-----Original Message-----
From: Luke Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 12:46 PM
To: Subject: vialls


heres a relevant quote wrt the lebanon hotel from joe (from a couple of years ago)
"Anyone doubting the nuclear identity of this weapon should take a look at the biggest car bombs detonated in Northern Ireland during the thirty years of trouble, which ranged in size up to 1,000 pounds of conventional explosive. None of them left craters in the road, because simple physics dictate that shock waves always takes the line of least resistance ? largely outwards and upwards to atmosphere. Nor am I aware of any 1,000 pound IRA car bomb trashing 27 buildings and 100 vehicles. "

the 'thousand pound bomb' is the same size as the one in bagdad today ("A US military spokesman said the explosion was caused by a 1,000-pound car bomb") - cept whereas the ira bombs didnt leave a crater, the one in bagdad "carved out a huge crater around 20 feet across and 10 feet deep in the road outside the hotel."

the other fun thing to note is that the americans are claiming that 28 are dead, but the iraqis are only claiming five. the only other time ive heard of americans being on the upper end of the range was that stupid massacre when the americans claimed to be ambushed delivering new currency.

i dont know whether the 'no crater' theory is valid, but 'least resistance' kinda makes sense to the completely uneducated (me), and its always fun to mention these things before the event. 3 meters is a pretty deep hole.

watching the news over the last few hours, the one thing that it seems that im sposed to takeaway (ie the message) is that the trees caught on fire. it was the sort of curious fact that got repeated just a bit too often, too loudly. vialls seems to suggest that the shockwaves of these explosions are so intense that they are more likely to put out a fire than cause one. i didnt see any trees on fire in any of the pix i saw - itll be interesting to see whether the trees are blackened come the morning sunshine.

if the blast vector theory is correct, then the bomb or nuke or woteva the hell it was must have been planted pretty deep. this presumably occured via sewage systems or whatever. its difficult to imagine actually digging a hole in the street without raising suspicion...

if any of these theories (madrid or baghdad) are anywhere near correct, then all of the presumed suspects are completely off the table. its not eta, not JI, not alcohaida, not foreign insurgents, not baathist remnants, not (i forget what adjective to use here) mujahadeen, not 10 year old palestinians. my guess is if u are a real freedom fighter/terrorist, u either blow shit up to gain (somewhat specific) political leverage, or u truly just wanna create terror and chaos cos somehow outta the indeterminate ashes u think you eventually become stronger/better out of the anarchy by virtue of at least getting rid of the tyrant.
i accept that im kinda predisposed to think that if u are gonna blow up yourself (and others), u mite as well be unambiguous about your message, but even if there are 'pure' terrorists who are simply trying to create bedlam (with no discernible purpose), then why hide the capacity of the bomb and bury it underground and then claim it was a car bomb. if u chose to do that, you'd be hiding your capacity to terrorise - which seems dumb. the bomb required would be scarier than the one u pretended to use. therefore if the bomb was actually buried, it points to people whose political goal appears to be the creation of the illusion of insecurity and threat - ie people who want the situation to appear more chaotic than it really is. what logic/motivation set fits that possibility? the message seems to be either: a) americans need to stay after jun 30 to keep the peace b) blame it on foreigners and go blow up syria and/or iran c) incite civil war.
my best guess is that a foreign state is involved - probably america. the whole jun30 thing has sounded suspicious since the beginning - altho the msg is well obscured - im not sure if they want to delay handover and stay, or if they wanna run and watch the country explode in civil war or wot - something fishy going on.

interesting that again the target is a 'soft target'. the 'soft target' logic sounds reasonable prima facie - but i find it more convenient than convincing. we can at least take some comfort in the fact that these evil people actually seem to care about life to the extent that they seem to value american lives above anyone elses. 911 being a necessary evil. since then it has been proxy aussies, proxy brits, irc, UN, italians, spaniards, reporters, police recruits, shia, turks, microbiologists et al. i still cant get my head around the fact that nary a suicide bomber appears to ask themselves whether their presumed goal of attacking amerika might be better achieved by actually attacking amerika, rather than some very very poor 2nd-cousin proxy. the 'soft target' logic might be valid if we assume that iraq is the defined theatre - its prolly true that the military in baghdad is a harder target than a hotel - but how bout a bus in ohio? these are 'foreign insurgents' remember - they could just as easy go to akron as baghdad. and yet it seems that the only people who have attacked america (if we exclude 911 for purposes) are amerikans. mcveigh. anthrax. dc sniper. gwb. ohio sniper. etc etc.

sorry to rant about the same things over and over - they feel like important questions. and some of the possible answers are too spooky.

btw - operation mountin goat is underway - somewhat under the noise of the last week. 50 killed already. 13000 ams there 'on the border' - apparently the tribal chiefs arent happy. im not sure if i hope that ams know what they are doing or not. it could be messy either way.

the author is certifiably crazy


__________________________________________________
free martha. free jacko. free kobe. free stern. free sex. free hat.
wotisitgood4.blogspot.com