Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by pats1, Oct 18, 2006.
What message board was THAT threat on? Holy carp.
I hope they take this seriously. An attack on a stadium easily eclipsed the tragedy in NYC and at the Pentagon.
Let's to a happy and safe weekend.
I guess they must mean in the parking lot - it would be impossible to search every car going into the parking lot but impossible to get a radiological bomb inside a stadium. I would make a comment about the people who would do this . . . but I'd better not - except to say I hate the mother f*ckers.
It's hard to wrap your head around it due to the symbology of the attack in NY, but you're completely right. The loss of life would easily eclipse that of the 9/11 attack if it was successfully pulled off. And the fear it would instill would be far greater, IMO.
How many people work in giant sky scrapers or aspire to.. A large number maybe.. but.. How many people attend sporting events. Far larger number. Far larger 'fear effect', imo.
You showed remarkable restraint in not polticizing this. The meds must have taken effect already
I think it would be tough to get bombs inside seven stadiums. And if inside is the goal, the fact that four of the games are at 1pm eastern and the other three are at 4pm would put a big crimp in their plans.
This certainly does not belong on the political forum unless want to start a separate one over there. Hopefully we will keep politics out of this, which you have.
I just saw on sportsline that the threat does not sound credible at this time.
Dirty bombs are large and ugly looking things, no way you "sneak" one into a stadium. Vehicle type thing only.
On the plus side no one wants to bomb Buffalo!
Sporting of mass murderers
to give fair warning.
Next time ... no more Mr. Nice Guy!
Any truth to the rumor that after this report came out, the NFL advised Raiders security not to frisk anyone this weekend?
I do not know about the size of these things as compared to other nuclear devices..or whether there are dogs or other means available..but I agree..this could be worse, much worse and I certainly hope that extra means are taken into account in all stadiums.
I agree. Large amounts of explosives require a large medium, and a proximity to the stadium itself. Not impossible -- but very difficult to pull off. As for a dirty bomb, same issue, a large explosion needed to disperse the radioactive material.
On the same note, I have zero fear of attending the Patriots game this Sunday. No place I'd rather be, threat or no threat.
This isn't really related... but, my friend was just talking to a chick that is a jetter (Airforce) at Malmstrom AFB. She was saying that just the missles alone in the state of Montana has the nuclear power of blowing up the world...3 times.
This is just in Montana alone.
The thing that concerns me most about this 'public' threat is that it may be a form of misdirection for a real attack ....
Even if it doesn't sound credible they should take extra precautions. We need to learn from our mistakes. Didn't our national security blow off the threats to the impending attack at NYC?
Just recently a terror plot to put liquid bombs (where two chemicals had to be mixed for the bomb to go off) aboard airplanes was foiled. I don't know if dirty bombs are feasible but the security at those threatened stadiums should be tightened and on the lookout for them.
The warnings made their way to U.S. authorities after an article from the independent news website, canadafreepress.com, appeared on the Internet chat forum, thefriendsociety.com.
The article: "Next Attack Imminent: Muslims ordered to leave the United States," mentions a pending attack from a naturalized U.S. citizen, and was posted in the forum under the conversation titled, "New Attack on America Be Afraid."
The Friend Society Forums
the friend society is an internet humor corporation no jerks allowed.
Someone's idea of a joke?
And that, my friend, is politicizing this discussion. Didn't take long.
I wouldn't take this too seriously. A post on a Canadian chat room? Not exactly a Presidential Daily Briefing on the subject ...
No sense living in fear.
IIRC there were several lawsuits over enhanced security at stadiums by people who didn't want to be frisked. Some courts sided with the individuals
resisting the pat downs. Whatever your political beliefs, in a post 9/11 world, it makes sense to make sure that some idiot trying to make a name for himself or his cause doesn't have several pounds of explosives stapped to his vest by searching him before he/she gets in the venue.
Just my $0.02,
I am by no means saying that an attack on a stadium is more symbolic than attacks on WTC and the Pentagon. Not saying that those two attacks were small or anything. Strictly speaking from the numbers of casualty. 9/11 we lost 3000+ lives, but at a stadium, it's easily 60,000+ and those are just the spectators, not counting people that work at the game.
Remember, we were 'lucky' on 9/11 - 16,000 people who worked in the Towers escaped.
As someone who witnessed the towers' burining, I'm constantly amazed at how complacent people have become.
The next attacks (and sadly, I think this is inevitable) will be even worse, now that rogue nations have or are about to have nuclear capability.
Separate names with a comma.