To: Brian Kopp DPM
Not to question Mr. Starnes’ report but if the media's definition of “Weapons of Mass Destruction” is as loose as their definition of “Assault Weapons”, this kid could have had anything from an Atomic Bomb down to a couple of Cherry Bombs.
So as usual I think I will sit an wait for further reporting.
8 posted on
01/25/2014 10:39:46 AM PST by
Tupelo
(I am feeling more like Philip Nolan every day)
To: Tupelo
I’ve seen someone charged with possession of a weapon of mass destruction and it was a shotgun. Seriously.
To: Tupelo
I was thinking the kid had built a device that would spread zits. He successfully tested it on himself and, once activated, would disable the entire twit world.
21 posted on
01/25/2014 11:15:00 AM PST by
cherokee1
(skip the names---just kick the buttz)
To: Tupelo
He must of had a Suitcase nuke.
27 posted on
01/25/2014 11:44:52 AM PST by
angcat
To: Tupelo
if the media's definition of Weapons of Mass Destruction is as loose as their definition of Assault Weapons, this kid could have had anything from an Atomic Bomb down to a couple of Cherry Bombs. That was my first thought, too. What is the definition of mass destruction? Is it 3 people or 30 or 300 or 3000? My definition is closer to the 3000 which would mean it was military grade and I highly doubt some pot smokin' teen would have anything like that stuffed into a bag.
Another question, is he really Chechen or at least have Chechen associations?
42 posted on
01/25/2014 12:58:15 PM PST by
bgill
To: Tupelo
It is not just the media - the govt uses the term loosely at times, too. It could be some kind of explosive, or it could be a science project. We have to wait until Sunday to read it in the Altoona Mirror ;)
49 posted on
01/25/2014 1:53:58 PM PST by
PghBaldy
(12/14 - 930am -rampage begins... 12/15 - 1030am - Obama's advance team scouts photo-op locations.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson