Explosion at Glorietta?

[DonT]

Its really not suprising na after so many months..wala pa rin results yan. Either our experts are incompetent. Or there is a coverup happening. Conspiracy.

[shadow]

^^^haven't you been reading? the results were out....it was a gas explosion due to poor maintenance...

[Honda97]

Just an update for this thread:

Senate Hearing on Glorietta 2 Blast Fails to Explain the Presence of RDX

By Carmela S. Fonbuena;02/20/2008It remains the mystery question. How do you explain the RDX found in Glorietta 2 the day that police say two gas explosions in the basement killed 11 and injured 108 four months ago? The Senate’s six-hour hearing on Tuesday failed to shed light on this.

Royal Demolition Explosive or RDX is a highly explosive bomb substance that is not naturally reoccurring. It has to be manufactured. It is the most important military high explosive in the US and a major component of C4 bomb. It is therefore a heavily controlled item.

Contrary to earlier claims by the police, it is not present in deodorants and lipsticks. It means that someone must have brought it to the mall that day. (See: RDX not in Cosmetics and Deodorants.)

Police Chief Supt. Luizo Ticman—head of the Multi-agency Investigation Task Force that investigated the blast—did not deny the presence of RDX in Glorietta 2. But he provided no details on how and why it got to the mall.

Was the RDX planted? By whom? Why?

The Old Debate: Gas or Bomb

If at all, the Senate hearing allowed for the first time the task force and officers of the Ayala Land Inc. (ALI), which managed Glorietta 2, to present their conflicting findings and refute each other.

Ticman presented the task force’s findings that RDX or any bomb explosive component could not have caused the blast on October 19 because there was no crater, a tearing effect, or blackening in the blast site, which characterizes bomb explosions. Their findings show that the damages in Glorietta 2 were caused by two gas explosions. It was a methane gas explosion first, and this triggered the second diesel explosion.

“Clearly, bombing was not the cause of the explosion,” he said, adding that a detonator, which would have been required for the RDX to explode, was not found.

Besides, he said, the plastic that tested positive for RDX was found in the mall’s ground floor, not in the basement, where the explosion occurred. Ticman also cited excerpts of the findings of the Australian Federal Police and a team from the US Embassy supporting the task force’s gas explosion theory. The task force’s report was made public earlier in January.

ALI president and chief executive officer Jaime Ayala refutes the police theory and maintains that the mall explosion was caused by a bomb. There is no way that methane could have accumulated in the Glorietta 2 basement in a level that would cause an explosion, he said. (See: Glorietta Blast: Blaming the Basement) He also told reporters after the Senate Hearing that experts hired by ALI reported that RDX was also found in the basement.

“Five swabs and one scraping…in the basement, near the bottom of [the] stairs, at eye level or above, closer to the ceiling…All of them were positive for RDX and several other explosives, including the family of TNT [trinitrotoluene].”

Bomb Threat

Ayala also told reporters after the Senate hearing that a merchant of CD-R King, a tenant in Glorietta 2 mall, received a bomb threat a few days before the October 19 explosion. An anonymous female caller supposedly warned that a bomb would explode in the Glorietta 2 basement at 1:30 p.m. on October 29, which was ten days earlier than the incident. The tenant, who apparently did not take the threat seriously, only told ALI about it after the explosion. Ayala said they told the police as soon as they learned about it.

The same tenant supposedly received another bomb threat after the Oct. 19 blast.

Terrorist Attack?

It was the police which originally floated the theory that the Glorietta 2 blast was caused by a bomb planted by terrorists. Initial news reports pointed to a possible LPG explosion in the Luk Yuen restaurant in Glorietta 2. It was a believable theory because Luk Yuen had been hit by a fire before.

Chief Insp. Reynold Rosero of the Philippine Bomb Data Center and among the first to respond to the blast site, gave a television interview on the day of the blast that RDX was found in the scene of explosion.

The National Security Council hearing was held the following day. President Arroyo, Vice President Noli De Castro, national security adviser Norberto Gonzalez, and senior inspector Abrahan Tecson joined in declaring the bomb explosion theory to the media. Senator Biazon presented on Tuesday video footage of television news reports of their interviews.

Four days later, the government changed tune and said that it turned out to be a gas explosion.

“I’m bothered that the top guns of government make conclusive statements and then a few days later change them,” Sen. Rodolfo Biazon said.

