It might have been clearer if I had posted a :sarcasm: tag at the end of my original post.
Did you watch the youtube video I linked in the original post? If you did you would see the local TV newscasters and reporter on the day of the Murrah building bombing are all making announcements to viewers about other unexploded (and sophisticated) bombs found inside the Murrah building which had to be defused by bomb disposal experts etc. It makes a mockery of either A)the official story that Tim McVeigh was the only bomber who used a crude fertilizer and diesel fuel truck bomb planted outside the building or B) The TV newscasters themselves who couldn't get the story straight on day one and reported wildly erroneous facts on the air to their audience.
I personally do not for a second believe "B" is the correct assumption to make in this case. From my understanding of the reporting in the days following the OKC bombing and the initial reports of multiple bombs in the building, the story suddenly shifted when the official suspect (ie patsy) was produced, Timothy McVeigh, and the damage was all pinned solely on the actions of the McVeigh "lone nut" bomber and a few helpers and any references or follow ups on the earlier reports of multiple bombs inside the building were quietly dropped and just never mentioned again in polite company. To my knowledge there was no explanation ever offered as to how or why so many reporters were mistaken and erroneously reported in the wake of the explosion that there were multiple bombs found inside the building.
The mainstream media work for corporations with a stake in making sure that whatever the news might be, it cannot be allowed to too violently rock the government and corporate boats. Therefore, being basically corporate whores, reporters and mainstream journalists understand they are paid to report the facts as they are directed to report them and not necessarily as an honest and thorough investigation might show them to be. When in an effort to meet corporate/government requirements the news has to be changed in such a sudden, obvious, and (one would think) embarrassing fashion as occurred above, they just bold-facedly change the news and in a very Orwellian fashion simply ignore the contradictions between the old story and the new story knowing their apologists are ever ready to come to their defense by attributing any such glaring contradictions and inconsistences to honest "mistakes".
Cover-up in OKCby William F. Jasper
SNIP
Almost before the dust had cleared from the explosion, the official government line was that the attack on the Murrah Building had involved only a truck bomb, composed of ANFO (ammonium nitrate and fuel oil) and parked on the street next to the building. From that point on, the government story on the size and composition of the bomb mutated several times to fit the official line. As the Mc Veigh trial was about to start, the Department of Justice issued a report by the Office of the Inspector General that particularly censured the work of Special Agent David Williams of the FBI lab explosives unit, and Williams' supervisor, Thomas Thurman. Williams, the main explosives analyst for the prosecution in this case, had grossly fudged evidence on all of the major points: the size and composition of the truck bomb; the velocity of the explosives; the type of detonator used; the containers that supposedly were used; and the presence of explosive residue on clothing and other articles belonging to Timothy Mc Veigh. The Inspector General's critique found that Williams' forensic report was flawed, unscientific, biased, improper, unjustified, invalid, and appeared "to tailor the opinion to evidence associated with the defendants."
Long before this, however, many genuine experts had already concluded that it would have been physically impossible for the truck bomb alone to have accomplished the massive structural destruction of the heavy concrete, steel-reinforced columns. The evidence pointed overwhelmingly, they insisted, to the detonation of high-explosive contact charges on the columns inside the building. This stellar group of experts includes legendary physicist and defense analyst Sam Cohen, inventor of the neutron bomb; Brigadier General Benton K. Partin, former director of the Air Force Armaments Technology Laboratory; Dr. Frederick Hansen, professor of physics at the University of Oregon, former research scientist with NASA, and former head of earth and astro sciences at the General Motors Defense Research Laboratories; Dr. Ernest B. Paxson, an engineer with over 30 years' experience in civilian and defense-related projects and a published author in many professional journals; and Dr. Robert G. Breene, author, former professor of physics, and formerly a visiting scientist at the Max Planck Institute in Germany.
In addition to the authoritative assessments of these and other experts, there is the equally compelling testimony provided by eyewitnesses; official police, military, and fire department logs; and television video coverage showing that there were additional internal charges within the Murrah Building that failed to detonate and that were later removed by bomb squads. (See, "Proof of Multiple Bombs," in our issue for July 20, 1998.) This matter could have been settled with finality if an independent, technically competent analysis of the crime scene and the forensic evidence -- especially from the concrete columns -- had been allowed. But, incredibly, one month after the bombing, before such an evaluation could be made, the crime scene and evidence were destroyed, as the building was imploded by commercial demolition blasters. Then the massive evidence of the crime scene was hauled away and buried. This happened at the very time that heated arguments in the O.J. Simpson trial, "the trial of the century," centered on charges that the Los Angeles Police Department had failed to preserve the crime scene and other important evidence in that case. It is elementary doctrine and procedure to preserve the crime scene and preserve evidence; why in this, of all cases, was there such a rush to destroy the evidence?
http://911review.org/Wiki/CoverUpInOkc.shtml See also
http://www.911review.org/Wiki/OkcBombing.shtml
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
