• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS) receives letter testing positive for ricin

I can't find anything in his history that would make him a target.
 
ricin originates from castor beans. Regardless they allegedly have someone in custody on this who is a known nut job letter writer.
 
I ran across this online. Is there a full moon out this week or something?
 
Ricin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A dose as small as a few grains of salt can kill an adult human. The LD50 of ricin is around 22 micrograms per kilogram (1.78 mg for an average adult, around 1⁄228 of a standard aspirin tablet/0.4 g gross) in humans if exposure is from injection or inhalation.[1] Oral exposure to ricin is far less toxic and a lethal dose can be up to 20–30 milligrams per kilogram.
Click to expand...
 
Jesus. Hope everything turns out okay.
 
zgoldsmith23 said:
Letter sent to Sen. Roger Wicker tests positive for ricin

Envelope tests positive for ricin at Washington mail facility
Click to expand...

If you remember right after 9/11/01 you had the anthrax attacks, letters with anthrax sent to people. If I remember correctly seven people died.

It's believed that the person who was responsible was an American scientist who committed suicide I think back in 2008.

The only reason I bring this up, that there are some who like to say these anthrax attacks were terrorist attacks on G.W. Bush's watch. Even though they had nothing to do with Al Qaeda or any other foreign terrorist organization.

By their definition the bomb that was intercepted that was addressed to Sheriff Joe Arpaio last week would also meet the definition of a attempted terrorist attack. The person or individuals who sent the bomb were very likely pro illegal alien, pro amnesty and pro open borders. Does that mean that all who support amnesty are terrorist ?

When ricin artillery shells along with mustard gas shells were found in Iraq during the Iraq war, the political left said that ricin didn't count as being a WMD.
 
Just a point of clarification for the OP, Roger Wicker is a senator from Mississippi (MS) not Massachusetts (MA).
 
Republic Now! said:
Just a point of clarification for the OP, Roger Wicker is a senator from Mississippi (MS) not Massachusetts (MA).
Click to expand...

Thank you for clarifying that. Hit the wrong key. Apologies.
 
APACHERAT said:
If you remember right after 9/11/01 you had the anthrax attacks, letters with anthrax sent to people. If I remember correctly seven people died.

It's believed that the person who was responsible was an American scientist who committed suicide I think back in 2008.

The only reason I bring this up, that there are some who like to say these anthrax attacks were terrorist attacks on G.W. Bush's watch. Even though they had nothing to do with Al Qaeda or any other foreign terrorist organization.

By their definition the bomb that was intercepted that was addressed to Sheriff Joe Arpaio last week would also meet the definition of a attempted terrorist attack. The person or individuals who sent the bomb were very likely pro illegal alien, pro amnesty and pro open borders. Does that mean that all who support amnesty are terrorist ?

When ricin artillery shells along with mustard gas shells were found in Iraq during the Iraq war, the political left said that ricin didn't count as being a WMD.
Click to expand...

So it is only terrorism if it's a foreigner doing it?

Who is this guy, Political Left? Why does what he says mean anything?

Is there anything you do not try to spin into a mindless attack on people?
 
APACHERAT said:
If you remember right after 9/11/01 you had the anthrax attacks, letters with anthrax sent to people. If I remember correctly seven people died.

It's believed that the person who was responsible was an American scientist who committed suicide I think back in 2008.

The only reason I bring this up, that there are some who like to say these anthrax attacks were terrorist attacks on G.W. Bush's watch. Even though they had nothing to do with Al Qaeda or any other foreign terrorist organization.

By their definition the bomb that was intercepted that was addressed to Sheriff Joe Arpaio last week would also meet the definition of a attempted terrorist attack. The person or individuals who sent the bomb were very likely pro illegal alien, pro amnesty and pro open borders. Does that mean that all who support amnesty are terrorist ?

When ricin artillery shells along with mustard gas shells were found in Iraq during the Iraq war, the political left said that ricin didn't count as being a WMD.
Click to expand...

rbe0dk-1.gif
 
LaMidRighter said:
I ran across this online. Is there a full moon out this week or something?
Click to expand...

I think when one nutjob goes off, many nutjobs on the ledge feel more emboldened.
 
