Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Registered; Arthur McGowan; the gillman@blacklagoon.com
Good post, Registered! This is all very interesting. I've heard very little about it in the mainstream press.

While reading it, I was trying to imagine a sensible motive for the Government's desire to cover up any foreign involvement in OKC.

At post 12, Arthur McGowan suggests that Clinton wanted it to appear to be a domestic plot so that he could pin the blame on domestic enemies:

"So foreign terrorists were responsible for OKC? Covered up by Clinton--who then attempted to pin the blame on HIS enemies, not the COUNTRY'S enemies? It was more important to him to damage his political opponents than to defend the country against an external threat."

Then at post 17, the gillman@blacklagoon.com suggests that Clinton would actually have liked to have had a Middle Eastern terrorist act occur during his Presidency:

"He was hoping for the big event, 911, to happen on his watch, which would have made him king. Can't trust those middle easterners. No sense of time or dates.

Has anyone yet come up with a sensible and internally consistent theory as to why the Government would have wanted to distort the history of this event? Or are people still just trying to gather the facts?

It is very interesting stuff. Good work!

38 posted on 04/19/2002 10:17:41 AM PDT by humbletheFiend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: humbletheFiend
It has been offered that 1994 GOP election had more to do with Waco than the 1993 tax increase. Secondly, after the 1993 WTC bombing, Clinton polled weak on 'terrorism' and thus could not afford two attacks on American soil plus a Waco in one term.
43 posted on 04/19/2002 11:08:25 AM PDT by JohnGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]

To: humbletheFiend
Has anyone yet come up with a sensible and internally consistent theory as to why the Government would have wanted to distort the history of this event?

I'll give you MY humble working theory...(FWIW)

I think clinton knew in advance that it was going to happen, that a homemade truck bomb would do SOME damage to the bldg. I believe Clinton saw this as a golden opportunity to pin the blame on the "right-wing clinton haters", using McVeigh as poster-boy/patsy.

I believe clinton sent in black ops personell to wire the Murrah Bldg with military-grade explosives which were armed with seismic triggers. When McVeigh set off his truck bomb, it detonated the (REAL) inside bombs, and took down the bldg. Clinton then immediately went on the offensive, blaming "right-wing talk radio" (which was starting to ask hardball questions about Vince Foster, Waco, whitewater, etc) for inciting the American people into "mistrusting their government".

This halted the Contract with America in it's tracks. Clinton quickly caught McVeigh, demolished the Murrah bldg evidence. Case closed. It was the right-wing clinton hater nuts who did it.

They have every reason to cover up the truth because, IMHO they engineered the tragedy.

46 posted on 04/19/2002 11:15:28 AM PDT by berned
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]

To: humbletheFiend
The following makes sense to me: Clinton didn't want to disturb the "good times"; he also hoped that, by not responding to WTC I, and OKC, there would be a bigger atrocity which WOULD rouse the populace and make him, effectively, King. Unfortunately for Clinton, Bush gets to be King instead. The Patriot Act is an abomination. It should be repealed or appealed to the USSC as soon as possible.
49 posted on 04/19/2002 11:30:45 AM PDT by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson