Torture Bill States Non-Allegiance To Bush Is Terrorism

Discussion in 'Freedom and Liberty' started by melbo, Oct 5, 2006.

  1. melbo

    melbo Hunter Gatherer Administrator Founding Member

    Torture Bill States Non-Allegiance To Bush Is Terrorism

    Legislation tolls the bell for the day America died, birth of the dictatorship
    By Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones

    [​IMG] Buried amongst the untold affronts to the Bill of Rights, the Constitution and the very spirit of America, the torture bill contains a definition of "wrongfully aiding the enemy" which labels all American citizens who breach their "allegiance" to President Bush and the actions of his government as terrorists subject to possible arrest, torture and conviction in front of a military tribunal.


    After five hours of searching through the 80-plus page bill, Alex Jones, who won the 2004 Project Censored award for his analysis of Patriot Act 2, uncovered numerous other provisions and definitions that make the bill appear as almost a mirror image of Hitler's 1933 Enabling Act.

    In section 950j. the bill criminalizes any challenge to the legislation's legality by the Supreme Court or any United States court. Alberto Gonzales has already threatened federal judges to shut up and not question Bush's authority on the torture of detainees.

    "No court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider any claim or cause of action whatsoever, including any action pending on or filed after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, relating to the prosecution, trial, or judgment of a military commission under this chapter, including challenges to the lawfulness of procedures of military commissions under this chapter."

    The Bush administration is preemptively overriding any challenge to the legislation by the Supreme Court.

    The definition of torture that the legislation cites is US code title 18 section 2340. This is a broad definition of torture and completely lacks the specific clarity of the Geneva Conventions. This definition allows the use of torture that is, "incidental to lawful sanctions." In alliance with the bill's blanket authority for President Bush to define the Geneva Conventions as he sees fit, this legislates the use of torture.

    <script language="JavaScript"> <!-- function SymError() { return true; } window.onerror = SymError; var SymRealWinOpen =; function SymWinOpen(url, name, attributes) { return (new Object()); } = SymWinOpen; //--> </script> <script type="text/javascript"><!-- google_ad_client = "pub-3923740223021058"; google_alternate_ad_url = ""; google_ad_width = 336; google_ad_height = 280; google_ad_format = "336x280_as"; google_ad_type = "text_image"; google_ad_channel ="5862413590"; google_color_border = "FFFFFF"; google_color_bg = "FFFFFF"; google_color_link = "000000"; google_color_url = "333333"; google_color_text = "333333"; //--></script> <script type="text/javascript" src=""> </script><iframe name="google_ads_frame" src="" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" vspace="0" hspace="0" allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" height="280" scrolling="no" width="336"></iframe> The media has spun the bill as if it outlaws torture - it only outlaws torture for "enemy combatants," and in fact outlaws the retaliation of any military against the United States as "murder." Those deemed "enemy combatants" are not even allowed to fight back yet the government affords itself every power including the go-ahead to torture.

    Further actions that result in the classification of an individual as a terrorist include the following.

    - Destruction of any property, which is deemed punishable by any means of the military tribunal's choosing.

    - Any violent activity whatsoever if it takes place near a designated protected building, such as a charity building.

    - A change of the definition of "pillaging" which turns all illegal occupation of property and all theft into terrorism. This makes squatters and petty thieves enemy combatants.

    In light of Greg Palast's recent hounding by Homeland Security, after they accused him of potentially giving terrorists key information about U.S. "critical infrastructure" when filming Exxon’s Baton Rouge refinery (clear photos of which were publicly available on Google Maps), sub-section 27 of section 950v. should send chills down the spine of all investigative journalists and even news-gatherers.

    "Any person subject to this chapter who with intent or reason to believe that it is to be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign power, collects or attempts to collect information by clandestine means or while acting under false pretenses, for the purpose of conveying such information to an enemy of the United States, or one of the co-belligerents of the enemy, shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a military commission under this chapter may direct."

    Subsection 4(b) (26) of section 950v. of HR 6166 - Crimes triable by military commissions - includes the following definition.

    "Any person subject to this chapter who, in breach of an allegiance or duty to the United States, knowingly and intentionally aids an enemy of the United States, or one of the co-belligerents of the enemy, shall be punished as a military commission under this chapter may direct."

    For an individual to hold an allegiance or duty to the United States they need to be a citizen of the United States. Why would a foreign terrorist have any allegiance to the United States to breach in the first place?

    This is another telltale facet that proves the bill applies to U.S. citizens and includes them under the "enemy combatant" designation. We previously cited the comments of Yale law Professor Bruce Ackerman, who wrote in the L.A. Times, "The compromise legislation....authorizes the president to seize American citizens as enemy combatants, even if they have never left the United States. And once thrown into military prison, they cannot expect a trial by their peers or any other of the normal protections of the Bill of Rights."

    The New York Times stated that the legislation introduced, "A dangerously broad definition of “illegal enemy combatant” in the bill could subject legal residents of the United States, as well as foreign citizens living in their own countries, to summary arrest and indefinite detention with no hope of appeal. The president could give the power to apply this label to anyone he wanted."

    Calling the bill "our generation’s version of the Alien and Sedition Acts," the Times goes on to highlight the rubber stamping of torture.

    "Coerced evidence would be permissible if a judge considered it reliable — already a contradiction in terms — and relevant. Coercion is defined in a way that exempts anything done before the passage of the 2005 Detainee Treatment Act, and anything else Mr. Bush chooses."

    Since with this bill, in the aggregate, Bush has declared himself to be above the Constitution and the laws of the United States, the allegiance of American citizens is no longer to the flag or the freedoms for which it stands, but to Bush himself, the self-appointed dictator, and any diversion from that allegiance will mandate arrest, torture and conviction in a military tribunal under the terms of this bill.

    Similar to the UK's Glorification of Terrorism law, which top lawyers have slammed as vague, open to interpretation and a potential weapon for the government to kidnap supposed subversives, the nebulous context of "wrongfully aiding the enemy," could easily be defined to include publicly absolving an accused terrorist of involvement in a terrorist attack.

    That renders the entire 9/11 truth movement an aid to terrorist suspects and subject to military tribunal and torture. In addition, Bush's recently cited National Strategy for Combating Terrorism, which is available on the White House website, labels conspiracy theorists as terrorist recruiters.

    This should leave us with no doubt as to which parties are the target of the government's torture and intimidation campaign.

    Could protesting a war approved by the government and their bootlickers in Congress and the Senate be considered breaching an allegiance to the United States? Could campaigning against the bombing of a target country be considered wrongfully aiding the enemy?

    When the USA PATRIOT act was rushed through at the height of an anthrax scare without any members of Congress even having time to read it, we were assured that it was to fight terrorists and would not be used against the American people.

    Since then a plethora of cases whereby the USA PATRIOT act was used against U.S. citizens emerged, including the internment without trial for over three years of Jose Padilla, an American citizen who was finally released after no evidence of terrorism was uncovered.


    The so-called "compromise" before the bill was passed and the media acclaim of John McCain as some kind of human rights champion is one of the biggest con jobs ever inflicted upon the American people.

    Shortly after the bill was finalized it was spun by Bush security advisor Stephen Hadley as "good news and a good day for the American people." McCain said that it safeguarded "the integrity and letter and spirit of the Geneva Conventions."

    In truth the legislation does the exact opposite, giving Bush carte blanche to "interpret the meaning and application of the Geneva Conventions."

    In addition, under the bill, "No person may invoke the Geneva Conventions or any protocols thereto in any habeas corpus or other civil action or proceeding to which the United States, or a current or former officer, employee, member of the Armed Forces, or other agent of the United States is a party as a source of rights in any court of the United States or its States or territories."

    The bill also allows hearsay evidence (obtained via phony confessions after torture) to be considered by the military tribunal and bars the suspect from even having knowledge of the charges against him - making a case for defense impossible. This is guaranteed to produce 100% conviction rates as you would expect in the dictatorships of Uzbekistan or Zimbabwe and other torture protagonists who are in many cases allied with the Bush administration and provide phony confessions obtained from torture that allow the U.S. government to scare its people with the threat of imaginary Al-Qaeda terror cells waiting to kill them.

    Following the Supreme Court's ruling to previously strike down Bush's shadow penal system, Alberto Gonzales is already out threatening federal judges to shut up and get behind the dictator or face the consequences.

    Gonzales has the sheer gall to attack judges for even considering to "overturn long-standing traditions or policies without proper support in text or precedent," which is exactly what Gonzales, Bush and the rest of the White House criminals are doing themselves by de facto abolishing the Bill of Rights!

    This is a dark day for the United States, the day America died and the bastard birth of a literal dictatorship.
  2. melbo

    melbo Hunter Gatherer Administrator Founding Member

  3. Quigley_Sharps

    Quigley_Sharps The Badministrator Administrator Founding Member

      • Have you read these?Some of these are interesting , I can seem to find any that state it can be used on our citizens you find any?
  4. ghostrider

    ghostrider Resident Poltergeist Founding Member

    Yeah, I don't see how anybody can construe that to mean American citizens.
  5. ghrit

    ghrit Bad company Administrator Founding Member

    So you are saying that the bill cannot be challenged at the USSC? Laws wrongly or carelessly written get that opportunity. Or at least they used to. If that provision no longer exists, we are indeed in trouble.
  6. Infidel

    Infidel Guest

    Not Much of a Reader are You
  7. Seacowboys

    Seacowboys Senior Member Founding Member

    What amazes me is the number of people that don't seem to have a problem with this. They just refuse to believe that it will ever be turned on our citizens and if it is, then the citizen deserved it.
    We're your government; we're here to help you.
  8. Quigley_Sharps

    Quigley_Sharps The Badministrator Administrator Founding Member

    No I read that, and if you help an enemy you should be shot .OSB
  9. ghrit

    ghrit Bad company Administrator Founding Member

    Agree, that would be treason. That said, until now at least, treasonous citizens get the same protection from the Bill of Rights as burglars. What is raising my hackles is the presumption of guilt rather than innocence that this bill affords the AG.

    So far as enemy combatant's rights go (in or out of uniform), my feeling leans toward them having the same rights as God given, just as our Constitution claims they are. The idea of the secret prisons gives me the willies, if for no other reason than they violate personal rights beyond those we are used to, and entitled to. Never mind keeping the incarceration secret from the foreign citizen's home country where even international treaties would also be violated. Habeas corpus has to rule.:eek:
  10. Blackjack

    Blackjack Monkey+++

    This really does scare me. Crackheads, Burglars, general bad guys don't scare me, but my own government does.... strange eh?
  11. Seacowboys

    Seacowboys Senior Member Founding Member

    Just a few years back, when something like this was predicted, everyone shout "get your tinfoil hat, this is america, by god and the american people will never let that happen!" Where's that same damned "from my cold dead fingers" crowd today? They are still calling those of us that refuse to stick our heads in the sand "conspiracy nuts" and "tinfoil hatters". They are still defending the governments method of protecting us from evil terrorists and defending a stupid war that has more to do with Halliburton than domestic security. They just claim that some of us refuse to see the "Big Picture"; well, maybe we do see the big picture and just don't think it belongs in the United States.
  12. ColtCarbine

    ColtCarbine Monkey+++ Founding Member

    I hope all that think The Patriotic Act won't be used against law-abiding U.S. citizens are right. I'm not as optimistic, especially if Democrats obtain control of Washington again. They have abused their power in the past and probably will do it again. Everybody in this forum probably fits the bill for being considered a Domestic Terrorist :eek:
  13. Quigley_Sharps

    Quigley_Sharps The Badministrator Administrator Founding Member

    A democrat seems to be what everyone wants now days, I wish they would have got the crazy fker Al Gore it would be interesting to see how they act then.
  14. Quigley_Sharps

    Quigley_Sharps The Badministrator Administrator Founding Member

    Sea you seem to have a lot to say about political things.
    <FONT face="Times New Roman">With all due respect .What is your plan to fix it? Other than bitch about it?<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com[​IMG]Why don’t you run for office and change things?
    Where would you run on issues? What wouldn’t you endorse?
    It seems like you have a lot of negative to say about the political arena why not throw your hat in and change things?
    I think you have some valid points and I think you are off on some of them.
    I'm tired of voting for the lesser of the two evils why don’t you run third party and I will vote for you.
    I voted for Bush both times and would do so again if the same people were running.
    Who did you vote for? And Why?
    There are few things I can agree on with Bush and there are many I can’t, yet those few are the only thing that had me voting the way I did.
    There are people Like Infidel who come here and bitch about our system and they don’t help to fix it, maybe they should go home if it so bad here, Don’t get me wrong I would like to go back 30 years and start over But it’s the fail attempt on several Administrations that has caused the events of today, Its not fair to blame them on one.
    Lets just say Bush sat on his ass Like Clinton and Gore and let them keep attacking us, and lets say after 911 they did another one only in greater magnitude then 911, what would they say about Bush then? That he didn’t do enough? I would hate to walk in those shoes even if it’s just for one seconded.
    I'm interested in hearing how you would advise the American people to the route of fixing the issues at hand?
    I'm not picking on you, I'm just curious of you have a plan or know how to fix it.
    Tell me about the " Big Picture" you are talking about.
  15. ghostrider

    ghostrider Resident Poltergeist Founding Member

    Hooah, dude. The only thing Bush could ever get accused of is trying to do too much. We spend more on intelligence than almost everybody, and our intelligence stinks. They actually come up with a way to listen to telephone conversations from suspected Al Queda members to people here in the states, and the New York Slimes leaks that to try to hurt the administration. Even though we know that's how they got on to the bombers that were planning to board in Britain. Even though it undoubtedly saved lives.

    I hope no one is naive enough to believe an FBI agent from the midwest can infiltrate an Al Queda cell and send back information. Ahmed doesn't walk into a police station in Chicago, and tell on his cousin building a bomb. We really don't have a lot of capabilities to monitor someone. We have just been lucky no one had died.

    Our intelligence capabilities were destroyed by Jimmy Carter, he gave away all our human intelligence networks. Nobody would trust us after that, so we were reduced to reading newspapers and electronically intercepting millions of calls, looking for a needle in a haystack. Our crippled intelligence believed Iraq had NBC capabilities, I still believe that info was planted by Saddam or Saddam's inner circle, because it was so specific, and believable. Bush did what he thought was best for the American people, if Clinton had done HALF as much, 9/11 probably never would have happened.
  16. Seacowboys

    Seacowboys Senior Member Founding Member

    I don't know how to fix what is wrong, only that it is broken. I do however have some ideas that I believe in deeply.
    First, let me say that I voted for Bush too but I never believed he would do so much to damage the Constitutional restraints placed on the Federal government. I know he has been faced with tough decisions and somehow we have given over the task of defending our country solely to the feds.
    I have no interests in becoming a politician but I do have an interest in defending the rights to free speech, the rights to assembly, the rights to outright protest something that I believe is wrong.
    Our government is designed with checks in-place to prevent one branch from becoming a dictatorship. The Supreme Court should have the final say in matters that Bush is circumventing. If given the choice of greater risks of terrorist attacks or living in a totalitarian police state, I would choose the risks. Our population just exceeded 300,000,000 people in the ffice:smarttags" /><?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com[​IMG]<st1:place w:st="on">United States</st1:place></st1:country-region>; that is just too many people and natural selection will thin us out one way or another. I fail to see the difference in 3000 people being killed in a terrorist attack or 3000 people being killed in a war to prevent it, dead is dead but associated costs of war grow much deeper. It increases our national debt, it takes the strongest of our youth and leaves the dregs here to reproduce. If a task, however monumental, is undertaken, there will always be obstacles to overcome. The monumental tasks given our government, if it cannot be resolved within the constraints of our constitution, needs rethinking. If a bridge won’t work, dig a tunnel, divert the river, or stay on one side but don’t fill it in and deny us all water.
    The problems we face today are not ones that any elected official can solve. There is absolutely no means of defeating a guerilla attack or terrorism without confining each and every individual that might possibly disagree with the status quo. If kids are playing their music too loud, some will ask them to turn it down and when they refuse, call the police, others will unplug the power supply or create a louder diversionary noise, then there are some that will shut it down with a hammer. Terrorism is a reality of our times; it is a reality of our population growth and impotence. The one thing that has given our country its greatness is the history of our civil liberties. <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">America</st1:place></st1:country-region>, home of the Brave and Land of the Free has stood the test of time and numerous attacks by hostile forces. We have withstood the deaths of millions of our citizens to preserve our way of life and I cannot believe that we fall to a few thousand terrorists incidents or even a few hundred thousand. If we were told the truth about what is going on and not some spin-doctored version designed to gain political support, maybe some of us would be a little less strident in the demands for constitutional support. For example, I have spent a good deal of my life working with high explosives and my experiences tell me that there is absolutely no way an anfo-bomb could have brought down the federal building in Oklahoma City. There is no way that even the quantity of anfo they claim was mixed could have been done in the time frame given McVeigh. It labels me as a tinfoil hatter because I know that the story told could not work and I can only speculate about what really happened and why, but it doesn’t change what I know. In <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>, we failed to learn from the Russians. One of my co-workers is disabled Special Forces. He lost his kneecap in Carter’s dismal attempt at rescuing hostages in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Iran</st1:place></st1:country-region>. He also spent many months training the Taliban mercenaries to fight Russians in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>. These guys learned their trades from our best and nobody mentions that. By definition, we are destined to fail in our War on Terrorism. Terrorism is the only means to fight big governments with any chance of influencing the out-come of events. An act of terrorism has divided our country and has given momentum towards destroying the one single thing that held us above the rest of the world: Freedom. Terrorism cannot be defeated. The only thing that can be defeated is an ideal that has sustained our great country for more than 200 years.
    I do not believe in attacking a symptom. Let’s go after the disease. Why can’t the sacrifices being made come from our lives instead of our liberty? I do have some ideas about how to defeat this enemy and keep our freedoms.
    1. Stand up and reaffirm your oath of office, Mr. President and believe it this time. Pledge to support the CONSTITUTION of this nation against all enemies, both foreign and DOMESTIC.
    2. Leave states to live by the laws they pass without interfering. If a state legalizes marijuana, so what? If they trust their citizens to own machineguns, so what? If they want to drive at any speed, so what? If they want to lower their drinking age, so what? It is their choice and was voted by a majority of the people that live there.
    3. Do away with the federal support and guidelines for local and state police forces. We do not need armies posing as police. We need peace keepers, not law enforcement. We need police as members of our community, not some secret SWAT fraternity.
    4. Disband the BATFE, they serve no legitimate purpose in a free nation.
    5. Disband the DEA, they serve no legitimate purpose in a free nation.
    6. Protect our borders. Really protect our borders.
    7. Utilize the citizens militia in border patrol and community level police, rather than soldiers and soldier wanna-bes.
    8. Stay out of our educational system. Teachers did just fine teaching without your guidelines.
    9. Do away with political lobby, campaign contributions, et al. Make it mandatory that media give equal time to all candidates and their platform and pay for it with our tax dollars. We have to get rid of this two party system and devote time and attention to personal integrity and platform, rather than the Party’s golden child of the moment. <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:country-region w:st="on">America</st1:country-region></st1:place> cannot compete with an industrial machine fired party system where the candidates are picked for us.
    10. People that attack our constitutional liberties are the real enemy; treat them that way. Hold every elected official liable for any transgression or damage to our constitution. Charge any elected official that violates constitutional law with treason and put them in your secret prisons and torture them. This is the only thing that holds our great nation above the unfortunate rest of the world. Protect it. Be prepared to die in the defense of it, if necessary. Get some new blood in the Supreme Court instead of a bunch of half-dead old geezers and make them work for a living. They were tasked with the burden of protecting our Constitution and lately, seem to be sleeping on the job too much.
    And as for my personal plans to deal with this, I certainly do have them:
    • Bitch, shout, complain, write letters, post on bulletin boards, argue, preach, sing to the choir, each and every time my bullshit meter tells me we are being sold a bill of good. BE HEARD!
    • Send money and support to Gun Owners of America and Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, as these are the only two organizations that I am totally convinced are proactive. I resigned my paid in full NRA lifetime membership when they drug their feet over the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:City w:st="on">New Orleans</st1:City></st1:place> gun confiscations.
    • Support platform regardless of Party affiliation when they proponent something that doesn’t set off the bullshit meter.
    • Watch the voting records of my elected officials and participate in massive mailings to make their constituents aware of it.
    • Do not fall for the belief that if their view-point is opposed to mine, that they are totally wrong. I even occasionally support the ACLU. I won’t fall for the trap that says the enemy of my enemy is my friend, that is syllogistic reasoning at best and at worst, narrows the choices down to two items or ideas.
    • I am a damage control professional. I make my living doing crisis management, damage control, marine fire-fighting and salvage. The first step to damage control is to determine what the problem actually is; what is causing it, only then do you evaluate what you have to address it with and plan an attack. With the problems I see here, my first step is to prepare to protect my family when the other shoe drops, hence my presence on survival related boards. My second task is to sound off with opinion and see how many and how deeply people give a damn. I then think-tank with others of common interests, up to and including taking long road trips at inopportune times to meet with other like minded individuals and begin a dialogue that breeds ideas for address. I look for common grounds, even with my opposition as a means of dealing with an imminent crisis. What I see coming down the pipe scares the hell out of me but I will not bury my head in the sand or support anyone that is fighting a war that cannot be won.The only way to defeat terrorist is to deny them their agenda which is to destroy our country and our country is defined by our FREEDOM.
    • When we give up our liberty in the name of security, the Terrorist have won by default. Game over.
  17. Quigley_Sharps

    Quigley_Sharps The Badministrator Administrator Founding Member

    I'm not sure what that means, I protected our country when I enlisted in the service for several years. I took a personal initiative and got off of my ass and joined up.
    I put my life on the line for people to be able to speak out their opinions.
    I believe if more young Americans were to do that, we would have less crime by gangs etc they would have a job and roof over their heads.

    I believe you should have that right.

    When did he circumvent the Supreme Court?
    When did the reference to a terrorist attack become “Natural Selection”? I guess that would mean Hitler Naturally selected out the Jews?

    The difference is one is protecting and the other is attacking.
    One is good and One is evil.

  18. Seacowboys

    Seacowboys Senior Member Founding Member

    I do not support my troops when they are being sent into a war that is wrong. I do not support the war on terrorism when as you say, it is a war against Islam. Period. If it is a war against Islam, then declare it. I'll support it then. But until it is declared (they declared it on us)we are fighting a lie. A war against terrorism cannot be won. A war against Islam has all the biblical proportions of Armageddom.
  19. Seacowboys

    Seacowboys Senior Member Founding Member

    Explosives are substances that, through chemical reaction, rapidly and violently change to gas, accompanied by high temperatures, extreme shock and a loud noise. An explosion is the process of the substance transforming into the gaseous state.
    Explosives are classified as low or high according to the detonating velocity or speed at which this change takes place and other pertinent characteristics such as their shattering effect. An arbitrary figure of 3300 fps is used to distinguish between burning/ deflagration (low explosive) and detonation (high explosive).
    There are three types of explosions atomic, mechanical (characterized by a gradual build-up of pressure in a container until it overcomes the structural resistance of the container and an explosion occurs such as a pipe bomb), and chemical the rapid conversion of a solid or liquid explosive compound into gasses having much greater volume than the substances from which they are generated. The entire conversion takes place in only a fraction of a second and is accompanied by shock, heat, light and a loud noise.
    In all chemical explosions, the changes that occur are the result of combustion or burning. Combustion (of any type) produces several well-known effects: heat, light, and release of gas. The burning of a log in a fireplace and the detonation of a stick of dynamite are similar because each changes its form and, in doing so, produces the same effects through combustion. The difference between a burning log and the detonating dynamite stick is the rate of the combustion process.
    There are three rates of combustion; ordinary combustion, explosion (Rapid Combustion), and detonation. Detonation can be defined as instantaneous combustion, although there is actually a time interval where combustion passes from one particle of explosive compound to the next. When an explosive is detonated, the block or stick of chemical explosive material is instantaneously converted from a solid into a rapidly expanding mass of gasses.
    The velocity of instantaneous combustion has been measured for most explosives and is referred to as the detonation velocity of the explosive. Detonation velocities of high explosives range from approximately 3,300 feet per second (fps) to over 29,900 fps. To bring this speed down to our terms – If we took a five-mile length of garden hose and filled it in with a high explosive and then detonated one end of the hose, it would only take one second for the chemical reaction to reach the other end.
    In a detonation, the chemical reaction moves through the explosive material at a velocity greater than that of sound through the same material. The characteristic of this chemical reaction is that it is initiated by and, in turn, supports a supersonic shock wave proceeding through the explosive.”
    In a deflagration, the chemical reaction moves rapidly through the explosive material and releases heat or flames vigorously. The reaction moves too slowly to produce shock waves.”
    There are two types of Explosives Low Explosives and High Explosives. Low explosives are said to burn or deflagrate rather than to detonate or explode. The burning gives off a gas which, when properly confined, will cause an explosion. Most low explosives are mechanical mixtures or a mechanical blending of the individual ingredients making up the low explosives.
    High Explosives do not require confinement to shatter and destroy. It must generally be initiated by a shock wave of considerable force. This is usually provided by a detonator or blasting cap.
    The varying velocities of explosives and configuration have a direct relationship to the type of work they can perform. The difference in velocities determines the type of power exerted by high or low explosives. Low explosives have pushing or heaving power and high explosives have shattering power(Brisance).
    A high order detonation is a complete detonation of the explosive at its highest possible velocity. A low order detonation is either an incomplete detonation or a complete detonation at lower than maximum velocity.
    Explosives have several effects, blast pressure effect (most powerful of all explosive effects). When the explosion occurs, very hot (between 3,000 and 7000 Fahrenheit) expanding gases are formed in a period of approximately 1/10,000 of a second. These gases exert pressures of about 700 tons per square inch on the atmosphere surrounding the point of detonation at velocities of up to 13,000 miles per hour or 29,900 fps. The expanding gas rolls out from the point of detonation like a ripple in the water and is known as the blast pressure wave.
    This wave has two distinct phases positive and negative. Positive; the blast pressure wave moves outward from the point of detonation and delivers violent force to everything in its path. It lasts a relatively short period of time and delivers the highest pressures and velocity. Negative; more descriptively known as the suction phase. It is three times longer in duration but of less intensity than the positive phase. It is formed as the out rushing air is compressed and forms a vacuum at the point of detonation. The vacuum causes the displaced air to reverse its movements and return to the point of detonation. This accounts for much of the debris that is found at the seat of the explosion and nearby.
    Fragmentation Effect; missiles are produced by the explosive container, objects around the detonation point and the intended target. Fragmentation adds to the destructive force of the explosive device. Fragments can travel at velocities up to 2,700 fps.
    Incendiary Thermal Effect can vary greatly from one explosive to another. In general, low explosives will produce longer incendiary thermal effects than will high explosives. A high explosive will produce higher temperatures but for a shorter time. The effect is seen usually as a bright flash or fireball at the moment of detonation. The low explosive fireball is more likely to cause a secondary fire than a high explosive detonation.
    Ancillary explosive effects are secondary blast pressure effects (reflected); created by blast waves that are shattered, reflected or shielded by reflective surfaces. The reflective blast wave off of surfaces surrounding it may actually reinforce the original wave by overlapping it in some places (i.e. corners of a room). Certain unusual effects may be noted at a crime scene that can be attributed to the secondary blast pressure effects.
    Ground and Water shock; occur when an explosive is initiated while buried in the earth or submerged under water. Both earth and water are less compressible than air and tend to propagate a shock wave further and with more force than air. Therefore, structural damage may be substantially greater under those circumstances where earth and water are involved. Water cannot be compressed at all and, therefore, will transmit energy much faster and farther than any other medium (tamping).
    Overpressure; types of overpressure include Incident Overpressure: a result of the explosive pressure wave itself and Reflective Overpressure; a result of the explosive pressure wave hitting a surface and rebounding, increasing the overpressure value. The effect of overpressure on the human body varies depending on; distance from explosion, nature of surroundings, and the age and physical condition of the individual.
    Table of Explosive Detonation Velocities

    Table of Explosive Detonation Velocities
    This table lists the detonation velocities at specified (typically, the highest practical) density of various explosive compounds.
    The velocity of detonation is an important indicator for overall energy or power of detonation, and in particular for the brisance or shattering effect of an explosive.
    <table class="MsoNormalTable" style="" border="0" cellpadding="0"> <tbody><tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    Explosive Name
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    Detonation Velocity (m/s)
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    Density (g per cm<sup>3</sup>)
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Aromatic explosives
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 1,3,5-Triazido-2,4,6-trinitrobenzene
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> TNB
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 7,300
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 1.71
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Trinitrotoluene
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> TNT
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 6,900
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 1.6
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Trinitroaniline
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> TNA
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 7,300
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 1.72
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Tetryl
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 7,570
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 1.71
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Picric Acid
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 7,350
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 1.7
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Dunnite
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 7,150
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 1.6
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Methyl Picrate
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 6,800
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 1.57
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Ethyl Picrate
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 6,500
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 1.55
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Picryl Chloride
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 7,200
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 1.74
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Trinitrocresol
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 6,850
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 1.62
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Lead styphnate
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 5,200
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 2.9
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Triaminotrinitrobenzene
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> TATB
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 7,350
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 1.80
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Aliphatic explosives
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Methyl nitrate
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 6,300
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 1.217
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Nitroglycol
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 7,300
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 1.48
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Nitroglycerine
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> NG
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 7,600
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 1.59
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Mannitol Hexanitrate
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 8,260
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 1.73
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Pentaerythritol Tetranitrate
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> PETN
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 8,400
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 1.7
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> EDNA
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 7,570
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 1.65
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Nitroguanidine
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 8,200
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 1.7
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> RDX
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 8,750
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 1.76
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Cyclotetramethylene Tetranitramine
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> HMX
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 9,100
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 1.9
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Tetranitroglycoluril
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Sorguyl
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 9,150
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 1.95
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Inorganic explosives
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Mercury Fulminate
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 4,250
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 3.0
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Lead azide
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 4,630
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 3.0
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Silver Azide
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 4,000
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 4.0
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> Ammonium Nitrate
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> AN
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 5,270
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;"> 1.3
    </td> </tr> <tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt;">
    </td> </tr> </tbody></table> [edit]

    Somewhere between ten and fifteen explosives experts and professional engineers have written strongly worded opinions that the Murrah building had to have been destroyed by interior bombs and that the ANFO truck could not have done the damage. These experts included a NASA scientist and demolition experts who have worked in the field for thirty years. What is most eye-opening is that even a government report concluded that the ANFO truck bomb couldn't have possibly destroyed the Murrah building. In early 1997, Wright Laboratory at <st1:City w:st="on">Elgin</st1:City> Air Force Base in <st1:State w:st="on">Florida</st1:State> constructed a concrete, steel-reinforced structure that was similar to the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placeName w:st="on">Murrah</st1:placeName> <st1:placeType w:st="on">Building</st1:placeType></st1:place>, and then did a series of explosions to test bomb effects. The Air Force structure was not nearly as structurally as sound as the Murrah Building, and the bombs used against it were more powerful than a 4,800 pound ANFO bomb. Minimal damage was done to the structure. Afterwards, the Air Force released a 56-page report that was entitled Case Study Relating Blast Effects to the Events of April 19, 1995, <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:City w:st="on">Oklahoma City</st1:City>, <st1:State w:st="on">Oklahoma</st1:State></st1:place>. The report, which included an extensive technical analysis that the Air Force commissioned from construction and demolition expert John Culberston, concluded that ". . . it is impossible to ascribe the damage that occurred on April 19, 1995 to a single truck bomb containing 4,800 lbs. of ANFO . . . It must be concluded that the damage at the Murrah Building is not the result of the truck bomb itself, but rather due to other factors such as locally placed charges within the building itself . . . The procedures used to cause the damage to the Murrah Building are therefore more involved and complex than simply parking a truck and leaving . . ." Six explosives experts strongly agreed with the report's findings.
    Brigadier General (ret.) Partin has been the most vocal of the critics of the government's one-bomb, one-man scenario. During his thirty-one year Air Force career, General Partin's expertise was explosives. During that time, he designed warheads, "had a lot of experience in combat damage evaluation", was trained in all the pertinent military laboratories, and was one of the government's foremost--if not the foremost--experts on explosives. "When I first looked at the reports coming out of <st1:State w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Oklahoma</st1:place></st1:State> I knew that the truth was not coming out. The media was pretty much confused, or passing out disinformation, and I think some of the officials down there were passing out disinformation, and what was going on down there was totally at odds with what I had twenty-five years experience of knowing," General Partin has said. To Partin, the contention that the ANFO truck bomb did the damage to the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placeName w:st="on">Murrah</st1:placeName> <st1:placeType w:st="on">Building</st1:placeType></st1:place> is "absurd". Within a month of April 19, 1995, the General had prepared a technical analysis of the bombing. In the report, Partin made it clear that by the time the blast wave from the ANFO truck bomb had hit the building it would not have had anywhere near enough psi (pounds of pressure per square inch) to collapse the steel-reinforced concrete columns. (By the time the ANFO blast wave hit the columns it would have been yielding 25-375 psi; the yield strength of concrete is 3,500-5,000 psi.) The report also made it clear that larger, thicker columns further away from the truck bomb came down, while smaller columns much closer to the truck were undamaged. "You don't have to go any further than that to know that you had demolition charges on those larger columns. There's no other explanation for it . . . Unless you believe in magic," Partin said. General Partin examined hundreds of photos of the destroyed building, and his in depth report listed the many other reasons why he can see “clearly, clearly…with a very high probability . . . with a high level of confidence" exactly where interior bombs were placed. Partin eventually delivered his analysis to all 535 senators and congressmen. In his cover letter to the politicians, he pleaded that the "Congress take steps to assure that evidence in Oklahoma City be evaluated by a collection of demolition experts from the private sector before the building is demolished." If experts had been able to examine the building closely, they could have reported definitively how the building was bombed. On 23 May 1995, though, just 34 days after the bombing, the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placeName w:st="on">Murrah</st1:placeName> <st1:placeType w:st="on">Building</st1:placeType></st1:place> was destroyed, and the rubble was buried in a landfill that is surrounded by a chain link fence and guarded by security personnel. "This is a classic cover-up of immense proportions," the General said.
    Five professional engineers and demolition experts firmly concurred with Partin's analysis. The testimony of these explosives experts is one of the main reasons that the <st1:State w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Oklahoma</st1:place></st1:State> Bombing Investigation Committee feels that the Congress should impanel a committee to reinvestigate the bombing. (Currently, Congressman Dan Burton, chairman of the House Government Reform Committee, is strongly considering reinvestigating the bombing.) It is by no means, however, the only reason. The OBIC's Final Report is five hundred and fifty meticulously documented pages.
survivalmonkey SSL seal warrant canary