tc239 said:debunks that nonsense.
Seriously, 8 out of 10 of your links were to "jewsreallydidit.com".
The only thing you left out in your post spam was the sentence "I'm not an anti-semite, but this eerily matches the pattern laid out in the Protocols of Zion".
from your first 3 results:http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Virgil+Steele+okc
its real easy to corroborate all of the claims instead of ad-homs directed at the source used.
you guys cant possibly get anymore transparent around here.......
The 1995 Oklahoma City Bombing - PROOF there were additional ...
Virgil Steele is the elevator inspector who discovered that the story ... GREER did work in that office for FEMA at the time of the Oklahoma City bombing. ...
www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/bombs/bombs.html - 12k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this
HOTT - Oklahoma City Bombing Cover-Up
It's time to collect all the hard facts about Oklahoma City, ... Virgil Steele is the elevator inspector who discovered that the story told by a senior BATF ...
www.hourofthetime.com/okcbombingcoverup.html - 28k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this
The 1995 Oklahoma City Bombing - PROOF there were additional ...
The Oklahoma City Bombing. PROOF there were additional explosive charges. ... Virgil Steele is the elevator inspector who discovered that the story told by ...
www.veteranhosting.net/okc_bombs/bombs.htm - 6k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this
from your first 3 results:
even just looking at the snippet the search page gives you they are obviously all c/p'd from the same source, thats not corroboration
if you want to call other members on attacking the host of the statement you are free to do that, but dont claim they are corroborated by showing another site hosting them (and clearly plagiarizing eachother)you're right.
all those other sites are using the same sworn affidavits as a source.
now is there some proof that this is a mike rivero/wrh forgery?
if not then the source i used for the sworn affidavits from eyewitnesses is irrelevant as these are real documents which you too can get a copy of.
Anyone who believes that the evidence cited in the OP provides a clear-cut case for a conspiracy is a complete whack-job.Please note I will put everyone on ignore who uses ad-homs in this thread.
if you want to call other members on attacking the host of the statement you are free to do that, but dont claim they are corroborated by showing another site hosting them (and clearly plagiarizing eachother)
Anyone who believes that the evidence cited in the OP provides a clear-cut case for a conspiracy is a complete whack-job.
How'd I do, TC? Did I make the cut?
When I first saw the pictures of the truck-bomb's asymmetrical damage to the Federal Building, my immediate reaction was that the pattern of damage would have been technically impossible without supplementing demolition charges at some of the reinforcing concrete column bases…. 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 A-7 is beyond credulity.
It would have been absolutely impossible and against the laws of nature for a truck full of fertilizer and fuel oil… no matter how much was used… to bring the building down.
Please note I will put everyone on ignore who uses ad-homs in this thread.
This is the dictation tape made by a lawyer which captures the sounds of the blast which destroyed the Oklahoma Federal Building on April 19th, 1995. Note the sounds of a rattle which precedes the blast by one second. This sound is the surface wave from the ANFO Truck Bomb which arrives ahead of the airborne concussion, traveling through the Earth's surface. 4.2 seconds ahead of the start of the rattle, a "thump" is heard on the tape, overlapping the second syllable of the word "attorneys".
MP3
Events marked on the jpg file
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/spectrum2.jpg
1. The thump at -4.2 seconds.
2. An airborne event which arrives at the correct place to be associated with event 1, if it originates at the same location as the truck bomb itself.
3. This marks the start of the arrival of the surface wave from the truck bomb. On the tape, this can be heard as a rattle building under the lawyer's voice. Note that unlike the lawyer's voiceprints, which show clear banding in frequency, the sounds from the truck bomb surface wave are smoothly distributed in the lower frequencies.
4. This is the arrival of the airborne concussion from the truck bomb. Like the surface wave, this signal lacks the striations of the lawyer's voice. The most notable difference is the sudden transition to high frequency components.
Note that the Surface Wave / Air Wave delays are identical in both cases, indicating similar distances from the recording device.
When I originally heard this tape, I discarded the "pop" at the -4.2 second mark as just noise on the tape. However, when the Water Board tape (which follows) also had an artifact at the -4.2 second mark, I ran a frequency domain audio spectrogram on the lawyer's dictation tape. The spike corresponding to the pop at the -4.2 second mark is circled. The other event marks were added later. The stripe at the top is electronic noise, possibly from the dictation machine itself.
At the time when the Truck Bomb exploded outside the Murrah Federal Building on April 19th, The Oklahoma Water Board was meeting in a building diagonally across the street. 4.2 seconds prior to the truck bomb blast, a loud "thump" is heard on the tape, just as the speaker finishes the phrase," are four elements that I have to..".
On this tape, the speaker pauses after the thump is heard, and just prior to the main blast, if you listen real close, other voices can be heard just starting to speak up.
MP3
From the above evidence, it is clear that an event which generated a high frequency surface wave which preceded the main truck bomb blast by 4.2 seconds. This event was recorded at two different locations at distances of 100 yards and 1/3 of a mile. Because the 4.2 second interval remains constant at both distances, theories of mechanism producing echoes are eliminated. Because the spectrogram of the lawyer's tape shows BOTH surface and airborne waves separated by 4.2 seconds from BOTH surface and airborne waves of the truck bomb, arguments of a surface/air phenomenon are invalid. Two events at the Murrah building 4.2 seconds apart produced two sets of surface/air pairs 4.2 seconds apart at the lawyer's office.
These images are scans of the seismographic output from the Norman Oklahoma Z-axis recorder for April 19th and May 23rd; the bombing and the demolition respectively. This is the raw data which led Ray Brown and Charles Mankin to decide that there may have been a second explosion. It turns out that the 10 second delay is caused by differing propagation times through the layers of shale and sandstone that lie under Oklahoma City.
April 19th: The Bombing of the Murrah Building
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/ok_geo.jpg
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/lo_19.jpg
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/hi_19.jpg
May 23rd: The Sequenced Demolition of the Murrah Building
The additional spikes on this record are caused by wind flexing the radio antenna which is used to transmit the data to the Oklahoma Geological Survey.
Seismographic record of the Murrah Building Demolition
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/lo_22.jpg
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/hi_22.jpg
Note that the 8 second long sequenced demolition of the remainder of the Murrah Building yielded a trace the same length as the original bombing. The first trace, if indeed a single explosion, should be shorter. But it isn't, suggesting that BOTH events consisted of multiple sequenced detonations over several seconds' duration.
Roundhead, what is your source for that letter? I'll say it again: it is dishonest or at least disingenuous to fail to indicate your sources. Obviously it's copied from somewhere. Is this another Rule 4 situation?
I fail to see what difference it makes as to who it is sourced from.Its a letter i copied verbatim....but, here is the source
http://www.riflewarrior.com/chief_william_citty.htm
Now if you have information this 27 year cop didnt write this letter, or its misquoted, lets see it.
I believe Riflewarrior dot com is Wm. Craig Roberts' own site. He runs his own vanity press, too. He's a catch-all conspiradroid. Something fishy about everything to him.... from 911 to Lockerby to JFK to OKC to TWA800.
Knowing Roberts' work, the fact that he refers to it as "written to" rather than "sent to" is probably significant. It looks more like a blog article... or news op ed piece... sort of a "J'accuse!" for the modern era.
ive already stated my position, the 2 additional explosive devices found in the building were training devicesis it your claim that these sworn affidavits are forgeries or that the witnesses are lying?
yes or no.
So, a personal attack on a veteran, and long time police official, who obviously was well thought of professionally, as he was asked to help.
More to the point, what of his accusations?. I have read accounts of the dead officers widow, his actions that morning, and his death, from other sources. What of the wrist lacerations, etc, and the case files?
And if you are going to belittle somebody, i assume you have proof Roberts didnt send a letter to both police chiefs, and wasnt qualified to state what he did??