Only A Terrorist Would Complain About Tennessee's Water Quality

from the drink-the-damn-water...-or-the-terrorists-win! dept

The War on Terror has lasted so long the words have lost all meaning. Some of our war on terror actually involves warlike actions in other countries. Other parts of this war take the form of a debate on which constitutional rights are now considered optional — a debate the general public isn’t welcome to attend.

Still other parts of this capital-W, neverending war are even more poorly defined. Whenever some act or statement might have potentially negative consequences for Americans and/or their government, these too become our enemies. Another example of how the word “terrorism” has come to mean everything and nothing simultaneously is gracelessly provided by a member of Tennessee’s water regulation body.

A Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation deputy director warned a group of Maury County residents that unfounded complaints about water quality could be considered an “act of terrorism.”

“We take water quality very seriously. Very, very seriously,” said Sherwin Smith, deputy director of TDEC’s Division of Water Resources, according to audio recorded by attendees. “But you need to make sure that when you make water quality complaints you have a basis, because federally, if there’s no water quality issues, that can be considered under Homeland Security an act of terrorism.”

It’s tough to tell where Smith was headed when he began this statement, but it’s altogether unsurprising where it ends up. Anything is an act of terrorism, even complaining about water quality. If the state disagrees with the public’s assessment that the water is so hard it’s best consumed with a chisel and a fork, they’re now on The List and should know that any attempts to board a plane in the future will require a full-blown molestation of their person and carry-on luggage.

Even if the state agrees the water is better described as “heavily diluted silt,” you’ve still got the feds to deal with, at least according to Smith. Apparently, the US government also has the power to declare your drinking water “pretty excellent, actually” before charging your complaining ass with “communicating terroristic speculation on local water quality.”

At least the audience had the presence of mind to a.) get it all on tape and b.) say what everyone was thinking.

“Can you say that again, please?” an audience member can be heard asking on the audio.

Smith went on in the recording to repeat the claim almost verbatim.

Well, if you can’t be right, at least be consistent. Smith’s spokespeople were quick to issue a “no comment” and pledged to get to the bottom of Smith’s statement, which was probably “misheard” or “taken out of context.”

“In terms of the comments made by a member of the Water Resources Division at the meeting, we are just receiving the information and looking into this on our end,” spokeswoman Meg Lockhart said. “The department would like to fully assess what was said in the meeting. I am told that the meeting was far longer than the audio clip provided by SOCM and that Mr. Smith actually clarified his remarks. But again, we are looking into it.”

The comment shocked and outraged attendees, who saw it as an attempt to silence complaints, said Brad Wright, organizer for SOCM in Middle Tennessee.

Rep. [Sheila] Butt, who organized the meeting, also was shocked.

“I think that we need to be very careful with how we use the words ‘terrorist’ and ‘terrorism,’ ” she said. “I thought it was out of context. That did not apply to anything that we were discussing at the meeting.”

Butt said the water issue had been marred by “communication breakdowns” by both sides, which wouldn’t be made easier with such inflammatory comments being made.

Silence by rhetoric or not, there’s evidence that those in charge of regulating water supplies take any disparagement of the goods very seriously.

A few months ago, a couple of Florida DJs pranked the local population, issuing a warning that the local drinking water was full of “dihydrogen monoxide.” A small panic ensued and the pair briefly found themselves facing possible felony charges before more rational thinking prevailed.

[A]pparently, the station, the water works, and perhaps the authorities are still trying to figure out if the two hosts could face felony charges for, again, reporting that the scientific name of water was coming out of the pipes. “My understanding is it is a felony to call in a false water quality issue,” Diane Holm, a public information officer for Lee County, told WTSP, while Renda stood firm about his deejays: “They will have to deal with the circumstances.”

There you have it. If citizens know what’s good for them, they’ll shut up and choke down the local water, no matter how loaded with unexpected minerals, chemicals and barely treated sewage it is. This is America, dammit, home of the world’s finest water! We certainly don’t need rowdy crowds of dehydrated malcontents ruining our reputation at home and abroad with their terroristic complaining.

Filed Under: , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Only A Terrorist Would Complain About Tennessee's Water Quality”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
63 Comments
Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Terrorism

I think its clear that what the government defines as terrorism, is not the same thing that most of us think of.

Most people’s definition:

Terrorism: the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes. (Source: Dictionary.com)

Example: The September 11th attacks were an act of terrorism.

