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.

 

What do we know about the pipebombs?

page: 17
61
<< 14  15  16    18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 25 2018 @ 02:38 PM
link   

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.


Well excuse me, maybe I should write threads about Trump with less than 100 words in them like you do?

I could only hope to reach your level of thread quality.




posted on Oct, 25 2018 @ 02:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: mysticrecluse

Blame twitter, not the media.


I usually don't watch mainstream news, so I didn't know one way or another. I just assumed it originated from CNN or MSNBC or something.

I should know better than to jump to conclusions like that, but I still wouldn't put it past them.



posted on Oct, 25 2018 @ 02:51 PM
link   
Live link here if any one is interested

Q&A session coming up with law enforcement officials....



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.”


... i'm not gonna cut 'n' paste all night !



edit on 25-10-2018 by Cassi3l because: re-ordering quotes oldest first for readability

edit on 25-10-2018 by Cassi3l because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2018 @ 02:51 PM
link   
The more I think about it the more I believe the same people who thought smashing cell phones with hammers was an elegant way of covering their tracks would do something like this thinking it was a great idea. What scares me the most is that these are not the six-toed stunted liberals down the street. These are the cream of the crop. In liberal land this is as good as it gets.

If it turns out the person who sent the fake bombs is a conservative at least he has all the threats and acts of violence from the left to cite as the reason for his actions. A very misguided 'fair is fair'. If it turns out to be a liberal its just more of the same lashing out and intimidation tactics they are already employing.



posted on Oct, 25 2018 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Cassi3l

As of right now a lot isn't making sense with this press conference...

Answering a question if this could be a hoax or fake devices "We are treating these as if they are live devices"...

Very strange.



posted on Oct, 25 2018 @ 02:59 PM
link   

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. You would WANT for the bomb to NOT go off and you would want to make sure those items you want banned are front and center in the story. We shall know more tomorrow I am betting. Friday news release to stoke the fires over the weekend.



posted on Oct, 25 2018 @ 03:26 PM
link   
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.



posted on Oct, 25 2018 @ 03:28 PM
link   

If your intent is to get the "sort of bomb materials" put on a ban list then you would WANT to include them.


Kind of hard to ban PVC pipe, styrofoam, wire, kitchen timers, etc.



posted on Oct, 25 2018 @ 03:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Gazrok

Including the x-rays of one of the devices. That one is pretty baffling to me. When are x-rays of explosives ever released to the media? This whole thing seems fishy to me. 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.



posted on Oct, 25 2018 @ 03:58 PM
link   

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.


That is what makes me as sure as I can be that this is a fake drama - a production for the mid terms.



posted on Oct, 25 2018 @ 04:16 PM
link   

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.


I don't even joke about that one. I like breathing. I've gotten used to it. Still the most botched, yet successful false flag since 911.



posted on Oct, 25 2018 @ 04:54 PM
link   

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.

edit on 25-10-2018 by Jobeycool because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2018 @ 04:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

They do look like firework mortars...



posted on Oct, 25 2018 @ 05:17 PM
link   

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.



Or maybe a kids clock project?




posted on Oct, 25 2018 @ 05:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: agenda51

Yeah. Who was the message for?


Sooo what you're trying to say by repeatedly posting this picture is that the "bomber/s" needed to improve moral by slapping some words on these devices?



posted on Oct, 25 2018 @ 05:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Gazrok

The way information almost instantly started coming out about this one, including the x-rays of the device, tells me that someone is trying to draw a narrative. Vegas, on the other hand screams cover up, though I could only speculate on what is being covered up. Quite a few possibilities with that one.



posted on Oct, 25 2018 @ 05:26 PM
link   

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


Oh you would?

You'd pose with a potential bomb, not knowing if the mechanism is triggered via alarm, set to an unknown time, or call/text.



posted on Oct, 25 2018 @ 05:30 PM
link   

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?



I'm sure the guy that shot Steve Scalise only yelled at one point..



posted on Oct, 25 2018 @ 05:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: CynConcepts

Apparently, the sender thinks Brennan works at CNN.
Wrong station. The sender doesn't watch CNN?


Isn't it against the law to open someone elses mail?



posted on Oct, 25 2018 @ 05:38 PM
link   
a reply to: CynConcepts

It's very faint but the date on the postmark looks like 23 to me.



new topics

top topics



 
61
<< 14  15  16    18  19 >>

log in

join