In number one, we explored the seismographic evidence
from two locations. Due to the duration of what is
considered by some to be the second explosion, I am
inclined to believe that it is, more likely, the collapse
of the building. A nine story building is well over one
hundred feet tall. The rate of fall (19 ft/sec/sec) would
only account for a few seconds, but the need for each
floor to fail, structurally, and then collapse, would
account for quite an addition to the total time. This, in
itself, however, is not sufficient to come to an absolute
conclusion.
So, let's look elsewhere. We know that we have an
explosion outside. This is evidenced by a rather
substantial crater. Considering the force of the outside
blast (damage resulting in condemnation of five
buildings), if the building were weakened by the outside
explosion and this was followed by an inside explosion,
it would seem that rather large pieces of debris and
material would have been "ejected" from the
building, and would be apparent, even in the video
footage currently available. The contrary seems true. It
appears that only smaller pieces of debris were ejected,
and the substantial pieces remained inside of the
exterior wall line, or just outside of it.
By the same token, had there been a substantial
interior blast, the windows throughout the building would
have blown out. The concussion from a bomb substantial
enough to bring down the building, as it did, would
surely have had the force, and compression, necessary to
create havoc with the pressure inside, and would probably
have been noticed, and commented upon, by the survivors.
My final point on the single bomb theory is a result
of an interview with a friend who has had decades of
experience (not in some past military life) in
investigations of explosions and arson. He has worked
with the BATF, and, to protect his identity and secure
our source of valuable information, he must remain
anonymous. He has, however, been to Oklahoma City and
viewed the evidence. He has spoken with OKC Fire
Department investigators, BATF, FBI and many others
involved in the investigation. Unless all of those
investigating, from all of the agencies involved, are
involved, also, in a conspiracy (many are municipal
employees from other states), we should be able to assume
that the information they have provided to
"our" investigator is accurate. "Our"
investigator reports that there is no evidence of an
inside bomb, there is no evidence of damage to the
interior wall of the basement, there is no evidence of
another outside bomb (i.e. craters), and all evidence
points to a very powerful bomb which left the crater in
the street. He has described the majority of the damage
(pancaking of the building floors) as evidence of a
structural failure.
To understand where the structural failure comes in to
play, it must be understood that the building was
constructed by first creating a three story, very rigid
"box". On top of this "box" were
built the next nine stories, more flexible, by design, to
endure winds, earthquakes, etc. If there were to be a
failure in the infrastructure of the lower portion, that
failure would allow structural failure of any portion
over the failure of the lower portion. At the point of
the deepest (north-south) damage, there was a horizontal
beam which carried the load of the building from front to
rear. This beam failed, probably as a result of the
failure of a vertical member forming the support for the
beam. The horizontal member along the front of the
building also failed. The result is that there was total
failure along the entire front of the building, and total
failure above the beam running front to rear. The
remainder of the damage was failures of interior support
members damaged by the blast, or, indirectly as a result
of the blast. This secondary damage continued until the
interior supporting columns, which were undamaged, were
reached by the crumbling and breaking floor sections. The
virtual vertical break lines in the damaged floor
sections is indicative of structural failure being the
primary cause of the damage.
Again, this "structural failure" concept
could be supported by the one or two explosion theory,
but, unless and until there is evidence (direct damage,
crater, or other evidence) to prove the second bomb's
detonation, it appears that the only logical conclusion
is that there was, more than likely, only one bomb.
There are many who will choose to believe what they
want to believe, regardless of the evidence. This has
been evidenced by the two years it has taken for certain
truths to come out about Waco. While we criticize the
"establishment press" for their failure to tell
us all of the truth, we still tend to exclude common
sense and reason from our own determinations of fact when
it comes to events such as the OKC bombing.
We criticize politicians, for we know that they say
what we want to hear, and then do what they want. Most of
us even understand the difference between a politician
and a statesman. The politician tells you what you want
to hear and the statesman tells you what you need to
hear.
Let's try and build our case on what happened in OKC
on fact. The conclusions that are presented, and then
supported by only the pieces of evidence that might
support the conclusion, to the exclusion of other
evidence, creates an appearance of irrationality to the
Patriot community, as a whole.. If we can discourage this
appearance, there are many who are beginning to recognize
the government as evil, and who would probably be willing
to join us. We have an opportunity of unparalleled
importance to our cause, should we be willing to
demonstrate a level head during this critical period.
Previous article
Next article
Return to Oklahoma City Index