There was a chemical weapons attack on the Capitol. The chemical Ricin was found in the office of Sen. Bill Frist, R-Tenn. Ricin is a potent toxin that has potential to be used as an agent of biological warfare and as a weapon of mass destruction (WMD). Ricin is widely available, easily produced, and derived from the beans of the castor plant (Ricinus communis).
But, all anyone can talk about is Janet Jackson showing her tit at the Superbowl. (BTW, I have closeup pics, here.)
So, ok, the tit in question would be all I care about on another day, but there was a Weapon of Mass Destruction attack, people. Where are your priorities?
Article comments
1 - Chris Wilson
To say there has been a "Weapon of Mass Destruction" attack is to convey there has been a foreign terrorist attack. There has been no FOREIGN terrorist attack. In fact, the attack is absolutely the result of a disgruntled American attempting to make headlines in the same way Janet Jackson did. Unfortunately, the locally-bred terrorist was not given the opportunity to perform during the Super Bowl halftime show, unless Kid Rock planted the stuff, of course.....
2 - Eric Olsen
that's a close-up alrighty
3 - Nyx
An American Terrorist blew up the Oklahoma Federal Building.
Anyway, how do you know it wasn't a foreign terrorist? That hasn't been confirmed or denied, yet, has it?
4 - Natalie Davis
To say there has been a "Weapon of Mass Destruction" attack is to convey there has been a foreign terrorist attack.
How is that so? The vast majority of the world's WMDs belong to the US. Seems to me the attack is more likely to be domestic, but of course, at this point, we don't know.
5 - felix
Since the powers-that-be didn't seem to give two shits about the Anthrax sent to Tom Daschle, they'd better not treat this as any more important.
That would be a bit partisan, wouldn't it?
6 - Thrillhouse
It's less a matter of importance, and more a matter of how the media works. Which will sell more newspapers/attract more viewers?
1) Celebrity hottie Janet Jackson, brother of an alleged child molester, getting her clothes torn off by Britney's ex boyfriend at the most popular television event of the year.
2) Some politician whose name most Americans won't even recognize getting some poison dust in the mail which doesn't even make him sneeze.
Clearly, the eyeballs and the money are on #1, although it's equally clear that the importance lies with #2.
I'm going to look at the positive side - I'd rather see apathy than another all-out terrorism panic.
7 - Thrillhouse
You are right to be more concerned with attempted murder than JJ's boob, but your outrage is a bit watered down by the fact that you include a link to a blown-up photo of said boob, but no links to any news stories providing more information on the subject you're so concerned about.
Forgive me. The irony here was just *too* rich, and I just couldn't keep myself from pointing it out.
8 - Mac Diva
So, now Janet Jackson is a terrorist because she flashed a partly covered boob on TV for two seconds? Lay off the sauce, Chris Wilson.
Really, Thrill? I'm not even going to give him a new browser by looking. The blogosphere brings out the whorishness in folks. Anything for a link.
Nix, you undermined your point if you posted a pic of the 'terrorist' boob to attract hits.
9 - Mac Diva
So, now Janet Jackson is a terrorist because she flashed a partly covered boob on TV for two seconds? Lay off the sauce, Chris Wilson.
Really, Thrill? I'm not even going to give him a new browser by looking. The blogosphere brings out the whorishness in folks. Anything for a link.
Nix, you undermined your point if you posted a pic of the 'terrorist' boob to attract hits.