you, there will be nowhere left to hide.

We are in the midst of another Great Terror, a la Stalin and his Jewish cohorts in Russia.

Of course, the Left love muslims because they have so much in common: blind adherence to an insane political ideology, stupidity, an inability to admit they are wrong, supreme arrogance, disdain for 'the other', a desire to KILL anybody who disagrees with them, and a complete inability to DEBATE their position. (Because it's insane.)

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Anonymous Coward]

You're right, let's all never joke about serious things ever again and the world will be a slightly better place.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[LordLimecat]

There are several disturbing things about your post...
For starters, you have no sympathy for others who die due to their own greed-- do you then say that you have no vices of your own? Do you think any death you might suffer deserves not a second thought because of them?

And I would shed no tears for a religious fundamentalist, of any flavor, who causes their own demise. These people put their own desires over society's and I see no reason to respect them when they are 'hoisted by their own petard'

Aside from the massive leap involved in lumping all "religious fundamentalists" into the category of "wants to destroy our civil liberties or our democratic system", I see no reason you could not just as easily substitute "opposition political parties" in place of "religious fundamentalists". Each political party tends to think the others are headed down a path to disaster; are they therefore unworthy of sympathy on event of their demise?

Their last act may be the only positive contribution to society, amusement.

....and the massive leap in stating that no "religious fundamentalist" has ever contributed to society, the idea that one is only worthy of sympathy if they contribute meaningfully to society? Would you therefore feel no sorrow if a newborn were murdered? What about the elderly, the invalids? Mankind has gone down that path many times before, we know what monster lies behind that door.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[LordLimecat]

Trying to quantify a human's worth is tricky and dangerous business. Many very bright individuals have attempted to bring such ideas into policy, but society very fortunately tends to shy away from such things as eugenics, forced sterilization, and the like.

Talking about someone's right to live as a positive or negative value also implies that with enough good works, one might not be punished for certain infractions. Do you really want to go down THAT road?

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[reidconti]

no, it actually is, in fact, funny.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[HereIAmJH]

Recently a local young man was drunk and driving his car at 150 mph and rear-ended another car on the interstate and killed one of the passengers in that car. Had he killed himself instead, I would not have shed a tear. He didn't care what effect his actions would have on others, why should I care about him?

Should the members of Westboro Baptist church cause their own demise, it would be a positive result for society. Religion has been responsible for massacres throughout history. If you need religion to get you through the day, fine, but when you place your beliefs over other people's lives, you have no place in civilized society.

And absolutely, if I should happen to cause my own death, I do not expect strangers to mourn my death.

And really, before you get all self righteous and claim that I want to commit genocide and kill babies, elderly, and invalids, you really ought to understand the term 'hoisted by their own petard'. It has a very specific meaning.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[SanityInAnarchy]

They may have lost any sense of a moral high ground, but they didn't lose their humanity. Yes, there are some people you may never reach. If you stop trying, there will be _more_ such people.

It's not enough to decide this is an evil fuck deserving no sympathy. WHY did they do what they did? What motivates them? Was it a grossly inappropriate response to a legitimate offense? Even if the offense isn't legitimate, can we understand what the psychology of the situation is, and maybe empathize just a bit?

I laughed, too. I view them as an enemy, too, and if it came to it, I'd have no problem killing them myself.

But that doesn't mean they've suddenly become inhuman, a monster. As soon as you believe that, you lose any chance you might've had to fix the real problem, and to actually start to prevent this kind of thing.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[mysidia]

I don't like spammers either, but to charge the spammer with anything you have to show at least some culpability. The spammer had to know there was a non-negligible chance his junk messages could cause direct harm to someone as a result of the message.

This would fall under reckless disregard for the safety of others.

Sending out messages to random mobile phone numbers is certain to eventually result in you sending a text message to someone who will be harmed by receiving a text message. Whether the cause of death is... girlfriend sees spam and thinkgs boyfriend is cheating, resorts to capital murder..... Or that spam message was the one last piece of spam that caused them to crack and commit suicide. Or, whether their cell phone beeping to indicate a text message was what revealed her hiding place to the killer who broke in (aiding and abetting), or whether that message was the distraction at a critical moment, that caused the recipient to fall to their death, crash into the vehicle in front of them, or allowed their assailant to get the best of them. A remote detonator is just one possible way.

You need to realize, every time you pick up a cell phone -- you are holding in your hands, a lethal weapon.

Look what happened in Egypt? Cell phones caused mass protests in the streets, violence, injuries, and deaths. It got so bad they had to turn off all the cell phones to protect the people. Unfortunately, they might have done so too late... thousands of lives could be lost, all because of cell phones <Evil Grin>

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[mysidia]

. The spammer had to know there was a non-negligible chance his junk messages could cause direct harm to someone as a result of the message.

What text message sender could be unaware of the $0.25 per message charge they are incurring on recipients?

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[geekoid]

to be fair, someone else was going to detonate it. In all likely the person was forced to do it in order to save their family.

I'm glad it want of early, but don't be quick to judge the person how had the bomb

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[snuf23]

Expressing disdain for the practice of suicide bombing does not say anything about that person's opinion on using drone aircraft strikes or manned aircraft strikes or assault with an army of bazooka laden smurfs for that matter.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[LordLimecat]

My comment about babies and invalids was aimed very specifically at the implication that a person's value as a human is tied to their use to society. So lets have it in plain english-- is that your intention?

Should the members of Westboro Baptist church cause their own demise, it would be a positive result for society

All other points aside-- and very emphatically, I do not think they are minor points-- this raises another major flaw with the thrust of your arguments. You seem to think that we can look at a person or group and know the extent of their contributions; Here is an obvious example of where that falls short. I am myself no fan of the WBC, but was rather suprised to learn that for all the allegations of bigotry etc that its pastor Fred Phelps gets, he was, about 50 years ago, an attorney in kansas who (AFAICT) focused on, in his words, "tearing down Jim Crow laws" (source). He was disbarred about 20 years later for conduct in court, and his performance and vitriol at the pulpit has done no favors to the name christian; the man has a great many flaws. But not knowing the people he defended, or the times he grew up in, are you prepared to look at the mans life and declare it of no value? How can you be confident that you know the full worth of any man's life, to declare it worthy of no tears?

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Anonymous Coward]

And in response to the possible attack, Israeli forces bombed several schools and murdered another 20 palestinian children?

(Because that's how things usually go with the Israelis).

Yes, in the Arab language version of Al Jazeera. With the stock footage of the man holding his dead child in his hands, you've seen him many times before.

(Because that's how things usually go with the Muslim propaganda)

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[theArtificial]

But that doesn't mean they've suddenly become inhuman, a monster. As soon as you believe that, you lose any chance you might've had to fix the real problem, and to actually start to prevent this kind of thing.

Typically after the bomb goes off there is no bomber to talk to. When a person muders a bunch of innocents I think they're a monster. I understand that the people who organize and plan these events are the ones we should be going after.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Anonymous Coward]

I think this is the kind of terrorism we can all get behind - where the terrorist blows himself up without harming other people.

It's not terrorism. Terrorism is where they do something and you react with terror.

I laughed when I read this. The proper term is therefore comedy...

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[HornWumpus]

I'm just going to chirp in hear and say that LordLimecat's life is worthless and that I will laugh out loud if I hear of his demise.

There is no shortage of people.

Especially idealistic mental children.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Anonymous Coward]

"What about the elderly, the invalids?"

If they don't contribute to society in any way, DEFINITELY!

And no, I'm not some twenty-something. I'm closing in on elderly, and have asked my wife, if there comes a time I get Alzheimer's and become useless to society, TAKE ME OUT. There is no reason to live beyond a certain point, you're just wasting resources and taking up space.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[shutdown -p now]

They would likely level similar accusations against us, and who's to say how much of the information they have is correct?

Yes, because a woman with an explosive belt in the middle of Moscow was really just looking for the nearest military base to blow it up right and proper - after donning her recognizable uniform on at the gates.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[mikael]

I heard about this story. The Israelis had decided to make the change in daylight saving mode a day early. This caught out the Palestinians who hadn't heard of the change announced on the radio. Witnesses said they just saw the car explode in the middle of the highway.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[The Grand Falloon]

Seriously? This person is out to murder as many people as possible. She is not a military "enemy." It's not a case of, "I'm stuck in a foxhole shooting at someone who I would probably get along with if our governments weren't in a spat, I wish we could get along." This is someone out to murder civilians, but gets blown to smithereens because someone is offering to make her cock bigger. FUCKING HILARIOUS.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Anonymous Coward]

So having a LOL about something, somewhere in the world is morally equivalent to strapping a bomb to your body and blowing up people just hanging around?

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure that they are HAPPY, THRILLED and ECSTATIC when other people die as well.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Ihmhi]

Anyone who would kill unarmed civilians is honorless in my book. How could you even rationalize this falling under your code of honor?

Bombing the U.S.S. Cole or Army Barracks are attacking military targets. That's fine. Setting off a bomb at a market or a school is just being a worthless piece of shit.

If anyone can tell me how killing unarmed civilians could fit into anyone's code of honor, I'd love to hear that logic. I could use a good laugh.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[ShakaUVM]

No, I'm pretty sure I am human when I am happy to see someone who wishes to cause others harm kill themselves before they get the chance. Being enlightened before they decide to do it is a good choice too, but death works just as well.

People like you who try to empathize with evil people are no longer human. They are wrong. Period. They want to KILL people. KILL. OTHER. PEOPLE. Which one of those words don't you understand. I am HAPPY, THRILLED, ECSTATIC, that they did not get the chance. 10's, dozens, possibly hundreds of others get to live now. That brings me JOY. A tear to my eye. ELATION.

You can say what you want about the US government and its military, but we don't intentionally target civilians, we don't kill indiscriminately even people who may be on our side, etc. etc. There are accidents, friendly fire casualties, bad apples, and a lot of other bad shit that happens, but it is war and it is chaotic. We try our best not to harm the innocents or our own.

These monsters walk right into the biggest pile of innocent civilians they can find and detonate themselves.

So while people like you sit idly by and think of the children, there are some people who work hard to prevent it, and get a little joy when the enemy screws up. You're wrong, not them. Get off your pedestal.

You, sir, just won the Internet.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[HereIAmJH]

My comment about babies and invalids was aimed very specifically at the implication that a person's value as a human is tied to their use to society.

No, what you have done is focused on a simple sentence that you either couldn't comprehend, or intentionally twisted, so that you start a debate of your own choosing.

I said:

Their last act may be the only positive contribution to society, amusement.

Now, we are discussing a suicide bomber that died by their own hand. Regardless of what you may think of value of their life, when they died without taking their victims with them, it was an extraordinarily good thing for society. It's not just that we should shed no tears for this person, we should celebrate their passing. And the fact that they were undone by a spam text is certainly a humorous irony.

If you want to mourn this persons passing and look for the good in their life that's fine. You sit there and think happy thoughts about someone whose intent was to take the life of as many innocent victims as possible. But I could read stories of suicide bombers accidentally blowing themselves up in their workshops daily and be quite happy about it. The world will be a better place without them.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[benyahuda]

A few years ago the Israeli's blew up a terrorist by detonating his own cell phone. It can work.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[dotgain]

If anyone can tell me how killing unarmed civilians could fit into anyone's code of honor, I'd love to hear that logic. I could use a good laugh.

I'm not going to tell you how, because I find it just an incomprehensible and insane as you do. There's just no way I could word it and pretend I was doing you some informative favor by telling you.

So I can't tell you how, but please understand - for religious reasons - that some do define that as honorable.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Anonymous Coward]

^ Middle-of-the-roader who calls himself liberal disgusted by the liberal-ness of a real liberal.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[ShakaUVM]

>>BWA HA FUCKING HA. So not only are you a hate-filled hypocrite, you must be willfully ignorant.

I've got some marine friends that would love to talk with you, Mr. Coward.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Eivind]

I guess it could be rationalized if the civillians where, say, delivering supplies to a military base. But then again, if someone is willingly working to directly support military operations, I guess it's questionable if they count as civillians at all.

That is, if your country is occupied by a foreign power, I find it not-too-hard to rationalize blowing up for example a diesel-truck on the way to one of the bases of the occupying forces, even if the driver ain't a soldier.

Not that that has anything to do with what you're talking of, offcourse.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Ihmhi]

So I can't tell you how, but please understand - for religious reasons - that some do define that as honorable.

Welp, that would explain why I think that religion is one of the most harmful plagues ever set upon this planet.

Religion can take away the fear of death from the weak-minded, and moreover it empowers those clever enough to elevate themselves into a position of power over them.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Ihmhi]

I can agree with that. Hell, that's Real Time Strategy games 101. Whether it's Starcraft or Age of Empires or Dawn of War, hitting the supply lines is an effective and important part of warfare. And thank you for concluding your statement with the fact that this is not the thing I have a problem with.

One might reach the logic of "well, they're listening to that infidel American music which supports the American government through taxes which supports the military and therefore they must die", but that is really stretching things.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[Eivind]

Yes. But many bombings (suicide or not) do fall atleast close to this scenario.

Occupying forces in Afghanistan and Iraq (i.e. our forces!) have an express plan of gradually handing power over to the local government and it's security-forces/police/military. Would you say, blowing up, say the recruitment-lines for a school educating new police-officers in Afghanistan, is attacking a civillian target ? It's fairly grey, if you ask me - these schools are directly supported by the occupying forces, and their explicitly stated purpose, is to educate locals to take over some of the tasks that are presently handled by occupying soldiers.

Sure, it's easy to find examples that are *clearly* attacks on unrelated civillians, but a fairly large percentage of attacks are also on softer-targets on the outskirts, "civillian" institutions that form part of the military strategy and/or support-mechanism.

In short, you're right. It's tricky to say exactly what the proper definition of civillian is. Is a petrol-station-owner a civilian if he delivers petrol to Blackwater ? I honestly don't know.

Re:Oh, I laughed when I read this

[scot4875]

People like you who try to empathize with evil people are no longer human.

Yeah, god forbid anyone should actually *try* to understand the motivations of these suicide bombers.

Best to just sit here with a holier-than-them attitude and call them all evil and pat ourselves on the back about how not-evil we are.

--Jeremy

Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[Hartree]

Thankfully many of the bomb makers for such groups don't think through the failure modes very thoroughly.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[fredmosby]

Either that or they care so little about the suicide bombers that they didn't bother doing the extra work to prevent this.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[Tablizer]

Thankfully many of the bomb makers for such groups don't think through the failure modes very thoroughly.

Those Terrorism Safety courses are kinda boring. Too much theory and not enough hands-on (or should I say, "hands-off").

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[KDN]

My question is, if this person was a suicide bomber, why trigger remotely? Seems to me there would be fewer things to go wrong if you have a deadman switch in your hand.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[JavaBear]

True, and the added bonus is, the user probably won't be filing any complaints over premature detonation...

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[Anonymous Coward]

The article answers your question, so stfu and go read it.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[tofubeer]

Prevents the bomber from backing out.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[tophermeyer]

The sorts of people that are typically recruited as suicide bombers are what you might call "unstable". There's no guarantee that they would detonate at the right moment, or at all.

Having the handler control the detonation also takes a lot of the responsibility off of the mule (in their own eyes). All they have to do is walk into a crowd, the handler will be the one actually pulling the 'trigger'.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[wisty]

Cold feet, perhaps? What percent of them would be unable to actually pull the switch?

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[Anonymous Coward]

If you remote detonate then the bomber can't back out at the last second.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[sjames]

My guess is that suicide bombers would tend to have reasonability re-assert itself at the last minute when it "becomes real" to them.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[ifrag]

Probably to prevent deserters. These suicide bombers very likely have some lingering doubts about what they are doing, and by having the switch in their hand, they might actually make the correct decision and walk away. Someone who is not so directly invested in the operation personally is probably more likely to actually detonate the device.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[PlusFiveTroll]

People tend to fuck up their own suicides. If you're holding something that will kill you if you let go, you might find you'll have a very hard time letting it go, so much so that people around you might notice what's going on.

A friend of mine is a justice of the peace, he has to go out on the death calls in the county and declare people dead, how it happened, and if an autopsy is needed. In many gun suicides people tend to have a jerking reaction at the last minute and do things like blow their face off instead of their brains out... making for a slow painful death rather than a quick one.

In this case it makes sense that a third party that has more of there wits about them pulling the trigger, they may have a little more situational awareness going on. Then again, both people involved seem to be out of their fucking mind in my perspective.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[peragrin]

Because if thebomber is the least bit nervous/skittish or simply gets bumped wrong then the bomb can go off early too.

As well the bombers themselves are partially brainwashed into killing themselves. You don't want them to have a last minute change of heart and get arrested(it has happened). Instead you put a trusted spotter on the bomber to make sure they are in place and you pull the trigger(or text) Remotely.

Even sucide bombers can change their mind at the last minute.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[nicholas22]

So the advice here is: Use Eiffel when programming such devices :P

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[jburroug]

To keep the suicide bomber from getting cold feet and walking away at the last minute.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[NFN_NLN]

Thankfully many of the bomb makers for such groups don't think through the failure modes very thoroughly.

Every time I seen a movie with a cell phone detonated bomb I always thought to myself... what if a wrong number called and detonated it prematurely. People always say I over think things but clearly this wasn't the case :).

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[spun]

I've read that suicide bombers tend not to be unstable and tend to be well educated middle class professionals. A little fact checking on Wikipedia shows there have been other, conflicting studies, though. Still, in general, suicide bombers are not the unstable, low income, desperate types portrayed in the media.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_bomber#Profile_of_attackers

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[gtall]

Maybe they are typically unstable, but the Taliban have taken to using small children. One woman recounted how she fled the family home when her brother told her she would be next martyr. Unfortunately, her sister was left behind she is sure her brother used her instead.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[Beardo the Bearded]

If it's for religious reasons, and it usually is, then they are forbidden from committing suicide upon punishment of going to hell. Because they are dead, it's a sin that cannot be forgiven. The loophole exists that they aren't killing themselves if someone else does the actual button pressing. These guys take loopholes way more seriously than the character optimization board at WotC and they've had thousands of years to figure this shit out. The consequences are greater, sure, but they've got it figured out.

The murders, apparently, are kosher / halal / unicode error. Better than that, actually, by martyring yourself whilst killing the holy enemies of your chosen one then you are assured -- fucking assured -- that you get to escape this oppressed life and move to a perfect beautiful one (albeit a hilarious parody of adolescent fantasy) in paradise, with the blessing of your chosen one.

I know, it assumes facts not in evidence. I'm a Secular Humanist so don't try saying but there's no God because I already know that, I'm just saying that that's their mentality.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[nospam007]

Or that they are to cheap to use a phone with a Whitelist that would only allow calls from a specific phone.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone how decides to wipe out tens, hundreds, or thousands of human lives because of their own religion and/or beliefs is by definition, NOT STABLE. They were weak and manipulated by their religion to act in that manner.

Take or believe what you want about religion but for humans in the world to believe in so many different various religions (many of which directly contradict others religious views) with such intensity prove that we are vulnerable to manipulation.

Your religion is defined by whatever powerful being or chronological or spiritual method you are comfortable with believing in to explain how the world was formed, how our very existence came to be, and what we should expect when we are gone... With so many different established ideas and methods to explain that cycle (many of which directly contradict with other religious beliefs), how can they all be 100% right as taught and believed by so many? Answer.. they can't. If you don't realize that and think the one you choose to believe is the only possible situation and all others that do not believe in your choice should die, you are UNSTABLE.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[HateBreeder]

Well, I would think they would care about fixing this simply in order to increase their kill efficiency.

The outcome from the point of view of the detonated terrorist is quite the same, albeit delayed.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[LurkerXXX]

I think if you blow yourself up, by definition you are not stable.

Also, there are lots of well educated people with decent jobs who live lives of quiet desperation. So I think those bombers really are desperate.

The thing we can agree on is that a good number of them are not low income. Some are, some aren't.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[spun]

We should not take the decision to suicide bomb into account when determining the stability of the person doing it. Obviously, by one definition, they are not stable. But that is not the real question. The question is, can we judge who is likely to become a suicide bomber by their stability prior to the bombing? If they act like normal people before the bombing, rather than acting unstable in some way, then the answer is no.

We are looking for answers to the question, "What would make someone do that?" and one easy answer is "They are crazy." But that is no answer at all. And when we look, we see that (besides the bombing) these people don't look crazy. So we have to look further for the reasons. And that is scary. If they are simply crazy, we can wash our hands of it, there is nothing we can really do besides fight them. If they are not crazy, things become a whole lot more complicated. We need to start looking at their real motivations. And we never like what we see when we really look at their motivations, because their motivations relate to our actions. It is much easier to say "They are just crazy" than it is to say "They are regular people who believe they have been pushed too far and are fighting back."

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[spun]

If you blow yourself up, certainly you are unstable. But that is the wrong way of looking at the question. If that is the only unstable thing these people have ever done, then we can not predict whether someone will suicide bomb based on their stability. The question is not "Given that they suicide bombed, are they unstable?" It is "Did they do anything unstable prior to bombing?"

It is much easier to believe these people are simply unstable or desperate, rather than looking honestly at their real motivations. If someone who is fighting you is just crazy, your choices are simple and morally unambiguous: you fight back. But if they are not crazy, things become more complicated, you need to look at your own actions as well as theirs, and you need to really consider what you would do in their shoes. Obviously, "They are unstable maniacs who hate our freedoms" makes much better propaganda than "They are normal middle class people just like you and me who believe they have been pushed too far and are fighting back in the most effective way they know."

Note that I am not saying they HAVE been pushed too far, or excusing their actions in any way. I am saying that they believe it, and that is why they are fighting, not because they are unstable. Really looking at your opponents motivations is not the same thing as excusing them. It is simply a more effective way of fighting them than making up inaccurate mythologies about them.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[Anonymous Coward]

I think if you blow yourself up, by definition you are not stable.

That's certainly true afterwards! (rimshot)

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[GameboyRMH]

I have a relative who's a cop and says the same thing. People who try to kill themselves by jumping in front of a train freak out at the last second, creating a much bigger mess than if they held still.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[Karlt1]

A little fact checking on Wikipedia....

Really?

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[spun]

Yes, really. You have a problem with that? You DO know that Wikipedia articles are well referenced, right? I mean, there are TONS of links to the actual studies backing up the claims. If you have a problem with the conclusions the Wikipedia article reaches, state what those problems are rather than trying to poison the well against Wikipedia. People love to claim Wikipedia is unreliable, but independent studies show it is actually less likely to contain inaccuracies than traditional encyclopedias.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[robot256]

Strategy. The person on the ground is usually not thinking straight in the first place (that's why they just strapped a bomb on themselves) and isn't fully aware of his surroundings. Not to mention he might chicken out run away without detonating it. Having an operative with binoculars somewhere watching the crowds around the bomber--and also able to see targets of opportunity like police officers approaching--dramatically improves the effectiveness of the attack.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[gandhi_2]

when I was in ramadi in 2005 to 2006, it was common practice for the aqi to use mentally handicapped for suicide bombings.

the local insurgents would use them for ied emplacers.... sometimes with tragically funny results.

but what would I know.... I didn't read wikipedia.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[bluefoxlucid]

"They are regular people who believe they have been pushed too far and are fighting back."

So emotionally unstable

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[eth1]

Thankfully many of the bomb makers for such groups don't think through the failure modes very thoroughly.

Those Terrorism Safety courses are kinda boring. Too much theory and not enough hands-on (or should I say, "hands-off").

Suicide bomber isntructor: "Now pay attention! I'm only going to show you this once."

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[lwsimon]

Wait, you fact check by going to Wikipedia?

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[lwsimon]

In that case, you fact checked by visiting the references on Wikipedia. That's not the same thing at all.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[spun]

Are you claiming that Wikipedia is unreliable?

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[spun]

Why is that a problem? Independent studies have shown Wikipedia contains fewer inaccuracies than traditional encyclopedias. If you have a rebuttal to any of the points I brought up, please rebut. Poisoning the well by casting unwarranted aspersions on a source is not a valid form of debate.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[spun]

Whatever. That Wikipedia article is referenced. If you want to debate what's on Wikipedia, debate what's on Wikipedia. Don't try to poison the well. Studies have shown Wikipedia is more accurate than regular encyclopedias.

Right now, I have cited sources, while you have cited a personal anecdote. Got anything to back up your claims? Or, you know, even anecdotal numbers? How many bombings were there in Ramadi in 2005-2006? How many of those were carried out by the mentally handicapped?

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[undecim]

You DO know that Wikipedia articles are well referenced, right? I mean, there are TONS of links to the actual studies backing up the claims. If you have a problem with the conclusions the Wikipedia article reaches, state what those problems are rather than trying to poison the well against Wikipedia. People love to claim Wikipedia is unreliable, but independent studies show it is actually less likely to contain inaccuracies than traditional encyclopedias.

I have done many college papers using Wikipedia as my primary source, and citing the links at the bottom of the page (with a quick check to verify consistency between the article and the source). Whenever I tell someone else about this, they usually respond "Wow, I never thought of that"

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[casca69]

With one Caveat:
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[kyrio]

They are unstable for believing in retarded shit that people from thousands of years ago made up to feel better about themselves and their surroundings. As humans, who can learn and make intelligent decisions, we should have all figured out that those stories are just that. Anyone who would continue to act like an ape, so long after we evolved, is unstable.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[Anonymous Coward]

Wrong way of looking at what question? You stated "Still, in general, suicide bombers are not the unstable, low income, desperate types portrayed in the media.".

They are unstable/desperate, as stated. Your comment was wrong.

Asking if people fighting you might have a reasonable reason for fighting you is an entirely different question than asking if people who blow themselves up are unstable. Certainly your actions may cause others to want to fight you, and give them good reason for it. (In the case of the middle east, I'd go so far as to say many who are fighting have legitimate grievances, the US are invaders after all.) In their tactics during this fight, some may also take advantage of unstable/desperate people and use them as weapons against you. That has nothing to do with the fact that the people who actually blow themselves up are in fact unstable/desperate.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[spun]

No one has shown my comment to be wrong, so how can you claim that? Please, if you have evidence that the majority of bombers are unstable, present it. I am not tied to any particular interpretation. I don't have a horse in this race. I just thought that what I had read was interesting. If you have another viewpoint that you can support with evidence, I would love to hear it.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[icebike]

Either that or they care so little about the suicide bombers that they didn't bother doing the extra work to prevent this.

LOL. (Who modded this insightful? Its clearly the funniest post in this thread).

Its also entirely possible that the detonation was triggered by police, by having knowledge of a plot but no specifics. All they would have to do is order the (largely) state controlled carriers to wish every recently activated cell a Happy New Year and then listen for the booms.

Most of the bomb makers tie into the speaker or vibrator circuit as trigger. Takes two minutes with a soldering iron. They are not technical enough to tie into specific calling number. As such just about any event, a phone call, a text message, or even a timer/calendar event will work.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[dkleinsc]

It's worth noting that many terrorist groups using suicide bombings as basically a way of getting rid of those low-level members that show signs of being stupid enough to endanger the rest of the organization. Or, for that matter, those who join up and are suspected of being spies.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[spun]

They are unstable for believing in retarded shit that people from thousands of years ago made up to feel better about themselves and their surroundings. As humans, who can learn and make intelligent decisions, we should have all figured out that those stories are just that.

Anyone who would continue to act like an ape, so long after we evolved, is unstable.

If they are unstable for that reason, so are the majority of human beings. As I said, the real question is, what other unstable characteristics have they demonstrated before becoming suicide bombers? If there are none, then we can not honestly claim that their prior instability is the cause of them becoming suicide bombers.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[russotto]

Thankfully many of the bomb makers for such groups don't think through the failure modes very thoroughly.

Yep. The standard Slashdot troll of its users by posting articles saying that "terrorists are disproportionately engineers" needs to be changed to "terrorist are disproprotionally lousy engineers."

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[kyrio]

If they are unstable for that reason, so are the majority of human beings. As I said, the real question is, what other unstable characteristics have they demonstrated before becoming suicide bombers? If there are none, then we can not honestly claim that their prior instability is the cause of them becoming suicide bombers.

Yes, the majority of human beings are unstable. It's the reason we have so many problems in the world today, including suicide bombers.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[Anonymous Coward]

You stated it yourself in your previous post "If you blow yourself up, certainly you are unstable." Which directly contradicts your previous statement in the thread "Still, in general, suicide bombers are not the unstable, low income, desperate types portrayed in the media.".

You showed your own comment was wrong. That's how I can claim that.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[spun]

Is it? I assume that when you make a controversial claim such as "Yes, the majority of human beings are unstable. It's the reason we have so many problems in the world today, including suicide bombers." you have some evidence to back up your claim? Because otherwise you would look as though you don't know how to debate.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[ShooterNeo]

Any terrorist with 3 brain cells could choose a cell phone that has a menu option to only ring/vibrate when specific numbers are calling. Dozens of models of phones have this feature, and it's just a matter of finding one in the local market where terrorists shop I guess. (I don't think they have ebay which would make the task trivial)

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[icebike]

True, but it would be easy to forget that a text message might also set it off, and even if they did remember this, many older phones did not have the ability ring differently for one sms source as opposed to another.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[Quiet_Desperation]

quiet desperation

What?

Oh. Never mind.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[MichaelSmith]

You know, whenever I go to Malaysia my Australian SIM logs connects to a local carrier so I have roaming access and the Malaysian carrier sends me a text message advertising their services. It seemed pretty pointless to me...

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[jimbolauski]

In Communist Russia Spam Deletes You!

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[kyrio]

The evidence is walking around every street that has been built.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[cmr-denver]

Uh, actually you cited unnamed sources, which is usually considered about as reliable as personal anecdote.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[spun]

I'd say the evidence is that human beings are remarkably stable. Witness the fact that we have had societies with streets to walk around on for thousands of years. But maybe this is just your way of making yourself feel good. Obviously, you are not unstable, and therefore, better than everyone else. I'd be a big old meanie to take that away from you, wouldn't I?

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[spun]

What unnamed sources did I cite? I believe its name is "wikipedia." It even comes with these amazing things called hyperlinks, you can follow them to even more sources! Or are you claiming wikipedia is not a source?

I love how many people, when Wikipedia contradicts their world-view, will imply that Wikipedia is unreliable, but won't actually come right out and say "Wikipedia is unreliable" because they know that claim can be easily refuted.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[moortak]

Even if they don't care about the bomber you would expect them to care about either their mission, the increased risk of detection, or at the very least the cost of the wasted supplies. Semtex isn't free.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[kyrio]

You're right, I'm much better than everyone else.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[Tablizer]

http://www.strangemilitary.com/images/content/2821.jpg

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[jarlsberg71]

I would imagine a remote detonator would ensure no "cold feet" as well as the slim probability that someone in the crowd could discover them and prevent them from setting it off. Deadman switches would work, but imagine walking and holding your thumb on something and you trip... Either way it's a very sad state that anyone would choose this action, let alone be a "handler" to enable others to do so. Very disturbing.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[boxxertrumps]

Can't/Won't/Indifferent are all interchangeable in a situation like this.
Unless you have dozens of one time use disposable phone pairs, setting the bomb to only go off for a specific number is traceable back to you, you wouldn't be able to use the same phone for more than a day without a huge risk of discovery.

Re:Poor Engineering As A Plus:

[icebike]

But I suspect anyone unconcerned about disposing of their delivery boy (to say nothing of the target) would have no qualms about throwing a cheap/stolen phone in the river.

killer text message

[TiZon]

Talk about a 'killer text message'...

Uniqueness

[jimmerz28]

Maybe they should have came up with a more unique phrase to set off the detonator than "Happy New Year".

Not that I consider blowing yourself up to be overly intelligent, but cmon...

Re:Uniqueness

[The MAZZTer]

I doubt it was that sophisticated; they probably just hooked up the wires for the ringer or vibrator to a detonator instead.

Re:Uniqueness

[Anonymous Coward]

I highly doubt that it read the fucking text message, they bought a disposable phone and set the trigger to go off if any text message came in. They (foolishly) assumed that since no one had the number, they wouldn't get any text messages. Then a message came in from the carrier and they got fucked.

Re:Uniqueness

[Anonymous Coward]

It sounds like it was set to go off when the phone received a text message in general, not one with specific text...

Re:Uniqueness

[Anonymous Coward]

How about "Merry Christmas" instead?

Re:Uniqueness

[Anonymous Coward]

they should have had a custom ring and set it to vibrate. I think some phones can do that. Only calls from certain people will cause a ring the rest will vibrate.

Re:Uniqueness

[jimmerz28]

Yea I need to stop putting myself in their shoes and lower my bar of expectations.

Re:Uniqueness

[jbuck]

yeah. just wired to the vibrator motor leads probably. I mean, it wasn't sophisticated like the Knight Industries Two Thousand, it was a simple bomber jacket.

ha, I just made myself chuckle a little.

Re:Uniqueness

[metamatic]

Something like "Rubber Dinghy Rapids, bro!"?

Re:Uniqueness

[stoanhart]

But then, who uses a smartphone that can receive e-mail as a bomb detonator? I'd use a $15 Nokia, the one with the black and white 15x20 display.

Re:Uniqueness

[s0litaire]

it was an SMS text message not an E-mail which set the bomb off..

Countermeasure

[mark72005]

Interesting. I wonder if this delivery method will cause countermeasures to be used to prevent attacks?

Perhaps governments may look at shutting off text messages in a given area, or from a given set of towers, if they perceive a threat to the area.

Re:Countermeasure

[Haedrian]

Bombs don't kill people. People kill people.

If you block text messages off in an area, only outlaws will have text messages.

end satire.

Re:Countermeasure

[Iamthecheese]

God forbid. Cutting off communications in an area would also be the perfect way to quell descent or to turn an organized protest into a discrediting (for the protesters) riot. And/or disappear people whilst stopping them from telling others they're being arrested.

Re:Countermeasure

[Anonymous Coward]

Or just send constant free "Terror Risk Updates" to an area, to "keep the population informed of the situation".

Re:Countermeasure

[corbettw]

Or how about just preventing people from calling for help if a bomb were to go off? Seems like it would do that, too.

Re:Countermeasure

[Anonymous Coward]

Bombs don't kill people. People kill people.

If you block text messages off in an area, only outlaws will have text messages.

end satire.

People don`t kill people, text messages kill people... RTFA !!!

Re:Countermeasure

[sjames]

That wouldn't do much for long. Calling the phone voice would also set off the bomb. If that starts being blocked as well, the terrorists would just move to simple custom circuits.

Re:Countermeasure

[mark72005]

True - but I thought the downfall of custom circuits was that sometimes the operator chickens out. Obviously, those who plan these devices didn't find manually operated or time controlled mechanisms as effective as this, or they'd still be using them...

It's probably just an academic discussion because really, the chances this was going to happen or will happen again are probably slim.

I'm guessing they used an old phone or a burner that was recently (re-)activated and the spam was just sent to a random telephone number with a known-mobile exchange prefix.

Re:Countermeasure

[laejoh]

Read the article, it's actually: "Bombs don't kill people. Spam kills people!"

Re:Countermeasure

[Anonymous Coward]

Ironically, you are correct. Shutting off text messages will do little to stop someone determined to detonate a bomb. The TSA is rife with this kind of thinking. After the shoe bomber: everyone take off their shoes! After box cutters were used on 9/11: ban box cutters! The box cutters didn't take down the towers, it was destructively creative people. The only way to stop terrorism is to stop the people, not the techniques they use. Infiltrate the organizations, remove the organizers.

Re:Countermeasure

[ToasterMonkey]

Bombs don't kill people. People kill people.

If you block text messages off in an area, only outlaws will have text messages.

end satire.

End the madness, we need strong bomb-control laws!
Even better, lets ban bombs!

Re:Countermeasure

[Mister Whirly]

Exactly. Looking for bad items instead of bad people is why airline security is a joke in the USA. Completely wrong approach.

Re:Countermeasure

[Anonymous Coward]

My right to make car bombs is protected under the 2nd admendment.

Re:Countermeasure

[The Grim Reefer2]

Bombs don't kill people. People kill people.

If you block text messages off in an area, only outlaws will have text messages.

end satire.

People don`t kill people, text messages kill people... RTFA !!!

There's has to be a "In Soviet Russia..." joke in there somewhere.

Re:Countermeasure

[sjames]

I was referring to custom remote operation circuits rather than a simple relay attached to a cellphone's vibrator. For example, a multi-tone detector attached to a simple AM radio receiver.

I primarily mentioned that option to demonstrate that even the extreme measure of blocking all cellphones in all public places wouldn't be enough to prevent suicide bombers on remote control.

As for the false trigger, I imagine it was a broadcast text sent to all of the carrier's customers.

Re:Countermeasure

[qbast]

Yeah, because it is so hard to go back to using walkie talkie or any other short range radio transmitter. Surely no terrorist will think of it.

Re:Countermeasure

[city]

You mean like vodafone just did in Egypt? http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_17226433?source=pkg

Re:Countermeasure

[jbeaupre]

No, you could do just the opposite. I always wondered why they didn't try millions of random calls and text messages in Iraq during the height of cell phone bombings. Could have resulted in dozens or hundreds of premature detonations, maybe even take out a few of the bomb makers. Eventually bombers would find ways to mitigate it, but worth a try.

(hmmm a billion text messages at 10 cents each, now that would have been a bill!)

Re:Countermeasure

[Em Adespoton]

Been to Egypt recently? I hope someone marks you insightful.

LOLZ!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

I can see the spam now:
"B10w ur load urly?" Buy M3dic4l V1a6ra!!!

Re:LOLZ!!!

[EdgeCreeper]

I had a simalar spam titled "Multiple Explosions", amusing in itself.

Irony. It's in the game.

[TheReij]

Who would have ever thought that Spam would save a life?

Re:Irony. It's in the game.

[skuzzlebutt]

In Soviet Russia, even...

Re:Irony. It's in the game.

[TheReij]

Apparently in Soviet Russia, spam blocks death.

Mortals beware.

Re:Irony. It's in the game.

[fridaynightsmoke]

In Soviet Russia, spam deletes YOU?

Re:Irony. It's in the game.

[Notquitecajun]

Who would have ever thought that the meme would ever really come this true...

Re:Irony. It's in the game.

[dadelbunts]

i wish i had mod points still.

Re:Irony. It's in the game.

[Hooya]

The most apropos "In Soviet Russia" joke EVER!!

Kudos, sir, kudos.

Re:Irony. It's in the game.

[Anonymous Coward]

+1

Re:Irony. It's in the game.

[Anonymous Coward]

One second she received a SPAM, the next second she turn into Spam(R).

Re:Irony. It's in the game.

[Anonymous Coward]

This has happened before! In WWII, after the Germans overran the Soviet's farms, Nikita Khruschev was quoted saying "Without Spam, we wouldn’t have been able to feed our army.” So, in a sense, this is history repeating itself.

Re:Irony. It's in the game.

[Chapter80]

Shoot, you got (Score 5: Funny), while my comment 12 minutes earlier apparently got buried.

In Soviet Russia, spam deletes you.
or
In Soviet Russia, SpamAssassin executes you.

Re:Irony. It's in the game.

[fridaynightsmoke]

The Mods move in mysterious ways... (that or people desperately spend their mod points on the last day before they expire, tending to mod posts higher up the page, because they know/think that failing to spend today means failing to receive tomorrow)

I saw your post (and 1 or 2 others) after I posted mine; great minds and all that.. :)

Re:Irony. It's in the game.

[Doctor Faustus]

Actually no, this one is:

The setup:
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/cf1n2/holy_fuck_i_just_saw_someone_get_hit_by_a_train/c0s4de4

(Comments in between mention this was in Russia.)

And here it is:
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/cf1n2/holy_fuck_i_just_saw_someone_get_hit_by_a_train/c0s4nfi

Re:Irony. It's in the game.

[Espressor]

BRILLIANT! Mod parent up please!

I love one of the appreciative comments:

I hope you get 1000 blowjobs this year ;-)

Re:Irony. It's in the game.

[toygeek]

That is incredibly funny! IRIRL (I Laughed In Real Life!)

Re:Irony. It's in the game.

[Paul1969]

In Soviet Russia, even...

You mean this actually happened prior to 1990? :rimshot:

Re:Irony. It's in the game.

[Anonymous Coward]

LOL! I second those kudos!

Re:Irony. It's in the game.

[Anonymous Coward]

Best one yet!

Re:Irony. It's in the game.

[Phantom Gremlin]

I currently have mod points, but I'm responding anyway. Two reasons
1) it's already +5 funny
and even if it wasn't, then
2) the new discussion system is so borked that I don't want to moderate: I can't in good conscience do it, because I simply can't follow all the hidden posts and confusing nesting to make sure I'm doing the right thing.

I haven't had mod points in about 6 months. Once my karma went from positive to good they just disappeared. Before that I had them pretty much every week. Things must be desperate, maybe nobody wants to moderate. Currently there are very few highly rated comments in the posts. So now slashdot is scraping the dregs (e.g. I have mod points again)!

Re:Irony. It's in the game.

[Anonymous Coward]

I beg to differ: http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/cf1n2/holy_fuck_i_just_saw_someone_get_hit_by_a_train/c0s4nfi?context=3

and in the usa you pay up to $0.25 per text for in

[Joe The Dragon]

and in the usa you pay up to $0.25 per text for incoming and you only choice is to block all texts or pay for a plan to get out of it.

spam is no longer a "victimless crime".

[Nadaka]

At least now they can't say that spam never killed anyone.

Re:spam is no longer a "victimless crime".

[McNihil]

actually we can all say now that spam saves lives! .... and there goes the neighborhood.

Re:spam is no longer a "victimless crime".

[FragHARD]

Oh Great!!! now the Islamist's will be going after the spammers that sent their comrade to the virgins.... wait... That is GREAT!!!

Ladies this goes to show...

[Falsify]

Does't matter what type of female you are or what you do. You can never get away from those texting creepers that come around during the holidays!

Good

[Chrisq]

How are we going to rid the world of ISLAM? These peopel make me despair, they won't be happy until they convert or kill us all. There isn't a country in the world that hasn't suffered from this religion of hate

Re:Good

[Nerdfest]

Why stop at Islam?

Re:Good

[i.r.id10t]

Indeed - any fundie is a danger, no matter what invisible sky being they believe in

Re:Good

[Haedrian]

Because Islam burns people as witches.
Abuses underage boys and cover it up
Burn people for saying that the earth goes around the sun
Torture people to make them admit they're jews, then execute them.

Oh wait, wrong religion. Sorry. Carry on.

Re:Good

[cptdondo]

Islam != terrorism.

Please study your religions. Islam is the world's most common religion; only a tiny fraction of its adherents are violent. It's just like saying "How are we going to get rid of Christianity? They wont be happy until they're raped all our children."

Re:Good

[Anonymous Coward]

How are we going to rid the world of CHRISTIANITY? These people make me despair, they won't be happy until they convert or kill us all. There isn't a country in the world that hasn't suffered from this religion of hate.

Re:Good

[Anonymous Coward]

how in the hell has this been moded up? Trolling hate directed at 25% of the world's population (1.5 billion) based on the actions of *very* few. (it's estimated that al-Qaeda has no more than 1000 trained "operatives")

Re:Good

[Anonymous Coward]

Why stop at Islam?

Because picking on unpopular groups is easier.

Re:Good

[Anonymous Coward]

There isn't a country in the world that hasn't suffered from this religion of hate

I'm from ireland, don't think we've "suffered from" Islam, had plenty of it from similar stupid religious crap

Re:Good

[DoofusOfDeath]

How are we going to rid the world of ISLAM? These peopel make me despair, they won't be happy until they convert or kill us all. There isn't a country in the world that hasn't suffered from this religion of hate

My impression is that this has as much to do with Russian unpleasantness in Chechnya, as it does religion.

I'd be intersted to see how much "Islamic" terrorism the West and Russia faced if they stopped pissing on so many Muslims.

Re:Good

[DoofusOfDeath]

Indeed - any fundie is a danger, no matter what invisible sky being they believe in

My impression is that there's a lot more justification (and impetus) for forcible world domination in the Q'uran than there is in the Bible.

Not that that stopped the Western European powers from using it as a justification. But I suspect it was more a pretense for most of those leaders, than it was anything driven by a desire to be good Christians.

Re:Good

[lymond01]

And me without mod points. Not to be a conspiracy theorist, but I imagine there's some group of people who are convincing the mainstream media to air only the unfriendly folks of the Islamic religion. Any extremist belief, be it in a god, policy, linux distro, etc., has the chance to decide they cannot persuade others to choose their path in a logical fashion. So they convince themselves that destruction is a good method. I used to think that there was generally a puppet master or twelve who had ulterior motives to just religious zealotry (money, power, fortune and glory), and these people would use the religious beliefs of others to abide their will (or simply say we'll pay your family X if you blow up A through W).

Lately, I've been thinking there are people who would actually blow themselves and others up in the name of their god. I really hope this isn't true cuz that's just dumb. Like 380 Verbal dumb.

Re:Good

[shoehornjob]

How are we going to rid the world of ISLAM

How are we going to rid the world of ignorant people who can't understnad that all people who believe in Islam are not terrorists and hate the western world. There are plenty of people (not peopel) in the world that interpret the Koran differently from terrorists that already have malice and hatred in their heart. And don't even get me started on all the bad shit the Catholic church has done in the past. You need to broaden your World view and let go of your own hatred.

Re:Good

[Anonymous Coward]

Why stop at Islam?

Right, we can't take any chances. Kill everyone. Let God sort them out.

Re:Good

[o'reor]

I'd be intersted to see how much "Islamic" terrorism the West and Russia faced if they stopped pissing on so many Muslims.

Oh, we all know we'd be all much better off if, like the UK, we allowed shariah to rule our courthouses for our islamic communities.

But for some reason, some of us just can't get over with it and just move on. I'm told it has something to do with democracy, equal rights and social progress, whatever that means... [sarcasm inside]

Re:Good

[Dasher42]

How are we going to rid the world of CHRISTIANITY? They're impossible. They're picketing funerals, shooting doctors, and I even saw one waving "God hates fags" signs in San Francisco without a thought to what the guy next to him with the "God hates corduroy" felt.

Re:Good

[Mashiki]

I'd tend to agree except in the west the fundies are kept in check by other members of the flock for the most part. In Islam they're celebrated, and shining examples to be held up for the rest in many societies. Don't believe me? Take a look at moderate malaysia some time, pakistan is another fine example.

Re:Good

[geekoid]

Depends how you read them. If you are looking for 'signs' in either one that you are to force domination over another you will find it in either text...well ANY lard text anyways. You could find sign in Moby Dick telling you to do what ever it is your looking to do.

Re:Good

[geekoid]

No, you were correct. That's Islam...also most other religeons.

Re:Good

[Anonymous Coward]

It's odd because I've never heard of the Chechens referred to as Islamists before. Always "Chechen Rebel", not "Islamic Terrorist who happens to be from the portion of Russia that has/had a horrible civil war".

Re:Good

[dkleinsc]

Well, last I checked Islam is the second-largest world religion, after Christianity (about 1.5 billion Muslims versus 2.1 billion Christians). Not that that makes your point invalid by any means.

And a real-life example of how unreasonable this all is: What if we had judged all Christians by the behavior of the IRA?

Re:Good

[DoofusOfDeath]

I'd be intersted to see how much "Islamic" terrorism the West and Russia faced if they stopped pissing on so many Muslims.

Oh, we all know we'd be all much better off if, like the UK, we allowed shariah to rule our courthouses for our islamic communities.

I don't see any necessary connection between (just to be concrete in my example) Russia adopts Sharia law, and whether or not Russia forcibly occupies Chechnya.

I do not thing that adoption of Sharia law would be a good thing at all. My point is that maybe the religious arguments that people find compelling when they're under seige by Russia, would be such compelling arguments if they were able to live in peace and independence.

My point is basically that two things are unusual about the Russian suicide bombers, presumably: their religion, and how much Russia is pissing on their region. And maybe its the pissed-on attribute that's a stronger impetus for their suicide bombings than is their religion.

Re:Good

[ElectricTurtle]

Yeah, Islam is more into stoning women who were raped.
Abusing underage girls and claiming cultural/religious license to do so.
Executing people like Theo van Gogh in the street for saying anything negative about Islam.
Kidnapping and torturing people including aid workers until finally taping their slow, agonizing decapitation.

Yeah, Islam has quite a moral high ground there too.

Religion is evil.

Re:Good

[bwashed75]

How are we going to rid the world of $RANDOMBIGGROUP? These peopel make me despair, they won't be happy until they convert or kill us all. There isn't a country in the world that hasn't suffered from this group of hate

There fixed it for ya. This script is more generic.

Re:Good

[cptdondo]

I stand corrected. For some reason I had it in my head the other way around.

Re:Good

[slater.jay]

Because Islam beheads infidels.
Abuses underage girls and advertises it Burns embassies for cartoonists of that nationality running cartoons critical of their religion Torture people to make them admit they're jews, then execute them.

Wow! You can make anyone look bad!

Re:Good

[Eunuchswear]

Oh, we all know we'd be all much better off if, like the UK, we allowed shariah to rule our courthouses for our islamic communities.

You are a lunatic. Please seek psychiatric help.

Re:Good

[Notquitecajun]

Actually, if you do some digging, you may find that there are similar problems within Islam.

Re:Good

[SilverEyes]

Minor correction: Islam is the second largest religion by number of followers. Christianity is the most common religion.

Re:Good

[Nadaka]

Right, so to prevent Islamic fundamentalist terrorism all we have to do is convert to their brand of Islamic fundamentalism, tear down science and knowledge, re-enslave our women, kill all the infidels and submit to the absolute authority of a few wealthy imam. Glad to know. That sounds like a good idea.

Re:Good

[gtall]

Yes, and let's hear from the Muslim Street about what crimes they think are being committed for the sake of their religion: [crickets]

Re:Good

[amicusNYCL]

only a tiny fraction of its adherents are violent.

That's true. But isn't it also true that the vast majority of the world's violent religious extremists are Muslim? Go ahead and compare these two subjects:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_terrorism

Count the Christian terrorist groups, and count the Islamic ones. Notice how Islamic terrorists are just as likely to attack each other, another sect, as they are anyone else.

More to the point, check here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_designated_terrorist_organizations

Compare the ratio of Islamic groups with the rest. If only a tiny fraction of Muslims are violent, why are they, as a group, the largest group of violent extremists? Wouldn't it be appropriately in proportion if there were nearly an equal number of Christian terrorist groups? Why is the proportion so skewed?

Re:Good

[Anonymous Coward]

islam != terrorism? Where do you live buddy?
Or wait you might be one of them, that's why you are going around saying that islam is peaceful. From where i come from, I am a 2nd class citizen if not a 3rd class citizen with no rights. Do you know why ?. Because i am not muslim. People talk trash about me and my community because i am not muslim. This is your religion buddy, Force islam on everyone. If they do not want islam, kill them or make them pay taxes since they are kuffars! The world is starting to wake up, People are reading your supposed so called holy book and are spitting on it.

Btw, Have you ever read your Sahih al Bukhari books? As a good muslim, you should know the life of your prophet, don't you think? You should know how mohamad (Piss Be Upon Him) killed, raped, pillaged and tortured.
You should know also how he died! He died from Poison!
"
Muhammad attacked Khaibar. He destroyed, tortured, murdered, plundered, and enslaved many people (ref Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir, volume 2, page 134, 136, 137). They were not preparing to attack him. A Jewish woman, whose family had been wiped out by Muhammad, put poison into a lamb and fed it to Muhammad and the other Muslims. Muhammad ingested some of the poisoned lamb and began to feel it's effects. He died three years later as a result of the poisoning."

  Is this why you hate Jews and you call them pigs? :)
i think you should study your own religion before saying that islam is not terrorism.
I hope the west wakes up and smells the f'in coffee. islam is not a religion but an ideology just like fascism.

Re:Good

[dasunt]

My impression is that there's a lot more justification (and impetus) for forcible world domination in the Q'uran than there is in the Bible.

I would suggest rereading your bible, than reading a good translation of the Koran.

From the bible, there's passages such as "The LORD is a man of war" (Exodus 15:3), and is supported by other passages such as "And the LORD our God delivered him before us; and we smote him, and his sons, and all his people. And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain." (Deut. 2:33-35).

The biblical account of the Israelis' conquest of the south Levant is pretty bloody and full of genocide.

Plus there are such commands as killing everyone in a city who preach about another religion "If thou shalt hear ... men ... saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which ye have not known ... Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword." (Deut. 13:12-17), and kill family members that try to get you to convert "If thy brother ... or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods ... Thou shalt not consent unto him ... neither shall thine eye pity him ... But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people." (Deut. 13:6-10).

One can find plenty of advocacy for genocidal conquest in the Christian Bible.

Re:Good

[Notquitecajun]

Here's the present issue. The number of violent Islamists - or those who support them - are a greater percentage - VASTLY greater - than in Christianity, and Islam has done a VERY poor job of self-policing.

Re:Good

[Bardez]

Three of your four no longer occur. It may just be me, but past offenses (an offense over, say, ten years old) do not condemn a modern body, whereas present actions do. This is akin to me making me partially responsible for slavery in the Unites States because I had ancestors here. Your second example unfortunately happens in every society everywhere, Christian or not. Also, Catholic is a subset of Christian.

Presently, a woman can be stoned for being raped in many Muslim countries. That's pretty fucking savage behavior.

Re:Good

[Notquitecajun]

For those who don't get the above joke, Westboro Baptist accounts for something like 25 people.

Re:Good

[stdarg]

I don't see any necessary connection between (just to be concrete in my example) Russia adopts Sharia law, and whether or not Russia forcibly occupies Chechnya.

The Chechen resistance is a jihad to establish Muslim self-rule in Chechnya. But jihads don't necessarily stop when their immediate objectives are achieved, and when they do stop they're not necessarily at the borders that non-Muslims had established.

My point is that maybe the religious arguments that people find compelling when they're under seige by Russia, would be such compelling arguments if they were able to live in peace and independence.

Ah, but can they live in peace and independence? Or will there be another excuse later on.. Russia is stealing their natural resources, Russia is corrupting their political parties, etc. Look at Pakistan's relationship with India where you see the exact same arguments, and of course the underlying theme that no true Muslim will submit to Hindu-Zionist power (i.e. work together, give up terrorist "strategic depth", all that crazy stuff). Perhaps India would have been better off treating Pakistan as Russia treats Chechnya. They'd have the same amount of terrorism but wouldn't have to be in a nuclear arms race and wouldn't have to have a million troops permanently stationed the border.

My point is basically that two things are unusual about the Russian suicide bombers, presumably: their religion, and how much Russia is pissing on their region. And maybe its the pissed-on attribute that's a stronger impetus for their suicide bombings than is their religion.

In what sense is Islam an unusual religion for suicide bombers?

Anyway, my problem with your statement is you are ignoring the wealth of Islamic terrorism examples we have to draw from. Heck just a few days ago a teenager blew himself up in Pakistan to kill some Shias. In case you're unfamiliar with it, let me give you a little background info. Shias are a minority Muslim sect in Pakistan. The Sunnis are not being "pissed on" in any way shape or form. They dominate Pakistan in the army, in politics, in civil rights, etc.

My point is, perhaps Chechen terrorists are motivated by Russia's actions towards them, but to pretend that their religion plays no role in how they respond to Russia's actions is ludicrous. And perhaps more importantly, their culture, and the Islamic influence on their culture, plays a HUGE role in determining what actions by Russia are deemed provocative to begin with. Here's a great 3-part article on the interactions of the Bolsheviks with the Muslim population.

I'm not saying Chechnya is at fault or that they are morally wrong for resisting Russian rule (I'm not saying the opposite either). I'm just saying you should not ignore Islam's influence on their culture and more importantly their relationship with other cultures.

Re:Good

[maxume]

I saw Fox news giving a woman airtime to argue that Muslims were not all terrorists.

I watched it for 15 seconds, and they did have a guy there to roll his eyes and argue the counterpoint, but they weren't exactly not airing what she was saying.

Re:Good

[Anonymous Coward]

Those aren't true Christians, they're a group of roughly 200 radical, ultra-conservative nutcases based out of Topeka, KS who think that anyone who isn't part of their congregation or who doesn't subscribe to their specific set of beliefs is surely hated by G_d. Fred Phelps, the leader of the congregation, is an insane bastard who basically sends his "followers" around the country to protest anything and everything they can that is incompatible with those beliefs, regardless of whether it makes any sense or what exactly the conflict even is. They follow him blindly, and are the prime reason why the First Amendment should not cover hate speech.

I disagree with the premises of the Christian faith, but I have to believe in my heart that even the most fundamentalist of true Christians would denounce the behavior of these nutcases.

Re:Good

[GameboyRMH]

A Muslim friend of mine doesn't consider Al Qaeda etc. to be Muslim at all. He says they're "totally confused."

Re:Good

[LanMan04]

If only a tiny fraction of Muslims are violent, why are they, as a group, the largest group of violent extremists?

You forgot to add "at the moment".

It's because of the current state of geopolitics. Give it 200 years or so and it'll be the Hindus, or Christians, or some other group.

Go back 30 years. 50 years. 100 years. There were still a many millions of Muslims in the world at those times. Islam certainly hasn't fundamentally changed since then (heck, "radical" Wahhabi-ism started in the 1700s), so why is it JUST NOW that there are a lot of Muslim terrorists?

Geopolitics.

Re:Good

[LanMan04]

Religions don't "self police". Anyone can join a religion who wants to, and can act as wacky in the name of said religion as they want to.

It's not like terrorists need approval to say "I'm killing people in the name of Islam" or something.

Re:Good

[theArtificial]

Depends how you read them. If you are looking for 'signs' in either one that you are to force domination over another you will find it in either text...well ANY lard text anyways. You could find sign in Moby Dick telling you to do what ever it is your looking to do.

*snicker* Is it made to appeal to fatties?

Re:Good

[Mashiki]

One can find plenty of advocacy for genocidal conquest in the Christian Bible.

Really? Because I was pretty sure Christianity had 3 or 8 or so reformations where the various religious leaders due to the people saying. Nah this shit isn't kosher. But hey maybe I'm living in an alternate universe to the rest of you, and this stuff that's actually happened didn't actually happen.

Re:Good

[amicusNYCL]

While it's true we can't ignore geopolitics, these issues don't happen in a vacuum, I think you should also look up the history of the word "assassin".

The fedayeen were the ardent followers of Hasan-i Sabbah (d. 1124), a leader of Ismail Shia in Iran, Iraq, and in Syria. Known to the west as the Assassins. The Assassins are regarded as "the first group to make systematic use of murder as a political weapon." Established in Iran and Syria in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, they used assassination and terrorism with the aim of overthrowing Sunni Islam's order and establishing their own.

In the 1890s the Shiite leadership in Iran became very involved in violence, terrorism via Fedayeen-i Islam. The "self-sacrifice" or devoutees of Islam under Shi'ite theologian, they've targeted British and Russian officials for assassination.

The Ayatollah was very involved with the Fedayeen Islam who had a "network of holy killers engaged in repeated attempts at political assassinations." In 1944 he published: Kashf al-Asrar ("the Revealing of Secrets"), served as a guidance for the violent Fedayeen. Indeed, the militant group covered for the Ayatollah Khomeini until he became in power.

In 1928, Hassan al-Banna founded the Muslim Brotherhood, a rigidly conservative and highly secretive Egyptian-based organization dedicated to resurrecting a Muslim empire (Caliphate). According to al-Banna, "It is the nature of Islam to dominate, not to be dominated, to impose its law on all nations and to extend its power to the entire planet."

History records instances of the "call for jihad" being invoked by Islamic leaders to legitimate wars of conquest. According to the Center for the Study of Political Islam (CSPI), this has led to the killing through Jihad of around 270 million non-Muslims in the Middle East, Africa and South Asia over the last 1400 years.

Most of those are from the wikipedia article on jihad.

The AOL spam

[SuperKendall]

"You've Got Fail"

Someone's got to say it....

[Anonymous Coward]

In Soviet Russia, spam blocks you.

Re:Someone's got to say it....

[Digicaf]

Best use ever.

Re:Someone's got to say it....

[Anonymous Coward]

In Soviet Russia, spam deletes you.

Re:Someone's got to say it....

[Chapter80]

In Soviet Russia, spam blocks you.

I prefer:
In Soviet Russia, spam deletes you.
or
In Soviet Russia, SpamAssassin executes you.

Re:Someone's got to say it....

[Anonymous Coward]

+7, Funny.

If you're making a bomb anyway

[Iamthecheese]

All it would take is a day's prep, an extra chip and 10 minutes of work to make it only blow up if, say, the message contains 5 a's. Tie the text out to something to check for the right 1's and 0's. This was shoddy workmanship.

Re:If you're making a bomb anyway

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Worse than that. Virtually any cheapass phone allows you to set specific ring/vibration combinations for specific numbers. Set the trigger number to "vibrate", connect the vibration motor driver to the detonation stage, and set the default to "silent". Should take 25 seconds or so. Maybe a few minutes if VZ designed the interface...

Re:If you're making a bomb anyway

[LighterShadeOfBlack]

All it would take is a day's prep, an extra chip and 10 minutes of work to make it only blow up if, say, the message contains 5 a's. Tie the text out to something to check for the right 1's and 0's. This was shoddy workmanship.

You're talking about rudimentary programming for people who haven't even figured out that they could take the bomb off before detonating it. Gotta walk before you can run.

Re:If you're making a bomb anyway

[Anonymous Coward]

That sounds like a lot of effort. Why not just have the bomber turn the phone off until she's in theater so your failyer mode goes from "total failyer and loss of agent" to "sub-optimal efficiency"?

Re:If you're making a bomb anyway

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe detonation by spam isn't as common or costly enough for them to think that it is worth that extra 25 seconds.
Perhaps they are using a documented process and the cost of updating the process documents are larger than the loss they have when they follow them.

Re:If you're making a bomb anyway

[jburroug]

Or even more idiot proof - don't turn the phone on / plug it into the bomb until you're ready to start the bombing run...

Re:If you're making a bomb anyway

[bugs2squash]

big pack Viagra 4 sale now cheap...

Re:If you're making a bomb anyway

[LongearedBat]

Don't worry. I'm sure he won't do it again.

Re:If you're making a bomb anyway

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

I'm not sure whether a terrorist organization whose thinking includes "Consider cost of updating process documents" would be a good or a bad thing.

On the minus side, it would suggest that they've been allowed to grow to enormous size under our noses. On the plus side, it would suggest a degree of institutional sclerosis so crippling as to render them doomed in the long term.

Re:If you're making a bomb anyway

[shutdown -p now]

The usual way of triggering the detonator is via vibrate, actually. It's just that those folks have forgot it set it up such that it would only vibrate for one specific number.

Re:and in the usa you pay up to $0.25 per text for

[leuk_he]

Well, this message came from the carrier. That one could have been free.

In Europe Only the sender pays a charge (exception: when you are in a foreign country).

So, Weekly World News was right!

[Applekid]

Sure, everyone laughed the first time around. Not so funny now, eh?

Re:So, Weekly World News was right!

[geekoid]

Are you kidding me? it's even more funny now.

Re:and in the usa you pay up to $0.25 per text for

[CTalkobt]

AFAIK, It's pretty much always been free to block SMS. I've done it on all cell plans I've had (various carriers over the past 10-12 years). They don't like to advertise / push it - but if you ask how they'll certainly tell you and it's not complicated.

After all, you should be in charge of your bill - not somebody spamming you w/ SMS texts.

My wife and I use google talk to get around lack of SMS, which ironically probably costs the telco more but costs us less.

"Charges may apply"

[Falsify]

No pun intended ;)

Re:"Charges may apply"

[Nadaka]

That made my day. Great joke.

Re:"Charges may apply"

[Falsify]

No problem ;)

Not another excuse for spam

[rickb928]

Great. Now spam is an anti-terrorism tool. Is there no escape?

Re:Not another excuse for spam

[confused one]

That's what I was thinking... Now they'll send out periodic SMS to everyone for some time.

Re:Not another excuse for spam

[Anonymous Coward]

In other news, TSA announced plans to send daily text messages to all phones in the US (hourly for subscribers on a new watch list *).

"Americans must understand that this is an essential tool in the fight against terrorism, together with the new mandatory cellphone proximity regulations. You have nothing to be concerned about unless you are engaged in acts of terrorism," said a spokesperson.

However, following widespread negative coverage, a hasty retraction was issued. "Anyone who does not wish to carry their cellphone on their person at all times will be able to request a prisoner tracking device instead".

* The watch list will include anyone who has visited the so-called "real world" outside of the US, or has the same area code or last name as a "real world" visitor

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[Lord Byron II]

The "story" is a little light on details. The suicide bomber has no name and no location is given, other than she was in a "safe house". Why wasn't this news four weeks ago, when it was New Year's? Why do they think it was an errant text message that set the bomb off and not just a defective trigger (after all, the phone should have been destroyed in the blast)?

I expect to see this on Snopes shortly.

Why do I suspect the phone's ringtone was...

[RevWaldo]

..."Those Endearing Young Charms"
.
.
(testing - this should be in italics)

Re:Why do I suspect the phone's ringtone was...

[Anonymous Coward]

For now, until slashdot is fixed, use the em tag to get italics.

Interactive TV, Jack! Wave of the future - ha ha h

[Joe The Dragon]

Interactive TV, Jack! Wave of the future - ha ha ha, huh?

Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[jaymz2k4]

It seems rather dangerous to have it set off with any incoming SMS. You'd think they could've invested in the time to hook it to at least only respond to a particular number.

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[Anonymous Coward]

They're suicide bombers, danger has a whole other meaning for them.

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[martas]

It's probably a very crude device, where they attach the speaker/vibrator wires directly to a detonator... Anything more sophisticated/selective would probably require more expensive equipment. I'm sure cost is of at least some concern to them.

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[Anonymous Coward]

that knowledge/equipment may be a little outside of the average terrorist group, one thing is to hook up some wires to the speaker of a cheap cellphone and other thing is a gsm module connected to a detonator.

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not... They usually just wire the detonator to the vibrate motor supply and keep the number secret. Terrorist attacks aren't really orchestrated by MI6. Anyways, I'm not aware of any phones that offer message filtering... The only real possibility I can think of is having an MMS specific ring setting (offered by BlackBerries at least), but that wouldn't completely solve the "problem" and MMS may be more delay prone which would kind of defeat the point.

Anyways, the point is that terrorists (esp. like these) aren't terribly sharp. Failures like these are much more common than not. But what do you expect from people with nothing better to do then blow themselves up?

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[jaymz2k4]

Isn't losing an entire willing bomber + explosives with no target fatalities a much bigger cost loss then? You'd think they would've forseen this sort of thing. Someone needs to draw some use-case diagrams I think.

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[Anonymous Coward]

So set the number to a selected ring group, and only have that ring group vibrate / ring. Easy peasy.

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[RobertLTux]

you forget a couple things

1 the bomber may not exactly be willing and there is an effectively unlimited supply of willing bombers

2 all the supplies can be stolen

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[ToasterMonkey]

It seems rather dangerous to have it set off with any incoming SMS. You'd think they could've invested in the time to hook it to at least only respond to a particular number.

Maybe "spam" is a cover for a covert state agency knowingly sending the detonate signal in an uncontrolled, but relatively safe environment.

I'm being serious.

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[MattSausage]

Outstanding, you are a winner. Please continue to come up with easy peasy ways for terrorists to keep from blowing up due to their own lack of foresight. Perhaps you can give them some tips on how to best pack their vests to do maximum damage.

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[Anonymous Coward]

I imagine that it works simply by the speaker circuit being connected.
If the phone could be set to "silent except for calls from x", then what you propose is possible.

Personally, I'd pick up a new phone for doing this sort of thing.

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[rsborg]

It's probably a very crude device, where they attach the speaker/vibrator wires directly to a detonator... Anything more sophisticated/selective would probably require more expensive equipment. I'm sure cost is of at least some concern to them.

Still doesn't explain why they didn't use a different SIM card/account (one that had no expectation of receiving other messages). Sounds pretty basic to me... I mean, what would have happened if that SMS arrived inadvertently while the bomb was being outfitted by the tech? Then you lose a bomb, the bomber, and the tech...

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[schlachter]

Yea like a friends and family plan. Pick 5 numbers.

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure cost is of at least some concern to them.

Other than the human cost.

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[Anonymous Coward]

They probably had such a "special" SIM for just this one use. It is the carrier who apparently decided to send New Years greetings to all subscribers...

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[Anonymous Coward]

But why not have the device attached to the speaker, with all numbers except one set to silent?

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[Anonymous Coward]

so how hard is it to hook to the phones vibrator and see the phone to silent mode with an exception to vibrate from a particular number from the addy book? The phone used likely could of done this.

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're about to kill yourself, why not use a little bit more money to make sure you do it right? I mean, you're not going to be using that money once your dead. I'm sure whoever's inheriting it isn't gonna miss a little bit.

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[Anonymous Coward]

Martyrs are cheap and not too bright. Good phones are expensive.

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure cost is of at least some concern to them.

Why? The bomber doesn't exactly need to worry about paying back his creditors.

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[LynnwoodRooster]

Other than the cost of the bomb? Not really. There's a pretty big supply of willing suicide bombers, so it's really a couple hundred dollars of explosives and shrapnel that you lose.

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe they'll learn to keep the battery in their other pocket until show time.

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes but even so, mobile phones have been able to react differently (different ring tones, buzz, silence) for different caller groups for *ages* now. This wouldn't have required any investment, just a tiny tiny amount of knowledge....

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[Anonymous Coward]

It's probably a very crude device, where they attach the speaker/vibrator wires directly to a detonator... Anything more sophisticated/selective would probably require more expensive equipment. I'm sure cost is of at least some concern to them.

Any cheap consumer phone today has settings to use selectively ring for a particular person. They could have enabled silent mode except for one specific person.

It's not about cost: they just didn't know. Now they know. So don't get too excited about SMS spam.

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[dasqua]

They are unconcerned about the loss of human life, only the fear it creates.

Mobile phones on the other hand actually cost money.

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a lie. There would be no reason to attach a remote detonator to a suicide bomber. He can detonate the explosive himself.

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[FShort]

My guess is the dev work was outsourced

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[Archwyrm]

Even stealing has a cost, if only time.

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[RightwingNutjob]

The saving grace of Western civilization is that while much of the rest of the world is sufficiently uncivilized to be susceptible to Islamic extremism, it seems that an overwhelming majority of candidate True Believers are too damn stupid to learn to fly airplanes, not blow themselves up, or even aim when they shoot.

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, now they only have to pay for one more suicide bomber, one more vest, and one more box of dynamite and nails!

Oh, and a roll of duct tape.

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm guessing there is a lack of skilled engineers in the Islamic terrorist club. The kind of searching curiosity that leads people to become great engineers doesn't seem compatible with any kind of strict religious fundamentalism.

Re:Surprised they weren't doing *any* filtering

[thetaco82]

My old roommate and I once hacked up a remote starter for his car using an old cell phone. To avoid exactly this problem, I just used the phone's ability to only ring/vibrate for specific contacts.

How about we send everybody a text

[alta]

Ok, this will only work a few times, and soon the terrorists would find other ways to detonate....

Every now and then the phone company can randomly send a text message. Or, since the bomb is probably tied to the speaker, just send half a ring. just something small. And do it more often near holidays or major events where people gather (like, before the superbowl, send everyone a text message)

No need to send to EVERYONE, just everyone in areas where people gather...

Re:How about we send everybody a text

[nedlohs]

No need to send to EVERYONE, just everyone in areas where people gather.

It's a bit late by that point, surely the idea is to trigger it before they get into an area where people gather...

Re:How about we send everybody a text

[Anonymous Coward]

No need to send to EVERYONE, just everyone in areas where people gather.../I.

Of course by that time it's too late and you've done the bomber's work for them.

Re:How about we send everybody a text

[Anonymous Coward]

You suggestion fails:
-I is a security theater. If this is covered bombers will refine their technology.
-You need to send/call people NOT in crowds. If you send it to a bomb in a crowd you just triggered the bomb.
-But your Method beats the voluntary Denial Of Service some police make by shutting off all mobile phones in a area to preven futher bombers... that also hampers the aid....

Re:How about we send everybody a text

[roc97007]

> Every now and then the phone company can randomly send a text message.

I think they already do that. It's usually an ad for some sort of AT&T add-on.

Re:How about we send everybody a text

[Anonymous Coward]

... because ofcourse in areas where people gather, it would be safe to explode a bomb...

Re:How about we send everybody a text

[sabt-pestnu]

Or, perhaps, "everyone connected to Cell towers X, Y, and Z".

Even better: Have as great aerial coverage as you can, and investigate the dust clouds, instant seismic disturbances, and sudden disconnects....

Re:How about we send everybody a text

[Anonymous Coward]

Why not sent a SMS to EVERYONE on special days like this? Just do it randomly an hour or two before the event. It will cost almost nothing for a carrier to do this (unless its on roaming or international). Their biggest cost will be the partial salary paid to some guy to type in the "Happy New Year" message and click Submit.

Re:How about we send everybody a text

[joeme1]

This could have worked the other way. If she had been in a crowded bus when receiving the text, and ended up heading to an area that wasn't as crowded as she had hoped, it could have been the opposite, and no one would have been wiser. Random texts or half rings would irritate more than save lives. You can never be sure that the bomber isn't in a preschool dropping off her kids before going to blow up somewhere else.

Re:How about we send everybody a text

[alta]

I would say that if she's an aspiring young terrorist, and she wants to blow up as many as possible, she's going to realize that the bus is a better target and manually detonate...

Now, what if she's on her way to a bombing in a truck with her 7 other suicide bombing buddies.... Great!

What if you managed to catch the bomber and their handler in the same place (who said terrorists are smart... NYC, pathfinder, fail.

Re:How about we send everybody a text

[alta]

Good point, then I'd say we send it before the event gets crowded...

Or perhaps to all towers around the event, but not at the event...

Or perhaps this is just a bad idea all together because as soon as we figure out a way to do this right, people are going to stop using cell phones and move to something else.

Re:How about we send everybody a text

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok, this will only work a few times, and soon the terrorists would find other ways to detonate....

Every now and then the phone company can randomly send a text message. Or, since the bomb is probably tied to the speaker, just send half a ring. just something small. And do it more often near holidays or major events where people gather (like, before the superbowl, send everyone a text message)

No need to send to EVERYONE, just everyone in areas where people gather...

Right, so the solution is to detonate them at random without knowing where they might be, who they might be with, or how many people they might be around?
Great idea, fucktard.

Re:How about we send everybody a text

[alta]

It beats the terrorist method of intentionally exploding when near a massive amount of people. Hey, and every now and then you'll get lucky and blow up a bunch of terrorists together.

Idiot...

ORLY?

[knetcomp]

How could anyone know this happened? Did they interview the bomber's handler after the incident?

Re:ORLY?

[Anonymous Coward]

How could anyone know this happened? Did they interview the bomber's handler after the incident?

No need to interview; simple forensic analysis.

For this type of bomb, the blasting cap is simply wired in place of the vibrate motor. There would be enough of the cellphone left after the explosion to determine that such was the case. Also, the you can determine from the sim card (or from cell tower records if the sim card is missing or unreadable) what cell phone it was. A simple record search for activity (either a call or a text) sent to that phone, correlated to the approximate time of the explosion, and you've connected the dots to a high degree of probability.

Re:ORLY?

[PlusFiveTroll]

Unless there is a terrible fire after the detonation, bombs don't destroy as much as you'd think. It just blows little tiny pieces everywhere, given a detailed investigation the pieces can be found and some of what occurred can be pieced back together. Three things probably tipped them off pretty quickly...

Remains of a bomb vest were found.
Pieces of an altered cell phone where found and it number was identified.
The cell phone company showed a sms sent to the phone around the same time the bomb detonated.

Hell, it could have been something else, the bombers phone could have rang, scaring him so bad he did something unintentional to set the vest off.

Racism about Islam does not help you

[captainpanic]

How are we going to rid the world of ISLAM? These peopel make me despair, they won't be happy until they convert or kill us all. There isn't a country in the world that hasn't suffered from this religion of hate

You make me despair. How are we going to get rid of the STUPID people who, without blinking, generalize about a billion people? There isn't a country in the world that hasn't suffered from this racist stupidity.

Re:Racism about Islam does not help you

[Anonymous Coward]

Islam is not a race.

Re:Racism about Islam does not help you

[Gunnut1124]

I think the OP was talking about getting rid of the religion, not the people... Religion is patently bad. The people behind the religion aren't...

Re:Racism about Islam does not help you

[Anonymous Coward]

How are we going to get rid of the STUPID people who, without blinking, generalize about a billion people?

You're calling him stupid? Of COURSE you can generalize about a billion people who have in common a belief system.

I can tell you right now, Muslims generally believe in Allah and they believe Mohammed was a prophet.

Oh noooo I'm raaaaacist

Re:Racism about Islam does not help you

[Anonymous Coward]

Racist? It's a religion we're talking about, not a race. I tire of stupid people that claim "racist" at the drop of a hat for things that have nothing to do with the act in question.

Re:Racism about Islam does not help you

[theArtificial]

You make me despair. How are we going to get rid of the STUPID people who, without blinking, generalize about a billion people? There isn't a country in the world that hasn't suffered from this racist stupidity.

Person A laments stupidity while actively preaching it. Islam is not a race.

Money well spent

[lioc]

We spend a fortune on "security" but still one of the best methods appears to be to rely on the bombers themselves to screw it up as best they can. Shame that they are not more reliable at this.

Took that Verizon bastard?

[ilkensai]

I hope she took that Verizon bastard with her.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[omnichad]

I suspect you answered your own question. It took time to figure all this stuff out, going through records and such, and that's why it's only now being reported on.

US Lawmakers...

[Itesh]

February 2nd 2011
Associated Press

"Both houses of Congress passed a bill that requires all US Cell Phone companies to send one free text message every hour to all mobile phone user in the country." This controversial bill is aimed at stopping any attempted suicide bomber attacks. Opponents of the bill say...

Re:US Lawmakers...

[Ogive17]

In related news, the cell phone bill of every person in the US is expected to go up by $5 per month beginning in March.

SPAM = Saving People At Moscow

[webbiedave]

Tastes fine, saves lives.

Seems to me...

[hAckz0r]

It seems to me that this is finally a pretty good reason for having a feature enabled like call forwarding. Send the bloody message back to the handler instead.

</humor>

Quite frankly this has a darker story. The handler can't trust the person to push their own button, so the handler does it remotely without the persons consent. That would imply that a number of people have failed to do what they have been psychologically coerced to believe what their duty, when its not something they really wanted to do in the first place. Feelings of despair and insignificance are easily played upon by psychotic individuals.

Re:Seems to me...

[NicknamesAreStupid]

Actually, it may have to do with the fact that many religions forbid suicide. Dying at another's hand can still get you into heaven. I know it sounds like a loophole, because it is. Loophole: defined as a small hole in a wall, used from discharging weapons. Look it up.

Re:Seems to me...

[Anonymous Coward]

Quite frankly this has a darker story. The handler can't trust the person to push their own button, so the handler does it remotely without the persons consent.

The bomb carrier can get grabbed or shot by security forces, and the handler can still detonate the bomb

Re:Seems to me...

[BenFenner]

Another reason might be that the handler is higher up and has the best vantage point to see when to detonate (to do the most harm). That's what the summary made me believe anyway.

Re:Seems to me...

[Anonymous Coward]

It is possible that she didn't even know that she had a bomb...

Re:Seems to me...

[bugs2squash]

What a line they tread: Wanting the bomber to believe it is not suicide but the public to believe that it is a desperate act of self sacrifice. How does anyone get to the point where they feel they can keep full faith and somehow pull one over on their god ?

Re:Seems to me...

[Notquitecajun]

Militant Islamism doesn't. It celebrates suicide, which is why it's more prevalent in that religion.

Re:Seems to me...

[Arccot]

I took it as people trying to activate their own devices are more easily suspected and caught before detonation. In cases like this, even when the carrier is caught or incapacitated, a handler can detonate before evacuation or disarming can occur.

Re:Seems to me...

[kent_eh]

It seems to me that this is finally a pretty good reason for having a feature enabled like call forwarding. Send the bloody message back to the handler instead.

</humor>

Quite frankly this has a darker story. The handler can't trust the person to push their own button, so the handler does it remotely without the persons consent.

Which means that calling them "suicide bombers" is even more of a misnomer than it already is.
The person carrying the bomb was murdered, just like the entirely innocent people in their vicinity.
Not saying the person walking around with a bomb in their backpack is innocent,just that they aren't necessarily committing suicide either

Re:Seems to me...

[ToasterMonkey]

Quite frankly this has a darker story. The handler can't trust the person to push their own button, so the handler does it remotely without the persons consent. That would imply that a number of people have failed to do what they have been psychologically coerced to believe what their duty, when its not something they really wanted to do in the first place. Feelings of despair and insignificance are easily played upon by psychotic individuals.

Don't be a dipshit. Any remotely intelligent person would wonder why you'd do suicide bombing any other way. Relying on the bomber themselves to do this would be a huge sign these were not professionals. It says way more about the people behind the bombings than the people used for them.

You want to suggest that lack of follow-through is an indication that someone is sickly taken advantage of. How darker could it be than for someone to think even for a minute that blowing themselves up is a solution to any problem? Doing the deed does not in any way mean a suicide bomber was 'OK' in the head and not manipulated by a number of external things.

Re:Seems to me...

[GameboyRMH]

I think that's what the handler tells the bomber so he doesn't have to say "The reason I'm controlling the bomb is so you can't chicken out."

Re:Seems to me...

[Kjella]

I'm not a big expert on nutbag ideology but after all the person goes out there in the crowd wearing or carrying the damn thing. Perhaps by the bomber not knowing when the bomb will go off and the handler not knowing exactly where the bomber is think this is more like fate, that it's Allah's will who lives and dies? Or they see themselves more like soldiers, they're willing to sacrifice their lives and so it is "valid" but it doesn't mean they have to commit suicide. In any case, you're trying to apply logic to a religious fundamentalist terrorist. Maybe the voices in his head told him, or the sect leader that he trust implicitly said it was fine, they call it blind faith for a reason. And ultimately if you could understand it would only be like watching into the mind of a serial killer, the wires just go different than in everybody else.

Re:Seems to me...

[tibman]

In iraq, it was not uncommon for the VBIED (vehicle borne improvised explosive device) driver to be handcuffed to the steering wheel. This is very similar to your "The handler can't trust the person to push their own button".

I don't have much experience with suicide vests but they are usually detonated by the wearer. This way they can go in with guns first and detonate when/if they become incapacitated by return fire. I'm also pretty sure that suicide bombers wear the vest for long periods beforehand. So they become accustomed to the vest and act natually in it.

I agree with you on all points. The bombers themselves weren't trained anythings.. they were puppets who couldn't be trusted by their parent organization. So they weren't soldiers for their cause.. more like they had more reasons to die than live.

Re:Seems to me...

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.rand.org/pubs/reprints/RP1187/index2.html

'A policeman told me, "There was one event where a suicide bomber had been told all he had to do was to carry the bomb and plant explosives in a certain place. But the bomb was remote-control detonated."'

Re:Seems to me...

[Anonymous Coward]

Or they didn't plan on being a suicide bomber, can still be a terrorist without killing yourself.

Re:Seems to me...

[Anonymous Coward]

or, also likely, the handler is situated in a high position where
1) they can see the layout of passersby to optimize damage,
2) react if the bomber gets killed, stunned or restrained by security forces.

OMG

[ed__]

This story is hilarious! I'm gonna text it to all my terrorist friends right now!

Re:OMG

[Anonymous Coward]

That's nice for you. Thanks for sharing.

I'm off to the toilet now, just so you know.

Re:OMG

[Anonymous Coward]

Doubt they'll reply. Glad I am not your frie

Re:OMG

[Anonymous Coward]

You got a +5 Funny but I think you may have also earned a prominent position on the watch list.

Sad...

[Lumpy]

Because 90% of women bombers are forced to do it. the scumbag Islamic terrorists either start killing their children, or threaten to kill their kids to make the woman do the deed. In fact a cellphone detonator means she could not be trusted to blow herself up so her Islamic torturer needed to have control of her death to make them happy.

All you flag wavers saying "dumb bitch" are uninformed as to how Utterly Disgraceful and lack of Honor these Islamic Terrorists are.

Re:Sad...

[TravisHein]

Right. How come her husband gets off easy by being put in jail. That only temporarily prevents him from doing this again, which most likely will when he gets out. If only he could just be executed.

Re:Sad...

[bill_mcgonigle]

In fact a cellphone detonator means she could not be trusted to blow herself

Good insight, Mr. Lumpy. I'm breaking my no-comments-until-they-fix-the-css pledge because this deserves it.

Re:Sad...

[drinkypoo]

I don't think anyone should be surprised when a woman chooses to blow up herself and some strangers instead of her children. I do not, however, think anyone should give her a free pass because her children were in danger. None of us is qualified to judge who is more deserving of life because none of us is omniscient. Therefore the only responsible thing to do in this situation is choose death for you and yours.

Or in short, choosing to become a suicide bomber instead of watching your family die is utterly disgraceful and lacks honor. You can condemn the act, however, without condeming the person (who is presumably aerosolized and heading off to meet the maker if there is such a thing.) That is, unless you have been in that position, it's a bit arrogant to be judging someone's decisions.

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

That is the twisted disgusting mess that is Sheria law..

Women are not human, but objects that can be killed for any reason. and men get no punishment for what their wives do or what they do to their wives.

Honestly, all parts of Islam are evil and downright horrible, I cant believe anyone would willingly become one. They make Christianity look like nice people with a harm nobody love everyone attitude.

I would like for someone to please defend Islam and the pure hate it seethes towards non islams and women.

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

...and 90% of statistics are made up...

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd like to start a thread debating the relative honor of Islamic terrorists. Bill Maher can moderate.

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

My understanding is that the remote-kill switch is standard procedure in all suicide bombings. There is always an observer with a remote switch in case the bomber has second thoughts.

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

Remote detonation is a good idea for willing bombers too. They are going to be extremely stressed and fiddling with the detonator might blow them up too early or be too conspicuous. They might also freeze. Even if they can detonate themselves a remote backup is useful if security personnel notice something and pin the bomber's arms.

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

all parts of Islam are evil and downright horrible, I cant believe anyone would willingly become one.

Unless you're a man. Then you can just kill your wives and daughters if they don't join you.

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

87% of all statistics are made up on the spot. Now that that's out of the way, it could be totally true that she didn't do this willingly. In the end it doesn't matter. She was willing to go into an area and let herself blow up, for whatever reason, to try to cause terror and hurt others. She got what she deserved in the end. Any terrorist who's justification is religion is the lowest caliber of person. This includes Islamic terrorist, and even people who bomb abortion clinics. If she didn't have the strength to do what was right which is not try to blow other people up, even if her kids were being used as pawns, then it's no one's fault but hers. If she did decide to sacrific herself to save her kids, what is the end game in that? She's now dead and there is no one to protect her kids from growing up just to be used as bombers themselves. In the end, we're probably not going to know her reason for strapping on a bomb cause she's dead. Any way you look at it she basically got what she deserved.

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

Because 90% of women bombers are forced to do it. the scumbag Islamic terrorists either start killing their children, or threaten to kill their kids to make the woman do the deed. In fact a cellphone detonator means she could not be trusted to blow herself up so her Islamic torturer needed to have control of her death to make them happy.

Citation needed. Please name your sources and explain why they are credible before you start hurling insults.

Re:Sad...

[waperboy]

If we had no emotions this might be reasonable, but the reality is that it's more or less hardwired into the brain to protect your loved ones - especially children - whatever the cost. For some reason I think it's more so in women than in men, which might be a preconception. You don't see many women orchestrating these things, but then again the islamic communities are not known for gender equality.

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

When forced to choose, it's disgraceful to choose death for strangers rather than for your family?

I think you have a strange view on human emotional bonds.

Re:Sad...

[ewhenn]

None of us is qualified to judge who is more deserving of life because none of us is omniscient.

Hey now, speak for yourself.

Now bow before Zuel!

Re:Sad...

[danhaas]

According to the TFA:

"The dead woman has not been identified, but her husband is apparently serving time in jail for being a member of a radical Islamist terror group."

It seems she had some real motivation to do it, not only coercion. Even money may be involved, since islamic women rarely can handle being single moms. They may have used a remote detonation device because they feared she might give up.

Why are terrorists targeting Russia? A: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chechen_War

It's a very sad situation for the woman, chechens overall and the terrorists throwing out their honor for a "Holy" War.

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

you don't have kids, do you?

Re:Sad...

[MattSausage]

+1 internets for you! I lol'd.

Re:Sad...

[tobiah]

That is a completely unsupported statistic. Suicide bombers, especially female ones, are not easily profiled. The wikipedia article on it links to a number articles and case studies where the opinion varies a great deal, but none suggest the women did it because her children were threatened.

And it's no excuse even if they did.

Re:Sad...

[cdrguru]

The thing to keep in mind is that the concept of "woman" in Islamic terms is nearly a non-sentient tool to assist in reproduction. And maybe housekeeping. It isn't as if there was a real human life involved.

Another thing that is probably even more important is that "human life" is a brutal struggle to these people and ending it early is a reward. They are firmly focused on the afterlife in all things and in all considerations. So if taking some action is going to kill hundreds of people but ensures their happy destiny in an afterlife then the hundreds of people are meaningless - besides, it is just giving them into their afterlife early anyway. It is amazing what you can justify when you believe this.

And having a focus on an afterlife isn't unique to Islam. It is equally dangerous when this is the mindset of anyone. It makes them immune to most of the things that we like to think control and moderate human behavior.

Re:Sad...

[sznupi]

So, why do you choose this quite safe and comfortable life, for you and your family, instead of being in a place & doing things which, while risky, have a real chance of saving many lives of others?

You can even make that choice under no duress / etc.

Re:Sad...

[Bemopolis]

The thing to keep in mind is that the concept of "woman" in Islamic terms is nearly a non-sentient tool to assist in reproduction. And maybe housekeeping. It isn't as if there was a real human life involved.

In many parts of the US we also have religious people who hold this position, going so far as to shoot doctors and blow up buildings in order to constrict the reproductive choices of women.

To go further, we held the same concept about a race of people — both women and men — exercised freely for the economic benefit of those in the Southern region of our nation. This concept was even encoded in one of our founding documents.

Re:Sad...

[ScentCone]

To go further, we held the same concept about a race of people

At you used the past tense when referring to the 19th century. And here we are in the 21st century, with a virulent and thuggish religion egging on people who burn school teachers alive for daring to teach a girl to read, or stoning a woman to death for having been raped. And this isn't out of ignorance, it's as deliberate as can be. Well-educated, worldly, big-money people are behind movements like the Taliban. They're just basically evil.

Re:Sad...

[BitterOak]

Because 90% of women bombers are forced to do it. the scumbag Islamic terrorists either start killing their children, or threaten to kill their kids to make the woman do the deed. In fact a cellphone detonator means she could not be trusted to blow herself up so her Islamic torturer needed to have control of her death to make them happy.

All you flag wavers saying "dumb bitch" are uninformed as to how Utterly Disgraceful and lack of Honor these Islamic Terrorists are.

So, it is morally justifiable to kill a bunch of other people's kids if someone threatens to harm or kill your own. Sorry I don't buy it.

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

It is what it is; I'm approving of their own idiocy in selecting against themselves.

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

That is a completely unsupported statistic. Suicide bombers, especially female ones, are not easily profiled. The wikipedia article on it links to a number articles and case studies where the opinion varies a great deal, but none suggest the women did it because her children were threatened.

And it's no excuse even if they did.

Oh, YES they are.

Describe them as "Islamic", and you profile about 99.99% of them.

Re:Sad...

[Bemopolis]

Meanwhile, we have Christian members of our own government travelling to places like Uganda and urging the passage of laws such as the death penalty for homosexuals. As a result of the virulent and thuggish environment they have ginned up, one of the most prominent activists was just beaten to death.

Well-educated, worldly, big-money people are behind movements like the Christian right. They're just basically evil.

Re:Sad...

[Threni]

I heard the recession is over now - prophets are going through the roof!

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

Because 90% of women bombers are forced to do it.

Citation, please? This sounds far too much like a "women are angels, only men ever do bad things (and if women do bad things, they were obviously forced by the evil men!)" comment for me to take serious without some sort of evidence to back it up.

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

Who said this was the act of an islamic terrorist?

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

I liked Firefly more than most people, but reading those references to it in your post made me feel momentarily ill. Please... stop.

Re:Sad...

[Onymous Coward]

Describe them as "Islamic", and you profile about 99.99% of them.

And you drag in about 1,490,000,000 people who are not terrorists.

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

Describe them as "Islamic", and you profile about 99.99% of them.

And you drag in about 1,490,000,000 people who are not terrorists.

And exclude about 6,000,000,000.

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

I notice you pointedly used the term "Islamic terrorist" several times, instead of simply "terrorist".

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok, well if that's true, then we can only hope she was in a room with terrorists, and may God rest her soul.

Re:Sad...

[geekoid]

I'd die for my country, but I would also destroy it if it would save my family.

Re:Sad...

[geekoid]

of course it's an excuse, don' be daft.

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

Because 90% of women bombers are forced to do it.

Killing a third party to save yourself or those close to you is murder. Plain and simple.

Re:Sad...

[shutdown -p now]

The girl was a Chechen, born and raised there. This already gives you a very high probability that she's a Muslim. Even aside from that, non-Muslim or non-fundamentalist Chechens these days are the folk who rebuild their republic, not the ones who are on a mission to "drive out disbelievers".

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, yes, well if wikipedia says so...

And it is an excuse, albeit a pretty rubbish one. Many parents will go to extreme lengths to protect their offspring[0], including sacrificing their own lives, and of those some are probably dumb enough to believe that killing themselves for some extremist protects their children better than sticking around and ensuring the extremist doesn't get to harm the kids.

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

That is a completely unsupported statistic. Suicide bombers, especially female ones, are not easily profiled.

Ummm... Yeah, they are.

I'll give you a hint. They aren't Presbyterians.

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

what bonehead marked this informative ?

wikipedia says ... so it must be true huh ?

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

Like hell. Dying (along with your kids) to save the lives of a bunch of people who would otherwise call you a "dumb bitch" for getting blown up by spam doesn't sound like an honorable or smart thing to do. A person's first duty is to themselves. A person's second duty is to whoever they choose. Finally, their duty is to society so long as society upholds its own promises as part of the social contract. You think this woman wanted to die by the terrorists' hands or by a suicide vest? No, she wanted the police to arrest the terrorists and save her. Society failed her. She owed no further debt to society.

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, racist much?
If you actually read the article instead of arrogantly spouting your unfounded hatred of Islamic people, you would realise that this bombing and the Moscow train station bombing were done by "Black Widows" who are widows from the Chechen war. This has nothing to do with Islamic terrorists as such but with (basically) guerrilla warfare...

The reason why they have cellphone detonators is so that they can still detonate the bomb if the bomber cannot (due to incapacitation, lack of information - hard to tell how big a crowd is if you are in it, being arrested, etc).

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

If you actually read the article, they don't have any family, it is why they are doing it. They are war widows from the Chechen war, hence the reason why they are striking at the Russians...

Re:Sad...

[Lost Race]

It's absolutely not an excuse. Following orders to kill innocent strangers in order to protect your own children is evil.

Re:Sad...

[MelindaM2120]

You make the same mistake that terrorists do. You judge a person / culture by standards that are either unknown or unacceptable to them. Also, if people face a superior military power that they have no hope to repel and they feel that the international forums do not give a damn about their plight and the outlook for them is grim, you have a breeding ground where extremist ideas will thrive. What is "lack of honor" for you may be "the ultimate honor and sacrifice" for them.

Re:Sad...

[bungatron]

While I agree with much of what you say, singling out 'Islamic terrorists' does not benefit anybody.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Douglas_Wells

Re:Sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

Therefore the only responsible thing to do in this situation is choose death for you and yours.

It's easy to say that, but extremely difficult to do it. Put yourself in that position. I do hope you have kids. Will you choose to let your only daughter die or will you consent to blow up 100 people and yourself?

Force

[Anonymous Coward]

Islam isn't the problem. Religion isn't the problem. Force is the problem. Coercion. Violence. Theft. Fraud. In the absence of force, religion is harmless. In the absence of force, everything is harmless.

Force is the true root of all evil, because without force, there can be no evil. It's not logically possible, because force is what defines evil from beginning to end.

Instead of focusing on beliefs, culture, and trying to divide people into "teams" who are supposedly enemies, we should be looking precisely at where and how force is employed, and by whom. This is where the evil is, and this is what needs to stop. Islam doesn't need to stop. Religion doesn't need to stop. FORCE NEEDS TO STOP.

Now, how many of us are man enough to admit that for every human being murdered by a suicide bomber, governments have caused thousands of times more death and destruction? There's a reason why government wants you to believe that the problem is "Islam", rather than force alone.

Re:Force

[Nadaka]

Even without force, religion causes harm. Even for those who willingly accept it, it still poisons the mind and can lead to derangement and self harm. And can lead to people harming themselves. Even Buddhism isn't immune from this effect, some still starve themselves to death seeking enlightenment.

Re:Force

[gtall]

When your religion idolizes force, the religion IS part of the problem. You do know what sentence is meted out to anyone attempting to leave Islam, don't you?

Re:Force

[m50d]

Humans are always going to be able to kill other people - how would you even start to prevent that? So I think working against religion is a better use of my energy than trying to eliminate force.

Oblig.

[ilsaloving]

I think this about sums it up:

http://nelsonhaha.com/

doesn't make sense

[Anonymous Coward]

"A suicide bomber's plan to detonate explosives in Central Moscow on New Year's Eve was foiled when she received an unexpected spam text message that caused her deadly payload to blow up too early .. The bomber's handler, who is usually watching his charge, sends the bomber a text message to set off the explosive belt at the moment when it is thought they can inflict maximum casualties"

Why the need to send a text msg to detonate the explosives when the suicidial carrier would presumably be happy to do it. How could the 'Security sources' could possibly know this, as the evidence is presumably destroyed. Anyone else get a happy new year msg from their carrier. Why don't I believe all this?

Happy New Year indeed!

[LongearedBat]

Well, the SMS made it a happy new year for lots of people who didn't loose their lives, limbs, friends or family (even if they don't know it).

Kinda like those Good Year ad's... "If it saves you once a year, it's a good year."

Technology gone mad ...

[Rambo Tribble]

... now with new, improved irony!

Re:and in the usa you pay up to $0.25 per text for

[corbettw]

I pay $10 per month for unlimited text for me and my entire family. So I'm not sure where this "$0.25 per text" idea came from, unless you're an idiot who thinks that's somehow cheaper than the flat-rate plans that are available.

Couldn't have happened to a nicer person

[geekoid]

That said, maybe all phones should be spammed with a test ring and a txt message every hour? Or basically rnd*60 after every previous random test.

A soldiers take on this

[bhenson]

i hate to say it but thank god for spam txts that day ---a soldier.

Who detonated it

[Anonymous Coward]

Doesn't say in the summary, but the one who set off the explosives was the bomber's mobile phone operator, who sent the new year's wishes txt, *not* the bomber's handler.

Suicide bombers as assassins?

[handy_vandal]

The assumption is that suicide bombers are used to "inflict maximum casualties," which is probably true in most cases.

On the other hand, I suppose that suicide bombers might also be used as assassins, to kill one (or several) specific targets, under the guise of mass-murder terrorism.

Re:Suicide bombers as assassins?

[MattSausage]

It seems I remember a story out of Afghanistan about a very high-level informer, who'd given lots of very valuable info, suddenly refusing to talk to anyone but the highest levels of the CIA and military in the country. After finally coaxing the guy and prodding the guy they finally agreed to get him in front of the people he asked for. And on the day he was to meet them, he blew up his suicide vest outside in the hallway waiting to go into the meeting. Killed or injured a LOT of high level CIA and Army brass.

That seems pretty close to what you're talking about.

Re:Suicide bombers as assassins?

[handy_vandal]

I recall that event, yes. I was actually thinking of Jihadists killing their own -- internal enforcement of the party line, keep the weak-willed from straying -- but your case is another good example.

Re:Suicide bombers as assassins?

[Archwyrm]

I have a hard time believing that an informant would be let anywhere near anyone "high level" without so much as a cursory search, nevermind at the gate..

proprietary solutions found hazardous

[Thud457]

Should'a used an Arduino.

Somebody really needs to kickstart an open-source bomb controller project.

Re:proprietary solutions found hazardous

[GameboyRMH]

Here we go, Arduino overkill again. A simple PICAXE could do the job.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[Machtyn]

While you bring up good points (no name, no location), it really isn't that hard to ask the phone's service provider for all messages sent to a specific phone number and from where and at what time.

cool!

[hesaigo999ca]

We should spam many texts to pagers and cell phones to test the line to make sure it is not being used for such things....sort of a contact me without charges from the cell co., this way it can not be used for detonations as this would be at random and unavoidable....cool to see so many t.bombers blow up by accident all over the place..

Suicide?

[Anonymous Coward]

The *handler* remote detonates? Is this suicide? I'm even more appalled than I thought I could be by an already appalling situation...

Re:and in the usa you pay up to $0.25 per text for

[LearnToSpell]

Well, if you send fewer than 40 texts per month, that's somehow cheaper, unless you're an idiot who never passed grade one math.

Just because it had to be said...

[MrSenile]

Somebody set up us the bomb.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[Lord Byron II]

One other thing that is bothering me is why do they have a suicide bomber on a remote detonator? If you're a suicide bomber, then can't you be trusted with your own detonator?

And you're capable of building a bomb with a remote detonator, then why would you be a suicide bomber (and not just a "drop it and run" bomber)?

Jihad against spam or spam against jihad?

[tommyatomic]

I'm confused.
I hate spam. I think that spam is the act of an ultimately useless flacid coward. Probably why they are always hawking so much damn viagra.
I hate terrorists. I think that terrorism is the act of an ultimately useless flacid coward. Maybe they wouldnt be so cranky if someone gave them some viagra.
So the question, If the spammers anger the suicide bombing kooks; And the jihadists go after the the spammers.
Who do we want to win? I suppose the best we can hope for is mutual distruction.

Re:Jihad against spam or spam against jihad?

[phek]

hows the saying go... the friend of my enemy is my friend too?

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[Vectormatic]

One other thing that is bothering me is why do they have a suicide bomber on a remote detonator? If you're a suicide bomber, then can't you be trusted with your own detonator?

And you're capable of building a bomb with a remote detonator, then why would you be a suicide bomber (and not just a "drop it and run" bomber)?

- suicide bombers can have doubts, and you dont want one turning at the last moment

- dropping a suspicious package/backpack and walking/running away can alarm people, if you are obvious enough, everyone might run away in panic after someone shouts 'BOMB', costing you lots of precious victims. Putting the bomb on a person ensures surprise.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[kevinNCSU]

If you're a suicide bomber, then can't you be trusted with your own detonator?

Really? You really have to ask if someone whose bright plan is to strap explosives to themselves is level-headed enough to be trusted the with detonator?

And you're capable of building a bomb with a remote detonator, then why would you be a suicide bomber (and not just a "drop it and run" bomber)?

It is very rare that a suicide bomber is also the bomb maker. They are usually some idealistic kid or even mentally handicapped person that the bomb maker or cell takes advantage of and convinces to go blow themselves up. The remote detonator takes away that deciding moment of whether they can really press the button and allows for remote detonation in the case they are ID'd and shot. The use of a suicide bomber makes a statement and display about the "dedication" to the cause and has a larger psychological impact. It also does not leave open the chance for the drop-off guy to get picked up and interrogated.

I have newfound respect for spam

[Drakkenmensch]

Cheap discount Cialis is a patriotic war hero!

Re:I have newfound respect for spam

[Locke2005]

Herbal V14GR4 deserves a medal for this!

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[BrokenHalo]

However, if the story is at all true, it leads to the usual conclusion:

If you (the bomber's handler) want something done properly, you just have to do it yourself.

The story is not credible

[Adayse]

Investigator: "A text message was sent to the dead woman around the time the bomb went off and so we conclude that this text alone detonated the bomb".

Re:The story is not credible

[shutdown -p now]

In most cases where suicide bombers have been involved in the past in Russia, the bomb was also activated via a cellphone (usually in vibrate mode). So if you know that she had the bomb on her & activated, and received a text message at about the time the bomb blew up (which you know from your other investigations), then it's a perfectly reasonable conclusion.

Soviet?

[Framboise]

Is your worldview blocked to last century?

Re:Soviet?

[Anonymous Coward]

Fry: "Yakov Smirnoff said it."

Leelah: "No he didn't"

Re:Soviet?

[Archwyrm]

In Federal Russia, worldview blocks YOU!

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

The story is almost certainly a hoax. Someone went to the trouble of setting up a remote bomb detonator via a mobile phone, but didn't take into account unexpected spam messages setting it off? Remember that scene in "The Specialist" wasn't it(my memory is hazy), where Ray is making the bomb and placing a detonator in it? You're telling me the guy who put the thing together actually turned on the phone and jammed it into a few pounds of semtex when it could have gone off at any time?

This story smacks of the typical kind derogatory propaganda that come out of the Kremlin these days. Stories that make the regime's opponents look foolish or undignified. I'm reminded of Kasparov being griefed by a flying penis. This is the caliber of political maneuvering that can be expected form the Putin regime.

This story is probably nothing more than a KGB sourced urban legend, designed to make Chechen separatists look incompetent and backwards. Anything to distract from the Government's inability to protect its capital city from people who live 2000km away.

Cost isn't, expertise is

[SuperKendall]

It's probably a very crude device, where they attach the speaker/vibrator wires directly to a detonator.

Exactly, that's all it is.

Anything more sophisticated isn't a matter of cost so much as having anyone who knows how to do it. Triggering by a specific number involves actually writing code to be run on the phone, which would involve a lot more effort and couldn't be done by just anyone.

Re:Cost isn't, expertise is

[ergean]

Or not. All you need is a phone with white listing... even my first Ericsson had that.

Re:Cost isn't, expertise is

[SuperKendall]

White listing is not going to stop your carrier from sending you a happy new year SMS (which is what happened in this case).

not just Russia

[dlt074]

Islamist terrorists in Russia often use mobile phones as detonators

this is not something unique to Russia. Islamic Terrorists use this all over the world.

I'd rather nobody died

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, I just can't relate with the posters saying there's a "funny" side to this story.

In Red Square

[Jammer6502]

I was in Red Square on New Years Eve attending the festivities. There was no way the bomber could have made it in before midnight due to the massive police and military presence (to get in I went through 3 checkpoints where I lost my alcohol and bottled water). However, after midnight they dropped the security and a bomber could have made quite an impact at any of the several stages surrounding the downtown area that were still packed with people (the streets were closed off to cars so everyone was just walking around). This spam text was a lucky break for the Russians, things could have gone much worse.

Counter Terrorism's Finest Hour

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't it wonderful what good intelligence can do?

Small point....

[n_djinn]

If someone else detonates you as the bomb, your not a suicide bomber.

But now the real question...

[Anonymous Coward]

... do female suicide bombers also get 72 virgins?

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[spun]

No, suicide bombers are usually college educated middle class people. I know that makes for a more confusing narrative than "Unstable, idealistic, and poor," but it is true.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_bomber#Profile_of_attackers

Re:and in the usa you pay up to $0.25 per text for

[Hoi Polloi]

Russian intelligence has traced the message they send to trigger the bombs.

"HEADS UP! :)"

Without the person even being aware?

[crovira]

Here's a gedanken experiment:

A terrorist can made a bomb with:
  an Arduino micro-controller,
  a 9 volt battery,
  a Wifi receiver and
  10 or pounds of C4 that is set to go off when the device receives the message " Go BOOM! ".
The device gets snuck onto some unwitting person's luggage.

Now, you see somebody is struggling with a heavy suitcase through a transport facility. (Say Liberty International Airport, or O'Hare, or Grand Central Station at 4:30 on a Friday.)

Do you help him/her, or do you run like hell?

Re:Without the person even being aware?

[dasqua]

The device gets snuck onto some unwitting person's luggage.

Now, you see somebody is struggling with a heavy suitcase through a transport facility. (Say Liberty International Airport, or O'Hare, or Grand Central Station at 4:30 on a Friday.)

Do you help him/her, or do you run like hell?

No. I don't help others with luggage. I figure if they packed it they should live with the consequences of overloading.

As for your experiment, that's just bad experimental design from start to finish. The exploratory questions don't make sense.

Agreed

[Anonymous Coward]

If you hate this world so much that you're not concerned with your own existence anymore, don't be selfish and take other people with you, preventing them from being constructive and fulfilled in their own life just because you can't. Maybe Futurama had it right, suicide booths could be the answer.

How about we shut everybody down?

[Anonymous Coward]

Shut down the cell towers' signals where large crowds are gathering for some event or celebration?/? Can the signal be isolated out? OR stop selling phones to likely terrorists? Muslims phones be made with a (anti) kill switch, say when it comes within proximity of say 4 more cell phones, it just stops working? Just tossing these out there..

Express their world view?

[rsilvergun]

Excuse me? WTF? They're not expressing anything. The bombers are confused people with no options or hope. The handlers are psychotic power hungry warlords using terrorism to get ahead in the world. War & terror are never statements, they're the wealthy (or aspiring wealthy) manipulating the hopeless and downtrodden.

Re:Express their world view?

[casca69]

Excuse me? WTF? They're not expressing anything. The bombers are confused people with no options or hope. The handlers are psychotic power hungry warlords using terrorism to get ahead in the world. War & terror are never statements, they're the wealthy (or aspiring wealthy) manipulating the hopeless and downtrodden.

