was OKC an inside job?

[oahuoahu]

in the OKC event, the bomb levelled almost half of one building, but it did nothing to other buildings that were only a couple feet further away from the bomb than the building that suffered the most damage.... also the crater the bomb left to the ground was very small considering how it was able to destroy and do so much damage to that building... i never understood how this made sense. any science docs i can watch that explain how the OKC bomb worked how it did so much damage and only blasted mainly in 1 direction and not in a full circle?

[Revolutionary91]

was OKC an inside job?

Yes.

[Revolutionary91]

http://members.aol.com/bardsquill/TRUCK2.GIF

[Devil's Advocate]

in the OKC event, the bomb levelled almost half of one building, but it did nothing to other buildings that were only a couple feet further away from the bomb than the building that suffered the most damage.... also the crater the bomb left to the ground was very small considering how it was able to destroy and do so much damage to that building... i never understood how this made sense. any science docs i can watch that explain how the OKC bomb worked how it did so much damage and only blasted mainly in 1 direction and not in a full circle?

I have not looked into this one. Not that I should not, I was unaware there was a CT theory about it until I saw someone mention it off hand one day in a news report.
I nosed through stuff, but once the 9/11 event happened, and CT grew around it, I became interesting into looking into it.

One of the things I recall having a problem with it was the seismic data recorded two blasts, but that was ignored.
Why it was ignored I do not know.
Well, maybe not ignored, perhaps it was explained and I never saw that, but I am unsure about it all.

Another claim I found interesting (If True) was that not only did the device continue to change size, but the delivery vehicle did as well.
But again, I have not looked into it, so it is all just speculation as far as what I am saying is concerned.

[Devil's Advocate]

http://members.aol.com/bardsquill/TRUCK2.GIF

What military base is that?
And who is the source of the photograph?

[Revolutionary91]

What military base is that?

The pilot who took the photos wishes (for the obvious reasons) to remain anonymous, but these photos are purported to be of an area near Camp Gruber-Braggs, Oklahoma in early April of 1995. Needless to say, just days after this photo was taken, the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City was destroyed (along with internal cutter charges) by a Ryder truck full of explosives.
NEW! In a recently discovered news article written by the Washington Post on June 17th, 1997, the Oklahoma National Guard authenticates the following photos as being exactly what they appear to be, photos of a Ryder truck in a clandestine base at Camp Gruber-Braggs.


http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/TRUCK/truck.html

[oahuoahu]

that photo doesnt really reveal anything. who cares if a truck was at a base

but what im talking about is important

you have a bomb literally with such destructive force it demolishes a building in one direction, but does nothing to buildings in the other direction that are just as far away... doesnt make sense. unless it was like a bomb that only blows up in 1 direction i could understand that

[Devil's Advocate]

that photo doesnt really reveal anything. who cares if a truck was at a base

but what im talking about is important

you have a bomb literally with such destructive force it demolishes a building in one direction, but does nothing to buildings in the other direction that are just as far away... doesnt make sense. unless it was like a bomb that only blows up in 1 direction i could understand that

Do you have a map of the area to back up your claim about the distance of the buildings?
I would like to see it if you do.
I'm not saying you're wrong, I just do not have much information on this issue.

[DGM]

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/TRUCK/truck.html
That has to be it. The smoking gun. Ryder after all only had one truck.:rolleyes:

[Revolutionary91]

that photo doesnt really reveal anything. who cares if a truck was at a base

but what im talking about is important

you have a bomb literally with such destructive force it demolishes a building in one direction, but does nothing to buildings in the other direction that are just as far away... doesnt make sense. unless it was like a bomb that only blows up in 1 direction i could understand that

Bombs dont do that. The picture of the truck is important and is one of many pieces of evidence.

[DGM]

that photo doesnt really reveal anything. who cares if a truck was at a base

but what im talking about is important

you have a bomb literally with such destructive force it demolishes a building in one direction, but does nothing to buildings in the other direction that are just as far away... doesnt make sense. unless it was like a bomb that only blows up in 1 direction i could understand that
Lots of windows were blown out. The the collapse was cause because the truck was parked next to a critical column

[Revolutionary91]

That has to be it. The smoking gun. Ryder after all only had one truck.:rolleyes:

Oh I see, just a coincidence. How about this video?

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2006/181206mcveighvideo.htm

[slingblade]

in the OKC event, the bomb levelled almost half of one building, but it did nothing to other buildings that were only a couple feet further away from the bomb than the building that suffered the most damage.... also the crater the bomb left to the ground was very small considering how it was able to destroy and do so much damage to that building... i never understood how this made sense. any science docs i can watch that explain how the OKC bomb worked how it did so much damage and only blasted mainly in 1 direction and not in a full circle?

Back up--what do you mean by "inside job?"

You can't understand how the physics of it worked in that instance, so it must have been committed and covered up by Clinton? What?

I'm wondering now if every president has tried to kill his citizens and cover it up. Or if it's a requirement of the office.

Or if it's just speculation by people who don't know how anything works, but would rather blame that on the government.

EDIT: and as to your spurious claim above:

Wiki: At 9:02 a.m. CST, the Ryder truck, which contained about 5,000 pounds (2,300 kg) of fertilizer and nitromethane mixture packed into the back, detonated in front of the north side of the nine-story Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building.[7] The blast destroyed a third of the building[8] and created a thirty-foot (9 m) wide, eight-foot (2.4 m) deep crater on NW 5th Street next to the building.[9] The blast destroyed or damaged 324 buildings in a sixteen-block radius,[10] destroyed or burned 86 cars around the site, and shattered glass in 258 nearby buildings[11] (the broken glass alone accounted for 5% of the death total and 69% of the injuries outside the Murrah Federal building).[12] The destruction of the buildings left several hundred people homeless and shut down multiple offices in downtown Oklahoma City.[13]

May want to do some reading. Find out some things for yourself instead of coming here to get spoon-fed by others.

[DGM]

Oh I see, just a coincidence. How about this video?

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2006/181206mcveighvideo.htm
And that story proves what?

[Dr Adequate]

MEMO TO ALL STUPID PEOPLE

The fact that you cannot understand something does not mean that it was caused by:

(1) the government;

(2) Jews;

(3) aliens;

(4) divine intervention;

(5) Keebler Elves.

Thank you for your attention.

[Revolutionary91]

And that story proves what?

Read it.

[DGM]

Read it.
I did! You need to explain the connection not just through something out.

[Gravy]

in the OKC event, the bomb levelled almost half of one building, but it did nothing to other buildings that were only a couple feet further away from the bomb than the building that suffered the most damage.... also the crater the bomb left to the ground was very small considering how it was able to destroy and do so much damage to that building... i never understood how this made sense. any science docs i can watch that explain how the OKC bomb worked how it did so much damage and only blasted mainly in 1 direction and not in a full circle?The bomb blast didn't level half the building. It leveled one column, which led to progressive collapse of the floors above. About 80% of the victims died from that collapse, not from the blast effects.

See links to technical papers here: http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=2380904&postcount=4

There is no evidence of any kind of "inside job."

[oahuoahu]

Lots of windows were blown out. The the collapse was cause because the truck was parked next to a critical column

by nothing i meant nothing to the structual integrity. i know windows were blown out but that doesnt really help demolish the building

was the trick really parked next to the building? i coulda sworn i saw pictures of the blast crater far from the building, in the far side of the parking lot, and the blast crater was not really much closer to the fed building than it was to building across the street

sigh i got to try to find pictures again

[Revolutionary91]

I did! You need to explain the connection not just through something out.


I hope other people who click on the link are able to read.

[Par]

http://members.aol.com/bardsquill/TRUCK2.GIF



Heh, don't you think that the Ryder people, in some crazy scheme to actually turn a profit, might have more than one truck?

[Gravy]

MEMO TO ALL STUPID PEOPLE

The fact that you cannot understand something does not mean that it was caused by:

(1) the government;

(2) Jews;

(3) aliens;

(4) divine intervention;

(5) Keebler Elves.

Thank you for your attention.

Addendum:

If you're wondering if this was meant for you, it was.

[DGM]

by nothing i meant nothing to the structual integrity. i know windows were blown out but that doesnt really help demolish the building

was the trick really parked next to the building? i coulda sworn i saw pictures of the blast crater far from the building, in the far side of the parking lot, and the blast crater was not really much closer to the fed building than it was to building across the street

sigh i got to try to find pictures again
Within feet.

[Gravy]

was the trick really parked next to the building? Yes. Check the links I just gave.

Edit: this one in particular (http://www.mipt.org/pdf/forensicengineering2.pdf).

[DGM]

I hope other people who click on the link are able to read.
So you can't explain it then? Speculation is not proof.

[slingblade]

No, none of us can read. Or write. How we post here, and respond to posts, is an inside job.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/thum_5604469a1525c5cd3.jpg (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=7038)

Just wondering, what other buildings near the blast should have been equally as damaged? I'm looking really hard, here, but can't seem to find any.

[Revolutionary91]

Heh, don't you think that the Ryder people, in some crazy scheme to actually turn a profit, might have more than one truck?

Why would it be in a military base? I know there were defence cuts but I'm sure soldiers have their own trucks.

[oahuoahu]

heres pictures i could find in 2 minutes. i need to find closer ones of the crater... hmm i will try

http://www.apfn.org/OKC/no-crater.jpg

http://jeffhead.com/liberty/liberty/okcpat.gif

second picture shows where the car was parked, however i dont know if that is accurate. first picture shows how it blew apart 1 building, but the other building close by wasnt demolished at all... i guess what we need to figure out is if the truck really was parked right next to the fed building or not. if it was parked in the middle or far side of the parking lot, then things look fishy. i doupt the truck was parked on the sidewalk of the building rofl pretty sure it was parked in the parking lot

will look for more

[DGM]

Why would it be in a military base? I know there were defence cuts but I'm sure soldiers have their own trucks.
Why not.

[Revolutionary91]

So you can't explain it then? Speculation is not proof.

It contradicts the official timeline of McVeigh.

[Revolutionary91]

Why not.

Do the military hire Ryder trucks?

[Gravy]

Why would it be in a military base? I know there were defence cuts but I'm sure soldiers have their own trucks.The military often rents trucks. A friend of mine used to rent U-Hauls to the local National Guard base on a regular basis.

[Gravy]

i guess what we need to figure out is if the truck really was parked right next to the fed building or not. Yes. 14 feet from the face of the building, next to a column that supported a main transfer girder.

[DGM]

Sure why not. Who's to say it wasn't a private contractors. Ever hear of them? You just don't know.

[Devil's Advocate]

Revolutionary91,

What was to be gained from this event if it were an inside job?

[roger]

Do the military hire Ryder trucks?Yes. They also buy surplus, second hand trucks, vans, cars, you name it. Have you ever been on a military base in your life. Ever worked on one? Apparently not.

FYI, just a few weeks ago I was driving around a panel truck on a military base in a Iraqi road check exercise. I promise you we weren't using humvee's, but a ragged collection of cars, vans, etc.

[slingblade]

i doupt the truck was parked on the sidewalk of the building rofl pretty sure it was parked in the parking lot



The truck was parked in the street. Not in any parking lot. No one cares what you doubt; not when the facts show your doubts are without foundation.

GAAAAH! I'm so tired of arguments from incredulity!

[uk_dave]

GAAAAH! I'm so tired of arguments from incredulity!


I know. I can't believe people still use them.

ahem....

[slingblade]

I know. I can't believe people still use them.

ahem....

Floggings are at six; do be prompt. :cool:

[Gravy]

I know. I can't believe people still use them.

ahem....I find it hard to believe that someone would make such a lame joke so soon after I've woken up.

[oahuoahu]

i consider the side of the street where cars are parked, a parking lot

anyway ive looked at the science and this seems pretty open and shut to me. the bomb was close to the support collumn and when 1 support collumn collapsed it brang a few others down with it causing the collapse

other buildings werent close enough to the force to have their support collumns knocked

makes sense to me now

[DGM]

It contradicts the official timeline of McVeigh.
You have conflicting report on the time line from one source. That's a little weak don't you think. Would you like to get convicted on that?

[slingblade]

i consider the side of the street where cars are parked, a parking lot

Why? It's the street. Parking lots are lots, off the street. They are called lots for that reason. Don't do that anymore, or at least say it out loud. People will laugh.

anyway ive looked at the science and this seems pretty open and shut to me. the bomb was close to the support collumn and when 1 support collumn collapsed it brang a few others down with it causing the collapse

other buildings werent close enough to the force to have their support collumns knocked

makes sense to me now

Sorry, but you don't get off that easy for having wound up Revo over something you could have looked up yourself.

Drop and give me 50.

:D

[Revolutionary91]

You have conflicting report on the time line from one source. That's a little weak don't you think. Would you like to get convicted on that?


One source? It's a video!

If it was security cam footage of him robbing a bank do you think he would get convicted?

[slingblade]

I'm pretty sure I've heard about that video, and that it's subsequently been proven the man in it is not McVeigh. Just a close resemblance. But I won't swear to that. I'm trying to find info, but Google's all dirty with CT links. The spiders have gone stupid, I think.

[DGM]

One source? It's a video!

If it was security cam footage of him robbing a bank do you think he would get convicted?
Did this video magically appear or did some one make it (source)?

[slingblade]

"The video was released by Bill Bean, a film producer who has suffered intense surveillance and harassment since taking the footage, and is the subject of a February 2007 Hustler Magazine feature story..." from article.

[SOMERLED]

No, none of us can read. Or write. How we post here, and respond to posts, is an inside job.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/thum_5604469a1525c5cd3.jpg (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=7038)

Just wondering, what other buildings near the blast should have been equally as damaged? I'm looking really hard, here, but can't seem to find any.
The building in the bottom right hand corner of your photo had debris feom the Murrah building on its roof. Clear evidence of the blast coming out from within the Murrah bldg.
Hey, dont take my word for it, even Congress knows. Some retired general sent them a full report.
Don't ask me for references, look and learn.

[DGM]

If it was security cam footage of him robbing a bank do you think he would get convicted?

It's not a security video is it?

[Revolutionary91]

Did this video magically appear or did some one make it (source)?


So you were lying when you said you had read the article.

Are you suggesting McVeigh was photoshopped in? You are like the no planersw.

[kookbreaker]

The building in the bottom right hand corner of your photo had debris feom the Murrah building on its roof. Clear evidence of the blast coming out from within the Murrah bldg.


That's a funny definition of 'clear'.


Hey, dont take my word for it, even Congress knows. Some retired general sent them a full report.
Don't ask me for references, look and learn.

The military is not immune to having nutters in its ranks.

Sucks for you that McVeigh admitted he did it, eh?

[DavidJames]

Gee the same people who believe the 9/11 CT believe the OKC CT, I'm shocked.

Defective brains don't discriminate.

[Revolutionary91]

Former FBI Terrorist Task Force director Danny Coulson has called for a new grand jury investigation into the Oklahoma City bombing and for the first time names Andreas Strassmeir as an "agent," in a documentary set to air Sunday, according to lawyer Jesse Trentadue.



http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2007/020307okcinvestigation.htm

[scissorhands]

Heres the video in question.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVL0c7v0ZF4&eurl=

Its clearly not McVeigh, but could someone screen cap the fleeting glimpse of his face?

[Revolutionary91]

Its clearly not McVeigh

Have you consulted any experts on that? Or is it just your opinion?

[DGM]

So you were lying when you said you had read the article.

Are you suggesting McVeigh was photoshopped in? You are like the no planersw.
I'm saying it's not McVeigh. When did I lie. I said it was a single source.

[slingblade]

The building in the bottom right hand corner of your photo had debris feom the Murrah building on its roof. Clear evidence of the blast coming out from within the Murrah bldg.
Hey, dont take my word for it,

Hadn't planned on it. Really.

The blast from the truck was sufficient to cause what you see there. A Catholic church was also destroyed, as well as hundreds of other buildings damaged. All of it caused by that truck bomb. Period.

I'm not going to ask you for the evidence we both know you don't have, nor am I going to care about any argument you make, because it's just not worth your time or mine. You've a moderated thread to tend to, and I'm certainly not going to divert you from it.

[scissorhands]

My opinion obviously, it doesnt look anything like him.

[Par]

Revolutionary91: In light of the fact that the military have been known to rent vehicles, has your opinion of the photograph of the Ryder truck in the military base changed at all?

[Revolutionary91]

My opinion obviously, it doesnt look anything like him.

Good job your opinion has no bearing then.

[Revolutionary91]

Revolutionary91: In light of the fact that the military have been known to rent vehicles, has your opinion of the photograph of the Ryder truck in the military base changed at all?

Show me some evidence that they have. All I had was 2 personal anecdotes.

[Firestone]

Well, I somehow expected to see some real evidence that the guy in the video is McVeigh.
I also expected to see some real evidence that the van in the video is the same van than the one used by McVeigh.

Silly me, of course.

[Gravy]

Heres the video in question.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVL0c7v0ZF4&eurl=

Its clearly not McVeigh, but could someone screen cap the fleeting glimpse of his face?Nah. This was all discussed in a separate thread a while back. It's got photos. You can find it with the search function if you're interested, but there's nothing to it. Just more abject denialist nonsense.

Here's the thread: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=70806
Wizard is Pdoherty.

[scissorhands]

Thanks, as I thought, its not him.

[Par]

Show me some evidence that they have. All I had was 2 personal anecdotes.



So, let’s say, just hypothetically, that I was to provide such evidence in my next post. Would that change your opinion of the photograph of the Ryder truck in the military base?

[Dr Adequate]

Again, I'm having difficulties imagining the planning process.

Black Op. 1: So, we want people to think that Timothy McVeigh used a truck full of explosives to blow up the Murragh Building. How are we going to do it?

Black Op. 2: Well ... we could use a truck full of explosives to blow up the Murragh Building, and then blame it on Timothy McVeigh.

Black Op. 1: Don't be daft.

Black Op. 2: Huh?

Black Op. 1: Look, it's standard black ops doctrine. If you want people to think that something has happened, the very last thing you'd do is actually make it happen. What's the point of that?

Black Op. 2: Well, it would be convincing. You know, we could blow up the building with the truckload of explosives, and then say that the truck full of explosives had blown up the building, and point to all the evidence that the truck full of explosives did in fact blow up the building. Our story would be, you know, consistent with the facts.

Black Op. 1: We don't want our false-flag attacks to be convincing. Look, let me give you an example. If you wanted people to think that terrorists had released rabid wolves on the streets of Seattle, how would you go about it?

Black Op. 2: I'd ... er ... I'd release rabid wolves on the streets of Seattle and blame it on terrorists.

Black Op. 1: No, no you fool! You'd take a bunch of aardvarks, paint them so that they look like iguanas with toothache, and release them in Detroit.

Black Op. 2: I quit.

[Revolutionary91]

So, let’s say, just hypothetically, that I was to provide such evidence in my next post. Would that change your opinion of the photograph of the Ryder truck in the military base?

I weould consider it far less suspicious. If you have such evidence please post it.

[Z]

Rev, old boy, what damnes your opinion most of all is the fact that McVeigh admitted to doing it, explained how he did it, and had his story corraborated by multiple sources... one of which I worked with at the time of the bombing. Further, you clearly have no idea about anything military - there are regularly Ryder trucks, U-Haul trucks, etc. all over military bases. If for no other reason, than at the time of the bombing, our operational vehicle status was at under 50% on Ft. Sill, OK - meaning over half of our vehicles were down for repairs - we rented a LOT of trucks for a variety of purposes. Futhermore, soldiers rent their own vehicles for other purposes, and in most cases, there's nothing specifically wrong with driving non-military trucks into military motorpools.

One of my co-workers at Ft. Sill was Spc. Charles Davidson, who had worked alongside McVeigh when he was still in demolitions. He was in no way surprised when the OKC bombing happened. We were in the field on a training exercise, and quite suddenly, we were all put into checkfire. Chuck was pulled from his ammo truck and questioned intensely for several hours, simply because he had been in the same unit as McVeigh. In fact, when they pulled him and someone said, 'OKC bombing', it was Chuck who first mentioned McVeigh.

The ragtag group of civil revolutionaries that McVeigh belonged to had existed for several years already, but had never been believed to have the balls to pull off much of anything. If you can accuse the government of anything at all in the OKC bombing, it's general incompetence when dealing with internal terrorism.

The mechanical details of the bombing are precisely known, and most of the damage was done not by the explosion itself, but by the disabling of a front support column on the building... As federal buildings go, this one was pretty poorly designed.

McVeigh's own admission sets the responsibility cleanly on his head - and the video footage was analyzed several times by several different experts, and all conclude that the person in that security cam video was NOT McVeigh. Besides which, McVeigh admitted to not being there at all.

Granted, my statements are largely anecdotal; but unless you're going to decide that I'm in on the conspiracy too, you're going to have a hard time convincing ANYONE who was actually in OK in the military at the time that this was an 'inside job'.

As far as burden of proof goes, since McVeigh himself made a full confession, the burden of proof is on YOU to prove that this was an inside job. It's on YOU to prove that the military never rents vehicles (which will be impossible, because we did). It's on YOU to prove that the man in the video is McVeigh (again impossible, because it's NOT). And it's on YOU to prove that either piece of 'evidence' leads to a conclusion of 'inside job'.

Considering McVeigh's military background, that could have been his van, which he took to the base to load up with explosives or stolen arms or whatever.

Considering his circle of friends, the man in the video could have been disguised to look like McVeigh to act as an alibi.

Considering your lack of knowledge of the military in general and Oklahoma specifically, I have to wonder what gives you the authority to declare OKC an inside job.

[Revolutionary91]

I know McVeigh admitted it. His accomplice has also said recently that he was provocateured by an FBI agent. If you are going to accept McVeighs word as gospel, why not Terry Nichols?

Do you beleive all the sightings of John Doe number 2 were mistaken? Even the former head of FBI terrorism task force is convinced he exists.

[Gravy]

I weould consider it far less suspicious. If you have such evidence please post it.

MILITARY SURFACE DEPLOYMENT AND DISTRIBUTION
COMMAND U.S. GOVERNMENT TRUCK RENTAL AGREEMENT (http://www.sddc.army.mil/sddc/Content/Pub/899/truckagree.pdf)

Seriously, dude, that took 30 seconds.

[Revolutionary91]

McVeigh's own admission sets the responsibility cleanly on his head - and the video footage was analyzed several times by several different experts, and all conclude that the person in that security cam video was NOT McVeigh. Besides which, McVeigh admitted to not being there at all.

Which security cam video? I posted a home video. Can you name these experts?

[roger]

Show me some evidence that they have. All I had was 2 personal anecdotes.

In the mid 1970s Ryder secured a contract with the Department of Defense to provide rental trucks for military personnel at 110 bases in the United States.

From http://www.answers.com/topic/truck-rental-and-leasing-without-drivers?cat=biz-fin.

Ryder also supplies and manages vehicles, equipment and personnel for military organizations in the United Kingdom and Germany
From here (http://stocks.us.reuters.com/stocks/fullDescription.asp?rpc=66&symbol=R).

more:
http://www.sddc.army.mil/Public/Passenger/Carriers%20and%20Programs/Car%20Rental%20Carriers
http://www.trianglerentacar.com/dis_gov.html

evidence that rental car agencies exist on military bases:
Rental car agencies located on Military Installations are only available to service Military and Federal Government personnel who have access to the installation.
http://www.oahu.us/oahu_car_rental.htm

I'm bored, it's silly to argue with these people.

[Z]

I know McVeigh admitted it. His accomplice has also said recently that he was provocateured by an FBI agent. If you are going to accept McVeighs word as gospel, why not Terry Nichols?

Do you beleive all the sightings of John Doe number 2 were mistaken? Even the former head of FBI terrorism task force is convinced he exists.


Terry Nichols was also a well-known liar and schemer, around Ft. Sill anyway. His word isn't worth spit. He used to regularly tell similar tall tales to get himself out of trouble or to make the government look bad.

And, yes, I do believe all the sightings of John Doe number 2 were mistaken - that is, that they did not see who they thought they saw. But again, I also think it could well be a case of someone attempting to alibi McVeigh instead.

[DGM]

Rev 91;

Still waiting for you to man up.

[Z]

Which security cam video? I posted a home video. Can you name these experts?

I may be confused - I thought you were referring to the convenience store video that was supposed to put McVeigh somewhere else at the time of the bombing. My apologies - I'll go back and check out your post.

(I rarely read through these links anymore because I've seen them all time and time again the entire time I've been on the net. Most of them are just the same old, debunked, recycled, anti-patriot garbage that's been there all along. Sorry.)

[SpitfireIX]

The military often rents trucks. A friend of mine used to rent U-Hauls to the local National Guard base on a regular basis.


Just to expand on this: I used to work for Sears as a customer service representative (in fact, I was working there when the Murrah Building was bombed), and our delivery information screens showed whether the delivery was to be made by a Sears truck, or a rented truck, such as Ryder or U-Haul. Sears had its own fleet, yet still rented some trucks when needed. The number of trucks required on any given day fluctuates; rather than have enough trucks available to cover the heaviest delivery days and have a large number sit idle on lighter delivery days, Sears had enough trucks to cover the average case, and used rental trucks to supplement capacity when demand required it. That's simply good business practice. So why do you find it suspicious that the Army or National Guard would supplement their fleet with rental trucks when needed? Should important maneuvers be canceled, or useful equipment be left behind, just because a couple of trucks have broken down?

Also, I did occasionally arrange for deliveries to military bases--usually to residential facilities, but once we actually delivered something to a submarine (though our truck wasn't allowed to enter that part of the sub base--the Navy carried the item the last part of the way). So what we see in the picture could just be a delivery truck of some sort (or, as mentioned, a contractor's truck).

[Revolutionary91]

Rev 91;

Still waiting for you to man up.

Well you know what it is like to wait.

[Liszt]

edit - my PC appears to be on drugs

[Z]

OK, regarding the video clip - are we talking about the one with the M113 in it? - I spot several obvious problems with the theory that this 'proves he was in the army in '93'. First: no reliable date-time is presented. By reliable, I mean something in the video itself that clearly dates the piece as being in '93.

Second, the location is clearly not a U.S. Army motorpool. The condition of it is completely unacceptable, especially in '93, at the height of what we used to call the 'dog and pony show' Army. It could well be a National Guard pool, though.

Third, the condition of the M113 is extremely indicative of not being regular army. The CARC paint job was nonstandard for '93, in this particular camo pattern. The interior views reveal a stripped-to-the-core vehicle, with no radios, no equipment at all - not even any seats - and in filthy condition. This is clearly NOT a regular army vehicle.

The uniform the soldier is wearing has an earplug case. Earplug cases are common to field artillery units, and for a time, to units on Ft. Sill, OK. (There may be other units that added the earplug case, but I'm not aware of them). However, McVeigh was in EOD, and as far as I know (this is based on second-hand knowledge, so it may be wrong), EOD units did not standardly wear earplug cases in '93. They have RELIABLE forms of hearing protection.

My own consideration of this video is as such: IF the kid in the video IS McVeigh, AND this video IS from '93, it proves only that McVeigh had a military uniform (which you are expected to keep and maintain during your eight years of inactive ready reserve duty), and that he was somewhere with a pair of stripped out M113s - from the looks of them, I'd say in a reserve or nat'l guard motorpool, or in a private motorpool. And yes, you can buy used APCs from the government. Collectors often do.

In fact, there's a good chance that you're seeing a video from a militia motorpool. Several militias have APCs and a few other non-offensive vehicles.

I'll try to capture a screenshot of the kid's face.

[Par]

Well you know what it is like to wait.



So, are you simply saying that you refuse to apologise to DGM for falsely accusing him of being a liar? I’ll admit, this sort of thing fascinates me; so, out of interest, what makes you think it’s OK to do that -- what is it about you that you feel exempts you from common decency?

[Z]

7657

That's the best shot I could get.

Another interesting anomaly - his earplug case is buttoned to his central shirt buttons. The Army puts ours on the left breast pocket.

[Z]

I have to guess I'm looking at the wrong video, since that's a SPC rank on his hat, and McVeigh was a sergeant. Sorry for the mix-up - REV, what post number has the home video you mentioned? Thanks.

[Par]

Revolutionary91: In light of the fact that the military have been shown (as per the evidence now provided) to rent vehicles, has your opinion of the photograph of the Ryder truck in the military base changed at all?

[peteweaver]

You should look at similar bombings such as the manchester arndale centre bombing by the IRA in 1996.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/check/manchester/realmedia/bomb_explode?size=16x9&bgc=C0C0C0&nbram=1&bbram=1

http://www.bbc.co.uk/manchester/content/image_galleries/150606_manchester_bomb_gallery.shtml?9

http://www.bbc.co.uk/manchester/content/image_galleries/150606_manchester_bomb_gallery.shtml?10

Windows were shattered half a mile away, however nobody was killed, the IRA had issued a coded warning and police were able to work out the approximate location of the bomb.

[Elizabeth I]

The bomb blast didn't level half the building. It leveled one column, which led to progressive collapse of the floors above. About 80% of the victims died from that collapse, not from the blast effects.

See links to technical papers here: http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=2380904&postcount=4

There is no evidence of any kind of "inside job."

Oh, no, not ANOTHER "progressive collapse." That's so sloppy. When will these plotters ever learn?

Why would it be in a military base? I know there were defence cuts but I'm sure soldiers have their own trucks.

I can think of at least two reasons for a rental truck being on military installation, besides its having been rented by the military (which also happens):

1. Delivery to the installation by a vendor. ETA: which has already been mentioned.

2. Personnel moving into new quarters and renting a truck or van for their possessions.

I know McVeigh admitted it. His accomplice has also said recently that he was provocateured by an FBI agent. If you are going to accept McVeighs word as gospel, why not Terry Nichols?

He was provoked. An agent provocateur provokes. Provocateur is French for provoker. You wouldn't say he was "provokered," would you?

[FactCheck]

Before 9/11, Alex Jones' piggy bank was the dead of Waco and OKC. Alex Jones and other conspiracy theorists need OKC to be an inside job so they can make money off dead. You can't make a dime if you agree with the government and say McVeigh did it.

So they search the internet for anything which can be used as a tool to those ends.

Since Reagans infamous words "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.', the culture in this country has slowly grown to do more than hold government accountable. It's been to hate and fear government. As if it were some monolithic demond with only one purpose - to inslave mankind. People like Alex Jones use that fear make a living.

I think this is an important part of the conspiracy story which is too often left out. It helps the conspiracy story when they talk about neo-con motives, but no one ever talks about the conspiracy theorist motives for hobbling together unrelated facts.

If money was the motive for destroying the towers then the question is, did Alex Jones blow up the towers?

[scissorhands]

So, are you simply saying that you refuse to apologise to DGM for falsely accusing him of being a liar? I’ll admit, this sort of thing fascinates me; so, out of interest, what makes you think it’s OK to do that -- what is it about you that you feel exempts you from common decency?

His whole world view necessitates calling thousands of people liars and shills without a shred of evidence to support it.
After a while, doing this on such a casual basis makes it seem quite normal I guess.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

http://times.discovery.com/tv-schedules/series.html?paid=141.13745.30536.33887.x

Watch it and stfu.

[SpitfireIX]

From a Washington Post article (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/oklahoma/stories/militia.htm):


The Oklahoma National Guard confirmed Friday that the aerial photos were indeed taken above Camp Gruber in the fall of 1994 and said the classified project involved weapons sensors and was overseen by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. The National Guard's statement said the truck "had no association whatsoever with the tragedy at the Alfred P. Murrah Building."

[Undesired Walrus]

And what was the OKC bombing in the interests of exactly?

Kosovo?

[Stellafane]

OK CT nutjobs, it's gloves off time...

Listen up, OK? McViegh was one of your own -- one of your own! He was a CTer wacko like you, believing in all sorts of weird crap about the government and sekrit conspiracies and the whole stupid lot. You may not want to own up to that, but there it is. And has been mentioned elsewhere in this thread, McVeigh actually confessed to doing the bombing. The despicable puke seemed proud of it in fact; if anything his only regret was that he didn't get a higher body count.

Ironic, isn't it? Here you guys go around accusing the government of killing its own people, and yet you seem reluctant to accept that a self-confessed one of your own was a mass killer of 168 innocent civilians, many of whom were children. Rant and whine all you want, but when it comes to recent mass murder atrocities on the American public, it's CTers 1, Government 0. Is this why you try to promote such the insane idea that OKC was an inside job -- because at the end of the day, it's the CTers with American blood on their hands?

Funny, I also noticed that you didn't answer a rather obvious question: Why would the American government do this? Explain to me Clinton's thought processes when he conspired to kill innocent American goverment workers and blame it on a fringe group of crazies no one had ever even heard about. Explain how he convinced McVeigh to take the blame and keep his mouth shut right up to the point they stuck the lethal injection in him. (I know Clinton was persuasive and all, but come on...)

So that's it. OKC was done by a self-confessed mass murderer who bought into the CT drivel a little too seriously. I suggest you all just shut up about it, and hope like all hell that all this 9/11 nonsense isn't breeding future Timothy McVeighs.

[Revolutionary91]

OK CT nutjobs, it's gloves off time...

Listen up, OK? McViegh was one of your own -- one of your own! He was a CTer wacko like you, believing in all sorts of weird crap about the government and sekrit conspiracies and the whole stupid lot. You may not want to own up to that, but there it is. And has been mentioned elsewhere in this thread, McVeigh actually confessed to doing the bombing. The despicable puke seemed proud of it in fact; if anything his only regret was that he didn't get a higher body count.

Itonic, isn't it? Here you guys go around accusing the government of killing its own people, and yet you seem reluctant to accept that a self-confessed one of your own was a mass killer of 168 innocent civilians, many of whom were children. Rant and whine all you want, but when it comes to recent mass murder atrocities on the American public, it's CTers 1, Government 0. Is this why you try to promote such the insane idea that OKC was an inside job -- because at the end of the day, it's the CTers with American blood on their hands?

Funny, I also noticed that you didn't answer a rather obvious question: Why would the American government do this? Explain to me Clinton's thought processes when he conspired to kill innocent American goverment workers and blame it on a fringe group of crazies no one had ever even heard about. Explain how he convinced McVeigh to take the blame and keep his mouth shut right up to the point they stuck the lethal injection in him. (I know Clinton was persuasive and all, but come on...)

So that's it. OKC was done by a self-confessed mass murderer who bought into the CT drivel a little too seriously. I suggest you all just shut up about it, and hope like all hell that all this 9/11 nonsense isn't breeding future Timothy McVeighs.

McVeigh did this on the anniversary of Waco. He was acting in revenge for the machine gunning of women and children, by the government.

[DGM]

McVeigh did this on the anniversary of Waco. He was acting in revenge for the machine gunning of women and children, by the government.
And you consider this right?

[scissorhands]

McVeigh did this on the anniversary of Waco. He was acting in revenge for the machine gunning of women and children, by the government.

Oh, so he did do it now?
Sorry its hard to keep track here.

[D'rok]

McVeigh did this on the anniversary of Waco. He was acting in revenge for the machine gunning of women and children, by the government.

Remarkable.

1. The Most Davidians died in a fire. They were not machine-gunned. No women or children were shot
2. So when it is rhetorically convenient, McVeigh committed the bombing?

[uk_dave]

McVeigh did this on the anniversary of Waco. He was acting in revenge for the machine gunning of women and children, by the government.

So it wasn't an 'inside job' after all?

[scissorhands]

But I thought he was still in the army, you said that video proved it?:confused:

[Pardalis]

and hope like all hell that all this 9/11 nonsense isn't breeding future Timothy McVeighs.

That's my fear also.

[Dr Adequate]

McVeigh did this on the anniversary of Waco. He was acting in revenge for the machine gunning of women and children, by the government. So, he was acting in revenge for something which never actually happened, by killing people who had nothing whatsoever to do with the Waco siege?

I can see why you'd pick him as a poster boy.

[Revolutionary91]

Remarkable.

1. The Most Davidians died in a fire. They were not machine-gunned. No women or children were shot
2. So when it is rhetorically convenient, McVeigh committed the bombing?


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5510108493532885562

When did I claim McVeigh wasnt involved?

[D'rok]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5510108493532885562

When did I claim McVeigh wasnt involved?

What exactly are you claiming?

[Dr Adequate]

When did I claim McVeigh wasnt involved? In the second post on this thread, you said that OKC was an inside job. Now you say "McVeigh did this on the anniversary of Waco. He was acting in revenge for the machine gunning of women and children, by the government."

If you have some consistent hypothesis, then I, like D'rok the Lacone, am at a loss to guess what it is.

[Pardalis]

What exactly are you claiming?

Let me guess...

McVeigh was a hologram?
McVeigh was a mossad agent?
McVeigh was a reptilian in disguise?

[Revolutionary91]

In the second post on this thread, you said that OKC was an inside job. Now you say "McVeigh did this on the anniversary of Waco. He was acting in revenge for the machine gunning of women and children, by the government."

If you have some consistent hypothesis, then I, like D'rok the Lacone, am at a loss to guess what it is.

He was provocateured by the FBI, just like in the 1993 wtc bombing. Why do people feign such confusion on this forum?

[Pardalis]

He was provocateured by the FBI

Yeah, that was my fourth guess... :rolleyes:

[D'rok]

He was provocateured by the FBI, just like in the 1993 wtc bombing. Why do people feign such confusion on this forum?

The FBI wanted to blow up some civil servants in order to get revenge for their own bungled siege at Waco?

[Revolutionary91]

The FBI wanted to blow up some civil servants in order to get revenge for their own bungled siege at Waco?

That was the ATF.

[scissorhands]

You mean provoked, not provocateured.
You have already been corrected once in this thread.
Thats a nonsense word isnt it?

[Pardalis]

Was there a missile involved in some way in OKC?

[Revolutionary91]

You mean provoked, not provocateured.
You have already been corrected once in this thread.
Thats a nonsense word isnt it?

No, I meant provocateured.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_provocateur

[Revolutionary91]

Was there a missile involved in some way in OKC?

According to the official story a missile was found. I don't believe that.

[D'rok]

That was the ATF.

Oops.

"A subsequent 51-day siege by the Federal Bureau of Investigation ended on April 19 when the complex was destroyed by fire"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_Siege

[kookbreaker]

No, I meant provocateured.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_provocateur

You either need a small lesson in French or a big one in English.

[Stellafane]

He was provocateured by the FBI, just like in the 1993 wtc bombing. Why do people feign such confusion on this forum?

Hookayyy....looks like the Magical Mystery Tour has now officially landed in La-La Land.

[scissorhands]

No, I meant provocateured.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_provocateur

:hb:

[Revolutionary91]

Oops.

"A subsequent 51-day siege by the Federal Bureau of Investigation ended on April 19 when the complex was destroyed by fire"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_Siege

ATF were based in the Murrah building and it was their original raid at Waco.

[Par]

Revolutionary91: In light of the fact that the military have been shown (as per the evidence now provided) to rent vehicles, has your opinion of the photograph of the Ryder truck in the military base changed at all?

