Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Does this sound like a cover up?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
 
JayS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-04 10:46 PM
Original message
Does this sound like a cover up?
Go to http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1846269 for a short (3:33) but interesting audio clip. Click on "All Things Considered audio" and you can listen in RealAudio or Windows Media.

Also of interest:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/ap/20040419/ap_on_go_c...

Document: Oklahoma City Bombing Was Taped
By JOHN SOLOMON, Associated Press Writer
Mon Apr 19, 6:59 PM ET

WASHINGTON - A Secret Service document written shortly after the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing described security video footage of the attack and witness testimony that suggested Timothy McVeigh (news - web sites) may have had accomplices at the scene.

"Security video tapes from the area show the truck detonation 3 minutes and 6 seconds after the suspects exited the truck," the Secret Service reported six days after the attack on a log of agents' activities and evidence in the Oklahoma investigation.

*SNIP*

An entry a day earlier on the same log reported that the security video was consistent with a witness' account that he saw McVeigh's getaway car in the lead before a woman guided the truck to its final parking spot in front of the Murrah building.

"A witness to the explosion named Grossman claimed to have seen a pale yellow Mercury car with a Ryder truck behind it pulling up to the federal building," the log said. The witness "further claimed to have seen a woman on the corner waving to the truck."

A Secret Service agent named McNally "noted that this fact is significant due to the fact that the security video shows the Ryder truck pulling up to the Federal Building and then pausing (7 to 10 seconds) before resuming into the slot in front of the building," the log said. "It is speculated that the woman was signaling the truck when a slot became available."

*SNIP*


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
benburch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-04 10:51 PM
Response to Original message
1. It does.
But why?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JayS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-04 11:00 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. The most common theory that I have heard from 1995 to...
...present was that it was a sting operation that went horribly wrong. It has all the marks of a hurridly thrown together plan to wrap up the case...and quick. It appears to be coming unwrapped though.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-04 11:14 PM
Response to Original message
3. Sounds more like normal confusion in the beginning of an investigation
The first passage mentions suspects, plural, the second passage from a day earlier sounds like only one person in the truck, and maybe another signalling. Sounds from the entry above that the video doesn't show anyone else, and doesn't show the yellow car, it only indicates that the truck pausing could be consistent with the witness's testimony.

There could have also been a little yellow car driving in front of the truck, pulling over at the corner, and waving at a friend nearby.

As it stands there, it just looks like agents trying to cover all bases, explore every possibility, and see what makes sense. In any big case that happens in the open, they have a hundred witnesses with a hundred stories, all believing they saw something. The first witnesses quoted saw Middle Eastern men leaving. People thought they saw bombs in the rubble afterwards (Alex Jones still makes a deal out of this, despite the fact that it happens at almost every such scene). Witnesses are unreliable, and latching on to one over the others is only justified if there is evidence to support any of them. Probably they concluded the witness here was just wrong. Probably.

On the other hand, I still don't believe that McVeigh's tag fell off. That was a cover story. They were looking for him, or someone that fit his description. Maybe it was just a profile, to look for a crewcut with a scowl, amongst other stereotypes. Maybe it was a little more specific-- like they figured out from their own records that McVeigh was one of the people who could have done it, and put out instructions to look for someone like him (amongst others, maybe). Or maybe it was very specific-- they were looking for McVeigh because they knew it was him, either because they had failed to stop him, as some have claimed, or because they had a record that he was going to try this but didn't believe it. But the story of the tag falling off is too pat, and exactly the kind law enforcement create in order to create probable cause.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JayS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-04 11:22 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. The kicker was that there was not supposed to be a video.
That is what is so alarming. When I first heard this story I thought the same as you...then I remembered that the only video that was supposed to exist was the one from the apartment complex that did not show anything.

The police story was odd at the time. What policeman would break off a call that required him to drive 90 MPH just to bust someone with no tag.

Or the ATF agent who claimed to fall five stories in the elevator only to jump out and rescue people...then the story became that he felt like he fell five stories then got out and rescued people...then no more stories. I think that agent is guarding gopher holes in Kansas now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-04 09:17 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. So, where's the video?
When will the video surface? Why hasn't it been made available? Who's hiding what? There is no defense from keeping evidence from us, and anyone trying to defend it is a traitor to America.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JayS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-04 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. That is the big question.
I would be willing to bet that it has been destroyed. I am sure it existed though. A secret service agent would not just make stuff up, twice.

