Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Who blew up the OK City building?

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Beethoven, Jun 20, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Beethoven

    Beethoven member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    404
    Like many of you here, I read Unintended Consequences by John Ross.

    For those of you who haven't read it yet, stop reading this thread and BUY THE BOOK AND READ IT!!! http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...102-6737716-9180917?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

    In UC, John Ross makes some very interesting and thought-provoking statements.

    I want to know your thoughts on the matter.

    Among them:

    - The destruction to the building was not consistent with the type of explosives that the govt. claims were used; a truck full of an unknown amount of fertilizer based explosive.

    - Not a SINGLE employee of the ATF was in the building that day.

    - The type of explosive that was allegedly used would be exceedingly difficult to detonate in such large quantities as would have been needed to sufficiently damage a building.


    There were a few other things that I'm sure I left out, but those were the ones I recall.

    What are your thoughts?

    Any of this stuff true/accurate?

    Thanks
     
  2. Rebar

    Rebar member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2003
    Messages:
    1,867
  3. Third_Rail

    Third_Rail Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2004
    Messages:
    4,981
    AN/FO is plenty easy to detonate in large quantities, easier than in smaller quantities. I still don't think that's all that was used, though. Just too much damage for the claimed amount, based on research done.


    Other than that, everything else is just coincidence, I think.
     
  4. 2nd Amendment

    2nd Amendment member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,929
    Location:
    Indiana
    The idea McVeigh blew the building is a nice fantasy. For those who want an excuse for bashing the militia. For those who want simple explanations. For those who don't want to deal with government corruption. For those who don't want to acknowledge Muslim terrorism...

    For the rest of us the idea McVeigh did it basically alone is laughable. That he did it with a fertilizer bomb parked out front is hysterical.

    I was sick at home that day, laid out on my couch. i watched ever bit of coverage from the moment it hit the TV. Until noon'ish local affiliates handled most of the coverage. One important thing they focused on was the OKCFD was inside the building reporting they had found more explosives and these were clearly live. Sometime after noon the network talking heads took total control and everything changed with an "interview" done with some guy supposedly several blocks up the road in an office. He stated that he was an explosives expert and this was clerarly a truck bomb(!?!?!?!).

    That was that.

    It was a truck bomb and there either were no explosives inside or they were "fake" training devices and anything proposed to the contrary was "tinhattism". Fine, whatever. I know better.

    Most likely thing is Muslim terrorists made this their first serious hit. McVeigh was certainly a part of it, but not via some silly truck bomb. The reason no Alphabet Agencies were there is because they knew what was coming, just not who nor when(thus why witnesses saw feds coming the area early that AM). The "coverup" existed not to help Clinton or bash the militia(though it was good for both) but because the feds screwed the pooch and didn't get their man till after the fact.

    Never ascribe to conspiracy what can better be assigned to incompetence and petty human nature. Oh, be ready for the usual suspects to post the usual tin hat pictures because you aren't buying without question the government spiel.
     
  5. BostonGeorge

    BostonGeorge Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2005
    Messages:
    145
    Location:
    Salem, NH
  6. CentralTexas

    CentralTexas Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2004
    Messages:
    1,235
    Location:
    Austin Texas
    The Govt is hiding something, one is

    the fact McVeigh wasn't alone as they claim. There were a multitude of security & ATM videos of the street showing the truck arrive and what happened up until the blast. Why are all Freedom of Information requests for those videos denied? What is there to hide except for who is in the truck?
    I also like the broadcast news reports (which I have seen and have copies of)from Oklahoma stations right after the blast happened, where the news reported other bombs were found and being defused according to local authorities, the street interviews with employees of certain federal agencies who were told not to come in that day etc.
    But other than that I'm sure McVeigh acted alone.... :rolleyes:
    CT

    As far as those here who instantly scream "tin foil hat" to such questions look up the history of the Cuban Missle Crisis where the JCS floated the idea to JFK of shooting down an AMERICAN airliner and blaming the other side....
    To consider such actions usually mean you are capable of such actions
     
  7. Lone_Gunman

    Lone_Gunman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,056
    Location:
    United Socialist States of Obama
    Come on guys... the government would never lie to us, right?
     
  8. Keaner

    Keaner Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2004
    Messages:
    392
    Location:
    Hillsboro, OR
    Where is the sit down and grab a box of popcorn smilie when you need it :evil:
     
  9. wmenorr67

    wmenorr67 Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Messages:
    348
    Location:
    Tulsa, OK--Formerly Kansas City, Kansas
    Another good book is The Third Terrorist by Jayna Davis. She was a newsreporter from OKC and did alot of investigative reporting on the bombing and she got some inside info that later was denied.
     
  10. Third_Rail

    Third_Rail Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2004
    Messages:
    4,981
    Uh....so he didn't act alone? Proof?


    Anything at all?
     
  11. RevDisk

    RevDisk Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    1,737
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Apparently it's sitting in a warehouse and the feds are denying FOIA access to it. Mostly ATM and security camera footage.

    If McVeigh was by himself as the feds say and he is now dead, why not release the footage and all other evidence? If they were worried about security vulnerabilities shown in the material, they've had a good number of years to fix them. If they were worried about other people shown in the tape but had not yet been caught, it's been a good number of years and if they haven't caught the folks by now... Heh.
     
  12. 2nd Amendment

    2nd Amendment member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,929
    Location:
    Indiana
    YOU HAVE COPIES?!?!?!?!?!??!?! I tried to get cuts directly from one of the stations a couple months after the event and was told those tapes had been destroyed! What would it take to get you to make me a copy or 10?
     
  13. Sungun09

    Sungun09 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2004
    Messages:
    233
    Questions ??

    Someone may be able to explain "Brissance" regarding ANFO.

    Also, how come we haven't seen pictures of the area across the street. It seems to me that this was not a shaped charge and as such should have created a roughly circular zone of damage encompassing the other side of the street.

    Beware - you are being lied too.
     
  14. 2nd Amendment

    2nd Amendment member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,929
    Location:
    Indiana
    Buildings opposite Murrah were hammered hard. Oddities though, included the fact it was concussion damage for the most part and months later those buildings had still not been cleaned up, or even touched. SoF did an article on it at the time with some very good pics.
     
  15. thereisnospoon

    thereisnospoon Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    896
    Location:
    At my house
    Hoo, Hoo ( the un-Official Battle cry of the Tin-Foil-Hat Brigade)

    Central Texas...great points

    The proof that the non-tin-foil-hat guys are looking for is locked up with the video being shot from the camera in the car behind JFK that day in Dallas and that door from the "Compund" in Waco...

    Thanks to Rebar for posting the Tin-Foil-Hat Brigade recruitment poster....much appreciated.

    Spoon
     
  16. rcm

    rcm Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2004
    Messages:
    97
    Location:
    NH
    I do not know who to believe anymore....didn't this same kind of who dun it thing come on 9-11 with the plane that hit the Pentagon?

    I lean towards the baloney side when it comes to the goverment telling the truth but...I have to have something laid out B&W for it sink in one way or the other.

    :banghead: This is generally where I end up!
     
  17. Preacherman

    Preacherman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    13,309
    Location:
    Louisiana, USA
    Not another conspiracy theory thread... :rolleyes:

    For those of you who entertain such ideas, kindly take note of the following: Neither I, nor any right-thinking person, will place any - repeat, ANY - stock in your ideas unless and until you can come up with at least one piece of hard, verifiable, measurable evidence, that can be taken to court and assessed as a fact. In every conspiracy theory I've heard - including the OKC bombing - there have been suggestions, innuendo's, allegations, etc. by the bucketful, but never a single fact that has been objectively verified and that contradicts the "official" version of events. Unless and until such evidence emerges, kindly don't waste our time with unverified (and unverifiable) theories.

    :fire:
     
  18. thereisnospoon

    thereisnospoon Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    896
    Location:
    At my house
    Preacherman...

    You're taking the "fun" out of dysfuntional... :evil:
     
  19. 2nd Amendment

    2nd Amendment member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,929
    Location:
    Indiana
    Whatever, Preach. You believe what you want, some of us have a problem with simplistic explanations, especially when they fly in the face of the initial explanations at the time of the event that were publicized on national television for several hours. :fire: :rolleyes:
     
  20. CentralTexas

    CentralTexas Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2004
    Messages:
    1,235
    Location:
    Austin Texas
    Preacherman

    -understand where you are coming from but like the video camera footage from OKC bombing the Government won't letpeople investigate through FOIA laws.
    That to me is proof in itself something is wrong....
    CT
     
  21. RevDisk

    RevDisk Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    1,737
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Dictionary definition is "The shattering effect of the sudden release of energy in an explosion." (American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language)

    Brisance used to be defined as the speed of the flamefront. Now it's the relative performance of an explosive in any one of a bunch of different tests, measured by the unconfined pressure on a target object. Usually measured in psi these days, often with the plate dent method tho the sand method is common too.

    In plainer english, how big of a boom it makes when not surrounded by anything except air.

    Usually explosives are tamped. That is, stuff is put around the explosive to focus it better. A varient of this is to place an explosive in a hole. Instead of wrapping a building column with TNT (or whatever), you drill a hole in the column and place the TNT into the column itself. More or less, the explosive energy mostly wants to go to the path of least resistance. (Any bomb guys or physics geeks, please don't flame me too bad, I'm trying to simplify.) If an explosive is merely placed against an object without tamping, the majority of the energy goes into the air instead of into the object you want to destroy. This is very ineffective.

    Ways of getting around this ineffectiveness is shaped charges. This focuses the explosive force by altering the shape of an explosive to point all that boom at a specific point. Not perfect, as a lot of energy is 'wasted' into the air instead of the target object, but better than nothing.

    Without tamping, shaping, or other techniques, a bomb blast will spend its energy in every direction instead of mostly the direction you want it to go.


    (Edit : Removed some bomb info, and clarified shaped charges a bit more.)
     
  22. rock jock

    rock jock Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    3,008
    Location:
    In the moment
    +1000

    John Ross is not a structural engineer specialzing in explosives. That is the only "expert" opinion I am willing to listen to.

    As I always say, conspiracies are the way that lonely and confused people deal with a world that is frightening to them.
     
  23. Molon Labe

    Molon Labe Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    Messages:
    1,700
    Location:
    SW Ohio
    Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

    Please provide extraordinary evidence that anyone other than McVeigh blew up the Murrah Building.
     
  24. 2nd Amendment

    2nd Amendment member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,929
    Location:
    Indiana
    So which engineer and explosives expert do you believe? The one that fits your world view, I'm sure.

    Funny, that's what I always say about people who brand anything outside their narrow world-view "conspiracy".
     
  25. cuchulainn

    cuchulainn Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    3,297
    Location:
    Looking for a cow that Queen Meadhbh stole
    Would those be the same news reports that incorrectly speculated that the explosion was the handiwork of Islamic terrorists?

    At-the-scene reports of chaos are notoriously incorrect.

    Maybe there was a government conspiracy behind OKC. Maybe there are aliens visiting Earth. But, as Preacherman has pointed out, the evidence is less than solid.

    fnord
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page