It’s hilarious watching JeffR get dismantled at every turn.
[quote]inner Hulk wrote:
It’s hilarious watching JeffR get dismantled at every turn. [/quote]
Great, some more driftwood.
Welcome!!!
However, I can point to $80,000,000 to $100,000,000 spent on New York’s dirty bomb detection program that says you are full of shit.
Seems like the people most affected/targeted take this the most seriously.
It’s easy sitting on the sidelines throwing rocks.
However, it’s also the mark of being callous and yellow.
If your loved ones were being targeted, you would be right there praising this program.
It’s a 100% certainty.
JeffR
[quote]JeffR wrote:
If your loved ones were being targeted, you would be right there praising this program.
It’s a 100% certainty.[/quote]
Wrong again.
One has to wonder which bothers you most: being wrong so much, or being so blatantly dishonest about it.
If a program wastes a lot of money on a very unlikely scenario, you’d have to be an idiot to praise it. And praise it you do.
I’d prefer to see that kind of money invested prevention, investigative work, better emergency response, etc. Spend the money where it will really increase the safety of the population; not just look good when the mayor mentions it in a speech later on.
It’s a safe bet that a terrorist smart enough to get his hands on radiological materials can also manage to hide them from detection. A steel box is not an unavailable technological marvel. Your very own “supporting” article from yesterday was filled with quotes from experts expressing doubts and reservations about the way the money was spent. You do read the articles you post for support, don’t you?
Your “praiseworthy” little program is only effective if the terrorists are as dumb as rocks. It sure gives the appearance of doing something, though. People feel so safe.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
inner Hulk wrote:
It’s hilarious watching JeffR get dismantled at every turn.
Great, some more driftwood.
Welcome!!!
However, I can point to $80,000,000 to $100,000,000 spent on New York’s dirty bomb detection program that says you are full of shit.
Seems like the people most affected/targeted take this the most seriously.
It’s easy sitting on the sidelines throwing rocks.
However, it’s also the mark of being callous and yellow.
If your loved ones were being targeted, you would be right there praising this program.
It’s a 100% certainty.
JeffR
[/quote]
So because the government spends a lot of money on a program it makes it important? The government spends 30,000 to study the mating habits of flies.
Anyway, as I said before, a dirty bomb is bullshit. One has never been used anywhere.
I’ve got more important shit to worry about than fucking dirty bombs, maybe like my city’s crime rate and consistantly high homicide rate which is higher than the state’s every year.
I’m glad the government’s busy spending millions of dollars into programs which are complete bullshit instead of solving real problems.
[quote]pookie wrote:
JeffR wrote:
If your loved ones were being targeted, you would be right there praising this program.
It’s a 100% certainty.
Wrong again.
One has to wonder which bothers you most: being wrong so much, or being so blatantly dishonest about it.
If a program wastes a lot of money on a very unlikely scenario, you’d have to be an idiot to praise it. And praise it you do.
I’d prefer to see that kind of money invested prevention, investigative work, better emergency response, etc. Spend the money where it will really increase the safety of the population; not just look good when the mayor mentions it in a speech later on.
It’s a safe bet that a terrorist smart enough to get his hands on radiological materials can also manage to hide them from detection. A steel box is not an unavailable technological marvel. Your very own “supporting” article from yesterday was filled with quotes from experts expressing doubts and reservations about the way the money was spent. You do read the articles you post for support, don’t you?
Your “praiseworthy” little program is only effective if the terrorists are as dumb as rocks. It sure gives the appearance of doing something, though. People feel so safe.
[/quote]
Again, must be nice to be out of harm’s way.
Oh, I always post articles in full. There are going to be discussions and dissenting voices.
Doesn’t invalidate any of them.
If I didn’t, you’d accuse me of cherry picking.
I’d rather be accused of intellectual honesty.
Have I mentioned that your sideline perspective doesn’t add anything to this discussion?
Spend some time in New York and get back to me.
