Let's dissect the FACTS as we know them so far...

[Atman]

Late at night/early in the morning, near a nightclub, a car swerves and hits a trash can. The driver runs away.

An ambulance driver says he saw smoke coming from the car. Was the guy smoking in his car? Was it pot smoke? Or was it billowing black smoke indicating an incendiary device? They won't say. Just "smoke coming from the car."

He has a nearly full tank of gas (60 liters = roughly 16 gallons). It is reported as "packed with 60 liters of petrol."

He has a standard cylinder of propane in his car. One cylinder, according the eye witness on CNN who actually photographed it.

We don't know how many nails he had. The media is only reading the press releases using the word "packed," but there is absolutely no indication it was "packed" with anything. Maybe he had a standard box of deck nails.

There has been NO MENTION of any sort of detonating device found. How was he setting off this bomb?

People, we need to wake up to this sort of hysterical bullshit. How many times have we been through this before? We'll find out, late some weekend night when no one is paying attention, that there was never any threat and what we had was a standard, run-of-the-mill leaving-the-scene-of-an-accident by an intoxicated driver after a night of clubbing.

Wanna bet?

.

[Atman]

1. Hello, is this thing on?

:hi:

.

[cigsandcoffee]

2. I've apparently missed something here.

Any links to a story for the latecomers?

[TreasonousBastard]

3. Ummmm....

at the moment the Brits are taking it pretty seriously, and they do say there was a detonating device involving a cellphone. This seems to be a bit more than a diversion.

If they're wrong, of course, keyboard experts have to apologize to far fewer people than those British security types.

[bryant69]

4. Right you are

I have to see I would rather see security types taking this sort of thing seriously than taking a laid back approach.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[madokie]

5. I have to agree with that

as most I'm sure do

[seriousstan]

6. So the bet is........

In some amount of time (2 weeks?), it will be announced in the MSM (not KOS or some fool blog or an editorial) that it has been determined that it was a "run-of-the-mill leaving-the-scene-of-an-accident" (or words to that effect)?

I will cut out the drunk driver part because it is too restrictive in this example.

And the bet is for........one gold star given to the person of the winner's choice?

Does this sound about right?

I like the odds because I think you are misrepresenting the facts as I am able to find them currently.

Soooo....do you have any problem with the way I structured the bet? Let me restate.

If in 2 weeks time, 12:01AM EST 06/30/07, there is not a MSM news article stating that it was only a hit and run accident you will owe me a gold star donated to the person of my choice.

[seriousstan]

8. Hello, is this thing on?

[Atman]

9. First of all, the story has changed some since I first posted this...

CNN reporters are still using lots of hyperbole not backed up by anything they can demonstrate. They keep using the term PACKED, but there is nothing they're showing us that backs this up. They've shown eyewitness accounts by the photographer showing one canister of gas and "rumors that there are three others." Why photos of one of them but not the whole scene? Why photos of the one gas canister but not the nails? Who is defining "packed?"

I haven't heard anyone say there was a cell phone detonator found.

I'll take your bet with some caveats...I think two weeks is a little soon. Maybe a month. And what happens if, in a month, it hasn't been shown to be bs, but it is a month after that? Do we reverse the bet and then give out another star to the second winner's choice? Or send a refund?

Why do you say I'm "misrepresenting" the facts? I just posted what was actually being said on the news, stripped of the hyperbole, scare-words and fear mongering.

I'm still trying to figure out how the story switched from a car with "60 liters of fuel (a tank of petrol)" to "52 gallons of fuel." That's a HUGE difference. How did they make such a huge mistake initially? Or is the news now playing games and adding the gas tank contents to the liquid measure of the patio gas tank, which is usually measured by weight, not liquid volume. You can't tell 16 from 52 just by looking at it? I am, indeed, saying they lied, either initially or now. Maybe after people starting adding up that "60 liters" just equals one standard tank of gas they changed the reporting for dramatic impact.

I don't know. I just know this whole thing stinks to high heaven.

.

