Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Simon Lane wrote:
Neil Sluman wrote: [...] There's a certain logic to the bombs being badly made. I can't imagine it's easy to test bombs. I'm hearing (PM, R4) that these devices were of a similar construction to the 7/7 ones. They all worked that time, none this time; maybe they had someone else provide detonators this time? The detonators worked, though. A theory i heard is that they were real bombs, made using the same batch of explosive as the 7/7 ones, but that in the intervening two weeks, this had basically gone off, and was no longer active. I'm slightly dubious about this; i believe the explosive in question is acetone peroxide, and i'm not aware of a 'going off' pathway for that which operates that quickly - there are mentions of it degrading in long-term storage, but two weeks is not what i think of as long term. IANAchemist, though. My own personal theory is that there's a strict alternation between proper terrorists and what we might call 'joke terrorists' or perhaps 'irritationists' - the September 11th terrorists, clearly very seriously proper terrorists, were followed by the shoe bomber, a man who PUT BOMBS IN HIS SHOES for ****'s sake. Our own 7/7 tube bombers, again proper terrorists, although by no means as successful as the September 11th mob, are followed by the clowns we had today. We should expect another proper bombing before too long, but after that, we can relax until the next round of no-hopers do their thing. tom -- Batman always wins |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 01:07:00 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote: On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Simon Lane wrote: Neil Sluman wrote: [...] There's a certain logic to the bombs being badly made. I can't imagine it's easy to test bombs. I'm hearing (PM, R4) that these devices were of a similar construction to the 7/7 ones. They all worked that time, none this time; maybe they had someone else provide detonators this time? The detonators worked, though. A theory i heard is that they were real bombs, made using the same batch of explosive as the 7/7 ones, but that in the intervening two weeks, this had basically gone off, and was no longer active. I'm slightly dubious about this; i believe the explosive in question is acetone peroxide, and i'm not aware of a 'going off' pathway for that which operates that quickly - there are mentions of it degrading in long-term storage, but two weeks is not what i think of as long term. IANAchemist, though. If it was a fresh batch made up by amateurs then there could be plenty of scope for the use of wrong ingredients (especially if domestic preparations rather than "proper" chemicals were used, thus allowing for e.g. the wrong type of drain cleaner not containing sulphuric acid) resulting on this occasion in a benign mixture being produced. snip |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
More bombs? | London Transport | |||
LONDON BOMBS COVER-UP: BOMBS WERE UNDER TRAINS | London Transport | |||
LONDON BOMBS COVER-UP: BOMBS WERE UNDER TRAINS | London Transport | |||
More bombs?? | London Transport | |||
2 is more likely (was London bombs - the work of ONE man?) | London Transport |