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

Skip to comments.

Government had missile in Murrah building
The Oklahoman ^ | 2002-09-26 | Associated Press

Posted on 09/26/2002 6:10:37 PM PDT by tomball

WASHINGTON — When Timothy McVeigh blew up the Oklahoma City federal building, the government had a TOW antitank missile stowed in a locker several floors above the daycare center.

The missile, about 3 feet long, actually had an inert warhead and only a small amount of rocket fuel, and the government says it did not contribute to the massive explosion that day. Instead, it tumbled into the rubble of the Alfred P. Murrah building.

But its discovery prompted an evacuation that slowed rescue efforts April 19, 1995, in part because the missile had been marked as live ordinance to make it look believable to the targets of a planned law enforcement sting, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press.

``Tow Missile recovered from A.P. Murrah Building,'' states an Oklahoma County sheriff's department evidence form showing the missile was removed from the rubble by the department's bomb squad and examined by military ordinance experts.

Oklahoma City emergency personnel records show the rescue site evacuation lasted 44 minutes.

``People were scrambling in every direction,'' recalled Sgt. William Grimsley of the Oklahoma County sheriff's department bomb squad, who helped remove the missile during the evacuation. ``From the crate, we knew it was some kind of a missile. We were told to get it out of there and get it out of there as fast as we could.''

The missile was the subject of a lengthy FBI investigation and also was examined by a local grand jury in Oklahoma, according to documents and interviews, but its existence has remained mostly a secret to the public — except for a handful of conspiracy theorists and government critics.

``There was a gag order at the time, we just didn't talk about it at all. It was an ongoing investigation,'' Grimsley explained.

McVeigh was convicted and later executed for the truck bomb blast that killed 168 people, including 19 children — most of them in a day-care center on the second floor.

Though a sidelight in the Oklahoma City drama, the missile's unexpected appearance in the rubble of a federal building frequented by civilians — including children — raises broader safety issues, experts say.

``We have no idea of what the potential dangers are in federal buildings because there is no methodology'' for the General Services Administration, the government's landlord, to independently review what is stored in every building, said John Culbertson, a former congressional aide to expelled Rep. James Traficant, D-Ohio.

Culbertson investigated the Oklahoma City building and other federal building safety issues and testified before a House subcommittee.

The GSA says its security procedures have changed greatly since 1995. The changes ``include extensive exchange of information with local, state and federal law-enforcement organizations, designing federal buildings to incorporate security measures and using magnetometers, X-ray machines and other innovations, some not visible to the public,'' GSA spokeswoman Viki Reath said.

Just last summer, GSA implemented a new regulation requiring federal agencies to seek its authorization before bringing ``hazardous explosive or combustible materials'' into federal buildings.

Still, the TOW missile is among a growing number of recent examples of weaponry, ordinance and other potentially dangerous materials that have been involved in incidents in government buildings.

In December, an FBI agent suffered severe burns on his hands, arm and abdomen when a stun grenade accidentally exploded in a federal building in Buffalo, N.Y. Witnesses said the explosion shook the building and caused smoky haze to drift through the complex.

And shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks, authorities divulged that a government office building that collapsed in a fiery heap near the World Trade Center had stored thousand of gallons of diesel fuel in tanks just above the ground floor. Investigators have examined whether the fuel could have contributed to the fire and collapse, and some insurance companies have sued the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey for storing the fuel there.

The federal building in Baltimore was evacuated in 1997 when pepper gas was discharged, overcoming several workers.

Some potential perils have been known by the government for more than a decade.

In 1987, a fire inside an FBI crime laboratory in Washington set off ordinance stored casually in a cabinet. ``The detonation of ordinance stored in the lower area of the cabinet occurred late in the fire as the heat level approached the floor,'' an FBI investigative report said.

That report states that among the items to detonate were two rocket-propelled grenades and 30 Soviet-made detonating fuses.

Federal law enforcement officials say their agencies frequently must store weapons — everything from handguns and ammunition to semiautomatic rifles and flash grenades — inside buildings frequented by civilians, but that those who handle them are carefully trained and abide by existing laws.

The Customs Service acknowledged it possessed the TOW missile in the Murrah building. When its discovery in the rubble sparked alarm, a Customs agent attempted to assure rescuers the missile was unarmed and pleaded unsuccessfully not to delay the rescue efforts.

``The Customs agent offered to personally remove the inert TOW missile from the building,'' the service said in a statement to AP. ``Rescue officials did not take up the agent's offer.''

Customs said the missile was marked live because it ``must appear to be live in order to gain the confidence of suspected arms traffickers during undercover investigations.'' But the agency added it believes its storage in a ``reinforced strong room'' was legal.

``Customs' actions in possessing and storing this system were completely within the law,'' the agency said. It would not discuss the details of the planned sting.

The FBI eventually took custody of the missile and traced the weapon's history from its creation and initial firing at an Alabama Army depot to its reconfiguration with a dummy warhead.

One military expert told the FBI that even an inert missile could pose dangers. ``He stated that inert TOW missiles are still operational. ... These missiles are still fireable as they contain an engine which is propelled by rocket fuel,'' an FBI report said.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: extended; fredthompson; okcbombing
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-74 last
Comment #61 Removed by Moderator

To: Poohbah
Well, it was as inert as it could be. Would you forbid agents to store ammunition for their sidearms in the building?