[seriousstan]

10. I will go 1 month AND NO there is no is no "reversing the bet". That is why there is a timeframe.

So are you willing to go with...

If in 1 month time, 12:01AM EST 07/30/07, there is not a MSM news article stating that it was only a hit and run accident you will owe me a gold star donated to the person of my choice.

?????

[Atman]

11. Okay, wait a minute...why limit it to a hit and run accident?

My contention is that it is just a bogus threat, that's all. The hit and run, as you call it, is only a guess, and example of a more likely scenerio. I'll take the bet if we limit it to "bullshit," and not define it specifically as a drunk driving, hit and run, whatever.

I'm just saying the facts don't add up and this is a bogus threat.

.

[seriousstan]

12. How's this......

If in 1 month time, 12:01AM EST 07/30/07, there is not a MSM news article stating that it was not an explosive device you will owe me a gold star donated to the person of my choice.

Being an explosive device would qualify as a non-bogus threat, wouldn't you say? "Bullshit" is too ambiguous for a bet.

Is it a bet or would you like a crack at stating the bet?

[Atman]

15. I'm a bit leary of that.

They could do as the freepers do when discussing WMD, changing the definition to mean what they want it to mean. Like, a tank of propane is certainly an "explosive device," but it's actually just a device capable of exploding.

My contention is that this simply has nothing to do with any Al Qaeda terrorist plot and that there was no bomb or real threat to anyone.

I'll bet you that that is the eventual outcome; this will prove to be all a big nothing, just a guy who perhaps will turn out to be guilty of something, like drunk driving or an outstanding warrant, but that he was not planning any attack on anyone and there is a valid explanation (non-terra) for his behavior and possession of a cylinder of propane and a recently-filled gas tank.

I'm still wondering why you don't think the winner should have to reverse the star should it take longer than a month. If it's bogus, it's bogus...if its found out to be bogus in five weeks as opposed to four, it's still bogus. And all I've ever said is that it's bogus, despite you're wanting to pull out individual key words for more importance than they warrant. (IOW, how long it takes to reveal the bogus-ness is not the gist of my post).

But sure...I'll take the bet. What's the worst that could happen? A DUer gets a star! Works for me.

.

[seriousstan]

16. Then it is a bet. The reason for a timelimit is obvious. It can't be open ended.

The clock is ticking. Good luck.

[Ghost in the Machine]

17. Maybe it was just a guy that had to go get some propane for his

BBQ grill. He went ahead and filled the car up while he was there, and picked up a box of nails to fix his porch or something. Then he stopped at the local pub, has a few rounds with his buddies, then heads home, realizing the late hour. On his way home, he loses control of his vehicle, hits a dumpster outside a bar then, seeing smoke coming from under the hood and thinking the car is on fire and going to blow because of the propane tank, takes off running for cover. When the car didn't blow, he took off anyways so he didn't get in trouble.

Someone should check the records and see if the owner reported the car stolen... and if he did, what time did he report it?

[Atman]

20. Man, that sound CRAZY!

That's...that's...uh...well, it's absolutely so plausible that it can't be true! They'll come up with something much better to keep the masses in a state of fear, and to help cover their asses for their Boston-style over reaction.

Remember, we went ALL DAY with that one before anyone finally admitted it was a hoax.

.

[Holly_Hobby]

7. Agreed

How stupid do they think we are? This is either the drunk driver scenario you describe or a deliberate false flag op.

An intentional car bomber would do nothing to draw attention to himself.

[Eurobabe]

13. They've jumped to blaming Al Qaeda on CNN

TERRA, TERRA, TERRA!!!!

[Bake]

14. MSNBC was speculating that it was an Islamic "splinter group."

From the lips of Roger Cressey, terrorism "expert."

I don't think he or anyone else at this point knows enough to be speculating whodunit.

Bake

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

18. I'm not going to believe anything British authorities say...

for at least a few weeks.

[Beelzebud]

19. It also happened right as a new PM was taking power. I call BULLSHIT

[seriousstan]

21. Not a good call.