Foreknowledge to the OKC bombing.

[FatesWebb]

link?

 

[Revolutionary91]

I suspect you know he doesn’t mean that. The recipe might not be legitimate.

Typical. You demand evidence then immediately declare it faked.

We know it isnt a forgery because the FBI now say he was there on a secret investigation.

 

[FatesWebb]

I think Fates may have realized that his truck photograph is not as damning as he thought and will henceforth ignore my response, as he has not replied, and will move on to yet another futile argument.

Am I psychic? Stay tuned and find out!

it called going to lunch, officer, or is that private?

 

[Par]

So why lie?

You have no problem that the head anti terrorist honcho booked into the OKC hotel 9 hours before the bombing in OKC, then denied it.

As I said on Page 3:

Because he didn’t want his wife to find out.

 

[Sabrina]

it called going to lunch, officer, or is that private?

Lieutenant, actually, thank you.

And I was making a joke; or did the winking smiley not make that clear to you?

 

[Foster Zygote]

So, does the receipt I have posted cease to exist because of WNDs reputation?

It becomes highly suspect. WND, a disreputable, biased, sensationalist publication, is the only source for this information. All I see is a scan of a Xerox that could have been embellished or faked. It may be genuine, but it may not. You need to prove it is genuine as I cannot simply take WND's word for it.

 

[Par]

Typical. You demand evidence then immediately declare it faked.

We know it isnt a forgery because the FBI now say he was there on a secret investigation.

So, what should one do if one is to demand evidence for something and is then presented with evidence that might well be faked? Presumably one is not committed to accepting it out of politeness. (Incidentally, I neither demanded this evidence nor claimed it to be fake. I was merely explaining what the other poster had meant and pointing out that you had intentionally misunderstood him.)

 

[twinstead]

So why lie?

You have no problem that the head anti terrorist honcho booked into the OKC hotel 9 hours before the bombing in OKC, then denied it.

There are any number of reasons why he might lie. Why do you declare that he did it because the FBI had foreknowledge of the bombing? How is that any more likely than any of the other potential reasons he could have lied?

 

[FatesWebb]

As I’ve already explained (twice now), this doesn’t prove foreknowledge. You’re claiming that either he wasn’t in Oklahoma before the bombing (and didn’t lie about his whereabouts) or he had foreknowledge of the bombing. This is an example of the false dichotomy fallacy.

hey par, do you not find it amazing that fema checked into nyc on sept 10th 2001? the day before the attacks?

 

[Revolutionary91]

Par do you even know he has a wife?

I'll say it again. After the receipt was revealed and he denied it the FBI claimed he was there.

 

[twinstead]

Typical. You demand evidence then immediately declare it faked.

We know it isnt a forgery because the FBI now say he was there on a secret investigation.

Kind of like how you and others declare all the physical evidence that 911 wasn't an inside job as planted? Like that?

 

[HyJinX]

Wrong thread Fates.

 

[FatesWebb]

That you don't know what you're talking about? No, no assumption there at all. You've proven it to my complete satisfaction, thank you.

so you know me, my expertise, my background? really? tell me all about myself.

 

[afinemadness]

So why lie?

You have no problem that the head anti terrorist honcho booked into the OKC hotel 9 hours before the bombing in OKC, then denied it.

Did anyone consider that the date was wrong? Could it be that he checked in at midnight on the 20th? It would not be the first time that a date was incorrect on a bill.

 

[Drudgewire]

Did I miss the links in this thread where it says the FBI proved he was there for a secret meeting? Or is that just part of the stuff that we're supposed to understand as fact because of the receipt?

 

[FatesWebb]

so far everyone has ignored this

Original reports of two explosions and several failed devices being defused by bomb squads were buried by the establishment as the official explanation that McVeigh acted alone was pushed. Scientific analysis conducted by General Benton K. Partin revealed core columns were blown out from within the building and the extensive damage to the Alfred P. Murrah building was completely inconsistent with the explanation of a single and relatively weak fertilizer truck bomb.

Intro to the Oklahoma City Bombing Report
PART ONE: Bomb Damage Analysis
PART TWO: Analysis of Graphic Evidence
PART THREE: Analysis of Photographic Evidence
PART FOUR: Conclusion and Appendix
Letter from Heidelberg to Judge David L. Russel
Response to Heidelberg from Judge David L. Russel
Letter from Gen Partin to U.S. Sen. Trent Lott
Resume of Brig. Gen. Benton R. Partin USAF (Ret.)

 

[Par]

Par do you even know he has a wife?

I have absolutely no idea whether or not he has a wife. I'm sure you're aware that it's a fairly glib example.

I'll say it again. After the receipt was revealed and he denied it the FBI claimed he was there.

Well, perhaps he was on a secret investigation then.

 

[HyJinX]

Did anyone consider that the date was wrong? Could it be that he checked in at midnight on the 20th? It would not be the first time that a date was incorrect on a bill.

Or even if the clocks had AM/PM switched. Maybe he checked in at noon...which would have been 3 hours after the bombing. Plausible.

 

[JimBenArm]

so you know me, my expertise, my background? really? tell me all about myself.

Your expertise, lack thereof, 1 each, on military matters is there, speaking for itself.

 

[FatesWebb]

Your expertise, lack thereof, 1 each, on military matters is there, speaking for itself.

Really I just posted a report from a Brig. General that there was more than one bomb in the building, is his experience on military matters also lacking?