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.

 

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

page: 3
16
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 1 2013 @ 09:49 AM
link   
From what I heard they used radio controlled cars for their detonator.
Think back when you were a kid. Did you ever fly Estes model rockets???

Glue the power wire to one tire of the car. When you command the car to drive forward the tire spins and contacts the battery to the rocket ignitor. You don't have to know anything about electronics.




posted on May, 1 2013 @ 09:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


good point Wrabbit
I have to run I will check your links later
Laying smoke is a standard military tactic designed to deal with certain expected circumstances
so are you saying as the poster up thread asked:
they different kinds of explosives?



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 09:54 AM
link   

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.


You don't need that much materials - all you need is a strong container than can withstand high pressures (pressure cooker pan, steel pipe), small metal objects; razor blades, ball bearings, nails, something explosive (oil, petrol, fertilizer, gunpowder, match heads), a source of ignition (a couple of nails, some wires and a battery, remote control kit, mobile phone, kitchen egg timer). Interesting that they chose gunpowder, which benefits the gun control lobby. Main problems are getting a container strong enough to hold together before the combustion materials are fully consumed, getting a big enough bang, avoiding the components failing and blowing yourself up



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 09:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by andy1972
 


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


If it was indeed a "toy" remote control, and were not talking Fisher Price here, then they could have detonated it from anywhere upto 800 - 900 meters away..on a very good day and in open fields.

That said, and i dont know the area of Boston, i dont know if there are high rise blocks near, but the nature of the terrain would limit termendously the distance of activation by a remote plane handset simply by cutting the signal strength.

So, maybe our man, or men, had to be relatievly close, maybe high looking down
Anyone remember the guy on the nearby rooftop that appeared in photos !!!

To use it from the ground would'nt be a good option, too much interference..he'd have to be high for a better signal and less chance of being seen.

edit on 1-5-2013 by andy1972 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by stormcell

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.


You don't need that much materials - all you need is a strong container than can withstand high pressures (pressure cooker pan, steel pipe), small metal objects; razor blades, ball bearings, nails, something explosive (oil, petrol, fertilizer, gunpowder, match heads), a source of ignition (a couple of nails, some wires and a battery, remote control kit, mobile phone, kitchen egg timer). Interesting that they chose gunpowder, which benefits the gun control lobby. Main problems are getting a container strong enough to hold together before the combustion materials are fully consumed, getting a big enough bang, avoiding the components failing and blowing yourself up


I'm not sure why you replied to me with this info, but......thank you.

More bath bombs. Less real bombs.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by SMOKINGGUN2012
 


Any number of things could have caused that situation.

The simplest answer is that unless it was manufactured to military specifications, no two devices will ever behave in exactly the same way.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 10:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 

Well, the two bombs at the marathon blew up in very different ways ...and to look at the uncensored and complete photo sets of the scene from detonation onward with an overhead perspective? They did far less damage than one would have thought for the size and weight of what could have been packed into the containers, IMO.

The very different ways they detonated? I'm thinking that shows poor design and quality with unreliable outcome. I'm guessing by the fact we've heard nothing about it by now, they weren't out at some quarry or dump site testing their contraptions in advance to get it 'just so'. In so many ways, Thank God for that too. I think this could and would have been unthinkably worse if one of the people from Iraq's Jihadi groups had been involved with design and build for these.

Some times, I think we all just get lucky by Mr Murphy (Of Murphy's Law fame) being on vacation and unavailable to insure every last thing goes worst case in an event. He must have been on extended leave this time, and I'm sure grateful. There were people from my own community, as it happens, on the street when those two things blew ...unhurt..and perhaps with the above factors to thank for it.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 10:24 AM
link   
I have maintained from day one that the pupose of the device was flash, flame noise and the minimum number of death and damage possible.

It was to be visually terrifying, all noise, thunder and flame a terrorific televisual delight for the controlled media world to play over and over again, so you'd never forget it.

It was made to scare, yet an IED that doesn't cause a human toll wouldn't have been credible, so somebody had to be wounded, someone had to die.

It was done to reawake the constant state of fear, that everyone had forgotton about and that the government told you existed for so long.

It was done to remind us all that the fear of radiacal islam cannot be forgotton and it hasnt gone away, and that even your neighbour could be terrorist.

Oklahoma and the 1st 9/11 attack was the starter.

9/11 was the main course.

Now, while your still having problems digesting the first two courses, they give you Boston as dessert.

And every so often and with more frequency they'll keep feeding you "snacks" of terrorism.

That way it'll always be on your mind...a contstant message subliminal telling you "be scared, it's for your own good".






edit on 1-5-2013 by andy1972 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 02:49 PM
link   
Sure, the FBI could have... But just the same as any other person with knowledge of such devices could have, such as (and as much as this word is over-used) terrorists.
This news that the bombs were too complex for the boys to have made doesn't really mean anything.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 02:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 


Ya know, this is why I've doubted this whole thing from the beginning. Because right away the Feds came out saying that these bombs were too sophisticated to have learned on Google, but then just days later they had their two suspects and we were told they learned how to build these bombs on the internet. What a joke.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 03:34 PM
link   
I've used fireworks with more bang than those so called bombs. Im calling bullsh*t on this one.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Danbones
Just watching the news on CNN this morning and they quoted an ex CIA expert claiming the electronics were too sophisticated for these boys to have made.
There is a thread on the front page this morning which states the Saudis warned the security peeps in the US very recently...

In the best tradition of cases like wtc 93, and the underwearbomber, do you think the fbi could have cooked the bomb and then used the boys as patsies, or if not, please attempt to explain these coinkydinks.
edit on 1-5-2013 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

Wrong. That just shows how thick the ex CIA guy was. Creating a trigger from phone call is piece of proverbial p... (nothing to do with bombs just switching technology in any electronics/computer magazine). Creating an explosive device, again...simple. I never did it but some "less academic folks" at my school regularily made bombs from weedkiller and sugar 40 years ago!!!. And as far as fireworks are concerned well even better. Now stick the homemade bombs with the simple homemade trigger Boom!

The trick would seem to be testing it without getting noticed and/or blowing yourself up.

So if this "fact" is meant to "prove" yet another wacky false flag theory then I'm afraid you have failed miserably.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by andy1972
I have maintained from day one that the pupose of the device was flash, flame noise and the minimum number of death and damage possible.

It was to be visually terrifying, all noise, thunder and flame a terrorific televisual delight for the controlled media world to play over and over again, so you'd never forget it.

It was made to scare, yet an IED that doesn't cause a human toll wouldn't have been credible, so somebody had to be wounded, someone had to die.

It was done to reawake the constant state of fear, that everyone had forgotton about and that the government told you existed for so long.

It was done to remind us all that the fear of radiacal islam cannot be forgotton and it hasnt gone away, and that even your neighbour could be terrorist.

Oklahoma and the 1st 9/11 attack was the starter.

9/11 was the main course.

Now, while your still having problems digesting the first two courses, they give you Boston as dessert.

And every so often and with more frequency they'll keep feeding you "snacks" of terrorism.

That way it'll always be on your mind...a contstant message subliminal telling you "be scared, it's for your own good".






edit on 1-5-2013 by andy1972 because: (no reason given)

I'm curious. PLease explain how the so called IRA bombings throughout the 70's and 80's were "government inspired". After all if the IRA bombs were genuine then that means any other terrorist organisation can do the same, especially the far more sophisticated electronic device we have these days.

Basically,
IF IRA bombs were true then todays bombs can also be true.
If Todays bombings are all false then all historical bombings must also be false.

They are the only two logical conclusions. The illogical conclusion is that terrorists packed up and went home to watch TV in the 90's and left all the bombings to democratic western governments since then.........Jaw dropper.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by watchitburn
 

I'm going to have to disagree, this device to me, seemed to have to much bite for its bark. i dont care what it was built in. way too much melodramatic smoke and big orange ball and plume, seriously. I personally cant wait to see what the swab results are.
And now it has complicated circuitry, come on. I bet it had a big digital countdown clock on it too.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 07:02 PM
link   
reply to post by yorkshirelad
 


The IRA bombings in the 70's and 80's were very real, there was no arguing over the explosion or bomb, why? because when it went off it went off with intent, a purpose unlike our Boston bomb, something i have maintained from day one.
Look at footage from areas around the world, a good bomb maker designs his device with maximum punch minimum wasted energy, the complete opposite it would appear at Boston.
A pressure cooker of that size used in the 70's IRA would have blown the front out of that building in the middle east and Israel a device that big would have blown the front of that building apart and cratered the ground.
but the Boston bomb didnt knock the fluff off of the cappuccino's still sitting on the table.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 07:51 PM
link   
What I want to know is...

Is there any evidence that these kids knew how to build bombs?
Did they have literature?
Did they practice? If so, where did they test their devices?
How come they didnt blow off their own fingers trying?

I mean, you just dont build a bomb with the intention of causing harm
and hope it goes off the first time do you?



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 08:11 PM
link   
Take a close look at this picture. You can see ball bearings or BBs in the square wholes close to the ruler. The piece being measured is part of the remote or timing device. I don't think the other pieces are nails but rather copper wires that were burnt.




The orange plastic almost makes me want to say it was a Novak Receiver for a remote.



edit on 30-4-2013 by JBA2848 because: (no reason given)


But then you have to ask who held the remote? The remote would be large for that type of receiver.



But there are those techy kids out there who use there iphones to operate receivers on remote control cars. I only bring up that remote and the receiver after seeing they used the battery from a rc car.




And it is a little complicated to do if your not using a large remote to operate it. I know the ones I have you use a antenna that pulls out about three feet in order to have distance. And they were along ways from the first blast area near the finish line.
edit on 1-5-2013 by JBA2848 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 08:13 PM
link   
reply to post by watchitburn
 


Why the nonsensical hyperbole and flawed rational...



IEDs are not difficult to put together, especially when you have a pressure cooker involved. A monkey could make a bomb out of a pressure cooker, and it wouldn't even have to be a trained monkey.

Add the right explosives and a power source and the pressure cooker will do the rest for you.


A monkey would defensively trow a "WMD" at you but it wouldn't be a pressure cooker bomb...

I can state with a high degree of certainly that even half the posters on this thread and even considering that we are in ATS wouldn't be able to create similar devices, they would probably take more than a year to come up with a working prototype. Finding the right explosives then the right container a good igniter and a way to remotely start the bomb all together and in a working fashion (that would include some test detonations and escaping detection doing that and the fabrication).

The monkeys on your planet are just way to smart for me to imagine human life there as possible, they would have probably managed to build a nuke and ended the party earlier...



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 08:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by samkent
From what I heard they used radio controlled cars for their detonator.
Think back when you were a kid. Did you ever fly Estes model rockets???

Glue the power wire to one tire of the car. When you command the car to drive forward the tire spins and contacts the battery to the rocket ignitor. You don't have to know anything about electronics.


the " CNN expert" said "sophisticated test circuits"
also as an IED specialist ( Neocrusader ) pointed out up thread pg 2
there are alot of stray signals that were EXCLUDED form the trigger
not so easy to do
edit on 1-5-2013 by Danbones because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 08:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


I watched a movie recently where some CIA guys were chasing a bomber in saudi arabia for the Sauds
all the bomb makers had missing fingers
murphy's law



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join