The Oklahoma City bombing victims and their families.
Arguable, but I see your point....closure??? You probably know I was asking more in terms of who might stand to gain political points making hay out of this.
I suspect this is only a teaser.
Hmmmm, well, do you believe the story is credible? If this is a teaser, what should be the next phase of escalation? Or, this is a chunk of raw meat thrown to some hungry dogs; let the chips fall?????
FGS
Yeah, I know. And I knew you knew that I knew. :-)
Hmmmm, well, do you believe the story is credible? If this is a teaser, what should be the next phase of escalation? Or, this is a chunk of raw meat thrown to some hungry dogs; let the chips fall?????
It may be a teaser for a more in-depth story in the near future by the WSJ. Or it may just be the WSJ 'testing the waters' on how much of this they can report and maintain their legitimacy. Regardless, yes, this story is very credible, even though the LAWeekly -- one of the original sources for the WSJ -- is not usually considered as such. Of this I am sure.
As BlueDog alluded to here, there's a 'war' going on inside the Beltway for the outcome of all this evidence of Middle Eastern involvement in the OKC bombing. That's pretty obvious to anyone who is paying attention. Here's my theory...
I may be wrong, but those recent "leaks from the Pentagon" in the NYTimes & WashCompost (about opposition to war with Iraq) may be connected to all this, perhaps in efforts to stop the growing 'rumblings' of Middle Eastern involvement in OKC. By planting the 'ill-advised war' ideas in the public's mindset, it gives them possible ammunition later. IOW, they may be hoping to stop the OKC 'rumors' by trying to put Bush in a checkmate situation. If Bush allows Dan Burton & others to 'find' all the evidence and tell us the truth about the extent of the M.E./OKC cover-up, they can then discredit Bush by claiming he's crazy and just trying to drum up support for his "ill-advised war."
Who is the "them" who are leaking the "war is crazy" ideas? I dunno. Presumably the same ones who have the most to lose if the true Middle Eastern source of eight years of "domestic" terrorism is revealed. That would logically be the few key people who originally orchestrated the OKC cover-up. And to a much lesser extent, those who actively participated.
The bottom line and determining factor on the outcome of all the evidence of M.E. involvement in OKC, in my opinion, is directly related to how much public pressure we put on the Bush Administration to tell us the truth and let the chips fall where they may.
If Bush is going to let the truth come out, then he needs public pressure as political cover. Otherwise, the libs/doves will scream, "He's gone mad. He's just trying to drum up support so he can go in and finish what his Daddy left undone."
Call your representatives and DEMAND the truth!