>>12174257 pb
>how do we know this wasn't a low yield tac-nuke that was set off?
children repeating the "nuke" bs need to stop and go back to their comic books, er, i mean graphic novels.
first, the visible damage at street level is consistent with a large firecracker + a molotov cocktail.
second, there is no radiation detected anywhere downwind. at D+ 13 hrs, it would be showing up by now.
http://www.radiationnetwork.com/
btw, this is a grass-roots, volunteer (no pun), NON-GOV'T monitoring network. so let's PLS put the "nuke" bs to bed for good, K?