CONSPIRACY: The Okla. City-Sept. 11 Connection

I'M NOT A conspiracy guy. I think Oswald killed Kennedy, and that he acted alone. And, like all Americans, I figured that the tragic bombing of the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City was the work of two sick ex-Army guys, Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols.

Last night, my radio station, the Big Talker 1210, brought three speakers to town for a remarkable presentation: Jayna Davis, a reporter from Oklahoma City; Larry Johnson, ex-deputy director of the State Department's office of counterterrorism, and Patrick Lang, Mideast expert formerly of the Defense Intelligence Agency.

In a spellbinding presentation, they made the case for a connection between Mideast terrorism, the Murrah bombing - and the attacks on the Twin Towers.

Now I know why former CIA Director James Woolsey has been quoted as saying that when the full truth is known about these acts of terrorism, the nation will owe Davis "a debt of gratitude."

Why her name is not already a household word is the greatest mystery of all. Just this week, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said that U.S. intelligence has "bulletproof" evidence of links between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein. Rumsfeld didn't offer specifics. But here is what we know from the work of Davis.

When the Murrah bombing occurred at 9:02 a.m. on April 19, 1995, Davis was a reporter for the NBC affiliate in Oklahoma City. She was among the first journalists to broadcast that an enormous truck bomb had rocked the heartland, killing 168 and injuring hundreds.

In the immediate aftermath of the explosion, the FBI launched an international pursuit of several Middle Eastern-looking men seen fleeing the Murrah Building in a brown Chevy pickup right before the blast. Without explanation, that all-points bulletin was later canceled. Two days later, Timothy McVeigh was a household name. So was Terry Nichols.

And that's where most of us left the tale. Stunned, but convinced that two Army buddies, homegrown terrorists, acted alone.

Thankfully, Davis didn't close this book as quickly as most of us did. She pursued the APB and set off to track reports of multiple sightings of McVeigh with an elusive dark-haired accomplice. The infamous sketch of John Doe No. 2 was always tucked firmly in her grip.

Davis soon uncovered that several employees at an Oklahoma City property- management company said they had seen a brown Chevy truck like the getaway vehicle aggressively pursued by law enforcement parked outside their office in the days before the bombing. The company's owner was a Palestinian with a rap sheet and suspected ties to the PLO.

Davis learned that, six months before the bombing, the Palestinian hired a handful of ex-Iraqi soldiers to do maintenance at his rental houses. Eyewitnesses told Davis that they celebrated the bombing.

She was also made aware that these same men were absent from work on April 17, 1995, the day McVeigh rented the Ryder truck that carried the bomb.

While pursuing the story of these Middle Eastern men, Davis also became aware of another ex-Iraqi soldier in Oklahoma City named Hussain Hashem Al-Hussaini. She was taken aback to see that Al-Hussaini's picture, when overlaid with the government sketch of John Doe No. 2, was arguably a perfect match. He even sported a tattoo on his upper left arm indicating that he likely had served in Saddam Hussein's Republican Guard.

Davis then set about looking for a connection to McVeigh, Nichols, Al-Hussaini and other Iraqis. It came when a colleague located two eyewitnesses who claimed to have independently seen Al-Hussaini drinking beer with McVeigh in an Oklahoma City nightclub just four days before the bombing.

This convinced her station to run with the Iraqi-connection story. It was met with some controversy.

The Justice Department responded that the identification of John Doe No. 2 was merely a case of mistaken identity. Al-Hussaini contacted local reporters, claiming to be falsely accused. Davis did not back off because she believed she could repudiate Al-Hussaini's alibi.

AND SHE LOCATED two dozen witnesses who identified eight specific Middle Eastern men, the majority of whom were ex-Iraqi soldiers, who were seen with McVeigh and Nichols. Two witnesses named Al-Hussaini as the dark-haired, olive-skinned man they observed one block from the Murrah Building just before daybreak on the day of the blast.

She also uncovered evidence that implicated several of Al-Hussaini's co-workers. One of these men was identified as sitting in the driver's seat of a Chevy pickup at an Oklahoma City apartment complex hours before the truck was abandoned on the lot and towed to the FBI command post. According to police records, the truck had been stripped of its vehicle identification numbers and identifying body molding.

The story gathered steam. Here, it would appear, was the deserted pickup that was the same vehicle that was seen speeding away from the vicinity of the Murrah building with two Arab-looking occupants.

And there was more. Five witnesses independently fingered several of Al-Hussaini's associates as frequent visitors to an Oklahoma City motel in the months, days, and hours leading up to 9:02 a.m. on April 19. On numerous occasions, the subjects were seen in the company of McVeigh, and during a few instances, associating with Nichols - at the same motel!