Further, are you simply saying that you refuse to apologise to DGM for falsely accusing him of being a liar? I’ll admit, this sort of thing fascinates me; so, out of interest, what makes you think it’s OK to do that -- what is it about you that you feel exempts you from common decency?

[Dr Adequate]

He was provocateured by the FBI, just like in the 1993 wtc bombing. Why do people feign such confusion on this forum? It's not so much feigned confusion as a genuine inability to read your mind.

Now, do you have any evidence for your claim?

[Pardalis]

How does one go about provocateuring people?

[kookbreaker]

How does one go about provocateuring people?

Maybe its like teachering people, or debunkering kooks, or drivering your car!

[Beanbag]

you have a bomb literally with such destructive force it demolishes a building in one direction, but does nothing to buildings in the other direction that are just as far away... doesnt make sense. unless it was like a bomb that only blows up in 1 direction i could understand that

Manipulating and directing the force of an explosion is quite common. 30 seconds on Wikipedia got me the following:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaped_charge

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosive_lens

These are just two sources. Look around, there are lots more. I only spoon feed two bites per appetite.

I do seem to recall an interview on a news program of 60 Minutes - type ilk where they were talking with a neighbor of McVeigh. For whatever reason, McVeigh diagrammed out to her how he was planning to arrange the drums of explosive in the truck to project more of the force in one direction. No, it wouldn't be a precise, one-way blast, but you can get more force going one way than the other, hence the lopsided damage.

Beanbag

[Revolutionary91]

It's not so much feigned confusion as a genuine inability to read your mind.

Now, do you have any evidence for your claim?

Read the thread. I already stated that a Head of Terrorism Task Force in the FBI has said Strassmeir was an agent. Terry Nichols said McVeigh was being provocateured by the FBI.

[Jonnyclueless]

I think it was actually an outside job. No way they could have gotten that van inside the building.

[Par]

Revolutionary91: Earlier in this thread you stated that if you saw evidence for the claim that the military rent vehicles, you would re-evaluate your opinion of the photograph of the Ryder truck in the military base. Gravy and others have now provided such evidence. So, why are you ignoring me when I ask you if you have now re-evaluated your opinion of the photograph as per your original statement?

[uk_dave]

ATF were based in the Murrah building and it was their original raid at Waco.


If you say that someone provokes a response, then are you saying that they deserved that response?

Who made mcveigh judge, jury and executioner?

Do you condone his actions? Do you, Rev91, think the legal siege of the waco compound and the unfortunate deaths of those inside caused by their own refusal to adhere to the rule of law is justification for mcveigh to kill people?

[Jonnyclueless]

What person wouldn't put a truck full of explosives and blow up a federal building if provoked?

[scissorhands]

What person wouldn't put a truck full of explosives and blow up a federal building if provoked?

You mean provocateured.

[Pardalis]

What person wouldn't put a truck full of explosives and blow up a federal building if provoked?

Provocateered?

[uk_dave]

I think rev91 is either saying:

1. The deaths at waco provoked mcveigh into taking the action he did

or

2. The FBI encouraged or facilitated mcveigh to take the action he did.

Now both of those claims have a tendency to elicit sympathy for poor tim mcveigh or at least seek to share the blame with the government.

Sad that people can't just accept that a white supremacist who views the attack on waco as an attack on the ideal of being able to shut yourself off from society (which you hate) and live by your own rules, even if that means breaking laws agreed upon within the society as a whole, could act without any government involvement.

[Revolutionary91]

If you say that someone provokes a response, then are you saying that they deserved that response?

Who made mcveigh judge, jury and executioner?

Do you condone his actions? Do you, Rev91, think the legal siege of the waco compound and the unfortunate deaths of those inside caused by their own refusal to adhere to the rule of law is justification for mcveigh to kill people?

No, I just said that is what motivated him.

The children in that compound did not choose anything. They were gassed and shot at.

[scissorhands]

Rev91 says its provocateured.
So thats the definitive spelling.

[uk_dave]

No, I just said that is what motivated him.

The children in that compound did not choose anything. They were gassed and shot at.

They should have surrendered to the police at the beginning. The adults in the compound are the ones to blame. They should have acted like responsible adults instead of paranoid sheep.

[Revolutionary91]

They should have surrendered to the police at the beginning. The adults in the compound are the ones to blame. They should have acted like responsible adults instead of paranoid sheep.

You clearly condone the gassing and shooting of children. Nice.

[DGM]

No, I just said that is what motivated him.

The children in that compound did not choose anything. They were gassed and shot at.
Unfortunately their parents chose for them.

[D'rok]

ATF were based in the Murrah building and it was their original raid at Waco.

Fine. I'll rephrase.

The FBI wanted to blow up some civil servants in order to get revenge for their own bungled siege and the ATF's original raid at Waco?

If not, what was the FBI's motivation?

[SpitfireIX]

I know McVeigh admitted it. His accomplice has also said recently that he was provocateured by an FBI agent. If you are going to accept McVeighs word as gospel, why not Terry Nichols? <snip>


Because McVeigh's statement was against his own interest, and Nichols' was not.

To quote Adam Schiff, the original D.A. on Law and Order: "Uncorroborated accomplice testimony. That and $1.25 gets you on the subway." :rolleyes:

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

He was provocateured by the FBI, just like in the 1993 wtc bombing. Why do people feign such confusion on this forum?
It's not feigned; it's incredibly difficult to keep track of all the fantasies that CTist dream up.
You clearly condone the gassing and shooting of children. Nice.
Stawman. Produce some facts or stfu.

[D'rok]

No, I just said that is what motivated him.

The children in that compound did not choose anything. They were gassed and shot at.

Originally you were claiming that women and children were machine-gunned. I'm afraid the goalposts are still in field goal range; you should move them some more.

[uk_dave]

You clearly condone the gassing and shooting of children. Nice.

What do you condone?

The parents using their own children as a shield against the authorities?

Mcveigh taking 'revenge'?

How many of the children who died had gunshot wounds?

What gas was used?

[Revolutionary91]

Fine. I'll rephrase.

The FBI wanted to blow up some civil servants in order to get revenge for their own bungled siege and the ATF's original raid at Waco?

If not, what was the FBI's motivation?

It was a sting operation that they failed to stop in time, or possibly a rogue operative was employed to allow it to happen.

[uk_dave]

It was a sting operation that they failed to stop in time, or possibly a rogue operative was employed to allow it to happen.

Fantasy

[D'rok]

It was a sting operation that they failed to stop in time, or possibly a rogue operative was employed to allow it to happen.

That's quite the accusation. What did the FBI have to gain by "allowing it to happen"?

[Revolutionary91]

What do you condone?

The parents using their own children as a shield against the authorities?

Mcveigh taking 'revenge'?

How many of the children who died had gunshot wounds?

What gas was used?

I don't condone anything.

The ATF could have taken Koresh anytime they wanted, he went round town on his own. He even invited them to his house to inspect his weapons. Instead, they turned up mob handed and shooting because they wanted a successful raid for good PR. It went wrong for them.

Try listening to the 911 call from one of the Davidians. They were law abiding families suddenly attacked for no reason whatsoever.

[DGM]

Fine. I'll rephrase.

The FBI wanted to blow up some civil servants in order to get revenge for their own bungled siege and the ATF's original raid at Waco?

If not, what was the FBI's motivation?
Is Rev 91 saying the government attacked it self in retaliation for some thing it did.:confused: :rolleyes:

[stateofgrace]

You clearly condone the gassing and shooting of children. Nice.

You clearly beleive that using the deaths of innocent children is ok if it fuels your paranoid delusions. Nice.

[Stellafane]

It was a sting operation that they failed to stop in time, or possibly a rogue operative was employed to allow it to happen.


Nice try. As the perpetrator himself proudly proclaimed, it was a CTer who finally acted out his paranoid fantasies. And no amount of lies and excuses and other mindless CT drivel will ever change that one scintilla.

[Revolutionary91]

Nice try. As the perpetrator himself proudly proclaimed, it was a CTer who finally acted out his paranoid fantasies. And no amount of lies and excuses and other mindless CT drivel will ever change that one scintilla.


Yes, Governments are good, they love us.:rolleyes:

[Pardalis]

Revolutionary91, is 91 the year of your birth?

[DGM]

Revolutionary91, is 91 the year of your birth?
Yes

[Pardalis]

Yes

Damn, we're arguing with a child... It figures.

[Stellafane]

Yes, Governments are good, they love us.:rolleyes:

Seriously dude, I had to compose myself before responding to this, because I was very literally laughing out loud! Is this all you can come up with. something that has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion? This is about as off-topic as claiming wheat germ is good for regularity. I'd say you're shooting blanks, but you don't even have a gun, you're just pointing your finger and going "bang!"

It's not often I give advice to a CTer about how to be an even better CTer, but for you I'll make an exception: Don't ever bring up OKC again. It is far and away the low point of the CT movement, because -- and forgive my repetition, but you still don't seem to be quite getting it -- it was one of your own who admitted to killing 168 innocent Americans and injuring hundreds more. McVeigh is the poster child for those who fear CTers aren't just harmless cranks, but are potentially deranged and dangerous.

The fact that a fellow CTer cheerfully admitted to killing children and only regretted not having killed more is something that I (were I unfortunate enough to be a CTer myself) would be extremely loathe to mention. Surely this is a point that even the stupidest CTer can grasp.

[Par]

I see Revolutionary91 has taken to simply ignoring difficult questions and evidence. Intellectual cowardice; emblematic of a truther.

[Pardalis]

I suggest we give Revolutionary91 a break, I didn't know he was that young.

Revolutionary91, buddy, live a little and stay in school. Cheers. :)

[Revolutionary91]

Damn, we're arguing with a child

And losing.

[Revolutionary91]

Seriously dude, I had to compose myself before responding to this, because I was very literally laughing out loud! Is this all you can come up with. something that has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion? This is about as off-topic as claiming wheat germ is good for regularity. I'd say you're shooting blanks, but you don't even have a gun, you're just pointing your finger and going "bang!"

It's not often I give advice to a CTer about how to be an even better CTer, but for you I'll make an exception: Don't ever bring up OKC again. It is far and away the low point of the CT movement, because -- and forgive my repetition, but you still don't seem to be quite getting it -- it was one of your own who admitted to killing 168 innocent Americans and injuring hundreds more. McVeigh is the poster child for those who fear CTers aren't just harmless cranks, but are potentially deranged and dangerous.

The fact that a fellow CTer cheerfully admitted to killing children and only regretted not having killed more is something that I (were I unfortunate enough to be a CTer myself) would be extremely loathe to mention. Surely this is a point that even the stupidest CTer can grasp.

Please show me your evidence that McVeigh was a conspiracy theorist. He certainly couldn't have been a 9/11 or OKC CTer.

[stateofgrace]

Yes, Governments are good, they love us.:rolleyes:

Thank you for you wonderous insight into the workings of the planets Governments.

So Rev 91 , what exactly is the alternative? An uprising, armed resistance, hey maybe everybody should march and start a revolution ?

You are not oppressed, you are not repressed, you are a free person in a free society. So free in fact you can go onto the streets , with a load speaker and accuse your Government of mass murder.

Maybe you want to try that in a real repressed country, try, North Korea, or Buma, hey maybe try it in Iran, or Syria. You have no idea what repression is, you like to feel you are. that way it fuels your anti establishment nonsense.

[uk_dave]

What else do you believe in Rev91?

Chemtrails?
NWO?
Numerology?
Reptoids?
Illuminati/freemason world domination?
The evil of zionism?

I do wonder just how many 'truther' boxes are ticked in your worldview.

[Par]

[W]hat exactly is the alternative? An uprising, armed resistance, hey maybe everybody should march and start a revolution ?



I imagine it’s listening to lots of Rage Against the Machine and sassing his parents – “F*** you I won’t tidy my bedroom!”

[Revolutionary91]

What else do you believe in Rev91?

Chemtrails?
NWO?
Numerology?
Reptoids?
Illuminati/freemason world domination?
The evil of zionism?

I do wonder just how many 'truther' boxes are ticked in your worldview.

Chemtrails? No
NWO? Yes
Numerology? No
Reptoids? No
Illuminati/freemason world domination? No
The evil of zionism? No


What do my beliefs on anything else matter. You do realise that 911myths.com has debunking contributions from a man who believes AIDS is manmade.

[steve s]

any science docs i can watch that explain how the OKC bomb worked how it did so much damage and only blasted mainly in 1 direction and not in a full circle?

The National Geographic show Seconds From Disaster devoted an episode to the Murrah building. You might be able to buy the episode from their site



you have a bomb literally with such destructive force it demolishes a building in one direction, but does nothing to buildings in the other direction that are just as far away... doesnt make sense.

The only reason it doesn't make sense to you is because you're ignorant of how the building was constructed. There was a large horizontal transfer beam (not a column as some have said) which supported the entire front of the building. All the blast had to do was to knock out that beam and the entire front of the building was suddenly unsupported. Gravity did the rest. There is nothing here that doesn't make sense and certainly nothing that points to an inside job.

Steve S.

