9/11, Waco and the Oklahoma city bombing inside jobs ?
Morgan
veteran used a fertilizer to blow up the Oklahoma city federal building
however the truth is that bombs were planted in the building and on
9/11 it was 4 plans and 19 patsies, all three were work of the FBI and
cops.
FBI Bombed Oklahoma City
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1b80c_msm-cover-up-fbi-bombed-okla-city_news
FBI Lab Scandal Oklahoma City Bombing
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3094162894003591865&e
The Waco Butchers Are Back
by Anthony Gregory
Sixteen years ago we were reminded of the deadly danger of having the
left-liberals in charge of the police state. The largest massacre of
American civilians by the US government since Wounded Knee climaxed on
April 19, 1993. The siege that had begun on February 28 with a botched
ATF publicity stunt ended when the Branch Davidian church and home went
up in flames, after an FBI-operated tank on lease from the military was
driven through the building, pumping flammable CS gas for six hours into
the place where women and children were cowering in fear. Chemistry
professor George Uhlig later testified that the high concentration of
the gas combined with poor ventilation subjected the women and children
to conditions "similar to… the gas chambers used by the Nazis in Auschwitz."
On April 12, the FBI had ruled out using gas because it was dangerous to
children. A week later, Bob Ricks, FBI Assistant Special Agent in
Charge, said the gassing was "to make their environment as uncomfortable
as possible until they do exit the compound." This excuse came after
weeks of throwing flash-bang grenades at the building when people tried
to leave.
Attorney General Janet Reno said the gas attack "was not meant to be
D-Day. This was just a step forward in trying to bring about a peaceful
resolution by constantly exerting further pressure to shrink the
perimeter." This militaristic lingo was characteristic of the feds’
approach throughout the siege. The government had waged psychological
warfare by blaring obnoxious music, shining glaring lights and cutting
the Davidians off water, electricity, their friends, attorneys and the
press. Firefighters were not permitted near the scene as the flames
continued engulfing the home. When it was all over, the ATF stuck its
flag up on the building to declare victory.
At a press conference on April 20, a day after the FBI gassed American
civilians, President Clinton said he did not believe "the Attorney
General should resign because some religious fanatics murdered
themselves." The press corps, in an unusually naked expression of
solidarity with the government, applauded Clinton’s statement.
This underscores the dynamic of having this crop in power. If even the
liberals are for a show of force, it must have been necessary. The blame
was put on the "religious fanatics," not the government fanatics, and
the press and most Americans ate it all up.
The media slavishly pushed war propaganda in Bush’s first term, but they
will prove even more sycophantic of Obama. Fair-weather left-liberals
who often criticize the most violent side of the Republican state look
the other way as their leader jails people without trial, builds
civilian surveillance systems, and kills innocents.
Over the last eight years, muckraking liberal journalists dissected
every word and deed of the Bush regime, but under Clinton very few were
bothered about the unambiguously atrocious nature of the federal raid at
Waco. They did not care that Lon Horiuchi, the sniper who murdered Vicki
Weaver at Ruby Ridge in August 1992, had been brought to Waco. They were
not jumping up and down about Janet Reno using internationally banned
chemical warfare on American children. They did not condemn the FBI for
using explosives in addition to flammable gas and then lying about it.
They were not concerned what it meant for the militarization of law
enforcement, and did not ask why David Koresh, who had befriended
federal agents, was friendly with local law enforcement, and had opened
the Davidian home up for inspection, was simply not arrested when he was
jogging or visiting the bar. The liberals did not wonder why the excuse
for the raid shifted from a meth lab to illegal gun ownership to child
abuse. They assumed that, as much as the government might have messed up
the raid, the fault was primarily that of the victims. The fact that the
Davidians were different and armed – though no more armed than the
average Texan – was enough to dismiss their suffering and excuse the
death of 80 Americans, many of them children, at the hands of law
enforcement.
Many mainstream conservatives also backed the administration after Waco,
but the weak reaction by the left-liberals, who Americans rely on as the
outspoken critics of police abuses, was more important. Incidentally,
many libertarians, broadly defined, also took the government’s side.
Notably, Objectivist Leonard Peikoff of the Ayn Rand Institute defended
the state’s raid and demonized the victims.
When Democratic administrations murder, the law-and-order right is often
split. The left is in denial or supportive. And the press tends to spin
the story to make the administration seem soft.
The headlines today emphasize Obama’s rhetorical shift from the "war on
terror" and his superficial changes in detention policy. The media push
the notion that Obama has cut military spending, when he is doing the
opposite.
Moreover, the continuity between the Clinton and Obama administrations
is not encouraging. We have Hillary, who cheered on the belligerent
foreign policy of her husband, the bomber of Belgrade, now in charge of
State. We have a Justice Department even more committed to sovereign
immunity than the last administration and headed up by Janet Reno’s
Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder.
Then there is the group the Democrats love to demonize: "Rightwing
extremists." Clinton built a proto-Bushian police state around fear of
militias. We saw a major blow to federal habeas corpus, which liberals
claim to love, when the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act
passed in 1996, in response to Oklahoma City and the supposed epidemic
of rightwing militias. When John Ashcroft was being confirmed as
Attorney General, his very suggestion that the U.S. government could
become "tyrannical" was mocked as ridiculous and extremist by Ted
Kennedy and liberals nationwide.
Today, we’re seeing a return of anti-militia hysteria. Just as the
federal government and its liberal defenders throughout the 1990s
conflated patriotic Americans and peaceful separatists with dangerous
"hate" groups and Rush Limbaugh’s listeners with Timothy McVeigh, we
have the same kind of culture-war nonsense today.
The Department of Homeland Security recently circulated a report that
warns against the "Rise in Right-Wing Extremism." The document is
apparently unclassified but nevertheless indicates it is "not to be
released to the public, the media" or others who do not "need to know."
The libertarian Judge Andrew Napolitano, who has roundly criticized the
tyrannical usurpations of both Republicans and Democrats, writes:
The thrust of this report is that in the present environment of
economic instability, returning military veterans, those who fear of the
loss of Second Amendment-protected rights, those threatened by an
African-American president, and those who fear "Jewish ‘financial
elites’" could all be a fertile breeding ground for groups whose power
and ideas the government hates and fears. The document is essentially a
warning for DHS and FBI officials to be on the look-out for rootless
persons looking for the comfort of groups as they may be a danger to
American security.
The summary (unclassified) document is terrifying. One can only
imagine what is contained in the classified version. This document runs
directly counter to numerous U.S. Supreme decisions prohibiting the
government from engaging in any activities that could serve to chill the
exercise of expressive liberties. Liberties are chilled, in
constitutional parlance, when people are afraid to express themselves
for fear of government omnipresence, monitoring, or reprisals. The
document also informs the reader that Big Brother is watching both
public and private behavior.
Do you oppose the Federal Reserve? Support states rights? Hate the
income tax? Support the right to bear arms? Know the Constitution better
than our rulers? You are a likely suspect of a hate crime. You are in
the same class as violent racists and terrorists.
With the upsurge in gun and ammo purchases and the mysterious rise in
mass shootings, we can expect more efforts to lump violent agitators
together with normal Americans who simply wish to defend themselves and
their families. With growing resentment about Washington’s saddling
future generations with debt, there will be more attempts to
characterize Americans who hate paying ransom to a distant government
with people who hate their country or want conflict. With the neglected
veterans of Bush’s wars having trouble readjusting to society or simply
dissatisfied with the increasingly socialistic country they come home to
after being told they were defending freedom, we will see this tragedy
caused by the federal government disgustingly twisted into a way to
bolster that government.
Many Republicans are making a big stink about the DHS report, but others
have pointed out that the administration has also warned about
"left-wing extremists" and so it is no big deal. Most grassroots
conservatives are rightly outraged, although they do not see the
continuity from the Bush era. As I warned them on LRC precisely four
years ago:
Conservatives today might be able to wrap themselves in the flag
and condemn dissidents as traitors, but before they know it, another
Clinton might come to power and they’ll be the ones again accused of
assisting the enemy by opposing the State. They might come, once again,
to see the difference between love of country and love of the
government, only it might be too late to bask in the distinction, thanks
to the anti-dissident political atmosphere they are helping right now to
create. Today’s leftists, it is to be hoped, will remember the feeling
of being branded a traitor, should a Democrat be in power during the
next national crisis or war.
The next national crisis has come and the left has for the most part not
learned its lessons. Now that their guy is in power, we are back to the
peculiar political dynamic of the 1990s, when the left-liberal police
state conducted atrocities and dissent was thin.
Of course in reality, the policies are bipartisan. Ruby Ridge happened
and Waco was planned under Republicans, and Waco was whitewashed by the
Republican Danforth Report. The Homeland Security Department and the
Fusion Centers going after rightwing militia were begun in the Bush era.
Under Bush the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention
Act, which targeted many of the same groups today targeted by Obama, won
the support of the overwhelming majority of Republican Congressmen. But
what changes most is the way the public reacts to state violence, and
with left-liberals at the throne police brutality and massacres tend to
be more tolerated by the mainstream. It is somehow politically correct
when a Democratic administration cracks down on the most marginalized
people in society.
Meanwhile, the Obama regime is raiding medical marijuana clinics in
violation of the spirit of campaign promises, continuing most
dictatorial Bush terror policies, and scheming new ways to censor and
control us. They want to take over the internet. They are contemplating
more citizen disarmament, a move toward national service and more
cradle-to-grave welfarism. By casting "rightwing extremists" as the
Other, they can use this domestic bogeyman to expand upon the tools of
oppression Bush constructed in the name of fighting the foreign
bogeyman. It will aggravate the culture war and cause social division,
but we must remember it is the state that is doing this dividing.
Obama has already killed a lot of foreigners. He has already broken key
promises on civil liberties and transparency. He has already looted
enough for five years of profligate spending. Let us hope his team does
not react to "rightwing extremists" the way Clinton’s did at Waco. They
would get away with it.
April 18, 2009
Anthony Gregory [send him mail] is a research analyst at the Independent
Institute and editor-in-chief of the Campaign for Liberty. He lives in
Berkeley, California. See his webpage for more articles and personal
information.
Garrison Blvd.
"Morgan" <John...@email.non> wrote in message
news:5audnWd8iYAUZnDU...@giganews.com...
> This Waco incident happened on 4/19/1993 and on 4/19/1995 an Iraq
> veteran used a fertilizer to blow up the Oklahoma city federal building
> however the truth is that bombs were planted in the building and on
> 9/11 it was 4 plans and 19 patsies, all three were work of the FBI and
> cops.
koo koo, koo koo
spamme...@pandora.orbl.org
Morgan
BOTH OF YOU HAVE A LOT TO LEARN ABOUT fALSE FLAG OPS.
The Corbett Report
Episode 038 - OKC was an inside job
Length - 1:13:49
From bombs inside the buildings to BATF officers who were tipped in
advance, suspicious suicides and surveillance tapes we're not allowed to
see, find out what they don't want to tell you about the OKC bombing.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE MP3
http://www.corbettreport.com/mp3/episode038_okc_was_an_inside_job.mp3
Morgan
Who paid the Federal agents to plan the operation. Was it that rich
Hollywood celebrity who changed his color to white and other African
Americans who are very pissed of at white racists? Was Timothy
Mcveigh duped into it without understanding the purpose behind it ?
They tried to pin it on Iraq just like when they tried to pin 9/11 on Iraq.
Overview of the OKC Bombing case created by State Representative Charles
Key. Takes a look at major issues regarding the cover up by the FBI and
Justice Department. Including: Eyewitnesses, Other Bombs found and Prior
Knowledge.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3272698624135234456
Local news reports of a second and third bomb at the Alfred P. Murrah
building in Oklahoma City.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKsQKc2eP-8
This was the news footage from the OKC bombing horror. It doesn't match
the government line. Hi tech explosives were reported being used.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BZHDiZR_kA
Morgan
A lot of people are saying it was an inside job, MR quad koo
The Opinions of General Partin and Other Bomb Experts
Filed under: Fake Terror
"My knowledge comes from practical handling of explosives," added
Gronning. "And my belief is that 4800 lb. of ANFO wouldn't have scuffed
the paint on the building."
The Opinions of General Partin and Other Bomb Experts
Brigadier General Benton K. Partin, U. S. Air Force, retired, has 25
years experience in explosives and ballistic weapons design and testing.
General Partin also served as the Commander of the Air Force Armament
Technology Laboratory.
Partin has this to say:
"When I first saw the picture of the truck bomb's asymmetrical damage to
the Federal building in Oklahoma, my immediate reaction was that the
pattern of damage would have been technically impossible without
supplementary demolition charges at some of the reinforced concrete
bases inside the building, a standard demolition technique.
"For a simplistic blast truck bomb, of the size and composition
reported, to be able to reach out on the order of 60 feet and collapse a
reinforced column base the size of column A7 is beyond credulity."
General Partin further explained that; "The total incompatibility with a
single truck bomb lies in the fact that either some columns collapsed
that should not have collapsed or some of the columns are still standing
that should of collapsed and did not."
"Reinforced concrete targets in large buildings are hard targets to
blast. I know of no way possible to reproduce the apparent building
damage through simply a truck bomb effort."
"It is easy to determine whether a column was failed by contact
demolition charges or by blast loading (such as a truck bomb)," Partin
wrote in his letter to Congress. "It is also easy to cover up crucial
evidence as was apparently done in Waco. I understand that the building
is to be demolished by May 23rd or 24th. Why the rush to destroy the
evidence?"
He concludes; "This is a massive cover-up of immense proportions."
The statement below is made by an Israeli terrorist expert who used his
experience with bombings in the Middle East. In making his deductions he
used film footage of the bombing just hours afterwards:
"It is clear that they used certain methods which were used in the
Middle East. I mean using a car bomb, putting it in front of the
building, and maybe planting inside the building itself . My feeling is
that it was not just an explosion outside, which is clear it was outside
as well, but also inside the building. So it is more than one man. It's
a network."
Sam Gronning, a professional blaster for more than thirty years, says:
"I have been a blaster for over thirty years and there is no doubt in my
mind that ANFO could not have been by itself the medium for that
powerful an explosion.... even enhanced at that distance, I doubt that
an external explosion could of created that extensive damage at the
reported weight of the bomb."
"My knowledge comes from practical handling of explosives," added
Gronning. "And my belief is that 4800 lb. of ANFO wouldn't have scuffed
the paint on the building."
"No truck bomb of ANFO out in the open is going to cause that kind of
damage we had there... In thirty years of blasting, using everything
from 100 percent nitrogel to ANFO, I've not seen anything to support
that story... I have set off 16000 pounds of ANFO and was standing
upright just
1,000 feet away from the blast."
Gronning went on to say that even a bomb that big wouldn't have caused
the damage seen at the Murrah building.
Dr. Roger Raubach, who has a Ph. D. in physical chemistry and is now the
technical director of a chemical company has this to say;
"I don't care if they pulled up a semi-trailer with twenty tons of
ammonium nitrate; it wouldn't do the damage we saw there."
David Hoffman, author of "The Oklahoma City Bombing and the Politics of
Terror" (Published by Feral House) wrote the following (taken from a
chapter in that book):
Yet Rick Sherrow, who wrote an article for Soldier of Fortune magazine
entitled "Bomb Blasts & Baloney," contends that the General's assessment
of the bombing is somehow inaccurate. Sherrow claims that the pressure
wave that would have struck the building from the [rapidly
deteriorating] blast of the ANFO bomb (375 p. s. i. according to
Partin's figures) would be more than enough to destroy reinforced
concrete columns, which Sherrow claimed in his article disintegrate at
30 p. s. i. (pounds per square inch).
Sam Gronning doesn't concur. "That's bullshit!!" exclaimed Gronning.
"Thirty p. s. i. wouldn't take out a rubber tire!"
Citizens monitoring police radios heard the following conversation on
the morning of the 19th: First voice: "Boy, you're not gonna' believe
this!" Second voice: "Believe what?" First voice: "I can't believe it;
this is a military bomb!"
When J. D. Cash, a journalist writing for the McCurtain County Gazette,,
tried to interview members of the Bomb Squad, Fire Department and
Police, he was generally told by potential interviewees, "I saw a lot
that day, I wish I hadn't. I have a wife, a job, a family, I've been
threatened, we've been told not to talk about the devices."
The most amount of force produced by even a perfectly made ANFO bomb
weighing 4800 pounds, is 1,457 p. s. i. by the time it hit the glass of
the Federal building. It's a law of physics that the destructive
capabilities of a bomb fall off dramatically only a few feet from the blast.
By the time the blast front made contact with the column nearest to the
bomb, the pressure would have decreased to 375 p. s. i., far below the
5,600 p. s. i. compressive yield strength of concrete. Even using
General Partin's very conservative figure of 3,500 p. s. i. for the
compressive yield strength of concrete, you would still require nine
times the potential damage pressure from the bomb at that distance.
Furthermore, the government would have us believe that the same bomb was
able to blast through an additional seven major concrete columns. If we
are to believe the absolute absurdity of the governments "science", then
we should also endorse the practices of voodoo and witchcraft, for they
both have the same amount of credibility.
Simply stated, it is a physical, chemical and thermodynamic
impossibility for a 4800 pound ANFO bomb, at a distance of approximately
20 feet away, to of inflicted the kind of damage the government said it did.
As reported widely on CNN & news stations across the nation on the day
of the bombing, up to four primed bombs were found inside the building
by bomb detecting dogs. The BATF (Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and
Firearms) later said they were dummy bombs, but why would bomb sniffing
dogs find, or be needed to locate dummy bombs which are clearly marked
as such; furthermore, why would munitions technicians spend so much time
diffusing "dummy" bombs? KFOR-TV said that another bomb had been located
strapped to a column next to the day-care center.
Around the noon hour, Channel 4 had as their guest Dr. Randall Heather,
a terrorist expert. Dr. Heather stated: "We got lucky today, if you can
consider anything about this tragedy lucky. We have both of the bombs
that were defused at the site and they are being taken apart. We will be
able to find out how they were made, and possibly who made them. These
bombs are very sophisticated high explosives with maybe a little
fertilizer damped around them."
The Oklahoma City bombing has earned the nickname "Mannlicher-Carcano
Bomb," after the cheap Italian-made rifle with a defective scope that
was allegedly used to kill President Kennedy. Attorney Jim Garrison
joked that the governments nuclear physics laboratory could explain how
a single bullet could travel through President Kennedy & Governor
Connally five times while making several U-turns, then turns up in
pristine condition (an event that no firearms expert in the world has
ever been able to duplicate) on a hospital gurney.
In the Oklahoma bombing case it seems the government is attempting to
perform a similar feat of light and magic. The fact is that a
non-directional, low velocity 4800 pound ANFO bomb, parked 20-30 feet
from a modern steel-reinforced super-structure could never have caused
the pattern or degree of damage that they say it did.
dogg...@yahoo.com
> This Waco incident happened on 4/19/1993 and on 4/19/1995 an Iraq
> veteran used a fertilizer to blow up the Oklahoma city federal building
> however the truth is that bombs were planted in the building and on
> 9/11 it was 4 plans and 19 patsies, all three were work of the FBI and
> cops.
I blame it all on the jackolopes, myself. Those son of a bitches
haven't been seen or heard since Waco.
Phil