Replies

I'm no lover of the MSM and I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Let me pose a hypothetical. Suppose the news media had been aware that terrorists had plans to use hijack airliners as suicide weapons. Should they have let that be known?

Another hypothetical: Should the media let it be known that ammonium nitrate and fuel oil are explosive ingredients for a bomb?

You can make the case either way. If the knowledge inspires other terrorists or criminals to mischief it's a bad thing. But if good people are aware of the dangers, they have a heads up.

The way I think about it, we have two things in our favor. 1) We are smarter than they are and 2) There are more of us than there are of them. Availability of knowledge always favors the wiser and more numerous combatant.

We are more numerous, and while that should be advantageous, the government, our government, has handcuffed us by identifying our enemy as a vague terrorist rather than what they really are, Islamic extremists, and most Arab.

I do appreciate your hypothetical questions. The media did broadcast many hijacking alerts prior to 9-11. While few thought the airliners could be used as manned missiles, most realized such hijackings would threaten lives.

The ammonia nitrate question could have best been handled by dispensers of this agent. That is solely my opinion anyway. The general public didn't need to hear the specifics of how this component is made into weapons. If the release of these details provide a single person with the knowledge they need to end one life it is one too many.

Back to the very beginning of the article we are posting to. Hypothetically speaking, should the media broadcast how a relatively small nuclear weapon could be delivered for optimum effect just to alert the public? I do not believe releasing such information to the general public could benefit anyone but those intending to use such weapons. While it would be beneficial to alert the public what to watch for, and what to do in the event of such an attack, speculative details of how to apply such a weapon should be withheld. I've a sense this subject will one day be breached by the media and it will detail which metropolitan areas would suffer the greatest potential loss.

Let me ask a question. As with the "Cold War" period we now live under threat of a nuclear attack by Islamic extremists. The media knows this. How many news segments have you seen since 9-11 that have detailed how the public should react if such an attack became a reality? I've seen none, not a single one. That is notable as such an attack could cause a great loss of life if people do not know how to properly react in the area struck.

Media has got to be held to a more responsible role in our safety. They could be a more proactive part of our national security. I really don't think you and I are far apart in how to address security. I know this. From your responses I'd trust you much more than the general media on security issues.