Timers or Cellphones: How many ways to say exactly nothing ?
by W. Owl
11/26/2014
Editor's Note: On January 5th, the trial of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev begins in the U.S. District Court in Boston, Judge O'Toole presiding. Forensic evidence (it is anticipated) will be very significant. Of primary interest here is how the bombs were triggered. We are not experts in any sense of the word as it pertains to the likely forensic evidence. However, beginning with the immediate aftermath, the media has relentlessly scrounged for answers and opinions, and engaged in much speculation. In this piece, we trace that story, drawing from excerpts from status conferences summaries and court filings from both the Prosecution and the Defense, and from media articles. Some of these articles include the opinions of individuals with experience and expertise in explosives, forensics, and counter-terrorism. The feds have been particularly tight-lipped with any solid information they may have, and media speculation has continued. As with much of this case, it is hard to know fact from fiction. The writer has assembled this disparate data with the hope of preparing the reader for whatever might lie ahead once the trial begins and the "experts" are trotted out to sell their particular version of the events to the jury. And so we begin.
On A Sunny April 15, 2013: Who flipped the switch ?
Methods of bomb-triggering fall into two broad categories - timer, and command, respectively. Set a timer in advance, and it will continue to zero hour when the bomb explodes. This cannot be interrupted unless the bomb is disarmed by a technician. Reliable and simple – there is not much that can go wrong.
Command triggering is also exactly as it seems: the operator chooses when to send the signal to the bomb. A variety of methods and degrees of sophistication are available: (cellphone, RC control, waiting by the roadside and connecting a couple of wires to an IED across the street.....etc.) With wireless signals, command methods can be prone to malfunction – especially in a hostile signal environment, such as at the Marathon: lots of crowds, obstacles, signals, and also (possibly) mobile bomb-jammers. The more complexity in the circuitry, the more there is to go wrong, and the more expertise required to minimize those possibilities.
To date, the three detonation methods postulated are: Cell Phone, Toy Car Speed Control, and Timer. There is no shortage of published opinions, but the FEDs are not saying much at all. Yet for all the opinion (learned and otherwise) and speculation, something vital is missing here. We have heard absolutely nothing about what the brothers allegedly used to set off the bombs. No speculation, no physical evidence reported.
'But what about the car speed controller ? They've told us, surely ?'.................well no, not exactly.
So let's look......a remote control (wireless type) model car set includes the car and the controller (in the form of a handset) - two distinct physical entities. The car's motor is on a circuit-board inside the car, and even when the circuit board is powered nothing happens unless somebody sends a signal to the car from the handset. Turning the motor is a consequence of sending the signal from the remote handset to the car. So to say 'they did it with a toy car speed controller' is to say that they had handsets of some sort. So where are these handsets ?.. and were they standard, standard-modified, custom-built? There are no reports that any were ever found.
Methods of bomb-triggering fall into two broad categories - timer, and command, respectively. Set a timer in advance, and it will continue to zero hour when the bomb explodes. This cannot be interrupted unless the bomb is disarmed by a technician. Reliable and simple – there is not much that can go wrong.
Command triggering is also exactly as it seems: the operator chooses when to send the signal to the bomb. A variety of methods and degrees of sophistication are available: (cellphone, RC control, waiting by the roadside and connecting a couple of wires to an IED across the street.....etc.) With wireless signals, command methods can be prone to malfunction – especially in a hostile signal environment, such as at the Marathon: lots of crowds, obstacles, signals, and also (possibly) mobile bomb-jammers. The more complexity in the circuitry, the more there is to go wrong, and the more expertise required to minimize those possibilities.
To date, the three detonation methods postulated are: Cell Phone, Toy Car Speed Control, and Timer. There is no shortage of published opinions, but the FEDs are not saying much at all. Yet for all the opinion (learned and otherwise) and speculation, something vital is missing here. We have heard absolutely nothing about what the brothers allegedly used to set off the bombs. No speculation, no physical evidence reported.
'But what about the car speed controller ? They've told us, surely ?'.................well no, not exactly.
So let's look......a remote control (wireless type) model car set includes the car and the controller (in the form of a handset) - two distinct physical entities. The car's motor is on a circuit-board inside the car, and even when the circuit board is powered nothing happens unless somebody sends a signal to the car from the handset. Turning the motor is a consequence of sending the signal from the remote handset to the car. So to say 'they did it with a toy car speed controller' is to say that they had handsets of some sort. So where are these handsets ?.. and were they standard, standard-modified, custom-built? There are no reports that any were ever found.
|
|
|
In the first few days after the bombing, while evidence was being collected, reporters freely published both speculation and conflicting statements coming out of official sources. The Feds have been tight-lipped ever since. As with much of this case, it is difficult to sort fact from fiction.
On Monday, April 15, beginning with an afternoon news conference, law enforcement began rolling out the official narrative. As a first step, FBI Special Agent Richard DesLauriers said authorities had recovered items including “pieces of black nylon, which could be from a backpack, what appear to be fragments of BBs and nails possibly contained in a pressure-cooker device.” The bags would have been heavy, he said, urging anyone who had seen someone struggling with a heavy bag to come forward. This initial information was the cornerstone of the 'bomb construction' story given to the public, and there is corroboration independent of the FBI.
Also that day, the Associated Press reported the following: “A law enforcement official says cellphone service has been shut down in the Boston area to prevent any potential remote detonations of explosives.” It was also said that improvised explosive devices (IEDs) such as those used to attack the marathon are sometimes triggered remotely by cell phones. Indeed cell phone bombs are common. For example, according to A. J. Clark, a former military intelligence analyst with deployments to Iraq and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, most improvised explosive devices include a cheap cell phone and other widely-available materials whose uses are typically benign. Nevertheless, by Monday evening cellular companies stated cell service in Boston had not been cut, rather the networks were swamped by the spike in call volume following the afternoon blasts. Such occurrences whilst rare, are known to accompany large-scale emergencies.
On Monday, April 15, beginning with an afternoon news conference, law enforcement began rolling out the official narrative. As a first step, FBI Special Agent Richard DesLauriers said authorities had recovered items including “pieces of black nylon, which could be from a backpack, what appear to be fragments of BBs and nails possibly contained in a pressure-cooker device.” The bags would have been heavy, he said, urging anyone who had seen someone struggling with a heavy bag to come forward. This initial information was the cornerstone of the 'bomb construction' story given to the public, and there is corroboration independent of the FBI.
Also that day, the Associated Press reported the following: “A law enforcement official says cellphone service has been shut down in the Boston area to prevent any potential remote detonations of explosives.” It was also said that improvised explosive devices (IEDs) such as those used to attack the marathon are sometimes triggered remotely by cell phones. Indeed cell phone bombs are common. For example, according to A. J. Clark, a former military intelligence analyst with deployments to Iraq and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, most improvised explosive devices include a cheap cell phone and other widely-available materials whose uses are typically benign. Nevertheless, by Monday evening cellular companies stated cell service in Boston had not been cut, rather the networks were swamped by the spike in call volume following the afternoon blasts. Such occurrences whilst rare, are known to accompany large-scale emergencies.
|
|
Of a cell phone scenario, one blogger remarked the bomber must have been an “idiot to go to the trouble to use a cell phone for such small explosions.” This comment was meant to underscore the absence of damage to nearby structures. Besides broken glass, most of both physical sites was left unscathed by the force of the explosion. However, if the primary intention was to kill and injure, the bombs' architect was far from idiotic.
In Other Publicized Developments
Counter-terrorism officials reported between 3 and 5 intact bombs were found at the bomb site and around the city. Experts explained these intact explosives would help with determining the builders “signature.” Possible bombs were reported at Mandarin Hotel, JFK Library, and bomb site #1.
A former Chief of FBI bomb Data Center and Kentucky University professor, Tom Thurman, cautioned not to be too hasty in assessing blame. "Let the evidence direct us," he says. "We need to have an open mind. This could have been anybody.”
On Monday evening, the FBI took control of the investigation.
All the coverage of the cellphone service shutdown could have created a public perception that the bombs were triggered by cell phone. Thus, anyone who was in the 'wrong place, wrong time' using a cellphone might be the suspect. Now, the public only needed to see the 'incriminating' photos to connect the dots back to the suspected bomber.
In Other Publicized Developments
Counter-terrorism officials reported between 3 and 5 intact bombs were found at the bomb site and around the city. Experts explained these intact explosives would help with determining the builders “signature.” Possible bombs were reported at Mandarin Hotel, JFK Library, and bomb site #1.
A former Chief of FBI bomb Data Center and Kentucky University professor, Tom Thurman, cautioned not to be too hasty in assessing blame. "Let the evidence direct us," he says. "We need to have an open mind. This could have been anybody.”
On Monday evening, the FBI took control of the investigation.
All the coverage of the cellphone service shutdown could have created a public perception that the bombs were triggered by cell phone. Thus, anyone who was in the 'wrong place, wrong time' using a cellphone might be the suspect. Now, the public only needed to see the 'incriminating' photos to connect the dots back to the suspected bomber.
|
|
|
On Tuesday, April 16, Governor Deval Patrick announced there were two bombs only, claiming that reports of additional devices were false or simply inaccurate. With many bags being abandoned on Boylston Street in the scramble to escape, the bomb squad was kept very busy, and conducted controlled explosions later in the afternoon. Every abandoned item had to be checked.
It was announced the FBI would be subpoenaing the cell phone companies, scanning cell phone tower records for phone numbers that were called on that block or in that neighborhood at exactly the “moment of detonation." A corresponding cellphone number could be traced to identify suspects. If calls went to unregistered mobile numbers (prepaid mobile devices referred to as burner phones) it could indicate those were the detonators.” If the burner phones were sold at a CVS or 7-11, store surveillance camera video of the buyer could then be made public to identify the face of the bomber(s).
The ATF sent 30 specialists, and bomb squad and forensic personnel worked the 15-block crime scene. Components of the bombs had already been collected, and images of a mangled pressure cooker lid, circuit board fragments, burnt wire and a Tenergy battery pack were publicized. It was reported that the means of triggering the bombs remained unclear.
• Roy Parker, a retired ATF and Explosives agent who developed the agency’s explosives training program, said the circuit board would be ''key to determining whether it was a timer or remote control device." Timer triggers are easier to wire and arguably safer. It is also what is taught in the Inspire article.
• Denny Kline, a former FBI explosives expert and instructor in forensics at its Academy called the process of gathering evidence and recreating the bombs a 'painstaking detective process,' and refused to speculate further.
• Former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, a GW Bush appointee following 9/11 and who developed the country’s first national counter-terrorism strategy concurred with Kline. "It’s drudge work. It is painstakingly focused on the slightest detail..... a bit by bit, very slow, methodical, incremental process. They will identify the perpetrators, they will find out who is responsible for this horrific act, but it’s going to take some time.”
|
Evidently, none of these individuals photographed in the Marathon crowd at Site 1 in front of Marathon Sports were holding or using cell phones at the time of the first explosion. Whether or not they were identified and questioned has never been disclosed. What was it about Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's use of a cellphone, if the bombs were triggered by timers, that made his actions suspect? |
On Wednesday, April 17, it was reported the bombs used "an electronic speed control" as a switch, and Tenergy "sub-C rechargeable battery packs" as the power source. This indicated some competence and experience on the part of whoever had built the bombs. A battery pack and circuit board fragments were recovered at the scene, but again this tells us nothing about the handsets. Where are they ? Were they standard, standard but modified, or custom-built ? No information was forthcoming about the recovery of this specific data or evidece.
