Time: Mon Feb 17 11:30:44 1997
	by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA24108
	for [address in tool bar]; Mon, 17 Feb 1997 07:59:39 -0700 (MST)
	by usr02.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA06301;
	Mon, 17 Feb 1997 07:54:12 -0700 (MST)
	by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id HAA21618;
	Mon, 17 Feb 1997 07:52:38 -0700 (MST)
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1997 11:09:44 -0800
To: rchong@fcc.gov
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: Oklahoma City bombing

TO:       Rachelle Chong
          Federal Communications Commissioner

FROM:     Paul Andrew Mitchell
          Counselor at Law

DATE:     February 17, 1997

SUBJECT:  Oklahoma City bombing


This is an unsolicited request that you take a 
closer look at important evidence which is now coming
forth about the Oklahoma City bombing.  You are
a communications commissioner, and a graduate of
U.C. Berkeley, so I am confident that the technical
aspects of what I am about to share with you will
be easily within your ability to comprehend.

Sound waves travel at a very predictable speed, 
depending on the ambient air pressure and temperature.
A shock wave from an intense blast behaves like any
other sound wave -- it propagates outwards in the
shape of a sphere, attenuating in proportion to the
cube of the distance from the blast origin.

If you assume the federal government's allegation
about the blast origin (the fertilizer truck), you
can then propagate that shock wave outwards, into
various structural components of the federal building
which was destroyed.  The bearing columns are very
critical components, because they hold up everything
else.  

Here's the rub:  certain columns were completely
destroyed, and yet these were measurably a greater
distance from the alleged origin of the blast, than
several other columns which remained standing after
the explosion.  Simple science will tell you that
it is, therefore, very unlikely (statistically
improbable) that such massive destruction could have
occurred from a single fertilizer bomb, detonated
from a small truck at the front of the building.

Another hypothesis is much more worthy of examination,
in light of these bearing columns which remained
standing, even though they were closer to the alleged
blast origin, than others which failed completely,
i.e. failed at their base.  The fertilizer bomb was
a detonator itself, which triggered pressure-sensitive
charges which had been drilled into the bearing columns,
most probably in the parking basement, most probably 
of the C-4 plastic variety. 

A parametric method can be used to compute estimated
probabilities for this hypothesis.  The blast propagated
outwards at a very precise velocity, taking into account
the weather data for that particular date and time.  The
pressure detonators in the column charges had a rated
"response" time, i.e. upon detecting a rapid increase 
in ambient air pressure, the detonators would have a small,
but measurable delay before activating.  Once activated,
these detonators effectively decapitated the columns,
right at their bases, causing everything they were bearing
to collapse into a heap of rubble, crushing many lives to
death.

As the larger, secondary explosions propagated their own 
shock waves outwards, nearby seismic stations picked up
distinct rumbles in ground waves.  There have been quite
a few references to the seismograph readings which show
two distinct episodes of shock, a smaller initial one,
followed by a larger secondary one.  Using elaborate
mathematics and a proper computer simulation, this
hypothesis can be tested so as to predict the seismograph
readings via simulation, and then to compare the simulated
results with the actual seismograph results obtained that
the fateful moment.

The precise delay between the "fertilizer" bomb, and the
larger secondary explosions, will carry forward to the
seismograph readings, if this hypothesis is correct.

Until this kind of analysis is done, and until all the
evidence is presented to a lawful grand jury in Oklahoma,
I do not believe it is in the public's interest to 
stifle discussion of such matters as these.  It may be
in the interests of the federal government to stifle
this discussion, particularly if its agents were in any
way responsible for the worst act of domestic terrorism
this country has ever witnessed.  Sooner or later, the
truth shall prevail.  I say, the sooner the better.

The FCC has a preeminent responsibility to the truth, 
not to encouraging the emergence of a Fourth Reich 
in this country.

Thank you very much for your consideration.  Since I do
not have the email addresses for the other Federal
Communications Commissioners, I would appreciate it 
very much if you would share a copy of this message
to each and every one of them.

/s/ Paul Mitchell
Counselor at Law

copies:  Supreme Law School clients, friends,
         general broadcast lists




========================================================================
Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.    : Counselor at Law, federal witness
email:       [address in tool bar]   : Eudora Pro 3.0 on Intel 80586 CPU
web site:  http://www.supremelaw.com : library & law school registration
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech,  at its best
             Tucson, Arizona state   : state zone,  not the federal zone
             Postal Zone 85719/tdc   : USPS delays first class  w/o this
========================================================================


      


Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail