Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: B4Ranch
Or, the terrorist in Afghanistan could simply be making a note from one of his classes, that this formula worked well in the Oklahoma city bomb. What chemicals were used in Oklahoma city are pretty widely known. The fact that a much higher sensitiser than diesiel fuel (nitromethane), and the possibility that the bomb was made directional, make the government theory more plausible. Nitromethane would greatly increase the velocity and explosive power of the bomb.

Also, if you look at the pictures of the damage done at Oklahoma City and at the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, the damage appears to be quite simular.

10 posted on 12/01/2001 3:51:31 AM PST by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: marktwain
Sorry, but the facts don't support this. The one that is easiest to comprehend is: You have a concrete pillar that has steel rebar bracing inside of it. An explosion from one side will not cut this pillar into dust. It will break the concrete from it in large chunks. Too many pillars were destroyed for this to be an outside job.
12 posted on 12/01/2001 4:01:14 AM PST by B4Ranch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: marktwain
"What chemicals were used in Oklahoma city are pretty widely known. The fact that a much higher sensitiser than diesiel fuel (nitromethane), and the possibility that the bomb was made directional, make the government theory more plausible. Nitromethane would greatly increase the velocity and explosive power of the bomb."

Sure it does. The FBI lab never tested a single molecule of ammonium nitrate or nitromethane from the Oklahoma City bombing. The only sample that they got from the site "disappeared" by the time it got to the lab.

The government's "theory" is simply an unfounded assertion, because there is no physical evidence to back up their claims. And as for the chemicals in question being "widely known," I suppose they are given the oft-repeated line that an ANFO bomb brought that building down. But as for physical evidence of an ANFO bomb, there isn't any.

16 posted on 12/01/2001 7:32:59 AM PST by Reactionary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: marktwain; OKCSubmariner
According to the article in the Times of London on this discovered document in Kabul, the notation indicated that the explosive used in OKC was not a simple ANFO explosive, but included dynamite and nitroglycerin. If the notation was right on this point, Al Qaeda people in Kabul had information on the nature of the OKC explosive that was not available to the American public. Someone should inform Kellie Donovan (the author of this article) of that fact.
20 posted on 12/01/2001 9:31:33 AM PST by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson