It is beginning to look as if ME terrorism was involved in OKC too. Why has no one stepped up to take credit?
Of course, one answer could be that ME terrorism was working hand in glove with forces placed within the administration, no? Perhaps even the very highest level.
I found this to be a plausible explanation:
"The absence of a claim of responsibility for the downing of TWA 800 has puzzled some, but in fact only about half of all incidents of international terrorism are credibly claimed. In another quarter of the incidents, the likely perpetrators are easily identified, but the remaining quarter requires sleuthing."
"The lack of claims may reflect the changing motives and organizational patterns of terrorism. When terrorists pursued political goals on behalf of identifiable, if imaginary, constituencies, a claim of responsibility was seen as contributing to the achievement of the terrorists' objectives. Terrorists working on behalf of state sponsors, determined solely to punish their perceived enemies, or inspired by religious fanaticism with God or his self-appointed spokesperson as their sole constituent have no need to claim responsibility. Unclaimed attacks may also simply be more terrifying as they give us no enemy to identify."
1. The actors are willing to die themselves. There are great numbers of the willing. This fact means that no escape plan is necessary, no attempts at detection avoidance, etc., greatly simplifying the act.
2. The actors don't have the need to claim credit. That isn't part of their strategy or tactics. It's not necessary to their ends.
Does anyone remember seeing this article? It was posted on FR two or three months ago. I don't remember what number 3 is.
As others who write books have theorized, it may have been a Navy missile test gone wrong. Thus the cover-up to protect Clinton's re-election chances.
But along the way you are thinking, if it was a test gone bad. I wonder why a navy crewman or two with a guilty conscience hasn't come forward.
We'll never know the truth.