Last week, a section of viaduct for Interstate 85 in Atlanta collapsed following a fire that suddenly sprang up in a pile of PVC piping and optical fiber cable that had been stored there.

Three people were arrested – stories were put forth about "a meth-lab" in that pile of construction materials, "the homeless trying to keep warm" (on that warm April day ...), and so on. (Mumble, mumble ...)

Cleanup and crime-scene investigation will continue for some time. Nevertheless – I wonder – and so do many other people, too: "was this, in fact, an act of terrorism? Or at least, sabotage?"

- - - - -

When the firefighters arrived on the scene, the thick, smoky fire was already burning unusually hot. When they turned their hoses on it, it suddenly burned much hotter. (Although still not explosively.) They sent to the airport for firefighting foam. We could watch them pouring it on. But, nonetheless, the fire had by then reached such intensity that it compromised and thus destroyed the concrete beams that held up the roadway. Tons of concrete fell on a fire that kept(!) burning.

Fortunately, firefighters saw chunks of concrete fall to the ground, put two and two together, and quickly evacuated the scene. We think that no one was killed, nor seriously injured , as all responders were accounted for, and surely anyone living under the bridge (none are known) would have long since been driven away by the noxious smoke. All motorists (and police officers) had been removed and kept far away from the area. The fire eventually burned itself out.

PVC piping, while combustible, does not continue to burn once the source of ignition is removed, and the same can be said of cable insulation. (Both can be put out with water.) GDOT was acting responsibly and did not store any hazardous materials there: it was just a large, dry, convenient and otherwise-unused space, properly fenced off. Firefighters know these things. Once they think they know what is burning – GDOT immediately told them – they know what to do and what not to do in order to put it out. It is obvious to me that there had to have been some other, very potent, source of ignition ... one that fed on water and that apparently had its own oxidizer. "There was something about that fire" that the firefighters did not know.

What sort of a thing could that be?

- - - - -

Let's engage in a little bit of purely hypothetical speculation. "If you were a psychopath, what would it be possible for you to use?"

(And, mind you, this is speculation on my part – absolutely nothing more!) I'm looking for possibilities – and, vulnerabilities.

How about: a big container of lithium-ion batteries?

Howzabout you pack a bunch of off-the-shelf lithium-ion batteries – perhaps taken from thrown-away cell phones – into, say, a large PVC piping tube placed among all the others. Now, all you need is some very simple way to puncture one of the batteries. (All evidence of it will be melted in the fire. How about a cell phone and some tiny thingy plugged into the speaker port?) The battery will catch fire and begin to set on fire all the others. As more and more elemental lithium is exposed to the air, the fire will grow. And woe betide any firefighter who tries to put the thing out with water!

(You can't even put the fire out with smothering foam, because a lithium ion battery by definition contains its own self-contained source of oxygen.)

- - - -

Unfortunately, and while this is vastly smaller and simpler a scenario than was "9/11" with its fantastic use of exotic high explosives to take-down three buildings, this purely-hypothetical speculation of mine does point out that our society is now far more vulnerable than ever it was to "unconventional attacks."

We are vulnerable because "it never occurs to us." But (I speculate!) what if it does occur to some psychopath whose heart is as black as night?

And yet, one day, these attacks are certain to cease to be focused just on infrastructure. Because we so flagrantly allow personal information of every conceivable sort – even our exact position, our heartbeat and our very footsteps – to be shared and copied "who knows where" to be accessed by "who knows who" – we can be dreadfully certain that "psychopaths who 'think outside the box'" have not run out of ideas. Ideas that will prove to be terribly obvious "in hindsight."

The vulnerabilities are real – and legion – and some might argue that some of them are even necessary. The hard question, then, is exactly what can be done about it.

To that question, I, too, have no answer at all.

Facebook

By all the accounts I've read, it was an act of stupid.

I will not express my opinion of using it to promote panic and foment fear, but the above statement is mild in comparison.

Unfortunately, I was well nigh to an eyewitness to it . . .

Nothing at all remarkable – well-organized and well-separated stacks of various perfectly-ordinary looking (dry ...) materials over here, and roadside-assistance trucks parked over there at the far end of the lot. Nothing whatsoever to draw one to the conclusion that "this is a disaster waiting to happen." I drove directly past them at very close distance several times a week for several years. I wasn't there the day that they caught fire, but I'd driven right past them the day before. They tell me they'd been stored there without incident for more than 10 years, and I believe it.

The materials known to have been stored there are about as un-interesting as those in the back room of your local hardware store: high-density polyethelene, optical fiber, and so on. They are not at all "highly flammable." If you took even a blowtorch to them, they won't be eager to burn once you remove the torch. And yet, somehow, this pile burned so fantastically hot and for so fantastically long that it managed to compromise all of the concrete girders of this bridge-section, despite all of the firefighter's well-informed efforts to combat the fire. The well-known properties of these materials are not at all consistent with the conflagration which occurred at this location, nor with the various reactions that this fire seemed to have to various knowledgeable attempts to suppress it.

If you'd like to watch a clip of HDPE burning, YouTube will of course oblige. But don't hold your breath waiting for this stuff to take-down your overhead bridge abutment. Any quantity of this stuff, alone, should have been put-out very easily.

Now, let's just punch a few small holes in an ordinary cell-phone battery with a kitchen knife.

Or this more-scientific test.

Foam didn't put it out.

Whatever you do, don't add water.

An incendiary device could (I speculate!!) easily have been placed there – and it could have been quite-easily made. It would have been impossible to extinguish using any of the materials applied to it, and would have reacted vigorously (as observed) to water.

Perhaps this was an act of terrorism. Perhaps, an act of sabotage. It certainly was not, to me, "merely a plastics fire."

Yes, stupid does account for more than need be. Stupid killed 13 people near me when a kid was texting and driving.
However terrorism affects people. It makes them worry and slowly takes part of their life and happiness in the process.

http://www.fourwinds10.com/siterun_d...p?q=1491240343


A new Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) report on the believed to be Islamic State (IS/ISIS/ISIL/Daesh) bombing of a crucial bridge in Atlanta, Georgia, states that American government authorities have launched a massive cover-up of this terror attack that the US now says was caused by a first-time-in-history steel reinforced concrete bridge suddenly catching on fire, while at the same time they’re ignoring eyewitnesses to this catastrophe—including Georgian resident Bobby Barnhart, who said he was 60 yards away from this bridge when he heard several explosions and a slow rumbling before its collapse and added “It was a big sound. You could feel the vibrations.”

According to this report (and as we reported on in our 31 March report titled “Catastrophe Strikes Atlanta After ISIS Terrorists Blow Up Main I-85 Bridge”), on 31 March, the SVR issued a terror alert bulletin noting a large increase of signal intelligence (SIGINT) intercepts from both the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and at least 7 of the 16 intelligence agencies under the command of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) within minutes of this terror attack in Atlanta occurring.

In this new SVR report, however, an expansion of this SIGINT intelligence includes unencrypted US electronic intercepts from local Atlanta emergency officials (911 calls/ emergency scanners) pointing towards multiple initial citizen reports stating that several massive explosions had occurred with PVC piping debris being scattered over a large area.

Also to be noted in this new SVR report is its stating that at least 50 FBI specialized counter terror agents have descended upon Oconee County, Georgia (located 67 miles [107 kilometers] from Atlanta)—and who are conducting a massive investigation into a 6 March reported theft of up to 150 gallons of diesel fuel.

The critical importance of the FBI investigating the theft of this diesel fuel, this report continues, is due to ISIS describing in its online bomb making instruction guides (and videos) how to detonate 50-gallon barrels of diesel fuel using PVC pipe bombs to destroy large structures—such as concrete reinforced checkpoints, bridges and buildings.


The power of using PVC pipe bombs to blow up 50-gallon barrels of diesel fuel, this report further notes, cannot be underestimated in its destructive power—and as evidenced by the SVR documenting two videos (see below) in this report—the first exhibiting a massive fire caused by just 75 gallons of diesel fuel, the the second showing the diesel fuel burning under the I-85 bridge in Atlanta.

So powerful, in fact, was this ISIS bomb used to destroy the I-85 bridge in Atlanta, this report explains, US authorities are now reporting that over 700 feet of this bridge has to be removed and totally rebuilt—but that within 8 hours of this attack occurring, they had removed every single bit of evidence debris from, including scrubbing all evidence of fire damage away from the scene too.

As "tasty" as this report sounds – I find it highly doubtful. Even "150 gallons of diesel fuel" is only "three drum's worth," and that's not going to burn a bridge that's about 80 feet overhead. It's not even going to burn for a long time. And, even when surrounded by ordinary-sized piles of not-so flammable HDPE pipe, it's still not enough to explain this.

The problem seemed to be that the firefighters couldn't put it out. A plastics fire is no big deal, and frankly, neither is burning diesel. Pour enough water on it and you'll put it out, and disperse any flaming fuel. (In this case, you don't care if you disperse it: it's a couple acres of nothing-but-dirt.) No, it seems that was something fundamentally different-seeming about this fire. (But what?)

Firefighters had every reason to believe that they knew precisely what the material was. These guys are pros. They knew what mixture of chemicals to apply. But it didn't appear to work. (Why not?)

Firefighters could be seen using optical measuring instruments to assess the characteristics of the fire.

Firefighters had been under the structure, fighting these unexpectedly-recalcitrant fires, when one of them noticed chunks of concrete beginning to fall from above. (Not, "a rumbling explosion.") News helicopters were flying everywhere, filming the entire time (including the collapse). People in nearby apartments had their phones running. Realizing that the situation was now unsafe, captains ordered retreat from the scene. Firefighters and other responders walked from under the structure, gathered at their designated meeting points, accounted for everyone, and then retreated further to be far away from any debris. A few minutes later, the structure gave way, killing no one(!), and it was filmed the entire time. In this case there is no evidence whatsoever that the thing was "brought down by explosives," unlike 9/11. If there had been "an explosion," it would have been on countless tapes and movie-files. There wasn't. The beams were losing their integrity, but gradually. Gravity did the rest.

But nevertheless, my speculation is that there could have been involvement in the form of introducing an extremely flammable device that reacts to water – and "a box of lithium-ion batteries" certainly could have been sufficient. It could have produced the size and the temperature of fire needed to de-stabilize a pre-stressed concrete beam. (Which is not a structure that is specifically designed to withstand heat.)

Or, my speculation could be entirely un-founded.

As much as we are anxious to put the tired old brand-name of "ISIS®" on yet-another unexplained incident, buttressed by juicy bits such as "intercepted communications happening at the instant of the fire" (is it really plausible that they would start communicating at that time, given that any fool could see that the caper was done?), we must remember that anyone can be a psychopath.

"Titillating details" can be deceptive. For instance, you don't need to "steal" diesel fuel: you can simply buy it. Now you've got to get those heavy drums into the middle of that pile when people are coming-and-going all around you (hundreds of thousands of drivers a day) ... and, while you're under video surveillance. (Ergo: "not bloody likely.") "FBI agents" might or might not "suddenly have reason to 'rush'" to some site hundreds of miles away, pursuing "some hot lead" that "suddenly materialized." (Why now?) Batteries, say, are not exotic materials, and you don't need a video prepared by "muslims" to conclude how one might build a pyrotechnic device using them. This isn't a Mission: Impossible movie. This is also not "9/11." If this is a caper, it is a technically simple one.

And, anyone can claim credit for a criminal act. We must look for "old-fashioned American psychopaths," just as intensely as we might look at someone half-a-planet away from here. The people who drove the truck in Oklahoma City were red-blooded American men. We must treat this as it is being treated: as a crime. Since the area contained valuable motorist-assistance trucks and valuable construction materials, it was under video surveillance.

A shared-use trail (pedestrians, bicyclists, equestrians) goes under Interstate 40 in Albuquerque. Homeless people had been living on the shelf just underneath the highway. The city put barriers on the edges to prevent entry. The residents scavenged pallets to use as a ladder, pulled them up with ropes. Then the city put razor wire blocking it all along the way.