Dangerous fossil fuel terrorist event leads to calls for dangerous fossil fuel ban.

[NNadir]

This is a crosspost:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2937215

Actually if you read the article, you will not see a call for banning fossil fuels.

Most people who pretend to be concerned about the potential for terrorism couldn't care less about whether dangerous fossil fuels are used in terrorist events.

The only terrorism we need to worry about is "nuclear terrorism" even though so called "nuclear terrorism" has caused zero deaths and I think we've all lost count of the bodies associated with dangerous fossil fuel terrorism.

[Zenlitened]

1. Well if they're only *pretending* to be concerned about the potential for terrorism...

Why would you expect them to care about the means of delivery?

:shrug:

[NNadir]

2. I don't know. I hear alot about "nuclear terrorism" in my position.

I never hear about dangerous fossil fuel terrorism.

From what I can tell the main difference between the two is that one exists and the other doesn't.

[Zenlitened]

3. What is your position, if I may ask?

If you're involved in terrorism prevention, I'd imagine you hear about nuke fuel in connection with "dirty bombs," no?

[NNadir]

4. Oh I hear about "dirty bombs" all the time.

You can't avoid hearing about them.

I must have covered them hundreds, if not thousands, of times in this space.

In fact, one hears a lot more about them than say, Oklahoma City, a dangerous fossil fuel terrorist event.

I'll bet you in the last 8 years Wolf Blitzer has spent a zillion hours talking about dirty bombs.

Of course, I know more about nuclear fuel than Wolf Blitzer could ever even comprehend but for some reason Wolf Blitzer gets far more attention than I do, although I know what the fuck I'm talking about and Wolf Blitzer doesn't and never has.

My position is nothing more or less than nuclear power advocate. I've been at it for years. I am very concerned about dangerous fossil fuel terrorism, dangerous fossil fuel accidents, and dangerous fossil fuel waste.

Except for the pathetic Jose Padilla incident, about which I'm sure Wolf Blitzer prattled on for days and days and days I'd guess - without a single reference to the Constitutional implications - the number of "dirty bomb" terrorist plots, events or attempts remains, well, zero.

[Zenlitened]

6. Interesting. Are you part of a formal advocacy group? Think-tank? Industry?

I'd be interested to know more about who the major players are. :)

[NNadir]

7. Answers to your questions: No. No. No. n/t.

[TheWraith]

5. Nuclear fuel wouldn't make a good dirty bomb.

Of course, the whole threat of a "dirty bomb" has been hyped VASTLY out of proportion with reality, but even under the most generous scenario, reactor grade uranium and the like just isn't that radioactive. It only really starts kicking when you're talking criticality.