Conspiracy Files : Oklahoma City Bombing
Reprehensor Sat, 04/07/2007 - 10:36pm
For some reason, this documentary on the OKC bombing is much better than the "documentary" on 9/11, despite the fact that it's part of the same series, "The Conspiracy Files".
No mention of Benton K. Partin, though.
- Reprehensor's blog
- Login to post comments
It does seem more even-handed
It could be anything from the segment producer's viewpoint, to the safety of it being OKC versus 9/11, to an attempt to look better and make people think that if they did a better job on this segment then the 9/11 segment must have also been good, to....? (depending on how paranoid you want to be, etc.)
----
Senior 9/11 Bureau Chief Correspondent
http://www.chico911truth.org/
"When the game is over, the king and the pawn go into the same box."
9/11 Truth is the Path to Peace
Interesting footage. I was
Interesting footage. I was about 15 when that went down. The way it was presented leaves something to be desired. Those two fbi agents in the suits are full of sh!t! Let me paraphrase what one of them said, "...I have no doubt that 100 years from now it will be known that it was Mcveigh..". The way this guy is justifying Mcviegh's guilt is based off of what...what he claims we'll know in 100 years??? He screwed up his doublespeak right there. He'll never make senior level with those kinds of slip ups!
I also like how the program had some clips of McVeigh speaking yet they did not play footage from his mouth of what "he is accused of".
How about the recent news about Nichols claiming some sort of government involvement. It was literally a few months ago, I believe in colorado?? At any rate the Judge silenced this but only after Nichols statement got out.
The ATF was nowhere to be found that day...what?
Modus operandi people. How many times can they repeat this shit before the sheep wake up?
"... In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." (Galileo Galilei, 1564 - 1642)
OIL IS OBSOLETE - WAKE UP - YOU'VE BEEN LIED TO, AGAIN!
http://www.waterfuelcell.org/
Discovery Channel 'Debunking' OKC Bombing...
I was talking to a girl I used to work with and she is now a producer for Discovery (or one of those channels) and she said they are currently working on a "debunking" piece about Oklahoma City.
The problem, she told me, is that all the evidence she is debunking seems to really point to a conspiracy. She said: There's no doubt: there was a cover-up. I asked her how the show was going to get around this, and she said: My senior producer is cutting stuff out of it, like interviews and other important stuff that contradicts the official story. So I told her that the show would be continuing the coverup. Then of course I told her about the mother of all coverups, 9/11. She said she hadn't heard such an idea. I told her to look into it. She seemed like she didn't want to hear about it. Anyways, look out for this new bullshit doc coming out soon.
i disagree
This documentary is absolutely misleading. There is no mention of the 3 unexploded devices that were found in the Murrah building that day. How can we take this any more seriously than the BBCs 9/11 doc? Am I missing something here, or could it not be more obvious what a joke this doc is? The post is correct in pointing out no mention of Benton Partin, the retired general who studied the blast pattern and concluded that there must have been devices inside that went off in addition to the ones that didn't.
____
♠
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
I say it's better
because the 9/11 piece is a full-on attack on "conspiracy theorists" bar none, whereas, this documentary gives some credence to some aspects of a broader conspiracy. It's a matter of degree. I didn't say it was "great". Certainly wouldn't take much to be "better" than the 9/11 hit piece, IMO.
I noted in the opening post that there is no mention of Partin. This is indeed a disappointment.
You're right, no mention of other bombs. Another disappointment.
Jon Ronson did a better job. This is one conspiracy that he has a soft spot for.
"Conspiracy Files" cribbed half of his research.
I need to up his version...
i think those are pretty damning omissions
they essentially misrepresented what the real conspiracy seems to have been. a classic straw man hit piece, whether or not they used the velvet glove treatment. the end product is just as deceptive as the 9/11 doc, which implied that Loose Chnage, Jim Fetzer, and Alex Jones are the main proponents of the alternative view, when all three of them are in fact suspiciously problematic each in their own way. i'm not sure that disappointment is a strong enough word, since it implies that otherwise this doc is a good thing. it is a terrible thing in that it could lead the viewer to automatically shut down their brain to a real treatment of the issue.
____
♠
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force