It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Moreover many eyewitnesses reported not one, but two explosions, and this is a certifiable fact. Investigations at the Oklahoma Geological Survey at the University of Oklahoma revealed seismographic records indicating two explosions, ten seconds apart. The first occurred at 9: 02 and 13 seconds with another following at 9:02 and 23 seconds. According to General Partin and many explosive experts that investigator Ted Gunderson has spoken to, this rules out the explanation of a truck bomb.
A more plausible explanation, they say, is a barometric bomb. This works via a process that involves not one but two explosions; the first uses an explosive known as PETN which releases a lethal cloud of chemicals, ammonium nitrate and aluminium silicate. This cloud is energized with what is described as a “high potential electrostatic field.” A few seconds later there follows another blast using an explosive called PDTN that ignites the cloud created with a much greater force than TNT.
This would account for the two blasts heard by witnesses and it would also explain the extensive damage caused by the explosion. However such a bomb would be beyond the scope of a supposed ‘lone nut’ like Timothy McVeigh. In fact knowledge of how to construct such a device is available to only a few with the highest level of security clearance because the barometric bomb is still highly classified. In other words only those with a high level of security clearance in the U.S. Government and security services would have access to the know how to construct such a device.
On possible other than nuclear devices used on 9/11 :
The fabled a-neutronic bomb :
"Riconosciuto's talents were much in demand. He had created the a-neutronic bomb (or "Electro-Hydrodynamic Gaseous Fuel Device"), which sank the ground level of the Nevada test site by 30 feet when a prototype was tested. Samuel Cohen, the inventor of the neutron bomb, said of Riconosciuto: "I've spoken to Michael Riconosciuto (the inventor of the a-neutronic bomb) and he's an extraordinarily bright guy. I also have a hunch, which I can't prove, that they both (Riconosciuto and Lavos, his partner) indirectly work for the CIA."
Riconosciuto's bomb made suitcase nukes obsolete, because it achieved near-atomic explosive yields, but could be more easily miniaturized. You could have a suitcase a-neutronic bomb, or a briefcase a-neutronic bomb, or simply a lady's purse a-neutronic bomb. Or just pull out your wallet for identification and... The Meridian Arms Corporation, as well as the Universities of California and Chicago owned a piece of the technology."
Michael Riconosciuto & Ted Gunderson's 1986 Meeting with 'Tim Osman' (Osama bin Laden)
Yet some critics of the government's story have gone beyond the relatively ordinary explanations of Partin, Gronning and others to suggest that the Federal Building was destroyed by a device called an "A-Neutronic Bomb." These advocates cite as evidence the nature of the spalling (the disintegration of the concrete into tiny pieces) on the top of the building, and the extent of the damage to surrounding buildings that even men like General Partin claim would be impossible for an ANFO bomb.
Larens Imanyuel, a Berkeley assistant physics professor who has studied the bombing, is one such advocate. Imanyuel's analysis, which appeared in Veritas newsletter, indicates that the wide extent of the collateral damage was not consistent with a conventional explosion. As Imanyuel writes:
There was some very sophisticated bomb that was capable of causing a tremendous blast atmospheric pressure wave that blew out windows in so many of the surrounding buildings. This had to be some sort of very high-tech dust explosive-like bomb — one that creates a widely dispersed explosive mixture in the very air and then detonates it with a secondary charge. This last spectacular high-tech bomb served the purpose of convincing the general public that the alleged solitary truck-bomb was powerful and "devastating" enough that it could wipe out and collapse a nearby building.
Consider the comments of a local structural engineer, Bob Cornforth, "The range of this blast has really impressed me — the extent of the damage and the distance out." A mile away, window frames had been pushed back two feet. On the other hand, he inspected two buildings just a little over 200 ft. from the so-called crater, the YMCA center and the Journal Record building, which lost part of its pitched concrete roof. To his surprise, "The structural frames performed extremely well. We design for 80-mph winds," which he says seems adequate. The lack of damage to the frames, despite the massive light-structural damage showed that the shock waves were of short duration. This was consistent with a many-point explosion, but not with a single-point explosion large enough to knock out the four heavy columns that had collapsed in the Murrah Building.
