CHAPTER 10

DESTRUCTION IN OKLAHOMA CITY

Explosions demolished the Alfred E. Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995. 168 Americans died as a result, including a number of little children attending a day-care center housed in the building. 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.

News reporters on the scene shortly after the building collapsed reported that workers were removing bombs that did not go off from within the building.

The bombs that did explode did not explode simultaneously. The bomb blasts were recorded on two seismometers, one at the Omniplex Museum, 4.34 miles northeast of the Building, and the other at the University of Oklahoma in Norman, 16.25 miles to the southeast. Both of these seismometers recorded two separate, closely spaced explosions of approximately equal intensity.

Also, several highly credible witnesses reported hearing separate explosions. Shortly after the explosions, the bomb squad defused one unexploded bomb inside the building, and were working on a second.

There is an emerging pattern here. When President Kennedy was killed, it was declared that a lone gunman, Lee Harvey Oswald, had committed the crime. As we saw in chapter eight, there is a tremendous amount of evidence that proves there were several gunmen. Lee Harvey Oswald took the rap, and many others went free.

When the Murrah Building blew up, it was declared that one man was primarily responsible, Timothy McVeigh. But Benton Partin, a military explosives expert, showed that it was impossible for the truck bomb to have done the damage. Others had access to the building plans and planted explosives around the columns. They were guiltier than McVeigh, but they went free. Who were the people really responsible for the Oklahoma City tragedy?

During a live-feed video interview, an Assistant Fire Chief on the scene stated that the bomb squad was at the Murrah building at seven clock that morning, two hours before the bombing took place. What were they doing there two hours before the bombing?

Immediately after the explosions, Mayor Ron Nordick, Dr. Randall Heather, Governor Frank Keating, and numerous news anchors stated that the FBI and the ATF had confirmed that high explosive bombs were taken out of the building. Now, the official story is that it was a fertilizer bomb. Were the governor, the mayor and the news anchors lying, or were they just not briefed in time for everyone to get their stories straight?

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms had offices in the Murrah Building. On the day the Murrah building was bombed, none of the ATF agents came to work that morning. The ATF agents, who had children in the day-care center, did not drop their children off that day. There were no ATF agents or their children on the casualty list of the Oklahoma City bombing. — Freedom Network News, June/July 1996, pp. 5, 6.

This is amazing. A United States government agency, that had offices in the building, did not report to work that day or bring their children to the daycare center. Do you suppose they knew what was going to happen to the building?

On a radio talk show ten days after the bombing,

[Mark] Boswell interviewed 28 year CIA veteran James Black and assistant Ron Jackson regarding sworn affidavits now in their possession, sworn by two Justice Department officials which state that they were part of a ‘Committee of 10’ who planned the Oklahoma bombing. — Martin O. de Brook, Cherith Chronicle, May-July, 1995, page 5.

In light of all the evidence, this is the only story that makes sense. As in the case of Kennedy’s murder, so it is in the Oklahoma City bombing. High-level agents of the U.S. government, claiming to love America and our freedom, were serving another master, carrying out his purposes. As we will see, there was a distinct purpose for the Oklahoma City bombing. How sickening that so many lives were lost to answer the call of the papacy!

Like JFK, Waco, and the World Trade Center, the Oklahoma City bombing leaves a great many questions that demand answers, but none have been given. Consider some of these questions.

1. Why was U.S. Judge Wayne Alley, whose office was located in the Federal building, warned several weeks in advance in a Justice Department memo to be prepared for an unnamed terrorist act directed against the federal building?

2. Why did the director of the University of Oklahoma’s geological survey, Dr. Charles Mankin, tell the media that according to two different seismographic records, there were two blasts?

3. Why has the information of Benton K. Partin not come to the light of day?

4. Why did the Clinton administration blame right wing radio talk shows for the incident, and demand the most draconian police state legislation ever proposed in the United States so quickly after the blasts? This proposed legislation was so well organized that it was obvious it had been prepared long before the destruction of the building.