Speculation continued, with The Las Vegas Sun, FOX, and CNN all claiming timers rather than remote control was used. Much of this information was from 'un-named persons working close to the case.’
Emphasis then shifted back to cellphones, as the FBI announced video obtained showed a suspect “placing down a bag…..talking on a cellphone moments before the twin blasts.” The media followed suit, with (for example) ABC quoting yet another senior law enforcement official: “one of the suspects is seen making a phone call around the time of the explosions, leading investigators to believe it may have triggered the blast. Investigators are trying to trace that call back to the phone used by the suspect.”
That same evening, CBS reported Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD), top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee said it was a remote control for a toy car that triggered the bombs. But the inherent danger of using a r/c remote would be that any r/c enthusiast in the crowd, nearby hotel room, apartment or shop could turn on their device and potentially set off the bombs. Untold numbers and types of wireless transmissions were in use at the race. Carrying the bombs as the Tsarnaev brothers were claimed to have done along Boylston would have been extremely risky, if not an actual death wish. But again, nothing about the handsets.
So Maybe it was....
On Thursday, April 18, the FBI released pictures of two suspects, purportedly chosen from surveillance video, spectator stills and videos, cell phone call logs and physical evidence (pressure-cooker remains, batteries, the shredded black bag, etc.) According to LE and court documents, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was singled out of a crowd of thousands in surveillance video because he was deemed to be acting differently than others around him. (Plus a review of that crucial surveillance video "hundreds of times" evidently finally convinced someone in charge.)
Meanwhile, in response to the “component pictures” made public earlier, "techie types, ex-military and others" were busy blogging their opinions. The cell phone trigger theory was rejected because no cell phone parts were present. All agreed the circuit board fragment was from either an r/c toy car or helicopter. (But that identification did not conclude the trigger was done by a remote control--it could have been a decoy to hide the bomb-maker's signature - a practice not unknown.)
Conventional cellphone triggering requires 2 phones per bomb. One is used by the bomber, the other is physically embedded in the bomb. The phone in the bomb is destroyed or at the very least, extensively and visibly damaged – though it can be still recognizable as a cellphone. Cellphone bombs tend not to be triggered from any close distance.
When the bomber dials the receiving cellphone, it connects very quickly, although there can be an unpredictable delay before the receiving phone starts ringing, so the bomber who plans to stay alive would trigger the cellphone bomb from a safe distance. A closed remote system can be triggered from 'line of sight' to a few city blocks. The range is dependent upon a variety of factors, including the quality of the components and the circuitry.. The Department of Homeland Security pamphlet recommends an evacuation distance of 1,850 feet for a pressure cooker device left outside. One point of interest here is that the distance between the Forum Restaurant and the corner of Fairfield where Dzhokhar was photographed rounding the corner is a mere 236 feet. Cutting it close, or was he just escaping like everybody else ?
CNN reported that (according to another unnamed LE official), the second bomb was command-detonated: that is, remote control. While emphasis seemed to be placed on the suspicious suspect holding a cell phone, the R/C remote theory was gaining traction.
On Thursday, April 18, the FBI released pictures of two suspects, purportedly chosen from surveillance video, spectator stills and videos, cell phone call logs and physical evidence (pressure-cooker remains, batteries, the shredded black bag, etc.) According to LE and court documents, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was singled out of a crowd of thousands in surveillance video because he was deemed to be acting differently than others around him. (Plus a review of that crucial surveillance video "hundreds of times" evidently finally convinced someone in charge.)
Meanwhile, in response to the “component pictures” made public earlier, "techie types, ex-military and others" were busy blogging their opinions. The cell phone trigger theory was rejected because no cell phone parts were present. All agreed the circuit board fragment was from either an r/c toy car or helicopter. (But that identification did not conclude the trigger was done by a remote control--it could have been a decoy to hide the bomb-maker's signature - a practice not unknown.)
