linked - Investigating the Terror

(2) Analysis
MR. CAMPRIELLO: I didn't hear you, Judge.
THE COURT: Could it be ANFO?
THE WITNESS: Yes, it could be.
THE COURT: In other words, there could have been an ANFO
bomb sitting there, and if that exploded, it would have caused
the same kind of damage?
THE WITNESS: That's correct.
(a) Direct Examination
First, Williams testified on direct examination that because of that type of
damage . . . the type of explosives that fit in that bracket are very limited.
Assuming the VOD testified to at the Salameh trial--14,000-15,500 feet
per second--there are many different explosives that fit in that bracket.
Using the VOD testified to in the Rahman trial--12,000-16,000 feet per
second--there are even more that qualify. Williams testified in his OIG
interview that a lot of different explosives meet the 14,000-15,500 feet per
second VOD range. For example, the 1980 Dupont Blasters' Handbook (
Dupont ) lists six prill products, four water gels, and two dynamites with a
VOD within the 14,000-15,500 feet per second range, and more within the
12,000-16,000 feet per second range. The 1968 Canadian Industries
Limited Blasters' Handbook lists three products with velocities in the
14,000-15,500 feet per second range. The 1995 Dyno Nobel Inc.
Explosives Engineers Guide ( Dyno ) lists twenty-seven products with
velocities in the 14,000-15,500 range.
Williams' testimony about the very limited type of explosives that fit in
the 14,000-15,500 feet per second bracket was literally correct, because
the many commercial products within that range fall into certain