When is Bush going to catch the Anthrax killer?

[Moonbeam]

Anybody know how the investigation is going to find a person who could have killed millions of Americans.

Why do you suppose this story gets no press or emphasis?

 

[conjur]

I wanna know what happened to Chandra Levy.

 

[alchemize]

Cause the left has explained to us that Anthrax and Sarin aren't WMD's. So we aren't worried anymore.

In fact, conventional weapons that the US has are much more of a concern.

 

[alchemize]

PS it was in the news today

 

[lozina]

Originally posted by: alchemize
Cause the left has explained to us that Anthrax and Sarin aren't WMD's. So we aren't worried anymore.

In fact, conventional weapons that the US has are much more of a concern.

who says anthrax isn't a WMD ?

 

[NumbersGuy]

Originally posted by: conjur
I wanna know what happened to Chandra Levy.

Her body was found, some nut was arrested for it, case closed...

 

[kage69]

Some nut was arrested for it? That's the first I've heard of it. How is Gary Condit these days anyway?

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: alchemize
PS it was in the news today

It was also mentioned on the radio last night which is why I brought it up. With millions of potential deaths involved you'd think this would get more attention.

 

[lozina]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: alchemize
PS it was in the news today

It was also mentioned on the radio last night which is why I brought it up. With millions of potential deaths involved you'd think this would get more attention.

We're more interested in finding outdated harmless artillery shells which some disgruntled army officer might have smuggled out of Saddam's arsenal back in 1990 before he destroyed them all to try and justify our war with Iraq.

 

[NumbersGuy]

Moonbeam - sorry about detouring your thread

Originally posted by: kage69
Some nut was arrested for it? That's the first I've heard of it. How is Gary Condit these days anyway?

I wrote too quickly! 😱

A suspect with a history of similar attacks, Ingmar Guandique, was assigned to the case but not been charged as he apparently had nothing to do with it.

Case remains unsolved.

This looks like the best summary WP link. Tin-foil-hat version T-F-H Link

AFAIK, Condit is doing well thank you very much. :roll:

 

[alchemize]

who says anthrax isn't a WMD ?

Same folks who would suggest that artillery shells filled with Sarin are "harmless".

Originally posted by: lozina

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: alchemize
PS it was in the news today

It was also mentioned on the radio last night which is why I brought it up. With millions of potential deaths involved you'd think this would get more attention.

We're more interested in finding outdated harmless artillery shells which some disgruntled army officer might have smuggled out of Saddam's arsenal back in 1990 before he destroyed them all to try and justify our war with Iraq.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: alchemize

who says anthrax isn't a WMD ?

Same folks who would suggest that artillery shells filled with Sarin are "harmless".

You meant to say the one shell filled with components to form Sarin but lacked enough explosive charge to be effective and, therefore, was useless when it exploded.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: alchemize

who says anthrax isn't a WMD ?

Same folks who would suggest that artillery shells filled with Sarin are "harmless".

You meant to say the one shell filled with components to form Sarin but lacked enough explosive charge to be effective and, therefore, was useless when it exploded.

Just curious. What would that harmless one shell have done if fired from a 155mm artillery piece into central baghdad? ...But there was only one. I'm sure there aren't any more. And even if there are, they'd never figure out the incredible logistics required to do that...

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: alchemize

who says anthrax isn't a WMD ?

Same folks who would suggest that artillery shells filled with Sarin are "harmless".

You meant to say the one shell filled with components to form Sarin but lacked enough explosive charge to be effective and, therefore, was useless when it exploded.

Just curious. What would that harmless one shell have done if fired from a 155mm artillery piece into central baghdad? ...But there was only one. I'm sure there aren't any more. And even if there are, they'd never figure out the incredible logistics required to do that...

The same as it did when it exploded yesterday...slightly injured a couple of people.

Well, it might have killed someone if it actually physically hit them on its downward trajectory.

 

[lozina]

Originally posted by: alchemize

who says anthrax isn't a WMD ?

Same folks who would suggest that artillery shells filled with Sarin are "harmless".

guess I have to ask twice...

who says anthrax isn't a WMD ?

 

[PingSpike]

He'll get right on that as soon as the Anthrax guy tries to kill his dad.

 

[Saulbadguy]

Originally posted by: lozina

Originally posted by: alchemize

who says anthrax isn't a WMD ?

Same folks who would suggest that artillery shells filled with Sarin are "harmless".

guess I have to ask twice...

who says anthrax isn't a WMD ?

I don't consider it a "WMD".

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: alchemize

who says anthrax isn't a WMD ?

Same folks who would suggest that artillery shells filled with Sarin are "harmless".

You meant to say the one shell filled with components to form Sarin but lacked enough explosive charge to be effective and, therefore, was useless when it exploded.

Just curious. What would that harmless one shell have done if fired from a 155mm artillery piece into central baghdad? ...But there was only one. I'm sure there aren't any more. And even if there are, they'd never figure out the incredible logistics required to do that...

