I agree with every word you said

Current Events » in reply to I don't see how an attack 3 months before an election would be a problem

alcaray — 7/12/2004 9:49:04 PM (archived)

I only say that it does not go far enough, if you leave out discussion of trigger and duration. So far I haven't seen a word about these.

And for Tom: if Clinton had started contingency planning of suspended elections you might have started checking out GQ, what the trendiest tinfoil hats were.

The whole thread (15 posts)

Bush and his cronies can't fathom anyone replacing him. He's tightening his grip on power. - Derek - 7/12/2004 1:19:07 PM
- We had elections during WWII and the Civil War. - Bowser - 7/12/2004 11:50:03 PM
  - How many northern cities were under attack in 1864? How about 1944? - Larry J - 7/13/2004 1:46:52 PM
  - I'm with Bowser. I don't see any need for postponing elections. - Tom Brosz - 7/13/2004 4:08:41 AM
    - Who would be the first to howl - FrankC - 7/13/2004 5:18:51 AM
      - Redo - Tom Brosz - 7/13/2004 7:00:21 AM
- I guess you've never heard of contingency planning - Larry J - 7/12/2004 3:49:41 PM
  - re: I guess you've never heard of contingency planning - Derek - 7/13/2004 1:37:15 AM
    - Remember Madrid? (n/t) - RobVG - 7/13/2004 2:05:55 AM
  - They could go a long way to alleviate suspicion... - alcaray - 7/12/2004 4:40:30 PM
    - "Don't know one way or the other?" Are you serious? - Tom Brosz - 7/12/2004 4:50:11 PM
      - If there is a 9/11-level attack 3 months before the election... - alcaray - 7/12/2004 5:29:23 PM
        
        I don't see how an attack 3 months before an election would be a problem - Larry J - 7/12/2004 6:13:17 PM
        
        I agree with every word you said - alcaray - 7/12/2004 9:49:04 PM
        
        re: If - Tom Brosz - 7/12/2004 5:38:30 PM

Recent posts

On this day in Current Events

The whole thread (15 posts)