(no subject)

[taerowyn]

So there was a big natural gas explosion last night a few towns over. It was massive and could be seen for miles.


When asked if Milne thought this could be terrorist-related, he said, "That's exactly what I was thinking." Maybe I'm just naive but when a highly volatile substance in the middle of nowhere Colorado explodes, I just think accident...or maybe they're just paranoid.

Comments

[skunk237.livejournal.com]

terrorism, my ass. because there were no deaths reported, had no major impact psychologically, economically, or otherwise, wasn't able to be conveniently seen on TV by millions, it can't possibly be considered terrorism. there are much more easier, more effective ways to terrorise than to blow up something in the middle of nowhere, believe me.

accident? probably. foul-play? possibly. terrorism? no fucking way.

it baffles me how effective the "terrorists" have created an environment where the first thing that is thrown out the window is common sense. where will it lead? "oooooooh! my kitty is stuck in the tree! it must be terrorists!"?

[lots42.livejournal.com]

There's a difference between investigating the possibillity of terrorism and losing all your cool and running down the middle of the street screaming "The Taliban is coming, the Taliban is coming!"

Re:

[skunk237.livejournal.com]

very true. i support investigations into the possibility of terrorism when the event fits the terrorism profile. but in the case of the Eaton explosion, i would dare say that, by it's very own nature, terrorism can be ruled out without the investigation into its possibility. a terrorist, by definition, wants to terrorise as many people as possible. you can't terrorise effectively by exploding something in the middle of nowhere, unless that explosion results in the collapse of an infrastructure that people are dependant upon. yes, it's possible people might end up paying slightly more for natural gas for the short-term because of this, but no one will go without. IF the Eaton explosion was instigated by the hand of man, and IF the people involved had terrorist intentions, then they are very bad at doing their job...because hardly anyone, if any, were terrorised by this little event. nor, do i think, would it have been possible for this explosion to terrorise, even in a worst-case scenario.

but really, my main point is that there are much easier and more effective ways to commit terrorism... even in our "hightened alert". why would a terrorist choose to commit acts that are more difficult and less effective in his struggle to terrorise?

[pootrootbeer.livejournal.com]

Jeesh -- when a gas main in the dense New Jersey suburbs ruptured and created a huge fireball back in 1994, you didn't hear anyone blaming it on terrorism.

And when exactly did that explosion happen? A little after midnight the morning of March... 24.

Exactly nine years ago.

Holy crap that's creepy.

[tiamhdha.livejournal.com]

Hey there, just wanted to let you know about a new LJ community, The Celtic Connection (http://www.livejournal.com/community/kissmeimceltic/)
Stop by & join if you'd like. Cheers,
Tim
p.s. i have a degree in comparative religious studies and i too am saving up and biding my time til grad school. I FEEL YOUR PAIN!