The A-Neutronic bomb, or "Electro-Hydrodynamic Gaseous Fuel Device," was reportedly developed by the young scientist-prodigy in the early 1980s while he was working for Hercules Manufacturing in Silicon Valley, CA. The first bomb test at the Pentagon's super-secret Area 51 in Nevada apparently resulted in the death of a technician and injured several others due to their underestimation of its power. The project was reportedly compartmentalized and classified under a "Nuclear Weapons" category by President Reagan. [For a description of the device, see Appendix]
(LT: I can't get my hands on this Appendix, anyone can?)
[What does Samuel Cohen have to say about the A-Neutronic bomb? "Well, I'm not expert enough to really vouch for his statements, but I've got a hunch that it's technically well-based. I've spoken to Michael Riconosciuto (the inventor of the A-Neutronic Bomb) and he's an extraordinarily bright guy. I also have a hunch, which I can't prove, that they both (Riconosciuto and Lavos, his partner) indirectly work for the CIA."]
According to Imanyuel, a member of a public watch-dog group that monitors military and nuclear procurement activities, "The design would be particularly suitable for use as a cruise missile warhead, where a non-nuclear charge is required that can reliably destroy a hardened target despite a several-meters targeting error. Such weapons are designed as part of the Advanced Technology Warhead Program of Lawrence Livermore and Los Alamos National Laboratories."
Ted Gundersen, who has independently investigated the bombing, included numerous letters and memos in his report which pointed to the existence of such a device. He reported that the government contract number for the bomb was DAAA-21-90-C-0045, and was manufactured by Dyno-Nobel, Inc., in Salt Lake City. Dyno-Nobel was previously connected with Hercules Manufacturing, where Riconosciuto worked. The Department of the Army denies that contract DAAA-21-90-C-0045 exists. Dyno-Nobel refused to respond to inquiries from Gundersen or the author.
Curiously, the bomb specialist the government called as its expert witness during the Federal Grand Jury testimony was Robert Hopler. Hopler recently retired from Dyno-Nobel.
Sherrow raised the issue of the Electro-Hydrodynamic Gaseous Fuel Device in his Soldier of Fortune article. According to Imanyuel, "Gundersen's bomb model was clearly unworkable as presented in Soldier of Fortune, but contained the essential information that the bomb generated an electrostatically charged cloud."
One victim in the HUD office in the Murrah Building described in a National Public Radio interview on May 23, 1995 how she felt a heat wave and a static electricity charge immediately before the windows blew in.
Daina Bradley, who lost her mother and two children in the bombing, said she felt electricity running through her body right before the bomb went off.
Another victim, Ramona McDonald, who was driving about block away, remembers seeing a brilliant flash and described the feeling of static electricity. "It made a real loud static electricity sound. It sounded like big swarm of bees — you could actually hear it. The next thing was a real sharp clap, like thunder.…" McDonald also described both gold and blue flashes of light. Interestingly, Riconiscuto has called his device "Blue Death."
Another survivor of the blast was quoted on CNN as saying, "It was just like an atomic bomb went off. "The ceiling went in and all the windows came in and there was a deafening roar…"
Proponents of the A-Neutronic Bomb conclude that these are all signatures of such a device.
Much of that reminds me of Ground Zero, with the heat generated from the collapses, blowing out windows of nearby buildings for some distances, pulverizing concrete, and the "clap of thunder" was literally used to describe the initiation of WTC7's collapse, just as it was the explosion at the Murrah Federal Building.
Originally posted by LaBTop
Billybob, as you can see in my first link, the Piezo-electric charge exists of high-voltage, and very low amperage.
