("Quid coniuratio est?")
Many thanks to Mr. John DiNardo, who has been doing yeoman's work to get the truth out, for the following information:
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Part 1, 4/26, INTELLIGENCE REPORT on the Oklahoma City Bombing
JOHN STADTMILLER:
Mark, without further ado, I think we'll bring on Mr.
Ken L. Gunderson. Mr. Gunderson, are you there?
KEN GUNDERSON:
Yes, I am.
JOHN STADTMILLER:
Okay. Mr. Gunderson, I'm sitting here and I'm reading
what you've been involved in -- what you've been doing
since you retired from the F.B.I. You have quite a record
of service, sir:
senior special agent for Los Angeles from 1977 to 1979;
special agent-in-charge of Memphis, Tennessee from 1973 to 1977;
in Dallas, in 1973, chief inspector;
from 1965 to 1973, you were assistant special agent-
in-charge of New Haven, Connecticut and
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania;
KEN GUNDERSON:
I retired in 1979. I was in the F.B.I. from 1950 to 1979.
And I was in Washington, D.C. in the `60s, as a supervisor.
And then I became a chief inspector in the early `70s.
And from there I went to Memphis, Dallas and Los Angeles,
where I headed up those three offices.
JOHN STADTMILLER:
Okay. Very good.
Now, I understand that you can shed some light on the
incident [bombing] that happened in Oklahoma City.
KEN GUNDERSON:
Well, several days ago, I received a copy of the seismogram,
which is from the University of Oklahoma Geological
Department, Norman, Oklahoma. This seismogram shows that
there were two surface waves in the seismogram that was
being monitored by the University of Oklahoma. Of course,
they normally monitor for earthquakes.
But I called this morning and talked to Dr. Ken Luza. I asked him to read and interpret this seismogram for me. He told me that there were two surface waves on the morning of April the 19th. One was at 9:02 A.M. and 13 seconds, and the other was at 9:02 A.M. and 23 seconds, ten milliseconds apart.
[JD: Actually, ten seconds apart.]
I asked him what that means, and he said that this indicates
that there were two detonations of a bomb, not one, as our
Government would like to have you believe.
So, with that, I did a more little research, through some of my sources and contacts, and I came up with what I think is probably the bomb that was used. At least it appears to have been the bomb, based on my research and my contacts.
It was not a fertilizer bomb [as the U.S. Government states]. There are too many reasons why it was not a fertilizer bomb. The [actual] bomb is called an "electro-hydrodynamic gaseous fuel device" -- a barometric bomb. Now what that does ... it's similar to the Army Blue-82 bomb, which is called the "Daisy Cutter". The primary detonation sets up a cold [coal?] cloud, a chemical cloud, which is energized with the electrostatic voltage, and the second detonation produces an enhanced explosion due to electrostatic microfronts.
I called the person (whom I happen to know) who developed this bomb, and I relayed the information from the seismogram to him, and pointed out to him that there were ten milliseconds [or is it "seconds"? between explosions]. And he says that he is confident that that is the bomb that he invented, or that he developed.
Now, the bomb has a signature [such] that barometric pressure increases so rapidly and dramatically that it blows out the windows in buildings within a two-to-three-block radius. And, believe it or not, the bomb is the size of a pineapple.
Now, the reason that I do not believe, nor do my two technicians believe (and I talked to two individuals on this) that this was a fertilizer bomb is because there is not enough "breisance" in an explosion of fertilizer to cause the shock wave that destroyed that building.
JOHN STADTMILLER:
From what I understand, with these blasts that we're talking
about, we're actually talking about frequencies. And with
the [Government-declared] fertilizer bomb [story], they
[the Government] keep increasing the size of the bomb.
It started out being a thousand to fifteen hundred pounds.
And now they're up to two tons of it.
But, even still, that type of blasting device is a low-yield,
low-frequency [device], not capable of doing the type of
damage that was witnessed upon that Federal Building.
KEN GUNDERSON:
You said it before I did, and that's exactly what I was
going to say next. And that is exactly what was said by
the technicians whom I had talked to.
(to be continued)
I urge you to post the episodes of this ongoing series to other
newsgroups, computer networks, computer bulletin boards and
computer mailing lists. It is also important to post hardcopies
on the bulletin boards of campuses, churches, supermarkets,
laundromats, etc. -- any place where this vital information may
be read by concerned citizens.
Our people's need for Paul Reveres and Ben Franklins is as urgent
today as it was 220 years ago.
John DiNardo
I encourage distribution of "Conspiracy Nation."
Coming to you from Illinois -- "The Land of Skolnick"