The Georgia Guidestones "bombing" may not have been a bomb

 

By now I'm sure most readers know that the so-called Georgia Guidestones were damaged by an explosion on Wednesday morning.  The rest of the monument was demolished soon afterwards, allegedly due to "safety concerns".

I have grave doubts about the news coverage of the incident so far.  I haven't commented until now because I've been waiting for more details:  but it looks like a cover-up may be in progress, so details may be conspicuous by their absence.  That being the case, I'll put out a few ideas for consideration.

First, there's no evidence that a bomb (as such) was involved.  Looking at video of the explosion, it appears very likely that it came from some sort of missile.  The Intrepid Reporter has done a good job of explaining why he thinks that.  Based on my own experience (combat and otherwise) in Africa, I'd say he's pretty much on the mark in what he says.  When I saw the first images of the damage, that was my immediate reaction, too.  Go read his analysis for yourself.

I'll go further.  Based on initial video of the damage, I can't see any reason to demolish the remaining panels of the Guidestones.  They were just standing there, not hurting anybody.  If there was any risk of them falling, it could have been attenuated by simply cordoning them off, then attaching supports to keep them in place.  Neither appears to have been even attempted.  Instead, they were brought down with almost indecent haste.  That looks to me like an attempt to prevent anyone else analyzing the debris patterns, blast and fragmentation damage from the demolished panels, etc. - all of which would speak volumes to an investigator who knew what he/she was looking at/for.

I'm also curious why no reporters were apparently allowed (or, for that matter, pressed for) to be allowed access to the site before the demolition took place.  Seems to me that any reporter worth his/her salt would be jumping up and down with eagerness to see for themselves, instead of relying on official statements;  and their parent news media should have been doing the same, if not more so.  Not in this case, it seems.  The journalistic silence has been deafening.  Why?  Your guess is as good as mine, but it suggests to me that "the fix is in".

The next question is:  Why is a "fix" necessary?  What's being hidden, and why?

Obviously, right now, every explanation is speculative - including those provided by the authorities.  I have a feeling there's a great big can of worms that's been popped open by this "explosion".  I'm looking forward to seeing how many of those worms escape the can and wriggle their way into the daylight, where we can all see them for what they are.

Pass the popcorn, please . . .

Peter