It is NOT POSSIBLE to "blow up" a fuel pipeline! GRRRR

[karlrschneider]

What a steaming load of horse shit.




"The devastation that would be caused had this plot succeeded is just unthinkable," said Roslynn Mauskopf, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, where the criminal complaint was filed"



http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/06/02/national/main2877931.shtml

They're trying to make it sound like the whole underground fuel pipeline network would explode in an Armageddon-like volcano of mass destruction.

NOT POSSIBLE. Liquids are NOT flammable! Only gases are. There is no way that fuel could burn, let alone explode inside the pipes unless the 'terists' found some way to pump huge quantities of air or some oxidizer into the underground conduits.

There are fires at the ENDS of pipelines all the time...they do not spread or erupt elsewhere in the system.

:grr: :puke: :mad: :eyes:

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

1. Why are you bringing facts, physics and science...

Into a perfectly good FearFest?

Jeebus, Karl, why do you hate Amerika? ;-)

[karlrschneider]

3. I guess I'm just a contrary old phart.

That's why. :D

[StarryNite]

10. You really do need to get with the program.

Sheesh! How can they scare us into submission with people like you spreading the truth?

[karlrschneider]

19. Great, now I'm probably on -another- list...

:silly:

[StarryNite]

23. It serves you right!

You're a troublemaker.

:silly: :crazy:

[FogerRox]

37. Really, those gosh darned facts...

[Solon]

2. People believe hollywood is reality...

This doesn't surprise me that they would create a threat that violates the basic laws of chemistry.

[MLFerrell]

35. It worked quite well on 9-11...

The whole "scientific impossibility" thing, that is.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

4. is Roslynn Mauskopf, U.S. Attorney, a REgent U grad? that would explain

quite a lot, now, wouldn't it?

[uppityperson]

5. cars don't automatically explode when they roll over either. "unthinkable devastation"?

No, cars don't all explode when they roll over or hit another car. No, you can't explode a pipeline full of fuel. You can blow a hole in it and watch what comes out burn, but geez. OMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMG!!!1

Even if it were to catch on fire, even if you dropped a few bombs there, blew a few hole in it, "The devastation that would be caused had this plot succeeded is just unthinkable," is a really stupid thing to say. If an ED NY USAttny can't think of what it would be like, well, just isn't thinking.

[tridim]

6. So has any MSM outlet explained that fact?

Or should I assume that none have even postulated that it wouldn't work as described?

Obviously I've been ignoring the MSM for a while now.

[karlrschneider]

7. I'm pretty much ignoring them too, just happened to catch that while surfing channels.

So I really don't know. I kinda doubt it...
glurk

[MadMaddie]

9. So you are asking if the MSM actually performed actual

Investigative Journalism? :sarcasm:

Bwah..haw..haw..you are killen me...:silly:

[high density]

14. Flipping through the channels, I think CNNHN mentioned offhand...

that the plan was "not feasible." But the main thrust of their coverage, at least what little I saw of it, was BE AFRAID AMERIKA!!!!

[Speck Tater]

8. What?

You mean lighting the pilot light on my stove WON'T blow up the whole city gas pipeline network? Well, I guess it's safe to use my stove after all.

[merh]

11. Now you're cooking with gas!

:rofl:

Terra, Terra, Terra

[annabanana]

12. This fear-fest is personal, damn it!

My husband & son both work at JFK and I resent the HELL out of this bogus

"BOO" party. How will I ever know if there is any real danger? How will I ever know?

[merh]

15. Sadly, annabanana

I don't think you will ever know until we have a regime change.

:hug:

[tjwash]

13. THERE. ARE. 4. LIGHTS!!!

Vague star trek reference.

[Solon]

36. Why do you hate Cardassia? n/t

[Breeze54]

16. That was explained on every news outlet.

:shrug:

That there was NO REAL DANGER!!!!!

[karlrschneider]

18. Good, I didn't see the disclaimers.

thank you.

[Breeze54]

20. I coudn't sleep last night and I saw an expert

on every channel saying that they weren't even close and had no bomb making
materials and that it would have been impossible for them to succeed anyway.
I saw that repeated early this morning on all big three MSM at 7 AM also. ;)

-------------------

snip-->

A snag in plot: Jet fuel doesn't easily explode

Last update: June 02, 2007 – 10:30 PM

http://www.startribune.com/484/story/1222149.html

But aviation experts cautioned Saturday that the alleged plot targeting John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York would have faced numerous hurdles, not the least of which is the fact that jet fuel does not easily explode.

"The level of catastrophe that may be created is much more limited than most people would expect," said Rafi Ron, former head of security at Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion International Airport in Israel. "The fuel that we are talking about is mostly jet fuel which, unlike the gasoline most people put into their cars, is not that susceptible to explosion."

That difficulty apparently concerned one of the alleged plotters -- an engineer who, federal authorities said in their complaint, explained to his associates that the tanks at JFK probably would require two explosions to provide enough oxygen to ignite the fuel.

But even then, aviation security experts said, fire would not have spread through the pressurized pipelines that bring fuel out to airplanes parked at gates.

Jet fuel is similar to kerosene and, unlike gasoline, requires very high temperatures to burn. Unless it is in vapor or mist form -- which can occur in an airplane crash -- jet fuel should not explode.

[karlrschneider]

21. That's good...thanks.

:-)

[Canuckistanian]

31. Jet fuel? That's basically oil furnace fuel

My FIL used to work on oil furnaces and said he used to smoke while working on the furnaces.

He said he wasn't concerned at all about cigarettes sparking an explosion.

He explained that oil ignited only at very high temperatures and only burned with the constant sparking of the ignitors in the furnace.

I've even heard of using kerosene to put out smoldering fires in cotton bales.

[formercia]

17. Well, well, they did it in the 'Movies', didn't they?

jet fuel doesn't explode, period.


You have to mix it with oxygen, then it burns.

[Warpy]

22. Not the stuff that goes in planes

Well, you can, but it takes more than those supposed plotters had the knowledge, ambition, funding, or anything else to accomplish.

Had they been going after a major NG pipeline, that would have been entirely different.

This is completely unimpressive as all the "big terra busts" have been so far.

All the Feds are managing to get are a bunch of no hopers who have allowed FBI informants to whip their dreaming into a frenzy.

[Breeze54]

25. I'm still glad they got the morons though!

;)

[HowHasItComeToThis]

24. Roslynn Mauskopf is a GOOD BUSHIE, AS I SAID BEFORE

THIS IS ALL A SETUP TO TAKE AMERICANS TTENTION OFF HEARINGS

[pa28]

26. Thank you.

I've been hearing plenty from government officials who own stock in the fear machine and precious little from experts who might actually know how such an event would actually play out.

[burrowowl]

27. They were looking for funding from

Alcada!
I don't think they would get any, the plot was just too stupid!

[rucky]

28. Why do you hate America?

next you're going to try and convince us not to bomb Trinidad.

[nadinbrzezinski]

29. Actually it is possible, not easy, not feasible

but possible

For a pipeline to blow up you literally need the pefect storm of conditions (The first of course failures of safety sysems, followed by things such as some of this flamable materail in gas form, and I could go on)

But it is possible, not likely, but possible

Damn I still remember them training clases

That said, the USA is making a mountain out of a damn molehill... but... I will give her a slight benefit of the damn doubt.

Not many people know or undesttand why I wrote what I just wrote.

And Distrcit Attoerneys usually tend to worst case when making annoumcments, it just sounds good for when elections come

[dusmcj]

32. doesn't the explosion provide both atomization and heat ?

Since you sound like you might know what you're talking about, I'll send my question as a reply to your post - wouldn't an explosion which causes a catastrophic rupture of a pipeline also supply both the vaporization of the fuel, and the heat to ignite it ?

[intaglio]

33. Very limited

Locally it would vapourise and burn; but not systemically

Personally I would not be surprised if the whole thing turned out to be the idea of the FBI "agent provocateur"

[mvd]

30. On one hand, Bush has fostered terror with the invasion

But on the other hand, they are fearmongers, so you really have to look at every "threat."

[Swamp Rat]

34. k&r

ooga booga! :hide:

:eyes:

[malaise]

38. The story is bullshit.

They want these men because of their connections to Iran. People in Guyana and Trinidad accept scholarships in colleges and schools for their children. There are good relations with these countries and several social and religious conections. They know fellow Muslims all over the world.

If any of them had either the desire of capability of blowing up anywhere, they'd have done it in their own countries. This is serious rubbish.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1041575