[uk_dave]

Chemtrails? No
NWO? Yes
Numerology? No
Reptoids? No
Illuminati/freemason world domination? No
The evil of zionism? No


Thank you for your honesty.

What do you understand the 'New World Order' to mean?

[kookbreaker]

Nice try. As the perpetrator himself proudly proclaimed, it was a CTer who finally acted out his paranoid fantasies. And no amount of lies and excuses and other mindless CT drivel will ever change that one scintilla.

I love how this one morphed over the years. Back in the late 90's, the USENET conspiracy crowd was babbling about how Mcveigh was innocent, he was a fall guy, all sorts of 'evidence' claiming he had nothing to do with it and was nowhere near the scene.

Then McVeigh goes and admits his crime on TV. Spoiled the whole 'save our militia' movement right there and then.

Now, of course, the new tale is this whole 'The FBI dood it using Mcveigh!!!!' routine. Whatever happened to McVeigh never doing it?

[Revolutionary91]

Thank you for your honesty.

What do you understand the 'New World Order' to mean?

You know what it means so why ask?

[uk_dave]

You know what it means so why ask?

I'm interested in what it means to you.

I suspect it means something very different to me. :D

[MIKILLINI]

It's not so much feigned confusion as a genuine inability to read your mind.

Now, do you have any evidence for your claim?

Yes Rev, Evidence, this type of evidence;
Evidence in its broadest sense, refers to anything that is used to determine or demonstrate the truth of an assertion. Philosophically, evidence can include propositions which are presumed to be true used in support of other propositions that are presumed to be falsifiable.

[D'rok]

Is Rev 91 saying the government attacked it self in retaliation for some thing it did.:confused: :rolleyes:

Yup. Some theory, eh?

[Mince]

You mean provoked, not provocateured.
You have already been corrected once in this thread.
Thats a nonsense word isnt it?

It's Alex Jones speak. And if the master says it, it must be an appropriate word. All the time I hear Alex Jones say a word or phrase or express an idea on the radio, then I'll see that word, phrase or idea posted, verbatim, all over CT forums hours later. Of course, it'll be just after they've called everyone else a brainwashed sheep. Quite an interesting mentality.

[Civilized Worm]

Wow, this has to be the WORST conspiracy theory I've ever heard! How did the government - sorry, NWO even benefit from it?


The bomb blast didn't level half the building. It leveled one column, which led to progressive collapse of the floors above. About 80% of the victims died from that collapse, not from the blast effects.


Progressive collapse? A likely story! Everyone knows that no building has ever collapsed due to explos... Oh...


Don't ask me for references, look and learn.


Don't worry, most of us have realised by now that asking you for references is about as productive as asking dogs to be cats.


Good job your opinion has no bearing then.


And Alex Jones' opinion means what exactly? Funny isn't it, you didn't need any experts to decide that the famous Osama tape was not in fact bin Laden.


That was the ATF.


So the FBI is at war against the ATF? Well it makes about as much sense as the other rubbish you've come out with.


Please show me your evidence that McVeigh was a conspiracy theorist. He certainly couldn't have been a 9/11 or OKC CTer.


I know you're young, but surely you realise that there were conspiracy theories before OKC?

[Devil's Advocate]

I always thought the NWO was an agenda, not a group?
Or am I mistaken?

[Pardalis]

I always thought the NWO was an agenda, not a group?
Or am I mistaken?

It's a band of goons

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a154/perdalis/nwo.jpg

[Civilized Worm]

Wrestling jokes will never stop making me LOL.

Actually the NWO was very well named, cos EVERYONE WAS IN IT!

[DGM]

I always thought the NWO was an agenda, not a group?
Or am I mistaken?
I can't tell you that. (Its a secret)

[Alzke]

I don't know if Oklahoma City was an inside job but as usual the American people are not getting the whole story.

In the last thread on OKC I know the story of Terrence Yeakey was brought up (and mostly ignored).

http://www.rinf.com/columnists/news/the-terrance-yeakey-cover-up

http://www.patshannan.com/yeakey.html

He was the first city cop on the scene and according to his wife and saw things he was not supposed to, resulting in his "suicide".

You can listen to a 2 part interview with his widow on the first link above. Do you think she's a liar?

What Yeakey saw may very well have corroborated the news reports from that day describing unexploded devices inside the building.

[Unsecured Coins]

I don't know if Oklahoma City was an inside job but as usual the American people are not getting the whole story.

In the last thread on OKC I know the story of Terrence Yeakey was brought up (and mostly ignored).

http://www.rinf.com/columnists/news/the-terrance-yeakey-cover-up

He was the first city cop on the scene and according to his wife and saw things he was not supposed to, resulting in his "suicide".

You can listen to a 2 part interview with his widow on the link above. Do you think she's a liar?

What Yeakey saw may very well have corroborated the news reports from that day describing unexploded devices inside the building.

I'm very interested in finding out what sort of things you're not supposed to see at a bombing site.

And I gotta be honest with you. I get a hearty guffaw every time a truther comes out with a video as "concrete proof" of whatever conspiracy and follows it up with... "could have been" "might be" etc... I know others have said this before, but I've been seeing it alot as of late.

[Alzke]

I'm very interested in finding out what sort of things you're not supposed to see at a bombing site.

And I gotta be honest with you. I get a hearty guffaw every time a truther comes out with a video as "concrete proof" of whatever conspiracy and follows it up with... "could have been" "might be" etc... I know others have said this before, but I've been seeing it alot as of late.

What the **** are you babbling about ?

I posted an audio interview with the wife of the first OKC police officer on the scene.

Terrence Yeakey told his wife that the story the public was given is not true.

He was acting scared and paranoid after the bombing, due to what he saw.

He was being tailed by government agents.

He committed suicide on federal land by slashing his wrists and throat, then crawling a mile and finally shooting himself in the head, three days before he was due to receive the Medal of Valor.

And this is the ******** you're going to come at me with? Inappropriate remark removed.and just listen to the interview.

Keep in mind the Membership Agreement and do not use insults or personal attacks to argue your point.

[Unsecured Coins]

Thanks, that clears up thw whole "what aren't you supposed to see at a bombing site" thing for me.


What Yeakey saw may very well have corroborated the news reports from that day describing unexploded devices inside the building.

Oh look, you don't know. That's speculation, hoss.

[Stellafane]

Please show me your evidence that McVeigh was a conspiracy theorist. He certainly couldn't have been a 9/11 or OKC CTer.

I'll answer your question, and then I'll bow out of this discussion. If (as has been indicated) you were born in 1991, I feel rather foolish and embarassed to learn I've been debating a teenager.

McVeigh never made any secret of his belief that the US government was conspiring to take away our civil rights and basically enslave us. He believed Waco and Ruby Ridge were evidence of this. He was inspired by the book "The Turner Diaries," written by an American neo-Nazi. (In fact, the OKC bombing may have been copied from the book's plot, in which the racist, anti-semite "hero" blows up the FBI building.) McViegh also bought into other CTs, such as the US government importing drugs from Canada in mini-subs. (He even claimed he had proof on this, only the document was printed on special paper that you couldn't copy in a photocopy machine!) For more, see http://www.crimelibrary.com/serial_killers/notorious/mcveigh/dawning_1.html.

So all in all, McVeigh appears to have been deeply immersed in the CT scene (which of course stretches far beyond 9/11 and OKC). The only difference between him and most other CTers is that he finally acted out on his fantasies, and other CTers haven't -- so far.

[slingblade]

You can listen to a 2 part interview with his widow on the first link above. Do you think she's a liar?

This sounds so much like a kid on the playground, swearing to something his mommy told him. Gee, would it be okay if, until I have all the facts, I entertain at least the possiblity that people lie? Even those who survive a tragedy, like a spouse's suicide? Not saying she is; just letting you know that in the real world outside of Paranoiaville, many things are possible.

What Yeakey saw may very well have corroborated the news reports from that day describing unexploded devices inside the building.

You mean the simulated bombs they had been using to train dogs with?

[DGM]

Originally Posted by Alzke
What Yeakey saw may very well have corroborated the news reports from that day describing unexploded devices inside the building.

There were unexploded "devices" in the building. They were training rounds. This has been beat to death.

[DGM]

He was the first city cop on the scene and according to his wife and saw things he was not supposed to, resulting in his "suicide".

Yes he did see things he was not supposed to see. Without going into gory details there was a daycare there and many kids were badly injured. He never came to grips with this.

You can listen to a 2 part interview with his widow on the first link above. Do you think she's a liar?

Ex-wife/widow. I don't think she understood what he went through they were not close. Mistaken not a liar.

What Yeakey saw may very well have corroborated the news reports from that day describing unexploded devices inside the building.

As before. Training rounds not bombs

[Gravy]

How does one go about provocateuring people?
First, purchase a beret and a pack of Gauloises....
Second, watch a lot of Hitchcock films.
Oh, wait, that's saboteuring people to commit sabotage. I think I need a refresher course.

[Jonnyclueless]

I don't know if Oklahoma City was an inside job but as usual the American people are not getting the whole story.

In the last thread on OKC I know the story of Terrence Yeakey was brought up (and mostly ignored).

http://www.rinf.com/columnists/news/the-terrance-yeakey-cover-up

http://www.patshannan.com/yeakey.html

He was the first city cop on the scene and according to his wife and saw things he was not supposed to, resulting in his "suicide".

You can listen to a 2 part interview with his widow on the first link above. Do you think she's a liar?

What Yeakey saw may very well have corroborated the news reports from that day describing unexploded devices inside the building.



It makes perfect sense. It was just a fluke. Who could possibly have known that someone would have shown up early to the scene of a massive explosion? Clearly he caught them unprepared in such a daring caper. I bet they had everything planned out perfectly. "OK bob, no one will come to the scene for at least 15 minutes as per massive explosion protocol".

If she also said the building was actually made of cheese, I guess we couldn't deny that either. How could anyone, it would be insulting to say about someone who's loved on killed themselves. It's not like they would want to come up with some kinda of rational to ease their pain and not make it feel like a person may have died in vein or feel like they didn't do enough to help that person who killed themself. Who would feel guilty about their husband committing suicide? What's next' People who lose a loved one wanting someone to be held responsible?

I'm so right there with ya. ;-)

[Gravy]

I don't know if Oklahoma City was an inside job but as usual the American people are not getting the whole story.

In the last thread on OKC I know the story of Terrence Yeakey was brought up (and mostly ignored).

http://www.rinf.com/columnists/news/the-terrance-yeakey-cover-up

http://www.patshannan.com/yeakey.html

He was the first city cop on the scene and according to his wife and saw things he was not supposed to, resulting in his "suicide".

You can listen to a 2 part interview with his widow on the first link above. Do you think she's a liar? Not his widow, his ex-wife. The two had restraining orders against each other at the time of his suicide. She says that things are unclear to hear, she doesn't know the whole story, perhaps more information is needed, but she thinks some things may have been suspicious, and she says that on a crackpot radio show 10 years ago. That's all. No evidence of anything but the sad suicide of a troubled cop.

It is wrong to drag a dead person's name through the mud because of the kooky, hazy suspicions of one person that were broadcast by crackpots years ago. So don't do it.

Okay?

[Alzke]

Yes he did see things he was not supposed to see. Without going into gory details there was a daycare there and many kids were badly injured. He never came to grips with this.



Ex-wife/widow. I don't think she understood what he went through they were not close. Mistaken not a liar.



As before. Training rounds not bombs



So his wife/exwife/widow did not know what he went through, but YOU do? You're full of ....!

Letter written to Yeakeys friend:

----

Dear Ramona,
I hope that whatever you hear now and in the future will not change your opinions about myself or others with the Oklahoma City Police Department, although some of the things I am about to tell you about is [sic] very disturbing.

I don't know if you recall everything that happened that morning or not, so I am not sure if you know what I am referring to.

The man that you and I were talking about in the pictures I have, made the mistake of asking too many questions as to his role in the bombing, and was told to back off.

I was told by several officers he was a ATF agent who was overseeing the bombing plot and at the time the photos were taken he was calling in his report of what had just went down!

I think my days as a police officer are numbered because of the way my supervisors are acting and there is [sic] a lot of secrets floating around now about my mental state of mind. I think they are going to write me up because of my ex-wife and a VPO.

I told you about talking to Chaplain Poe, well the bastard wrote up in a report stating I should be relieved of my duties! I made the mistake of thinking that a person's conversation with a chaplain was private, which by the way might have cost me my job as a police officer! A friend at headquarters told me that Poe sent out letters to everyone in the department! That BITCH (Jo Ann Randall) I told you about is up to something and I think it has something to do with Poe. If she gets her way, they will tar and feather me!

I was told that Jack Poe has written up a report on every single officer that has been in to see him, including Gordon Martin and John Avery.

Knowing what I know now, and understanding fully just what went down that morning, makes me ashamed to wear a badge from Oklahoma City's Police Department. I took an oath to uphold the Law and to enforce the Law to the best of my ability. This is something I cannot honestly do and hold my head up proud any longer if I keep my silence as I am ordered to do.

There are several others out there who was [sic] what we saw and even some who played a role in what happened that day.

[Two Pages Missing]

My guess is the more time an officer has to think about the screw up the more he is going to question what happened... Can you imagine what would be coming down now if that had been our officers' who had let this happen? Because it was the feds that did this and not the locals, is the reason it's okay. You were right all along and I am truly sorry I doubted you and your motives about recording history. You should know that it is going to one-hell-of-a-fight.

Everyone was behind you until you started asking questions as I did, as to how so many federal agents arrived at the scene at the same time.

Luke Franey (a BATF agent who claimed he was in the building) was not in the building at the time of the blast, I know this for a fact, I saw him! I also saw full riot gear worn with rifles in hand, why? Don't make the mistake as I did and ask the wrong people.

I worry about you and your young family because of some of the statements that have been made towards me, a police officer! Whatever you do don't confront McPhearson with the bomb squad about what I told you. His actions and defensiveness towards the bombing would make any normal person think he was defending himself as if he drove the damn truck up to the building himself. I am not worried for myself, but for you and your group. I would not be afraid to say at this time that you and your family could be harmed if you get any closer to the truth. At this time I think for your well being it is best for you to distance yourself and others from those of us who have stirred up to many questions about the altering and falsifying of the federal investigation's reports.

I truly believe there are other officers like me out there who would not settle for anything but the truth, it is just a matter of finding them. The only true problem as I see it is, who do we turn to then?

It is vital that people like you, Edye Smith, and others keep asking questions and demanding answers for the actions of our federal government and law enforcement agencies that knew beforehand and participated in the cover-up.

The sad truth of the matter is that they have so many police officers convinced that by covering up the truth about the operation gone wrong, that they are actually doing our citizens a favor. What I want to know is how many other operations have they had that blew up in their faces? Makes you stop and take another look at Waco.

I would consider it to be an insult to my profession as a police officer and to the citizens of Oklahoma for ANY of the City, State or Federal agents that stood by and let this happen to be recognized as any thing other than their part in participation in letting this happen. For those who ran from the scene to change their attire to hide the fact that they were there, should be judged as cowards.

If our history books and records are ever truly corrected about that day it will show this and maybe even some lame excuse as to why it happened, but I truly don't believe it will from what I now know to be the truth.

Even if I tried to explain it to you the way it was explained to me, and the ridiculous reason for having [our] own police departments falsify reports to their fellow officers, to the citizens of the city and to our country, you would understand why I feel the way I do about all of this.

I believe that a lot of the problems the officers are having right now are because some of them know what really happened and can't deal with it, and others like myself made the mistake of trusting the one person we were supposed to be able to turn to (Chaplain Poe) only to be stabbed in the back.

I am sad to say that I believe my days as a police officer are numbered because of all of this....

[DGM]

So his wife/exwife/widow did not know what he went through, but YOU do? You're full of ....!

Letter written to Yeakeys friend:

----

Dear Ramona,
I hope that whatever you hear now and in the future will not change your opinions about myself or others with the Oklahoma City Police Department, although some of the things I am about to tell you about is [sic] very disturbing.

I don't know if you recall everything that happened that morning or not, so I am not sure if you know what I am referring to.

The man that you and I were talking about in the pictures I have, made the mistake of asking too many questions as to his role in the bombing, and was told to back off.

I was told by several officers he was a ATF agent who was overseeing the bombing plot and at the time the photos were taken he was calling in his report of what had just went down!

I think my days as a police officer are numbered because of the way my supervisors are acting and there is [sic] a lot of secrets floating around now about my mental state of mind. I think they are going to write me up because of my ex-wife and a VPO.

I told you about talking to Chaplain Poe, well the bastard wrote up in a report stating I should be relieved of my duties! I made the mistake of thinking that a person's conversation with a chaplain was private, which by the way might have cost me my job as a police officer! A friend at headquarters told me that Poe sent out letters to everyone in the department! That BITCH (Jo Ann Randall) I told you about is up to something and I think it has something to do with Poe. If she gets her way, they will tar and feather me!

I was told that Jack Poe has written up a report on every single officer that has been in to see him, including Gordon Martin and John Avery.

Knowing what I know now, and understanding fully just what went down that morning, makes me ashamed to wear a badge from Oklahoma City's Police Department. I took an oath to uphold the Law and to enforce the Law to the best of my ability. This is something I cannot honestly do and hold my head up proud any longer if I keep my silence as I am ordered to do.

There are several others out there who was [sic] what we saw and even some who played a role in what happened that day.

[Two Pages Missing]

My guess is the more time an officer has to think about the screw up the more he is going to question what happened... Can you imagine what would be coming down now if that had been our officers' who had let this happen? Because it was the feds that did this and not the locals, is the reason it's okay. You were right all along and I am truly sorry I doubted you and your motives about recording history. You should know that it is going to one-hell-of-a-fight.

Everyone was behind you until you started asking questions as I did, as to how so many federal agents arrived at the scene at the same time.

Luke Franey (a BATF agent who claimed he was in the building) was not in the building at the time of the blast, I know this for a fact, I saw him! I also saw full riot gear worn with rifles in hand, why? Don't make the mistake as I did and ask the wrong people.

I worry about you and your young family because of some of the statements that have been made towards me, a police officer! Whatever you do don't confront McPhearson with the bomb squad about what I told you. His actions and defensiveness towards the bombing would make any normal person think he was defending himself as if he drove the damn truck up to the building himself. I am not worried for myself, but for you and your group. I would not be afraid to say at this time that you and your family could be harmed if you get any closer to the truth. At this time I think for your well being it is best for you to distance yourself and others from those of us who have stirred up to many questions about the altering and falsifying of the federal investigation's reports.

I truly believe there are other officers like me out there who would not settle for anything but the truth, it is just a matter of finding them. The only true problem as I see it is, who do we turn to then?

It is vital that people like you, Edye Smith, and others keep asking questions and demanding answers for the actions of our federal government and law enforcement agencies that knew beforehand and participated in the cover-up.

The sad truth of the matter is that they have so many police officers convinced that by covering up the truth about the operation gone wrong, that they are actually doing our citizens a favor. What I want to know is how many other operations have they had that blew up in their faces? Makes you stop and take another look at Waco.

I would consider it to be an insult to my profession as a police officer and to the citizens of Oklahoma for ANY of the City, State or Federal agents that stood by and let this happen to be recognized as any thing other than their part in participation in letting this happen. For those who ran from the scene to change their attire to hide the fact that they were there, should be judged as cowards.

If our history books and records are ever truly corrected about that day it will show this and maybe even some lame excuse as to why it happened, but I truly don't believe it will from what I now know to be the truth.

Even if I tried to explain it to you the way it was explained to me, and the ridiculous reason for having [our] own police departments falsify reports to their fellow officers, to the citizens of the city and to our country, you would understand why I feel the way I do about all of this.

I believe that a lot of the problems the officers are having right now are because some of them know what really happened and can't deal with it, and others like myself made the mistake of trusting the one person we were supposed to be able to turn to (Chaplain Poe) only to be stabbed in the back.

I am sad to say that I believe my days as a police officer are numbered because of all of this....
Source?

[Dr Adequate]

Read the thread. I already stated that a Head of Terrorism Task Force in the FBI has said Strassmeir was an agent. To be precise, you linked me to a PrisonPlanet article about a documentary which had not yet been screened in which it was claimed that Coulson was going to blame Strassmeir --- after which the same PrisonPlanet article accused Coulson of being part of the conspiracy.

So, a source who is not reliable (Jones) says that a documentary which he hasn't seen shows a man whom he doesn't trust (Coulson) identifying Strassmeir as "an agent" --- which, even if true, doesn't mean that the government were directing all his actions. He may, for example, have been a paid informant but ripping them off.

Terry Nichols said McVeigh was being provocateured by the FBI. Ah, so the mass-murderer's accomplice blames his crimes on the institution he most hates --- the U.S. government. Did he provide any corroborating evidence, or should I just take his word for it?

[Dr Adequate]

So his wife/exwife/widow did not know what he went through, but YOU do? For some astonishing reason, possibly because he's not made entirely out of straw, Gravy didn't actually say that.

Letter written to Yeakeys friend: Yes, have you read it?

It's paranoid, and I don't mean that in the sense of "believing in a CT that I don't". I mean it's paranoid.

[Gravy]

For some astonishing reason, possibly because he's not made entirely out of straw, Gravy didn't actually say that.

Yes, have you read it?

It's paranoid, and I don't mean that in the sense of "believing in a CT that I don't". I mean it's paranoid.And it's promoted by paranioacs as written by Yeakey, although they provide no evidence. If so, it's more evidence of his troubled state of mind.

There is no evidence that his death was anything but a suicide.

Edit: And that bit about Agent Luke Franey not being in the building is wrong. He was trapped there with another BATF worker, and a photo of him holding a sign at a window, asking for help on the 9th floor, was presented at McVeigh's trial. Five BATF agents were in the building when the bomb exploded, and three were seriously injured. Excerpts from Franey's trial testimony are here (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=1573248&postcount=256).

[Mobyseven]

No, I meant provocateured.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_provocateur

'Provocateur' is a noun. As such, it does not vary in tense. Your mistake is that you are using 'provocateur' as a verb and it is not a verb, it is a noun.

This page was linked to on the Wikipedia page you cited. Learn the damn English language or you're going to have one hell of a time passing high school. (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/provocateur)

[Mobyseven]

Please show me your evidence that McVeigh was a conspiracy theorist. He certainly couldn't have been a 9/11 or OKC CTer.

You are aware that conspiracy theories were in existence before you were born, right?

[kookbreaker]

'Provocateur' is a noun. As such, it does not vary in tense. Your mistake is that you are using 'provocateur' as a verb and it is not a verb, it is a noun.
[/URL]

Stop teachering him! You ruinered all our fun!

[leftysergeant]

This is another issue that puts a lot into my lap. I am a retired soldier. I still live within easy bicycling distance of my last active duty station.

There are Ryder trucks all over the place when any unit does a move. U-Haul has a concession on Ft Lewis and McChord AFB. Lots of people connected to the military have occassion to use rental vehicles. The motor pool evidence is useless for forensic purposes. I see a lot of really sleazy CTers use aerial photos of military bases for disinformation purposes, including John Trochmann, a close associate of McVeigh and the Elohim City conspirators.

The damage done to the Murrah Building and the lack of structural damage done to near-by buildings is consistant with a single charge of ANFO. It was not neccessary to knock anything down, actually. It was enough to lift a few elements off the foundation and then let them down again. ANFO can do that better than dynamite. It propogates slowly, and the shockwave, although it is slow to spread, falls off in power over a very short distance. This is pointed out very clearly by General Benton K. Partin in the half-true paper he wrote on the subject. (More about that whiz-bang officer later.)

The crater is small specificly because the explosive used was ANFO. It does not produce a concrete-shattering blast like dynamite or C-4 applied right to the surface. It is used in quarrying, where the object is to break loose big chunks or slabs of rock rather than rubble as one would in hard rock mining or road building. I have helped make ANFO charges as artillery strike simulators for military training. We used it specificly becauser it would look showy and loud and would be, beyond a few yards, ineffectual.

Partin makes a biig mistake, perhaps deliberately, in showing that the over-pressurization would be equal in all directions, both inside and outside the building. It is common sense that the over-pressurization would fall off more quickly outside than in an enclosed space. This is sort of the same princle that makes a pile of gun powder less threatening than a grenade.

McVeigh was, in deed, trying to act out the bombing scenario from The Turner Diaries. (Read it, if you can get hold of it without contributing to the finances of the National Alliance. Some of the other strategies are being put into action already.) Bombing the Murrah Building had, however, nothing to do with Waco. It had to do with the execution for murder of one Richard Wayne Snell, one of the leaders of Elohim City, a totally racist terrorist group masquarading as a religious community. John Trochmann had made statements warning the government that there could be serious repercussions for executing him at all, especially on that particular day.

Both McVeigh and Trochmann were regular visitors to Elohim City. So Trochmann's disavowal of McVeigh just does not hold water.

Now, obviously, Nichols and Trochmann both have reasons to lie about their involvement. So, to a lesser extent, and for different reasons, has General Partin.

While Trochmann and McVeigh were acting on behalf of white nationalist interests, Partin is a professional Christian victim activist. His motivation, as far as I can see, may have been to discredit Clinton. I have heard his study cited by inside-jobbers in connection with 9/11, but I have, as yet, seen no comment by Partin himself in re 9/11. The big difference I can see is that one of his people is now in command. I do not expect to see him weigh in in any meaningful way on 9/11 any time soon.

[Revolutionary91]

'Provocateur' is a noun. As such, it does not vary in tense. Your mistake is that you are using 'provocateur' as a verb and it is not a verb, it is a noun.

This page was linked to on the Wikipedia page you cited. Learn the damn English language or you're going to have one hell of a time passing high school. (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/provocateur)

Ah so you can use made up words like twoofer but I can't bastardize Provocateur slightly to describe a process. Yes that makes sense.:rolleyes:

[slingblade]

Ah so you can use made up words like twoofer but I can't bastardize Provocateur slightly to describe a process. Yes that makes sense.:rolleyes:

Oh, now you've done it. You've summoned The English Teacher.

Twoofer is a coined word.

Provocateur, however, is French. What you are doing to it is not "bastardization," but the dreaded "verbing the noun." Now, sometimes this works. Google is a noun that easily becomes a verb.

Provocateur does not lend itself to this. What you are doing wreaks havoc with the meaning, rendering it meaningless. You make yourself appear ignorant by continuing to flog the poor thing. Give it a rest, use your brain, and come up with the word you really want.

[Revolutionary91]

Oh, now you've done it. You've summoned The English Teacher.

Twoofer is a coined word.

Provocateur, however, is French. What you are doing to it is not "bastardization," but the dreaded "verbing the noun." Now, sometimes this works. Google is a noun that easily becomes a verb.

Provocateur does not lend itself to this. What you are doing wreaks havoc with the meaning, rendering it meaningless. You make yourself appear ignorant by continuing to flog the poor thing. Give it a rest, use your brain, and come up with the word you really want.

What is the word I want then?

[MetalPig]

next to a column that supported a main transfer girder.
Did he plan it that way? Or did he just park it next to the building not knowing anything about its structure?

<edit> I just realised there were 4 more pages to this topic and I quoted something from page 1.

[slingblade]

What is the word I want then?

Normally, I'd disdain such a request with a sneer, but considering your age, I'm inclined to help out. Seriously.

I don't know the word you want, because I'm not sure what you're trying to describe. You confused me with your use of provocateured ("inciting agented", as it were).

You can't say a man was inciting agented. I know now you see this. It's just not a sentence.

Try to describe the concept to me, using only English, and I will sincerely help you find a word or short phrase to encapsulate the concept.

[Revolutionary91]

Normally, I'd disdain such a request with a sneer, but considering your age, I'm inclined to help out. Seriously.

I don't know the word you want, because I'm not sure what you're trying to describe. You confused me with your use of provocateured ("inciting agented", as it were).

You can't say a man was inciting agented. I know now you see this. It's just not a sentence.

Try to describe the concept to me, using only English, and I will sincerely help you find a word or short phrase to encapsulate the concept.

No, I think I will stick with provocateured. It's perfect. Thanks, anyway.

[Hawk one]

Except the actual word is "provoked".

By the way, are you going to admit you're wrong about your claims regarding the Ryder trucks soon? I mean,there are plenty of other things you're wrong about as well, but not even being able to admit you were wrong on such an easily researched matter speaks volumes about your integrity, or lack thereof.

[Revolutionary91]

Provoked does not describe the process.

While people use twoofer I think i'll use provocateured.

By the way I can use any words I like within the forum rules and the fact that thje grammar police want to focus on that proves they are just after oneupmanship and petty point scoring.

[uk_dave]

No, it just means that you will not be understood. Just because your creation of a word conveys to you the meaning you ascribe to it, does not automatically mean others will do the same.

So, what does the word you choose to use convey that 'provoked' does not?

Oh, and what do you understand 'New World Order' to mean?

[Revolutionary91]

No, it just means that you will not be understood. Just because your creation of a word conveys to you the meaning you ascribe to it, does not automatically mean others will do the same.

So, what does the word you choose to use convey that 'provoked' does not?

Oh, and what do you understand 'New World Order' to mean?

Not being understood is a common hazard on boards full of idiots. I will take the risk.

[Hawk one]

So you insist on using non-words instead of perfectly acceptable word out of pure stubbornness. Got it.

Are you at least going to show some intellectual honesty and admit that the army use Ryder trucks? That's what people do when they're actually debating instead of trying to score points, you know. Admitting mistakes. I can heartily recommend it.

[Dr Adequate]

By the way I can use any words I like within the forum rules and the fact that thje grammar police want to focus on that proves they are just after oneupmanship and petty point scoring. There are plenty of substantial issues on this thread that you could have addressed. Such as those which I raised, or the Ryder truck issue. Instead, you wish to insist on the correctness of a word which you made up, and then whine about it when people point out that it doesn't exist. I can see that you're going to shake the foundations of the New World Order. Vive la Revolution!

First you'll persuade people that the word "provocateured" exists, and then you'll rise up against the oppressors. And hopefully, before too long, you'll get laid.

[slingblade]

Provoked does not describe the process.

While people use twoofer I think i'll use provocateured.

By the way I can use any words I like within the forum rules and the fact that thje grammar police want to focus on that proves they are just after oneupmanship and petty point scoring.

Not really. How you communicate is just as important as what, or why. If you want to be understood, that burden is on you.

But if you want to be misunderstood, go for it. No one's going to try to stop you.


"Board full of idiots," eh? Yes, that's a good way to get us to listen to you. You betcha.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Not being understood is a common hazard on boards full of idiots. I will take the risk.


Since you come from LCF, I guess I can understand why you don't care about being understood...

Of course you care about being understood, otherwise... ud b typin lik this!

You don't even realize it, but you're just being the rebellious teenager you actually are, and not an adult.

[Revolutionary91]

Since you come from LCF, I guess I can understand why you don't care about being understood...

Of course you care about being understood, otherwise... ud b typin lik this!

You don't even realize it, but you're just being the rebellious teenager you actually are.

Thanks. I'm glad you see i'm being normal for my age, unlike the adults who want to go round trolling forums full of teenagers. They know who they are.

[slingblade]

Thanks. I'm glad you see i'm being normal for my age, unlike the adults who want to go round trolling forums full of teenagers. They know who they are.

Oh, guffaw! You mean this forum?

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Thanks. I'm glad you see i'm being normal for my age, unlike the adults who want to go round trolling forums full of teenagers. They know who they are.


Oh, don't give us that crap, kid. It's not who you are that's the problem; it's who you make yourself out to be. You can't pretend to be some kind of revolutionary who's going to change the world, and then play the "I'm just a teenager" card when you start feeling the pressure.

[Mobyseven]

Oh, now you've done it. You've summoned The English Teacher.

Twoofer is a coined word.

Provocateur, however, is French. What you are doing to it is not "bastardization," but the dreaded "verbing the noun." Now, sometimes this works. Google is a noun that easily becomes a verb.

Provocateur does not lend itself to this. What you are doing wreaks havoc with the meaning, rendering it meaningless. You make yourself appear ignorant by continuing to flog the poor thing. Give it a rest, use your brain, and come up with the word you really want.

First he summoned Former Linguistics Student Level One.

But with his following post, he cast Summon English Teacher Level Eight.

A nice response, by the way.

Provoked does not describe the process.

Well now see, that's what sentences are for. "He was provoked by the FBI," makes sense and describes a process, but if there is additional information required then you can use adverbs ("He was covertly provoked by the FBI,") adjectives ("He was provoked by the evil FBI,") subordinate clauses ("He was provoked by the FBI because they needed a patsy,") and many, many other things. You literally have the entire English language at your disposal!

While people use twoofer I think i'll use provocateured.

The problem with this is that many people here, and I'd likely say any English speaker, would have difficulty understanding any sort of nuance in semantics between, "provoked" and "provocateured" - in fact any sensible analysis of your sentence reveals the intended meaning to be identical in so far as the context of the lexeme stands at the moment. If there is additional information to be found in the definition of "provocatuered" then I would be glad to hear it.

Your comparison to the coined word, "twoofer" is also flawed. "Twoofer" was not just suddenly made up on the spot one day, it was modified from the related word, "twoof" - a word which was itself a satirical modification of the word "truth". "The twoof" is that which people claim is "the truth" but which is in reality utter nonsense. The common suffix "-er" was attached to this word to create the word "twoofer". The meaning of this word is well known within relevant circles, but outside of the 9/11 Truth Movement and the corresponding debunkers and debunking sites the word "twoofer" would not be understood. It is a slang term used primarily by debunkers to refer to conspiracy theorists in a negative light. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the use of the word, "twoofer".

"Provocateured" however, is little more than nonsense. You have formed it from the common noun "provocateur" which itself basically means "one who incites" or "one who provokes". The infinitive "to provocateur" therefore seems to have a strange meaning - the only logical meaning I can assign to such a verb is to describe a state of existence, and not an action itself; "to provocateur" would then mean "to be one who incites".

This obviously is not what you want the word to mean - such a verb is intransitive and cannot take a direct object, yet you want your verb to take the direct object "Timothy McVeigh". Note that this meaning was obtained by translating your original sentence written in passive voice in which "Timothy McVeigh" was the agent into the active voice, where he becomes the direct object. I assume you will not object to this (*snicker*). As such, we must further examine what you meant by your use of this word - the logical action therefore becomes that action which was described by the original noun; "to incite" or "to provoke".

This leads other people to read your original sentence as, "He was provoked by the FBI," and to simply assume that, "provocateured" was simply misuse of English in order to sound smarter. That is what my money is on too, by the way, and it has royally backfired on you. You're only fifteen though, so I'll grant you leniency this time with the following words of advice: Don't ever use the word "provocateured" in an English essay. Unless there is a damn good case for it, your teacher isn't going to have a bit of any argument that involves your right to make up words.

By the way I can use any words I like within the forum rules and the fact that thje grammar police want to focus on that proves they are just after oneupmanship and petty point scoring.

Actually, it's more the way that you continue to avoid pertinent posts that have been addressed to you numerous times. Your evasion makes many of us think that you might not really be interested in learning anything, and are instead simply using the forum to entrench your pre-held beliefs.

An English lesson seemed like a better way to spend my time. I figure you might actually be interested in learning about something that will help you pass high school.

[Belz...]

was OKC an inside job?
Yes.

No.

You need to explain the connection not just through something out.

I hope other people who click on the link are able to read.

Why don't you just answer the question instead of dodging ?

McVeigh did this on the anniversary of Waco. He was acting in revenge for the machine gunning of women and children, by the government.

I'm trying to understand if you're saying you support his ideals or if you're trying to blame the government for HIS actions...

He was provocateured by the FBI, just like in the 1993 wtc bombing. Why do people feign such confusion on this forum?

So he did do it ?

And what's provocateuring ??

You clearly condone the gassing and shooting of children. Nice.

Why do you truthers always defend the terrorists, nutters, fanatics and badguys in general ?

[Belz...]

Yes, Governments are good, they love us.:rolleyes:

They're not goody-goody, but it doesn't follow that they're evil maniacs out for blood and power.

You should stop watching the X-files, wait until you start growing a beard, and then start REALLY researching this subject before making a fool of yourself here and elsewhere.

What would your mom say ?

Damn, we're arguing with a child
And losing.

Just because you're stubborn doesn't mean you're "winning".

What's this about "winning" anyway ? I thought we were debating.

[Belz...]

NWO? Yes

And why do you believe this entity exists ?

Thanks. I'm glad you see i'm being normal for my age

Yes. Being immature is VERY normal for your age.

[uk_dave]

I'm still waiting to see if rev91 can actually describe what the 'new world order' is.

Somehow, I suspect he can't.

[Revolutionary91]

I'm still waiting to see if rev91 can actually describe what the 'new world order' is.

Somehow, I suspect he can't.

You are confusing can't and won't. You know exactly what the NWO is believed to be, even if you don't believe it exists.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

You are confusing can't and won't. You know exactly what the NWO is believed to be, even if you don't believe it exists.
Why are you refusing to provide your definition of "the NWO"?

[Revolutionary91]

Heres Gary Hart at the CFR on 9/12/01 saying that Bush can use 9/11 as an opportunity to create the New World Order that Bush Sr spoke of. We didnt coin the phrase.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEfdUuPeus0

[uk_dave]

You are confusing can't and won't. You know exactly what the NWO is believed to be, even if you don't believe it exists.


But what is it that you believe it to be?

I'm not trying to trip you up, I sincerely am interested in how you perceive this 'NWO' affects your world.

But I'm afraid that at the moment I can only conclude that you don't really know and that you just read something about it somewhere at sometime and that you have taken that persons interpretation at face value without doing any proper research or applying any critical thinking to the subject.

[Revolutionary91]

Why are you refusing to provide your definition of "the NWO"?

Why would I?

[uk_dave]

Heres Gary Hart at the CFR on 9/12/01 saying that Bush can use 9/11 as an opportunity to create the New World Order that Bush Sr spoke of. We didnt coin the phrase.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEfdUuPeus0

But what does it mean?

ETA: What is so wrong with the phrase 'New World Order'? What am I supposed to be scared of?

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Why would I?
Because it helps to frame the discussion. Because it helps to prevent others from having talking points that are not relevant to your intent. Because it is vital to any debate that the terms used within it are clearly defined.

[Revolutionary91]

But what does it mean?

ETA: What is so wrong with the phrase 'New World Order'? What am I supposed to be scared of?

You are not concerned that the day after 9/11, while people still lay under the rubble, the CFR was describing it as an opportunity to realise the New World Order? Really?

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

You are not concerned that the day after 9/11, while people still lay under the rubble, the CFR was describing it as an opportunity to realise the New World Order? Really?
uk_dave did not say, or imply that. You are continue to dodge and weave.

[beachnut]

Yes.
Only real dumb people cannot understand OKC, and how Tim did it.

People across the street in other buildings were blasted through walls. What is the OP talking about?

Tim took a lot of Fert/Fuel in truck right next to a building and killed some kids and people because he also is a real dumb person. No ability to make rational thought, Tim went postal. Anyone who cannot follow how Tim did it, is not as smart as Tim, and Tim is DEAD.

Simple stuff and real dumb people need to find some facts and get lots of education on how to think rationally.

[DavidJames]

First he claims the NWO exists, then refuses to provide a definition, and when asked replies "why would I".

We have a junior killtown among the adults.

[uk_dave]

You are not concerned that the day after 9/11, while people still lay under the rubble, the CFR was describing it as an opportunity to realise the New World Order? Really?

Well actually, No, I'm not at all concerned.

It kinda depends upon what sort of 'new world order' we are talking about.

Does it mean removing nasty, brutal regimes who oppress their own people and encourage/facilitate terrorism around the world, such as the Taliban?

Does it mean a chance to stop supporting brutal mid-east regimes and actually sow the seeds of democracy in the region?

Does it mean forging alliances with former enemies to counter the growing threat of terrorism?

Does it mean an end to the support (tacit and otherwise) of some americans for terrorist groups such as the IRA?

Why should a speech about an event which changed the world, in which the phrase 'a new world order' is mentioned, be the cause of so much paranoia?

I don't get it.

[Revolutionary91]

Well actually, No, I'm not at all concerned.

It kinda depends upon what sort of 'new world order' we are talking about.

Does it mean removing nasty, brutal regimes who oppress their own people and encourage/facilitate terrorism around the world, such as the Taliban?

Does it mean a chance to stop supporting brutal mid-east regimes and actually sow the seeds of democracy in the region?

Does it mean forging alliances with former enemies to counter the growing threat of terrorism?

Does it mean an end to the support (tacit and otherwise) of some americans for terrorist groups such as the IRA?

Why should a speech about an event which changed the world, in which the phrase 'a new world order' is mentioned, be the cause of so much paranoia?

I don't get it.

This sums up what they want, so you can drop the naive act.

All countries are basically social arrangements... No matter how permanent or even sacred they may seem at any one time, in fact they are all artificial and temporary... Perhaps national sovereignty wasn't such a great idea after all... But it has taken the events in our own wondrous and terrible century to clinch the case for world government.



The Birth of the Global Nation by Strobe Talbott, Rhodes Scholar, roommate of Bill Clinton at Oxford University, CFR Director, and Trilateralist.

[uk_dave]

This sums up what they want, so you can drop the naive act.

The Birth of the Global Nation by Strobe Talbott, Rhodes Scholar, roommate of Bill Clinton at Oxford University, CFR Director, and Trilateralist.

So?

You're worried about a 'global government'? As opposed to what?

You think globalisation doesn't already exist?

You benefit from globalisation. Where's the chip in your computer made? All of the components for that matter!

The world trades globally. Finance is global. Entertainment is global. Sport is global. Technology is global.

Are you just frightened of losing some kind of national identity?

Or is it a case of circling the wagons against the foreigners?
Are you american, or are you defined by the state in which you live?
Perhaps you define yourself by the county within that state, or the town/city within that county?
Or maybe the street within that city?

How insular do you want to be before you feel safe?

[Revolutionary91]

So?

You're worried about a 'global government'? As opposed to what?

You think globalisation doesn't already exist?

You benefit from globalisation. Where's the chip in your computer made? All of the components for that matter!

The world trades globally. Finance is global. Entertainment is global. Sport is global. Technology is global.

Are you just frightened of losing some kind of national identity?

Or is it a case of circling the wagons against the foreigners?
Are you american, or are you defined by the state in which you live?
Perhaps you define yourself by the county within that state, or the town/city within that county?
Or maybe the street within that city?

How insular do you want to be before you feel safe?

You don't mind a global government?

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

You don't mind a global government?
What are your concerns with a "global government"?

[uk_dave]

They'll never be a global government in your lifetime. It's a utopian pipe dream.

But what there will be is closer co-operation and standardization between countries.

You'll benefit. When you are about to go to college, you'll have the opportunity to travel overseas without the need for any special visas and you'll be able to live and work (for a short period of time) and experience different cultures.

Globalisation means that your notepad computer and cellphone will be useable in those countries and your currency will be acceptable.

Globalisation is the chance for less developed countries to start catching up because all markets will be open. And already you have groups such as the G8 making attempts to eradicate poverty in Africa.

It may not be perfect (and its imperfections are precisely why you wont see a global government, because there will always be vested national interests which will get in the way) but it's a hell of alot better than it was 50 years ago.

So, what in your opinion is the downside of globalisation?

[Revolutionary91]

So?

You're worried about a 'global government'? As opposed to what?

You think globalisation doesn't already exist?

You benefit from globalisation. Where's the chip in your computer made? All of the components for that matter!

The world trades globally. Finance is global. Entertainment is global. Sport is global. Technology is global.

Are you just frightened of losing some kind of national identity?

Or is it a case of circling the wagons against the foreigners?
Are you american, or are you defined by the state in which you live?
Perhaps you define yourself by the county within that state, or the town/city within that county?
Or maybe the street within that city?

How insular do you want to be before you feel safe?

How ironic that this was said by UK_dave.

[uk_dave]

How ironic that this was said by UK_dave.

Is it? How so? Merely because on an internet forum I chose a name which indicated the country from which I am typing?

Tell me, don't you think kids in Africa should have the same opportunities as you?

If you do, wouldn't you applaud a new world order which ended the power politics which have been played out in africa for the last 50 years by the superpowers?

Don't you think it's cool that apartheid ended in south africa? Do you think that would have happened without the end of the cold war?

Just what is the problem with countries coming closer together and national boundaries becoming less defined?

[Revolutionary91]

Is it? How so? Merely because on an internet forum I chose a name which indicated the country from which I am typing?

Tell me, don't you think kids in Africa should have the same opportunities as you?

If you do, wouldn't you applaud a new world order which ended the power politics which have been played out in africa for the last 50 years by the superpowers?

Don't you think it's cool that apartheid ended in south africa? Do you think that would have happened without the end of the cold war?

Just what is the problem with countries coming closer together and national boundaries becoming less defined?

Yes thats right. This new world order business, invasion of iraq etc is all to bring peace and harmony to the world and let african children have opportunities. It has nothing to do with natural resources and maintaining american dominance. Cant wait for the nuclear attack on Iran, these nwo hippies with the flowers in their hair are really sending out the peace and love to the iranian children.

[uk_dave]

Yes thats right. This new world order business, invasion of iraq etc is all to bring peace and harmony to the world and let african children have opportunities. It has nothing to do with natural resources and maintaining american dominance. Cant wait for the nuclear attack on Iran, these nwo hippies with the flowers in their hair are really sending out the peace and love to the iranian children.

That wasn't very rational.
If anything, the anti globalisation, nationalistic types are the ones who want to maintain american dominance. Globalisation offers the chance for other countries to become global players, such as India and China.

[Revolutionary91]

Dave im going to be honest here. I don't really think you believe what you are saying. If you do believe it then I am genuinely frightened. Very frightened.

Either way, the debate is pointless because you dont disagree with what I say is happening.

[N.Texas]

One of the things I recall having a problem with it was the seismic data recorded two blasts, but that was ignored.
Why it was ignored I do not know.
Well, maybe not ignored, perhaps it was explained and I never saw that, but I am unsure about it all.

From www .agu.org/sci_soc/eosholzer.html ( Eos Vol. 77, No. 41, October 8, 1996, pp. 393, 396-397. . © 1996 American Geophysical Union.)

Thomas L. Holzer, Joe B. Fletcher, Gary S. Fuis, Trond Ryberg, Thomas M. Brocher, and Christopher M. Dietel

The terrorist bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995, generated seismic waves that were recorded on two permanent seismographs about 7 and 26 km away from the bombing. The seismogram recorded at 26 km shows two low-frequency wave trains, discrete sets of oscillatory signals, that begin about 10 s apart. Public release of this record prompted speculation that each wave train was caused by a different energy source. On May 23, 1995, the U.S. Geological Survey monitored the demolition of the bomb-ravaged Federal Building with portable seismographs (Figure 1). Two wave trains were picked up again. The recordings indicate that the wave trains during both the bombing and demolition represent seismic waves traveling at different velocities. We conclude that the two wave trains recorded during the bombing are consistent with a single impulsive energy source.

[uk_dave]

Dave im going to be honest here. I don't really think you believe what you are saying. If you do believe it then I am genuinely frightened. Very frightened.

Either way, the debate is pointless because you dont disagree with what I say is happening.


Fair enough.

All I would ask of you is to not automatically believe everything which is being pushed at you by the websites you visit. Even if you aren't prepared to listen to an alternative take on what you believe to be happening in the world, just be a bit more skeptical about the aims and motives of the likes of prisonplanet and infowars.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

From www .agu.org/sci_soc/eosholzer.html ( Eos Vol. 77, No. 41, October 8, 1996, pp. 393, 396-397. . © 1996 American Geophysical Union.)

Thomas L. Holzer, Joe B. Fletcher, Gary S. Fuis, Trond Ryberg, Thomas M. Brocher, and Christopher M. Dietel

The terrorist bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995, generated seismic waves that were recorded on two permanent seismographs about 7 and 26 km away from the bombing. The seismogram recorded at 26 km shows two low-frequency wave trains, discrete sets of oscillatory signals, that begin about 10 s apart. Public release of this record prompted speculation that each wave train was caused by a different energy source. On May 23, 1995, the U.S. Geological Survey monitored the demolition of the bomb-ravaged Federal Building with portable seismographs (Figure 1). Two wave trains were picked up again. The recordings indicate that the wave trains during both the bombing and demolition represent seismic waves traveling at different velocities. We conclude that the two wave trains recorded during the bombing are consistent with a single impulsive energy source.
The Discovery Channel show discovered similar results in their two tests of equivalent size fuel-bombs.

[Belz...]

You are not concerned that the day after 9/11, while people still lay under the rubble, the CFR was describing it as an opportunity to realise the New World Order? Really?

What a great opportunity!!

The Birth of the Global Nation

How would that be a bad thing ? Really.

[leftysergeant]

I have a problem with the globalization of the ecconomy in that it gives too much power to corporations which really do not give a rat'sa whether they improve the lot of working people or not. In the off-shoring of our industries, one can see that they would as soon people here starved as to see the corporate profit margin decline. Then they whine about being taxed to death.

One world government, of by and for the people of the world would be cool.

Government of the corporations has always sucked. Consider the British East India Company and what their special tax cut lead to in the 18th century.

[Civilized Worm]

No, I think I will stick with provocateured. It's perfect. Thanks, anyway.


This is fantastic! He has been conclusively shown that "provocateured" isn't a word, but he doesn't care!


Edit: Doesn't "provocateured" sound a lot like something George Bush might say?

[uk_dave]

This is fantastic! He has been conclusively shown that "provocateured" isn't a word, but he doesn't care!


Edit: Doesn't "provocateured" sound a lot like something George Bush might say?

Hey it's been conclusively shown that 911 wasn't an inside job, but he didn't care about that either!!

[DGM]

This is fantastic! He has been conclusively shown that "provocateured" isn't a word, but he doesn't care!


Edit: Doesn't "provocateured" sound a lot like something George Bush might say?

Now that's just being mean.:)

[Civilized Worm]

Hey it's been conclusively shown that 911 wasn't an inside job, but he didn't care about that either!!


Yeah but in this case he actually conceded that it wasn't a word.

[SpitfireIX]

Edit: Doesn't "provocateured" sound a lot like something George Bush might say?


No, because I doubt Bush the Younger knows the word "provacateur."

[slingblade]

Dave im going to be honest here. I don't really think you believe what you are saying. If you do believe it then I am genuinely frightened. Very frightened.

Either way, the debate is pointless because you dont disagree with what I say is happening.


I'm betting this 16-year-old is religious. Fundie, and probably Pentecostal.

I have my reasons.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Honestly, it sounds like Rev's idea of "globalization" is a Nazi Germany-like take-over, except successful; a military and oppressive union of all nations.

That, frankly, is impossible. The kooks point to Iraq in an attempt to prove that the "NWO" is trying to take over the world, but by doing so they are giving Bush the benefit of the doubt; that it's actually working.

Me? I see Iraq as precisely the reason why Rev's idiotic notion of globalization is a conspiracist pipe dream.

And I still don't believe Rev has any idea what the "NWO" actually means to him. It's just a nebulous idea that represents "evil" and can be made into whatever he needs to be whenever he needs to invoke it.

He also seems to feel that there's only ever one meaning associated with a phrase: his. I mean, there's nothing inherently evil about the phrase "new world order", but it passes through Rev's paranoia filter and uh-oh! The person speaking the phrase is being "blatantly subtle" about his evil agenda.

[Devil's Advocate]

Ok, I'll not join in the english lesson.
But, I do have a question with regard to police offers that committed suicide.
Was what the audio said true?
That he slit his wrist and throat, then shot himself in the head with a gun they could not find?

[DGM]

Ok, I'll not join in the english lesson.
But, I do have a question with regard to police offers that committed suicide.
Was what the audio said true?
That he slit his wrist and throat, then shot himself in the head with a gun they could not find?
No. Google his name then go about 10 pages down and you will find the real story. It was after all 10+ years ago.