| |  | |
| | Monday, May 11, 2009. Year XXI. Number: 7084. OPINION EDITORIAL 11-M: when science disproves the statement We are aware that disclosure of the conclusions of the scientific report by the expert Antonio Iglesias serve to heighten awareness of the most sensitive sector critical of English society on the importance of finding out the truth about the 11-M. But also that some will react by appealing to the conspiracy theory and criticizing the stubbornness of those who we strive to further investigate the slaughter of Madrid. Responding to skeptics is very simple: the world is limited to advance the main conclusion of a scientific work of 500 pages. Nothing in the policy reviews, speculation or concerns regarding the terrorism. Empirical evidence, scientifically derived and scientifically verifiable. The author is a chemical that focuses on the review of tests on the 11-M explosives in the laboratories of the Scientific Police, with the participation of eight experts, including himself. Churches work for a year has followed the procedures established by the scientific community and is delivered the College of Chemistry for other experts to submit to criticism, controversy or refutation their content. We are also aware of the difficulty of understanding for the reader of this issue, which is easy to get lost in the complexity and diversity of processes and chemicals that appear, sometimes with similar names. There are, however, two very important assumptions in this scientific report to conclude that the explosive used by terrorists to blow up trains was Titadyn, which contradicts the official version that what exploded was only Goma 2 ECO. The first of these assumptions is that the analysis of sample M-1, the best preserved and the only one that was not washed with water, showed the presence of nitroglycerin and dinitrotoluene, two substances that are part of Titadyn but not in the Goma 2 ECO stolen in Asturias. The second premise is even more relevant as a novelty leaving death touched the credibility of the decision: the court erroneously concluded that the presence of dibutyl phthalate in any analysis of samples it was possible to ascertain Goma 2 ECO. The deduction is wrong because this substance is also part of Titadyn seized by the Guardia Civil Cañaveras, two weeks before the slaughter in Madrid. The verdict says that dibutyl phthalate was a "differential component" of each other explosive and this is not true, as has been demonstrated in the analysis of Churches. As explained in our paper today, the figure was not known during the trial because the graph reflecting the results of analysis of Titadyn generically referred to phthalates, specifically omitting the occurrence of dibutyl phthalate. According to Iglesias, the omission went "unnoticed" or, perhaps, "was circumvented" by the director of expertise. Anyway, what says the statement is false. The findings of this report are certainly evidence of the judicial inquiry into the 11-M and the court's work. For this reason, some people are welcomed with disdain or silence, without bothering to refute scientifically and arguing that the ruling of the trial and ruled on the explosives. But facts are stubborn and we are releasing today further accentuates doubts about the official version of 11-M. No one better than Interior Minister Alfredo Perez Rubalcaba, who is a chemist by profession, would assess the report of Churches from the scientific point of view and, according to their own conclusions, order a new investigation on a matter so fundamental to clarify the slaughter. Tuesday, May 12, 2009. Year XXI. Number: 7085. SPAIN 11-M RESEARCH / The 'report Iglesias' AVT: "The 11-M is open, more research is" Madrid The Association of Victims of Terrorism (AVT) said yesterday that "the 11-M is still open" to any doubts about what explosives were used. Angeles Pedraza, Vice President of AVT, considered the report published by THE WORLD "We're supposed to investigate further." "We do not know whether there was a conspiracy in the 11-M. We do not know whether it was purely an Islamist attack, and do not know because, to some investigations that failed to clarify it, the State has given up on efforts to discover the truth, "he said. Monday, May 11, 2009. Year XXI. Number: 7084. SPAIN 11-M RESEARCH / The 'report Iglesias' (I) chemical A report concludes that the 11-M exploded Titadyn The Antonio Iglesias expert reveals that the main technical argument of the statement is false because the DBP attributed exclusively to the Goma 2 ECO also appeared in the Titadyn of Cañaveras. Insists that, however, both nitroglycerin and DNT detected in the only other lights that could be analyzed, are components of Titadyn and in any case of the Goma 2 ECO. One year has reviewed all analytical explosives and has a 500-page report that has been deposited at the College of Chemicals to submit a dispute between his colleagues Marraco MANUEL Madrid One expert chemicals analyzed for the court's 11-M's remains explosions has prepared a comprehensive report ruled out that terrorists use the stolen dynamite for the plot of Asturias and says that in at least one of the bulbs broke some kind of Titadyn. The expert's macroinforme Antonio Iglesias considered "highly probable" that the backpack bomb one of the focuses of the station of El Pozo, the number three, containing Titadyn. To reach this and other relevant findings, go over nearly 500 pages all the expert analysis conducted in the laboratory of the Scientific Police, in a report already registered in the Official College of Chemists of Madrid. Churches participated in the expert at the request of the Association of Victims Support 11-M. Beside him, three experts appointed by the allegations and defenses accompanied two police officers and two police officers. In total, eight experts for a report that should alleviate the serious consequences of poor performance of the former head of Juan Jesus Sanchez Manzano EOD. material in this review, the expert has come across a fact that disrupts an argument with which the court reached the conviction that all bulbs had exploded the Goma 2 ECO stolen by Emilio Suarez Trashorras to the Islamist cell . The ruling of the High Court noted that "in all" the outbreaks analyzed by experts detected dibutyl phthalate (also known as dibutyl phthalate, DBP). According to the data managed by experts and then the court, the substance was part of the Goma 2 ECO, but not of Tita-dyn. Hence, the Board gave as proven the presence of Goma 2 ECO in all the lights and just leave the door ajar to further may be mixed with another explosive. However, the Church report shows that the same element is also part of Titadyn that allegedly discarded. In fact, it was present in the explosive seized from ETA that mark just two weeks before the slaughter in the truck intercepted Cañaveras. court orders among the eight experts was to analyze a sample of Titadyn, suspecting it could be one of the explosives used in trains. And did contain DBP. "Surprisingly, we had not noticed this fact during the skill. I've noticed this expert report reviewing chromatograms, "says the expert on the section of the report devoted to the comparison of dynamite. The data is not known during the trial because, in the graph reflecting the results, which should correspond to dibutyl appeared "generically labeled" as phthalate. Something that, according to the expert, or went "unnoticed" or "was ignored" by the director of expertise. The alleged absence of DBP in the Titadyn served the defenders of the official version to counter the emergence of two substances, nitroglycerin and dinitrotoluene (DNT) - which were not part of the Goma 2 ECO stolen in Asturias. Police tried to explain this inconsistency with subsequent arguments, from factory pollution to contamination during storage of samples. In parallel to what happened to the DBP, the statement highlighted the emergence of a second component (nitroglycol), which also belonged exclusively to the Goma 2 ECO. However, the table of components reflected in the macroinforme indicates that it is part of all types of Titadyn. The presence of both elements (nitroglycol and DBP) led to the Chamber to conclude, "following a logical"-words of the sentence, "that the Goma 2 ECO was present in all foci. Iglesias, taking into account the presence of DBP in the Titadyn, confirms what we already noted in incorporated the comments submitted to the court expert's report: the presence of such dynamite in at least one outbreak of 11-M. The sample analyzed was 3.5 grams of powder collected red extinguisher with one of the wagons. The experts agreed that this sample, designated as M-1, had a "special analytical interest" since it offered the best performance features to deliver security. Not only acted as an absorbent of chemicals exploded, but was the only sample that had not washed EOD early analysis. The report notes that "the joint presence" of four components in the sample M-1 "can discriminate the type of dynamite used in the focus of which was removed." Two of these elements are common to both Goma 2 ECO and the Titadyn (ditritoetilénglicol ammonium nitrate). Two others, however, "not part of the Goma 2 ECO and yes the Titadyn" (the Dinitrotoluene and nitroglycerin). "Given these facts, [...] we highly likely that the focus No. 3 of El Pozo Titadyn has exploded," he concludes. Later, the expert rejects the interpretation of the police chief of the expertise that the amount of nitroglycerin was so low that it could not be considered as part of the explosive burst, but the result of contamination during storage. "It is logical to conclude that nitroglycerin and confirmed unequivocally detected [...] comes from an explosive that contained not a trace level, but at a much higher, which corresponds to the specifications of dynamite carrying nitroglycerin in his composition "rebate. Apart from exhaustive analysis of the key shows, Iglesias also reviews all tests on samples from 13 other bulbs that came into his hands. In his view, "the main feature "is the appearance in all cases of DNT, oblivious to the composition of the Goma 2 ECO. "The conclusion that emerges is that it has broken an explosive other than the Goma 2 ECO, as it has no DNT in its composition. Instead, it takes the Titadyn. " This is compounded by the aforementioned appearance of nitroglycerin in the sample number 1, which also leads to the conclusion "highly probable" that the outbreak was Titadyn. SUPPORT ¶ Three dynamite, 21 samples The report includes dozens of graphs generated by hundreds of experts in the analysis made, as well as others who serve as a summary. The top graph shows the elements detected in 21 samples of outbreaks. The lower points to elements that are part of each type of dynamite. Including dibutyl phthalate does not appear, but the content of the report itself points out Titadyn as a component of them was found to Cañaveras ETA. This photo shows two policemen collecting samples of one of the pockets of the well that never came to court. The image attached to a letter that counsel Manuela Rubio victims filed two months before the hearing. SUPPORT ¶ What leads to Titadyn
