was OKC an inside job?

[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://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/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

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.

more:
http://www.sddc.army.mil/Public/Passenger/Carriers and Programs/Car Rental Carriers
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?