It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: ManFromEurope
Is this all there is in this book?! If the rest of it has the same level of arithmetic, it sounds completely worthless to me.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: mysticrecluse
Blame twitter, not the media.
FBI assistant director William Sweeney refuses to confirm earlier reports that the bombs originated in Florida. He doesn’t deny it, but points out: “We are not going to get into where the packages originated.”
NYPD’s Miller admits the authorities “don’t know” if other bombs are out there, perhaps en route to other targets.
Bill de Blasio is up now, saying: “This is absolutely terrorism. Using violence to make a political impact.” But he adds, in characteristic upbeat tone adopted by civic leaders in time’s of tension such as these: “The people in New York City are as tough as it gets.”
NYPD’s O’Neill, responding to press questions: “I’m not going to get into intent”, when asked what he thinks is the motivation of the perpetrator(s) of this campaign.
He describes the package found on Thursday as a “suspected explosive device”.
But emphasizes: “We are not treating these as hoax devices.”
originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: Gazrok
Actually, an even MORE important question, and likely a big clue, is...
Why send a fake bomb with any ACTIVE ingredients at all?
If you're going to send a fake bomb, make it fake...all the way. You don't send a "sorta" fake bomb. The message is the same either way, and clearly these devices were ALL about the message and none of them were intended to actually detonate. So, why not just send all inert ingredients? The risk of sending a 'sort-of-fake' bomb with active ingredients is 10,000x higher than sending something inert. So why do it? Why take the risk? It serves no value-added purpose.
It doesn't take a rocket surgeon (or even an EOD expert) to look at these devices and conclude they were intended to "look" like a bomb, but not actually go off like a bomb. Whoever did this wanted people to "see" the actual devices. If they had detonated there wouldn't be anything to see.
If your intent is to get the "sort of bomb materials" put on a ban list then you would WANT to include them.
originally posted by: Gazrok
Another really curious point....
WHY DO WE KNOW SO MUCH ABOUT THESE?
Seriously, as many LEO friends of mine have said to me, they are all really puzzled, because typically, the investigators would not be releasing pics of the devices, and sharing the kind of details they have so far. It could really compromise or impede their investigation.
It's really odd. They also wouldn't let photographers close to anything they suspected as a LIVE bomb! Yet we have all these pics of the devices?
They've stated they are looking for who sold components, etc., all kinds of small details.
These are really some good questions. I'm not sure we'll like the answers.
Just within the first few hours we had more information than we still do about the Vegas shooting that took place over a year ago.
originally posted by: Vasa Croe
originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: SonOfThor
The send to address was wrong and it was reported as being returned to sender.
Which if one thinks about it, means that that one should have taken longer to deliver.
I have a feeling these are all just fireworks made to look like a pipe bomb.
If they were a real danger, they would definitely not have one sitting on a table taking pics of it next to the envelope with no discernable features of it being disabled.
They wouldn't take the chance of blowing up the packing by having it there.
Whole thing screams staged for effect to me.
originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: tjack
I have extreme doubts about it even being functional, even if it even contains a charge.
Looks more like an art project.
originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: UKTruth
I would take a picture....just saying, if I saw something like that I would probably snap a quick pic, takes seconds these days.
Doesn’t really prove anything though either way
originally posted by: narrator
originally posted by: hillbilly4rent
originally posted by: carewemust
originally posted by: hillbilly4rent
originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
If the bombs were not real, is the sender of the packages considered a terrorist?
Yes
Then legally, that would mean the people who attacked Republicans in restaurants movie theaters campaign offices Etc are also terrorists.
Hell yes it dose!!
No, no it doesn't. You just can't equate yelling at someone and sending someone a fake bomb. That isn't on the same level. Nowhere near the same level.
Example: Is yelling at someone for parking on your lawn on the same level as trying to rob a liquor store with a fake gun?
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: CynConcepts
Apparently, the sender thinks Brennan works at CNN.
Wrong station. The sender doesn't watch CNN?