5. Why was a blizzard of domestic terrorism bills rushed into Congress in a matter of days after the bombing? These laws include the banning of virtually all privately owned firearms. Remember Waco?

There were liberty-restricting measures in Congress just prior to the Oklahoma City bombing that were stalled. Right after the bombing they were immediately passed.

The Omnibus Counter Terrorism Act of 1995 was on a slow track in Congress and the subject of a lively debate as to whether it would violate some fundamental civil liberties, including the right to confront one’s accuser.

Now, after the Oklahoma City bombing, there are few surer legislative bets in Washington. Democrats and Republicans issued news releases Thursday calling for the bill’s quick passage. — Terror in the Heartland: Terrorism Bill Moves Very Fast, Orlando Sentinel, April 21st, 1995 (emphasis supplied).

 

President Clinton prodded Congress on Friday to move swiftly on his anti-terrorism legislation and avoid political ‘endless quibbling’ over details. ‘We must not doddle or delay. Congress must act, and act promptly.’ His 1.25 billion anti-terrorism package would expand law enforcement’s investigative and enforcement powers and toughen penalties for certain crimes. Republicans have reacted favorably to the proposals Clinton put forward on Wednesday, one week after the Oklahoma City bombing. — Clinton Urges Swift Action on Anti-terrorism Legislation, Orlando Sentinel, April 29th, 1995.

The purpose of the Oklahoma City bombing was to get Congress to pass the anti-terrorism bill without debate. If a debate had taken place, the issues of constitutional liberties and the creation of a police state would have been raised. The Jesuits in Congress prefer that the police state be implemented without the public noticing by creating a climate of national hysteria using a staged terrorist attack. The bill sailed through with no debate or discussion.

One of the laws considered for passage after the Oklahoma City bombing was the gross destruction of the First Amendment advocated in Charles Schumer’s bill, HR 2580. In this bill, a five-year prison sentence would be given for publicly engaging in unseemly speculation and publishing or transmitting by wire or electronic means baseless conspiracy theories regarding the federal government of the United States.

We have seen that in the aftermath of the Oklahoma City bombing, several liberty-restricting laws were passed by Congress very quickly. The bombing created a climate of fear in America. In this setting, laws passed with few dissenting voices. In the midst of the hysteria, the unconstitutional laws could be quickly passed. The people want comfort and security, and they did not object to the passing of these laws. These laws seriously eroded the constitutional liberties that have been the cornerstone of American prosperity for over 200 years. It is amazing how quickly a normally slow and cumbersome Congress can act when the agenda is all set.

A conditioning program got well under way after the Oklahoma City bombing. How many freedoms would Americans give away in order to feel safe? Do we not see that the powers running our government want to destroy the Constitution?

People do not realize that governmental power is extremely dangerous. Down through history, peoples’ worst enemy has been their own government. When constitutional freedoms are gone, there is nothing to restrict government from doing anything it wants, and deadly governmental persecution is the result.

For some time to come Americans will be struggling with questions that were supposed to draw no closer than Jerusalem or Belfast or, at worst, Manhattan. Just how much can they do to make life safer from terrorist attacks? And to accomplish that, how much should they be willing to give up in convenience, money, and the freedoms they take for granted? — Time Magazine, May 1, 1995, page 68, (emphasis supplied).

Americans just don’t realize that as they give up their freedoms they are not increasing their security, but decreasing it. They are putting themselves at high risk for governmental persecution. Already the government confiscates many hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of personal property each year without a trial. Already human life is not considered sacred anymore. Remember Waco?

America would not be such a prominent terrorist target if the government did not make itself so obnoxious to nearly every country in the world. One hundred years ago, the people of the world loved Americans and wanted Americans to visit their countries. That certainly is not the case anymore.

Concrete and steel can help. But countering terrorism at home raises the hard question: how much should we spend in cash — and civil liberties? — Newsweek, May 1, 1995, page 56, (emphasis added).