Conventional cellphone triggering requires 2 phones per bomb. One is used by the bomber, the other is physically embedded in the bomb. The phone in the bomb is destroyed or at the very least, extensively and visibly damaged – though it can be still recognizable as a cellphone. Cellphone bombs tend not to be triggered from any close distance.
When the bomber dials the receiving cellphone, it connects very quickly, although there can be an unpredictable delay before the receiving phone starts ringing, so the bomber who plans to stay alive would trigger the cellphone bomb from a safe distance. A closed remote system can be triggered from 'line of sight' to a few city blocks. The range is dependent upon a variety of factors, including the quality of the components and the circuitry.. The Department of Homeland Security pamphlet recommends an evacuation distance of 1,850 feet for a pressure cooker device left outside. One point of interest here is that the distance between the Forum Restaurant and the corner of Fairfield where Dzhokhar was photographed rounding the corner is a mere 236 feet. Cutting it close, or was he just escaping like everybody else ?
CNN reported that (according to another unnamed LE official), the second bomb was command-detonated: that is, remote control. While emphasis seemed to be placed on the suspicious suspect holding a cell phone, the R/C remote theory was gaining traction.
The Tsarnaev Brothers Have Sophisticated Skills?
On Friday, April 19, in Watertown, with a large perimeter secured around the Laurel & Dexter street area, no “remote control devices” were reported to have been found. However, there had been a large detonation that shook the foundations of the surrounding houses after midnight during the shootout. The detonation was captured on several resident videos and left a gray smoke cloud in the sky. And A. Kitzenberg reported he had seen the two bombers use a cigarette lighter to ignite the bomb. (He had video showing a lighter's flame.) But a cigarette lighter was not used to ignite the Marathon bombs.
On Monday, April 22, unexploded evidence recovered in Watertown, providing what the experts refer to as “the signature”; how the bombs were made. However, although reports (one such from the Washington Post) quoted an FBI affidavit that the pressure cooker recovered in Watertown “was of the same brand,”, this does not shed light on how the marathon bombs were triggered. Similarly, a report that the Tsarnaevs "distinguished themselves by building four separate IED designs -- and used three types successfully, including pipe bombs and CO2 "cricket" grenades." tells us nothing about the triggering of the marathon bombs.
Not bad for two brothers, with no known previous military or explosives training or experience building even a single IED - let alone two for a successful co-ordinated strike. Subsequent Prosecution Court filings indicate LE has been unable to find residues of any black powder or other bomb making materials in the Tsarnaev's residences or dorm room. Leaving unanswered "If the brothers built the bombs, where did they do it ?".........and if they did not build the bombs, who did ?
On Friday, April 19, in Watertown, with a large perimeter secured around the Laurel & Dexter street area, no “remote control devices” were reported to have been found. However, there had been a large detonation that shook the foundations of the surrounding houses after midnight during the shootout. The detonation was captured on several resident videos and left a gray smoke cloud in the sky. And A. Kitzenberg reported he had seen the two bombers use a cigarette lighter to ignite the bomb. (He had video showing a lighter's flame.) But a cigarette lighter was not used to ignite the Marathon bombs.
On Monday, April 22, unexploded evidence recovered in Watertown, providing what the experts refer to as “the signature”; how the bombs were made. However, although reports (one such from the Washington Post) quoted an FBI affidavit that the pressure cooker recovered in Watertown “was of the same brand,”, this does not shed light on how the marathon bombs were triggered. Similarly, a report that the Tsarnaevs "distinguished themselves by building four separate IED designs -- and used three types successfully, including pipe bombs and CO2 "cricket" grenades." tells us nothing about the triggering of the marathon bombs.
Not bad for two brothers, with no known previous military or explosives training or experience building even a single IED - let alone two for a successful co-ordinated strike. Subsequent Prosecution Court filings indicate LE has been unable to find residues of any black powder or other bomb making materials in the Tsarnaev's residences or dorm room. Leaving unanswered "If the brothers built the bombs, where did they do it ?".........and if they did not build the bombs, who did ?