If it did surface and showed that more people were involved...that would be something. Can you imagine solid proof that the government allowed people with a bomb making, and using, fetish to walk away unpunished and remain free somewhere among us.

Then again, I wonder if people would even care.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DulceDecorum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-04 11:32 PM
Response to Original message
5. Al qaeda
was behind it.
Al qaeda killed John F. Kennedy.
Al qaeda killed Princess Diana.
Al qaeda killed Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown.
And al qaeda ate my homework.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TO Kid Donating Member (565 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-04 11:06 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Wrong, it was the Rockefellers
You just can't have a good conspiracy without a Rockefeller. Get with the program.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JayS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-04 09:24 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. There may actually be something to that.
March 28, 2004
Ex-Terror Czar: Feds Couldn't Disprove Nichols-Yousef Connection
By J.M. Berger
INTELWIRE.com
http://www.intelwire.com/2004_03_28_exclusives.html


Federal agencies were "never able to disprove" claims that Ramzi Yousef and Terry Nichols may have met in the Philippines prior to the Oklahoma City bombing, according to the former National Security Council director of counterterrorism Richard Clarke, who also reveals that Nichols and Yousef were in Cebu City on the same days.

Amid the controversy over Against All Enemies, Clarke's expose of the Bush Administration, there has been only sporadic coverage of his brief mention of the Oklahoma City bombing and rumors that al Qaeda may have provided training to convicted conspirator Terry Nichols, which he cited as a loose end that still weighs on his mind.

"We were never able to disprove" the alleged connection, wrote Clarke, who headed a Clinton administration interagency task force on terrorism at the time. He said Nichols and Yousef "visited Cebu on the same days." Previously, the two had only been conclusively verified as being in Cebu together on one specific date (Dec. 11, 1994), but there is significant evidence to suggest more overlap.

*SNIP*

It's unclear whether the results of the investigation cited by Clarke were fully disclosed to defense lawyers for Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols. The production of documents by the FBI and other federal agencies has been a major issue in the state trial of Terry Nichols.

An investigation by the Associated Press has turned up significant evidence that the FBI failed to provide and in some cases even destroyed evidence related to a broader conspiracy in the Oklahoma City bombing. AP's reports prompted the FBI to open an internal investigation into the bombing last month.

*SNIP*


***********************
INS Deported al Qaeda-Linked Suspect Just Days After Oklahoma Bombing

Gov't Returned Evidence, Erased Charges, Despite Ties to OKC Bombing Confession

By J.M. BERGER

http://www.intelwire.com/khalifa100603.html


Seven days after the Oklahoma City bombing, the INS agreed to deport a brother-in-law of Osama bin Laden who had been implicated as a possible accessory to the attack by a jailhouse confession and documents relating to bomb construction.

*SNIP*

Arrested in San Francisco on an immigration violation in December 1994, Khalifa was a figure of primary interest to the FBI, which suspected him of assisting al Qaeda operatives Ramzi Yousef and Abdul Hakim Murad in a plot to bomb a dozen U.S. airliners from their base in the Philippines earlier that year, according to Peter Lance (http://www.peterlance.com ), author of "1000 Years for Revenge," a new book covering the FBI's investigation of Yousef.

Evidence in the FBI's possession at the time potentially implicated the Saudi businessman in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the airliner bombing plot and the Oklahoma City bombing. Khalifa was formally named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 New York City Landmarks bombing plot.

*SNIP*

On the basis of evidence in the FBI's hands at the time a deal was finally approved in April, Khalifa was at minimum a material witness in the three biggest criminal cases in the history of the United States.

On the day of the Oklahoma bombing, Murad told a prison guard that the "Liberation Army" was responsible for the attack, an allegation he repeated to the FBI the following day, according to documents obtained by Lance, who contributed to this article.

Convicted World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef had claimed responsibility for the 1993 WTC attack on behalf of the Liberation Army. Items seized from his Manila apartment and at the time of his arrest also contained references to the group.

*SNIP*


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DulceDecorum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-04 10:24 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Steve Emerson
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 08th 2024, 01:16 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC