13 ms·
This article doesn't make this so explicit, but ATT infrastructure appears to be the intentional target of the bombing. You can see the building in the helicopt
by joshuakelly 6y ago
This article doesn't make this so explicit, but ATT infrastructure appears to be the intentional target of the bombing. You can see the building in the helicopter shot at the top of the NYTimes article on the story: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/25/us/nashville-explosion.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/25/us/nashville-explosion.ht...
Obviously a telecommunications/switch hub, with it being a large windowless building in a downtown core.
The other thing that's particularly odd is the fact that the attackers appear to have broadcasted some sort of warning or evacuation message from the site of the bombing prior to the explosion.
- paxys 6y agoWhat is the source for AT&T being the intentional target? Maybe it just happened to be the building in the background?
- deathgrips 6y agoMaybe the real targets were the pigeons on the sidewalk?
- fibers 6y agoif you look at the map on the opposite side of the street/block its filled with random pubs/liquor stores/restaurants. do you really think the target was random restaurants?
- lovetocode 6y agoI’d like to play the devil’s advocate. The restaurant industry took a big hit this year due to COVID. The motivation is there.
- capitol_ 6y agoYou mean that it's insurance fraud? Wouldn't it be more effective to burn the restaurant down if you wanted to do that?
- tptacek 6y agoAT&T says that their services went down along with the gas & power in the area, as a side effect: the gas shutoff cut off their backup generators. That doesn't sound all that targeted.
- buildbot 6y agoCould just be good planning if they knew that was procedure after an explosion.
- elmo2you 6y agoIt could be interesting for regulators to see if anyone "miraculously" managed to make a lot of money from/during this incident, because some people do have the resources to pull something like this off and make a profit from it. But I think it's rather unlikely. Aside from that, I seriously doubt that just disruption of AT&T services was the objective here. Considering that this appears to have been a rather serious explosion, I guess the intent was more likely destruction rather than disruption. With the amount of 5G nut jobs running around these days, I suspect that it is far more likely that somebody just seriously underestimated what it takes to bring down a building like this one. But I guess that time will tell (more). I'm just speculating of course.
- brundolf 6y agoIt honestly reminds me of something from an Ocean's movie, where they destroy some piece of infrastructure just to get past a security camera or something But the 5G conspiracist angle actually makes a ton of sense.
- covercash 6y agoThere’s always the option of disgruntled/fired employee out to destroy the company.
- Throwaway1771 6y ago
- tyingq 6y agoSome of the images from the NYT article for those that are paywalled. https://imgur.com/a/Hi9Rzi7 https://imgur.com/a/Hi9Rzi7
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- nr2x 6y agoFAIRVIEW source for VOIP. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairview_(surveillance_program) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairview_(surveillance_program...
- gizmo686 6y agoSending a warning before a bombing isn't that uncommon. It's less common (although not entirely unheard of) if the bombing is a terrorist attack. But if, as you suggest, that target is infrastructure, the only real reason to not give a warning is tactical. WIthout knowing who is responsible for it, it is possible they wanted to inflict whatever damage they had in mind, without causing any loss of life or human injuries.
- stevekemp 6y agoThe IRA often used to send out warnings for their terrorist attacks. (Not always of course, but it wasn't so unusual).
- rorykoehler 6y agoThe IRA nearly always sent warnings in the 90s. Usually by calling a radio station with a code word.
- harperlee 6y agoSame with ETA in Spain. > It's less common (although not entirely unheard of) if the bombing is a terrorist attack. But if, as you suggest, that target is infrastructure A terrorist attack’s first objective is to cause terror, not to kill people. Thus warning in advance is also effective to instill terror. And separating terrorism from bombing infrastructure is a weird dichotomy...
- notsureaboutpg 6y agoWhat about when countries bomb each other's infrastructure during war? That both causes terror in the populace and achieves a strategic objective... If causing terror were a hallmark of a terrorist attack, wouldn't every attack be a terror attack (even, for example, mass school shootings or shootings like the Las Vegas shooting, etc.)
- erikpukinskis 6y ago
- takeda 6y agoWondering if it was anti-5G related.
- rendall 6y agoI suspect the target of the bombing was the Melting Pot, a fondue restaurant. Have you ever had fondue? Burns the roof of your mouth, every time. It should be illegal
- thom 6y agoYou’ve got to perfect the right technique to spin your fork so you don’t lose cheese, while allowing it to cool before popping it in your mouth. This is one of the pleasures of fondue for me.
- m1sta_ 6y agoTrigger failover. Access data.
- tomjen3 6y agoThe IRAs most successful bombings targeted the financial hubs with plenty of warning so they cost massive monetary damages, but no loss of life.
- throwaway743 6y agoWatch it be anti-5G related... oh boy...
- playingchanges 6y agoJust to add an interesting bit it appears possible there was someone in or in the direct vicinity of the vehicle when it exploded. https://www.chicagotribune.com/nation-world/ct-nw-nashville-rv-explosion-updates-20201226-rftanvaq7bcilfwv6lxiudhyei-story.html https://www.chicagotribune.com/nation-world/ct-nw-nashville-...