[deleted]

Don't forget Holder's involvement in the Fast and Furious coverup.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2013/10/06/will-fast-and-furious-justice-finally-befall-eric-holder/

[deleted]

Same template, increased scale each time.

Fast and the furious was on a way smaller scale than 9/11 and honestly was just a poorly thought out anti cartel op that was exploited by Fox News to make Obama look worse in an election year. Those Cartels would have had guns anyway when they shot that Jet skier I don't get the conspiracy or how it's a larger scale.

Possibly, but how do you know how deep the rabbit hole may be? This is a long time scheme the US govt has played involving guns, drugs, money and cartels, and not just in Latin/South America. We do this shit globally on a scale unimaginable by the average pinhead.

Fast and Furious was just the tip of the iceberg.

No Fast and Furious was absolutely on a much smaller scale than 9/11. Like one hundred thousand percent certainty that it was smaller. We're talking about 3,000 deaths and two wars and trillions of dollars of lost treasury vs a guy and his wife getting shot on a jet ski by narco terrorist who would have been armed any way.

It was a poorly thought out operation that sought to use guns as a means of tracking cartel activity as it was the easiest way to infiltrate them. And if like you say it's just the tip of the iceberg why the fuck would they admit to the program so readily and quickly when discovered or allow the transparency for such "sensitive information" to be exposed so easily during an election year in the very media most on here claim they control. It's incompetence and a poorly thought out op and is incomparable to 9/11. If you just want to speculate all day fine but good conspiracies rely on facts and evidence, and at the very least verifiable and reliable sources not some dumb bitch running her mouth on Facebook about something that is provably false like where Eric Holder was working in the 1990s. People mistake criticism of some of the theories on here for complacency ( or for the more special Among us as proof that there is a cover up, in some circular logical worm hole were the only facts that matter are the ones that fit their narrative) but it's more akin to people asking for a little bit of critical thinking and evidence for claims because any fool can make up some bullshit and say it's fact if the verification of information is deemed unnecessary.

Do you realize what sub you're in bro? It's Obama!!

Holy crap, I knew Holder was in deep with the authoritarian crowd, but I didn't know he'd been there for that long! Then again, considering his recent efforts to re-establish an anti-"domestic terrorism" committee, it makes sense that he would've hated patriot militias as much now as he did back in the 90s.

what if these events shaped Eric Holder and made him into the authoritarian. Not the other way around?

It's possible. But in that case, he's just a dumbass, instead of a moderately intelligent tool. At a certain point, the distinction becomes moot in my book.

These people aren't fools. They know exactly what they are doing. And they are very patient.

This is a good point. How come Lon Horiuchi never got his big payday (or did he and we are unaware..)?

what if these events shaped Eric Holder and made him into the authoritarian. Not the other way around?

The question is: would it even matter?

I guess the point I was getting at was, for example, if a child is lying dead and mutilated on the kitchen floor, does it really matter what lead their murderer to commit the act?

Eric Holder is doing and has done horrible things in his life. Whether he has "valid reasons" or not is mostly irrelevant in my opinion. Even assuming the best for him, that events in his life made him that way, that just sounds like making excuses for him. Surely many others in his position wouldn't have responded the same way.

I tend to think that he probably has always been a psychopath though.

Fair enough. I think I'm a bit biased by the fact that I strongly suspect that Eric Holder has always been a subversive manipulator and shadow government stooge.

Eric Holder was a leftist revolutionary in his days at Columbia, actually participating in an armed takeover of the local ROTC building demanding that it be turned into a Malcom X Lounge. His history is that of someone who is at war with traditional American society and no doubt he saw the patriot movement as part of that society he wishes to overthrow.

Exactly. He wants to get rid of patriots. It's bullshit and racist. He says if you don't like Obamas policies, your racist. It's fucking retarded

Leftist organizations have always had infiltrators.

