Written by William Powell as a teenager when he was enamored with the ’60s counterculture/resistance movement according to Wikipedia. If he gained this knowledge of explosives and home cooking as a teen does anyone know what the precursor to the AC was? This bomb making stuff seems to indicate subversive movement knowledge and/or activity.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/29/arts … -dies.html

It’s a fairly horrible book, you would poison or blow yourself up if anything worked at all. It’s still available.

-glurk

William Powell says publishing that book was his biggest regret. He even requested that it be taken out of print, but as he signed the rights to the publisher, and because the publisher refuses to cease printing the book, it remains in print, despite the authors pleas.

Even to this day that book haunts Powell. In the film "American anarchist" Powell describes his regret and attempts to explain his initial motivations, which believe it or not were well intentioned, but as terence mckenna says " If you charge off with some political agenda that is not informed by clarity, you are going to end up with business as usual. The road to hell is paved with good intentions but it is not paved with clarity."

Powell admits that a lack of clarity lead to the publication…

Powell is a teacher specializing in working with children with special needs, he works abroad in countries like Africa, and was horrified and devastated to find that his book had been used by school shooters.

Powell wrote the book after the 1968 Democratic National convention. During the convention the youth were shamelessly beaten and arrested without cause.
This event had a huge impact on many, hunter s. Thompson’s ex-wife said after participating was one of the only times she EVER saw Hunter cry. This injustice perpetrated by the authorities had a massive impact on nearly every individual who was present, as well as impacting those who were not.

Anarchism understands that by becoming violent you are making yourself amenable to control and manipulation by the forces you are acting against, therefore anarchism is antiviolent.

When it gets down to having to use violence, then you are playing the system’s game. The establishment will irritate you – pull your beard, flick your face – to make you fight. Because once they’ve got you violent, then they know how to handle you. The only thing they don’t know how to handle is non-violence and humor.”

― John Lennon

I think that what we have to say is that we must win by example. You know, the I Ching says you must never confront evil directly, because then it learns how to defend itself. The hippies were certainly no threat to the government as a military force, but as an example, as a model for others to follow, I think they scared them to death. They were probably very happy to see them all turn into Weathermen and begin hurling molotov cocktails. *That* they understood. They could relate to that. But flowers in the barrels of their guns spelled ruin and defeat, and they knew it -terence mckenna

Again, anarchism is not a non-violent ideology. When you act violently against another you are taking away their right to exist freely in peace, and therefore it would not be anarchism.

*As a chemist, I despise books like the "anarchist cookbook", or any of the garbage "uncle fester" publishes. I personally refuse to explain to ANYBODY how to manufacture any substance that can be used as a weapon or be used for violent means.

I also hate that the word "anarchist" was attached to the publication. It further adds to the already negative misperceptions attached to the concept.

Also, if you have to ask advice regarding something so chemically simple, then perhaps you are not skilled enough to be reforming the procedure, and as the procedure involves synthesis of dangerous compounds I am a bit surprised that you would even think to ask, as no respectable chemist should give you the information.

William Powell says publishing that book was his biggest regret. He even requested that it be taken out of print, but as he signed the rights to the publisher, and because the publisher refuses to cease printing the book, it remains in print, despite the authors pleas.

Even to this day that book haunts Powell. In the film "American anarchist" Powell describes his regret and attempts to explain his initial motivations, which believe it or not were well intentioned, but as terence mckenna says " If you charge off with some political agenda that is not informed by clarity, you are going to end up with business as usual. The road to hell is paved with good intentions but it is not paved with clarity."

Powell admits that a lack of clarity lead to the publication…

Powell is a teacher specializing in working with children with special needs, he works abroad in countries like Africa, and was horrified and devastated to find that his book had been used by school shooters.

Powell wrote the book after the 1968 Democratic National convention. During the convention the youth were shamelessly beaten and arrested without cause.
This event had a huge impact on many, hunter s. Thompson’s ex-wife said after participating was one of the only times she EVER saw Hunter cry. This injustice perpetrated by the authorities had a massive impact on nearly every individual who was present, as well as impacting those who were not.

Anarchism understands that by becoming violent you are making yourself amenable to control and manipulation by the forces you are acting against, therefore anarchism is antiviolent.

When it gets down to having to use violence, then you are playing the system’s game. The establishment will irritate you – pull your beard, flick your face – to make you fight. Because once they’ve got you violent, then they know how to handle you. The only thing they don’t know how to handle is non-violence and humor.”

― John Lennon

I think that what we have to say is that we must win by example. You know, the I Ching says you must never confront evil directly, because then it learns how to defend itself. The hippies were certainly no threat to the government as a military force, but as an example, as a model for others to follow, I think they scared them to death. They were probably very happy to see them all turn into Weathermen and begin hurling molotov cocktails. *That* they understood. They could relate to that. But flowers in the barrels of their guns spelled ruin and defeat, and they knew it -terence mckenna

Again, anarchism is not a non-violent ideology. When you act violently against another you are taking away their right to exist freely in peace, and therefore it would not be anarchism.

*As a chemist, I despise books like the "anarchist cookbook", or any of the garbage "uncle fester" publishes. I personally refuse to explain to ANYBODY how to manufacture any substance that can be used as a weapon or be used for violent means.

I also hate that the word "anarchist" was attached to the publication. It further adds to the already negative misperceptions attached to the concept.

Also, if you have to ask advice regarding something so chemically simple, then perhaps you are not skilled enough to be reforming the procedure, and as the procedure involves synthesis of dangerous compounds I am a bit surprised that you would even think to ask, as no respectable chemist should give you the information.

Wooaahhh Nelly!!! Hold your horses there dude. I think you have completely misunderstood both the intent and purpose of my post. Let’s get one thing perfectly dadgum straight! At no time was I asking advice or any information on anything about explosives or the manufacture of such or chemisty in any way. I was simply asking in a very general, investigative frame of mind how was information like this acquired back then before there were computers and even before the publishing of the aforementioned book. At first you kind of think it indicates knowledge one might gain in the military, but most average soldiers are not gonna know bomb making like he’s describing. Just throwing out thoughts and questions like everyone else does on here about everything from what he liked to eat for lunch to his tendencies on writing the letter "j".

I can not help you with your distaste of the word "anarchist" being attached to the publication as I did not name it. But it is the name of the well known publication so, for clarity’s sake, I will use the name associated with the publication.

I was NOT endorsing this publication in any way and I’m not sure what I wrote that would cause someone to jump to that conclusion.I’ve never read it myself. I’ve simply heard by word of mouth what it contains. I was simply trying to discuss a valid aspect of RESEARCH into this case in the bus BOMB letter section. That of what, if anything, can we derive from this apparent knowledge of explosives?

Lastly, in no way either was I trying to open up any thread endorsing or condemning any sociopolitical ideology/outlook. This is not the place to have social and/or political debates. And again, I don’t know what it is I might have written that would cause someone to jump to that conclusion.

If I’ve come off aggressive that’s unfortunate, but your inference that I was trying to acquire information of a possibly illegal nature and condemn what I’ve always respected as a legitimate (though possibly not practical) social structure outlook myself leaves me with no alternative but to thoroughly clarify myself.

William Powell says publishing that book was his biggest regret. He even requested that it be taken out of print, but as he signed the rights to the publisher, and because the publisher refuses to cease printing the book, it remains in print, despite the authors pleas.

Even to this day that book haunts Powell. In the film "American anarchist" Powell describes his regret and attempts to explain his initial motivations, which believe it or not were well intentioned, but as terence mckenna says " If you charge off with some political agenda that is not informed by clarity, you are going to end up with business as usual. The road to hell is paved with good intentions but it is not paved with clarity."

Powell admits that a lack of clarity lead to the publication…

Powell is a teacher specializing in working with children with special needs, he works abroad in countries like Africa, and was horrified and devastated to find that his book had been used by school shooters.

Powell wrote the book after the 1968 Democratic National convention. During the convention the youth were shamelessly beaten and arrested without cause.
This event had a huge impact on many, hunter s. Thompson’s ex-wife said after participating was one of the only times she EVER saw Hunter cry. This injustice perpetrated by the authorities had a massive impact on nearly every individual who was present, as well as impacting those who were not.

Anarchism understands that by becoming violent you are making yourself amenable to control and manipulation by the forces you are acting against, therefore anarchism is antiviolent.

When it gets down to having to use violence, then you are playing the system’s game. The establishment will irritate you – pull your beard, flick your face – to make you fight. Because once they’ve got you violent, then they know how to handle you. The only thing they don’t know how to handle is non-violence and humor.”

― John Lennon

I think that what we have to say is that we must win by example. You know, the I Ching says you must never confront evil directly, because then it learns how to defend itself. The hippies were certainly no threat to the government as a military force, but as an example, as a model for others to follow, I think they scared them to death. They were probably very happy to see them all turn into Weathermen and begin hurling molotov cocktails. *That* they understood. They could relate to that. But flowers in the barrels of their guns spelled ruin and defeat, and they knew it -terence mckenna

Again, anarchism is not a non-violent ideology. When you act violently against another you are taking away their right to exist freely in peace, and therefore it would not be anarchism.

*As a chemist, I despise books like the "anarchist cookbook", or any of the garbage "uncle fester" publishes. I personally refuse to explain to ANYBODY how to manufacture any substance that can be used as a weapon or be used for violent means.

I also hate that the word "anarchist" was attached to the publication. It further adds to the already negative misperceptions attached to the concept.

Also, if you have to ask advice regarding something so chemically simple, then perhaps you are not skilled enough to be reforming the procedure, and as the procedure involves synthesis of dangerous compounds I am a bit surprised that you would even think to ask, as no respectable chemist should give you the information.

Wooaahhh Nelly!!! Hold your horses there dude. I think you have completely misunderstood both the intent and purpose of my post. Let’s get one thing perfectly dadgum straight! At no time was I asking advice or any information on anything about explosives or the manufacture of such or chemisty in any way. I was simply asking in a very general, investigative frame of mind how was information like this acquired back then before there were computers and even before the publishing of the aforementioned book. At first you kind of think it indicates knowledge one might gain in the military, but most average soldiers are not gonna know bomb making like he’s describing. Just throwing out thoughts and questions like everyone else does on here about everything from what he liked to eat for lunch to his tendencies on writing the letter "j".

I can not help you with your distaste of the word "anarchist" being attached to the publication as I did not name it. But it is the name of the well known publication so, for clarity’s sake, I will use the name associated with the publication.

I was NOT endorsing this publication in any way and I’m not sure what I wrote that would cause someone to jump to that conclusion.I’ve never read it myself. I’ve simply heard by word of mouth what it contains. I was simply trying to discuss a valid aspect of RESEARCH into this case in the bus BOMB letter section. That of what, if anything, can we derive from this apparent knowledge of explosives?

Lastly, in no way either was I trying to open up any thread endorsing or condemning any sociopolitical ideology/outlook. This is not the place to have social and/or political debates. And again, I don’t know what it is I might have written that would cause someone to jump to that conclusion.

If I’ve come off aggressive that’s unfortunate, but your inference that I was trying to acquire information of a possibly illegal nature and condemn what I’ve always respected as a legitimate (though possibly not practical) social structure outlook myself leaves me with no alternative but to thoroughly clarify myself.

First, you should expect these types of responses just from brining up the subject of bomb making books, if I did not say these things I hope that somebody would have. (Though most of this was not directed specifically towards you, but more towards the subject itself)

Sorry you took my post the way that you did. Its a subject where clarity is essential, and perhaps I should have been more clear.
Lastly, I didn’t want to see any type of glorification or spreading of harmful information, I felt I would put in my two cents at least.

Most of what I was saying was for informational purposes regarding "the anarchist cookbook" regardless of your views on it. Any time this topic comes up I feel it is necessary to explain that Bill does not endorse the book or what it has been used for, I also think its important to mention that the book is full of wild disinformation, "bananadine" being a rather harmless example. It is also important to mention the ethical issues and dangers surrounding such a topic.

It’s a touchy subject to bring up bomb making books, many might question your intentions, so perhaps being absolutely clear the first time would be beneficial.

I was not trying to argue politics on this board, I simply wanted to clarify that there is a distinction between anarchism and terrorism, and that the labeling of users of Bill Powell’s book as "anarchists" is a misnomer at the very least. I never mentioned my personal politics, and I do not wish to discuss others personal politics. Its kind of like explaining the facets of democracy to someone brining up a "democratic cookbook", it’s not a debate or a personal politics situation, it’s just stating facts.

Ok, perhaps this is what you were initially after:

Bill Powell compiled "the anarchist cookbook" from books which he found at his college library, most of these books were military instructional guides and military enthusiast publications. All of this information is public domain, and could have easily been accessed through a local library or book store in the 1960-70s.

This is definitely not the type of thing one should bring up on a serial killer forum.

Anyway, what great question! precursors to the AC? Well I always got a bit of a vibe that a lot of the information in the AC was as much word of mouth as any other source. The type of stuff that teenagers might pass on to one another, you could get blown up trying half of them and I really think if they came from better sources like actual military books the information would be a lot better. It’s very DIY.

I really wonder if there where any precursors, this is definitely worth investigating. The Zodiac’s bomb had a particular design, although common in someways, it’s precise design may give us clues about what books he may have read in order to create the diagram.

The particular type of device that the Zodiac designed, which I won’t go into detail out of taste, but suffice to say it’s a method that’s well known in pop culture. I can’t remember where I first heard about this particular cocktail, but it was used in loads of books and movies and whenever the topic came up in school some kid would always mentions "did you know that you can use X to make them?! My dads got a whole shed full of that stuff". Actually I just remember where I first heard about it, it was in adventure series for teens, don’t get too excited this particular book was from the 90’s.

I wonder if there’s any old films that use it.

My opinion on his "bomb making skills" or "engineering skills" (which there is no proof Zodiac had) is that he didn’t really have any. I wont specifically say who I work for now, but will say that I do actually work on military aircraft and ordnance as a civilian. When I was in the Navy, I was also an FT on an submarine. I’m definitely not an engineer, in fact, i’m a far cry from it, but i do work close with them, and definitely have to use their drawings/blueprints. I take x-rays and interpret them to ensure they adhere to the engineering specifications. I personally feel the Zodiac bomb idea and drawing are not the work of a professional. Whoever made the drawings, it definitely had "magazine order" / "anarchist cookbook" vibe. Zodiac apparently felt the need to "prove" that he knew how to make such a device by detailing "how" it would be built, probably because he had no real world experience at such things. I think he had the information available to build a bomb, but couldn’t actually do it in practice, I think he knew there was a reasonable chance he would inadvertently kill himself if he actually build the device.

Serial killers who use bombs to kill represent the class of serial killers with the highest I.Q., which may not fit the Zodiac, compared to serial killers with low I.Q., who bludgeon and strangle, Zodiac most likely sits in between these two, I’m not a psychological profiler either, lol, but I’m guessing this guys I.Q. was between 100 to 110 and was a mixed organized/disorganized killer. I think he was smart enough to know, he couldn’t build and deploy a bomb. I give Zodiacs "engineering skills" score a ZERO.
Ignore me, I’m in full on speculation mode today. It’s all I have to offer and I wanna help,lol