Dzhokhar's Cellphone use wasn't Significant?
The blizzard continued, with media seemingly kept in the loop by ubiquitous 'sources close to the investigations' and 'senior LE officials' and even members of Congress.....here are some examples of what was reported.
- 4/23 - that the FBI “did not say whether Dzhokhar was using his cellphone to detonate one or both of the bombs or whether he was talking to someone. However, the FBI said surveillance-camera footage showed Dzhokhar manipulating his cellphone and lifting it to his ear just instants before the two blasts.”
- On 4/24 and again on 4/26 - that the attackers did not rely on cellphone detonators, but rather toy car speed controllers as the ‘ trigger', requiring a clear view of the explosives.
- On 4/25: “Two brothers suspected in the deadly Boston Marathon bombings used remote controls from toy cars ” Representative Michael McCaul, (R, TX) and chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, described the detonator as the type used to remotely control a toy car. “That’s the igniter, when he turns on the device, it triggers the ignition and it blows up.” But as usual, nothing at all about how the device was switched on. So what did he use, and where is it ?
One point of interest is that another anonymous insider claimed that the use of remote-control toy parts as a detonation mechanism is not found in the online magazine 'Inspire', which was cited in early reports as the suspects' likely bomb-making guide.
"I can't comment on any of the specifics on the design of the weapon that went off, but it is very clear when you take the totality of it that there was some outside counsel to these individuals on how to build and how to detonate”, Republican Rep. Mike Rogers, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said.
Dr Hall, (amongst several forensics experts) stated that whilst a timer is crude, a remote triggering suggests sophistication. “If it was remotely initiated, it may not suggest a huge organization, but it does suggest this was more organized than if somebody was just messing around.”
- On April 27, an anonymous source working the case told Fox News that new evidence could indicate a third person: “While the working theory among investigators is that one or both of the Tsarnaev brothers triggered the detonation using speed controllers, Fox News is told a third party in the crowd has not been ruled out, though there is no evidence suggesting a third party at this time.”
So where is the evidence that has not been ruled out? Or is there is no evidence at all of a third party?
In other words, yet another way of saying exactly nothing.
In other words, yet another way of saying exactly nothing.
Green-color fireworks hobby fuse.
Recent Revelations
On 5/13/14 an FBI court statement claimed cell phone technology was in fact used in the bombing. This is an interesting statement, as both remote control toy vehicles and cellphones work via radio waves: indeed a cellphone is a radio – a sophisticated one, but a radio nevertheless. So why 'cell phone technology' and not 'cell phone(s)' ? How, exactly, does the FBI define 'cell phone technology' in this context ? Once again, it has never been reported that cellphone debris was found.
Finally on 5/22/14, it was reported that “the Boston Marathon bombing suspects used "relatively sophisticated” bombs with fuses made from Christmas lights and remote control detonators made from model car parts.” So what was the remote-control device ? The model car handset ? A mobile phone ? A remote computer ? Something else ?
Court papers also said that the brothers' use of "burner" cell phones with interchangeable SIM cards was further evidence that suggested they "had received training and direction from a terrorist group." There is still no mention of whether such phones were used to trigger bombs, or were used by the brothers later in the week.
'Inspired ?'
According to authorities, Dzhokhar confessed in his hospital bed that he and his brother learned how to build the bombs at home by reading the online Inspire magazine article “Make a bomb in the kitchen of your mom” allegedly published by Al Qaeda. The technique teaches the use of a kitchen timer. Such a device was used in the attempted bombing of Times Square in 2010 - which was an FBI 'sting' operation. It was “a pressure cooker containing approximately 120 firecrackers," according to the 2010 DHS bulletin, while another was used in an attack in Pakistan earlier that year.
The
'Inspire' article is eight pages of step by step instructions and
diagrams to build a basic IED. It describes wiring a "timed
circuit as it is simple”. It further instructs that "It only
works if contained in a high-pressure environment such as iron pipes,
pressure cookers, fire extinguishers or empty propane canisters ...
The pressure cooker is the most effective method.”
The Experts Weigh In on the 'Inspire' connection
Security experts say the technique taught in that article is basically a scaled-up pipe bomb. It does not instruct how to wire a cell phone or a remote initiator. A source, who agreed to discuss progress with the media in the Marathon bombing case on the condition of anonymity, said “the use of remote-control toy parts as a detonation mechanism is not found in the Al Qaeda online magazine Inspire.” It does however, instruct in the use of Christmas tree type light bulbs.
Further, according to a published analysis by the FBI's Terrorist Explosive Device Analytical Center, a side-by-side comparison of the pressure cooker IED design found in the 2010 debut issue of "Inspire" magazine with evidence collected in Boston showed significant differences in the design and construction.
ABC News reported that many senior current and former counterterrorism officials -- including former Boston Police Commissioner Ed Davis, Homeland Security Committee Chairman Michael McCaul and former Joint IED Defeat Organization director Army Lt. Gen. Michael Barbero -- "remain skeptical that the Tsarnaevs built their bombs solely from instructions they found posted online." No one else has built the "Inspire" pressure cooker IED inside the U.S. homeland in the four years since the magazine's "How to build a bomb in the kitchen of your mom" recipe was made public.
Writers at The Wire claimed to have worked out how to rig a cellphone, "We were able to figure it out in a little under an hour with a little bit of Googling and intuition.” However, Bomb expert Defenbaugh cautioned “pundits who may be painting the Boston bombs as unsophisticated? If you construct it, and it blows up as designed and you haven’t killed yourself, then it is pretty sophisticated.”
Bomb expert Fred Burton says, “Bomb making doesn’t require a lot of technical expertise, but the weapons can be unpredictable. It is harder than it sounds to actually get a device to work.” “It doesn’t take a lot of complexity to be able to put these things together, but to be able to sequence them so you have two that actually detonate shows a degree of experience. I have manufactured bombs in training environments and certainly blown them up, and it is harder than it looks.”
The Experts Weigh In on the 'Inspire' connection
Security experts say the technique taught in that article is basically a scaled-up pipe bomb. It does not instruct how to wire a cell phone or a remote initiator. A source, who agreed to discuss progress with the media in the Marathon bombing case on the condition of anonymity, said “the use of remote-control toy parts as a detonation mechanism is not found in the Al Qaeda online magazine Inspire.” It does however, instruct in the use of Christmas tree type light bulbs.
Further, according to a published analysis by the FBI's Terrorist Explosive Device Analytical Center, a side-by-side comparison of the pressure cooker IED design found in the 2010 debut issue of "Inspire" magazine with evidence collected in Boston showed significant differences in the design and construction.
ABC News reported that many senior current and former counterterrorism officials -- including former Boston Police Commissioner Ed Davis, Homeland Security Committee Chairman Michael McCaul and former Joint IED Defeat Organization director Army Lt. Gen. Michael Barbero -- "remain skeptical that the Tsarnaevs built their bombs solely from instructions they found posted online." No one else has built the "Inspire" pressure cooker IED inside the U.S. homeland in the four years since the magazine's "How to build a bomb in the kitchen of your mom" recipe was made public.
Writers at The Wire claimed to have worked out how to rig a cellphone, "We were able to figure it out in a little under an hour with a little bit of Googling and intuition.” However, Bomb expert Defenbaugh cautioned “pundits who may be painting the Boston bombs as unsophisticated? If you construct it, and it blows up as designed and you haven’t killed yourself, then it is pretty sophisticated.”
Bomb expert Fred Burton says, “Bomb making doesn’t require a lot of technical expertise, but the weapons can be unpredictable. It is harder than it sounds to actually get a device to work.” “It doesn’t take a lot of complexity to be able to put these things together, but to be able to sequence them so you have two that actually detonate shows a degree of experience. I have manufactured bombs in training environments and certainly blown them up, and it is harder than it looks.”
Former CIA operative, Robert Baer, concurs. He says the brothers did not build the bombs. “Without special training, the Tsarnaev brothers did not have the skills to make the detonators for the ‘pressure cooker bombs’ used in the Boston Marathon Bombing. Someone else out there must’ve made the bombs.” He goes on to say: “Recent reports by the so-called mainstream media suggest that the pressure cooker bombs were detonated by remote control using ‘toy car’ hand-held controllers. If that really was the case, then the bombs would’ve required an electronic device capable of receiving the same frequency and signal emitted by the hand-held remote control, and yet, capable of igniting the ‘fireworks powder’ or gun powder inside the pressure cookers. The making of such device requires experienced personnel or someone with an electronics experience.
Mr. Baer also asserts the Inspire article did not cover the remote control detonating device: “My opinion is, it’s the circuitry of the bomb. There’s a certain signature they are going to find on this. And I have seen multiple reports, “Wall Street Journal,” ABC News, CNN and on, that there — that police are looking at this as a sophisticated device which does not precisely follow the Internet plans that are in “Inspire” magazine. If that’s the case, there’s a master bomber out there. If there is a master bomber, is he in Dagestan or is he in the United States? Because if he’s in the United States, there’s a chance he could strike again.”
Ominously, Robert Liscouski, Assistant Secretary of Infrastructure Protection for the Department of Homeland Security, now with Implant Sciences, a company that makes bomb-detection devices, said bomb maker "might deliberately choose to use a less sophisticated device because he knows the explosives will be harder to trace,” that an expert can rig a bomb in a particular way to make it look like the work of beginners. “It’s what you would expect of someone who wants to carry out more of these attacks.”
Of Interest:
Lisouski opined further, saying that IEDs are set off by remotely by cellphone, radio device or timer for a reason, “If you use a gun, you have to be there and you are unlikely to able to leave the scene.” He added that the DHS Office of Bombing Prevention budget that had been cut from $20 million to $11 million a year "seemed out of whack."
Despite all the purchases required for the explosives involved in Boston and Watertown, the brothers were not detected by the FBI’s “Tripwire” program or the NSA. The tripwire program is designed to detect purchases of chemicals used in explosives, despite a significant level of 'false positives' – better to cover too many bases than too few.
Searches of the brothers residences, vehicles and other places they had frequented found no trace of the fine black powder used in the IEDs, "strongly suggesting that others had built, or at least helped the Tsarnaevs build, the bombs," the government filing stated.
The indictment states: A minute before the first explosion, Dzhokhar used his prepaid cellphone to call Tamerlan. Seconds later, Tamerlan detonated the first bomb. Seconds after that, Dzhokhar detonated his.
No pictures or video have been seen showing Dzhokhar holding a remote control device at the race.
Dzhokhar allegedly purchased a pre-paid cell phone on April 14th - and it is established that around this time, there were problems with his main phone account.
Unidentified female DNA was found on the bomb – there has been no further information other than the DNA was not from Katherine Russell-Tsarnaeva or either of the Tsarnaeva sisters.
No reports have emerged about finding any control units needed to operate the RC toy car parts. This includes Watertown.
References: (See Part II of this Article for a complete listing)
(With assistance from S. Greene)
Recommend this:
VISIT OUR MAIN ARTICLES AND FEATURED STORIES INDEX HERE
Want more? For NIPS, quick takes, and blog posts by the main contributors to this site visit here
________________________________________________
We actively encourage comments, discussion and debate on this site! Please remember to keep it relevant and be respectful at all times.
Want more? For NIPS, quick takes, and blog posts by the main contributors to this site visit here
________________________________________________
We actively encourage comments, discussion and debate on this site! Please remember to keep it relevant and be respectful at all times.
