yea, i'm not watching a 58 minlong youtube video.

General Partin said
Bullshit

arliest and most compelling challenge to the lone bomb/lone bomber theory came from Brigadier General Benton K. Partin (USAF, Retired), an expert with sterling credentials and a distinguished military career. On May 18, 1995, one month after the bombing, General Partin delivered a preliminary detailed analysis of the event to members of Congress. "From all the evidence I have seen in the published material," Partin testified, " I can say with a high level of confidence that the damage pattern on the reinforced concrete superstructure could not possibly have been attained from the single truck bomb without supplementing demolition charges at some of the reinforced column bases." In that report (See "OKC Bombing: Expert Analysis" in our June 26, 1995 issue), and in the detailed study which he released on July 13, 1995 (see "Explosive Evidence" in our August 7, 1995 issue), Partin eviscerated the prosecution’s lone-bomb thesis with a host of findings from the forensic evidence indicating that demolition charges were certainly used inside the Murrah Building.
Since that time, a veritable mountain of evidence, documents, records, eyewitness testimony, and authoritative support has accumulated to fortify General Partin’s thesis, making the stubborn adherence of government officials and journalists to the lone-bomb scenario truly incredible.
New Evidence
In this article, we present startling new eyewitness testimony concerning demolition charges removed from the Murrah Building and the men who may have planted them there, together with new expert testimony, recently released official records, and some of the most important evidence and supporting documentation that has been reported piecemeal in our previous articles on the bombing. This includes:
• World-renowned physicists and an assortment of scientists, engineers, and explosives experts who concur that internal charges must have been used.
• A series of Air Force test blasts on concrete structures corroborating General Partin’s main contention that air blast from a truck bomb outside of the building could not possibly account for the pattern and magnitude of the damage to the Murrah Building’s superstructure.
• A study by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) which acknowledges that a truck bomb of 4,800 pounds of ANFO (as claimed by the government) would have been insufficient to cause the destruction experienced at the Murrah Building.
• Two eyewitnesses inside the Murrah Building who attest that they observed bomb squad personnel removing undetonated explosive devices from the building after the initial blast.
• A rescue worker who attests that she heard an ATF agent state that he had found an undetonated explosive device inside the building.
• Recently released government communiques and radio transmission logs indicating that undetonated devices had been found in the building during the early rescue efforts.
• Recordings of real-time, live television news broadcasts reporting official confirmations of multiple unexploded devices inside the Murrah Building.
• Early statements from government officials and terrorism and bombing experts — before the "official" line was laid down — that the explosives used were clearly very sophisticated, indicating it was the work of a "group" highly knowledgeable in explosive techniques.
• Five survivors of the blast who attest that they saw three men in the parking garage of the Murrah Building with wires, tools, and what appeared to be building plans several days before the bombing.
• Military personnel who reportedly saw McVeigh or John Doe No. 2 inside the building but were threatened with court-martial if they mentioned what they had seen.
The Unheard Experts
General Benton Partin’s report on the Oklahoma bombing should have hit the nation like a thunderclap. Not only was his analysis thorough and scholarly and his credentials unimpeachable, but his observations also conformed to a commonsense appraisal of evidence that was widely available and understandable to the general public. General Partin’s highly decorated, 31-year military career included command of the Air Force Armaments Technology Laboratory and direct involvement in the research and development of many of our armaments and weapons systems. Among many other things, this expert’s expert pointed out that:
• Blast through air is a terribly inefficient coupling mechanism against heavy reinforced concrete beams and columns. Blast wave energy drops dramatically when traveling through air, initially falling off more rapidly than an inverse function of the distance cubed.
• Using the official estimate of 4,800 pounds of ANFO would yield a maximum pressure of explosion of about one-half million pounds per square inch at detonation. But by the time the blast wave traveled through the air to the nearest of the building’s columns, it would have dropped off to about 375 pounds of pressure per square inch, and by the time it reached the nearest column in the second row of columns it would have been down to 27 to 38 psi. The compressive yield strength of concrete is around 3,500 pounds per square inch, far above anything exerted by the truck bomb blast on the building’s structure
• The asymmetrical damage to the building — i.e., the off-center "bite" — presents another insuperable problem for the official scenario, requiring that the blast wave leave standing columns that were closer to the explosion while taking out columns that were farther from the blast.
• Inherent in the official scenario is the absurd claim that the truck blast was sufficiently strong to collapse the huge columns and beams, but not strong enough to knock down sheet rock, furring strips, and other light, fragile materials.
• Examination of the photographic evidence shows clearly that the column failures were smooth and localized, as would be expected with cutting charges, not jagged, as would be the case if they had been shattered by the brisance of an air blast.
The persuasive cogency of his analysis — coupled with his outstanding stature and experience in the field of military ordnance, explosives, and blast effects — should have earned General Partin’s thesis a respectable hearing. But it was dismissed out of hand or ridiculed by the same officials and media-anointed "experts" who have propagated a continuous string of absurdities to explain away the avalanche of contradictions and inconsistencies in the official scenario of the bombing.

General Partin..
Don't ignore the pArt that gives it credibility so you can shrug it off.

Look at the reports.
The column further away fell, and a smaller one stood nearer.

If everyone had someone who knew the truth..

And that's included in the stuff I've posted.
The admission is in the linked stuff or pasted.
Common sense should be enough.

You need to read about Terry Yeaky.

And with the information that
Partin provided, and the fact that EVERYBODY KNOWS about the warning, and STILL the
oFISHYal story is what the Dumbmasses believe, do you think You would risk Your Life to try to shine a light on something that is already totally obvious, knowing that
You'll just be labelled a conspiracy theorist
Or have an accident
Or decide life is not worth living..

It's uncomfortable seeing the truth.

He got how much media attention?
Me?
And look how effective I am.
SHOWING WHY people should ask questions and investigate yields nothing.
Shrug, run, do what you must to avoid the obvious.

Practically by definition, by you saying you heard a reputable source say he was told not to go to work that day presumably because he was valuable to whomever was responsible for killed 168 people, you are claiming a conspiracy.

And you are saying this man had information that would give some level of justice to the parents of the children buried in rubble, but neither he or you, took the next step.

To that I say Bull$hit.

All conspiracies like this have common elements, one of which usually is someone who heard or saw something. The other common element is it's impossible for a certain blast to damage something in a certain way.

Anyone who has ever had a catastrophic motorcycle or car crash, anyone whose house was destroyed by a tornado or fire etc. can report that in the midst of all the carnage, one window was left intact, or a picture on the mantel wasn't moved etc...   You could just as easily create a conspiracy theory out of any of those situation. Catastrophic damage on a large building is controlled by billions of variables, too many to account for.

McVeigh and his partner, Nichols(?) blew up the building.

Note: I have a tie to OK city. I was living in KC at the time working for a truck leasing company as a controller. During the trial, it came out McVeight or Nichols, don't recall who, stopped on the freeway above what's know as the West Bottoms in KC and looked at 3 truck leasing companies all in a row. Our office was one of those. He decided it was too populated an area to rent a truck from so he drove couple hours into Kansas and got one there. Also, our rental manager at the time was from KC and their old neighbor was killed in the explosion.

Also, maybe I'm remembering some of this wrong, but the truck was tracked down because of a vin number on the axle. They figured out who purchased the truck and tracked it back to the Ryder Truck Rental  place in Kansas. When Nichols came back to get his $100 deposit back, he was caught.  Otherwise, they might have gotten away with it.