Is 'explosive' the best word to use?

This entry was published at least two years ago (originally posted on July 10, 2003). Since that time the information may have become outdated or my beliefs may have changed (in general, assume a more open and liberal current viewpoint). A fuller disclaimer is available.

U.S. report on 9/11 to be ‘explosive’:

A long-awaited final report on the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks will be released in the next two weeks, containing new information about U.S. government mistakes and Saudi financing of terrorists.

Former Rep. Tim Roemer, who served on the House Intelligence Committee and who has read the report, said it will be “highly explosive” when it becomes public.

[…]

The report will show that top Bush administration officials were warned in the summer of 2001 that the al Qaeda terrorist network had plans to hijack aircraft and launch a “spectacular attack.”

Hill would not discuss details of the report, but said it will contain “new information” about revelations made last year, when the joint House-Senate investigation held nine public hearings and 13 closed sessions.

The final report was completed in December. Since then a working group of Bush administration intelligence officials has “scrubbed” the report, objecting to additional public disclosures.

Could be very, very interesting.

But — keep in mind that no matter what the report contains, it has already been “scrubbed” by the Powers That Be. Who knows what was lost at that point. And, additionally, as Kos points out:

…people are going to play the expectations game. In this case, the administration has an interest in really hyping the report, leaking suggestions that it will be, well, “explosive”. That way the actual report can’t live up to the expectations and the press will think, “oh, it’s really not that bad”.