Skip to comments.JAYNA DAVIS - why won't Rohrbacher bring my video interviews before his committee in closed session?
Posted on 04/03/2006 8:13:43 AM PDT by doug from upland
click here to read article
I never knew that! John Kerry twice on national television referred to Flight 800 as a terrorist attack and so did George Stephanapolous.
Just to keep the record straight, ANFO is only about seven (7) percent fuel oil. The oil's primary function is to keep the primary explosive (ammonium nitrate) from absorbing moisture.
Oil is not required for detonation -- witness the SS Grandcamp, which exploded while being loaded with fresh ammonium nitrate at the Texas City Monsanto dock in 1947.
That would be Yousef Bodansky
I am a PROPONENT of the concept that someone (middleeasterners) were involved in OKC besides McVeigh. My thought here was that SOMEONE ON FR, if anywhere, could explain what THEY THOUGHT or SUSPECTED had happened in a short paragraph.
Something like: "Saddam, motivated by XYZ, wanted to strike the US, so he linked up with McVeigh and provided him with ABC, etc."
Instead TXnMA complain that -I- use bad logic (bad logic in a question, forcryingoutlioud!!!,) Peach scolds me for not reading "all the links," and DFU, in an honest response to my request for "a clear, concise, convincing, bite-size argument as to what "really" happened"....sends me 2,199 words (counted them in word) from a continuously updated blog (update I, Update II, etc, link, link, link.)
I want to have an argument that can be spread easily and simply to grandparents and friends who are not "FR-quality."
But if I can't get anything like that here, it seems clear that it doesn't exist.
DFU, I thank you for your post, of course, but I'm going to try to summarize that link and see if you think I've distilled it correctly.
The article above quite clearly says that (1) Schippers flew to OKC to interview Jayna's sources, and then (2) that Rohrbacher can't afford to get Jayna to washington?
Schippers (or you, or JimRob, or ME or ANYONE) involved in this and totally behind it is able to spend money to check out the sources, but then nobody can afford $400 of their own money round trip to send Jayna to Washington to see the committee?
Sounds like to me that Schippers went, saw, and either got less interested, or was unable to persuade anyone else to be interested.
Meanwhile, I tried to get someone here to give me a synopsis of this thing, and all I've gotten is people telling me I haven't "read the links." Maybe Rohrbacher got the same treatment I have?
I'm beginning to think there is a simple theory, story, or anything that isn't book-sized and $19.95.
Uh? So anytime there's no proof of something, then it must've been covered up?
Ok, so what was the motivation for the coverup and how did everyone get on board?
I started believing this stuff back when Alex Jones was the only person covering it. Now that he's turned into a leftist lunatic, I'm starting to wonder who's really still walking the line here.
When you summarize it, share the summary with us.
That's his name; thank you.
So you're telling us it has to be simple or you don't believe it? Or can't follow it?
I don't get what you don't get.
Did you see what I said about Iraqi Republican Guards upthread? You do know that some Iraqi's want to destroy America, right? And that they brag about using proxies?
I didn't realize that you wanted a summary for distribution. Some people here probably thought you were just being lazy and didn't want to read the info. :) Doing a summary will be helpful for others who don't have the time for the massive amount of info in this case.
Yup. As I recall I heard something to that effect quite a while ago. I have been riding the OKC hobby horse for some time. My congressman doesn't seem to be interested the President doesn't seem to be interested and the press is definately not interested.
This and the Iraq/AQ connections have been my primary interest as well and that the administration does not even talk about them drives me nuts.
The magazine includes an article with photo of Congressman Rohrabacher. I have scanned the relevent page of the magazine on my website - the image is so large I'm concerned about it causing FR to slow down so I'll post the link to the image along with the contents of the article.
April 3, 2006: What's the agenda?
Is Congressman Dana Rohrabacher's call for Congressional hearings into the April 1995 Oklahoma City attack an attempt to uncover the truth - or is his goal to once and for all hide the facts regarding the attack?
But does Rohrabacher, the man hailed in the above article from the October 1998 edition of the US-based Muslim Magazine for his record which "demonstrates his ongoing support of the Muslim community" have another agenda?
Questions posed by investigative journalist Jayna Davis, author of the book The Third Terrorist which explored the Middle East Connection to the Oklahoma City bombing, indicate that the Congressman may not be attempting to uncover the entire truth.
Earlier today, through Freeper Doug from Upland, Jayna posed the questions listed below. They also asked:
Last year, David Schippers, famous for prosecuting both the Chicago mob and William Jefferson Blythe Clinton, flew to OKC to meet Jayna and her witnesses. Dave spent 12 hours grilling 14 of them on camera.
When he was finished, he told Jayna that, with just three of them, he would get a federal indictment of Hussain al-Hussaini in one day. FBI agent Dan Vogel told her he could do the same -- with one of her witnesses. That is how credible they were.
So why, Congressman Rohrabacher, did you tell Jayna that the committee has no budget to fly her to Washington, D.C.? What is the problem? Are we finally going to get the truth or is this grandstanding?
If this is an attempt to get to the whole truth, what harm can come from having Jayna Davis testify before Congress? What information are they afraid she might have about a Middle East connection?
In some ways, it's surprising that Rohrabacher, a man who received an award from the American Muslim Council. In fact, Rohrabacher has received tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from Muslim donors, some of whom are in prison now on terrorism-related charges.
Ken Timmerman wrote the following in a 2004 article in Front Page Magazine:
Foremost among those friends is Khaled Saffuri, a former government affairs director of the American Muslim Council who has coordinated contributions to Rohrabacher's re-election campaigns from Muslim donors, some of whom today are in federal prison on terrorism-related charges.
While at AMC, Saffuri worked under AMC Executive Director Abdulrahman Alamoudi, who was jailed last October on charges of illegally laundering money from the Libyan government. At a September 2000 rally in LafayettePark in front of the White House, Alamoudi led followers in chanting their support for Hamas and Lebanon's Hezbollah, both of which are considered as international terrorist organizations by the U.S. government.
As AMC's chief Washington lobbyist from 1995-1998, Saffuri worked to organize AMC members and contributors into an effective political force. Besides $10,400 in direct contributions he made to Rohrabacher's re-election campaigns, he helped raise another $24,000 for in direct contributions to Rohrabacher's campaign war chest from AMC members and sympathizers, according to publicly-available Federal Election Commission records compiled for this article.
Born to Palestinian parents, Saffuri has made a career in Washington, DC of putting a moderate face onto radical Islamic causes while mixing with a Wahhabi-inspired network of donors who include Alamoudi and former University of South Florida teacher Sami Al-Arian, who was jailed on Feb. 20, 2003 for his alleged involvement in the leadership of Palestinian Islamic Jihad, an outlawed terrorist group.
One of the responsibilities for Congress which it opens an investigation is to learn the truth - and by truth that means the entire truth.
Doesn't America deserve an answer once and for all to the question: Was there a Middle Eastern connection to the Oklahoma City bombing? Don't we owe the victims and survivors of this attack the answer?
Sam_Paine, we all share your frustration that the OKC picture is not crystal clear -- even though several of us have spent years trying to make sense of it.
I, for one, specifically avoided the questions of "who?" and "why?", and left investigation of those to others while I concentrated on the "what happened?" and "how?". Even then, I was not able (with the avaiable evidence -- not sequestered or destroyed by Federal agencies) to arrive at a single, unequivocal conclusion.
What I did not start with, but was unable to avoid developing as I studied all the evidence, was the firm conclusion that the DOJ, BATF and FBI (at least) behaved very badly and dishonestly re the evidence.
I'll venture to say that everyone who has investigated the OKC bombing at length will agree with this: Anyone who starts with the OKC bombing and investigates in any direction soon finds themselves facing some very strange and frightening people -- and organizations.
Sorry, but, AFAIK, if you want a simple answer, you'll just have to dig it out for yourself. Just be ready to overcome many formidable obstacles!
Oh, and -- if you are successful -- please share the results with all of the rest of us... < no sarcasam -- at all -- intended>
All of the above. We've become so PC in this country that I don't see how we'll possibly win the war on terror. The jihadists won't defeat us. We'll defeat ourselves. We look like fools, imo, for some of the terrorist bill of rights stuff we've passed.
For crying out loud, not one thing that happened at Abu Graib was torture. Pretending dogs were going to bite but not letting them bite? Fake electrodes? Blankets over heads? Listening to obnoxious music? Sheesh. The jihadists must be laughing themselves sick.
On 9/11, within a few seconds, freepers said it was OBL. I was watching the news, channel surfing for information frantically because I have a stepbrother who worked in a building next to one of the towers, and not one of the anchors had a clue for a good 15-20 minutes. So all of what you said is correct, imo.
Doug - see #264 for a possible explanation about Rohrabacher.
StillProud2BeFree - thank you for your work on this and posting it here. I read the book Infiltration by Paul Sperry a few months ago and was pretty stunned at some of the names of people on our side of the aisle who were Muslim sympathizers. I don't remember Rohrabacher's name being in there, but it might have been.
You aren't kidding. There is a reporter who has followed the white supremist route. And Jayna who followed the Iraq route. IMO, neither of them is "wrong". Iraq said they'd use lily whites and proxies and who is more of a lily white than a white supremist?
Powerful people protect powerful people.
Thanks, Doug. I may have had trouble finding a concise summary, cuz there may not be one!!!! Here's what I've done so far (below.) I'm down to 600 words, but I'm still missing McVeigh's motive for "taking credit" etc.
I'm not being lazy, and Peach is really ticking me off about this! There are things and threads and all sorts of things that I have read over time that confuse me. Like, whatever happened to Padilla being John Doe #2? Forgive me if I've not kept up, but I'd like to!
You forgot taking a prisoner's peanut butter and eating it in front of him.
That's a decent summary. There's tons more that could be included, of course, but I wouldn't want to tick you off :-)
You could take out many of the words and do an outline with bullet points.
What?? Are you kidding? I hadn't heard that one. Some days I absolutely despair at our stupidity. When I tell people there was no torture at Abu Graib, they don't believe it. So I challenge them to go find one instance of torture. Maybe they missed the peanut incident :-)
Good idea about the bullet points for the summary. You could search for doug's posts today on this thread; snippets from the book and witness testimony that were mostly one or two sentences and worthwhile to be included in your summary.
I could do that for you, if you'd like, but it will have to be tomorrow. Let me know if you'd like me to do that; I really wasn't trying to make you mad but didn't get what you didn't get, if you know what I mean.
Here's an example... What happened to Jose Padilla being John Doe #2? That made sense to me early on, now this Al-Hussaini guy makes sense. Who's who?
So you're telling us it has to be simple or you don't believe it? Or can't follow it?
Is that kind of belittling really necessary? At least -I- am trying to do something constructive.
Aha! So now you want to be nice!?!? Well two can play the nice game. ;-P
Whoops. The peanut butter torture was at Guantanamo.
--- Of course, countless abuses have been committed against war prisoners throughout the ages - no one denies that. But, while not downplaying their suffering, it must be admitted that even the most unfortunate of these victims can only breathe a sigh of relief that he was not subject to what Mr. Abbasi was forced to endure when he:
had his peanut butter eaten by a guard "right in front of him".
One needn't be a bleeding heart to shudder at the inhumanity thus displayed.
After seeing Padilla's photo, someone surmised that he looked at lot like the sketch of John Doe 2. Totally bogus. There is loads of eye witness testimony, however, about Hussain Al-Hussaini. Unfortunately, it has been kept from the public.
I exposed three or four years ago that food service trucks were able to get onto the airport without going through security. Who knows what they were loading onto the plane.
I'm sorry; I've seen so many people who absolutely belittle any possible connection that I'm suspicious.
You've done an admirable summary and I thank you for it.
Personally, I think that although Padilla looks like John Doe #2, there is too much compelling evidence that it was Al-Husseini.
ROFL. Thanks for that info; I hadn't heard about the peanut at any location and think that's absolutely hilarious and just further evidence that we've lost our collective minds in this country.
And Ashcroft was sure in a hurry to stick McVeigh with the needle.
Best case scenario is they covered it up for "good" reasons.
After 9-11, it had to remain covered.
See #237 for my analysis of why this administration covered it up. Clinton's reasons are self evident; it was far too much fun for him to blame Rush Limbaugh and "hate radio".
The FBI covered up the crater from the truck bomb with eight sheets of plywood (a 16-foot square) to -- according to FBI's OKC SAIC, Danny Defenbaugh --"protect evidence that was water-soluble".
Where's the coverup?
How's that for starters on a literal "cover-up"?
Yes, Peach, I have her book next to my bed. It is very eye-opening, to say the least. Victor Mordecai also talks in his books about the ME connection to the OKC bombing and TWA Flight 800.
This has definitely gone beyond the bounds of "Reynolds Wrap". To think that our government just rolled over on this--and continues to while we have these savages stalking us, waiting for the right moment to strike again-- makes me sick.
I didn't know that. (Or if I did, I'd forgotten). The FBI used to be good at its job but have gotten so sloppy in the last 10-20 years that I have zero faith in their ability.
Did you know that Mueller refuses to say the words terrorism and Middle Eastern extremists in the same sentence? He's a Muslim sympathizer, imo.
I'll go with that PLUS the "We didn't want to create a panic and show we were vulnerable in the heartland".
I never heard of Victor Mordecai; I'll have to google him after "24" which starts here in a few minutes.
Yup. That's what it will take. And even then, in the current climate, I'm not sure people still won't be pointing fingers instead of getting down to business.
Definitely. The political protection was just for starters. The Congressional anti-terrorism specialist (Bodansky) told Congress before the blast that the ME was planning a terrorist attack in the heartland and would use lily whites; law enforcement didn't do a thing to beef up security as far I've ever been able to tell.
What's it going to take? A city or port a smoking ruin, that's what. If the WTC attack didn't do it for the public, something worse will, and someting worse is coming. Make book on it.
P.S.: Shows you there's more good sense here on FR than the entire MSM. They are, if anything, more clueless, lazy, PC, self-serving, and gutless than many in gov.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.