Skip to main content

View Diary: Elizabeth Colbert Busch's lead over Mark Sanford grows in South Carolina special election (108 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  IEDs likely qualify (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    due to the potential for widespread damage, and in this case the large number of dead and injured.

    You're right that when Bush/Cheney said "WMDs" they meant biological, chemical, or nuclear weapons. But I don't see a logical reason to limit it to that. If some civilian doofus got hold of a conventional smart-bomb, and lobbed it into lower Manhattan, I'd have no issue calling that a WMD.

    They're just tracking the language of the Federal statute.

    •  WMD (0+ / 0-)

      Saw a program on CNN where the guest said that in terms of casualties, not dead, Boston will be number 5 in the US.

      He also said that some animal rights group [forget which one] was number one in the number of terrorist attacks [but no casualties]

      •  Casualties (0+ / 0-)

        if Boston is number 5

        there would be

        World Trade Center
        Georgia Olympics
        Oklahoma city

        What would the other one be?

        •  September 16, 1920 Wall Street bombing (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          39 killed, hundreds injured. Generally blamed on "anarchists" but never solved.

          Also, I think the Atlanta Olympic bombing would be below Boston - only 111 injured in Atlanta.

          More likely they are counting the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed 6 but injured over 1,000.

          My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we’ll change the world - Jack Layton

          by terjeanderson on Mon Apr 22, 2013 at 05:15:49 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site