Davis spoke to the motel owner and a maintenance worker who said the men came within feet of a large Ryder truck parked on the west side of the parking lot at 7:40 a.m. on April 19. An unexplained odor of diesel fuel emanated from the rear carriage. Minutes later, McVeigh entered the motel office and returned the room key. The motel owner then saw McVeigh drive off the lot with a man identified as Al-Hussaini.

To this day, the Justice Department has refused to return the original registration logs for the motel.

Davis has 80 pages of affidavits and 2,000 supporting documents, and they suggest not only an Iraqi connection to the Murrah bombing, but also to the attacks against the Twin Towers.

For example, Nichols was a man of modest means. Yet he traveled frequently to the Philippines. Davis discovered that Nichols was there, in Cebu City in December 1994, at the same time as the convicted mastermind of the first World Trade Center attack, Ramzi Yousef.

She has also found evidence that Islamic terrorists boasted of having recruited two "lily whites" for terrorism.

Al-Hussaini had a very American response to Davis' investigation. He sued for defamation. In a ruling on Nov. 17, 1999, federal Judge Timothy Leonard dismissed the case.

In 1995, the federal grand jury proclaimed in the official indictment that McVeigh and Nichols acted with "others unknown." And several members of the Denver juries who convicted the two said publicly that they thought they had help.

Since 1997, Davis has repeatedly tried to interest the FBI in her investigation. She has been rebuffed.

As for Al-Hussaini, after leaving Oklahoma City, he went on to work at Boston's Logan International Airport, the point of origin for several for the 9/11 hijackers, including Mohammad Atta.

One more thing. That motel where McVeigh, Nichols and Al-Hussaini were seen together was later visited (pre-9/11) by Atta, Zacharias Moussaouy and Marwan Al-Shehi.

Ok, i have seen several links on this sensitive subject matter (that Iraq had something ...or maybe everything ....to do with the Oklahoma City building). I am not agreeing with the theory, but I will also not ridicule something that might very well be true! Hence i am as neutral to this as one can possibly be.

However i have a couple of questions i would like answered. Here they are:

1) If this is the case why did the Clinton Administration let it pass? I know it is easy for the answer to be 'Klingtoon was a traitor' but even if that is the case why? As in a real answer that makes sense instead of rhetoric! Clinton had major issues (and he still has), and if you consider the Chinese liasons he allowed stuff during his administration that are very un-American and even threatening to US national security! However did he(together with the upper echelons of his administration) invite Iraqi agents to wreak havoc on Americans? He may be a bad guy however i would like to know the logic to why he would allow such a thing. It seems a little too far off even for him.

2) Secondly (and possibly by far more important) when GW came into office, and this informationw as true, why did he not immediately do something about it? If there was verifiable proof that Iraq took part in the OKC bombing i think there would not even be talk of war ....it would be war instantaneous! And if GW had this information his call for taking care of Iraq would not have calls for 'international unity' or a strive to develop cohesion in the UN before an attack. He would strike Iraq. Furthermore his push for war would be made extremely easy if this info was to be given.

3) Thirdly why has it not made it to congress in the way befitting such info? Currently the most this stuff has done is become 'Urban Legend' talk in Washington, nothing more. I think Republicans would have amazing ire if this stuff was true and happened in Clinton's watch with his cooperation and also this information would probably ensure that the number of Democrats elected outside California are less than 5!!!! However this topic is basically not hot in Washington when if it was true it would be the powder keg of powder kegs and would probably shift American politics in a way unseen since the anti-Mason party! This would be huge!

Anyways i am not here to agree nor refute this information. However there are many places that make little sense, and others that just do not add up. However let me say if this was to turn out to be true it would be the biggest conspiracy since forever and a potent blow for the Democrats.

This issue needs to be clarified or it will become like the Kennedy assasination conspiracy with some swearing they saw an extra shooter behind a grassy knoll and documentaries on the History Channel on 'The Real Truth behind the OKC bombing.' In essence it would become mere bar talk. Hence they should make sure this information is released.... if it truly exists and is not just vestigial info some reporters will not let go off! After all to this day there are some who swear Kennedy was killed by the mob, or the govt, or the soviets (depending on who has the spookiest aspect that month); and that Roswell really happened. If nothing is released to prove Iraq had something to do with this then eventualiy this will become just another conspiracy theory. Hence the need to verify if it is true or not.

However there are several holes in this (the OKC connection) trhat make me feel a lot of stuff behind this theory is largely speculation and circumstancial stuff that could be applied to any rogue state. I thinkt hat there is some basis to this theiry, but the reason it has not been emphasised is due to the fcat there are no facts and the linkages to Iraq are at best nebulous! Ths the silence. Because if this was hard evidence the stance on Iraq would be totally different and the Democratic party would be in a lot of pain.

However what should be known is that as long as this info remains in the shadows it will always be nothing more than a conspiracy! That is how conspiracies are created ...basically people (including some with soldi credentials) who say something that is against orthodox belief and without hard evidence but merely personal accounts from eyewitnesses and investigation work. Again let me bring up the Kennedy thing: I have seen people with some credentials say it was a conspiracy, i have seen some 'expert' show 'evidence' from the Zippruder (sp?) that at least one shot had to come from a different angle, and there are dozens of eyewitnesses who saw the 'other shooters!' However this is considered to be nothing more than a conspiracy believed by crackpots and those who rage against the machine. Essentially this OKC-Iraqi thing will become like the Kennedy thing if it is not rectified. Or like another neo-conspiracy that has been making rounds, and that is the Downing of Flight 800! there are still reports it was a Stinger missile, and just like any good conspiracy there is all sorts of 'evidence' including apparent photos of a streaking missile and 'sworn testimony' that the FBI tampered the evidence to cover up stuff. However due to the lack of cohesive action and official investigation that says otherwise the Flight 800 has become just another crankpot conpsiracy.

With that said there is always the chance Kennedy was assasinated by men not a man, and that a stinger was used against an American flight! I do not believe in any of these conspiracies, but i am open to the fact that something might have happened that is not know (i.e that is a politically correct way for me to say they might be true). However i do not believe in them.

The OKC-Iraqi conspiracy will go the way of the Kennedy assasination, the Roswell incident, the Philadelphia experiment, Flight 800, and Sasquatch frolicking in the woods! Essentially disappear into the realm of anarchists and the like!

And this will happen whether Iraq was involved or not! As long as nothing is done about this it will become one of many conspiracies. Hence if there is anything to this it needs to be brought to the open as soon as possible. And if it is true then Saddam needs to be taken out with the full fury of the US military! And i am talking something 'sweet' not just a JDAM dropped on him. What do i think would be 'sweet?' If it was logistically possible (i seriously doubt though it would) imagine if Team Force Delta 'napped Saddam and brought him to the US? That would be a major accomplishment. however such an act is next to impossible since Saddam is a very efficient rat when it comes to hiding and using doubles. However a guy can wish ......

OK, I will bite and overlook the fact that you are such a newbie around here to have not been through much of the discussion during the Clinton impeachment era. What I am about to respond should not be viewed as complete answers, only sufficient ones, to explain the present state of this conspiracy -- a term which to your open mind appears to imply meaning something that is implicitly doubtful (since you conclude "the OKC-Iraqi conspiracy will go the way of ..."). Nevertheless, the amount of tin-foil being worn by those non-newbies of politically frozen attitudes who should know better here prompts a slight comment. Regarding your points:

The best and obvious guess I have is domestic political value of this to Clinton is that it allowed the continuance of the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" (Hillary and Morris Dees) propaganda thesis promulgated early in the Clinton regime. Remember politics is item number one to the Clintons. Whether or not the imported Iraqis were actually intended for harm here is hard to tell but unnecessary to the political goals. And that VRWC thesis is what has continued to this day to be pushed in the media -- leaving many doubtful about "extremism" of the right.
George, you will recall, chose to "move on" as part of his political 'strategery.' Perhaps he at least understood the rope-a-dope legalist morass he could get into if he stepped into fighting Clinton directly. Also keep in mind that a major part of the unionized government employ still to this day are Clinton holdovers -- George really has little control or support from most of the inflated beast. Further, the FBI appears to have been embarrassed by failing to keep a grip on their attempted sting operation and would rather not make that visible, especially because of international linkages (Strassmeir), it is a domestic agency after all.
Congress never removed Clinton for the same reasons. Perhaps Hillary's FBI dossiers on members of Congress mean something and have a purpose? The forces involved are pretty constraining and those Congresscritters don't want to lose their jobs by being embarrassed. Republicans are mostly RINO's without backbone and are afraid of Hillary. Seen Terry Lenzner recently? Who runs the Dem. Party, anyway?

None of this may likely do anything to convince you of what are ongoing issues, but someone needs to say the obvious while facing into the wind of media-constucted misunderstandings you have fallen into.

If you are serious about being interested dig up some of the articles on my profile. Unfortunately the owner of this forum agrees with your views and may be intending to remove this info.

Now, was that any help?

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.