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
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