In this article, Brent Scowcroft, former national security adviser said, “It’s so easy to do; it takes so few people; the materials are so readily available. But to counter it is so expensive in dollars and, more importantly, in civil liberties.”
Is it clear that terror was used, and is still being used, to condition Americans to give up their constitutional liberties? It was used successfully at Waco, Oklahoma City, and the World Trade Center. Doesn’t it make you wonder what will be next?

Who is behind the scenes leading “American” politicians to destroy civil liberty in America? Who has despised and hated our liberties for over 200 years? Who hates liberty so much that they eliminate people who stand in their way like pawns in a chess game?

One of the popes stated,

The absurd and erroneous doctrines or ravings in defense of liberty of conscience are a most pestilential error — a pest, of all others, most to be dreaded in a state. — Pope Pius IX, Encyclical Letter, August 15th, 1854.

Liberty of conscience is thoroughly detested by the papacy. Liberty of conscience is guaranteed ONLY in the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, the Bill of Rights.

In 1864, in his encyclical letter, Pius IX anathematized “those who assert liberty of conscience and of religious worship.” (Pope Pius IX, Encyclical Letter, December 8, 1864.) He is saying that anybody who believes that a person is entitled to freedom to worship God according to the dictates of their own conscience, should be anathematized. To anathematize somebody is too confine them to hell; to consider them to be a heretic worthy of damnation. In Pius’ mind, the Constitution should burn in hell and anyone who loves it should be burned too.

Liberty of conscience is proclaimed by the United States a most sacred principle, which every citizen must uphold.... But liberty of conscience is declared by all the popes and councils of Rome, a most godless, unholy, and diabolical thing, which every good Catholic must abhor and destroy at any cost. — Charles Chiniquy, Fifty Years in the Church of Rome, Chick Publications, page 284.

British Broadcasting journalist Avro Manhattan reported:

The Vatican condemned the Declaration of Independence as ‘wickedness’… and called the Constitution of the United States ‘a Satanic document.’ — Avro Manhattan, The Dollar and the Vatican, Ozark Book Publishers, page 26.

In the preface to Samuel B. Morse’s great book, it is written,

The author undertakes to show that a conspiracy against the liberties of this Republic is now in full action, under the direction of the wily Prince Metternich of Austria, who knowing the impossibility of obliterating this troublesome example of a great and free nation by force of arms, is attempting to accomplish his object through the agency of an army of Jesuits. — Samuel B. Morse, Foreign Conspiracy Against the United States, Crocker and Brewster, volume 1, p. 4, preface. (emphasis supplied)

Samuel B. Morse and the man who wrote the preface to his great work understood that the Jesuits and the Holy Alliance were committed to destroying the freedoms of this great Republic of the United States of America.
A former priest has written,

We will rule the United States, and lay them at the feet of the Vicar of Jesus Christ [the pope], that he may put an end to their Godless system of education, and impious laws of liberty of conscience which are an insult to God and man. — Charles Chiniquy, Fifty years in the Church of Rome, Chick Publications, p. 282, (emphasis supplied).

William Jefferson Clinton, who attended Georgetown University, which is the Jesuit college in Washington, D.C. pushed Congress to pass the anti-terrorism bill that was to be a direct assault on the liberties that we enjoy as Americans. The Oklahoma City bombing was planned, carried out, and fully known by the Jesuits, the government of the United States, and by the president. The secret players behind them all, who have wanted to destroy the liberties of this great Republic for the last 200 plus years are the Jesuits of the Roman Catholic Church.

They have wanted to put an end to the laws that guarantee our liberties as United States citizens. In order to bring that about, they carried out the greatest terrorist bombing on U.S. soil, and in U.S. history before the World Trade Center, when they did it again.

More attacks will come. Freedoms will be attacked again and liberty will be taken away. The Jesuits will continue to use many so-called “American” politicians, who are an integral part of the conspiracy of the papacy to totally demolish the Constitution and this great Republic. They are conditioning America and preparing the people for the inevitable takeover.

 

Chapter 11: World Trade Center Attack <<< Click

Return to Pacific Institute’s home page <<< Click