As did I. Your post is not the entire article. Moreover, the original story very clearly talked about how explosives were detected on one of the men:
A bomb-sniffing dog first detected explosives on one of the men and inside the truck. High tech equipment was used later to confirm the presence of TNT and RDX plastic explosive.So not only are you wrong about having copied the entire article to this forum, but you're also wrong about there being no mention of explosives on one of the men.
So not only are you wrong about having copied the entire article to this forum, but you're also wrong about there being no mention of explosives on one of the men.
Newbie:
Your first post on this thread was at 12:29 ET Today, and you did NOT copy and paste the entire article here, either the original or the revised version. Show me where you did that. You can't, because you didn't.
Furthermore, the sentence you highlighted was not in the article last night, not when terilyn posted the link, and not when I posted the article itself half an hour later. It is an ENTIRELY different article today, in fact. I challenge you to prove otherwise.
Are you going to accuse terilyn of leaving passages out too, or are you just going to admit you were completely wrong and the story has gone through a few recognizable changes since it first went up?