Like Fire, Fear Spreads When Given Plenty Of Air

fear mongering continues....

Published on June 6, 2007 By Sean Conners aka SConn1 In War on Terror

Recently, the White House continued on it's fear mongering campaign, instead of actually dealing with national security or anything that actually might do some good. This week's laughable JFK plot was just another example of rhetoric and fear over facts and reason.

The Bush appointed US Attorney, a group that has recently been scared into loyalty or face firing, announced the plot, describing it's results to be "unthinkable."

Yeah, they were unthinkable, as in impossible.

OF course, this isn't surprising from an administration who just a couple weeks ago contended that a few wanabees were going to go into the heavily fortified Fort Dix complex and somehow terrorize our military. A group that was so competent and skilled, they were found out by a Circuit City clerk.

What the administration failed to mention is that their description of the plot and the results of such an attack would defy the laws of physics, not to mention common sense.

Jet fuel isn't gasoline, and isn't nearly as volitile as what we put into our cars. It would take a minute or 2 just to get any ignition at all if one used a blowtorch. And it doesn't spread nearly as fast as gasoline would. There would also be plenty of opportunity to shut off one of 5 or 6 valves before it ever reached anyone. That is if there was enough oxygen, which there wouldn't be, in the pipeline.

And the governement failed to mention just how pathetic, like the Fort Dix crew, and others like the "shoe bomber" actually was. They had no inside information. No intelligence information. No funding whatsoever from anyone. All they had was what you and I have available at our fingertips, "Google Earth."

There was a real danger in relation to the JFK jet fuel pipelines. If someone could manage to shut down 5 or 6 airports fuel supply, it would have an impact. Tho, we probably would find a way to adapt around the inconveniences, like we always do.

What's more stunning than the plot, is the fact that this US Attorney that worked on this case for about a year and a half didn't even know the real dangers or the physics of the whole situation. Whether she was speaking out of her own ignorance or was directed to spew things that simply weren't in the spectrum of reality is anyone's guess at this point.

This is at least the 13th time the administration has used these lame fear tactics where they either hype up some wanabees who are a bigger danger to themselves in all likelihood than they are to anyone else or use sketchy, old info as if it was current and solid.

The following link reprints a transcript from Countdown, which details the fear mongering...

Link

Comments (Page 5)

cactoblasta

on Jun 17, 2007

And all that was only for a few political cartoons. They did much the same stuff for Newsweek's erroneous reporting of the toilet-bowl "flushings" of Muslim prayer books, by US guards, at Gitmo.
If that sounds like simply "shouting a bit and bitterly complaining", I think maybe Australia is a little more exciting than I've heard.

First of all - so that's the incident you meant! I couldn't pick it from your initial description.

More topically - I guess Australia is more exciting, although the throwing of rocks and the burning of embassies are frankly a surprise to me. This really happened everywhere with a Muslim population? How strange I never heard about it beyond a handful of chronologically isolated examples in the Middle East! I must have overlooked the billowing smoke and sky blackened from flung stones emanating from the Muslim/embassy district situated a few miles away from where I live.

Oh, and in Australia it's not uncommon for protests to involve screaming abuse at people, parades and the burning of effigies and flags, even over quite minor issues (such as perceived attacks on religion, or students, or the treatment of ethnic minorities). I'm surprised it's considered extraordinary and unthinkable in the US, but you are a different country; I can't get there by bus! Naturally you'd have different ways.

Rightwinger

on Jun 17, 2007

How strange I never heard about it beyond a handful of chronologically isolated examples in the Middle East! I must have overlooked the billowing smoke and sky blackened from flung stones emanating from the Muslim/embassy district situated a few miles away from where I live.

Oh, and in Australia it's not uncommon for protests to involve screaming abuse at people, parades and the burning of effigies and flags, even over quite minor issues (such as perceived attacks on religion, or students, or the treatment of ethnic minorities). I'm surprised it's considered extraordinary and unthinkable in the US, but you are a different country; I can't get there by bus! Naturally you'd have different ways.

---Cacto

Just like Baker....you're semantics are virtually flawless. How proud you must be. Congratulations.

cactoblasta

on Jun 17, 2007

Just like Baker....you're semantics are virtually flawless. How proud you must be. Congratulations.

I'm merely trying to point out that when we're talking MAINSTREAM we have to consider the actions of the MAJORITY. Incidents that only happen in a FEW places are NOT MAINSTREAM. Do you understand now or do you still there's only semantic differences (which coincidentally is a branch of linguistics entirely concerned with meaning) between MAINSTREAM and MINORITY?

Please let me know if you continue to have difficulties distinguishing between the two. I'm not sure if I'll be able to help further, but at least I'll know more accurately where you're coming from.

Rightwinger

on Jun 23, 2007

I'm merely trying to point out that when we're talking MAINSTREAM we have to consider the actions of the MAJORITY. Incidents that only happen in a FEW places are NOT MAINSTREAM. Do you understand now or do you still there's only semantic differences (which coincidentally is a branch of linguistics entirely concerned with meaning) between MAINSTREAM and MINORITY?

Please let me know if you continue to have difficulties distinguishing between the two. I'm not sure if I'll be able to help further, but at least I'll know more accurately where you're coming from.

---Cacto

I understand perfectly the difference between "Mainstream", and "Minority"....what you refuse to acknowledge is that a MINORITY--a Muslim-acknowledged 10-20% of 1.3 billion billion people---is still a big chunk of warm bodies. And, that only a very small MINORITY of the MAINSTREAM of that 1.3 billion seem to be willing to stand with us in opposition, which makes many of us--at least those who aren't in near-total denial--wonder if support for the terrorist MINORITY isn't really a MAINSTREAM ideal. Do you understand me, now?

By the way....if I took your comment #61 too seriously, forgive me. I kind of got that impression from the rest. If that's the case, I apologize.

Skyjack

on Jun 29, 2007

And the MAFIA? What, fighting for Christ hahahahahahahahahahahah! oh my, what a piss-poor analogy.

show me a catholic church that doesn't take their money. where 's the outrage? it doesn't exist.

So that makes them "fighting for Christ"? hahahahahhaha

Piss-poor analogy....still.

Is the Pope sending out "fatwas"

to the mafia to be carried out? Not in about 700 years or so.

Just a rock-thrower you are.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!