tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5187043.post6627194549431839511..comments2024-03-27T21:30:35.824+00:00Comments on UK Commentators: Boom Bang-A-BangLabanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12031578024191117985noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5187043.post-80640827923101141532012-03-10T12:00:45.691+00:002012-03-10T12:00:45.691+00:00paulilc - when I say - "potassium nitrate - g...paulilc - when I say - "potassium nitrate - gunpowder" I mean that's what it can be used to make.<br /><br />LabanAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5187043.post-67483694558565541822007-08-10T05:48:00.000+00:002007-08-10T05:48:00.000+00:00"Under cross-examination by Alistair Webster QC, i..."Under cross-examination by Alistair Webster QC, it emerged touch explosives could not injure and were mainly suitable for "schoolboy pranks". <BR/><BR/>Touch explosive was the only substance for which all the ingredients were present at the house. <BR/><BR/>Ms Wilson conceded that seven of the chemicals found were either pointless or unnecessary for explosives, and one was a dietary supplement."<BR/> <BR/>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/lancashire/6361763.stm<BR/><BR/>It is a sick joke and a total injustice.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5187043.post-20094245447199057362007-08-09T18:33:00.000+00:002007-08-09T18:33:00.000+00:00Four containers of potassium nitrate - aka saltpet...<I>Four containers of potassium nitrate - aka saltpetre. Gunpowder.</I><BR/><BR/>Not quite. Gunpowder is only 75% KNO3, 15% carbon (charcoal) and 10% sulphur.paul ilchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02971581388762736463noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5187043.post-19326844908932303782007-08-09T14:04:00.000+00:002007-08-09T14:04:00.000+00:00What's with all this "bottle" of something, "conta...What's with all this "bottle" of something, "container" of something else, "ampoule" of a third substance?<BR/><BR/>No actual quantities given at all?<BR/><BR/>Could it be because the quantities were so small that publishing them would make the authorities look even more ridiculous than they do already?<BR/><BR/>Or is this just my cynical scientist's mind?<BR/><BR/>Because after all, the average teenage girl's bedroom probably contains <I>several</I> (shock, horror) "containers" of Acetone, doesn't it?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5187043.post-25195486601959111092007-08-09T09:51:00.000+00:002007-08-09T09:51:00.000+00:00Couldn't open the link juliam, what is bizarre is ...Couldn't open the link juliam, what is bizarre is that a crossbow bolt can inflict lethal damage, more you can say if you just lob a thunderflash in the general direction. But it was apparently ok for him to have the crossbow.<BR/><BR/>It is utterly grotesque to give a bloke 2.5 years merely for possessing the material with which thunderflashes could have been manufactured.<BR/><BR/>He also had some ball-bearings, presumably they would have alleged that he was going to make primitive grades - but the "explosive" materials clearly weren't up to it.<BR/><BR/>Overall absolutely pathetic and a terrible injustice, man's lost his job and he's got to spend another 6 months in a god-awful prison.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5187043.post-47708166964202035342007-08-09T09:08:00.000+00:002007-08-09T09:08:00.000+00:00"Rob Cottage sought to defend himself and his prop...<I>"Rob Cottage sought to defend himself and his property. If there was a mob underneath his bedroom window trying to batter down his front door and he lobbed a thunderflash into the middle of them the chance of innocent suffering would have been exceedingly small."</I><BR/><BR/>We can see how the justice systems views <B>any</B> kind of action against burglars here:<BR/><BR/>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/6936010.stm<BR/><BR/>No doubt if a thunderflash had been used, the householder would be charged with 'grevious bodily dazzling'....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5187043.post-66528491854180547552007-08-09T07:47:00.000+00:002007-08-09T07:47:00.000+00:00I'm glad that you have taken this up Laban.It is a...I'm glad that you have taken this up Laban.<BR/><BR/>It is a considerable injustice, which none of the mainstream media would ever have the courage to address.<BR/><BR/>My take on it is as follows:<BR/><BR/>The State no doubt would have liked him to get 20 years to demonstrate "even-handedness" with Islamic terrorists. But the case was so feeble that was too shamefaced a course even for them.<BR/><BR/>1) As one of the arresting officers said, he isn't a terrorist, and that has been borne out by these proceedings.<BR/><BR/>2) It had been claimed that he had "rocket launchers" and the largest stash of explosive chemicals ever found in a domestic dwelling. The rocket launchers, which are merely empty tubes quite useless without the rocket and are the sort of thing people interested in militaria collect, slipped off the radar screen of course. Whatever happened to them? As for these "explosives" we are not talking HMTD, the kind of thing terrorists use - but at most material that could be used in thunderflashes. One expert witness said that these were "touch explosives", used in jumping jacks. In other words hardly capable of doing anyone much harm.<BR/><BR/>3) When it was put to a jury on a charge of conspiracy to cause explosions, he was acquitted<BR/><BR/>4) Mrs Justice Swift admitted that the "explosives" were intended to make thunderflashes for "deterrent" purposes but claimed that his ideas were "over-valued". Really? Admiral West has said that Britain faces a 15 year war against Islamic extremism. We are told that there are 200 terror cells and 2/3000 suspects. We are told that there may be chemical, biological, radiological attack. Muslims rioted quite extensively in 2001. Channel 4 poll evidence showed that 33% of 16-24 year old Muslims sympathised with the motives of the 7/7 terrorists(to say nothing of the Sharia supporters et al)<BR/><BR/>So therefore on what basis can it be claimed that Rob Cottage's ideas are "over-valued"? If he is indeed paranoid then who has made him so? And if he has been pushed over the edge - should he have been on trial at all?<BR/><BR/>5) Mrs Justice Swift gave, as her view, the possibility that "innocent" people could have been harmed as a justification for the sentence. Rob Cottage sought to defend himself and his property. If there was a mob underneath his bedroom window trying to batter down his front door and he lobbed a thunderflash into the middle of them the chance of innocent suffering would have been exceedingly small.<BR/><BR/>6) In view of the threat level the state has admitted to maybe they would like to say when it is permissible to take a few "deterrent" measures in advance. Or is everything to be left to them, in which case it will probably be all just-too-late. Terribly sorry old chap!<BR/><BR/>7) Rob Cottage had a cross-bow, that's a far more lethal weapon than these ridiculous "explosives", but that's apparently ok.<BR/><BR/>8) Rob Cottage has been unjustly and harshly treated, but at least the state has fallen flat on its face in its crassly disingenuous search for "equivalence".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com