If you fear leaving your cocoon, then at least go onto some of the New York based forums.
The few I’ve perused since the dirty bomb scare seemed grateful to the NYPD and others for their prompt response.
JeffR
[quote]Inner Hulk wrote:
JeffR wrote:
inner Hulk wrote:
It’s hilarious watching JeffR get dismantled at every turn.
Great, some more driftwood.
Welcome!!!
However, I can point to $80,000,000 to $100,000,000 spent on New York’s dirty bomb detection program that says you are full of shit.
Seems like the people most affected/targeted take this the most seriously.
It’s easy sitting on the sidelines throwing rocks.
However, it’s also the mark of being callous and yellow.
If your loved ones were being targeted, you would be right there praising this program.
It’s a 100% certainty.
JeffR
So because the government spends a lot of money on a program it makes it important? The government spends 30,000 to study the mating habits of flies.
Anyway, as I said before, a dirty bomb is bullshit. One has never been used anywhere.
I’ve got more important shit to worry about than fucking dirty bombs, maybe like my city’s crime rate and consistantly high homicide rate which is higher than the state’s every year.
I’m glad the government’s busy spending millions of dollars into programs which are complete bullshit instead of solving real problems.[/quote]
So your mind cannot wrap itself around the idea that there are DIFFERENT levels of danger based on geography?
Sorry to hear that.
Why not just say, “Hey, I appreciate that New Yorkers have a different perspective. However, I don’t share their level of concern about terrorism”
The other crap you write, should be flushed.
JeffR
[quote]JeffR wrote:
The few I’ve perused since the dirty bomb scare seemed grateful to the NYPD and others for their prompt response.
JeffR[/quote]
Everyone is always greatful for the prompt response of first responders…
That isn’t the same as saying that their tax dollars have been well spent.
[quote]vroom wrote:
JeffR wrote:
The few I’ve perused since the dirty bomb scare seemed grateful to the NYPD and others for their prompt response.
JeffR
Everyone is always greatful for the prompt response of first responders…
That isn’t the same as saying that their tax dollars have been well spent.[/quote]
Everyone is grateful, no doubt there. We just have an issue with the danger that JeffR so blatantly misrepresents.
But then, there are those of us that can comprehend the gravity of a situation, and those of us that can’t.
Hell, if BH6’s response won’t shut the doubters up, then nothing will.
I think some of you are really missing the danger of a dirty bomb. The potential loss of life isn’t the only issue to consider.
Rendering a couple dozen blocks around New Yorks financial district uninhabitable would be a serious blow to the economy.
If several other major cities were to be hit simultaneously the economic effects could be massive.
The American economy is the engine that drives the entire world economy. The full damage from a dirty bomb attack might not be immediately felt, it could be something that slowly crept it’s way around the world.
Those who think that a dirty bomb attack is no big deal are not thinking about the big picture. Anarchist groups like AlQaeda can benefit from the disorder that a worldwide economic collapse can cause.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
Inner Hulk wrote:
JeffR wrote:
inner Hulk wrote:
It’s hilarious watching JeffR get dismantled at every turn.
Great, some more driftwood.
Welcome!!!
However, I can point to $80,000,000 to $100,000,000 spent on New York’s dirty bomb detection program that says you are full of shit.
Seems like the people most affected/targeted take this the most seriously.
It’s easy sitting on the sidelines throwing rocks.
However, it’s also the mark of being callous and yellow.
If your loved ones were being targeted, you would be right there praising this program.
It’s a 100% certainty.
JeffR
So because the government spends a lot of money on a program it makes it important? The government spends 30,000 to study the mating habits of flies.
Anyway, as I said before, a dirty bomb is bullshit. One has never been used anywhere.
I’ve got more important shit to worry about than fucking dirty bombs, maybe like my city’s crime rate and consistantly high homicide rate which is higher than the state’s every year.
I’m glad the government’s busy spending millions of dollars into programs which are complete bullshit instead of solving real problems.