20+ years is a long time. Didn't even know that he was assistant attorney general in 1995

Lot's of bureaucrats make their bones around incidents that become subjects of conspiracy theories. Current SEC head Mary Jo White investigated the 1993 WTC bombing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Jo_White

So what youre telling me is that people who are appointed to high office often come from high profile incidents? Nah, not possible.

Seriously - this is why people label "conspiracy theorists" as crazy. No critical thinking.

"So what youre telling me is that people who are appointed to high office often come from high profile cover-ups."

See how that works now? I would say you are the one not breaking the surface.

And this evidence of a cover-up is where?

Actually read the article and then get back to me.

haha scroll up bro

And now he's orchestrating Operation Gladio-style mass shootings in order to "brainwash the public" about guns.

Oh, by the way, Joe Biden wrote the Patriot Act, in 1995.

Speaking of investigations… Lee H. Hamilton was the head of the congressional task force assigned to examine the October Surprise controversy. He was the chairman of the Select Committee to Investigate Covert Arms Transactions with Iran (the Iran Contra affair), and the vice chairman of the 9/11 Commission.

no mention of Horiuchi?

i was just about to bring this up but needed sources

Source it is this just speculation on your part?

[deleted]

So you do realize the first few links discredit the theory particularly the time line of Holder's career that could anyway link him to Waco on thedailykos, right?

[deleted]

I looked at quite a few others there aren't any reputable sources saying it even has a thread of truth and the ones that I do trust as having the integrity to not pull stuff out of their ass say it was made up someone on Facebook and that holder was working in the courts at the time.

Good piece. Not a huge Gore Vidal fan, but he was an interesting character, for sure.

This paragraph is particularly telling:

The C.I.A.’s former director William Colby is also made nervous by the disaffected. In a chat with Nebraska state senator John DeCamp (shortly before the Oklahoma City bombing), he mused, “I watched as the Anti-War movement rendered it impossible for this country to conduct or win the Viet Nam War.… This Militia and Patriot movement … is far more significant and far more dangerous for Americans than the Anti-War movement ever was, if it is not intelligently dealt with.… It is not because these people are armed that America need be concerned.” Colby continues, “They are dangerous because there are so many of them. It is one thing to have a few nuts or dissidents. They can be dealt with, justly or otherwise [my emphasis] so that they do not pose a danger to the system. It is quite another situation when you have a true movement—millions of citizens believing something, particularly when the movement is made up of society’s average, successful citizens.”

This is the reason they brought down OWS so swiftly.

In case anyone is on the fence about OWS being infiltrated, reddit's own /r/occupywallstreet was infiltrated briefly by the authoritarian cheerleaders behind /r/conspiratard and /r/EnoughPaulSpam.

• http://np.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/qren5/rows_brouhaha_recap/

I think it was the lack of organisation to be honest. The numbers of people involved were good, but it wasn't a cohesive movement, except for a strong sense of dissatisfaction. No one could agree on anything, and there were too many factions all with their own agendas.

The movement was infiltrated and co-opted as well as crucified in the bought and paid for MSM. You are literally regurgitating the CNN talking points.

Perhaps I'm psychic, having never watched CNN in my life?

Or perhaps the reason it failed is because it was a disorganised mess. A movement without clear goals and leaders to keep people focussed on those goals is generally going to fail, as OWS did.

Personally, I think they should learn from those failures and do it better next time, or society is going to continue to suck.

Blame-shifting to ideas like infilitration and the like (whilst it undoubtably occured to some extent) won't actually solve any problems whatsoever.

So that's your answer? "Do better next time?"

What do you think about the FBI and other government agencies literally putting plants within OWS to discredit it? Or monitoring the emails of members of the group to learn the locations of events and meetings? Or the MSM blatantly smearing and attacking the entire movement, only focusing on the "dumb hippies" and beating the masses over the head with the idea that it was a "disorganized mess" and that it was "destined to fail"?

The goals seemed pretty clear to me - Wall Street is corrupt to the core, income inequality is worse than it's ever been, and we aren't going to stand for it anymore. It's not like it's too complicated to figure out where the injustices in this country are largely coming from.