The same as it did when it exploded yesterday...slightly injured a couple of people.

Well, it might have killed someone if it actually physically hit them on its downward trajectory.

:roll:

Take a break from posting and read about how chemical artillery shells work.

Edit: what am I thinking..."true moderates" like yourself know everything already. But just in case someone else wants to know:

A binary artillery shell is projected from an artillery piece with an acceleration of over 100g, and spins at thousands of RPM. It also gets very hot, from the flame of the propellant, but also from air friction. This is quite enough to break the membrane separating the two chemicals, and mix them very thoroughly indeed. By the time the shell reaches the target, the chemical reaction is complete, and a small bursting charge shatters the shell and spreads the fog of droplets over a wide area.

Stolen from command post.

Care to answer the question again? A fog of droplets over a wide area would slightly injure a few people?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: alchemize

who says anthrax isn't a WMD ?

Same folks who would suggest that artillery shells filled with Sarin are "harmless".

You meant to say the one shell filled with components to form Sarin but lacked enough explosive charge to be effective and, therefore, was useless when it exploded.

Just curious. What would that harmless one shell have done if fired from a 155mm artillery piece into central baghdad? ...But there was only one. I'm sure there aren't any more. And even if there are, they'd never figure out the incredible logistics required to do that...

The same as it did when it exploded yesterday...slightly injured a couple of people.

Well, it might have killed someone if it actually physically hit them on its downward trajectory.

:roll:

Take a break from posting and read about how chemical artillery shells work.

Edit: what am I thinking..."true moderates" like yourself know everything already. But just in case someone else wants to know:

A binary artillery shell is projected from an artillery piece with an acceleration of over 100g, and spins at thousands of RPM. It also gets very hot, from the flame of the propellant, but also from air friction. This is quite enough to break the membrane separating the two chemicals, and mix them very thoroughly indeed. By the time the shell reaches the target, the chemical reaction is complete, and a small bursting charge shatters the shell and spreads the fog of droplets over a wide area.

Stolen from command post.

Care to answer the question again? A fog of droplets over a wide area would slightly injure a few people?

So where are the terrorist going to get the Artillery to shoot an outdated shell like that at an American City?

 

[arsbanned]

Yeah, maybe we should take care of WMDs in the U.S. before launching any more "preemptive" wars.

Care to answer the question again? A fog of droplets over a wide area would slightly injure a few people?

Your buddies in the admin claim the insurgents didn't even realize that old shell had any Sarin in it.
Care to try again? :laugh:

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: alchemize
Just curious. What would that harmless one shell have done if fired from a 155mm artillery piece into central baghdad? ...But there was only one. I'm sure there aren't any more. And even if there are, they'd never figure out the incredible logistics required to do that...

The same as it did when it exploded yesterday...slightly injured a couple of people.

Well, it might have killed someone if it actually physically hit them on its downward trajectory.

:roll:

Take a break from posting and read about how chemical artillery shells work.

Edit: what am I thinking..."true moderates" like yourself know everything already. But just in case someone else wants to know:

A binary artillery shell is projected from an artillery piece with an acceleration of over 100g, and spins at thousands of RPM. It also gets very hot, from the flame of the propellant, but also from air friction. This is quite enough to break the membrane separating the two chemicals, and mix them very thoroughly indeed. By the time the shell reaches the target, the chemical reaction is complete, and a small bursting charge shatters the shell and spreads the fog of droplets over a wide area.

Stolen from command post.

Care to answer the question again? A fog of droplets over a wide area would slightly injure a few people?

You're also assuming this shell was still viable as a weapon which is not a distinct possibility. But, were it still effective, then, yes, that would be a disaster.


Q: Why was it left on a road and not fired from a launcher?


A: Because they had no idea that it contained sarin components.

 

[alchemize]

So where are the terrorist going to get the Artillery to shoot an outdated shell like that at an American City?

How about a hot air balloon, crack open the shell, mix the chemicals and use a common paint sprayer?

But don't worry, it's not WMD. And the US has WMD anyhow. And conjur, the true moderate, told me that it would only injure a couple people. Surely Red Dawn, the other true moderate, recognizes this as truth?

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: arsbanned
Yeah, maybe we should take care of WMDs in the U.S. before launching any more "preemptive" wars.

Care to answer the question again? A fog of droplets over a wide area would slightly injure a few people?

Your buddies in the admin claim the insurgents didn't even realize that old shell had any Sarin in it.
Care to try again? :laugh:

Well, thank goodness they randomly stumbled on the only shell in the region. It was pure random luck. And they don't read newspapers, so they'll never know to look for more. And soon Kerry will be elected and all will be well.

 

[Genx87]

It was also mentioned on the radio last night which is why I brought it up. With millions of potential deaths involved you'd think this would get more attention.

Tell me about it. I mean all we have heard from the liberal media the past year is about WMDs. Now we have this and the sarin arty shell found in Iraq was so important to the media it ended up on the 2nd to last page in Newsweek.

Think there is something going on here?