Last edited:
APACHERAT said:
When ricin artillery shells along with mustard gas shells were found in Iraq during the Iraq war, the political left said that ricin didn't count as being a WMD.
Click to expand...

No. the left didn't say that. The left, and anyone who has a brain said that the shelf life for the gas in the shells they found were well dead because those where the shells Saddam buried after Desert Storm a decade prior. The left said that those trumping these dead shells up as evidence of WMD and a solid reason for going into Iraq were completely FoS. As did GW Bush when he admitted they didn't find WMD's in Iraq. That's what the left said. Nice straw man. Have fun playing with it.
 
Redress said:
So it is only terrorism if it's a foreigner doing it?

Who is this guy, Political Left? Why does what he says mean anything?
Click to expand...

Re: terrorism

First we'll look at the U.S. military definition since it's considered to be a tactic in warfare.

The Department of Defense Dictionary of Military Terms defines terrorism as:

The calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological.Then you have the U.S. DOJ deffinition.

There is no single, universally accepted, definition of terrorism. Terrorism is defined in the Code of Federal Regulations as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives” (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85).

The FBI further describes terrorism as either domestic or international, depending on the origin, base, and objectives of the terrorist organization. For the purpose of this report, the FBI will use the following definitions:

■Domestic terrorism is the unlawful use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual based and operating entirely within the United States or Puerto Rico without foreign direction committed against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof in furtherance of political or social objectives.
■International terrorism involves violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or any state, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or any state. These acts appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or affect the conduct of a government by assassination or kidnapping. International terrorist acts occur outside the United States or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to coerce or intimidate, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum.
The FBI Divides Terrorist-Related Activities into Two Categories:

■A terrorist incident is a violent act or an act dangerous to human life, in violation of the criminal laws of the United States, or of any state, to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.
■A terrorism prevention is a documented instance in which a violent act by a known or suspected terrorist group or individual with the means and a proven propensity for violence is successfully interdicted through investigative activity.
FBI — Terrorism 2002/2005


Re: who is the political left

Well you might be one of those guys. You identify as being the political left.

Legally I can't verbally attack an individual unless he or she is a public figure but I can verbally attack groups of people or organizations with out fear of legal retaliation except on the DP.
BTW. Have you read some of the sticky rules on the DP ? What in hell does South Africa have to do with the Middle East ?
 
APACHERAT said:
Re: terrorism

First we'll look at the U.S. military definition since it's considered to be a tactic in warfare.

The Department of Defense Dictionary of Military Terms defines terrorism as:

The calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological.Then you have the U.S. DOJ deffinition.

There is no single, universally accepted, definition of terrorism. Terrorism is defined in the Code of Federal Regulations as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives” (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85).

The FBI further describes terrorism as either domestic or international, depending on the origin, base, and objectives of the terrorist organization. For the purpose of this report, the FBI will use the following definitions:

■Domestic terrorism is the unlawful use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual based and operating entirely within the United States or Puerto Rico without foreign direction committed against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof in furtherance of political or social objectives.
■International terrorism involves violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or any state, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or any state. These acts appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or affect the conduct of a government by assassination or kidnapping. International terrorist acts occur outside the United States or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to coerce or intimidate, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum.
The FBI Divides Terrorist-Related Activities into Two Categories:

■A terrorist incident is a violent act or an act dangerous to human life, in violation of the criminal laws of the United States, or of any state, to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.
■A terrorism prevention is a documented instance in which a violent act by a known or suspected terrorist group or individual with the means and a proven propensity for violence is successfully interdicted through investigative activity.
FBI — Terrorism 2002/2005


Re: who is the political left

Well you might be one of those guys. You identify as being the political left.

Legally I can't verbally attack an individual unless he or she is a public figure but I can verbally attack groups of people or organizations with out fear of legal retaliation except on the DP.
BTW. Have you read some of the sticky rules on the DP ? What in hell does South Africa have to do with the Middle East ?
Click to expand...

So what we learned is you do not have to be foreign to be a terrorist, so your first claim I questioned turned out to be wrong.

We also learned that the left is an ideology, which means it does not speak. So you where wrong, wrongful for two.
 
Re: Envelope tests positive for ricin at Washington mail facility

Well, this is not good. Not good at all. :(
 
I sincerely hope this is nothing more than an isolated incident by a lone whackjob who will be found and arrested quickly. The potential for harm with this stuff is enormous.
 
poweRob said:
No. the left didn't say that. The left, and anyone who has a brain said that the shelf life for the gas in the shells they found were well dead because those where the shells Saddam buried after Desert Storm a decade prior. The left said that those trumping these dead shells up as evidence of WMD and a solid reason for going into Iraq were completely FoS. As did GW Bush when he admitted they didn't find WMD's in Iraq. That's what the left said. Nice straw man. Have fun playing with it.
Click to expand...

They said the shells were corroded. Only the shell casings were corroded. Mustard gas and sarin are not metals and can not corrode. The chemical agents had deteriorated some but the real experts in NBC warfare said the chemical agents were still lethal and were still considered to be WMD's.

Why do liberals keep changing the definitions to further their political agenda ?

If it were President Clinton who would have gone in to Iraq and 500 155 MM artillery mustard and sarin shells were have been found, the Democrats would be calling Clinton a hero and that he saved New York City from a mustard attack. And you know it's true.

BTW: mustard gas has a long shelf life for decades.

In March 2003 UN report about Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction there is the following on page 77 (Page 79 of the pdf file), paragraph 1 of the report http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/documents/6mar.pdf : The Sulfur Mustard contained in artillery shells that had been stored for over 12 years, had been found by UNMOVIC to be still of high purity.

Have you ever been to Johnston Atoll ? I doubt it, It's where the U.S. Army took their fifty year old stockpile of mustard gas and other chemical weapons to dispose of them. Why do you think they don't dispose of 50 year old mustard gas in the CONUS but instead out in the middle of the Pacific Ocean ? The U.S. Army Chemical Materials Activity (CMA) - Johnston Island / www.adeq.state.ar.us/ftproot/pub/.../p/.../Volume_11_PX_84.pdf
 
APACHERAT said:
Legally I can't verbally attack an individual unless he or she is a public figure but I can verbally attack groups of people or organizations with out fear of legal retaliation except on the DP.
Click to expand...

Sure ya can, watch:

Conservatives and liberals are sheeple!

BTW. Have you read some of the sticky rules on the DP ? What in hell does South Africa have to do with the Middle East ?
Click to expand...

Really, you don't don't have a clue? huh
 
bubbabgone said:
They do???? Haven't seen that.
Click to expand...

When CNN was first reporting it they said something about McCaskill or however you spell it indicating that some known letter writer was in custody in connection with that particular letter. Beyond that, IDK.
 
To get back on topic...

Is there any reason?
Could it be connected to the Boston bombing?

Kinda strange to have terrorist attacks with no discernable rhyme or reason. Who hates the Boston Marathon? Militia terrorists don't care about that, right? I haven't seen anything to explain either event. I'm guessing lone wackjobs.
 
ecofarm said:
To get back on topic...

Is there any reason?
Could it be connected to the Boston bombing?

Kinda strange to have terrorist attacks with no discernable rhyme or reason. Who hates the Boston Marathon? Militia terrorists don't care about that, right? I haven't seen anything to explain either event. I'm guessing lone wackjobs.
Click to expand...

The Boston Marathon festivites presented a massed target. Terrorists don't target events, they target the people tht gather for these events. If the Boston Marathon only drew 20 people, it wouldn't be as attractive of a target. If, in fact it was actually terrorist. There's still the chance that it's just some scumbag who wanted to hurt and kill people.
 
apdst said:
The Boston Marathon festivites presented a massed target. Terrorists don't target events, they target the people tht gather for these events. If the Boston Marathon only drew 20 people, it wouldn't be as attractive of a target. If, in fact it was actually terrorist. There's still the chance that it's just some scumbag who wanted to hurt and kill people.
Click to expand...

Seems pretty weak to me. There's probably as many people in the street downtown New York on any given afternoon. Further, AlQ generally does target events/locations to send a message.

Also, wouldn't the same bomb in a movie theater have killed a lot more people?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom