Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Dutch Central Bank Sale Announcement Imminent? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GUSTAVE JAEGER who wrote (22483)	3/2/2005 7:03:35 AM
From: sea_urchin	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 81114

Gus > the very target itself --a jerkwater town's federal building-- betrays the terrorists' genuineness... That is a matter of opinion. There are many who consider, as with 911, that the official story is untrue and that the building was demolished by people who had access to it, presumably the government. reclaimaustralia.net >>The United States government has declared and steadfastly maintains that it was a fertilizer bomb, inside a Ryder truck parked in front of the building that caused the damage. We have seen in previous chapters that in tragic situations like this, what the government claims happened is totally unbelievable. Benton K. Partin, a retired Brigadier General and 31 year veteran of the United States Air Force, is a premiere expert on explosives. He served as commander of the Air Force Armament Technology Lab, and was responsible for munitions development for the armed services. He is a recognized expert as a major guiding force of our modern, precision, guided, weapons systems. General Partin did an extensive analysis of the bombing of the Murrah Building. In his report, he declares, It is impossible that the destruction to the building could have resulted from such a bomb alone. To cause the damage pattern that occurred to the Murrah Building, there would have to have been demolition charges at several supporting column bases, at locations not accessible from the street, to supplement the truck bomb damage. Indeed, a careful examination of photographs showing the collapsed column bases reveals a failure mode produced by demolition charges and not by a blast from the truck bomb… Blast through air is a very inefficient energy coupling mechanism against heavily reinforced concrete beams and columns… By contrast, heavily reinforced concrete structures can be destroyed effectively through detonation of explosives in contact with the reinforced concrete beams and columns… The Murrah Federal Building was not destroyed by one sole truck bomb. The major factor in its destruction appears to have been detonation of explosives carefully placed at four critical junctures on supporting columns within the building. The only possible reinforced concrete structural failure solely attributable to the truck bomb was the stripping out of the ceilings of the first and second floors in the ‘pit’ area behind columns B4 and By. Even this may have been caused by a demolition charge at column B3. — Benton K. Partin, Bomb Damage Analysis Of Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, July 30, 1995, (emphasis supplied). Thus, we see that it was impossible for the truck bomb to have destroyed the Murrah Building. Other bombs were strategically placed at the bottoms of the structural columns to do the damage that was done. Somebody who had access to the Murrah Building, who knew where the reinforced structural columns were, who had access to the building plans, placed the bombs that destroyed the building.<<