I am going to list some simple observations that I had when I first saw on the television the results of what went on in Oklahoma City and The Murrah Building and I do NOT profess to be an expert in explosives or demolitions; however, I know some real basics from combat military experiences.
1. No bomb crater: if there had been an external bomb of the scope claimed, there would have been a bomb crater. This is so elementary.
2. Alongside of the no bomb crater was the lack of damage to nearby buildings of similar distance from the placement of the parked van.
3. The explosives could NOT have been of ammo nitrate substance as there was no residue. If one examined the scene at the first WTC bombing, the rescue workers, that arrived up to 45 minutes later to the underground scene, received residues on their faces and clothing.
4. Steel beams in the front of The Murrah Building were bent almost straight up. This could only have been produced from explosives directly under those beams. An external force could NOT have caused it.
5. The simple physics of a blast would have dictated that the top of the building would have been gone and bottom floors remaining from from a large external blast.
6. An external blast loses force proportionately in relationship to the distance from the target, so for a blast to do some of the damage, it would have had to do more. Therefore, it could not have been from an external force. This does not deny that a smallish external blast did not occur. It denies that it did as claimed.
These listed observations were stated to another individual that called the newscast to my attention within a few minutes time. Later research caused me to strongly adhere to my initial conclusions.
"When in doubt, empty the clip."
