Posted on 04/03/2006 8:13:43 AM PDT by doug from upland
ROHRBACHER DEMANDING NEW PROBE OF OKC
Jayna Davis and I had an interesting phone conversation this morning. She is still waiting for a plane ticket to D.C. and an invitation to testify about the OKC bombing. Neither has been forthcoming.
Is it good news that Rep. Dana Rohrbacher (R-CA) is demanding a new probe of the OKC bombing? Maybe. But is it going to really get to the truth about the Middle Eastern connection to OKC? Maybe not.
Last year, David Schippers, famous for prosecuting both the Chicago mob and William Jefferson Blythe Clinton, flew to OKC to meet Jayna and her witnesses. Dave spent 12 hours grilling 14 of them on camera.
When he was finished, he told Jayna that, with just three of them, he would get a federal indictment of Hussain al-Hussaini in one day. FBI agent Dan Vogel told her he could do the same -- with one of her witnesses. That is how credible they were.
So why, Congressman Rohrbacher, did you tell Jayna that the committee has no budget to fly her to Washington, D.C.? What is the problem? Are we finally going to get the truth or is this grandstanding?
Andreas Carl Strassmeier has six witnesses saying that he was building a fence at the time of the bombing. He couldn't have been with McVeigh. Of 1100 fingerprints tied to the crime scene, none are Strassmeier's. Not one of 30,000 witnesses ties Strassmeier to the crime.
Here is a question for you, Congressman. Well, actually seven questions. Ten months ago, Jayna gave these to you in writing and still is waiting for the answers.
1. Why has the Justice Department/FBI not issued an official on-the-record statement exonerating Hussain Al-Hussaini of complicity in the Oklahoma City bombing? Has the DOJ provided Congress with Hussain Al-Hussaini’s whereabouts for the critical hours of the morning of April 19, 1995?
2. Why did the FBI never question Hussain Al-Hussaini about the bombing?
3. Why did the FBI previously suspect Al-Hussaini’s employer of ties to the Palestinian Liberation Organization?
4. Why were the original motel registration logs where witnesses testified McVeigh checked in with Al-Hussaini’s Iraqi cohort the evening of April 18, 1995, never returned to the establishment’s owner?
5. Whatever happened to the brown Chevrolet pickup that was seen carrying Middle Eastern suspects from the bomb site? The Oklahoma City police found fingerprints inside the recovered truck. Why were these prints not compared to the immigration files of the three Middle Eastern nationals whom witnesses observed in that getaway vehicle before, during, and after the bombing?
6. Why did the Bureau rebuff my efforts to surrender the witness statements and supporting evidence in September 1997? Why did the FBI withhold from the defense teams the twenty-two witness affidavits that I delivered to FBI Special Agent Dan Vogel in January 1999?
7. Why were the prior warnings issued by the Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare that predicted an Islamic attack in the “heart of the U.S.” disregarded as an indicator of foreign participation?
Congressman Rohrbacher needs to bring Jayna and Schippers to meet with the committee in closed session. The committee needs to see the on camera interviews of 14 eye witnesses. It needs to be done in closed session to protect the witnesses. They stepped forward as patriots facing great risk.
The real story of OKC should have been told long ago. Let's finally get it told now. Bill Clinton did not want to deal with Middle East terror on our soil. He wanted this to be domestic terror. That is what he got. Who are those deep inside the FBI who are responsible for continuing the coverup?
The truth about OKC will forever end any remaining legacy of the impeached William Jefferson Blythe Clinton. Had he dealt with OKC, 9-11 could have been prevented. He ignored Middle East terror, created the vast right wing conspiracy, and his Kool-Aid drinkers dug in their heels. He would be held accountable for nothing. They stood with him no matter what because they had to fight the dreaded right wing. That is how Clinton divided America as never before.
If anyone would like to join me in calling the congressman, he is at (202) 225-2415.
An example of reelection politics.
BTTT
Why didn't the defense find it? Hmmmm. Poor attorneys? On one of the most high-profile cases in American history? Seems unlikely. I'm just saying, it's like the JFK assassination: when you start probing a little further, you end up implicating hundreds and hundreds of honest Americans. But, I'll continue to look at the stuff as it emerges.
Again, lots of "likely" and "possibly" and "maybe," like shooters on a grassy knoll. What we have, though, are TWO defense attorneys in separate cases who had both a legal and financial incentive to make this case---not air tight, hell, all they had to do was create "reasonable doubt," but they couldn't even do that. That says a LOT.
~~~~~~~~
Juries can only consider evidence prsented to them in court. In all these instances, the prosecutors filtered the evidence very heavily to obtain the (predetermined, IMO) results they and their masters wanted.
Read the transcripts of the McVeigh trial, for instance. Of the nearly two dozen eyewitnesses who saw McVeigh in OKC, none (zero, zip, nada) of them were allowed to testify.
Why? Because all of those witnesses had testified (deposed) that McVeigh had someone else with him!
I have a question: Did you read the book The Third Terrorist? I believe it will answer a lot of your questions.
I own the book and lent it to people in my neighborhood who thought I was a nut. And two of them were democrats. After they read the book, they thought the war in Iraq was justified and they found Jayna's research compelling.
Perhaps McVeigh, who always thought of himself as a patriot, did not want to disclose information that would associate himself with foreign terrorists and brand him as a traitor.
McVeigh did serve in the Gulf War. However, he questioned whether he was doing the right thing. He said in an interview, ""I thought ... what right did I have to come over to this person's country and kill him? How did he ever transgress against me?"
"What did we do to Sudan? What did we do to Afghanistan? Belgrade? What are we doing with the death penalty? It appears they use violence as an option all the time."
Asked whether it is acceptable for citizens to use violence if the government uses it, he said, "I'll let my explanation stand for itself."
IMO McVeigh would rather be viewed as a patriot taking on the USG over Ruby Ridge and Waco than assisting AQ and Iraq in retribution for the Gulf War.
Bumping you.
Do you have a ping list for the OKC bombing?
If so, please add me to the list.
They pretty much already have, complete with the X on the map
Credit freeper Bush is the Man:
McVeigh Cites Osama Bin Laden in Letter to Fox News
Friday, April 27, 2001 1:41 a.m. EDT
A month after a former NBC News reporter went public with evidence of links between Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh and Middle Eastern terrorist Osama bin Laden, McVeigh himself has cited bin Laden in a letter to the Fox News Channel.
Responding to questions from FNC's Rita Cosby, McVeigh rejected some of the labels that have been applied to him, then tossed in the chilling reference to the notorious Muslim terrorist.
"Most of the insults are meritless and quite often absurd, so I don't pay them much attention," wrote McVeigh. "Hitler? Absurd. (Geraldo Rivera uses this same analogy, so Keating and Ashcroft are in good company!) Coward? This label would make Orwell proud – it is double think at its finest. Collateral Damage? As an American news junkie; a military man; and a Gulf War veteran, where do they think I learned that? (It sure as hell wasn't Osama Bin Laden!)"
In the next sentence, McVeigh mentioned convicted World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef, in perhaps another indication of a Middle Eastern connection to his own crime.
"For all else, I would refer you to my enclosed paper 'Hypocrisy,' and to Ramzi Yousef's statement to the court just prior to his sentencing. I filter all labels and insults thusly."
In the Jan. 8, 1998, court statement to which McVeigh referred, Yousef proclaimed, "Yes, I am a terrorist and proud of it as long as it is against the U.S. government," before being sentenced to 240 years in jail.
Last month former NBC reporter Jayna Davis told Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly that compelling evidence links McVeigh to a Middle Eastern terrorist cell ultimately controlled by bin Laden.
And, as ever,
FWIW, thanks to a pending visit, I'm planning to make another "granddaughters in the hammock" photo soon! :-)
Um, McVeigh had a defense attorney, right? Isn't it his job to call those people? Did he not know about them? If not, was he that stupid?
See #94.
It's like Pearl Harbor and FDR "knowing." You ought to see the rage by the decrypters and decoders when someone suggests that we "knew" and that these decrypts were passed on to FDR, because it IMPLICATES everyone of them as dishonest and killers. Well, to an extent, that is what this means for FOUR juries.
I say again, I remain open, but very, very cautiously so.
Again, think of it this way: all EITHER attorney had to do was to introduce just enough evidence to create reasonable doubt and McVeigh doesn't die and Nichols gets a lighter sentence.
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.