Trying to score internet points being a scary dude will only earn you your door getting knocked off its hinges at 6am.
See, underneath it all, you're still a faggot. I can see why you voted for Blair.
I was actually born after that. It's really telling you think that the only reason anyone would be so direct is that they want to be a "scary dude" - it's so that the police don't open fire on a crowd of protesters.
In reality - my worst-case scenario is an extremely painful death before I'm 30. The situation with the state has exceeded the point that it should have ended, and you're drastically underestimating how fucked everything is.
It's not even illegal. It's a circumvention of the creeping prohibition on nitrogen. It
works on a small-scale for that exact purpose. This shit is why it gets difficult to even bother - it's really demoralising for a middle-aged mong to rattle about how clever you are, for doing nothing and achieving nothing except
voting for Tony Blair.
I'm actually well within my rights as a UK native with the appropriate education, no criminal record, no links to any groups, to talk about my findings in my own field. This is the demoralising factor - despite coming out with a suspiciously advanced, detailed microbial synthesis of a specific ion, your first thought is "FED" - in truth, most people's grandparents handled this shit on a regular basis. It can be safely produced using centuries-old technology. Your grandmother probably handle it during the wars.
We're a long way from some Spanish anarchist revolution
Thanks, but it's not an Anarchist revolution. I should clarify, this is actually my field - specifically, I'm a Chemical Engineer. Not a
good one, but that's down to my health. So, developing a process is literally my exact background. I "investigated" a process which can easily be upgraded and automated, if need be, to produce an as-of-yet legal precursor to Nitric Acid.
Despite being perfectly within my rights to develop such a process, I have to hide it because
random retards genuinely trust the guys from paedophile island more than professionals. In the same way as the COVID Vaccines - "MRNA researcher said it was reckless, but the
man who always lies said it was safe. I.. I don't know who to trust!"
It's a way to let someone else, who can handle that shit, actually manage it. It's not complex, and as you said - damn right, I'm not pissing about with explosives willy-nilly. The end product is, currently, NaNO3 (but I would change that to KNO3) - in significant quantities. On its own, NaNO3 is a drying agent. That's
why it's fine to make and use. It became "reportable" and will likely become solidly restricted, later.
It's an inferior method, compared to the industrial practices. It's a "Plan B" method in-case the state, WEF, whoever, tries to further prohibit it. The farmer protests are also related to this problem - although, this wouldn't help them as much. Chemically, yes, but practically, they need several tons of it. There is a concerted effort to phase out nitrates and substitute urea or other, less reactive fertilisers.
Without going too much into the whole "Organic" shit, or "anti-pollution" measures - they are absolutely not for that purpose, even remotely. They have been replacing as much nitrate as possible with urea, for a long time, despite urea's objective inferiority and lower efficiency (and increased capacity to "pollute") - the UK could, easily, build the infrastructure for massive domestic production - it can be made
while reducing CO2 emissions if it's done with a renewable feedstock - "Green Hydrogen" and whatnot. The use of electricity to produce the two feedstock gases - electrolysis and cryoseparation - then reacting the resultant ammonia with CO2. That's how it
is done for a huge chunk of the world, like Russia - CO2 is actually a valuable commodity.
I love chemistry - fascinating stuff - but were your posts not fed-bait, I would say to you explore other options. There are all sorts of ways they keep smart and honest people out of positions of influence. And almost none of them are literal doors you can blow the hinges off.
Well, Sodium and Potassium Nitrate aren't really used directly in explosives. They're oxidisers - they can be used for that, just
not well - they're generally safer to handle because they absorb moisture like nothing else. I went for sodium since it uses baking soda, but calcium carbonate (egg shells) is also an option. Potassium Nitrate (from hydroxide, found in wood ash)
is used for black powder, but it's significantly safer than nitro.
It's one reason why the farmers have had so many protests. Nitrogen sources have been getting weaker and weaker, and harder to get, ostensibly because of "environmental pollution" - this is in staunch contrast to the
increased availability of a significant nitrogen source, which is added to diesel to reduce NOx emissions.
The only difference is that urea has to decompose in soil, which takes time, and a lot more of it runs off into water. There is literally no logic to the regulation, whatsoever. The entire fear is that it causes algae blooms - since it's a fertiliser - when it enters the water system. Rather than say, take advantage of the extremely fertile waters and maybe, divert the course through some nice woodlands, they'd rather just starve everyone. Note, urea is worse for this.
Tories have been slipping in weird, specific shit like this too, to farming regulations. AdBlue, as of right now, doesn't have any - but you can expect to see it added later. This is from
agriculture. Urease is the enzyme in the bacterial fermentation process that I used - and it's very common. To "reduce pollution" the government wants to kill off the fertilising bacteria in the farmlands. This came into effect
this year.
...what?
I could go into way more detail, but there's a good reason for my hyperfixation on this exact process. There is absolutely something
very fucking bad going on here, and it's most likely to prevent
companies from making ammunition. It's there to enforce a complete, international monopoly on arms. Most of the world's food depends on fertiliser imports - Russia exports like, two-thirds of the nitrates in the world.
I'll say that on the off-chance you genuinely had ideas along these lines I don't think you'll damage The Machine with bombs and blown off fingers.
Well actually, my long-term goal was to do literally anything against the incoming "imposed famine" and "global arms embargo" via restriction of nitrogen. Rather than "gun control", the problem is "ammo control" - there
was very few ways to acquire nitrates without access to a gigantic facility, and the Haber-Ostwald process. This method uses the same ammonia synthesis, but then jumps to Urea instead, and oxidises via bacterial fermentation with additional steps which usually occur in soil. It's objectively inferior, but it runs directly
against what the clear intention of those restrictions are. It requires more materials, but it's a workaround.
That's the extent of it - there's a deliberate, sinister effort to make sure that only a
very select few people can have guns, worldwide, via the prohibition of an entire chemical family. This may induce some kind of famine, so some may starve to death, but it's a price that Rishi Sunak is evidently willing to pay. It's not there to stop suicide bombers - I didn't talk about shit like sodium chlorate, which
absolutely cannot be regulated, ever, because it's made from table salt. Cap-guns are perfectly legal, and they have so many options for smuggling and organised crime that there's no shortage of illegal munitions being smuggled into the country.
It's there to make sure that the Arms industry is unable to function, to surrender our entire national security to
someone else - it's all in the fine print of the Paris Agreement. The goal is a complete monopoly on arms, brought to you by people who were regular visitors to
paedophile island.
There is no other way except to become fully independent. Part of that is to make sure you can produce
everything you need - including a means to defend yourself. If you can't defend yourself, you leave yourself open to callous abuse with no way to fight back.
Unless you have something like the IRA and a willingness to target every single traitor in power repeatedly and a way not to be caught by modern technology it's pointless trying. We saw what happened when that labour woman got killed by a nutjob. They made her a martyr for 5 minutes then put in a black woman to replace her and tories refused to fight it. It was a free diversity seat.
It's to fill in the missing link in a supply chain. All of the regulation focuses on one
exact chemical, Nitric Acid, HNO3 - the common feature of almost all modern weaponry. Nitro-chemistry is pretty fucking dangerous. It's not for
complete amateurs. I would not suggest anyone who isn't experienced, who doesn't have the appropriate equipment and qualifications, to even get close. I made this shit so someone who is, can.
It's the precursors which are targeted by this legislation. Those precursors are perfectly legal in most of the world, and I seriously have doubts in letting the exact same people who
sold huge chunks of the NHS to foreigners, giving complete authority over the health of millions of Brits to random Indian men with shady credentials have a complete monopoly on everything with an NO3 ion. I have made sure they don't.
I have my own opinions on how it should be used, but in reality, all I have done is fill in a blank space. Hence, getting pissed off at the average Brit - without even talking about any specific motive or aggression in any way, the assumption is always in the negative. There's an animosity towards fellow citizens, a "Crabs-in-a-bucket" mentality, where they choose to believe an obvious lie because it "makes them feel clever"
The IRA is a great example - after the British government managed to kill a higher proportion of the civilians than the IRA, why in God's name should the state have complete authority over who gets to own guns?
