From: TruthMonger <tm@dev.null>
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 1997 13:34:13 +0800
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: A Challenge to the Violent and Depraved / Re: [cpe:5035] Violence and Depravity
In-Reply-To: <199711201532.JAA17885@multi26.netcomi.com>
Message-ID: <34766B3C.4E43@dev.null>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



If you have not read the following post, do so.
It reflects the view of everyone I have spoken to who has even
the remotest knowledge of explosives and demolition.

Regardless, I am getting sick and tired of hearing the whining
'theories' of the 'experts' in regard to the OKC bombing.

A Challenge: If every naysayer/conspiracy theorist whose diatribes
  I have read (a small percentage of the total number) would kick
  in a couple of bucks, then there would be funds available to
  build a truck-bomb corresponding to the alleged OKC bomb, and
  to recreate the alleged crime with an abandoned building that
  can be found to provide a similar physical target.
  We're talking about a few grand, here. Put up or shut up. Anyone
  who cares to take on the challenge can cover that on T-shirt
  sales alone.
  If the re-enactment shows the truck bomb to have been a provably
  false scenario, it would be interesting to see a second display
  with BATF actors putting explosive charges in the middle of the
  building. (And then we can crash a Mercedes into the underground
  concrete pillars in Paris, to guage the results.)

TruthMonger

Neva Remailer wrote:
> Monty Cantsin wrote:
> >Violence is, in nearly every case, a poor investment of time,
> >money, and energy.
> 
> I disagree.
> 
> The US Goverment and the mainstream media were both guilty
> of either ignorance or deliberate subreption during McVeigh's
> trial.  As a military trained explosive demolition instructor,
> I am compelled to concur with the absent testimony and published
> findings of a certain three star, to wit:
> It ain't necessarily so.
> 
> Anyone with even a cursory knowledge of explosives will tell you
> that two tons of ammonium nitrate, sixty feet from the base
> of a tall, reinforced concrete and steel building, will not do 
> very much more than break lots of windows.  You see, ammonium 
> nitrate is a low velocity explosive compound useful for moving 
> dirt.  A brissance, or shattering effect, on steel and/or 
> reinforced concrete requires an explosive compound with much 
> greater explosive velocity.... C-4, several types of commercial
> blasting gelatin, even TNT.
> 
> If you observed the news footage of the Murray Federal Building 
> after the blast, you may have noticed that the damage was 
> configured in a semi-cylindrical fashion, rather than the conic 
> section which would have resulted from a ground placed charge of 
> sufficient strength.  You might also have wondered about the 
> apparent lack of a crater at the site of the explosion...
> (The crater was mysteriously relocated to the basement of the 
> structure, probably by A Terrorist-Provocateur To Be Named Later...)
> 
> If you looked closely at the ruined building, you would have seen
> evidence of brissance on alternating bearing members on each floor.
> (I have photos of this)
> 
> Had detailed chemical analysis of the site been permitted, evidence 
> of a very large and elaborate line or ring main constructed of 
> detonation cord, of the RDX or PETN based military variety, likely, 
> would have been found.
> 
> Consider that the placement of the array of charges necessary to
> simultaneously shatter several dozen large bearing members in the
> building would have required several hours for a well trained
> demolition team, not to mention unlimited access to the building 
> after hours.
> 
> Seismographs recorded TWO impacts that day, several minutes apart.
> 
> Consider that if this action was meant to revenge or commemorate the 
> Waco massacre, it achieved the opposite goal.  However, if this was 
> the work of agents-provocateur, it worked beautifully.  Waco was 
> downplayed in the face of 'the threat of domestic terrorism.'  The 
> body count was higher, and this time it came from the 'self-styled 
> militia.'
> Also, if McVeigh really had followed the Turner Diaries recipe, he 
> would have put his bomb somewhere useful.  The book details the use 
> of a similar device to destroy a large government database, and the 
> truck bomb is parked underneath it
> in the basement parking structure, _not_ sixty feet away...
> 
> The reader's digest version:
> 
> 1)  McVeigh's bomb, as it was and where it was, was a squirt of 
> piss in a hurricane.
> 
> 2)  A well financed team of demolition professionals did the job.
> 
> 3)  The payoff from this "investment" was the impressive Anti-Terrorism 
> bill, much political mileage for the agency "targeted" by the attack, 
> and an option for more legislation in the crypto arena.
> 
> 4)  In a perfect world, McVeigh would have been prosecuted for 
> incompetence, and given a suspended sentence because he was, after 
> all, merely an infantry sergeant, not a demolition pro.  In the 
> same perfect world, Woodward and Bernstein types would follow up 
> on stuff like this instead of gulping down regurgitated propaganda 
> like so many infant birds.  Then perhaps the true terrorists would 
> be punished, and the political agenda of their employers exposed.
> 
> 5)  The convenient deaths of poor defenseless children(TM) contributed 
> mostly to the policy goals of the jackbooted thugs, not to those of 
> their detractors.
> 
> 6)  McVeigh pulled an Oswald.  Quit crediting him with success.
> 
> A Noncom To Be Named Later