On Fri, 18 Oct 2002 10:06, Jeremy Bertenshaw wrote: > I'm interested to know what reason they would have for > misleading us about the design of the bomb?
Probably simply because the materials are so common place and so easily obtained. It's not exactly difficult to get a tank of propane and a couple of oxygen cylinders is it? Yet in essence that's how the Yanks finished off the tail end of the Iraqi troops leaving Kuwait at the end of the Desert Storm war. Criminal murder nothing less in my opinion. No wonder the Yanks are not wanting to have any thing to do with the setting up of the ICC under the control of the UN. I gather that the Tora Bora caves and the people in there were destroyed in much the same way. > I guess theres > so many other cover ups going on in the whole situation. Whitewash squirting in all directions on the radio this morning. > jeremyb. > > > From: Vik Olliver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: 2002/10/18 Fri AM 08:14:11 GMT+13:00 > > To: CLUG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: Re: Very OT: bombing > > > > No, it doesn't, which is why we're being misled over the design of the > > bomb. An ammonium nitrate slurry loaded with aluminium powder or the > > inclusion of a large quantity of a volatile liquid (propane, acetone > > etc.) over the main ANFO charge would behave like that. This is pretty > > much what was done in Bali with C4 and gas cylinders. > > > > However, the press are reporting many instances of the use of C4 where > > the explosive was in fact acetone peroxide. The shoe-bomber being a case > > in point. > > > > Vik :v) -- Sincerely etc., Christopher Sawtell
