Hey Chuckie, nice try with this attempted link to terrorists. But the sky is not
falling so relax. Have you read the paper the last few days?


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Within the last couple of days they arrested two guys at the Seattle airport.
One was on the "do not fly" list.
Both had Pakistani passports, and had slipped illegally into the US across the
Candian border at Blaine.

Both guys paid cash for one-way tickets to NY.

Was it a coincidence that they wanted to be in NY this afternoon?
Probably.

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
If the terrorists could knock out electic power without being caught
wouldn't this be an effective way to blackmail us? Why would they
need to do other stuff?

Absolutely.


Relax Chuckie. The sky is not falling. There are no terrorists involved in this.
Please take the time to read the paper and get informed.

Relax Chuckie. The sky is not falling. There are no terrorists involved in
this.
Please take the time to read the paper and get informed.

Gee thanks, Jimcrack. You're no smarter than when you were Dennis Compton, are
you? Go back and look at the first post in the thread. The one where I said the
terrorists taken off the flight to NY the day before the balckout was most
likely a "coincidence".

If the terrorists could knock out electic power without being caught
wouldn't this be an effective way to blackmail us? Why would they
need to do other stuff?

Absolutely.

Two points:

1. If the power outage was terrorism the USA could be quickly defeated
in this way alone. But I don't think it was terrorism, I hope not
anyway.

2. Why are we talking about this in rec.boats? :-)

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message ...
"basskisser" wrote in message
om...

Also, I
heard the lightning theory also, but the National Weather Service said
the closest lightning strike in the area was hundreds of miles away,
in Maryland.

But....the president repeated that rumor. It must be true. The lightning was
purchased secretly on the international arms market. From Africa.

I heard him refer one time to a lightning strike, and mentioned that
it was not substantiated. Later on during the same remarks, he
sounded as if he was going to mention it again, but then seemed to
change his wording to something more generic. He was not running
around repeating rumors of a lightning strike.

"Bill Cole" wrote in message .net...
Bass,
I was not saying that Gould's theory was bull****, nor do I believe that
Gould necessarily supported the theory. I read Gould's post as a way to
promote an off the cuff discussion (which in my neighborhood was called a
shooting the bull, or bull****).

The only info I have is the same as most of the readers in the NG, the power
experts believe that the problem was not the result of terrorist, but was a
combination of natural factors that overwhelmed the system.

Now, if I said that the power failure was the result of Flying Saucers
stealing our power, do you have any proof that my statement is bull****?

I wouldn't totally discount it, until all of the facts were in,
especially when there were some circumstances that did seem out of
place. As it were, they weren't connected, but at the time Gould put
that theory out, it wasn't out of the realm of possiblility.

OK,
so you do agree that Gould's theory was a way of promoting a discussion on
the power outage just to chat about it, not necessarily that there was any
facts for anyone to base any theory on. So he was just trying to shoot the
bull or have a bull**** discussion concerning the power outage.

I can go along with that.


"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"Bill Cole" wrote in message
.net...
Bass,
I was not saying that Gould's theory was bull****, nor do I believe that
Gould necessarily supported the theory. I read Gould's post as a way to
promote an off the cuff discussion (which in my neighborhood was called
a
shooting the bull, or bull****).

The only info I have is the same as most of the readers in the NG, the
power
experts believe that the problem was not the result of terrorist, but
was a
combination of natural factors that overwhelmed the system.

Now, if I said that the power failure was the result of Flying Saucers
stealing our power, do you have any proof that my statement is bull****?

I wouldn't totally discount it, until all of the facts were in,
especially when there were some circumstances that did seem out of
place. As it were, they weren't connected, but at the time Gould put
that theory out, it wasn't out of the realm of possiblility.

"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"Bill Cole" wrote in message
.net...
Bass,
I was not saying that Gould's theory was bull****, nor do I believe that
Gould necessarily supported the theory. I read Gould's post as a way to
promote an off the cuff discussion (which in my neighborhood was called a
shooting the bull, or bull****).

The only info I have is the same as most of the readers in the NG, the power
experts believe that the problem was not the result of terrorist, but was a
combination of natural factors that overwhelmed the system.

Now, if I said that the power failure was the result of Flying Saucers
stealing our power, do you have any proof that my statement is bull****?

I wouldn't totally discount it, until all of the facts were in,
especially when there were some circumstances that did seem out of
place. As it were, they weren't connected, but at the time Gould put
that theory out, it wasn't out of the realm of possiblility.

Agreed, and it was therefore ridiculous for Chuck to throw out a theory without knowing
the facts.

Agreed, and it was therefore ridiculous for Chuck to throw out a theory
without knowing
the facts.

No "theory" was thrown out.
Go back and look at the first post in the thread. There's a comment that two
guys had been arrested in Seattle, bound for NY, the day before the blackout.
Followed by a comment that it was probably a coincidence.

By the way, the discussion of theory is one avenue by which to determine and
evaluate facts. Scientists do it all the time.
To state that it is silly to advance a theory without knowing all the facts is
to state that it is always silly to advance a theory.

Chuck,
The discussion of theory is part of the scientific process, but do you
believe that any theory has ever been discussed in rec.boats where a general
consensus has been reached? Especially one that involved a terrorist
conspiracy and/or government cover-up. If so, that is a major milestone.

Wasn't your post really designed to provide a venue for shooting the bull,
while we waited for the newspapers and TV's to tell us what was the cause of
the power outage. That is the real purpose for rec.boats, sort of like a
bunch of neighbor getting together to discuss things they have no knowledge
of, and solve the world's problems.

If we ever decide wither or not Bayliner is the best boat in the world or
the worst piece of ****, ever to be thrust on the public, maybe we can move
onto solving the middle east crisis.


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Agreed, and it was therefore ridiculous for Chuck to throw out a theory
without knowing
the facts.

No "theory" was thrown out.
Go back and look at the first post in the thread. There's a comment that
two
guys had been arrested in Seattle, bound for NY, the day before the
blackout.
Followed by a comment that it was probably a coincidence.

By the way, the discussion of theory is one avenue by which to determine
and
evaluate facts. Scientists do it all the time.
To state that it is silly to advance a theory without knowing all the
facts is
to state that it is always silly to advance a theory.