Kuu

The son of a friend believes almost everything on this web site. Normally I wouldn't argue to much with people who believe conspiracy theories but in this case it is causing my friend stress as my friend lost a friend at Port Arthur

<a href="http://geocities.com/vialls/portarthur2.html" target="_blank">http://geocities.com/vialls/portarthur2.html</a>

However the part I am most interested in disputing at the moment is not about Port Arthur but the explosion in Bali

<a href="http://homepage.ntlworld.com/steveseymour/nuke/bali2.html" target="_blank">http://homepage.ntlworld.com/steveseymour/nuke/bali2.html</a>

Unfortunately I don't really understand anything about explosives but would appreciate it if anyone could see any obvious faults in the article.

I think the remark at this site that upset me the most is - 'Outside of highly trained anti-terrorist professionals, there are very few if any shooters who could have produced the devastating figures at Dunblane' - as if you have to be a good shot to shoot a classroom full of little five year olds.

Seraphim

Maybe I could give some details since I live in a country close to Indonesia. Malaysia and Indonesia are neighbours so whatever trouble there will effect Malaysia as well. Here's what I know so far.

Explosives (C4) was brought by money supplied by the Al Queda group to another group called Jamaliah Islamiah in Indonesia. JI (short for Jamaliah Islamiah) used to money to purchase a large quantity of C4 which was then packed in two vans and parked outside the nightclub.

After the incident, finger begin to point at JI and its leader (forgot the name) stated that there is no such thing as JI in Indonesia and stated also that JI only exist in Malaysia (my country) and Singapore (where the group did try to pull a stunt like this but Singaporean police managed to stop the attempt. This happened about 2 months before Bali).

After President Megawati (Indonesian female President) increase the affects to get the people behind Bali, various evidence begins to point to the leader (who accuse Malaysia and Singapore earlier) and police begin to get into investigating him and his followers. As of now, number of arrest been made but other than the monetary transaction between JI and Al Queda, there is no hard evidence as yet to link anyone.

Why such thing as a mini-nuke can't be possibly to be used on Bali Incident? Reasons are :

1. Indonesia is the worst to suffer in economic problem since 1997 when the Economic Crisis begin and it still considered haven't recover fully as before 1997. I doubt they have resources to make and use a Mini-Nuke.

2. Asian Region is a free Nuke zone, the nearest neighbour to have a nuclear material is Pakistan and India (and China toward the north). India is against Al Queda since day 1 because of the group's activity with Kahsmir liberation movement. Pakistan could be a good place to get the nuke but US is monitoring it closely and I doubt such thing as a nucklear material could go out without them noticing it. As for China, I don't see why they want to supply JI or Al Queda with anything.

3.Lack of expertises in Indonesia. Indonesia alone do not have enough experts to put together any nuclear devices and anyone with such expertice entering the country could be strictly be monitored.

4. Even IF such device was created somehow, the target could be some Infidel country such as Australia, US, UK or Japan since this country supported the Afghan War. Indonesia has most 90% Muslim and it has the biggest Muslim population in Asia region.

I hope I give you some useful information. Good luck convincing your son that it wasn't a Nuke which exploded in Bali.

Kuu

Not my son, my friend's son.

I believe the man behind this site believes that the people who made the mini-nuke that he says caused the explosion at Bali are not Muslims but Westerners trying to blame Muslims. He is blaming 'The New World Order' who he also blames for several of the gun massacres.

This guy really annoys me because some of the things he says about the legal system in Tasmania (concerning the aftermath of the Port Arthur massacre) are ridiculous but unfortunately what he says are believed by many people.

Corwin

Mmmmkay.

Plutonium alone isn't enough to make a bomb. Nukes use a combination of plutonium and uranium.

The blast radius is an order of magnitude too small. Even a briefcase nuke has a yield of about 11-12 kilotons with a blast radius of somewhere around a quarter to a half mile.

The fact that nobody has detected any radiation suggests that... gee... a nuke wasn't used. (duh.) Extremely low energy alpha and beta particles are difficult or impossible to detect... (the particle doesn't have enough energy to penetrate the window on the geiger counter...) but plutonium is in fact a high-energy alpha emitter and is clearly detectable.

Whoever wrote this article needs to study some basic physics.... in theory this explosion COULD have been caused by a fuel-air bomb... but a lump of RDX would be a lot cheaper, easier, more reliable, and much more likely.

Kuu

The site makes a deal about there being a crater. Would, or could, a fuel-air bomb or a RDX bomb leave a crater?

Corwin

If it's on or below ground level? Yes. Any explosive can.

A fuel-air bomb is the most powerful conventional explosive we have. It can produce a hell of a blast, but it's complex and difficult to do right. A big lump of RDX (C4) or ammonium nitrate would do effectively the same thing and would be a lot simpler.

Kuu

I have problems with this statement too. It does not quote the doctors properly. I am sure what the doctors said was they 'had never seen such burns before outside of a war zone'

The website also seems to think that if ir was an RDX bomb than bodies should not have been vaporised. Though I know that they have said that some bodies might never be recovered this those that those very close to the blast would have been literally blown apart and this, and the fire that followed, means there is little of the remains to find. I think this is very different from the way bodies are vapourised by nuclear weapons.

Also it makes an issue about the fire stating that such a fire didn't follow the bombing in Omagh. To me this could be explained by the fact that buildings in Ireland are built to a far higher standard than in Bali. The Sari nightclub burnt because it was built in such a way that it was highly inflammable. Would I be right?

[ November 18, 2002: Message edited by: Kuu ]</p>

Corwin

It's possible, or it could have been a fuel air bomb. There really is no 'detonation' (technically anyway...) it's combustion. It's like gunpowder... it doesn't actually explode, it burns violently. Not quite the same thing. (Similar effect, but not identical.)

Does he give any reputable source about bodies being 'vaporized?' (That pretty much would require a nuke... or a hell of a lot of ammonium nitrate... and even then the latter wouldn't actually vaporize them, just blow them into tiny pieces.)

Kuu

No, I don't remember anyone saying the bodies had been vaporised. They have said that it might be very little remaining of those that were extremely close to the bomb which is different IMO.

We are being told here that the main bomb was made out of ammonium nitrate. The first bomb that went off in Paddy's Bar was made from about 2lbs of TNT. People fleeing from this bomb ran onto the street where, about 20 seconds, after the first bomb exploded, the main bomb went off in a van outside the Sari nightclub. This bomb is said to have been caused by between 110-330 lbs of 110-330 pounds of ammonium nitrate.

Corwin

Um.... ok. That's.... a lot.

That's REALLY a lot.

Ammonium nitrate is used because it's very stable, and therefore very safe to handle... (you can shoot or light the stuff and it won't go off.... it just about takes a stick of TNT to actually set it off...) and it's quite a bit more powerful than TNT. (Twice? One and a half times as powerful? I forget exactly...)

The bomb being in a van explains the fires as well... fuel tank was full. Bomb goes off... gasoline gets thrown everywhere and ignited by the heat.