SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (20569)9/11/2002 12:50:04 AM
From: E  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 21057
 
Of course not. It's a paranoid rant. And it's scurrilous. But it's not a bomb threat, implicit or explicit. It's the opposite. It expresses a paranoid fear that Bush and/or his supporters would themselves bomb the capital so they could enjoy "martial law."

This is what he said. (GZ wouldn't post it because he's embarrassed.) (And GZ spammed it just as it is, and RD couldn't have changed all his too.)

The best way to end America's run as a republic and move up to being a full-blown and heinous empire is to blow up the Capitol with a "dirty nuke" on October 15. This gives enough time for the Supreme Injustices to weight in an allow the guys who are pulling the Shrub's strings to get martial law totally in place before the elections. Neat, huh? End of America, as we knew it.

He's not the only one with paranoid delusions. Check this out. Follow the links back a bit:

Message 17976572

Amazing what you can tell from a couple of quotation marks.



To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (20569)9/11/2002 9:26:09 AM
From: Bill  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 21057
 
<< no explicit bomb threat >>

If you wanted to have sex with a woman you just met, would you ask her if you could put your penis in her vagina? Or would you be slightly less explicit?