It seems to me that anyone with a functioning brain stem would be anxious to pursue every angle on this, especially in light of the world's foremost terrorist group and their subsequent actions in the United States on 09/11.
I don't give a rats arse if they check a white supremacist angle, just don't neglect to check out the Middle-Eastern angle on it as well.
I don't care what they find, I just want them to find out every aspect they can.
It will never happen. Clinton is free and clear of all wrongs committed while in office. One for him, and another for the old lady... We don't want anything negative being said about the Dems angel...
Motive? Possibly it is because he was "in the loop" when the CIA informed the committee he once co-chaired that the Middle East threat would shift from the hard target of Washington DC (remember the barricades on Pennsylvania Avenue) to the soft targets in the US. At the top of that list of soft targets was the Oklahoma City Murrah Federal Building.
Nichols' lawyers pursued the white supremecists angle too. Because Nichols had no connection to it. So what the govenment spewed out, Nichols' lawyers jumped on.
The Philippine trips did nothing for the Government's theory, and Nichols' attorneys weren't going to mention anything that would implicate their client.
I agree, all angles should be explored. Why not?
Most especially since it has been proven that Terry Nichols had probable connections to Abu Sayf in the Philippines and recent translations of Iraq Documents show that Saddam's secret service was very involved with funding and advising Abu Sayf operations.
The only possible reason not to thoroughly and openly investigate this, including interviews of all the witnesses, is because somebody large does not want this to ever come out. Maybe somebody very large.