————————————————————

Government’s definition:

Terrorism: What we accuse people of when we don’t get our way.

Example: You stole my candy you terrorist!

Niall (profile) says:

Re: Re:

You also have to remember that one man’s ‘terrorist’ is another man’s ‘freedom fighter’. That’s why it’s perfectly ok to rebel against your lawful king and (violently) declare a revolution, but not ok to (violently) protest a country’s excesses abroad. It’s ok to pay money to an organisation that will use it to kill and maim innocents (US to the IRA/Iran/Contras/Israel) but not to pay money to an organisation that will use it to kill and maim innocents (anyone else to Hamas/Hezbollah/Taliban).

Anonymous Coward says:

Use some common sense. If you go around saying that there’s a bunch of poison in the water in order to cause a panic, and you know it’s not true, that seems like terrorism.

On the other hand, if you’re describing the water as “heavily diluted silt,”, or that it’s “so hard it’s best consumed with a chisel and a fork” that’s not exactly going to cause a panic. There’s a big difference between “this water tastes bad and is leaving deposits” and “this water will kill us all.”

cpt kangarooski says:

Re: Re:

Use some common sense. If you go around saying that there’s a bunch of poison in the water in order to cause a panic, and you know it’s not true, that seems like terrorism.

Wow, you’re just awful.

There’s no real definition of terrorism. States that define it (in order to prohibit it) invariably do so in a way that allows them to engage in terrorism against their enemies and their own people, and to allow their allies to engage in it abroad. Academics, NGOs, international organizations, etc. tend to adopt broader views, also condemning state terrorism.

But one of the most commonly agreed upon criteria is that it requires violence or the threat of violence. That’s missing here. Merely criticizing the government, whether it results in a panic or not, is not only not terrorism, it’s a fundamentally important and necessary thing to do in a democracy.

So take your lily-livered kowtowing to authority figures who are so weak and insecure that they cannot even stand the slightest opposition, and go fuck yourself with it.

And before you drag out the old ‘falsely shouting fire in a theater’ example, know that the case it comes from (Schenck v. US) is no longer good law, having been superseded by Brandenberg v. Ohio, which is more protective of free speech, and also even by Schenck’s crappy logic, truthfully shouting fire is protected and in fact admirable.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

“But one of the most commonly agreed upon criteria is that it requires violence or the threat of violence. That’s missing here.”

So your argument is that poison is nonviolent?

“Merely criticizing the government, whether it results in a panic or not, is not only not terrorism, it’s a fundamentally important and necessary thing to do in a democracy.”

We agree on that.

“truthfully shouting fire is protected and in fact admirable.”

Yes, but I said “in order to cause a panic, and you know it’s not true”. I’m not even requiring that it BE true, just that the person THINK it’s true. Otherwise it’s on the same level as falsely saying there’s a bomb about to go off. It’s not protected speech and you can be arrested for it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: poisoning the water!!!

Eye: Causes eye irritation and possible burns. May cause chemical conjunctivitis and corneal damage.
Skin: Contact with skin causes irritation and possible burns, especially if the skin is wet or moist. May cause skin rash (in milder cases), and cold and clammy skin with cyanosis or pale color.
Ingestion: May be fatal if swallowed. Ingestion of large amounts of fluoride may cause salivation, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, fever, labored breathing. Exposure to fluoride compounds can result in systemic toxic effects on the heart, liver, and kidneys. It may also deplete calcium levels in the body leading to hypocalcemia and death. May cause irritation of the digestive tract and possible burns. May cause respiratory paralysis and cardiac arrest.
Inhalation: May cause severe irritation of the respiratory tract with possible burns. Aspiration may lead to pulmonary edema. Prolonged exposure to dusts, vapors, or mists may result in the perforation of the nasal septum. May cause systemic effects.
Chronic: Chronic inhalation and ingestion may cause chronic fluoride poisoning (fluorosis) characterized by weight loss, weakness, anemia, brittle bones, and stiff joints. Effects may be delayed. Chronic exposure may cause lung damage. Laboratory experiments have resulted in mutagenic effects. Chronic exposure to fluoride compounds may cause systemic toxicity. Skeletal effects may include bone brittleness, joint stiffness, teeth discoloration, tendon calcification, and osterosclerosis. Animal studies have reported the development of tumors.

ACK the government is poisoning the water!

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Water Quality

There are numerous mundane reasons why the water quality could be poor. Also, there is a perception issue: what exactly is poor water quality? It is based on visual characteristics, taste, bacteria, and pollutants. The first two would be readily identified by anyone and the last two often require laboratory tests to properly determine. I do not know the basis of the residents’ complaints but it is not terrorism.

Terrorism at the water plant would either be sabotage or spiking the water supply with a tasteless poison or pathogen. Since the local residents apparently are dieing in unusual numbers terrorism has almost certainly not occurred.

Michael (profile) says:

I am told that the meeting was far longer than the audio clip provided by SOCM and that Mr. Smith actually clarified his remarks

I have his clarification right here:

If you continue down this path of complaining about the water quality, the department of homeland security is going to declare you a terrorist and water-board you with this carcinogenic crap until you are permanently silenced. We will see if you like the taste of the water in Guantanamo Bay any better.

Matthew A. Sawtell (profile) says:

There is a term for this: "Trying to Keep Official Harmony"

There is a term from my wife’s old neck of the woods to discribe this sort of behaviour, “Trying to Keep Official Harmony”. Trouble is, this fellow is not a member of the CCP, and he is not in P.R. China (because this story most likely would not have been recorded) and anyone attempting to talk about it on the Internet (or attempt to petition it to a higher authority) would be branded as ‘attempting to disrupt civil order’.

Yet, the actions of the officals are merely a reflection of the people that elected them into office, or the elected the people that appointed the board. – http://bbs.chinadaily.com.cn/blog-135031-9764.html

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: There is a term for this: "Trying to Keep Official Harmony"

Yet, the actions of the officals are merely a reflection of the people that elected them into office, or the elected the people that appointed the board.

That’s the theory, but in practice money selects the candidates that the people can elect. Therefore the people are reduced to endorsing one of several corporate choices of candidate.

The Real Michael says:

Re: Re:

Seriously, who does this guy think he is to label innocent Americans as potential terrorists? By whose authority? Certainly not the People’s. The government so desperately wants to stretch the definition of what constitutes terrorism so that it can go after any group of people it arbitrarily takes exception to (think IRS) and give itself free reign to stomp all over our rights, treating American citizens as ‘enemy combatants.’

Maybe that shit worked in Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia but it sure as hell isn’t going to work here!

Mr Bad Example (profile) says:

Blundering bureaucrats

Just another lazy, uncaring asshat of a bureaucrat trying to bully the people he’s supposed to be working for, rather than actually doing his job. Hopefully, he’ll lose his job after this bit of bad publicity and have to face reality-stupid people like him can’t even get hired at McDonalds these days.

TtfnJohn (profile) says:

Before Terrorist, there was Communist, before that...

In the USA someone disagreeing with authority was probably pro-British or something.
Once upon a time terrorist had a meaning, it’s used so much now it has none. Before that calling someone a communist at least described a certain political, economic and social ideology, being pro-Brit, well, a denial of where the 13 States came from but still understandable at least.
Used too often words lose meaning. Terrorist has lost it’s meaning, as communist did before that (until it’s total failure in imperialist places like Russia.)
All any of these has ever meant, when tossed about like the water board guy did, is dissidents or people who complain about the fact that they can use their water as a substitute for concrete. Ahhh, freedom, where art thou now that we need you|!

The Real Michael says:

Re: Definition of Terrorist: Sherwin Smith

They have so much sodium fouride (toxic waste), but because environmental agencies won’t allow them to dump it in our rivers, lakes and the ocean, they dump it in our water supply for us to drink. They also put it in our toothpaste. Kind of makes you wonder about things…

Plum says:

Re: Re: Definition of Terrorist: Sherwin Smith

The toxic waste that they’re putting in the water is not sodium fluoride, it’s hexafluorosilicic acid, or else sodium hexafluorosilicate.

Sodium fluoride is indeed in toothpaste, which people generally don’t swallow.

Fluoridating water is nonsense, but fluoride toothpaste can really prevent deterioration dental health.

Anonymous Coward says:

considering that the government, both local and national and the various services, eg water, are all employed to supply things to the people. as those services have to be paid for and have to meet very stringent checks, can someone please tell me, is there anything/anyone that the people are allowed to complain about or has the USA turned totally Fascist, whereby the people dont mean squat and have to put up with anything and everything thrown at them, from crap water to shitty decisions without saying a word?

Leave a Reply to Niall Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...