Get down, get undressed
Aug. 10th, 2006 11:59 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cincinnatus_c
High today in KW: 26. Dewpoint then: 15. High dewpoint: 18.
High today, here: 27. Dewpoint then: 16. High dewpoint: 18.
Just when I think I must've hit bottom, Curt Schilling loses to the Royals. A day after Jonathan Papelbon lost to the Royals. Man. Wow. Mercy.
On the other hand, the Blue Jays are back in it! Right? Right? Look: if anything can possibly happen to get you back in it, then you were never out of it, hmm?
But what I want to know is, what are they doing letting people on planes wearing clothes? Listen, this is a matter of safety. Of national security! If you don't fly naked, the terrorists have won. Or will more likely win.
Anyway, it is clear that Osama wants to blow up some planes to show that he's cooler than Hezbollah. Which is, like, so lame. He probably picked up this week's New Republic, saw the "Move Over, Osama" headline and the drawing of the Shiite Santa, and said, that's it, I'm blowin' me up some planes.
Why planes, I have to wonder. Well, you know, they do blow up real good. But it's hard to blow up planes. Relatively speaking. Very inefficient, trying to blow up planes. So they blow up, or try to blow up, trains, too, sometimes, and the odd building--but my bit of free advice to the terrorists is: cars. I have to believe it'd be really goddamned easy to blow people up with cars. Just slip under random cars here and there, stick some explosives in there or screw up the brakes somehow or something, and, man, wow, there goes society. Can you imagine if every time you got in your car, you had to think it might blow up? Think about it!
Then again, I'm not entirely sure that terrorists could make a statistically significant difference in the number of people killed in cars. I mean, every time you get in your car you might die, or kill multiple other people, as it is, and yet that doesn't seem to bother hardly anyone except me.
High today, here: 27. Dewpoint then: 16. High dewpoint: 18.
Just when I think I must've hit bottom, Curt Schilling loses to the Royals. A day after Jonathan Papelbon lost to the Royals. Man. Wow. Mercy.
On the other hand, the Blue Jays are back in it! Right? Right? Look: if anything can possibly happen to get you back in it, then you were never out of it, hmm?
But what I want to know is, what are they doing letting people on planes wearing clothes? Listen, this is a matter of safety. Of national security! If you don't fly naked, the terrorists have won. Or will more likely win.
Anyway, it is clear that Osama wants to blow up some planes to show that he's cooler than Hezbollah. Which is, like, so lame. He probably picked up this week's New Republic, saw the "Move Over, Osama" headline and the drawing of the Shiite Santa, and said, that's it, I'm blowin' me up some planes.
Why planes, I have to wonder. Well, you know, they do blow up real good. But it's hard to blow up planes. Relatively speaking. Very inefficient, trying to blow up planes. So they blow up, or try to blow up, trains, too, sometimes, and the odd building--but my bit of free advice to the terrorists is: cars. I have to believe it'd be really goddamned easy to blow people up with cars. Just slip under random cars here and there, stick some explosives in there or screw up the brakes somehow or something, and, man, wow, there goes society. Can you imagine if every time you got in your car, you had to think it might blow up? Think about it!
Then again, I'm not entirely sure that terrorists could make a statistically significant difference in the number of people killed in cars. I mean, every time you get in your car you might die, or kill multiple other people, as it is, and yet that doesn't seem to bother hardly anyone except me.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-08-11 11:40 am (UTC)It's not like the number of deaths caused by terrorism is significant either - crossing the road is still way the fuck more [1] dangerous than being killed by terrorists or dying in a plane disaster, but the latter are much terrifying/newsworthy.
[1] That being a larger value than 'bore', 'way more' or 'fucking more'.
no subject
Date: 2006-08-13 02:22 am (UTC)They could kill a lot more people in cars, but still make a much less significant difference in the number of people killed in cars.
But, then, random lunatic snipers do even better at significantly increasing the number of people killed in particular situations. So, really what the terrorists ought to do is shoot people, with high-powered rifles, while they're eating dinner in their own homes, because the only time I can think of that happening is that abortion doctor in, where was it, NY state somewhere? So, you know, you could dramatically increase the number of people shot to death out of the blue, by an unknown assassin, while eating dinner.
no subject
Date: 2006-08-11 02:11 pm (UTC)Of course, people feel they're in control of their cars, and so they don't feel like they're taking a chance, which is different from airplanes and terrorists for this and a second reason. That reason is that when people hear about airplanes and terrorists, it's almost always in the context of a disaster of some kind. This colors their thinking a little.
Sneaking around other people's cars is risky for terrorists because it's hard to be inconspicuous if you're poking around under someone's car in the Wal-Mart parking lot, even if it's your own.
Terrorists should detonate their own cars on thoroughfares, like the Washington beltway. They may not kill too many people, but they'll annoy a hell of a lot of them. And, as a bonus, disrupt shipping.
The trouble with doing anything with cars is the lack of recognizable symbolism.
"Terrorists today detonated bombs in three Fords and Volvo on the Williamsburgh Bridge. Experts agree that this means that al-Qaeda wants an end to off-Broadway plays and a case of Bud Light."