Pardon me, Submariner, since I have followed most every one of your posts on this subject, but I don't believe this for a second. IF -- and it's a big IF -- the Bush administration is covering up the cover-ups, there has to be a logical reason why. Just because the American people couldn't survive the relevation that the Clinton FBI was corrupt?
That's a farce.
Political considerations alone would rule this out, much less the moral and ethical considerations which I believe the Bush administration heeds.
Remember, Janet Reno is mounting a gubernatorial challenge to President Bush's brother in Florida. Don't you think that if Reno's DOJ covered up aspects of OKC that the Bushes wouldn't capitalize on it for political purposes? What theory do you have that trumps the political motivations that George and Jeb must have to beat Reno in FLA?
Do you really believe that the Bush administration believes that Americans could not handle hearing about scandal in the previous administration?
To tell you the truth, I'm beginning to think that this John Doe #2 or 3 or 4 or whatever, theory is BS. I just can't conceive of a reason, especially after 9-11, that the Bush administration would continue to cover this up.
Please enlighten me.
"Ashcroft and Mueller have said they are cleaning up the FBI and DOJ but I doubt they are trying very hard since they are spending most of their time covering up the previous coverups so they can buy time (they say?)to clean up the FBI and DOJ in the future."
Five months ago Ashcroft was hand delivered in person hard evidence in the OKC bombing case of other domestic John DOes (Arizona and Kansas)I positively identitfied with key witnesses and color photos and other evidence. The evidence was explained to Aschcroft and he deliberately chose to do nothing . Read BlueDogDemo's reply for a good description of the ME link. He is a former OKC police officer and a Fed military official. He has more standing than me, believe him for sure. See reply #16 from BlueDog.
Have you not read the recent articles on FR that quote Assistant Defense Secretary Wolfowitz as saying that McVeigh was an Iraqi agent who had Iraqi intell phone nos in his possession? This was confirmed in a world Net daily article , "Dead Men Tell No Lies posted on the FR." I doubt you have yet had time to read all that I have written on the topic of the OKC bombing within the past 15 months I have authored over 30 articles on the OKC bombing case (many in 200 and 2001) Everything I wrote has proven to be correct including Ashcroft's coverups.
Please contact the others in the above reply this and they will provide you all the info and articles you can possibly read to verify what I have written. They are great archivists and know the case extremely well. I hope they can help you. I am very busy right now trying to keep up with all this myself and do not have the time to dig up everything to enlighten you even further.
Also, I was actually being kind to Mueller and ASchcroft in my remarks by saying they are tring to protect institutions-I was giving them the benefit of the doubt. Actually IMO They are both stupid and corrupt for not carrying out the laws of the land regardless of WHY. I do not have to prove or guess why. All I have to prove is what did in fact happen in the OKC case. I will leave the why up to others. The Why question can be a trap that can be used by them to get themsevles out of trouble and avoid the facts of what happened. You do not have to prove motive(why) to prove a crime.
---max