House explodes, 4-year-old survives

[Cl1mh4224rd]

PLUM, Pa. (AP) — An explosion flattened a house in suburban Pittsburgh on Wednesday, killing a man, injuring his 4-year-old granddaughter and damaging at least eight neighboring homes, authorities said.

[...]

Neighbor Lynn Celia told reporters she ran across the street right after the explosion and found Leith's granddaughter sitting in debris near the house next door. "I could see that she had been blown out of the house," Celia said.

(Source: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hay640dcYNdo-UkRsfU9D0yXX-JQD8V7K3B81 )

Now, I don't want people to think I'm being insanely callous about this topic. It sucks. We all know this. There really isn't anything I can say that others won't think or feel, so...

There are a couple reasons I'm posting this in the CT subforum:

1) As further proof that fragile things can survive violent events beyond all expectation. (Unless some truther wants to argue that this 4-year-old was surreptitiously planted in the neighbor's yard by some secret cabal for some secret reason.)

2) To show the progress of the story. The excerpt quoted above is from an AP article that is, at this time, 3 hours old. I've found two other AP blurbs about this event. Here are the three listed in order:

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hay640dcYNdo-UkRsfU9D0yXX-JQD8V7GD9O1 (7 hours ago) -> "Police say a house explosion in suburban Pittsburgh has injured a 10-year-old boy and an elderly man."
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hay640dcYNdo-UkRsfU9D0yXX-JQD8V7I70O1 (5 hours ago) -> "Police said earlier that a child and an elderly man had been hurt in the blast Wednesday afternoon. It's unclear whether the deceased person was one of the two injured people."
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hay640dcYNdo-UkRsfU9D0yXX-JQD8V7K3B81 (3 hours ago) -> "An explosion flattened a house in suburban Pittsburgh on Wednesday, killing a man, injuring his 4-year-old granddaughter [...]"

Would anyone continue to insist that the injured child was actually a 10-year-old boy, and not a 4-year-old girl? I would argue only the clinically insane would make an attempt. So, why do truthers insist that "the hijackers are still alive"?

[Mangoose]

Good point.

[Travis]

You gotta love Truther logic that the earliest reports, when details are sketchy, are the most accurate. I guess it comes from their idea that the media is all controlled by the NWO so the first reports are the only ones that weren't compromised.

Glad the girl is okay by the way.

[1337m4n]

In before Truthers accusing you of exploiting tragedy to promote your beliefs.



(isn't it great how easy it is to predict their every move?)

[Tweeter]

Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes!

[twinstead]

You gotta love Truther logic that the earliest reports, when details are sketchy, are the most accurate.

You're only partially right; they only believe the earliest reports are the most accurate if they confirm their theory. If the earliest reports are simply different and don't suggest something sinister then they are just inaccurate preliminary reports.

Unless of course they want to use it to claim the latter reports are lying, then the earlier reports are again the most accurate. Or something like that.

[bje]

There are a couple reasons I'm posting this in the CT subforum:

1) As further proof that fragile things can survive violent events beyond all expectation. (Unless some truther wants to argue that this 4-year-old was surreptitiously planted in the neighbor's yard by some secret cabal for some secret reason.)


I think the bigger point is that things (read: passports) and people can be blown out by fuel explosions without being burned. As far as we know at this point, the little girl suffered a broken leg but not burns.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

If the earliest reports are simply different and don't suggest something sinister then they are just inaccurate preliminary reports.


...or "prepared statements".