On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 14:59:36 -0400, "Kevin Brooks"
wrote:


"Peter Skelton" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 17:03:49 +0100, "Keith Willshaw"
wrote:

snip

Go and look at the report on what happened at
Flixborough

I have, in detail, often, with access to a lot that isn't
generally available.

Bingo. Another claim of access to information not available to the rest of
us--to go along with prior claims of attending sensitive briefings on what
US personnel were doing with the contras in Nicaragua, and battle update
briefings with a command that had troops engaged in Afghanistan? And you
wonder why more and more folks don't believe you?


I expalined quite directly why I had deeper knowledge than
generally available. Anybody who worked at Maitland or the Texas
plant (Victoria?) had the same. As you snipped that, I conclude
you're up to your old bull again, removing context so that you
can invent some. You've recently proven yourself grossly
dishonest three times, isn't that enough?

snip

The explosion was 15 tons equivalent of the BLEVE [1] type, the
fire lasted days becuase about 10% of the plant inventory had to
be allowed to burn out [2]. There was minimal effect past the
fence.

Gee, with all that access to information, you did not realize the true
extent of offsite damage and injury, as we can see from Keith's response
below...amazing, huh?

I certainly had a senior moment there. Kieth handled it nicely.
Do you have anything to contribute?



Wrong. Even though the explosion occurred on a rural site
53 members of the public received major injuries and
hundreds more sustained minor injuries. The plant was
destroyed as were several others on the same site and
close to two thousand houses, shops, and factories
were damaged with some 3000 residents being left homeless




Peter Skelton