This is just completely disingenuous. Inert? It was a live rocket motor. Are you seriously comparing the rocket motor of a TOW missile to a handful of 9mm or .45ACP rounds?

62 posted on 09/27/2002 9:34:04 AM PDT by TigersEye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
This is just completely disingenuous. Inert? It was a live rocket motor.

With most of the fuel gone--that's about as inert as you get.

Are you seriously comparing the rocket motor of a TOW missile to a handful of 9mm or .45ACP rounds?

No, to several cases of 9MM. That would compare quite nicely to a largely-defueled missile.

But, back to the main question: where do you store the weapon while you're setting up the sting?

63 posted on 09/27/2002 9:41:31 AM PDT by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah; glorygirl; aristeides; honway; Fred Mertz
Excerpt from the article:

The Customs Service acknowledged it possessed the TOW missile in the Murrah building.

Conclusion from Poohbah’s reply # 17:

The missile was going to be used in a sting. Since the stinging agency was Customs, the sting probably targeted some furriners.

17 posted on 9/26/02 9:36 PM Central by Poohbah

question: which specific group of “furriners” in the Oklahoma City area do you think we in for the sting?

64 posted on 09/27/2002 9:50:35 AM PDT by thinden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
...largely-defueled missile.

I missed that the first time I read through. Conceded. My bad, sorry.

But, back to the main question: where do you store the weapon while you're setting up the sting?

How about a Nat. Guard Armory? (Unless someone there was the subject of the sting.) I think it would be reasonable to pick it up there as the operation was set in motion and return it there, for safe keeping, afterwards. Fed agencies can cooperate that much can't they? I was thinking any secure storage facility away from a large building full of people. Guess I'm just overly cautious.

65 posted on 09/27/2002 9:52:02 AM PDT by TigersEye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah; All
But, back to the main question: where do you store the weapon while you're setting up the sting?

While that was MY main question in my asides to you let's not lose sight of the bigger question this article begs to be asked:

Why was it necessary to deny and conceal for so long this seemingly benign information? It does seem poignantly suspicious that they have to point out this 'inert' rocket was several floors above the daycare center.

The article already establishes that 'conspiracy theorists' were right about this from the beginning.

It does make this new admission look like a strawman to divert attention away from questions of other explosives reportedly removed from the wreckage. Not to mention years of denial of ME involvement that now seems to be the governments own first suspicion confirmed by newly emerging witnesses.

66 posted on 09/27/2002 10:06:43 AM PDT by TigersEye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
Why was it necessary to deny and conceal for so long this seemingly benign information?

I knew about this thing on the day of the bombing--it was all over the news at the time. I don't understand how you can say it was "denied" and "concealed" for so long.

It does seem poignantly suspicious that they have to point out this 'inert' rocket was several floors above the daycare center.

And, of course, the much larger truck bomb only one floor below the daycare center is completely unsuspicious. </sarcasm>

67 posted on 09/27/2002 10:12:00 AM PDT by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
"And Ashcroft's haste to have McVeigh executed suggests what? "

And the recent thread here about Nichols not getting funding for his defense.
68 posted on 09/27/2002 10:29:16 AM PDT by Tymesup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: WhirlwindAttack; Jim Robinson
I agree with WhirlwindAttack that OKCSubmariner should be restored.
69 posted on 09/27/2002 10:30:34 AM PDT by Tymesup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Asmodeus; Woodstock
"But I believe this and flight 800 were two acts of terrorism in this country that our government just would not admit to."

Uh, oh, another non-believer in the center wing fuel tank theory.

70 posted on 09/27/2002 10:32:16 AM PDT by Tymesup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
And, of course, the much larger truck bomb only one floor below the daycare center is completely unsuspicious.

That's funny. But non-sequiter.

71 posted on 09/27/2002 10:34:50 AM PDT by TigersEye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: tomball
But its discovery prompted an evacuation that slowed rescue efforts April 19, 1995, in part because the missile had been marked as live ordinance to make it look believable to the targets of a planned law enforcement sting, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press.

What sort of sting involves showing a missle to someone? Could the BATF be involved in luring people into a deal to purchase ordnance and then busting them for conspiracy?

72 posted on 09/27/2002 2:33:44 PM PDT by Twodees
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Twodees
"What sort of sting involves showing a missle to someone?"

This is a good question and reflective of what I meant when I said the ramifications are almost beyond comprehension.

The other questions that begs to be asked is WHY Customs won't release details of the sting 7 1/2 years after the fact. Are they still worried about catching/prosecuting the suspects? If that's the case, exactly who are these suspects? And if not's the case, why not release the details? Most enforcement investigations do not last this long. I really hope people grasp the implications of this story. I can only figure that it's some kind of half-hearted attempt to "explain away" "conspiracy theories" or answer the WSJ story earlier this month.

Poohbah, I would like to echo thinden's question: what sort of "furriners" are you suggesting?

73 posted on 09/27/2002 5:39:26 PM PDT by glorygirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: lawdog
bump
74 posted on 10/22/2002 8:15:53 PM PDT by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-74 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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