Do better next time is always good advice for any situation.

I don't think a few plants could really do much damage. There were thousands of people involved. Unless they were the spokespeople for it and steering it then they wouldn't be able to influence much from the crowd. If they weren't involved at that level, then they might do a bit of rabble-rousing, but too much of that and they'd out themselves.

The initial goals were good, and I think a lot of people (including myself) were really positive about it at the beginning but you had a lot of other groups turning up and trying to coast off the popularity like all these feminist groups (for example).

I'm all for equal rights, but OWS had precisely fuck all to do with feminism, and they promptly tried to hijack it for their own purposes.

If you Google OWS feminism, you'll see plenty of sites proclaiming "OWS is a feminist movement", which is of course nonsense.

The MSM are just a bunch of hacks these days. I don't expect any imaginative angles from them. They're always going to focus on the extremes of anything, because it gets them more page hits.

I don't think a few plants could really do much damage. There were thousands of people involved. Unless they were the spokespeople for it and steering it then they wouldn't be able to influence much from the crowd. If they weren't involved at that level, then they might do a bit of rabble-rousing, but too much of that and they'd out themselves.

Hell, look no further than bipolarbear and his infiltration of the reddit OWS leadership on this site to see that there were nefarious things going on at those levels.

All I'm saying is that constructive criticism is fine but at least know all of the things and people that were working directly against the movement. OWS scared someone or they wouldn't have bothered to go through so much effort to discredit and manipulate it.

The information was disseminated in more than a single television station. Perhaps you read it on the internet?

Yeah, that's probably it. OWS in its original form was still doomed to fail.

They needed a clearer message than "We don't like everything, and we want to you to change / fix everything!".

There's nothing the guys are the top are going to be able to do with that, even if they wanted to change / fix everything, which they don't.

OWS in its original form was meant to fail. The message was "Go outside and talk about something important to you."

That may or may not be true about the OW movement itself - but the fact is that hte USG was actively advising the various police departments and providing funding and equipment. Further, they had even put together a list of potential leaders of OWS that they were willing to assassinate if the movement couldn't have been brought down by other means.

Continuously parroting the talking points you just mentioned on every media outlet worked very well to undermine the movement.

Further, they had even put together a list of potential leaders of OWS that they were willing to assassinate if the movement couldn't have been brought down by other means.

Source?

Lots of hits by simple google search... but:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/06/30/1220039/-FBI-Kept-Quiet-About-OWS-Assasination-Plot-FOIA-Obtained-Docs-Show

Well, that doesn't really back up what you said. This shows someone/organization had planned to assassinate, but since the person/organization was redacted we don't know if this was USG, Militia, lone wolf (there's never a lone wolf).

It is very interesting that local law enforcement/OWS themselves weren't informed.

You just repeated the media talking points word for word.

Well, that is what happened. OWS was not as united as you might think, you had anarchists, big gov't liberals and tea partiers waving the same flag, among other demographics. Everyone agreed something was wrong, they all disagreed on what to do about it(other than physical protest).

Yeah but that has nothing to do with why they were taken down. Do you think the police wouldn't have busted them if they had a cohesive message? They would have gotten busted faster.

Exactly. Or the media would have completely distorted that message and then presented it to the US public like it was some kind of joke.

And for all we know, that is what happened.

I thought the message was quite clear myself: "Wall Street, corporate manipulation and greed has destroyed the country and the world economy. Lets all stand together and protest."

Pretty sure they police busted them because they were disrupting businesses. Granted, the businesses disrupted were commercial walk-in branches for major banks, but still... they'd do the same thing if people harassing a flower shop. It's their job.

The FBI had plans to assassinate OWS leaders with snipers on rooftops, FOIA documents show.

I almost wish they would have.

It would have been galvanizing.

Not when people are so brainwashed by the media. It would be completely slanted. They could say it was a result of infighting and label them all as violent and unstable.

Yeah we really need an attractive white martyr to catalyze things, as fucked up as that sounds.

I dont think race matters as much as attractiveness.

A martyr would tip the scales in our favor though.

The entire point of the protest was to demonstrate that lot of different people all thought there was a huge problem with the direction the country was going in.

With a focus on Wall Street and greed.

Hence the name Occupy Wall Street.

I heard the message loud and clear but the media somehow convinced everyone that they were supposed to make a power point presentation and present solutions for all of the millions of interconnecting problems in the country.

The sad thing is that the common people started buying that line, while at the same time the government dusted off some age old "park laws" and used that as way to squash the protest into nothing.

It was said best "If the US government cared as much about Wall St. regulations as they do about park rules, then we wouldn't be in this mess."

Agreed. The fact that they were disorganized, that some individual participants ah grossly misbehaved etc. doesn't mean it was too poorly executed, thus deserved or should be ignored by govt, or ridiculed by media.

Peacable assembly is the proper, legal way to indicate dissatisfaction with laws or policy (in the US). There were a lot of people in many US cities who were involved in OWS. Consider what had just happened in 2008. Things weren't getting better in 2010-2011. OWS, muddled or ultimately compromised by bad actors as it was, SHOULD have raised some red flags in federal and state government. They don't need OWS to tell them what they are doing wrong. They know, and they know how to make it change. That didn't happen. Look at things now. With benefit of hindsight, OWS was correct, as an early warning of rising inequality, corporate power and especially, financialization at the expense of everything, everyone else.

Interesting, because I don't really interact with the media much anymore.

So you were actually living in NYC at the time, drawing your conclusions from your surroundings while you stood protesting on Wall Street?

I'll take some down votes with you. There was some real support from middle America who was/is getting screwed by Wall St. People were angry and looking for direction. OWS failed to form a coalition and produce leadership.

So, who were the leaders and what were their positions and demands (solutions)?

What does that have to do with the police taking them down?

DeCamp was the dude who tried to bust open the pedophilia ring. I guess he was pretty close with Colby, found this on whale

"Quotes "What you have to understand, John, is that sometimes there are forces and events too big, too powerful, with so much at stake for other people or institutions, that you cannot do anything about them, no matter how evil or wrong they are and no matter how dedicated or sincere you are or how much evidence you have. This is simply one of the hard facts of life you have to face."--- Former CIA director and Cercle member William Colby giving advice to his friend senator John DeCamp, urging him to quit his investigations into the Franklin child abuse affair and to write a book about his experiences (The Franklin Coverup, 2nd edition, foreword)."

http://www.whale.to/b/franklin.html

Man history is crazy.

"Fluent in six languages and a law school graduate, John DeCamp, a native of Nebraska , went into the Army during the Vietnam War as an infantry captain and was later assigned to serve as a top staff aide to the Deputy U.S. Ambassador to Vietnam , William Colby, who was later named CIA director. Colby remained a close and life long friend of DeCamp.

...

Since taking on his investigation of the Franklin Savings & Loan debacle and its connection to high-level criminal activity, involving the laundering of funds for the CIA's Iran-contra arms-and-drugs smuggling operation and the sexual abuse of children used to compromise U.S. politicians in Nebraska and Washington, D.C., DeCamp is regularly reviled by the same newspaper that once praised him so thoroughly."

http://www.bushstole04.com/bushfascism/newly_posted_gannon_7A.htm

Lol excuse the source.

society’s average, successful citizens

Gotta kill/distract the middle-class.

I'll just repost this here, if that's allowed, as I think this article subtly supports half-truths, as I tried to point out, toward a new redirecting of the actually conspiracies:

"The revolution already happened among the boomers in the mid-90's. It was the militia movement. Do you see? Of course not, because they won the psycological war for yours and everyone else's mind that didn't care about the truth and sponsored with their minds and idle chitchat the narritive that Timothy McVeigh was linked to the militias, instead of the federal government. They convinced people with unproven speculation and allegations that Waco, and Ruby Ridge members were nuts. After McVeigh, the miltia essentially gave up and retreated to family and friends. That was your revolution. Now you frequent version 2.0 of their psyops campgain, Facebook and Reddit, or really, the internet. The youth have no idea still what they are up against. The next revolution will be a nice packaged one, it'll seem natural and everyone will rejoice. Ding your revolution is ready for you, just step out of the shadows and follow."

Spend some honest time with Waco, Ruby Ridge the Timothy McVeigh conspiracies, try understanding the movements that followed, not the bullshit Phil Donahue and others used to discredit partriots whiling to stand up. No movement will be all good, and can always be redirected, polluted, and lied about through disinformation, handled extremist, into just another evil. This is why information and understanding how people have been primed and how those misunderstandings can then be manipluated.

That is at least the premise for my other comment(s) in this tread.

"Pretext incidents, in themselves, are not sufficient to spark wars. Rumors and allegations about the tragic events must first spread throughout the target population. Constant repetition of the official version of what happened, spawns dramatic narratives that are lodged into public consciousness. The stories become accepted without question and legends are fostered. The corporate media is central to the success of such ‘psychological operations.’ Politicians rally people around the flag, lending their special oratory skills to the call for a military “response.” Demands for “retaliation” then ring out across the land, war hysteria mounts and, finally, a war is born." Richard Sanders, 2nd of May 2002

"People crushed by law, have no hopes but from power. If laws are their enemies, they will be enemies to laws; and those who have much to hope and nothing to lose, will always be dangerous." Edmund Burke

"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." Samuel Adams

Ding your revolution is ready for you, just step out of the shadows and follow."

Just step out of the shadows and change your Twitter icon, more like. You can always get people to do that.

This video was posted awhile back, which I managed to stumble upon last night, along with one other I'll share for anyone interested.

http://np.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/1jaysk/vice_one_of_americas_most_notorious_militias/

To get a full picture of how Timothy McVeigh was part of a government campgain to discredit and drive underground, the older pre-'internet generation' of truth seekers.

This video also covers Ruby Ridge, along with some of the aftermath.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-a0rg6Nn4T8

All three events are very closely tied, but from a federal government perspective, as well as a personal freedoms and information war perspectives, I believe. I think they pretty much come out and say Waco was a failed power play in an attempt to recover from the PR of ruby ridge. I would take it further and say they clearly made and example of Randy Weaver at a higher level, the same goes for Waco. This was a clear threat to anyone wishing to 'opt-out' of societies problems.

Personal experiences, granted, but I could tell stories about this, as while never in a militia, I have family that spread this information at the time in a very big way (VHS tapes, printouts, etc) that were not so subltly threatened into giving up after seeing most of american's response, they did so. They weren't interested in losing family members when people were so complicitly asleep.

Another good summary of Ruby Ridge and some of the following charges:

http://np.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/2ddgds/the_legend_of_ruby_ridge/cjogbsm

(I am borrowing from previous comments made elsewhere on this subreddit, by me)

If you would like to editorialize this all together in a bit more of a coherent way, please do, I'm a bit distracted by over consumption of caffine. The thoughts flow, but in no partiular order. :)

Stumbling upon your comment linking to a post of mine just made my day. Thanks man.

I think this topic should lead to /r/conspiracy next documentary of the week:

A Noble Lie

Almost as good as the New Pearl Harbour video is for 9/11.

this was a very good watch. well researched, very informative and hard to deny.

The bit about C4 in the parking garage should be widespread knowledge.

Very good movie.

I just want to add this here as well, hope it isn't off-topic:

And also:

Eglin Blast Effects Study

After the attack, US Air Force explosives experts at Eglin Air Force Base tested the official story by conducting a study of a three-story structure that resembled the Murrah Building structurally. The study, known as the Eglin Blast Effects Study (EBES), concluded that the explosive force from the ANFO bomb could not possibly have caused the pattern of destruction seen in the Murrah Building.

http://www.911research.wtc7.net/non911/oklahoma/index.html

Controlled Demolition Inc.

The same company on both cleanups with "Controlled Demolition" as the business name. How crazy is that?!

Sometimes the best place to hide is in plain sight.

OKC was the test run.

And also served a useful purpose.

This is an absolutely stunning article I read a while ago. I'll be back for some serious discussion after some real-world business but for now I just want to urge anyone on the fence about spending their time on it, just do it. Seriously.

As a child of the 80's I feel like I'm obligated to read this. I grew up in a culture where the name McVeigh was a household name synonymous with a crazy, malicious killer.

I was too young to follow the story when it happened, but I still want to know the truth.

Appreciate it. I've seen Rules of Engagement and it was pretty horrifying what they did there.

Painful how?

I remember when this came out, thinking it would change minds. Sadly another episode occurred which pretty much galvinized the terror threat crowd shortly after this hit the stand.

No social media then. Only MSM. I think it would have been different today.

I hope it would have been different today.

It probably wouldn't be any different today.

sigh

Actually there was plenty of social media around in 2001.

It wasn't as sophisticated as today but at the time we all thought it was amazing.

But I agree with your sentiment anyways. Maybe if it was like today things would have played out differently. A bigger part of me thinks that if the same thing played out today, the government would actually be able to use social media as their weapon against the minds of the masses.

I mean, look at the Boston Bombing. Essentially, millions of people were scanning through pictures and following their own leads and then out of nowhere the government came out and said: "Everybody stop, you are all wrong, these 2 guys did it. Look at these pictures of them."

And the pictures proved absolutely nothing more than the fact that those 2 guys were at the Boston Marathon. Yet everyone took it as the word of God himself and even reddit fell completely into line. People still joke about it like "remember when reddit detectives tried to solve the BB..." etc... In my opinion, that sentiment was also part of the campaign. Shame everyone who actually tried to get involved.

I mean, I could be totally wrong. Maybe those 2 brothers did do it. But the fact remains, they were sentenced to guilt with zero evidence other than the US government utilizing social media as a way to spread their verdict. These 2 did it. Here is your "proof". Move along.

(Even the fact that they fled means nothing when it is put in context. Imagine if you came home and saw that you and your brother were accused of the bombing. Fleeing seems like a pretty standard response.)

Supposedly there's a video of them putting the bags into the bins beforehand but even the governor of Massachusetts has not seen it. And then there's the convoluted story of their escape with that Asian guy hiding in a cupboard in a petrol station and all sorts of other weird crap.

The FBI found explosive residue in the sink of Dzokhar Tsarnaev's apartment.

Sign me up I'm convinced of guilt now.

And they put them in pressure cookers and made small bombs out of it. Deadly at close range but very primitive.

No evidence.

How anyone would trust what the FBI says without solid evidence is beyond me. Just look at their track record and history the organisation is bent as fuck. ^{now I'm on a list}

Don't worry, you already were.

That's probably true I love reading about this stuff

Anytime.

Sure they did...

No social media then. Only MSM.

Very wrong. Talk radio was the social media of the '90s. The radio business was mostly about music and concentrated in the FM band because of the superior fidelity of the signal. AM stations were cheap and plentiful and often locally owned as they were ignored by the big money. The patriot network sprang up there. The Peoples' Radio Network was an interactive format for people to spread information without the MSM in addition to independent newsletters and papers. Gun shows were also a nexus for politically independent dissent. Don't forget that Ham radio was much more popular than it is today and it could potentially reach around the world.

This is a cracking read. For users who are short on time, page 6 onward is where the real details of the investigation begin. Vidal's writing is excellent though, so the whole thing is worth the time.

e2a: As per discussion - what do you think was of particular interest, OP?

Yeah, that was what I understood to be a fairly widespread opinion of what happened at Waco. It's certainly true that the official account is ridiculous.

After the events of April 19 a small number of people alleged that the FBI intentionally set the fire at the compound. Those accusations are utterly false, as demonstrated by the evidence discussed above conclusively establishing that the Davidians set the fire. In addition, a nationally recognized team of arson experts (see discussion below) has also concluded that the Davidians started the fire, that the fire could not have been started by accident at a single point of origin, and that the gas delivery systems the FBI used were completely nonincendiary.

The Fire Development Analysis In addition to the arson investigation, which focused on the cause and origin of the fire, two experts from the University of Maryland's Department of Fire Protection Engineering traveled to Waco to investigate how the fire had developed and spread. Those two experts prepared a written "Fire Development Analysis" dated September 8, 1993. They reached the following conclusions: 1. The fires in each of the three points of origin grew very quickly, each resulting in full room involvement within two minutes of initiation. 2. The rapid growth rates of the fires resulted from an ignition source, probably liquid fuel, deliberately placed in each of the three points of origin. 3. The rapid growth rates of the fires could not have been caused by a CEV accidentally tipping a lantern, nor by the chemical (methylene chloride) used as the dispersal agent for the CS tear gas. 4. The strong winds did not significantly affect the fire growth rates inside the compound. The wind affected the external spread of flames, but not the initial rapid growth of the three fires to full room involvement. 5. The tank-made openings on the first floor of the compound could have had some effect on the fire growth, but more likely provided fresh air to areas of refuge for some of the occupants. 6. The compound residents had sufficient time to escape the fire, if they had so desired.

At 5:59 a.m., an individual answered the phone, where Sage had been waiting on the other end of the line. The ensuing conversation was short. Sage said "[W]e're in the process of putting tear gas into the building. This is not an assault. We will not enter the building." The individual responded, "You are going to spray tear gas into the building?" Sage replied, "In the building . . . no, we are not entering the building." The telephone was subsequently thrown outside. As soon as the phone was thrown out the window Sage began broadcasting the following message, read from a prepared script, over the loudspeakers to all the occupants of the compound: We are in the process of placing tear gas into the building. This is not an assault. We are not entering the building. This is not an assault. Do not fire your weapons. If you fire, fire will be returned. Do not shoot. This is not an assault. The gas you smell is a non-lethal tear gas. This gas will temporarily render the building uninhabitable. Exit the compound now and follow instructions.

You are not to have anyone in the tower. The tower is off limits. No one is to be in the tower. Anyone observed to be in the tower will be considered to be an act of aggression and will be dealt with accordingly.

If you come out now, you will not be harmed. Follow all instructions. Come out with your hands up. Carry nothing. Come out of the building and walk up the driveway toward the Double-E Ranch Road. Walk toward the large Red Cross flag.

Follow all instructions of the FBI agents in the Bradleys. Follow all instructions.

You are under arrest. This standoff is over.

We do not want anyone hurt. Follow all instructions. This is not an assault. Do not fire any weapons. We do not want anyone hurt.

Gas will continue to be delivered until everyone is out of the building.

Sage repeated this message, over and over again, until the fire finished burning later that day.

"Craddock advised that when the Bradley came in through the front entrance, they started moving fuel. Craddock believes that the compound had a total of approximately one dozen, one gallon containers of lantern fuel and that they had been located in the lobby area. He said he saw a lot of people grabbing fuel containers and moving them to other areas. Craddock believes that possibly three or four of these containers had been put next to the window that had already been knocked out by the Bradley on the southern side of1the chapel area. Craddock said he had heard someone talking about shifting the fuel from the hallway near the chapel to the (northern?) side window of the chapel. . . . He said he had heard someone complain about fuel being spilled inside.

. . .

Craddock indicated that he had heard shouts about starting the fire.

. . .

Craddock said that he did not believe the fire in the chapel was the first fire because before the fire in the chapel had begun, he had seen smoke outside. Craddock also said that he had heard someone say, 'Light the fire,' and that he had also heard someone else say, 'Don't light the fire.'"

