Re: CDR: Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
On Sat, 22 Mar 2003, Tyler Durden wrote: 1. What makes these lies as you claim commie? Do you think that by impugning US policy in the region we are by implication stating that the forced exit of the Soviets was bad? Quite saying commie all the time. All the commies are dead, except for 1 in Cuba and a couple of really old guys in rural China. Hey, what do you guys want? Not only are we not very useful, but, hell, I don't think we've been *communist* since at least the first attempt around at asian nations. Oh, wait. Commie means not like me. 2. You knowledge of history is as shoddy as your ability to spot communists and their lies. The CIA actively recruited and trained Isalmic religious students and helped build and arm the Taliban. And frankly, despite the fact I've never been a supporter of US foreign policy, I was all for it. The Taliban SEEMED at the time to represent a clear moral force that alone had the power to unify Afghanistan and bring an end to the Chaos. WHat exactly went wrong I have never fully understood, though I DO know that had I been Afghani, and had I seen a foreign Talib slapping around an Afghan woman, I would have done my best to off the punk. ANd Mullah Omar doesn't seem to have been all there on some levels... Mr. Powell, please meet Mr. Durden. Mr. Durden.. oh, hell he isn't European, is he? He is? Fuck it. Kill him anyway. I'm bored. Is there any cake around? -j -- Jamie Lawrence[EMAIL PROTECTED] I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country. - Thomas Jefferson
Re: CDR: Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
-- On 23 Mar 2003 at 8:09, Jamie Lawrence wrote: Hey, what do you guys want? Not only are we not very useful, but, hell, I don't think we've been *communist* since at least the first attempt around at asian nations. Oh, wait. Commie means not like me. Commie is an explanation for the fact that hostile lies about US allies who fought communists are usually accompanied by favorable lies about the Soviet Union and its servants. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG 2k9j5EK5Y4xNHQyHIAHgfLEiBFSDcgpeGajUQCOX 4+j+jTZ2GtM5shPO9ERgehUNxAfGbwxxmz4PJ1VFo
Re: CDR: Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
On Sun, 23 Mar 2003, James A. Donald wrote: Commie is an explanation for the fact that hostile lies about US allies who fought communists are usually accompanied by favorable lies about the Soviet Union and its servants. --digsig James A. Donald That's an interesting private definition. I'm glad you've finally voiced one. Now, for instance, I no longer have to waste precious cycles thinking that you just use the term for anyone who fails to have an absurd hatred for outspoken professors of language*. -j *The aforementioned statement should not be taken to presume the author has any love for outspoken linguists. -- Jamie Lawrence[EMAIL PROTECTED] Humans are at least as numerous as pigeons, their brains are not significantly costlier than pigeon brains, and for many tasks they are actually superior. -Richard Dawkins
Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
-- Ken Brown: But there certainly was some assistance from the US to the Taliban. US They didn't buy those 500 Stingers in Kmart James A. Donald: Commie lies. At the beginning of the recent Afghan war the US estimated the Taliban had at most fifty stingers. During the war it became apparent that they had far fewer, probably only the twelve that Hekmatyar gave them. Tyler Durden 1. What makes these lies as you claim commie? Do you think that by impugning US policy in the region we are by implication stating that the forced exit of the Soviets was bad? Yes. The demonization of US allies in Afghanistan is usually accompanied by a whitewash of the Soviet regime they were fighting -- as for example in the much repeated lie that the US intervened in Afghanistan before the Soviets did -- see the post http://groups.google.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ing.google.com for Nathan Folkert's response to this lie. Quite saying commie all the time. All the commies are dead, except for 1 in Cuba and a couple of really old guys in rural China. Yet oddly, I encounter the ideology and program of Pol Pot every day in the newsgroups. Dan Clore is still defending the Khmer Rouge, and G*rd*n assures us we have no way of knowing that Kim in North Korea has done anything wrong, people are still arguing that Stalin's efforts to subdue Greece was a spontaneous uprising of the oppressed Greek masses against their fascist overlords, and that Stalin's alliance with Hitler was forced on him by the planned imperialist aggression of Britain and the US. 2. You knowledge of history is as shoddy as your ability to spot communists and their lies. The CIA actively recruited and trained Isalmic religious students and helped build and arm the Taliban. The Taliban did not exist until long after the CIA had entirely forgotten about Afghanistan. As the enemies of the Taliban pointed out frequently and vigorously, the people who became the Taliban had no freedom fighter credentials, had not fought against the Soviet Union. Since they had not fought against the Soviets they had not received aid from the US. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG Xr+mXsZhgSN1VunXmTNlLq6WqQMj7FBTXHVmf9cG 4eeh8LJgnQvPDD/UTHjbkqVEnW+ciCAm09E3q9vA1
Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
James D wrote... -- On 21 Mar 2003 at 12:55, Ken Brown wrote: US originally helped the kind of people who later became the Northern Alliance - a rather odd mixture of unreconstructed Stalinists, liberals in the European sense of the word, separationists, local bandit chiefs, drug growers, pro-Iranian Shiite Islamists and who knows what else. The Taliban formed later, in Pakistan, and was at least at first indirectly funded by the US through Pakistan and through material inherited from some other groups - and of course later by various Arabs (who may or may not have thought of themselves as Al Qaida before the US pinned the name on them while looking for a New Enemy for the New World Order). But there certainly was some assistance from the US to the Taliban. US They didn't buy those 500 Stingers in Kmart Commie lies. My understanding is that the Taliban got twelve stingers, not five hundred, and they got them from Hekmatyar, who did get them from the US. Hekmatyar was certainly anti US, arguably a Stalinist and a supporter of terrorism, but he was not and is not an islamic fundamentalist -- his alliance with the taliban was rather like Saddam's alliance with Bin Laden. They temporarily agreed to hate someone else more than they hate each other. At the beginning of the recent Afghan war the US estimated the Taliban had at most fifty stingers. During the war it became apparent that they had far fewer, probably only the twelve that Hekmatyar gave them. 1. What makes these lies as you claim commie? Do you think that by impugning US policy in the region we are by implication stating that the forced exit of the Soviets was bad? Quite saying commie all the time. All the commies are dead, except for 1 in Cuba and a couple of really old guys in rural China. 2. You knowledge of history is as shoddy as your ability to spot communists and their lies. The CIA actively recruited and trained Isalmic religious students and helped build and arm the Taliban. And frankly, despite the fact I've never been a supporter of US foreign policy, I was all for it. The Taliban SEEMED at the time to represent a clear moral force that alone had the power to unify Afghanistan and bring an end to the Chaos. WHat exactly went wrong I have never fully understood, though I DO know that had I been Afghani, and had I seen a foreign Talib slapping around an Afghan woman, I would have done my best to off the punk. ANd Mullah Omar doesn't seem to have been all there on some levels... _ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
At 02:03 PM 3/20/03 +, Ken Brown wrote: Of all the places in the world you ought not to go if you want to not be shot at, a war with 8 sides (Residual Lebanese govt. vs Palestinians vs. Israel vs Islamist Shia militias vs. non-Islamist Shia militias vs. Sunni militias vs Maronite militias vs Druze - with interference from Iran Syria) at least 3 of whom hate /all/ the others, and /all/ of whom have a history of shooting at each other, is hardly at the top of the list. If you go to where the vultures and the jackals are disputing over a corpse that isn't actually dead, you have yourself to blame if you get bitten. So, I don't suppose you've heard about our more recent forays into the Balkans, Somalia, and Afghanistan --John Kelsey, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
At 09:57 AM 03/20/2003 -0500, Tyler Durden wrote: Good work, Shaddack. Gold star and smiley face. My father has mentioned the Texas City incident a few times while growing up (he grew up in Galveston). He remembers that it basically dissappeared in a giant fireball, and there was never an explanation. My first experience with earthquake-like events was in about 1970, when there was an explosion at some duPont fertilizer or chemical plant in New Jersey. Across the river in Delaware, we heard and felt it, and the building I was in rocked a bit. Google isn't helping me remember exactly when or what it was :-)
Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
-- The Taliban did not exist back then. The guys the US aided were for the most part, the guys that are running Afghanistan now. The major recipients of US aid, for example the lion of Afghanistan were the people the Taliban murdered. On 20 Mar 2003 at 8:16, Mike Rosing wrote: The Talib's have been around for more than a century. The British fought them in the late 1800's in their first try to conquer Afghanistan. The British did not fight Sunni islamic fundamentalists. The Taliban belongs to a sect that has never had a large following in Afghanistan, which is part of the reason why they drove out much of the Afghan population. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG 53Wyhn5mvmbLsfCa8xeusjGGTFC0Ynkauohr4Uov 4nszIWnEYzkvcoHX0K/dqcsoCOCdvV1NwFasx3H/G
Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
At 07:42 AM 3/20/03 -0800, James A. Donald wrote: ... The story you are telling is part of a big commie lie -- that the US aided the bigoted Taliban against the elightened communists who created a constitutional democracy where every man and every women have a vote, and universal education and health care were guaranteed, etc. I guess the particular Commie lie I'd always heard along these lines was more like the US aided a lot of crazed, bloodthirsty bandit chieftains who were nominally anti-communist, and deeply anti-invading-Russians, some of whom later wound up being Taliban bandit chieftains. I haven't dug into this story to see if it's true, but I certainly don't recall ever being exposed to the idea that the invading Russians and their allies were anything but brutal and nasty. We have a long history of holding our noses and handing weapons to objectionable folks who seem likely to help us fight our fights or accomplish our objectives. Surely it's not too hard to think of current examples --digsig James A. Donald --John Kelsey, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
John Kelsey wrote: At 07:42 AM 3/20/03 -0800, James A. Donald wrote: ... The story you are telling is part of a big commie lie -- that the US aided the bigoted Taliban against the elightened communists who created a constitutional democracy where every man and every women have a vote, and universal education and health care were guaranteed, etc. I guess the particular Commie lie I'd always heard along these lines was more like the US aided a lot of crazed, bloodthirsty bandit chieftains who were nominally anti-communist, and deeply anti-invading-Russians, some of whom later wound up being Taliban bandit chieftains. US originally helped the kind of people who later became the Northern Alliance - a rather odd mixture of unreconstructed Stalinists, liberals in the European sense of the word, separationists, local bandit chiefs, drug growers, pro-Iranian Shiite Islamists and who knows what else. The Taliban formed later, in Pakistan, and was at least at first indirectly funded by the US through Pakistan and through material inherited from some other groups - and of course later by various Arabs (who may or may not have thought of themselves as Al Qaida before the US pinned the name on them while looking for a New Enemy for the New World Order). But there certainly was some assistance from the US to the Taliban. US They didn't buy those 500 Stingers in Kmart (though some of them might have later turned up for sale in Peshawar or wherever it is they sell such things)
Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
At 2:59 PM -0800 3/19/03, Tim May wrote: The greater threat is that access to one's home is impaired, or a car breakdown occurs, which is why carrying a bag in a vehicle makes so much sense: a shovel for digging out, a few blankets or a sleeping bag, water, a flashlight, flares and other road emergency supplies, maybe a GPS, a transistor radio, spare batteries, simple food rations, a few tools, and some small assortment of extra junk like duct tape, fishing line, wire, etc. And the gun I mentioned. If you go to any of the National Parks with a bear problem (e.g. Sequoia/Kings Canyon and Yosemite in California), be very careful what kind of food you carry. Bears have a very good sense of smell, can recognize food packages, and have been known to tear the doors off cars to get to food. More annoyingly, they will check out anything that smells, including hand lotion and toothpaste. I don't think that canned food smells enough to cause a problem, but it must be kept out of sight. (The rangers may disagree with me here. If any of these kinds of things are in sight, you will get a notice on your car (if you are lucky), or a ticket. Cheers - Bill - Bill Frantz | Due process for all| Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | used to be the | 16345 Englewood Ave. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | American way. | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA
Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
On Wednesday, March 19, 2003, at 01:54 PM, Thomas Shaddack wrote: The design of current glass-tower skyscrapers encourages glass fragment blowthrough by the shockwave, which will result in massive injuries (simulated on pigs in wind tunnels it abraded flesh to the bone in seconds, it would certainly kill you by blood loss or at least maim badly). ARGH! Taking back my previous comment about light injuries by flying glass. Thought about the typical downtown brick-and-mortar buildings that have more robust construction with real inner walls. (Don't ask me what I think about the glass towers.) I don't think either of you Europeans is familiar with the architecture of the Washington, D.C. inner government core, extending out a few miles. To wit, there are no tall glass boxes. The nearest major ones may be the Watergate complex to the west, near the river, the Lafayette apartment/shopping complex to the southwest (as I recall the geography), and of course the Crystal City, Pentagon City (or whatever they call it), etc. complexes across the river, in Arlington. The reason for this is that D.C. has a strict building code, requiring that no buildings overshadow those of the Emperor. (The Official Reason is about heights not being more than some number of floors.) Also, many of the existing buildings are either museums or brownstone apartments or federal buildings of one sort or another. Or embassies, up near Dupont Circle and Kalorama. (I'm just going by memory, from living there more than 32 years ago and from a couple of return visits. And from looking at maps over the years. Don't quote me on the exact geography.) In other words, D.C. is not like downtown New York City, Frankfurt, etc. It's more like Paris. Think about pictures you have seen of the D.C. skyline and you will know that tall glass boxes are not common. There are glass windows of course in many apartment buildings and homes, and of course in many office buildings, but not the walls of glass associated with modern, Bauhaus-type boxes. If you're paranoid, a small cheap terror kit stored in office/car trunk/home could considerably enhance your survival chances, and minimize subsequent health risk. Or in each of the places. If it's small and cheap, it can be multiplied. It's a bit stupid to spend time and effort preparing a terror kit and then have it in the car when you need it in the office. Yes, but many offices don't allow handguns inside, even if locked in a case or backpack. (And many places don't even allow handguns or rifles if locked inside car trunks. Despite the historical intent of laws having people lock up their firearms, in many places but not all places, most of the gun laws now have untested language about how a firearm may only be in a vehicle when traveling to or from a legal shooting area. In other words, the proles are not supposed to keep guns in their trunks/boots or truck boxes, even if locked up. I say untested because I don't know of any cases where someone was charged with not being in transit to a legal shooting area. Having thought for a few minutes about this, I have figured that if I were asked why I have a handgun or rifle locked in my trunk I would say I was planning to travel to another part of the state and do some shooting there. No way could they ever disprove that this was my plan, or that I had planned to go shooting during a trip someplace else but then changed my plans, etc. It helps that my Go Bag has some camping supplies in it. Of course, now that I say here I routinely have a handgun in my Go Bag, I guess the jig is up should some DA spend enough time Googling.) Carrying a backpack or duffel bag every day to an office gets old real fast. A bag can be kept locked in a drawer in an office. I suppose if I were working I might have some minimal set of survival supplies with me, but not very much. I would take my chances. The odds of a 911-type building collapse making my car inaccessible would be small. Were I working in a building with up to 4 stories (floors), I might have a rope ladder in my desk drawer. And maybe a Kapton smoke hood. (I heard that some airline passengers were carrying them, until the airlines started treating them as devices which might scare the other passengers.) And even in a 911-type event, getting out of the building is 99% of the battle. Getting home after such an event should be straightforward. (Hence the rope ladder for small buildings and the Kapton hood.) The greater threat is that access to one's home is impaired, or a car breakdown occurs, which is why carrying a bag in a vehicle makes so much sense: a shovel for digging out, a few blankets or a sleeping bag, water, a flashlight, flares and other road emergency supplies, maybe a GPS, a transistor radio, spare batteries, simple food rations, a few tools, and some small assortment of extra junk like duct tape, fishing line, wire, etc. And the gun I mentioned.
Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
On Wednesday, March 19, 2003, at 12:57 PM, Bill Stewart wrote: At 01:37 PM 03/19/2003 -0500, Tyler Durden wrote: But as it the only terrorist attack (from non-US citizens, that is), was on 9/11/01. Were there ANY others? Sure. Besides the earlier truck-bombing of the WTC, there were Waco and Ruby Ridge. (Or do you only count terrorism if it's done by enemies of the state?) WTC #1 was a critical example. Yeah, it semi-fizzled and did limited damage, but mainly because of luck. I'm not a building engineer, but those who are have said that had the van filled with high explosives parked where the van owners had planned to park it, it probably would have toppled the tower into the other tower and then both would have toppled. With no chance for evacuation, and with a one-fifth of a mile high building toppling sideways, fatalities might have reached 30,000 or more. Also: -- the attempted simultaneous bombing of a bunch of American airliners, mostly flying between the Far East and the West Coast. (This was thwarted, but was actively planned and might have happened. Anyone saying Were there ANY others? must count this as a credible attempt. Apparently the plan even back then, mid-90s, was to fly a hijacked plane into a target.) -- the truck bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon in 1983...about 300 Marines killed. (Tyler Durden will probably claim that this was not on U.S. soil, but it's a distinction without a difference.) -- the Gander, Newfoundland mid-air explosion of an aircraft carrying U.S. troops ( Arrow Air, DC-8). Much evidence of connections with U.S. troops having been in the Mideast beforehand, Islamic Jihad claiming credit, and other cases where explosives and detcord were found on troop transports. Cf. this site for details: http://www.sandford.org/gandercrash/investigations/minority_report/ html/_5.shtml -- Kobar Towers in Saudi Arabia. U.S.S. Cole attack. Etc. (It is unclear to me from the section Bill quoted whether Tyler Durden was referring to terrorist attacks in general or only those on U.S. soil. If he meant to exclude European, Canadian, Far Easternor Middle Eastern attacks -- the arrest of the guy at the U.S. border near Vancouver with explosives in his trunk, supposed to use during the Millennium celebrations in L.A. And so on. Tim talked about people driving gasoline trucks into malls. A couple of years ago, somebody drove one into the California state capitol building and got killed; the early reports suggest that he was a parolee with a grudge against the governor. And he also did it at night. And he drove into a doorway, but bounced off a couple of walls. Compared to the average shopping mall with a glass curtain entrance, the California State Capitol Building is a hard target. (BTW, many office buildings are already somewhat hardened against vans loaded with gasoline or explosives. For example, Intel's main building in Santa Clara, the Robert Noyce Building, has extensive barrier blocking a suicide bomber from getting through the glass curtain wall...though there are other places a van or truck could get through.) A movie which I recommend for various reasons is Arlington Road. It's about vengeance, about truck bombs, about conspiracies. Tim Robbins and Jeff Bridges star. It was held back because of one of the terrorist events which that other actor, Tyler Durden, tells us don't happen here in America. And the movie has not been widely publicized. But I recommend it, despite a few flaws. It has a climax which put a huge grin on my face. Short of filming Clancy's Debt of Honor, with its Sato Solution, this is a pretty good substitute. Those who have seen Arlington Road will know what I am talking about. Please, don't give anything away here. Tim also commented on the traffic issues of commuting into DC from the burbs. The Washington Metro takes care of that problem very well; it can get crowded, but it sure beats the Beltway and it has its own parking downtown. And it's high up on the list of soft targets, though the Pentagon Metro station is probably at higher risk than the downtown stations (2600 kiddies take note :-) Yes, they build all of this after I left. I guess the main construction was in the 70s. I rode it once or twice when I visited D.C. in 1991. Two of the outlying stops are near my old high school and near where I used to live. A stop at the Springfield Mall, a couple of miles from high school, Edison, and a stop out on Telegraph Road, not far from where I actually lived. (I later learned that the Coast Guard Station out next to where I lived was actually a SIGINT facility and that a small government Army station was actually the first office of the National Reconnaissance Office, the NRO. And earlier I went to Langley High School, just over the fence and through some woods from the CIA headquarters. I think if I had to work in D.C. I'd