And the way the cloud gets charged, will have a sparkling effect at the outscores of the cloud.
But I don't understand how a witness could survive the detonation of such a charged cloud, to tell about the sparks in the air. Perhaps the charge travels further than we suspect, especially in dry air-conditioned air.
PO: I just kept running. I was aware there were other people running as well. After passing the cars on fire, I was trying to find someplace safe. I tried to run into the lobby of 6 World Trade, but there were federal police -- maybe 4 to 6 of them -- standing in the open doorways. As I tried to run in, they wouldn't let me, waving me out, telling me "you can't come in here, keep running." As I turned to start running west again, I saw a series of flashes around the ceiling of the lobby all going off one-by-one like the X-mass lights that "chase" in pattern. I think I started running faster at that point.
The weapons are particularly effective in enclosed spaces
such as tunnels, buildings and field fortifications. Fireball
and blast can travel around corners and penetrate areas
inaccessible to bomb fragments. Blast waves are
intensified when reflected by walls and other surfaces.
All explosions form a blast wave, which travels faster than the
speed of sound. Box 1 shows typical pressure histories for a
conventional high explosive and a thermobaric explosive
observed as the expanding shock front moves outwards from the
centre of explosion. A shock front originates at the interface
between detonation products and the surrounding atmosphere.
There is a dramatic increase in pressure across the shock front
(time t1 on the graph), which has a crushing effect on objects in
addition to an instantaneous lateral force. As can be seen in Box
1, the peak overpressure is much higher for the high explosive
detonation (P2) than for the thermobaric detonation (P1), but this
pressure drops much more rapidly. The positive phase is
followed by a negative phase below atmospheric pressure. The
negative phase results in a reversed-blast wind and causes human
targets to be bodily lifted and thrown. This phase can be longer in
a thermobaric detonation than a high explosive detonation. Thus,
despite the lower initial blast pressure, the total impulse
(represented graphically in Box 1 by the area under the curve)
can be comparable or even higher for thermobaric explosives
compared with high explosives. Target effects are dependent on
peak blast overpressure as well as on the duration (impulse) of
Thermobaric weaponry basics :
Detonation of a high explosive device produces a rapid, localized
energy release. The formation of a blast wave, thermal radiation,
break-up of the munition casing and acceleration of the
fragments dissipate this energy. In the case of conventional blast/
fragmentation warheads, a large part of the energy is taken up by
the break-up of the casing and acceleration of the fragments.
Thermobaric weaponry usually has very thin casing and most of
the energy ends up as fireball and blast/shock wave. The energy
release in explosions occurs over microseconds and is governed
by the detonation velocity of the explosive. Detonation velocities
of thermobaric explosives (3–4km/s) are similar to those of
mining blast explosives, and considerably lower than those of
military high explosives (about 8km/s).
Explosives used in thermobaric weapons are generally
oxygen-deficient; additional oxygen from the air is required to
achieve complete combustion of the charge. Only part of the
energy is released during the initial detonation phase, which
generates high levels of fuel-rich products that undergo “afterburning”
when mixed with the shock-heated air. The energy
released through after-burning and combustion lengthens the
duration of blast overpressure and increases the fireball. In
conventional blast/fragmentation TNT-based munitions, no
significant after-burn occurs. Fragments inhibit the mixing of
detonation gases with air and the rapid expansion of the
detonation has a cooling effect before mixing with atmospheric
Originally posted by LaBTop
Is there some mechanism in place in the modern (USA and ??) schooling system, which let all young western pupils avoid READING more than a few sentences?
Originally posted by Brother Stormhammer
..let's see...demolition charges (conventional)? check. Thermite / Thermate? check. Micro-nukes in basement? Check. Super-secret bombs that are more secret and more super than last month's super secret super weapon? check. Bouncing Budha on a rocket-assisted pogo stick! It's amazing that those towers didn't wind up in ORBIT.