Nuclear weapons of mass destruction in San Diego?

[upflying]

Apparently so according to this port of San Diego official. Of course the Department of Homeland Security now denies it.

Either the official was telling the truth or he misspoke. And when posed with these questions by a reporter, he should do what other officials do when asked these questions. Divert, spin and deflect the questions by not directly answering the question.

I am guessing the Officer Haller has new duties elsewhere.

[David13]

Well, they don't say nukular. They just saw mass destruction.

If you took a load of 50 tons of sugar, or flour, and poured it over 20 or 30 people, it would probably suffocate all of them.

Ergo; wmd! wmd!

Now we can spend billions of dollars on radios, and cars and personnel to run all around the port for no reason.

What else is new these days? Anything?

dc

[upflying]

Maybe, but interesting to also note the body language of Officer Haller. He actually says a lot with his non-verbal communication. Something is going on and his gestures suggest he didn't want to lie about it. He even diverts his gaze to an off camera official for advice on how to answer the question. So he tells the truth and now he's in trouble.

It's just a matter of time.

[CarrotNC]

Well, they don't say nukular. They just saw mass destruction.

If you took a load of 50 tons of sugar, or flour, and poured it over 20 or 30 people, it would probably suffocate all of them.

Ergo; wmd! wmd!

Now we can spend billions of dollars on radios, and cars and personnel to run all around the port for no reason.

What else is new these days? Anything?

dc

 

Recent news story in my neck of the woods completely redefined my understanding -- in this case the police filed charges for posession of a WMD becuase of a sawed-off shotgun. For those outside the US, that means a shotgun with less than 18.5 inches of barrel.

 

News story here: http://www.wral.com/news/news_briefs/story/9086766/