On CNN ex CIA expert say the suspects could not have made the bomb, it was too complicated

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by Danbones

 

Sybil Edwards

……..

Ohhh you mean Sibel Edmonds (not edwards) that women who was employed as a contractor for the FBI to translate Turkish who was then fired her after only about six months because she was crap at her job and now spends all her time bad mouthing American intelligence and claiming to have inside knowledge of just about everything and anything….

Yeah you will need to do better than that.

thanks for the correction
yes, the gag order was there because she had nothing to say
please show she was fired for being "crap at her job" or wear that euphemism yourself
she was fired for telling the truth...thats the definition of whistleblower

For the past four years, we have been told by the administration of George Bush and by the official 9/11 Commission report of Chairman Thomas Kean and Executive Director Philip Zelikow that Egyptian extremist Mohammed Atta was the key player in the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks. Atta, according to the Kean report, was the “tactical leader of the 9/11 plot”. He was the pilot who on that dreadful morning flew the first plane, American Airlines 11, into the North Tower of the World Trade Center in New York. It was Atta’s face, on television and in newspapers across the world, that became the symbol of Islamic terrorism. And it was Atta’s name – not the names of any of the 18 other hijackers allegedly lead by Atta on that day – that was cited by international security researchers. Atta was, as the Kean report stresses, “the tactical commander of the operation in the United States”. According to both the Bush administration and the official 9/11 Commission report, he was working on the orders of Osama Bin Laden who, from remote Afghanistan, controlled the entire operation.

Now, almost exactly four years after 9/11, the facts appear to have been turned upside down. We now learn that Atta was also connected to a top secret operation of the Pentagon’s Special Operations Command (SOCOM) in the US. According to Army reserve Lieutenant-Colonel Anthony Shaffer, a top secret Pentagon project code-named Able Danger had identified Atta and three other 9/11 hijackers as members of an al-Qaida cell more than a year before the attacks.

www.globalresearch.ca...


There, I done better
your turn

Originally posted by watchitburn
reply to post by Danbones

 

But, hundreds of uneducated Iraqis and Afghans have been making IEDs for years, many far more sophisticated than a pressure cooker device.

I just posted a comment before I read you response. I agree completely. Most of the folks who make these devices are not highly educated but nevertheless are smart enough to assemble readily available components (including electronic toy components) to make a nasty surprise. Even though it might not be a military grade, it is sufficient to do some damage which often ends up in casualties at a slow rate. It is very very hard for average folks to imagine in the West or US as how the other side lives and what drives them to come up with the low grade home made weapons. Besides there are several outside elements and countries who are more than willing to provide the necessary ingredients as part of their 'proxy support' against the west/US.

But, hundreds of uneducated Iraqis and Afghans have been making IEDs for years, many far more sophisticated than a pressure cooker device.

Yes, hundres of "uneducated" Iraqis and Afghans have been making IED's for years.

They were taught how to by men who spent 10 years at war with Russia...

These men learnt their trade and were taught how to make IED's by opertives of the CIA...

Who also gave them arms, money and night classes in radical islamic thinking...

So, these "uneducated" fighters, have a world of experience that no classroom can teach.

An IED can be as simple or complex as the builder desires, so long as the components are there

Trying to put it simply so all can get a handle on it

When it comes to the circuitry, as long as the circuit is complete, it's gonna work- all you really need is 3 wires connecting the detonator to the power pack the power pack to the trigger and the trigger back to the detonator, when using a remote detonated IED we need to add a receiver ........ Thus at least one more wire

Ok ..........presuming that a cell phone was used as the receiver ( but really could be any type of receiver - even servos off R/C toys )
Out in deepest darkest oogaboogastan there is very little chance of some kind of rouge signal pre detonating the device such as cold calls, wifi, mass cell phone signals and so on so a single point of imput ( like a call or a txt ) to a cell phone reciever can be sufficient, although they do use other systems such as a two point imput device.
A pressure plate and a cell phone .......... The device is safe until armed by cell phone, moments before your intended target hits the pressure plate

Now think of the Boston bomb and all the signal interference that would have been there.
In this scenario the chances of premature detonation would have been great - hell a simple single point input device could have received a survey call whilst the packs on your back, can't go connecting stuff up on target !

So a multiple imput device probably would have been used to prevent an accidental detonation. This may explain the complexities of the circuitry that's being described.

IED instructor
Counter IED instructor
Dug them up with my fingers
Dodge them for a living.

reply to post by Danbones


That isn't enough information about the detonator to determine the level of design expertise.

The det could be a disassembled cell phone wired to a relay. You can find it on the internet if you look. The phone circuit board is a high tech design with test features. Laymen could do this. I don't know what happened, but they could do it. I believe the FBI will know based on the evidence who is responsible. There seems to be plenty of physical evidence.

Originally posted by Danbones

Originally posted by RadarOReilly
I have a doctoral degree in neuroscience, so I'm not completely stupid, but I know nothing of explosives, detonation, or the physics/thermodynamic underpinnings of all this. I work around exceptionally brilliant people and have for years and here's one thing I know - never underestimate another's intelligence or ability.

Did these two build those bombs? I think they probably did. Did they have help? I think they probably did. Did our government help? I don't tend to think that way. Call me Sheeple. Call me maybe. Call me whatever, but I just don't tend to think along the lines that our government is THAT evil. Evil, yes.

But not that evil.

The Underwear Bomber attack has fundamentally changed my life. Not in the way most would think, but it has destroyed any faith I've had in the U.S. Government, the media and this country as a whole. To say that I believe the government is corrupt and the media is complicit doesn't fully explain my beliefs. Not only have I come to those conclusions, but I've witnessed that an ordinary person who sees something important can be silenced despite his efforts to spread the truth. Such is the Underwear Bomber case. I can do nothing but laugh at the TSA's new policy of "If you see something say something." That is exactly what I did, and not only did the U.S. Government not want to hear what I had to say, but it actively lied about it, attempted to get me to change my story, and hid, by withholding (secret government) evidence or putting a protective order on the evidence and nearly everything that would support my eyewitness account. ...

....attorney Chambers. Attorney Chambers has indicated to me that if he were Umar's attorney, that the defense would be entrapment and that I would be a key witness. Of course, such a defense would expose the U.S. Government's involvement in the plot.

haskellfamily.blogspot.ca...

As a degreed person I hope you apreciate the value of proper rules of scientific method

evil is as evil des

edit on 1-5-2013 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

A fascinating account, to be sure. My opinion remains unchanged.

reply to post by Danbones


The article you linked to has nothing to do with Sibel Edmonds its just about 9/11 and Able Danger that has absolutely nothing to do with this thread or Miss Edmonds

When she was with the FBI she worked on Turkish related matters and left in 2002 that would have made the bombers what 8 and 14 when she left the FBI. That really does beg the question how on earth can she claim to know any “details” about the two that isn’t already in the public domain.

Sorry but she is not a good source of information regarding the Boston bombs.

Originally posted by watchitburn
reply to post by Danbones

 

I understand where you are coming from, no offense taken.

But, hundreds of uneducated Iraqis and Afghans have been making IEDs for years, many far more sophisticated than a pressure cooker device.

I have not heard any specific details regarding the actual triggers for the bombs in question, but I know from first hand experience that it ain't rocket science.

You'll just have to take my opinion for what it's worth, that of an anonymous poster on the internet.

thats why i like posting references

I don't think there are too many unsophisticated bombers....left
IMHO
Thinking a bunch of dummies build the devices that take out some of the best designs in the world is somewhat farfetched

Iraqi Terrorists Exposed as British Government Agent Provocateurs
Lest we forget who the real Terrorists are… You might recall this incident in Iraq, back in September 2005. It’s a rare instance where the perps of a false flag op were caught red-handed. Every time one hears of “terrorist” bombings in Iraq or Afghanistan, chances are it’s US, Brit, or Mossad agents creating mayhem in order to justify the illegal occupations of these countries. Yet, the sheeple hardly give this a second thought — even after this incident was blown wide open in the MSM (original CNN and Wash. Post reports further below)… From 2005

conspireality.tv...

Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by andy1972

 

The CIA expert echoed what has been said before: that the bombs were triggered with remote control toy controlls with sophistcated test circuits..

What is not apparant (till the vid I saw can be dredged up ) is:
If he was refering to the chase part of the story or just the marathon part,

I think it'll be just the marathon part, as lighting a fuse long enough to get safely away while leaving it in front of 300 people it's made to kill has it's drawback's....

If it was remotely operated then it has to be by radio frequency such as a cell phone maybe even a garage door remote control..but that limits the distance,

If it's a phone, there has to be parts left..after the attacks in Madrid,which were done with dynamite, they still found phone and sim card parts.

If it was a clock...doesnt take a brain surgeon to set the alarm...but thats no exactly sophisticated.

So it looks like maybe a phone job..

reply to post by andy1972


well, that certainly explains the "training camps" the Nato countries are always on about

reply to post by Neocrusader


your Opinion appears to be informed thank you for posting on this thread

Maybe im retarded but is it not easy enough to buy prewired circuit boards? If they were using Rc car controllers as a detonator it stands to reason that they could of purchased circuit boards as well and just used the preexisting layout to wire the bombs. I know for a fact that the circuit boards can be used for other things other then there intended use with the proper wiring. Just saying that just because they used a circuit board doesn't mean that they built it themselves. They purchased all the other "ingredients" why wouldn't they purchase that as well?

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

Sorry but she is not a good source of information regarding the Boston bombs.

Agreed... I'm not going to pile on, because I do respect the OP here ...but I'd just got done pretty thoroughly thrashing her as a source on another thread recently, for using more than how to get fired for cause for violating basic security and procedure after a whopping 6 whole months of employment in anything like a sensitive position.

There's a whole lot more to it than that ..which is where I'll leave it. 6 months doesn't even get someone out of overall training and rookie status in a place like the FBI though. It sure doesn't get anyone into any 'inner circles' of deep trust or secrets worth saying all that much about, IMO.

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by Danbones

 

The article you linked to has nothing to do with Sibel Edmonds its just about 9/11 and Able Danger that has absolutely nothing to do with this thread or Miss Edmonds

When she was with the FBI she worked on Turkish related matters and left in 2002 that would have made the bombers what 8 and 14 when she left the FBI. That really does beg the question how on earth can she claim to know any “details” about the two that isn’t already in the public domain.

Sorry but she is not a good source of information regarding the Boston bombs.

You asked me to do better then Sybil Edmonds re government foreknowledge and complicity re 911
there I did

as to Sybil edmons firing I trust the ACLU on this one

Sibel Edmonds: A Patriot Silenced, Unjustly Fired but Fighting Back to Help Keep America Safe

www.aclu.org...

referencing speak loud

reply to post by watchitburn


If you don't mind since you seem to be able to attempt an answer at this, why would one bomb have smoke and the other was a fireball? I have yet to see the MSM address this issue at all. Were there different explosives used and in what amounts? Thanks.

reply to post by andy1972


Thanks Andy those are very good points
they did say in the OP and before somewhere, "toy remote control "

reply to post by Danbones

You asked me to do better then Sybil Edmonds re government foreknowledge and complicity re 911 there I did

No you referenced Miss Edmonds in relation to the Boston Bombers, I was pointing out to you that she is a pretty lousy source so directing me to something bout Able Danger, while a interesting topic has nothing to do with the Boston Bombings or makes her a better source.

I meant, and I would have thought this was quite clear given the topic of the thread, you need a better source that her when talking about the Boston bombers.

You can reference all you want but unless you can also critically appraise your references they don’t really mean very much.

Sibel Edmonds is not a good source and even worse when talking about what happened in Boston

reply to post by crimsongod21


I really hope we can get the actual cnn vid just for clarity's sake
The "expert" mentioned sophisticated test circuits which would not have been part of the prebuilt circuits

Originally posted by SMOKINGGUN2012
reply to post by watchitburn

 

If you don't mind since you seem to be able to attempt an answer at this, why would one bomb have smoke and the other was a fireball? I have yet to see the MSM address this issue at all. Were there different explosives used and in what amounts? Thanks.

If this might add something further? This was brand new material to me, across a thread last night. I didn't even know these photos existed or that anyone had shot images from this angle, for this engagement with police ....

Shootout with police and use of additonal pressure cooker bomb

If I'm not mistaken ..and I was not there, so I really am going by 2nd hand accounts from family who were.. an Iraqi IED would have done considerably more than essentially leave a greasy spot on the pavement and no discernible damage beyond that? The eyewitness who took the pictures there says it just filled the street with smoke, which is apparently how they were able to break contact with cops. One got away, as we all know ..and the other was run over by the one who did. Some way to treat his brother ..and seeing is believing.

If we accept what the guy on CNN says, and we accept that the detonation circuitry was a complex example then the use of a phone would not have been practicle to avoid a premature activation as pointed out by our esteemed colleague above.

He says "sophisicated" so that leaves out a wind up alarm clock...

Mercury tilt...impossible for transport reasons.

Personally, i think it was just a basic alarm clock detonator.

They need the fact that the detonation device was sophisticated as a "causus bellis" to maintain an imaginary terrorist cell on the run, giving them a reason to continue searching or doing what they need to do.

Maybe the circuitry will give them ALL the information they need as normally this type of thing carries a hallmark.. a ready made trail of crumbs to follow, just like in Madrid.