Blaming the Media

NCRPO chief Gen. Geary Barrias argued that the police did not make conclusive statements that the blast was caused by the RDX that was found in the mall.

On the National Security Council hearing the following day, Barrias said he presented two theories: that the explosion may have been caused by RDX or that it was caused by “some malfunctioning equipment in the basement.”

“It so happened that the focus was put on the RDX, forgetting about the other findings. One question led to another,” Barrias said.

Razon added that “media tend to put words in our mouths. It is they themselves who make conclusions ahead of the police. I did not say that the explosion was caused by the RDX.”

Cover Up?

Senators Alan Peter Cayetano and Jamby Madrigal hinted on the possibility that the bombing may have been used to cover up political issues that plagued the government at that time. The NBN-ZTE broadband deal was a growing controversy then. Also, Pampanga Gov. Ed Panlilio made an expose on the cash-giving in Malacanang.

“It was a highly charged political atmosphere,” said Cayetano.

Cayetano and Madrigal may have based their theories on a Senate resolution filed by Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV, who quickly accused Norberto Gonzales and Armed Forces of the Philippines Chief of Staff Gen. Hermogenes Esperon after the blast.

Vice Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Antonio Romero, who appeared in the Senate on behalf of Esperon, said that Trillanes’s accusation is “defamatory considering it was too early for the senator to make conclusion.”

Biazon questioned the reported presence of two Philippine Army personnel in the blast site, shortly after the explosion. “It could be related to the resolution filed by Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV,” he said.

Ticman said, “We thought [at first] that it was a terrorist attack. All the hands available were welcome.” He said that the two Army personnel would have been handy in disposing bombs that would be of further threat.

Biazon also questioned a report that the Army personnel supposedly took something out of the blast site. Barrias clarified that it was only a “misunderstanding” between the SOCO and the Army personnel, who didn’t know how about the police procedure in handling evidence.

It was the plastic that tested positive with RDX that they had a “misunderstanding” about. - abs-cbnNEWS.com/Newsbreak

[shadow]

hinde na siguro matatapos ito, the police will insist on their findings and the ayalas will say otherwise...

[jonski]

Ang gulo...sabi ng Ayala plus Senate ay BOMB explosion daw kasi yon sabi ng Malaysian expert according sa mga pictures na nakita nya while the PNP, Scotand yard, FBI plus Australian experts naman ay nagsasabing gas explosion.

[badsekktor]

i still believe it is a bomb.....

[leonleon]

http://www.inquirer.net/specialrepor...0101020-298687

Explosive, not gas, blasted Glorietta 2’

October 20, 2010 02:24:00
Alcuin Papa

Philippine Daily Inquirer


MANILA, Philippines—Now on his second lease on life, he wants what he calls the truth about the Glorietta explosion on Oct. 19, 2007, to be told.
Retired Army Col. Allan Sollano, said he believed then—as now—that an improvised explosive device, and not methane gas, had caused the blast. He said his belief was reinforced by a purported cover-up by the military and police leadership on orders allegedly of Malacañang.
In an interview with the Inquirer on the third anniversary of the explosion that killed 11 people and injured more than 100 others, Sollano, the leader of the Army Explosive and Ordnance Disposal (EOD) unit that rushed to the mall in response, called for a reinvestigation.
A little over a year ago, Sollano was bedridden and sure that he would die soon due to a condition that caused body swelling and extreme pain in his joints and bones.
But after a priest heard his confession on his birthday on Aug. 1, 2009, he suddenly felt better.
Said Sollano: “I thought I was going to die. It was a miracle I got up. Maybe I have a mission to say that Glorietta was bombed.
“Methane gas is out of the picture. Any scientist who would visit the [mall] basement would say the same thing. I’m now here, still alive. I still wish the people would know the truth.”

Only one look
Sollano can now walk around, albeit with a bit of stiffness in some joints and fingers. He talked with a pained expression on his face, as if eager to rid himself of a dirty secret.
An eight-year EOD veteran who has responded to many bombing cases, Sollano said his initial look at the explosion site on the mall’s first floor was enough to tell him that a high-explosive device was used. When he and his team went to the basement, he became all the more convinced.
“From what I saw—the dome in the roof of the basement and the damaged steel ladder—I concluded that it was caused by a very, very powerful blast effect of a high explosive,” Sollano said.
“One look and I knew it because of my experience. All the schooling I got in explosives was good. But you still need experience. All indications pointed to a high explosive,” he said.
Sollano said the bomb might have been triggered “non-electrically,” or lit manually with a fuse and put inside a damaged tank in the basement. “It could have been TNT, C4, Retonal or composition B. There was also a cigarette pack on top of the tank that could have been used to trigger the bomb,” he said.
What clinched it for him was a blackened plastic bag that, he said, could have held the bomb.
“The PNP (Philippine National Police) and the other investigators were all there with me when I made that discovery,” he said.
The plastic bag was later shown to have contained RDX, a chemical compound used to make C4 explosives. “But even without it, I knew it was a high explosive. The bag was just confirmation,” he said.

If the Palace says ...
But things took a disturbing turn, according to Sollano in his account:
The remark of a police investigator to him after his discovery—that “no matter how large this bomb is, when Malacañang says it’s just a firecracker, it’s just a firecracker”—was the first sign that things were not going right.
The next day, he was called by his superior, Gen. Ricardo David, then the chief of the Army Support Command and now Armed Forces chief of staff.
David said a Col. Reiner Cruz of the Army’s G2 (or intelligence branch) was requesting Sollano to account for the C4 explosives confiscated from the Oakwood mutineers. Even if the explosives were marked as evidence, Sollano made an accounting of them anyway.
In succeeding days, Sollano’s men told him, quoting news reports on TV, that police investigators were claiming he had planted the plastic bag he found.
“I couldn’t eat. I lost weight. How could the bag have been planted when the PNP was there when I recovered it?” he said.
In one TV report, Sollano saw then PNP Director General Avelino Razon say that the bag had tested positive for RDX.
“I knew that was right. That confirms that a high explosive was used,” he said.
But then his men also told him of an alleged meeting in the Palace, where the President was supposed to have told the generals to make it look like it was methane gas that had caused the explosion.
“So the tide turned against me,” he said.

Special project
Sollano began to feel like he was being watched.
“I had surveillance training, too. So I told General David that I was feeling the surveillance. I told him that I had a gun and that if they conducted a ‘special project’ on me, I would fight back,” he said.
By “special project,” he explained, he meant his disappearance and summary execution.
This was how Sollano recounted the succeeding events:
He was repeatedly visited by police investigators but he did not speak with them “because I was feeling the whitewash and I didn’t want to be part of it.”
Sometime in November 2007, Sollano received instructions from Alexander Yano, the then Army commanding general: Report to the then Southern Police District head, Chief Supt. Luizo Ticman, who was leading the investigation.
He was told to see Ticman “in civilian clothes, because there might be media in [the latter’s] office.”
Ticman asked Sollano if it was true that toothpaste and paint contained RDX.
“I said, ‘Sir, what I know is that high explosives have RDX.’ He said nothing. I asked him what it is that they wanted to happen. I told them I was just doing my job and I would stand by my findings,” Sollano said.

Smelly basement
When Sollano left Ticman’s office, an Inspector Bacani took his statement.
Recalled Sollano: “He wanted me to say it was really smelly in the basement. I said that in a bombed site, you get all sorts of smells. I felt he wanted to get to something, but I was not cooperating. An officer helping out with my statement told me, ‘Sir, let’s just help the government.’ I asked if charges would be filed against me. They said no. So I confirmed there was a whitewash.”
He reluctantly signed the statement.
Sollano said he thought long and hard about the matter until he fell ill.
“Maybe it was the souls of the dead who made me sick. I don’t know. Why was there a whitewash? There were lives lost. If we made our own report, we would have said it was a high explosion. Any good EOD would know the difference between large and small explosions. I am 100-percent sure,” he said.
Sollano retired in April 2008 and was issued a commendation for his work in the investigation of the explosion.
He started feeling the symptoms of his illness in July and was taken to hospital in October. He said he requested a discharge that same month because he could not afford the medical bills and decided to endure his condition at home in Nueva Ecija.

Courage
But Sollano recovered after his deathbed confession.
“There must have been divine intervention. My sickness gave me the courage to say the truth in the open. Because I became a coward, I thought only of my family. I told my wife that I would stand by the truth,” he said.
Sollano said his call for a reinvestigation was his chance to clear his name:
“I want to face all of them who said I was a fake. I hope the case will be reopened so we can all be clear about what happened, so all the doubts and lies told against me are cleared, so the truth in this part of our history comes out.
“Justice must be done for the victims. So we may know why they died.”