RE: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
Tim May[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, but many offices don't allow handguns inside, even if locked in a case or backpack. If people feel the risk is high enough, they could carry concealed. The number of non-governmental places which require staff to go a metal detector is miniscule. Check http://www.packing.org for state level discussion of regulations. (If someone says that escape from a building may be difficult AND getting home may be impaired, I would say this is piling unlikelihood on unlikelihood. Not something I am going to carry emergency supplies for. Except when it happens - remember that within hours of the WTC attack, all the bridges and tunnels to Manhattan were closed to private cars *in both directions*, and remained that way for several days. I'm sure that some of the WTC escapees found themselves stranded in Manhattan, with their cars (and any bugout gear therein) crushed under the wreckage (there was a *big* parking lot underground at the WTC). Peter Trei
Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
On Thursday, March 20, 2003, Peter came up with this... TP Except when it happens - remember that within hours of the WTC attack, TP all the bridges and tunnels to Manhattan were closed to private cars *in TP both directions*, and remained that way for several days. I'm sure that TP some of the WTC escapees found themselves stranded in Manhattan, TP with their cars (and any bugout gear therein) crushed under the wreckage TP (there was a *big* parking lot underground at the WTC). People who had boats made a fortune, they were charging $20-$100 or even more for a lift to Jersey. That's how my girlfriend's sister got home, she worked at 7 WTC. So, wads of cash are a definite must in your packs too. Also, make sure your pack isn't too big, the boat that took her to NJ refused to allow anything bigger than a woman's purse on the boat. (Not because he was afraid of bombs, but because he was trying to cram as many bodies on the boat as possible. And not out of compassion, he wanted to make money. I guess he also wanted to go back after and get everyone's stuff too. So much for people sticking together in times of crisis. Of course, if you have your gun you can just shoot him in the head and take his boat, so maybe cash isn't all that necessary.) -- stuart Anyone who tells you they want a utopia wants to put chains on the souls of your children. They want to deny history and strangle any unforeseen possibility. They should be resisted to the last breath. -Bruce Sterling-
Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
It was held back because of one of the terrorist events which that other actor, Tyler Durden, tells us don't happen here in America. Well, I wasn't EXACTLY trying to claim there's actually no terrorism here in the US (aside from our exportation of it, that is). BUT, the low numbers do bare investigation. My thought is that the number of militant Muslims actually willing to kill us is very, very minimal, otherwise we'd be seeing it all the time. Rather, our own government has leveraged the small amount of activities to whip us all up into a complete frenzy, so that we'd cower behind our big, protective government. (hum...kind of like Terrorism, except you only need to reap the harvest of someone else's work...didn't someone just post that?) Do I believe this? Tyler Durden is willing to for the sake of argument (and if anybody else puts quote marks around my name I'm gonna come grab you and make you front-n-center in our little club Tuesday nights!!!) -TD From: Tim May [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 15:57:39 -0800 On Wednesday, March 19, 2003, at 12:57 PM, Bill Stewart wrote: At 01:37 PM 03/19/2003 -0500, Tyler Durden wrote: But as it the only terrorist attack (from non-US citizens, that is), was on 9/11/01. Were there ANY others? Sure. Besides the earlier truck-bombing of the WTC, there were Waco and Ruby Ridge. (Or do you only count terrorism if it's done by enemies of the state?) WTC #1 was a critical example. Yeah, it semi-fizzled and did limited damage, but mainly because of luck. I'm not a building engineer, but those who are have said that had the van filled with high explosives parked where the van owners had planned to park it, it probably would have toppled the tower into the other tower and then both would have toppled. With no chance for evacuation, and with a one-fifth of a mile high building toppling sideways, fatalities might have reached 30,000 or more. Also: -- the attempted simultaneous bombing of a bunch of American airliners, mostly flying between the Far East and the West Coast. (This was thwarted, but was actively planned and might have happened. Anyone saying Were there ANY others? must count this as a credible attempt. Apparently the plan even back then, mid-90s, was to fly a hijacked plane into a target.) -- the truck bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon in 1983...about 300 Marines killed. (Tyler Durden will probably claim that this was not on U.S. soil, but it's a distinction without a difference.) -- the Gander, Newfoundland mid-air explosion of an aircraft carrying U.S. troops ( Arrow Air, DC-8). Much evidence of connections with U.S. troops having been in the Mideast beforehand, Islamic Jihad claiming credit, and other cases where explosives and detcord were found on troop transports. Cf. this site for details: http://www.sandford.org/gandercrash/investigations/minority_report/ html/_5.shtml -- Kobar Towers in Saudi Arabia. U.S.S. Cole attack. Etc. (It is unclear to me from the section Bill quoted whether Tyler Durden was referring to terrorist attacks in general or only those on U.S. soil. If he meant to exclude European, Canadian, Far Easternor Middle Eastern attacks -- the arrest of the guy at the U.S. border near Vancouver with explosives in his trunk, supposed to use during the Millennium celebrations in L.A. And so on. Tim talked about people driving gasoline trucks into malls. A couple of years ago, somebody drove one into the California state capitol building and got killed; the early reports suggest that he was a parolee with a grudge against the governor. And he also did it at night. And he drove into a doorway, but bounced off a couple of walls. Compared to the average shopping mall with a glass curtain entrance, the California State Capitol Building is a hard target. (BTW, many office buildings are already somewhat hardened against vans loaded with gasoline or explosives. For example, Intel's main building in Santa Clara, the Robert Noyce Building, has extensive barrier blocking a suicide bomber from getting through the glass curtain wall...though there are other places a van or truck could get through.) A movie which I recommend for various reasons is Arlington Road. It's about vengeance, about truck bombs, about conspiracies. Tim Robbins and Jeff Bridges star. It was held back because of one of the terrorist events which that other actor, Tyler Durden, tells us don't happen here in America. And the movie has not been widely publicized. But I recommend it, despite a few flaws. It has a climax which put a huge grin on my face. Short of filming Clancy's Debt of Honor, with its Sato Solution, this is a pretty good substitute. Those who have seen Arlington Road will know what I am talking about. Please, don't give anything away here. Tim also
Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
Good work, Shaddack. Gold star and smiley face. My father has mentioned the Texas City incident a few times while growing up (he grew up in Galveston). He remembers that it basically dissappeared in a giant fireball, and there was never an explanation. So of course I'l send him these links. -TD From: Thomas Shaddack [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: cypherpunks [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 21:55:17 +0100 (CET) On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, Tim May wrote: Having seen Vietnam (the war, not the country), and having seen today's media frenzies and rampant consumerism, I think American resolve will fold if 5000 deaths of Americans occur in Iraq. There is no solid American resolve. Most of the yes voices are backed by the thinking that what the current Authority says has to be Good Thing. It shouldn't take much to make them doubt; once then, the already-weak resolve will crumble to shards. The 100 or so deaths of Americans in 1991 was tolerable, but anything approaching the multiple thousands will trigger a paroxysm of Why are we there? and Congress never authorized this! and Bring our boys home sentiments. The sooner, the better. Hope it won't be TOO late. (And yet South Korean students and others are spitting on U.S. soldiers, yammering about U.S. out of Korea!, etc. I say we give them their wish. Ditto for Germany, Italy, and the rest of Europe. ...and my government is pondering to offer them a whole base with an airport... *sigh* Russians out, Americans in, change the flag, continue bowing. It's hardly implausible to believe I might survive a 1 kiloton nuclear blast, about what the Davy Crockett U.S. nuke, at around 50 lbs, provided. It makes sense to think that Soviet suitcase nukes have a similar yield. Quite easily. The blast wave, if the explosion would be on the ground, will be greatly attenuated by the surrounding structures. Lots of nonfatal but medially attractive bloody injuries by flying glass, though. The Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings were closer to 12-23 kilotons, according to one source (http://www.danford.net/hiroshim.htm), and there supposedly was a 50 percent survival rate at 1/8 of a mile from ground zero -- while the bomb went off above ground as opposed to on the ground. We shouldn't forget the targets were selected for their softness. Lots of mostly wooden buildings, easy to incinerate, easy to crush with the blast wave. The buildings that were built from solid concrete mostly survived, though damaged; that one with the well-known dome (I think it's a museum now) was, by the way, designed by a Czech architect. (We have a dome with the same construction in Prague, though the building itself is different.) We also shouldn't forget that there were countless nameless similar Japanese towns firebombed into oblivion, but Hiroshima took all the fame, despite of no bigger degree of destruction. A novel I read a few years ago is quite prescient: Osama Bin Laden sends a freighter into San Francisco harbor with a Russian suitcase nuke. Here's the blurb for Joshua's Hammer, David Hagberg, August 2000 (first mass market June 2001...I must have read it soon after the paperback came out, as I remembered the novel when 911 happened): If you want to sacrifice a cargo ship, you can use plain old ammonium nitrate, which is cheaper than a nuke (including the ship) and doesn't expose you to radiation detectors and gamma cameras. There are precedents to study. Check April 16 1947, Texas City, TX: http://www.rmstitanichistory.com/grandcamp/grandcamp.html http://www.firefightersrealstories.com/monsanto.html http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbninquiry.asp?isbn=0060185414 (surprising piece of info was that the US Government was shipping NH4NO3 from Europe, then became moving it through Texas City port, without telling the locals about the danger of the substance, hence keeping them unprepared (and unprotesting - neighbouring ports who knew the material properties reportedly banned the ships carrying them). For more general link, check http://web1.caryacademy.org/chemistry/rushin/StudentProjects/CompoundWebSites/2001/AmmoniumNitrate/history.htm (especially juicy is the bit about how the explosive properties of ammonium nitrate were discovered by accident, in the first paragraph). Or this: http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi1138.htm Mentions an accidental explosion in the city of Roseburg, OR, 1959. Many more accidents mentioned here: http://www.uneptie.org/pc/apell/disasters/toulouse/other_accidents.htm Who needs nukes? Who *wants* nukes? The cheapest way for a terrorist group will be to wait until a snafu happens, then take the blame. The news will widely report it was a terrorist attack on front pages. Couple days/weeks/months later, when it will turn out that it was just a technological failure, the report appears on fifth pages of the news. Most of the headlines-scanning public will still believe
Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
-- On 19 Mar 2003 at 14:53, Tyler Durden wrote: I agree the above would be bullshit if it weren't on some occasions demonstrably true. After the US helped get the Taliban rolling (through providing them with stingers and other weapons as well as subversive opps training to knock out the soviets), The Taliban did not exist back then. The guys the US aided were for the most part, the guys that are running Afghanistan now. The major recipients of US aid, for example the lion of Afghanistan were the people the Taliban murdered. The story you are telling is part of a big commie lie -- that the US aided the bigoted Taliban against the elightened communists who created a constitutional democracy where every man and every women have a vote, and universal education and health care were guaranteed, etc. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG 7RHG6436iyu0CEZRgLVbrRD6e9vztOYBLPDj87tj 47sltWxQU907jJOEeQwyKRWdG0+3Gl04FmdgDHSqa
Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
On Tue, 18 Mar 2003, David Howe wrote: Chemical weapons are legally dodgy - but under the Bush Doctorine, saddam could blow huge civilian areas of Washington away with missles, and just call it a shock and awe demonstration against a country that might attack it and that is known to have all three forms of WMD. I mean, that's reasonable isn't it? bush said it was I can't wait till China and Russia figure out that pre-emptive strikes are a really good idea, and the US is a problem that needs to be taken care of. Unfortunatly I think they'll leave Washington DC because that way no recovery will ever happen. But I suspect they'll nuke everything else! Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike
Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 08:59:31PM -0800, Tim May wrote: About the threat to Washington: I think it's relatively high. A nerve gas attack on buildings or the Metro seems likely. (The Japanese AUM cult had Sarin, but was inept. A more capable, military-trained operative has had many months to get into D.C. and wait for the obvious time to attack. And he need not even be a suicide bomber. A cannister of VX with a reliable timer is child's play. One big difference, it seems to me, is that the U.S. government was recently up against Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups that did not have the complete resources of a nation-state at their disposal (plus other factors, like sufficient uninterrupted time to prepare a second attack on U.S. soil after we began to target them post-911). Now we're up against a possibly enfeebled nation, but a nation nonetheless, with a leader who knows that his days are numbered so there's arguably little downside to plotting terrorism. Plus other Middle East nations that now might be inclined to lend covert aid if it's entirely deniable. I live in Adams Morgan in Washington, DC, which Mapquest tells me is three miles north of the White House (because of one way streets) -- the oh-so-brave denizens of 1600 have closed Pennyslvania Ave. It's probably 1.5 miles directly. It's hardly implausible to believe I might survive a 1 kiloton nuclear blast, about what the Davy Crockett U.S. nuke, at around 50 lbs, provided. It makes sense to think that Soviet suitcase nukes have a similar yield. The Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings were closer to 12-23 kilotons, according to one source (http://www.danford.net/hiroshim.htm), and there supposedly was a 50 percent survival rate at 1/8 of a mile from ground zero -- while the bomb went off above ground as opposed to on the ground. I might gain an extra half-mile or so because it's more likely a terrorist would attack the White House from the east, west, or south as opposed to the north -- Pennsylvania Avenue is closed, and traffic on H St. (further north) will be stopped or severely scrutinized during any heightened alert status. By way of comparison, the Tractor That Disrupted DC is about eight blocks southwest of the White House. If it were any closer, the Disgruntled Veteran Farmer would have been dispatched with extreme prejudice by Secret Service snipers. If the Capitol building is attacked, I live much further from that, so I'm not as worried by the immediate impact of the blast, just the aftermath. That leaves just biological and chemical weapons, conventional explosives, and dirty bombs. If I were Declan, I'd get out of Dodge. Well, I don't think I'll be living here the rest of my life -- DC is too tempting a target over the long term, as the U.S. empire spreads and its enemies grow accordingly. For the short term, DC is still an easier target than NYC if you're bringing a bomb in by truck (NYC would be easier by boat). NYC has bridges along which radiation sensors can be placed; DC, as Tim knows, is geographically just a part of Maryland connected by hundreds of residential streets. But I wouldn't be surprised to see the next attack take place in a far more distributed manner. Imagine a dozen Iraqi/Al Qaeda sympathizers or agents making dirty bombs (or even conventional explosives) and leaving them in gift-wrapped boxes in shopping bags at American surburban shopping malls. They detonate simultaneously after 15 minutes or if they're moved or disturbed. The perp would have time to escape and could take steps to mask himself from the inevitable surveillance camera footage that would be broadcast by the FBI. A week or two after that happens, you can imagine the AQ/Iraq axis trying the same thing in the parking lot of a metroplex theater at night (it's easy enough to leave a backpack under a parked car), in the bathroom of a dozen crowded restaurants, and so on. The U.S. would soon become accustomed to living in the same state of seige and constant surveillance that Israel enjoys. And watch what Congress will do to preserve our freedoms by giving more power to the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. Imagine that approach being escalated by radio-controlled or autonomous model helicopters or airplanes being sent from outside the Beltway to blast into the White House or the House and Senate office buildings. They'd be guided by GPS and carry only a modest payload, so might not accomplish much unless their targets are outside. No more Rose Garden press conferences after the first wave of the attack occurs, I'd wager. Yes, DC is not a good long-term place to live. It's too tempting a target. -Declan
Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
On Wednesday, March 19, 2003, at 07:37 AM, Declan McCullagh wrote: On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 08:59:31PM -0800, Tim May wrote: About the threat to Washington: I think it's relatively high. A nerve gas attack on buildings or the Metro seems likely. (The Japanese AUM cult had Sarin, but was inept. A more capable, military-trained operative has had many months to get into D.C. and wait for the obvious time to attack. And he need not even be a suicide bomber. A cannister of VX with a reliable timer is child's play. One big difference, it seems to me, is that the U.S. government was recently up against Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups that did not have the complete resources of a nation-state at their disposal (plus other factors, like sufficient uninterrupted time to prepare a second attack on U.S. soil after we began to target them post-911). Yes, and various other Axis of Evil nations (DPRK, France, etc.) will understand the importance of asymmetric warfare. Frankly, throwing the U.S. economy into chaos _before_ an attack on one's country would seem to be the best strategy. (And this kind of chaos need not be a decapitation attack on the Seat of Government. A disabling attack on agriculture--such as contaminating the meat supply with hoof and mouth or mad cow--or a psychological attack on consumerism--such as 5 suicide bombers hitting crowded shopping malls--would have a big effect. The destruction of a few dams would have similar effects, but, fortunately for us, they are apparently well-defended, i.e., they are _not_ soft targets.) Having seen Vietnam (the war, not the country), and having seen today's media frenzies and rampant consumerism, I think American resolve will fold if 5000 deaths of Americans occur in Iraq. The 100 or so deaths of Americans in 1991 was tolerable, but anything approaching the multiple thousands will trigger a paroxysm of Why are we there? and Congress never authorized this! and Bring our boys home sentiments. Chemical Ali probably understands this very well. (And the usual rhetoric about how if the U.S. is attacked with CBW it will respond by nuking Baghdad is silly. If even 10.000 U.S. soldiers are killed in a chemical attack, the U.S. will not nuke a city of 5 million. At least I doubt they will, despite the rhetoric. My hunch is that Chemical Ali thinks along the same lines.) So, going for a kill of 5-15K Americans, early on, is possibly an Iraqi strategy. It would be my strategy, were I on their side. Now we're up against a possibly enfeebled nation, but a nation nonetheless, with a leader who knows that his days are numbered so there's arguably little downside to plotting terrorism. Plus other Middle East nations that now might be inclined to lend covert aid if it's entirely deniable. I'm not even a despot, and yet I often fantasize about methods to kill tens of thousands of the bad guys, even if I died in the process. So I can imagine the fantasies some of the guys who have been in power for many years may have. I would of course agree with what many are saying, that Kim Jong Il is a much more serious threat--to some, though not necessarily to the U.S. (And yet South Korean students and others are spitting on U.S. soldiers, yammering about U.S. out of Korea!, etc. I say we give them their wish. Ditto for Germany, Italy, and the rest of Europe. This is why I hope the train wreck/clusterfuck in Iraq happens. Get our country out of the world's cop business. I live in Adams Morgan in Washington, DC, which Mapquest tells me is three miles north of the White House (because of one way streets) -- the oh-so-brave denizens of 1600 have closed Pennyslvania Ave. It's probably 1.5 miles directly. It's hardly implausible to believe I might survive a 1 kiloton nuclear blast, about what the Davy Crockett U.S. nuke, at around 50 lbs, provided. It makes sense to think that Soviet suitcase nukes have a similar yield. The Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings were closer to 12-23 kilotons, according to one source (http://www.danford.net/hiroshim.htm), and there supposedly was a 50 percent survival rate at 1/8 of a mile from ground zero -- while the bomb went off above ground as opposed to on the ground. I had recollected that Adams Morgan was up near Rock Creek Park, near Kalorama, and thus is further than 1.5 miles as the crow flies. A blast at that distance would probably not be good news, especially for a multi-story building. But, yes, many would survive. U.S. soldiers were expected to dig shallow foxholes prior to detonation of just such nukes, intended to clear Soviet armor at the Fulda Gap in Germany. I doubt any Iraqi could get a nuke close to the White House, though. (BTW, one of the best treatments of this idea, of terrorists getting access to small nukes, is in a novel by the guy who later became the Crypto Czar, David Aaron. Google or Amazon will have details. Probably years out of print. I haven't heard anything out of him in
Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, Declan McCullagh wrote: It's hardly implausible to believe I might survive a 1 kiloton nuclear blast, about what the Davy Crockett U.S. nuke, at around 50 lbs, The design of current glass-tower skyscrapers encourages glass fragment blowthrough by the shockwave, which will result in massive injuries (simulated on pigs in wind tunnels it abraded flesh to the bone in seconds, it would certainly kill you by blood loss or at least maim badly). It is very worthwhile to establish a duck and cover instinct at the first signs of the flash. It will minimize flash blindness/prevent holes in retina/skin burns as well as minimize the impact of debris and exposure to the shockwave. Getting out of the potentially developing firestorm (unlikely in a small yield weapon) in the panic stampede while minimizing exposure to fallout is much less constrained than right reflexes in the first second or so. If you're paranoid, a small cheap terror kit stored in office/car trunk/home could considerably enhance your survival chances, and minimize subsequent health risk. Actually it would be fun to assemble an item list for a kit. provided. It makes sense to think that Soviet suitcase nukes have a similar yield. Suitcase nukes missing (the only weapons without PAL codes/PAL codes issued to people in charge of them, all other weapons won't assemble without PAL encoding the assembly timing) are apparently a canard. In any case, these are are high-maintenance weapons, and no by now no longer operable/only capable of a fizzle, so only useful for salvaging the fissibles. Latter could be easily leached by purex process from black market low-ashes fuel (high-ashes fuel is much hotter and has the wrong Pu isotopes, so you'll get a hotter core with higher background neutron flux which will make it go off before full assembly can occur, thus seriously reducing yield). The Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings were closer to 12-23 kilotons, according to one source (http://www.danford.net/hiroshim.htm), and there supposedly was a 50 percent survival rate at 1/8 of a mile from ground zero -- while the bomb went off above ground as opposed to on the ground. If you pressize the weapon pit with 3-5 g gaseous tritium few seconds (Pu metal rapidly forms hydrides) before assembly the yield could be significantly higher (50 kT?), while still not being a fusion weapon which requires considerably more geometry and timing magic to work (the yield boost is from the fusion neutrons synergy fissioning more material during inertial confinement).
Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
The design of current glass-tower skyscrapers encourages glass fragment blowthrough by the shockwave, which will result in massive injuries (simulated on pigs in wind tunnels it abraded flesh to the bone in seconds, it would certainly kill you by blood loss or at least maim badly). ARGH! Taking back my previous comment about light injuries by flying glass. Thought about the typical downtown brick-and-mortar buildings that have more robust construction with real inner walls. (Don't ask me what I think about the glass towers.) It is very worthwhile to establish a duck and cover instinct at the first signs of the flash. Duck behind anything that can stop/slowdown the shards. A table should do. If you're paranoid, a small cheap terror kit stored in office/car trunk/home could considerably enhance your survival chances, and minimize subsequent health risk. Or in each of the places. If it's small and cheap, it can be multiplied. It's a bit stupid to spend time and effort preparing a terror kit and then have it in the car when you need it in the office. Suitcase nukes missing (the only weapons without PAL codes/PAL codes issued to people in charge of them, all other weapons won't assemble without PAL encoding the assembly timing) are apparently a canard. In any case, these are are high-maintenance weapons, and no by now no longer operable/only capable of a fizzle, so only useful for salvaging the fissiles. If they aren't boosted, if they don't need tritium source, why they would deteriorate? Are the pit cores with fast-decaying isotopes (like the Be-Po ones developed during the Project Manhattan) still in use, or were they fully replaced with arc-discharge neutron generators (or how's that thing with deuterium gas inside which gets ionized and accelerated against the target called)? Latter could be easily leached by purex process from black market low-ashes fuel (high-ashes fuel is much hotter and has the wrong Pu isotopes, so you'll get a hotter core with higher background neutron flux which will make it go off before full assembly can occur, thus seriously reducing yield). Not only that. Pu-240 is fissile, like Pu-239, but it doesn't produce free neutrons, thus acting as de facto a neutron poison. AFAIK, this is the main factor lowering the yield of energetical plutonium. I suppose it is rather hard to find low-ash spent fuel. The main interest of power plants is to get the most megawatthours from every rod, thus to keep it in the reactor as long as possible. The replacement of fuel in the most common VVER reactors requires shutdown of the plant block, which not only lowers efficiency of the plant, but also attracts attention of the inspectors (who don't need anything more than a thermal camera to see that the transformers handling the plant's output are colder than they should be - from miles away, very likely even from the satellite - not talking about the likely lack of vapors from the cooling towers, visible by naked eye). Other kinds of reactors - CANDU, or RBMK (which were so popular in the USSR mainly for this feature) don't have to be shut down for fuel exchange, but then they are much less common.
Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
I'm convinced that if the U.S. were libertarian, even libertine, that many Muslims would think of us as corrupt...but I don't think much organized effort would be directed against us. Exactly. You don't stress about the weirdos living at the end of the street if you can tune them out. Maybe it even boosts your self-righteousness to have such counterexamples. Well, I'm also not sure I by the Muslims are by nature fundamentalist line of thought. Of course, I'll probably take some heat for this, but to a large extent a local population with its own culture, etc..., when under siege or the pressure of extermination, often revert to something akin to a fundamentalism, in order to codify the rules of identity that are being nullified. It's possible that if the US had not maintained such a strong, interfering presence in the middle east for so long, the desirability of a Muslim form of fundamentalism might be greatly reduced (and for history buffs it should be noted that for most of its history, the Islamic world has not been particuarly fundamentalist). Note that Wahabism orignated in Saudi only mid-late 1800s, and probably didn't take a real firm root until the US start getting involved (humsomething to be said for Dave Emory's theory about the Wahabis being 'Islamo-Fascists'...) I agree the above would be bullshit if it weren't on some occasions demonstrably true. After the US helped get the Taliban rolling (through providing them with stingers and other weapons as well as subversive opps training to knock out the soviets), Pakistan's Benazir Bhutto said to Bush I You know you have created Frankenstein's Monster... SO if we hadn't been screwing around in the middle east for so long, perhaps the world would look entirely different. As for our troops, qwell, on some level it must be acknowledged that every man is utlimately responsible for his actions. And in this case, it's pretty evident that Iraq hasn't attacked us. But then again, perhaps weak schools make good soldiers. -TD _ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
Tim May wrote... (And this kind of chaos need not be a decapitation attack on the Seat of Government. A disabling attack on agriculture--such as contaminating the meat supply with hoof and mouth or mad cow--or a psychological attack on consumerism--such as 5 suicide bombers hitting crowded shopping malls--would have a big effect. The destruction of a few dams would have similar effects, but, fortunately for us, they are apparently well-defended, i.e., they are _not_ soft targets.) Well, I am not convinced. About the ever-present dangers of innumerable terrorists, that is. I mean, where the hell are they all? It's a giant country, with ungaurded borders extending for thousands of miles. It seems to me if there really were some vast army of terrorists waiting to kill us all out there, we should be seeing something happen about every other day. But as it the only terrorist attack (from non-US citizens, that is), was on 9/11/01. Were there ANY others? (Though I still think that plane that went down over Far Rockaway was obviously sabotaged.) Israel, of course, is a different story. But as Variola posted a few days ago, those suicide bombers grow up under very different circumstances. We don't have such circumstances here...yet. Those suicide bombers could see the possibility of direct and obvious pressure on local abusive forces that they had likely grown up witnessing first-hand. So what I am tempted to believe is that on September 11th, the vast majority of adult, mission-oriented Suicide bombers likely died in action. After that, it was easy to scare the population into accepting check points, lockdowns, the general loss of freedom, and 1.5 hour bus drives into lower Manhattan (such as I experienced this morning). You know what? There are no terrorists. _ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
Tim, it's time to switch to decaf. On Mon, 17 Mar 2003 20:59:31 -0800, you wrote: Journalists, diplomats, inspectors, and civil servants are being urged to evacuate the capital. A timetable of 48 hours has been given. The Evil Doers will be rooted out and the Evil Ones punished, said one spokesman. However, as of midnight, Eastern Standard Time, there is no evidence that Washington residents are taking these warnings seriously. Needless to say, this is not a threat. I am 3000 miles away, relatively safe on my hilltop. Being the survivalist that I have been for much of the past 30 years, I have a pantry closet filled with canned goods, rice, cereal. And I have a generator, which I expect not to use much. And solar battery rechargers (sufficient to recharge AAs and Ds for my various small radios, even recharge my laptop...this in case my 24-packs of AAs and Ds run out, or my several lead cell battery packs, etc.). And I have my perimeter alarms, my solar-powered intrusion alarms, my rifles, my handguns, my shotguns, my other weapons, my water filters, my colleagues. I don't expect to need this stuff, but I am, as always, happy to be able to just stay at home on my hill and watch the chaos unfold. About the threat to Washington: I think it's relatively high. A nerve gas attack on buildings or the Metro seems likely. (The Japanese AUM cult had Sarin, but was inept. A more capable, military-trained operative has had many months to get into D.C. and wait for the obvious time to attack. And he need not even be a suicide bomber. A cannister of VX with a reliable timer is child's play. If I were Declan, I'd get out of Dodge. --Tim May
Re: Journalists, Diplomats, Others Urged to Evacuate City
At 09:55 AM 03/18/2003 -0800, Tim May wrote: A Stinger missile launched from a hotel room window overlooking an airport (think of San Diego, for example, as the fllight path comes in over the downtown skyscrapers) would halt air traffic--again. Especially if several attacks happen at about the same time. Half a dozen Western airline companies have already gone into bankruptcy--another sharp falloff in bookings will likely send a dozen more into liquidation. Andrews Air Force Base, or wherever it is Air Force 1 flies out of, would be interesting as well