Now, here I have to correct you.
Most of these terrorists are actually Middle-class, literate people. Not wealthy, no, but they are certainly not without options.
Moving to a more prosperous place, one less violent IS a choice, also.
One they choose not to take.
Sam Kinnison once said about the Ethiopians, and while it is harsh, it is true.
What is this, pantomiming scooping up the soil
SAND
What will it be in a thousand years?
SAND!
If the conditions are horrific, change them. If you can't, change the location. I live in Oklahoma. When the dustbowl destroyed this area, most people moved.

Re:Express their world view?

[Chakra5]

I'd'know... "I'm hopeless and downtrodden, so fuck all of you to death" seems to fit the definition of a world view to me well enough to use the term here.

A comprehensive world view (or worldview) is the fundamental cognitive orientation of an individual or society encompassing natural philosophy, fundamental existential and normative postulates or themes, values, emotions, and ethics.

::shrug::

Re:Express their world view?

[rsilvergun]

What in the 9 plains of hell makes you think these people have options? Every story I've read about suicide bombers also notes that their families got a large payout. Notice how your kids aren't queuing up to blow themselves up? That's 'cause they have real options.

It's easy to say 'MOVE', it's harder to do it when you have the resources to move. It's not free you know, and the place you move to isn't likely to be thrilled about tens of thousands of refugees.

The US healthcare system sucks and it's ruining my life, but do you think Canada will take me? What do you think would happen to Ethiopians if they tried to overrun the more prosperous nations? Here's a hint, it start with an M and ends with "achete"

Re:Express their world view?

[kryliss]

If the "handler" was so righteous in his religion/belief then he would have been wearing the bomb, not the bomber.

Re:and in the usa you pay up to $0.25 per text for

[rotorbudd]

Russian intelligence has traced the message they send to trigger the bombs.

"HEADS UP! :)"

Thought it was:
"FIRE IN THE HOLE!"

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[nizo]

Don't forget that some are forced into it:

http://articles.cnn.com/2004-07-26/world/iraq.bombers.force_1_suicide-bombers-suicide-car-bomb-attacks-attack-missions?_s=PM:WORLD

Intelligence Spin?

[Cruciform]

If I was in counter-terrorism and had just killed a suicide bomber by identifying and remotely detonating them I'd love to have the media repeat this story so it sounds like a fluke. That means I get at least one free shot at future bombers as well.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[petermgreen]

after all, the phone should have been destroyed in the blast

The phone doesn't really matter, what matters is the sim and that is pretty small and therefore stands at least a chance of surviving.

With the SIM you can match up to the providers databases which will almost certainly have a record of what messages were received and from where.

Its funny when sociopaths kill themselves

[TiggertheMad]

Really? Is this where we are now? I am supposed to be upset that a sociopath that is trying to maim and kill other people dies by their own ineptitude? Most people are upset by injustice in the world. Riots have been touched off on occasion when the criminal justice system fails to deliver a verdict that aligns with the populist concept of what would be just. When a story like this pops up, it resonates with people because the 'victim' experiences true justice, inflicting on themselves the very same fate that they would have perpetrated on others.

You can write this off as an hateful attempt at demonizing the enemy, but that just stinks of an irrational bleeding heart idealism. This person was trying to murder random civilians because they didn't want to try to reason with the government. Fuck them, their death isn't sad, its a public service.

I don't buy that all life is precious bullshit. There are a few people who who the world is simply a better place without. Deal with it.

Re:Its funny when sociopaths kill themselves

[LordLimecat]

I am supposed to be upset that a sociopath that is trying to maim and kill other people dies by their own ineptitude?

To laugh as a sociopath is gunned down by the firing squad seems to place you squarely on the same path as he. Whos to say that with the right justification you might not find yourself in his place, in the name of eliminating others like him?

Re:Its funny when sociopaths kill themselves

[Dorkmaster Flek]

They're not getting "gunned down by a firing squad". They're dying from their own stupidity. Completely different scenario.

Re:Its funny when sociopaths kill themselves

[kryliss]

Uhm, one question... when an Islamic suicide bomber dies by setting off the bomb too early therefore killing no one.... do they still get the 79 virgins or just a fraction thereof... maybe none?

Re:Its funny when sociopaths kill themselves

[Anonymous Coward]

We're not talking about firing squads. We're talking about dickheads whose stupidity would put them in line for a Darwin Award, many examples of which can be found on websites, in books and in a feature-length movie. Why don't you log off here and go picket a cinema.

Re:Its funny when sociopaths kill themselves

[TiggertheMad]

To laugh as a sociopath is gunned down by the firing squad seems to place you squarely on the same path as he.

Yes, you are totally right, laughing at the irony of a dangerous murderer dying by their own hand will obviously set me on the same road as they were on. It will be but a scant few days before I start contemplating murdering unarmed civilians because I feel dis-empowered.

Whos to say that with the right justification you might not find yourself in his place, in the name of eliminating others like him?

I think what you are trying to say in some clumsy way, is that I might adopt a 'ends justifies the means' attitude, similar to the very person I laughed at. If you read the prior sentence a few times, I hope the ridiculousness of your thesis becomes clear.

Why would I need special justification to want to kill a attempted mass murderer? I haven't been the victim of a terrorist bombing or anything similar, but I wouldn't hesitate to pull the trigger on Hitler, Stalin, Pol-Pot or just some second rate suicide bomber. I suppose by some freakish yardstick of 'unconditional free love of everything', that makes me a bad person. I would sleep pretty darn well at night if I could do something that would save the lives of a few dozen people. Hell, it would probably be the best thing I ever did.

I suppose you would advocate 'just wishful hoping and love' to cure cancer. It doesn't work that way. A good surgeon cuts out the damaged tissue and kills it before it can kill the patient. Am I advocating killing people who might become dangerous? Nope. Am I suggesting that killing is anything but a last resort? Nope. But don't expect me to feel human empathy for someone who is not behaving in a humane fashion.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[undecim]

(after all, the phone should have been destroyed in the blast)?

I'm sure the only place records of text messages are kept are on the recipient's phone.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[kevinNCSU]

A college education and middle class standing doesn't preclude a person from being idealistic or unstable. Also you are flat out lying putting the word poor in quotes since I never used it nor ANY word relating to economic status, but don't let that stop you from setting up strawmen to knock down.

Allah Be Praised!

[Anonymous Coward]

God IS Great...

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[spun]

Okay, so where is your evidence that suicide bombers are unstable? And why are you so irate? I wasn't quoting you, I was merely stating what I have heard people claim about suicide bombers.

If you send this spam message...

[edxwelch]

I can see this being part of some sort moral delimma test for telephone operators:
"If you send this spam message two things will happen: you will receive $1,000,000, and someone whom you don't know will die.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[icebike]

I'm constantly astounded by people who start by saying "its almost certainly a hoax" and then appeal to a movie as justification for their views.

A movie? Seriously?

As for your speculated KGB involvement, its entirely possible the KGB sent the text message, having partially penetrated the cell, in which case I say good for the KGB.

I'm sorry, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

Does laughing out loud at this make me a bad person?

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[kevinNCSU]

In addition if you read one sentence past the one your quoting:

A study of the remains of 110 suicide bombers for the first part of 2007 by Afghan pathologist Dr. Yusef Yadgari, found 80% were missing limbs before the blasts, other suffered from cancer, leprosy, or some other ailments.

And then there's this gem from Pape who makes the educated middle class finding in his study:

Characteristics which Pape thought to be correlated to suicide bombing and bombers included: Islam, especially the influence of Salafi Islam;[34] brutality and cruelty of the occupiers;[35] competition among militant groups; and poverty, immaturity, poor education, past history of suicide attempts, or social maladjustment of the attackers.[36]

So people already missing limbs and dying with past suicide attempts, immature and social outcasts. So not stable, and not level-headed, just as I said. Also the phrase "Coming from the educated middle class" means that's where their parents were and the opportunities they had as a child, not where they live their life before they strap on the vest. You don't see many middle class shop owners strapping on the suicide vest, but you might see the disenfranchised son of one do so.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[icebike]

No longer true. Your article is dated.

Women, (seldom ever educated in backward muslim countries) are more and more being recruited to carry the bombs. Often these are the widows of other fighters who preceded them in death, or the half witted washer woman with no real means of support.

The one with brains are holding the remote detonation cell phone and building the bombs.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[spun]

Maybe you should put your quote in context:

Robert Pape, director of the Chicago Project on Suicide Terrorism, found the majority of suicide bombers came from the educated middle classes. A study of the remains of 110 suicide bombers for the first part of 2007 by Afghan pathologist Dr. Yusef Yadgari, found 80% were missing limbs before the blasts, other suffered from cancer, leprosy, or some other ailments. Also in contrast to earlier findings of suicide bombers, the Afghan bombers were "not celebrated like their counterparts in other Arab nations. Afghan bombers are not featured on posters or in videos as martyrs."[27]

Anthropologist Scott Atran found in a 2003 study that this is not a justifiable conclusion.[28] A recently published paper by Harvard University Professor of Public Policy Alberto Abadie "cast[s] doubt on the widely held belief that terrorism stems from poverty, finding instead that terrorist violence is related to a nation's level of political freedom."[29] More specifically this is due to the transition of countries towards democratic freedoms. "Intermediate levels of political freedom are often experienced during times of political transitions, when governments are weak, political instability is elevated, so conditions are favorable for the appearance of terrorism".[29][30]

Some suicide bombers are educated, with college or university experience, and come from middle class homes. Leaders of the groups who perpetrate these attacks claim that they search for individuals who can be trusted to carry out the mission, and that those with mental illnesses are not considered ideal candidates.

Use of suicide terror against civilian targets has differing effects on the attackers' goals (see reaction below). Some economists suggest that this tactic goes beyond symbolism and is actually a response to commodified, controlled, or devalued lives, as the suicide attackers apparently consider family prestige and financial compensation from the community as compensation for their own lives.[citation needed] Whether such motivation is significant as compared to political or religious feeling remains unclear.

Dr. Yadqari was speaking specifically about Afghan bombers, and how they are different from most other Islamic suicide bombers. And other studies have found his conclusions invalid. You are cherry picking, and my point still stands.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[spun]

Citation needed. Preferably not a series of anecdotes, but actual statistics.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[kevinNCSU]

Sorry for the irateness, I incorrectly assumed the quote in the reply was meant as a quote of my argument, my apologies. I posted a second response after reading through your Wikipedia link which agrees with what I've read on the subject. Let me quote the section in full from Wikipedia which we're talking about and highlight the discrepancies:

Attackers were disproportionately from the educated middle classes.[33] Characteristics which Pape thought to be correlated to suicide bombing and bombers included: Islam, especially the influence of Salafi Islam;[34] brutality and cruelty of the occupiers;[35] competition among militant groups; and poverty, immaturity, poor education, past history of suicide attempts, or social maladjustment of the attackers

When it says "from the educated middle classes" this is talking about the situation they were born into. That is, their parents were educated and middle class. This does not mean the suicide bombers themselves became college educated middle class citizens. By contrast the suicide bombers themselves have grown up to be poor and lacking in education, dissatisfied with the way their life turned out hence the past history of suicide attempts, and social outcasts. If immaturity and a history of suicide attempts does not classify a person as unstable I'm not sure what does.

Nelson

[mattack2]

[Nelson]
Ha ha.
[/Nelson]

Distinctive Ring

[bill_mcgonigle]

Triggering by a specific number involves actually writing code to be run on the phone, which would involve a lot more effort and couldn't be done by just anyone.

Most phones have the ability to have a default ringtone and a different ringtone for a specific number. Most of them can play mp3 files for ringtones too.

I'll leave it to those smarter than these terrorists to work out how that might affect speaker voltages.

Re:Distinctive Ring

[SuperKendall]

I'll leave it to those smarter than these terrorists to work out how that might affect speaker voltages.

Then you have to build something to react to specific speaker voltages, I would argue almost harder than code as even fewer people would know how to do this.

Re:Distinctive Ring

[bill_mcgonigle]

Then you have to build something to react to specific speaker voltages, I would argue almost harder than code as even fewer people would know how to do this.

What's the voltage across a speaker playing silence? Is it not zero? Even if it's not zero, the simplest transistor chosen for the required threshold voltage should be able to do the trick, no? I can't see how soldering in a transistor would be harder than building a custom application for a closed platform.

Re:Distinctive Ring

[SuperKendall]

What's the voltage across a speaker playing silence? Is it not zero?

I don't think you understand. What you are proposing (noting ANY activity in the speaker) is exactly what they are doing today. How does a "custom ringtone" help this? Especially in the context of an SMS, which probably played a DIFFERENT SOUND, and which you cannot usually assign a specific tone to...

Re:Distinctive Ring

[bill_mcgonigle]

What you are proposing (noting ANY activity in the speaker)

That's definitely not what I meant, but I don't feel it would be responsible to spell it out here. Put a meter on a pair of speaker wires with different samples and you'll see what I mean.

good for US lawmakers

[Anonymous Coward]

That this wasn't in the USA. Imagine the lawsuits to the telco on sending "unneccessary messages" because of time and unforeseen occurrence. Also, imagine how this would bring a war like none other before against legit messages sent to anyone via e-mail, and the kind of repercussions it would have on the increase of printed spam from legit companies to their users --and the associated price hikes passing these costs on to consumers, willing to read the spam or not.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[spun]

You don't seem to understand what is being said here. The majority of suicide attackers come from the educated middle class, HOWEVER, there are other factors that ALSO correlate with risk for becoming a suicide bomber. Those other, non-middle class attackers are in the minority.

Why is this particular narrative so important to you? What would you lose if you accepted that suicide bombers do come from the middle class, and are not all poor, ignorant, or deranged?

LOLLAH AKBAR

[Anonymous Coward]

n/m

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[mattack2]

You don't think that someone wanting to kill themselves, much less a bunch of random people, is by definition unstable?

(That's why I think the "insanity defense" is ridiculous.)

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[kevinNCSU]

Your point stands upon one misinterpreted quote from Pape which if read the way you currently are doing so, he completely contradicts in the very next sentence in that Wikipedia article:

Other characteristics Pape found were a difference in religion between the attackers[31] and the occupiers and grassroots support for the attacks.[32] Attackers were disproportionately from the educated middle classes.[33] Characteristics which Pape thought to be correlated to suicide bombing and bombers included: Islam, especially the influence of Salafi Islam;[34] brutality and cruelty of the occupiers;[35] competition among militant groups; and poverty, immaturity, poor education, past history of suicide attempts, or social maladjustment of the attackers.[36]

As a complete off-topic aside. Is there ANY way in this new design to click on the message notification and actually get to the fracking message instead of 8 levels up and having to click through every single level to get to the actual reply? That probably has a good deal to do with my irateness, lol.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[Quiet_Desperation]

Okay, so where is your evidence that suicide bombers are unstable?

By definition they are unstable. They explode! ;-)

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[Quiet_Desperation]

Stories that make the regime's opponents look foolish or undignified.

Yes, because setting off the suicide bomb at the *proper* time and murdering dozens of people is *much* more dignified.

Begging the Question

[spun]

The question, as I have stated multiple times, is BESIDES THE BOMBING, was there any evidence of instability in their lives. When you say that all suicide bombers are unstable because only unstable people suicide bomb, you are not actually saying anything at all, capiche? It is the classic definition of begging the question.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[spun]

I explained that. The majority of suicide bombers come from educated, middle class backgrounds, HOWEVER, there are also other factors.

Yeah, the new site design makes me want to go postal too. Clickity, clickity, clickity, now where was that post I wanted to respond too?

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[spun]

Classic begging the question:
Suicide bombers attack because they are unstable.
Suicide bombers are unstable because they attack.

Do I really have to point out what incredibly faulty logic you are using? You should pay me for the education.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[spun]

Perhaps they are metastable because they are apt to fall into a lower energy state with only slight interaction.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[MichaelSmith]

As a complete off-topic aside. Is there ANY way in this new design to click on the message notification and actually get to the fracking message instead of 8 levels up and having to click through every single level to get to the actual reply? That probably has a good deal to do with my irateness, lol.

Its slightly faster to move the message threshold slider (top right on the page) to the right which should show all messages. But I agree. Viewing a reply should mean viewing a reply.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[c6gunner]

They might not necessarily be poor or ignorant, but they certainly are deranged.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[c6gunner]

Cars move because they have an engine.
Cars have an engine because they need to move.

Yah, poor logic, sure.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[MichaelSmith]

Perhaps the cell phone systems at major events (say the London Olympics) should send welcoming text messages to people about to arrive at the venues. Something friendly with information on where to park and what entrances to use. That kind of thing.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[Quiet_Desperation]

They're certainly sensitive to radio signals.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[kevinNCSU]

Know thine enemy so the only narrative I'm interested in having is the right one. It really is my understanding based upon what I've read that while terrorists (general, not insurgents) are from middle class backgrounds, well educated and not particularly poor or unstable. These are the people who get in with other like-minded people and without outside influence they start to self-radicalize as they re-affirm each others beliefs. This seems to me to be exactly the group you are describing. But I don't think the subset of terrorism which involves suicide bombers specifically fits that bill. I should probably also say that I am talking about Islamic extremist suicide bombers of the type the strap a vest on and blow themselves up in a crowded area whether it be civilian or military targets. I'm sure other cultures have different characteristics.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[nametaken]

It's not that I doubt that possibility, but the passage you linked to starts with, "Studies have shown conflicting results."

Followed by seemingly relevant bits about many bombers being physically disabled, missing limbs and such. In addition, it also seems that results vary depending on location. At one point, it does say, "Some suicide bombers are educated, with college or university experience, and come from middle class homes." [emphasis mine]

Perhaps the more appropriate response would have been, "It's difficult to profile suicide bombers".

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[spun]

Besides the suicide bombing, what evidence of their derangement do you have? Because, if the bombing is all you have, then you are basically saying this:

Suicide bombers bomb because they are deranged.
Suicide bombers are deranged because they bomb.

Which is pretty clearly begging the question.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[spun]

But that is not at all equivalent to what I said. You put an extra "need to" in there which is not present in my example. To follow my example, you would have to write it:

Cars move because they have an engine.
Cars have an engine because they move.

I'm going to start charging for the free education in logic I hand out.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[qbast]

You should really pay GP for some logic lesions. Car analogy comparable to attack/instability logic fallacy would be: Cars move because they have an engine. Cars have an engine because the move. Trying to prove hypothesis (cars have an engine) in circular way using known fact (cars move).

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[spun]

If you were concerned with getting the narrative right, you would be more open minded to considering other possibilities. It really seems as though you are not so concerned with finding the correct narrative. It seems as though you are hell bent on defending a particular point of view that does not actually lead to any kind of insight into your opponent. "They are just crazy" is just a cop-out, it is a refusal to think things through.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[spun]

Perhaps the more appropriate response would have been, "It's difficult to profile suicide bombers".

Okay, I'll buy that. But it is not insightful or helpful to simply say "They are unstable and that is the most we can possibly understand about their motivations." That is just an intellectually lazy cop-out. It is a more comforting thought than "They are really just people like you and me, who are very angry about their situation, and believe this is the best way to achieve their goals."

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[HereIAmJH]

I'm sure the only place records of text messages are kept are on the recipient's phone.

Doubtful, many government agencies receive the full contents of any text message sent or received by a phone with service paid for with public money. And according to CBS News, it depends on your carrier.

But even if that was the case, billing info would have been collected with the time/date and source of any text messages.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[tragedy]

There are a number of things that seem a little dubious in this story, possibly because of plain old sensationalism or translation problems. The idea of a remote detonator isn't really one of them though. For one thing, it allows someone observing, say from a window somewhere, to set off the bomb for maximum effect. Also, it gets around the problem of a sudden attack of nerves or conscience on the part of the bomber at the last minute if they don't actually know when the last minute is.

I should also point out that, with all of the vilification of suicide bombers, people very seldom consider their motivations. While, undoubtedly, some of them are committed zealots, entirely ready to kill and die, others are maybe not so much. Many of them are going to be recruited and essentially brainwashed, manipulated, or even threatened. Let's not forget that pretty much all terrorist organizations are heavily mixed up with organized crime. I remember talking to some Irish college students back in the early 90's about the IRA. The IRA they were mostly familiar with wasn't chiefly concerned with bombings and politics, they were chiefly concerned with running protection rackets, money lending (with dire penalties for people who couldn't pay up), "solving problems" (ie, beating people up and possibly killing them) and settling disputes for a fee, and also, to some degree, charity. Most terrorist organizations are like that, acting as violent parallel governments, court systems and banking systems. Therefore, there are plenty of people who end up owing debts they can't pay back to some part of the organization or being obligated in some other way. It's not inconceivable that some of those people end up "volunteering" to blow themselves up essentially under pain of death for themselves and their relatives if they refuse. Suicide bombers like that will probably end up being held very closely, right up to the point where it's too late for them. Therefore they're going to end up in a "suicide" belt that they can't take off or disarm and detonated by someone else, because they can't be relied on to do it themselves by their handlers.

In the end, it's really hard to tell. The authorities probably dig up all kinds of evidence and produce a timeline and detailed information on the motivations of a suicide bomber. The chances of the public ever getting any of that information, especially any information that makes the bomber look more like a misguided human being, or even a victim, than a monster, is very slim.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[mattack2]

How did I use circular logic? I said they were *by definition* unstable. I didn't say that all unstable people attack.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[tragedy]

Birds are found in the air because they are fliers.
Birds are fliers because they are found in the air.

logic?

[rusl]

Why would a kamakaze bomber need remote detonation? Wouldn't they be better at timing and instigating it themselves? This story is a little too neat. I doubt the truth of it. Also, it's pretty sick how people are proud to laugh at something like this. Those people say they like the Achmed character of Jeff Dunham. I think the terrorists are right after reading that. People who like Jeff Dunham aren't really people you can reason with, blowing them up is the only option.

Re:logic?

[shutdown -p now]

Why would a kamakaze bomber need remote detonation? Wouldn't they be better at timing and instigating it themselves?

In most cases of suicide bombings in Russia (both successful and thwarted - the latter are much more numerous), the bomb is activated externally. Sometimes the terrorist is also given the switch, and external activation is only in case they change their mind at the last moment. Sometimes they're given the switch, but it's actually a fake one. The point is that, for all the effort that goes into executing such an operation, the organizers cannot depend solely on the goodwill of the "delivery vehicle" to see it to completion.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[spun]

Why do people decide to become suicide bombers?
Because they are unstable.
How do we know they are unstable?
Because they decide to become suicide bombers.
Yes, but WHY do they become suicide bombers?
I already told you, because they are unstable!
But how do we KNOW they are unstable?
I already told you, because they are suicide bombers!

Yeah, circular reasoning.

Terrorist or freedom fighter?

[Anonymous Coward]

The responses here truly sadden me. I don't approve of suicide bombers vs innocent civilians, but to be ignorant of the situation in Russia's border conflicts is the height of ignorance.

Educate yourselves: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chechnya
Russian conduct in Chechnya: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A63823-2002Jun28?language=printer
More Russian atrocities, and retaliatory atrocities: http://www.amazon.co.uk/One-Soldiers-Chechnya-Arkady-Babchenko/dp/1846270391

So - let's see - suicide bombers must be pretty twisted individuals. Maybe like this? http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/mar/29/black-widows-women-moscow-bombings

I wonder if maybe, just possibly, the bomber was actually a VICTIM?? Maybe the utter hatred for anything Russian robbed that individual of any semblance of rationality or reason? I wonder what kind of trauma could have caused that kind of psychological turmoil?

Until you've been in the Hell that is the 'Russian' Caucasus, think twice about where your information is coming from (http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Articles/issues/20th_century_ending_with_Russian%20Crime_in_Chechnya.htm)

And dig deeper, then ask yourselves: why exactly is Russia in the Caucasus?

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[spun]

Good example. That is circular reasoning which tells us nothing about why birds are found in the air. It pretends to address why birds are found in the air, but the answer boils down to "Birds are found in the air because birds are found in the air." Just like the suicide bomber bit boils down to "Suicide bombers are unstable because suicide bombers are unstable."

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[geminidomino]

Perhaps they are metastable because they are apt to fall into a lower energy state with only slight interaction.

Listen, pup, you won't be so quick to bounce back afterwards either, when you've got a few more years under your belt!

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[c6gunner]

With those poor logic skills, you're not likely to get paid much. You obviously don't understand what "begging the question" means. Since you didn't like the car analogy, here's another:

The building is tall because it's a skyscraper.
The building is a skyscraper because it is tall.

Definitions are inherently circular. If you can't understand that, you've got no business talking about logic.

Of course, if you don't think that committing suicide while murdering innocent people would classify someone as "unstable", then you can challenge the definition. But, in that case, you'd be a complete fool. As it is, I'm guessing you're just being a pedant.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[c6gunner]

Besides the circular nature of the argument, what evidence do you have that I'm begging the question? Because, if circularity is all you have, then you are basically saying:

You're begging the question because you're making a circular argument.
You're making a circular argument because you're begging the question.

Which is pretty clearly begging the question.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[nametaken]

I agree on all counts.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[patiodragon]

"...where is your evidence that suicide bombers are unstable?"

You are kidding, no? They are SUICIDAL!
QED

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[1729]

Okay, so where is your evidence that suicide bombers are unstable?

How about the fact that they blow themselves up?

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[spun]

Given that "circular argument" and "begging the question" are (in informal usage) the same thing, while "suicide bomber" and "unstable" are NOT the same thing, you fail yet again. Give it up already, we get it, you can't do logic.

Begging the question IS DEFINED AS making a circular argument.
Making a a circular argument IS CALLED begging the question.

See how that works? Now, is that true for suicide bombers and unstable people?

Suicide bombers are defined as unstable people.
Unstable people are called suicide bombers.

Ooops. That doesn't work, does it?

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[spun]

So they weren't unstable until they blew themselves up? If blowing themselves up is the only proof that they are unstable, how can their instability be the reason for blowing themselves up? In order to say that they blow themselves up because they are unstable, you would have to show instability prior to them blowing themselves up. Otherwise, you are engaging in circular reasoning:

Suicide bombers blow themselves up because they are unstable.
We know they are unstable because they blow themselves up.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[spun]

I had a good friend with terminal cancer who killed herself. She was not unstable, she had a good reason to do it. Therefore, not all suicides are caused by instability. Therefore, the main premise of your argument falls apart. QED.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[spun]

You are not addressing the issue, you are trying to confuse things by going off on a tangent. This is not a matter of definition, it is a matter of motivation. We are trying to determine the motivations behind suicide bombers. You say, "They do it because they are unstable. Proof being, they do it." That answers nothing!

I am saying, in order to determine the reasons that someone has decided to become a suicide bomber, we must look at the actions leading up to the bombing. If the bombing itself is the only evidence of instability, then it is not logical or helpful to claim that the instability is the reason for the bombing: because the bombing is given as the reason for the diagnosis of instability, the diagnosis of instability can not also be given as the reason for the suicide bombing.

Honestly, can you not see how that is circular?

Cool...

[Greyfox]

Maybe the telcos over there should increase random spam in the hopes of catching a few more of these guys before they wise up.

Brilliant!

[microbee]

1. The service provider can send people random texts when it detects they are just heading to a crowded area.
2. I'm going to write a block-incoming-text/call-until-I-reach-my-destination app and put it for iPhone and Android. I'd bet terrorists all over the world are going to buy it like crazy!

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[jc42]

I'd prefer to express it in the currently-popular fashion:

Q: Why do birds fly through the air?
A: Because they can.

This phrasing has the advantage that it tends to prevent people like me from interpreting the question as a request for "ultimate cause", and talking about birds' evolutionary history. That just brings down the wrath of the Intelligent Design (i.e. religious) folks on us, and we wouldn't want that, would we?

I'm not sure how one can turn the case of a suicide bomber into a similar source of humor.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[bickerdyke]

But you might guess you need to carry out a certain number of successfull suicide bombings before you get promoted to suicide-bomber-handler...

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[c6gunner]

I understand what you're saying, but the problem is that it IS a question of definitions. A deranged person is someone who does deranged things. If you accept that blowing up a crowded market is deranged, then you have to accept that the people who do it are deranged. There's no wiggle room there.

Moreover, your desire to look at their "motivations" is understandable, but largely irrelevant. If you go and firebomb an orphanage, and then tell me you did it because the fuchsia-lizards in your living-room told you to do it, it doesn't really matter what you think your reasons are - you did it because you're deranged. Finding the root cause would be nice, but that root cause isn't going to be present in the world as separate from you; it will be found either as a chemical imbalance in your cranium, or in the 'information" stored therein. Knowing what you think your motivations are doesn't help me, but finding a way to treat your condition might.

As for this bit:

because the bombing is given as the reason for the diagnosis of instability, the diagnosis of instability can not also be given as the reason for the suicide bombing

While this holds true for individual motivations, it doesn't hold true when we're discussing a label which is implicit in the action itself. When whats-his-nuts shot that governor a little while ago, plenty of people jumped to the conclusion that he was a tea-party zealot. And, in that case, your argument would hold true. You don't get to say "He shot the governor, so he must be a tea-party nut. And he must be a tea-party nut 'cos he shot the governor". The unstated premise there is that any time a governor is shot, it must be done by a tea-party member, which is downright silly. However, when you state that "He must have shot her because he was deranged, and I know he was deranged because he shot her", the unstated premise is that when a governor is shot, the person doing the shooting is deranged, which is certainly true in the colloquial sense of the word. If you want to get into clinical diagnosis, then we'd have to define the terms ahead of the time and have a different kind of discussion, but you'd just be splitting hairs.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[Firehed]

No, but if our normal clamoring about privacy is consistent with this story, it hopefully required them to get a warrant first. That can take time.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[Firehed]

Come on, it's right in TFS.

"...often use mobile phones as detonators with the bomber's handler, who is usually watching their charge, sending the bomber a text message to set off his or her explosive belt at the moment when it is thought they can inflict maximum casualties "

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[spun]

Ah, look. My grand dad killed a lot of people. He served in WWII. Killing a bunch of people does not necessarily mean you are deranged. I had a friend who had terminal cancer, then had her aorta split. She committed suicide. It was the most rational thing to do. Committing suicide is not necessarily irrational. I can think of cases where suicide bombing might be the best choice of action open to me. You can not simply define suicide bombing itself as deranged without knowing more about the situation. And knowing more about the situation is exactly what claims of insanity prevent. You say "Crazy!" as if that answers any important question. it doesn't.

What if what's his nuts had been a fanatic, and had no other evidence of being insane but the fact that he assassinated someone? Are you saying all assassins are deranged? I don't believe history bears that out. We say suicide bombers are crazy precisely because we do not want to know the real reasons Knowing the real reasons might entail some difficult introspection and soul searching on our part.

I don't think the majority of suicide bombers are crazy in the same way that what's his nuts is. Note that I am not trying to excuse their actions. I am saying, if we want to combat them, we must understand them. To understand them, we must look beyond "They are just crazy." That tells us nothing, it is basically stating that we do not and can not know the real root cause. It amounts to giving up.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[Vegemeister]

If that happens, just sheepishly walk over, pick the bomb back up, and try somewhere else. You can still use the remote detonator.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[Kvasio]

oblig movies here

Evil always turns on itself.

[steeleyeball]

Bombing people is evil... Spam is evil... Do the math!

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[tragedy]

It's not circular reasoning, it basically boils down to a tautology. Birds are fliers because they fly. Similarly, unstable people are defined as unstable because they do unstable things. It's not really begging the question or anything like that, it's just that committing suicide in and of itself is good evidence of being unstable, and taking a bunch of people with you on purpose is even more evidence of being unstable.

That said, not all suicide bombers are going to be unstable, some of them are going to be coerced.

Yeah Baby!

[stinkytoe]

Surfs up space ponies! I'm making gravy without the lumps!

I cant believe it.

[drolli]

Is it asked too much to write a simple j2me program waiting fro the *right* message? I dont have any experience with building bombs, but i know that it i would have to construct one the focus would be on *not making it explode in the wrong moment* (e.g. when wiring it up). Reacting to *any* message which comes in is purely stupid.

Reminds me to install spam assassin

[Crouty]

Wanted to do that for a long time now.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[mjwx]

No, suicide bombers are usually college educated middle class people. I know that makes for a more confusing narrative than "Unstable, idealistic, and poor," but it is true.

Collage educated in developing nations world countries means someone who has passed a hospitality course required to work in McD's or has taken a trade. Often it's equivalent to a western yr 9 or 10 education where the average level of education is yr 5 or 6.

Peoples minds are most easily influenced when they are young, 16-21 years of age where they've just reached full maturity and are finding out how hard the real world is. Why do you think the highest suicide rates in western societies are in the 16-25 age group. So there is your unstable and idealistic.

Also when you live in a warzone, even if you've trained as a carpenter or have your certificate in hospitality there is often no place to work. There is your poor.

So they've worked hard, yet have no money, no hope and no future Or you could just call it, unstable, idealistic and poor. So some silver tongued extremist gives them a load of bollocks about how great their god/idea/cause is and shows them some kindness that the world has not. This kind of confidence trick gets played on young kids in western societies all the time, especially on young girls (I.E. 35 yr old peruses 18 yr old girl for sex by playing pandering to her feeling of hardship).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_bomber#Profile_of_attackers

When quoting Wikipedia it's important to read the article to gain some context. From this very section of the article.

Robert Pape, director of the Chicago Project on Suicide Terrorism, found the majority of suicide bombers came from the educated middle classes. A study of the remains of 110 suicide bombers for the first part of 2007 by Afghan pathologist Dr. Yusef Yadgari, found 80% were missing limbs before the blasts, other suffered from cancer, leprosy, or some other ailments.

Also consider what is middle class in Afghanistan. This would be to own a bit of land, a few head of livestock and be able to work your own land. I'm currently in Thailand and they would call that poor, I work an average IT job in OZ and the Thai's call me rich. Context is very, very important.

Also

Use of suicide terror against civilian targets has differing effects on the attackers' goals (see reaction below). Some economists suggest that this tactic goes beyond symbolism and is actually a response to commodified, controlled, or devalued lives, as the suicide attackers apparently consider family prestige and financial compensation from the community as compensation for their own lives.

So money is a consideration as is the raising of their families status. In developing nations I've visited in Asia, a families status is very important. We don't place much value on it in the west because we've more or less done away with class systems but in poorer nations they haven't. To a Thai, the family status is very important, they will lie and cheat to prevent an uncomfortable truth from harming their face and status, high status enables you to break laws without consequence and in Thailand your status is very much influenced by the amount of money you have.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[freedumb2000]

In Russia? I doubt it.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[Peeteriz]

Just as the poster above said - 'some idealistic kid', which most often happens to be a middle-class guy in/after college.

Technology fail.

[dewexdewex]

Sometimes SMS messages take just under a day to reach my phone.

Security

[Anonymous Coward]

They should probably implement OAuth or a sign in with Facebook link.

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[Xest]

I actually read your link (yeah, there's a thing!), and it seems to be referring to specific studies in specific locations, one study talks about Afghanistan but of course the Afghan middle class can't be considered the same as the US middle class, they're just completely different.

The link also does nothing to suggest that the people aren't unstable, even if they are middle class, and says nothing about how idealistic the people are.

I suspect you would see differences across the globe, certainly in the UK our suicide bombers on 7/7 and the failed bombers on 21/7 really were all from relatively poor backgrounds, generally having problems ranging from unemployment to depression, to drug abuse.

Those that attacked Glasgow airport were far better educated had planted bombs in London but they were timed rather than suicide attacks, and it's not clear that their airport attack was designed to be a suicide attack- certainly it only ended up that way for one of them who died from severe burns some days later after managing to set himself alight with a petrol bomb which ignited nowhere near any potential targets. The other is I believe somewhere in the legal system, presumably in jail now because he was certainly captured, and I don't believe he's killed himself.

I don't think it's generally simple to determine who is likely to become a suicide bomber, there are examples from all walks of life, but certainly it's wrong to dismiss the idea that a good proportion, if not a majority have been from poor, poorly educated, possibly mentally ill backgrounds. Certainly that has been the case in Iraq, and certainly this has been the case with many Chechnyan suicide bombers. There have certainly been a number of cases of mentally ill people used:

http://www.iraqwarlogs.com/2010/10/22/al-qaeda-abuse-of-vulnerable/

Re:Best story ever. [citation needed]

[spun]

I had a good friend who had terminal cancer, then her aorta split. She committed suicide. It was the most rational choice. My granddad served in WWII. He was in the cavalry (they used light tanks, not horses, though) He killed a lot of people. He wasn't unstable.

Suicide and murder are not always the acts of an unstable person. Sometimes, there are comprehensible reasons for these acts.