Tuesday, May 12, 2009. Year XXI. Number: 7085. SPAIN 11-M RESEARCH / The 'report Iglesias' (II) Gum 2 of the Kangoo left cartridge the EOD Iglesias The report concludes that the explosive that changed the investigation of 11-M and the standard sample submitted by Manzano have the same origin. The chemical came to this result to prove the similarity in the granulation of the samples tested for starch. Disassemble the official explanations to justify that in both samples appear methenamine, a compound outside the Goma 2 MANUEL Marraco Madrid The explosive found in the van abandoned by the terrorists of 11-M and the standard sample of Goma 2 ECO delivered by EOD to make a comparison came from the same cartridge, or at least, had been stored together before the bombing. That is one of the conclusions reached by the expert chemist Antonio Iglesias, who participated in the expert's court-ordered 11-M and has developed a macroinforme after reviewing all the analysis of explosives. chemical expert reached this conclusion based on two essential facts. The first is the appearance in both samples of explosives of the same substance called methenamine, outside the original composition of the Goma 2 ECO but present in some military-type explosives. The second, the similarity of the starch granules displayed after submitting the samples to a particular analytical technique (optical microscopy and staining). The footprint they leave is so similar that it can only be explained by the common origin of both explosives. The consequence of all this, according to the report Iglesias, is "that the rest of explosive found in the Kangoo, according to the official version and the standard sample came from the same [...] or cartridge, or at least had been stored together on premises, "and that this place had methenamine storage. Either hypothesis is annulled by the expert's credibility finding that overturned the investigation as it traces the origin of the explosive of the Kangoo in the storage unit was then directed by the commissioner Juan Jesus Manzano. In the first hours after the attack, the fact that the explosive was Goma 2 undermines the credibility of the author's thesis research ETA and entrainment to the Islamic land. This exposes Churches in his report: "It is easy to admit any these two possibilities compromised the authenticity of the record and / or action by the EOD. [...] The fact that samples M-2 [rest of the Kangoo] and M-3 [show employer] could have been together or come from the same cartridge would point clearly to the falsity of the test cartridge rest appeared as the official version of the Kangoo van. " On March 11, 2004, the Scientific Police investigated two samples of explosive. One corresponded to that found in the Renault Kangoo abandoned by the terrorist cell near the station of Alcala de Henares. Were 3.221 grams of a white substance attached the end of a cartridge, identified as M-2 sample. The other was just over 100 grams of a standard sample of Goma 2 ECO contributed directly by the EOD in order to compare with the first and identified as sample M-3. The analysis gave a result identical in both samples. Identical even in what should not be. Came the elements of the Goma 2 ECO (nitrocellulose, nitroglycol, ammonium nitrate, dibutyl phthalate, calcium carbonate), but also, and in two samples of supposedly different origin, a foreign component, methenamine. According to the report, the danger methenamine posed to the official version led to the Civil Guard to strive to "justify" their appearance. First, it was thought "reasonably" could have been a contamination in the factory. However, English Explosives Union reported that it used the methenamine and provided the Army, samples of all materials that they check it. ruled that out, the security forces under the Goma 2 to multiple testing until it concluded that the combination of several components that make up the explosive, using methanol as a means reaction, results in the gas chromatograph to methenamine. " Ie methenamine not part of the samples, but was generated by analysis. Churches maintains that despite the "clear commitment" to put in it, nor the officer who led the expert ordered by the High Court or the Civil Guard officers who were present were able to demonstrate that it were so. Besides showcasing numerous technical objections to the explanation, remember that "there has, to date, the existence of any scientific publication that endorses" the theory maintained during the trial OTP. He adds that even the official version, properly interpreted, would reinforce the common origin of two samples of explosive. "If we admit only for purposes of argument, that methenamine is formed from ammonium nitrate, the fact that no other form provided precisely such samples 2 and 3 suggest that these two samples are in the same composition type of ammonium nitrate, which would be a plus-sign-one that would come from the same cartridge. " Although the security forces played down the appearance of methenamine the truth is that among its uses is to serve as raw material for the manufacture of military-type explosive RDX (exogenous, RDX, T4). Therefore, churches considered more plausible theory to explain the appearance of methenamine that the two samples had been "in contact with the explosive RDX likely which, as we have seen, is the precursor or raw materials for manufacturing. Whether the explosive was used or not in the train blast. " The same footprint The left image corresponds to the explosive found in the Kangoo van after undergoing analytical technique to stain the starch granules containing and look under the microscope. The central image is part of the standard sample of Goma 2 ECO. "The starch grains have a very similar" to those of previous shows, says Iglesias, who explains the common origin of both samples. In contrast, the report includes (right) the result of practicing the same technique to another explosive 11-M. "Note the difference in size of starch granules stained" notes the expert. Monday, 11 May 2009. Year XXI. Number: 7084. SPAIN 11-M RESEARCH / The 'report Iglesias' (I) inconsistencies and confusion in the ruling