DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**ballingham** · 02-06-2010, 03:50 AM

Well, firstly, can you please cut the theater... let's not bring emotion into a discussion about something none of us know a lot about.

Secondly, it has now been reported that there were multiple propane tanks, as well as gasoline tanks in the vehicle, so based on the available information it may have been an actual bomb. Badly thought out (no real idea on how to trigger it), but a bomb nonetheless. Of course, this hinges on the concept that what is being reported has any correlation to fact. Not a conspiracy theory, just an observation that to get more attention our press is not above describing a spare fuel canister and a box of firecrackers as three tons of TNT and a weapon of mass destruction.

Describing the possible real effects on real people is theater and emotion? But downplaying the whole incident, or ascribing less than sterling motivations to the responders based on (as you admit) inadequate information is better?

I admit sometimes I am very dim. I just honestly don't get it.

Real people could have been seriously hurt or killed. As far as I can tell, that is pretty much the only actual fact in the thread.

02-06-2010, 03:50 AM	#22
ballingham Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 477 Senior Member	Well, firstly, can you please cut the theater... let's not bring emotion into a discussion about something none of us know a lot about. Secondly, it has now been reported that there were multiple propane tanks, as well as gasoline tanks in the vehicle, so based on the available information it may have been an actual bomb. Badly thought out (no real idea on how to trigger it), but a bomb nonetheless. Of course, this hinges on the concept that what is being reported has any correlation to fact. Not a conspiracy theory, just an observation that to get more attention our press is not above describing a spare fuel canister and a box of firecrackers as three tons of TNT and a weapon of mass destruction. Describing the possible real effects on real people is theater and emotion? But downplaying the whole incident, or ascribing less than sterling motivations to the responders based on (as you admit) inadequate information is better? I admit sometimes I am very dim. I just honestly don't get it. Real people could have been seriously hurt or killed. As far as I can tell, that is pretty much the only actual fact in the thread.
	Quote