I'm almost 24 hours behind, so I apologize in advance if someone has already come up with this hypothesis.
In regards to the Weldon report and the "SEA" mention, I'm throwing out another possibility: SEA is the USPS code for the Seattle airport. I haven't looked at a map yet, but I would hazard a guess that it is slightly closer to the Canadian border, and could be considered a viable target possibility. A Canadian plane veering off-course towards a nuclear reactor would raise alarms. A Canadian jet coming into an airport would be less likely to, until it was too late. Although the damage inflicted would be less devestating than if a nuclear reactor were hit, consider the immediate impact on the airline industry if a hijacked airliner were able to take out an international terminal.
Just a scary thought...
Signing off for the evening. Have a nice night folks.
See my post at #3103.
And lo and behold, Seattle is mentioned right after the Weldon article re: SEA.
Your hypothesis makes more sense than a nuke reactor. As others have pointed out, it would be pretty difficult to do major damage to a reactor from a structural standpoint. A major airport would be easier, I would think.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1282666/posts?q=1&&page=3103#3103
To: Donna Lee Nardo; All
I'm almost 24 hours behind, so I apologize in advance if someone has already come up with this hypothesis.
In regards to the Weldon report and the "SEA" mention, I'm throwing out another possibility: SEA is the USPS code for the Seattle airport. I haven't looked at a map yet, but I would hazard a guess that it is slightly closer to the Canadian border, and could be considered a viable target possibility. A Canadian plane veering off-course towards a nuclear reactor would raise alarms. A Canadian jet coming into an airport would be less likely to, until it was too late. Although the damage inflicted would be less devestating than if a nuclear reactor were hit, consider the immediate impact on the airline industry if a hijacked airliner were able to take out an international terminal.
Just a scary thought...
3,103 posted on 12/15/2004 3:32:46 PM PST by liberallyconservative (A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both. - Eisenhower)
===
===
Note: The following text is an exact quote:
---
---
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/2004/12/004343print.html
December 17, 2004
Congressman: Terrorists Plan To Attack Power Plant. Government: No, They Don't
From AP, with thanks to Jeffrey Imm:
CONCORD, N.H. -- A Pennsylvania congressman who is writing a book about an Iranian plot to conduct an attack on the United States says a terrorist group in that country is planning to attack New Hampshire's Seabrook nuclear plant.
But state and federal officials are playing down the comments from Delaware County Republican Curt Weldon, reported this week in The New York Sun. They say they know of no specific threat against Seabrook.
"There is always that general possibility (of a terrorist attack on the Seabrook reactor)," said Jim Van Dongen, state Emergency Management spokesman, "but we haven't received any information that it's going to happen tomorrow."
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission said no particular sites have been threatened.
"As we have said before -- and it continues to be the case -- there has been no credible threat against a specific nuclear power plant," NRC spokeswoman Sue Gagner said. "We are in regular contact with intelligence and other federal officials on such matters."
A message seeking comment was left Friday morning with Weldon's press secretary in Washington.
Weldon, the vice chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, told The Sun that a source with high-level Iranian government contacts had told him a terrorist group in Iran plans to hijack Canadian airliners and crash them into an American reactor.
Posted at December 17, 2004 03:42 PM