The report reveals that the failure court relied on two factual errors MANUEL Marraco Madrid ignores data, assuming other inconsistent, creating confusion by introducing unnecessary elements and, however, is silent on other important. On the rare six-page report devoted to Case 11-M, the chemical expert brings many reasons to complain. And that although it appreciates the "explicit recognition" that the judges made the results obtained by the experts. Among other things, for "not preclude the use of explosives other than the Goma 2 ECO, as Titadyn." "No contradiction, therefore, the essence of our argument," he added. Iglesias says his "total disagreement" with the court has taken a "inconsistent data", in reference to the analysis quantitatively the most important example, designated as M-1. This analysis is trying to calculate the proportions in which each element is compared to qualitative analysis only indicates which elements appear. The expert points out that the eight experts had agreed that quantitative analysis would not be reliable because, by the scarcity of samples and because some components disappear after the explosion. However, the head of the expertise that imposed quantitative analysis to try to argue that the items did not fit the official version appeared in tiny proportions. This analysis quantitative, with the court did not know that part of Titadyn DBP, is that the verdict was based on two clerical errors. statement also alleges that "circumvention" to examine the results as relevant as a fact that all samples of the outbreaks had been washed with water and acetone by the EOD, which dismissed as to the samples. Churches also criticizes the court to emphasize the presence of DBP in all foci of attack and that, however, silent on the appearance, also in all outbreaks, the DNT. While the former served to bolster the official version the second cast many doubts, since it is a component of the Goma 2 ECO. Elsewhere in the report refers to the confusion generated by the court to find that, with the Goma 2 ECO, this could be another dynamite called "EC". This did have explosive nitroglycerine, which allowed the court to justify its appearance in the analysis. "The award cited the Goma 2 EC here is misplaced and misleading because it had been discontinued in 1999" refutes the expert. Churches matches the text of the statement that in samples no traces of military explosives. But for two added, that some elements evaporate at the time of the explosion, so its use should be deducted from the state of the trains, which were scrapped immediately, and that the appearance of a substance called methenamine aims to use one of those explosives, Semtex. respect to this substance, methenamine, regrets that the judges did not reach even to mention it, despite its appearance in several samples relevant because one of the express orders to the experts was to offer explanations for this appearance. Tuesday, May 12, 2009. Year XXI. Number: 7085. SPAIN 11-M RESEARCH / The 'report Iglesias' (II) "Unacceptable" performance of the commissioner Manzano Marraco Madrid MANUEL Commissioner Juan Jesus Sanchez Manzano starred in both the start and the end of the investigation into the explosive 11-M. In the midst of all this was dismissed by the continued complaints of the EOD under his command, who criticized discredit of the unit. was his laboratory, and not the most prepared of the Scientific Police, who analyzed samples of the explosive that blew up. This decision to retain samples and extracts to get rid of that resulted from the first analysis, making it difficult for further examination, carried Churches described as "inadmissible" their actions, that "departs from good analytical practice." Three years later, the lack of work forced the court Manzano 11-M to decide on a new examination of the explosives. In the very long list of irregularities, the report includes not provide the court remains of all the sources of explosions and hide for years the concrete elements detected, until the trial only spoke of "generic components of dynamite '-. But all this seems to be lower at the churches claim that the rest of Goma 2 found in the van of the terrorists had their origin in the warehouse of explosives under his responsibility. Tuesday, May 12, 2009. Year XXI. Number: 7085. OPINION PRINTS / The scientific findings 'report Iglesias' New reason to send some policemen "little de Jerez" as you delve deeper into the report's findings Iglesias, the greater the doubts about the official version of 11-M and more serious signs that reveal fundamental aspects of the investigation. Yesterday we stress that, after extensive review of the analytics of explosives, the expert Antonio Iglesias has discovered that a chemical that the Board considered unique to Goma 2 ECO is also in the Titadyn. This finding refutes the main technical argument of the sentence, under which the dynamite exploded on trains could only be Goma 2 ECO from Mina Conchita. Furthermore, in the same study, the chemical standard sample test police and the remains of Goma 2 ECO found in the Renault Kangoo used by terrorists had the same origin. That is, or both came from the same cartridge explosives, or had been together in the store of the EOD. Churches came to this result after checking the similarity of both starch granulation remains. The study also challenges the official theory, which he attributed to a strange chemical reaction the appearance of methenamine-component outside the Goma 2 ECO in both samples of dynamite. Science provides a basis which makes it difficult accusatory understandable that certain police officers were not sent "little of Jerez," as Gómez Bermúdez. But, of course, no one will talk about this today in the debate. | |
0 comments:
Post a Comment