722 posts
|
Post by hulmeman on Sept 15, 2017 10:38:18 GMT
Just reading about the problems at Parsons Green tube station, and I hope none of you London based or visiting boarders are anywhere near or involved n the incident.
Hate shall not win.
|
|
1,250 posts
|
Post by joem on Sept 15, 2017 23:39:04 GMT
We better make sure we beat hate then
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2017 5:20:57 GMT
The Daily Mail appears to have decided that this is a great chance to have a dig at the likes of Google and Facebook for allowing people to find out how to make bombs, apparently forgetting that chemistry was a thing people could do before the Internet. Making bombs is easy. I knew how to make nitrocellulose and nitroglycerine before I was in my teens and I can't ever remember not knowing how to make gunpowder, and once you have the chemistry right it's simple to turn it into something dangerous.
Personally I'd have blamed a bomb on the person who sets it off, but I don't work for the Daily Mail.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2017 6:23:12 GMT
It's funny then Daily Fail that we had all kinds of terrorism long before the internet. Sigh.
A friend of mine likes to share conspiracy theory posts a lot (hello 'Biggest Social Media Gripes') and the latest one this morning was 'it's all a lie there was no bomb at Parson's Green' with pictures of the half-expounded device as 'proof'. Sigh again.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2017 7:02:20 GMT
A friend of mine likes to share conspiracy theory posts a lot (hello 'Biggest Social Media Gripes') and the latest one this morning was 'it's all a lie there was no bomb at Parson's Green' There are people claiming that Hurricane Irma was a hoax as well. It's all The Government, innit? Because The Government needs to create false flag events to justify doing things even though it's the government and can do those things anyway because there is no higher authority to stop it. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2017 7:04:43 GMT
A friend of mine likes to share conspiracy theory posts a lot (hello 'Biggest Social Media Gripes') and the latest one this morning was 'it's all a lie there was no bomb at Parson's Green' There are people claiming that Hurricane Irma was a hoax as well. It's all The Government, innit? Because The Government needs to create false flag events to justify doing things even though it's the government and can do those things anyway because there is no higher authority to stop it. Of course. And the Government is creating ACTUAL WEATHER to cover up...well whatever it's covering up. |
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Sept 17, 2017 8:09:00 GMT
The Daily Mail appears to have decided that this is a great chance to have a dig at the likes of Google and Facebook for allowing people to find out how to make bombs, apparently forgetting that chemistry was a thing people could do before the Internet. Making bombs is easy. I knew how to make nitrocellulose and nitroglycerine before I was in my teens and I can't ever remember not knowing how to make gunpowder, and once you have the chemistry right it's simple to turn it into something dangerous. Personally I'd have blamed a bomb on the person who sets it off, but I don't work for the Daily Mail. Just because the Mail says something doesn't mean it's wrong. Their point is that internet publishers and content providers are held to much lower standards than conventional publishers. If I write an article on how to make explosives and detonators and timing devices and the Mail published it then they would be closed down the next day if not for legal reasons then because advertisers would drop them immediately. If I publish it via Facebook then nothing much happens to Facebook - if someone complains they take it down probably but there's no legal or financial impact. Anyway, given who the suspect is for Parsons Green I think you'll find the Mail is very keen to blame him. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2017 12:04:16 GMT
"the time has come to stop the abuse of the country's hospitality by the foreign malefactors."
The Daily Mail's response to the siege of Sidney Street in 1911; they've done it. Strange then how its proprietor Lord Rothermere, in the thirties, managed to support those who sought to really terrorise Britain (to be fair he also poisoned the Daily Mirror for a time on the left).
