Some In U.S. Fear Nuclear Terrorist Attack

[struggle4progress]

Angus Reid Global Scan) – Some Americans believe their country could be the target of a nuclear attack, according to a poll by Ipsos-Public Affairs released by the Associated Press. 44 per cent of respondents say they frequently or occasionally worry about the possibility of terrorists using weapons of mass destruction. <snip>

Polling Data

How often do you worry about a terrorist attack using nuclear weapons?

Frequently 13%
Occasionally 31%
Rarely 32%
Never 23%

Source: Ipsos-Public Affairs / Associated Press
Methodology: Interviews to 1,000 American adults, conducted from Mar. 21 to Mar. 23, 2005. Margin of error is 3.1 per cent.

http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewItem&itemID=6565

[mike_c]

1. define "worry...."

I think it's likely inevitable. I don't worry about it much.

[megatherium]

3. I live in a medium-sized city in fly-over land.

So I'm not worried either.

But the folks in Oklahoma City didn't expect a terrorist attack either.

[Carolab]

5. The folks in Oklahoma City didn't suffer a terrorist attack.

Furthermore, Sy Hersh and a BUNCH of experts on the subject say this was not an organized Al-qaeda attack but a loose assembly of tangential players.

[megatherium]

14. Huh?

You're right it wasn't al Qaeda, it was probably white supremacists with (just possibly) al Qaeda involvement. But it was a terrorist attack -- 168 fatalities, with heavy damage to many structures in downtown OKC. Or am I missing your point?

[Carolab]

22. If it was a "terrorist attack", then it was "domestic terrorism".

Not an "outside threat".

You ask me, I think the enemy is completely WITHIN the gates.

And, frankly, I think 9/11 was, at least in part, also an "inside job".

[byronius]

2. What percent of respondents say they frequently or occasionally

worry about the possibility of Neocons using weapons of mass destruction on America? Here's one vote!

:hi:

[Skip Intro]

6. ya mean, like our government, under control of bushco, staging an attack?

I'd like to see that poll question.

[conservdem]

11. Are you serious?

[LiberalUprising]

13. As a heart attack

I'm with byronius, so make that two

What makes you think the neo cons wouldn't?

Of course they would blame it on someone else, so who would know for sure.

[Laurab]

23. Make that three

That's really the only "terrorist attack" I worry about.

[bunny planet]

18. count me in, I worry about that all the time, or at least when *'s pole

numbers go down.

[TankLV]

26. Add my vote!

I worry about it all the time since November 2000 and 100 times that since 911

[Dave Reynolds]

4. She who shall not be named is gone,

time to crank up the fear some more.

[shadowknows69]

7. I live 7 miles

from one of the most utilized amry bases in the US, Fort Drum. I've had nightmares since I knew what nukes were.

[Dave Reynolds]

8. We used to have nuke drills

when I was in grade school. Strangely, the drills were essentially the same as a tornado drill.

I think I have become jaded.

[despairing optimist]

9. What,? Me worry? I'm NYC through and through

I'm not worried. I'm terrified. I still wake up screaming sometimes if I dream of seeing a blindingly bright light in the skyline and hearing the beginning of a sound I don't get to hear the end of.

My thanks to all who voted to give the people who brought us 9/11 another four years to top themselves.

[bloom]

10. Some in U.S. Fear U.S. Nuclear Attack on Someone Else ...eom

[Gyre]

12. When did this country become such a bunch of p_ssies?

Looks to me like 44% are hopelessly unenlightened. Having such a pack of wimps as peers doesn't make me want to associate with them much. Now THAT is a good argument to leave the states.

Gyre

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

15. I greatly fear *bush attacking another country with nukes.

Our government has the worst out-of-control nuke-happy mofos in it that I'm aware of. The greatest chance of disaster for the world is in the Oval Office.

[stillcool]

16. Some in US fear.....

implosion due to all the bullshit flowing through the air-waves. Where does it all go?

[cosmicdot]

17. what has it been since 14 days in October 1962?

44% = some who do
55% = some who don't
1% = say, what?


44% is a combo figure

if 'frequently' + occasionally' = 'some'

what does 'rarely' + 'never' equal?


is 13% unusual? is that high?


I'll just consider this more yellow journalism/sensationalism by the media keen on driving us over the cliff.

[salin]

19. struck me as well

that the difference between occaissionally and rarely - is so subjective that the categories blend, unless they are quantified for the respondent (eg, on occassion - once a month; rarely - once every couple of monts...)

[ConcernedCanuk]

20. Headline reading "55% say rarely or never" is harldly alarming . .

.
.
.

and including 31% occasionaly (which to me is pretty close to rarely) would bring the total to 86% not really overly concerned

but then that's not dramatic enough for the fear-mongers,

now is it?

