Skip to comments.
Did Oklahoma City Bombers Have Help?
http://www.foxnews.com/index.html ^
| Saturday, April 16, 2005
| Fox
Posted on 04/16/2005 3:31:47 AM PDT by teldon30
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 141-158 next last
To: mad_as_he$$
Somewhere there is an independent report from a well respected guy who examined the blast site and concluded that there was explosives on several of the main columns. I am sure somebody here has it.I remember reading it, but I no longer have it. I hope somebody still has it so he/she can share with us.
To: AlbertWang
Without turning this into a blasting seminar, it is my understanding that simply pouring oil on fertilizer is possible, but that ANFO takes a hefty punch to get going in the first place, and that simply pouring fuel oil into it is not the path to blasting success.
The OKC blast was remarkably strong. Shoddy ANFO would only have spread fertilizer around in a big mess.
62
posted on
04/16/2005 7:02:28 AM PDT
by
eno_
(Freedom Lite - it's almost worth defending.)
To: mad_as_he$$
When all is said and done... Where did the extra leg come from?Also, was it not determined the leg belonged to a woman? So there is a woman out there who was also involved. I say "involved" because had she not been, there would have been a hospital report.
The leg was initially buried with a woman but was later determined it was not her leg.
To: mad_as_he$$
When all is said and done... Where did the extra leg come from?Also, was it not determined the leg belonged to a woman? So there is a woman out there who was also involved. I say "involved" because had she not been, there would have been a hospital report.
The leg was initially buried with a woman but was later determined it was not her leg.
To: All
Sorry for the double post. Something went too slow, and I thought I hadn't posted correctly.
To: Gatún(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)
Here's a view of the Memorial last Saturday morning, 4/9/05
66
posted on
04/16/2005 7:07:46 AM PDT
by
plsvn
To: CaptSkip
Increased distance increases time between blast/shock waves and differential between the two? Why would it? Especially if the two shocks are from the same type of source.
67
posted on
04/16/2005 7:07:50 AM PDT
by
eno_
(Freedom Lite - it's almost worth defending.)
To: plsvn
Thank you for the photo. It's beautiful.
To: Joe Boucher
Then why doesn't Mr. Bush let the truth be known. Any attempt to expose the obvious and developing pattern of terrorist acts, as well as the incompetence (sanctioned or incidental) and possible criminal misrepresentation of facts and events leading up to 9/11 would backfire.
First, it would be seen as a late rebuttal to Fahrenheit 911, which is so shabby it does not bear a reply.
Second, the MSM would not recant, after having sold the 'official' versions of events, and instead would represent the entire thing as a partisan attempt to 'smear' Hillary.
Then they would start stumping for the 'poor wronged Hillary vote', victim of Bill's philanderings, victim of the VRWC, yadda yadda yadda. Victims are what the Democrats are all about. They are the base.
You get the picture.
Unfortunately, there is still a significant population of true believers and useful idiots who would suck this stuff up and use it to promote Hillary, quite possibly successfully.
69
posted on
04/16/2005 7:12:46 AM PDT
by
Smokin' Joe
(Grant no power to government you would not want your worst enemies to wield against you.)
To: CaptSkip
IIRC, University of OK seismographs picked up two distinct shockwaves, also.
They were later explained away as having been some sort of reverberation or refraction effect.
I am a geologist, not a geophysicist per se, but I didn't buy it. Two explosions, two shockwaves.
70
posted on
04/16/2005 7:15:53 AM PDT
by
Smokin' Joe
(Grant no power to government you would not want your worst enemies to wield against you.)
To: CaptSkip
There is so much out there on this but it seems the MSM isn't saying a word..COuld it be because it was during the Clinton years?
71
posted on
04/16/2005 7:17:38 AM PDT
by
Beth528
To: Gatún(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)
Isn't it amazing how the government think we are so stupid?
72
posted on
04/16/2005 7:19:35 AM PDT
by
Beth528
To: Leatherneck_MT
That would've been the seismological observatory at OU, about 30 miles south in Norman. I believe the official spin on the story was that the second wave was an echo caused by a substratum of stone.
Believe that?
73
posted on
04/16/2005 7:20:23 AM PDT
by
OKSooner
To: doberville
The least diabolical scenario I can concoct is that Federal agencies BATF?) had stored (illegaly?) explosives in the building which went off in sympathetic detonation.
If that is the case, that would explain why the support columns by the daycare failed when the truck bomb should not have taken them out.
It also means they were, in aggregate, probably as or more powerful than the ANFO bomb in the truck.
If that sort of foul-up was on the Feds, no way they would want to own it.
74
posted on
04/16/2005 7:21:08 AM PDT
by
Smokin' Joe
(Grant no power to government you would not want your worst enemies to wield against you.)
To: ovrtaxt
Will you add me to your ping list please? Thanks!
75
posted on
04/16/2005 7:22:46 AM PDT
by
I_saw_the_light
(Tagline:(optional, printed after your name on post):)
To: eno_
IIRC, ANFO is only 40% of the punch from an equal amount of TNT.
76
posted on
04/16/2005 7:25:09 AM PDT
by
Smokin' Joe
(Grant no power to government you would not want your worst enemies to wield against you.)
To: Gatún(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)
Thank you for the photo. It's beautiful.
You're welcome. I could post a few more if there is interest.
77
posted on
04/16/2005 7:25:25 AM PDT
by
plsvn
To: teldon30
I spent many many hours inside the perimeter in the days following the bombing, working with the USAR and FEMA teams. The details they gave us as far as how the explosion destroyed the building were as follows.
The truck bomb explosion lifted up the front of the Murrah building, compromising one or two of the main horizontal supports on the north side. When the weight of the upper floors came back down, the supports failed and the upper floors crashed through the remaining lower floors. Hence the huge rubble pile in the front middle of the building.
The hole was not blown out of the building, essentially, the hole was created when the unsupported north side of the building collapsed on itself.
I don't know if this explanation helps or hurts anyone's theory, it's just one we were given from the architectural / engineering teams working the site.
79
posted on
04/16/2005 7:26:08 AM PDT
by
Cboldt
To: ovrtaxt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 141-158 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson