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.
Return to Oklahoma City Index