I think Iran and Syria have more to worry about . .

[struggle4progress]

21. So when I see worried looking folk on the street, you don't think ...

... I should try to strike up a conversation about the possibility of a nuclear attack?

[chlamor]

24. It's Already Happened

ARE YOU OR YOUR FAMILY UNKNOWING FALLOUT VICTIMS FROM THE ATOMIC TESTS OF THE 1950'S?

OFFICIAL STATEMENT OF DOWNWINDERS ON RELEASE OF NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE ON 1950's ATOMIC BOMB TEST FALLOUT

The National Cancer Institute (NCI) today (8/01/97) admitted that fallout from the 1950's atomic bomb tests blanketed the nation at levels far inexcess of what the government has admitted to now or in past decades. In its statement it said there could be between 10,000 and 75,000 cases of thyroid cancer among those exposed. They remain firm in their stance that there is no certain link between exposure and effect -- still apparently having not yet heard about, nor read the results of studies of the thyroid cancers and disorders found among the Marshall Island Natives and the residents surrounding Chernobyl. The NCI puts these numbers out as "the worst case scenario."

Speaking for those most heavily exposed to those atomic tests,and well as from an awareness of continued health problems and deaths, we would like to state for the record just what the "real" worst case scenario is. The worst case scenario is not that the NCI can't find a link between dose and effect, no federal agency involved with public health has ever done so, or better yet ever wanted to. It is the fact that the cat is now out of the bag and off and running. The dilemma is not worrying about dose and effect, but how the federal government responsible for the exposures in the first place can quickly catch the cat and get it back in the bag. Sorry Folks, "We won't be fooled again!"

The real worst case for the American people is that the Iodine 131 radioactive isotope that is the basis of this study is only one of scores produced by the fissioning process that powered these test devices. Absent from the study are such isotopes as Strontium 90, Cesium 137, Zirconium, and on and on. These all have half-lives much longer than those of Iodine 131,with many still in existence today. Many of these like Strontium 90 seek out tissues of the body and there become lodged and remain for the lifetime of the persons exposed. Strontium 90 for instance seeks the bones,and from there radiates the fragile marrow cells that produce the bulk of human blood. Such exposures can lead to leukemia and other cancers.The worst case is that if the Iodine 131 resulted in 10,000 to 75,000 cases of thyroid cancer alone, how many cases did the other isotopes produce,and of those hundreds of thousands of cases that they would induce, how many innocent, unwitting, and unsuspecting Americans died?

http://www.downwinders.org/nci.html

[ConcernedCanuk]

25. Google "pharmaceutical terrorism" if ya want some scary figures

.
.
.

U.S. pharmaceutical companies and the FDA responsible for 100 times as many Americans deaths as terrorists

The FDA is getting desperate in the war to monopolize the U.S. pharmaceutical industry and prevent citizens from purchasing prescription drugs at lower prices from Canada and elsewhere. They've now invoked the "terrorism" label in the fight to suppress consumer free choice. Unbelievably, FDA commissioner Lester Crawford is now saying that prescription drugs from Canada are a threat to U.S. consumers because terrorists might be attacking us through those prescription drugs. This idea is so ridiculous as to be laughable.

/snip/

With 100,000 deaths and at least 2,000,000 injuries each year being caused by legal prescription drugs in the United States, it's hard to imagine how a terrorist could add any more terror to that equation.

/snip/

the statistics indicate that the prescription drug industry is killing 33 times as many people in the United States each year. In the three years since the 9/11 attacks in 2001, the U.S. pharmaceutical industry has -- according to the American Medical Association -- killed 100 times as many people as terrorists.

http://www.newstarget.com/001894.html

AND

in other articles of interest, I found claims that the pharmaceutical/petrochemical companies made Hitler's rise to power possible - they even claim that Hitler would never have "happened" without their financial support

and Granpappy Bush (Prescott, more at "Prescott Bush" link just below) had his fingers in that too

What's that they say that the nut don't fall far from the tree?

hmmmmm

[chlamor]

27. Monsanto

origins are from the WW1 Military shenanigans. Particularly the precursors for certain explosives. Bayer has a sordid past in WW2 as well. There is an excellent site which documents their history in connection with Nazi Germany. Used to have that stuff handy when working with anti-GMO campaigns.

Pharmaceutical junkies all over the place and sadly there are alternatives for most of these ailments.

17,000 children under the age of 5 die every day due to hunger related disease. That is a blessing of policies of Agribusiness-IMF-World Bank-etc.

Monsanto a very troubling terrorist organization.