Posted on 09/22/2001 2:05:18 AM PDT by kattracks
Interesting.
My exact thought as I watched the disaster the morning of the 11th.
In fact; I'd thought their attacks might spread progressively into the heartland where I am; flyover country?
Where although we were in horror alright, it was still nonetheless happening in a far-away place.
Had they struck an hour or so after the Pentagon & WTC in say, Louisville, KY or KC MO at *some* event whereby many people had amassed?
They'd have succeeded in creating near unmanageable panick.
Several of the stay-at-home Moms dropped over that Tuesday morning to hear my take on this; where & what I thought it all meant?
These Angels are in their early 30s, so seasoned in the ways of the world they're not.
Anyway, I asked these gals why they hadn't picked up their kids, or, why the schools hadn't sent the kids back home to 'em?
I explained my theory & said a High Scool/Jr.High/Grade School might serve well as a viable target??
None of 'em could figure out the failure of the schools to cancel classes, either.
"Like I said,Bush flying all the way to Nebraska is what makes me think this."
I guess the SS tried to do what wasn't an obvious move on the part of the POTUS?
A trap can't work if one doesn't behave as anticipated.
"Well,that along with the fact that I was initially shocked the terrorists using airliners instead of nukes to start with."
I found what the animals did with those airliners the only thing making any sense, given their resources.
How & what they did proved to me, beyond a shadow of a doubt, the Islamic whackos still do not possess this "suitcase" technology; as so many are wont to believe?
Seems a reasonable deducement that if they'd had 'em?
They'd have used 'em.
Either urban legend or an overreach by our propaganda ministry.
Before you flame, propaganda is necessary on both sides. Ours are just dumber than theirs.
Yes, I've heard these same claims; however, the bunch responsible for hitting us 9-11 were not the people in possession of such devices.
Had they access to suitcase nukes, they'd have used one in both the heart of NYC, and DC.
There can be no doubt about that.
"Stay tuned for a foreign shipping container ( plain steel, from ship to truck to your neighborhood ). I am betting a major university in a city. Hurt America? Hurt the children-en mass."
That's altogether possible, sure.
What we could agree on unequivocally would be they'll strike at a very high density area; when & if they make their move using one of these things.
*That's* how I know they don't have any nuclear devices right now.
So does the "Animal Liberation Front (ANF) and PETA,as far as that goes.
>>Think Bush will go after them?<<
Not a chance. Not until they blow up the first dam,that is. Maybe even the second one. These rabid enviromentalists have WAAAAYYYYY too much political support/power within the Dim Party. Hell,Goober is one of these cretins. No way in hell are there enough votes in Congress to fund any actions against ANY enviromental organization,no matter how nutty they are.
BTW,did you listen to FOX News this morning? They said JJ gave a "blame America" speech in Chicago,while Louis Farakhan was giving a speech in NY (I THINK)and was almost foaming at the mouth mad over the terrorist attacks. Jesse was expected,but when it comes to Farakhan,it's getting to where you just can't trust ANYBODY anymore!(G)
IMHO,you may well be right about everything but the above. The Chinese didn't steal squat,not even matchbooks. Everything they got was either given or sold to them by Bubba bin Bombing and his merry band of fascist traitors.
I understand Mary Jo is going to campign for Rhino in Florida next election. She's going to handle the short stops and speeches.
Face it,they never expected for anybody to see their files,so they could name them anything they wanted.
Self-extracting compressed text (ZIP) files come with .exe suffixes. You execute it and it uncompresses the embedded text file(s) for you.
TJMOICBW
Slainte,
CC
It's not a question of "believe". I DO work with self-extracting ZIP files with a ".exe" extension frequently.
It's the traditional way to distribute files to people who might not have pkunzip installed on their machine
I know ...... she let a whole gaggle of them go from the first WTC bombing
.
a) scare people
b) make them distrustful of the people, institutions, and things upon which they perforce depend and,
c) most importantly, are new.
You are IOW negative and superficial to the point of cynicism, and that adds up to anticonservatism. The source of your political perspective hides in plain sight; you wouldn't have even sought the job if you were conservative. To people who vicerally understand the superficiality of "there's nothing more worthless than yesterday's newspaper" journalism,
looking like fools
is simply the journalist's natural state of being.
Whether it makes sense to call journalism's inherent perspective a "bias" depends on whether they do or do not have a constitutional right to publish their perspective. Patently a print journalist is part of "the press" under the First Amendment, so there the answer is unambiguously that there is no more sense to criticizing their perspective than they would have in criticizing yours.
But since the First Amendment forbids censorship, and the FCC is actually the Federal Communications Censorship Commission (what, after all, does it do besides preventing people other than licensees from broadcasting?) Broadcast Journalism is Unnecessary and Illegitimate. No way can you make the case that a select few government licensees should be broadcasting, let alone broadcasting politics on election day, and even telling voters that the issue has been decided before the polls close.
The idea that journalism is or should be or even can be "objective" rather than political is the biggest whopper going.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.