So your mind cannot wrap itself around the idea that there are DIFFERENT levels of danger based on geography?
Sorry to hear that.
Why not just say, “Hey, I appreciate that New Yorkers have a different perspective. However, I don’t share their level of concern about terrorism”
The other crap you write, should be flushed.
JeffR
[/quote]
Alright, fine, despite the fact that I live less than 20 miles away from a nuclear power plant and my city is largely industrialized including numerous defense contractors and related organizations, I don’t share New Yorkers level of concern about terrorism. I realize terrorism is a threat, but one that is widely over emphasized and extremely rare. I reside in reality.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
I think some of you are really missing the danger of a dirty bomb. The potential loss of life isn’t the only issue to consider.
Rendering a couple dozen blocks around New Yorks financial district uninhabitable would be a serious blow to the economy.
[/quote]
Not really. Most of the finance companies in the district have redundant operations in Jersey and elsewhere.
[quote]Mendacious JeffR wrote:
I’d rather be accused of intellectual honesty.[/quote]
False accusations would go along well with your pathological dishonesty and wrong conclusions.
[quote]Inner Hulk wrote:
Sifu wrote:
I think some of you are really missing the danger of a dirty bomb. The potential loss of life isn’t the only issue to consider.
Rendering a couple dozen blocks around New Yorks financial district uninhabitable would be a serious blow to the economy.
Not really. Most of the finance companies in the district have redundant operations in Jersey and elsewhere.[/quote]
The people are not redundant, just the systems.
NYC is well prepared and getting better everyday. They are ground zero and know it.
Don’t think money is being spent on investigations, surveillance and contingency planning. It is. It just doesn’t get the press and it shouldn’t.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
I think some of you are really missing the danger of a dirty bomb. The potential loss of life isn’t the only issue to consider.
Rendering a couple dozen blocks around New Yorks financial district uninhabitable would be a serious blow to the economy.[/quote]
I don’t think anyone is trying to downplay the seriousness of a dirty bomb attack.
What most of the reasonable posters are trying to say is that informing the public about the real, actual risks might lessen the panic and save more lives, than the approach favored by Jeff, which appears to be to exaggerate everything out of proportion. Jeff is angry because no one agrees with him that a dirty bomb attack is a lesser catastrophe than the detonation of a low-yield nuclear weapon.
Dirty bombs are generally referred too as weapons of terror or of mass disruption, because they create fear and panic out of proportion with the real risks they represent.
Educating the public properly about those risks would lessen the terrorizing and panicking effect of such an attack. Instead, authorities play on those fears to reduce civil liberties and grab more grant money; while the media exploit them to get better ratings.
Somehow, some think we should be applauding these actions.
[quote]pookie wrote:
Educating the public properly about those risks would lessen the terrorizing and panicking effect of such an attack. Instead, authorities play on those fears to reduce civil liberties and grab more grant money; while the media exploit them to get better ratings.
Somehow, some think we should be applauding these actions.
[/quote]
Hmm, who are you calling terrorists?
I know that there are redundent systems for trading. There is even a second New York stock exchange. They are only part of the picture.
There is also the real estate market of Manhattan to consider. It would be a huge hit. There would be mortgage companies holding billions of dollars worth of loans that they could no longer collect on. It could collapse the mortgage industry. Which in turn would collapse the new housing industry. You have to consider the economic impact of bringing such a major cities economic life to a standstill.
There would be no easy clean up either. Trying to decontaminate dozens of city blocks would be an impossible task. In downtown Detroit they have a building that is radioactively contaminated. It’s right next to the new Stadium where they held the superbowl last year. The building cannot be made safe for habitation and it cannot be torn down because it will contaminate the entire downtown. So it just sits abandoned. Imagine having to abandon several blocks of Manhattan like that. It would be a big deal.
[quote]pookie wrote:
Something pithy, I am sure.
[/quote]
Youavatar cracks me up everytime. I stare ot it for minutes at a time just laughing my simple ass off.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
I know that there are redundent systems for trading. There is even a second New York stock exchange. They are only part of the picture.
There is also the real estate market of Manhattan to consider. It would be a huge hit. There would be mortgage companies holding billions of dollars worth of loans that they could no longer collect on. It could collapse the mortgage industry. Which in turn would collapse the new housing industry. You have to consider the economic impact of bringing such a major cities economic life to a standstill.
There would be no easy clean up either. Trying to decontaminate dozens of city blocks would be an impossible task. In downtown Detroit they have a building that is radioactively contaminated. It’s right next to the new Stadium where they held the superbowl last year. The building cannot be made safe for habitation and it cannot be torn down because it will contaminate the entire downtown. So it just sits abandoned. Imagine having to abandon several blocks of Manhattan like that. It would be a big deal.[/quote]
Sifu,
renny and pookie think you are being dramatic. You know why?
They aren’t likely to be hit.
However, there is good news (inner hulk) has grown some compassion.
When calculating the cost of a dirty bomb attack one must imagine that every person who was exposed will spend a lifetime wondering if the skin lesion, hair falling out, weight loss, etc… is due to that exposure.
Imagine the psychological and financial toll (doctor’s visits).
It’s hard to calculate the total cost of a dirty bomb.
Not to mention the mass panic it would cause in other city centers. Imagine the news coverage? The cost of lost tourism dollars?
On and on.
But, hey. If renny and pookie aren’t involved, then it must not be a big deal.
Callous punks.
JeffR
[quote]pookie wrote:
Sifu wrote:
I think some of you are really missing the danger of a dirty bomb. The potential loss of life isn’t the only issue to consider.
Rendering a couple dozen blocks around New Yorks financial district uninhabitable would be a serious blow to the economy.
I don’t think anyone is trying to downplay the seriousness of a dirty bomb attack.
What most of the reasonable posters are trying to say is that informing the public about the real, actual risks might lessen the panic and save more lives, than the approach favored by Jeff, which appears to be to exaggerate everything out of proportion. Jeff is angry because no one agrees with him that a dirty bomb attack is a lesser catastrophe than the detonation of a low-yield nuclear weapon.
Dirty bombs are generally referred too as weapons of terror or of mass disruption, because they create fear and panic out of proportion with the real risks they represent.
Educating the public properly about those risks would lessen the terrorizing and panicking effect of such an attack. Instead, authorities play on those fears to reduce civil liberties and grab more grant money; while the media exploit them to get better ratings.
Somehow, some think we should be applauding these actions.
[/quote]
Not what I said at all.
Nuclear weapons would be more catastrophic.
However, it is YOU who made that statement, “Just take some iodine pills.”
It’s YOU who is blowing this off safe in your pseudo-french cocoon.
It’s you and renny (who quoted things more likely to kill you) who need a sense of perspective.
Oh, if you read this thread, you’ll find people who are agreeing with me.
I still don’t know what Bh6 was talking about. I know a little about first responding. He still hasn’t clarified.
The response to a conventional and dirty weapon is VASTLY different.
I think BH6 realizes he made an error.
JeffR
[quote]pookie wrote:
Mendacious JeffR wrote:
I’d rather be accused of intellectual honesty.
False accusations would go along well with your pathological dishonesty and wrong conclusions.[/quote]
Does anyone here actually think I’m dishonest?
That would surprise me. You may not agree with my stances (or be incapable of connecting the dots), but, I think I’m always straightforward and honest.
If we are going to start hurling insults, there needs to be an effort to make them effective.
I’ll let you in on a little secret: Talking about the size of my balls (they are elephantine, by the way), calling me dumb, or dishonest means nothing to me.
You have to hit close to the mark to make it hurt.
I’ll start: pookie, you are a smartass, little punk who is only able to maintain your smug condescension because your province is meaningless. You and your pals are bit players on the world’s stage. Your claim to fame is being pseudo-french and you cannot even stage a decent secession from CANADA!!!
JeffR