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Sept 17, 2017 15:18:16 GMT
"the time has come to stop the abuse of the country's hospitality by the foreign malefactors." The Daily Mail's response to the siege of Sidney Street in 1911; they've done it. Strange then how its proprietor Lord Rothermere, in the thirties, managed to support those who sought to really terrorise Britain (to be fair he also poisoned the Daily Mirror for a time on the left). Some on the left choose to drag up the Mail's undoubted support of Hitler in the 1930s. It's about as relevant today as noting that the Democrat party in the USA is historically the party of the slave owners, gave birth to the Ku Klux Klan and many were segregationists right up to the 1960s. It's true but it's history. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2017 15:27:03 GMT
The culprit being Rothermere, whose fascist sympathies have been well documented. As for the switcih in US politics, it's down to Republicans, with their promotion of the Southern Strategy to attract the racist vote during the sixties, which they still benefit from.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2017 15:44:37 GMT
The Daily Mail appears to have decided that this is a great chance to have a dig at the likes of Google and Facebook for allowing people to find out how to make bombs, apparently forgetting that chemistry was a thing people could do before the Internet. Making bombs is easy. I knew how to make nitrocellulose and nitroglycerine before I was in my teens and I can't ever remember not knowing how to make gunpowder, and once you have the chemistry right it's simple to turn it into something dangerous. Personally I'd have blamed a bomb on the person who sets it off, but I don't work for the Daily Mail. Just because the Mail says something doesn't mean it's wrong. Their point is that internet publishers and content providers are held to much lower standards than conventional publishers. If I write an article on how to make explosives and detonators and timing devices and the Mail published it then they would be closed down the next day if not for legal reasons then because advertisers would drop them immediately. If I publish it via Facebook then nothing much happens to Facebook - if someone complains they take it down probably but there's no legal or financial impact. You can get this information from any library that has more than a handful of books on science, and elsewhere as well. I learnt how to make nitrocellulose (guncotton) from a book on the history of photography, because early film was made from celluloid and celluloid is made from nitrocellulose. Gunpowder is even easier: it even formed the basis of an episode of Star Trek. When I was at school everyone knew that you could make a bomb with sodium or potassium perchlorate. Once you have something that burns rapidly and creates a lot of heat and gas all you need to do is put it in a container to let the pressure build up before it's released by the failure of the container. I learnt that from a history of railways, because a boiler without a tamper-proof safety valve is effectively a bomb and often was. This is all very common knowledge to anyone with a moderate amount of interest in scientific matters. But when that very common knowledge that's available in many places is also available over the Internet it suddenly becomes a scandal. You might as well blame the Internet for making people aware that if you sharpen a piece of metal you can make a knife. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2017 15:51:39 GMT
You might as well blame the Internet for making people aware that if you sharpen a piece of metal you can make a knife. Most people would find it easier to purchase a knife from a vendor. |
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Sept 17, 2017 20:23:49 GMT
You can make flour explode, under the right conditions - I believe I first heard that on kid's tv, in a bit about how Guy Fawkes would have got away with the gunpowder plot if he'd had barrels of flour instead of gunpowder.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2017 21:15:54 GMT
I remember reading about making a flour bomb as a young child. It involved a custard tin, a funnel, a hose, a candle and some flour. Reading that list now the potential for sniggering strikes me in a way that it never did back then.
Don't try this at home, folks. Or if you do, make it somebody else's home.
|
|
5,073 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Sept 17, 2017 22:04:44 GMT
Strange what they showed on Blue Peter, who would have thought John Noakes would be party to terrorism.
Noted that the device was in a Lidl's cool bag, wonderful but strange the stuff you can purchase from that mystery aisle.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr Snow on Sept 18, 2017 5:41:07 GMT
Just because the Mail says something doesn't mean it's wrong. Their point is that internet publishers and content providers are held to much lower standards than conventional publishers. If I write an article on how to make explosives and detonators and timing devices and the Mail published it then they would be closed down the next day if not for legal reasons then because advertisers would drop them immediately. If I publish it via Facebook then nothing much happens to Facebook - if someone complains they take it down probably but there's no legal or financial impact. Well said. I now believe that if we are to fight back against terrorists then we will have to sacrifice some things we take for granted. We need to debate what those things might be. Holding the internet to the same standards as printed media would be an acceptable compromise to me. As you say just because the D. Fail agrees, it doesn't mean the idea is wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Sept 18, 2017 6:02:45 GMT
Just because the Mail says something doesn't mean it's wrong. Their point is that internet publishers and content providers are held to much lower standards than conventional publishers. If I write an article on how to make explosives and detonators and timing devices and the Mail published it then they would be closed down the next day if not for legal reasons then because advertisers would drop them immediately. If I publish it via Facebook then nothing much happens to Facebook - if someone complains they take it down probably but there's no legal or financial impact. You can get this information from any library that has more than a handful of books on science, and elsewhere as well. I learnt how to make nitrocellulose (guncotton) from a book on the history of photography, because early film was made from celluloid and celluloid is made from nitrocellulose. Gunpowder is even easier: it even formed the basis of an episode of Star Trek. When I was at school everyone knew that you could make a bomb with sodium or potassium perchlorate. Once you have something that burns rapidly and creates a lot of heat and gas all you need to do is put it in a container to let the pressure build up before it's released by the failure of the container. I learnt that from a history of railways, because a boiler without a tamper-proof safety valve is effectively a bomb and often was. There no book anywhere in a UK library that will tell you how to make a detonator and timing device for a home-made bomb. If such a book was found it would be immediately removed. You don't know how to either. The Parsons Green device had both. It just isn't common knowledge. You can find out how to do it on the internet though. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2017 7:22:22 GMT
You can get this information from any library that has more than a handful of books on science, and elsewhere as well. I learnt how to make nitrocellulose (guncotton) from a book on the history of photography, because early film was made from celluloid and celluloid is made from nitrocellulose. Gunpowder is even easier: it even formed the basis of an episode of Star Trek. When I was at school everyone knew that you could make a bomb with sodium or potassium perchlorate. Once you have something that burns rapidly and creates a lot of heat and gas all you need to do is put it in a container to let the pressure build up before it's released by the failure of the container. I learnt that from a history of railways, because a boiler without a tamper-proof safety valve is effectively a bomb and often was. There no book anywhere in a UK library that will tell you how to make a detonator and timing device for a home-made bomb. If such a book was found it would be immediately removed. You don't know how to either. The Parsons Green device had both. It just isn't common knowledge. You can find out how to do it on the internet though. Here's a cigarette lighter. It moves a bit of steel against a flint to create sparks that can ignite something. Here's an alarm clock. It has a hammer that moves rapidly at a preset time. Are you telling me you think nobody could work out how to put those things together to ignite an explosive at a desired time? If you need electrical ignition instead of heat then attach a switch to the hammer. If you need percussive ignition then you can just use the hammer alone. If that isn't percussive enough then add a mousetrap. Or if you want a purely electrical system then get a Raspberry Pi or Arduino and program it to create a pulse after a configurable delay. This is basic stuff. Children can do it. And if you have trouble getting the explosive to go off you can buy a pyro from a theatrical effects supply company, or use an electrically-ignited firework. These are all problems that are easy to solve. You seem to think that because you can't figure out how to do it then nobody can figure out how to do it, and if people aren't told exactly what to do then they couldn't possibly figure anything out for themselves from related information, but both of those things are ridiculous. Nothing about this is complicated. The chemistry is simple. The engineering is simple. It only requires a very small amount of research and a tiny bit of inventiveness. The reason we're not overrun by bombers isn't because making a bomb is difficult. It's because most people don't react to things by murdering strangers. |
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Sept 18, 2017 9:04:16 GMT
It seems particularly misguided to focus on this when the terrorists have now worked out that the easiest way to kill people in London is to hire a car and drive into pedestrians on crowded pavements. All you need for that is a driving license.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2017 9:17:47 GMT
It seems particularly misguided to focus on this when the terrorists have now worked out that the easiest way to kill people in London is to hire a car and drive into pedestrians on crowded pavements. All you need for that is a driving license. Well quite. A friend's Mum is 100% against her coming to London because she's convinced she'll be attacked by terrorists- in exactly this manner. That said Mum lives in New York and said Daughter lives in Chicago where you're far more likely to get shot is by the by I guess. BUT if I were reflecting on/being scared of what terrorists may or may not do, it's being run down by a car/van that is frankly more scary a thought. We can go some ways to preventing bombs, but with car incidents but there's virtually no way to prevent that. |
|
2,705 posts
|
Post by viserys on Sept 18, 2017 9:44:12 GMT
Well quite. A friend's Mum is 100% against her coming to London because she's convinced she'll be attacked by terrorists- in exactly this manner. That said Mum lives in New York and said Daughter lives in Chicago where you're far more likely to get shot is by the by I guess. BUT if I were reflecting on/being scared of what terrorists may or may not do, it's being run down by a car/van that is frankly more scary a thought. We can go some ways to preventing bombs, but with car incidents but there's virtually no way to prevent that. Even way back in the late 80s/early 90s when I first got interested in musicals, I heard Germans say "I won't be travelling to London while there's danger of an IRA attack" I think it's a particular mindset of people who are glad for excuses why they shouldn't venture out of their comfort zones. Other various arguments I hear are "I'm not going to the USA because of their obnoxious border/immigration procedures" (without ever having experienced them) or "I'm not going to any country whose language I don't speak" (which rules out about 99% of the world). |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2017 10:07:07 GMT
or "I'm not going to any country whose language I don't speak" (which rules out about 99% of the world). ... if you only speak Icelandic. |
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Sept 18, 2017 10:23:43 GMT
BUT if I were reflecting on/being scared of what terrorists may or may not do, it's being run down by a car/van that is frankly more scary a thought. We can go some ways to preventing bombs, but with car incidents but there's virtually no way to prevent that. I think the floral displays on metal carts and in concrete planters that have sprung up around Covent Garden are probably barriers designed to lessen the damage should someone try and drive a car into the crowd there. I imagine we'll see more of that kind of thing - safety barriers that look like street furniture. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2017 10:31:36 GMT
BUT if I were reflecting on/being scared of what terrorists may or may not do, it's being run down by a car/van that is frankly more scary a thought. We can go some ways to preventing bombs, but with car incidents but there's virtually no way to prevent that. I think the floral displays on metal carts and in concrete planters that have sprung up around Covent Garden are probably barriers designed to lessen the damage should someone try and drive a car into the crowd there. I imagine we'll see more of that kind of thing - safety barriers that look like street furniture. True- and practically on the ground there are ways to prevent that sort of thing, and frankly I can live with a few extra barriers on potential target roads. Unfortunately it's harder to prevent at the source- as nobody is googling 'how to drive a car into people' so there has to be different action. Thankfully all this is still a relatively rare occurrence. |
|
2,762 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by n1david on Sept 18, 2017 10:44:22 GMT
There no book anywhere in a UK library that will tell you how to make a detonator and timing device for a home-made bomb. If such a book was found it would be immediately removed. You don't know how to either. The Parsons Green device had both. It just isn't common knowledge. You can find out how to do it on the internet though. The IRA’s ISP bill used to be huge. |
|