-testimony from Graeme Craddock one of the surviving camp davidians

Incredibly intriguing read. I'd never heard any of this information before and as someone who was very young when this event occured; it's not something I had examined before.

I remember McVeigh was put to death and the president came on TV, his face twisted with glee. I had never seen such a thing. Horrible memory, maybe it's on YouTube.

[deleted]

My take on that is that it is weak sauce and it doesn't justify terror attacks.

I can understand the position, I maintain it is morally wrong though. However, if this was some sort of false-flag/manufactured event/allowed to happen type affair then effectively the feds destroyed their own, which is even more of an egregious moral crime.

Just to add the bits of particular interest to me were the specific instances of FBI non-involvement in chasing up suspect #3 and ergo his potential as an informant/undercover, and the bit about how the truck bomb couldn't possibly have had the power to demolish the building alone.

Don't forget a copy of A Nobel Lie in the OP.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DV4uuzgl5ig

Woah, you're back....

This information about Eric Holder is new to me though I do remember reading that he was in the Justice Department under Clinton. I did not know that he authorized the FBI to provide explosives to McVeigh and Nichols as part of a government 'sting' operation called PATCON short for Patriot Conspiracy.

This got to me: recorded shrieks of dying rabbits. I had to go look up an example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-3z-TjnqB4 (safe)

Why would our gov do this to our people?

Also see: Oliver Stone calls on US military to stop dismembering and torturing live animals.

Killing innocent people is wrong, regardless of motivation.

If somehow you start to get on board with the idea of acceptable civilian losses, then you can finally understand the government/terrorist mindset of "anything goes".

McVeigh went to my old high school and all the teachers at the time said there was no way he would do such a thing that he was a very nice guy. they could have been completely wrong or there could have been other factors involved with the bombing

ayy lmao

Well, I don’t think he committed it because he was deranged or misinterpreting reality.… He was overly sensitive, to the point of being a little paranoid, about the actions of the government. But he committed the act mostly out of revenge because of the Waco assault, but he also wanted to make a political statement about the role of the federal government and protest the use of force against the citizens. So to answer your original question, it was a conscious choice on his part, not because he was deranged, but because he was serious.

Something about this part gets me.

Excellent. These case studies are instrumental to realizing the degree of control that the modern nation state, and in particular the US global empire, are able, willing, and motivated to attain. This kind of thing has to be articulated at some level for it to happen. The best way to articulate it is NOT to, in other words, to make it happen without expressly stating so. So only a few people need to be in on it, within just a few agencies that are already inherently protected from view.

In the US this kind of institutionalize strategy sometimes called "persistent tension" has had several generations of professional spooks who have cut their teeth on it. Foreign or domestic, the techniques have merged.

The Last Empire: The Final Days of the Soviet Union by Serhii Plokhy, review: 'fascinating and readable'

Cult awareness network is a terrorist organisation on the homeland. They don't like apostates.

I want to know how the cops knew to look for ammonia residue on him just hours after the bombing happened. Also why would this considered out of the ordinary anyway, I mean this was in freakin Oklahoma. I would think not finding fertilizer residue on someone out of the ordinary. Then again it's been awhile since I read up on this subject so my recollection may be shaky.

He was trying to stop the CIA drug running which was headquartered at OKC.

ayy lmao

All I have to say about this situation is that I'd believe it. And it sucks that anything is okay when the government officials do it, but when a civilian does it, bold face lies are told and only people like us would understand the truth. Please keep your eyes open like you do. Conspiracists are what help keep faith in a corrupt, ignorant world.

OP, after doing research on the matter, it seems Mcveigh was a nobel man, do you think he could have been silenced through threats on his loved ones? Just like every big 'event' in America the accused is very rarely allowed to talk, and when they are they don't say much.

have we all realized all these spectacular media events have been happening very frequently? they brought their soap operas to fox news

"Apparently, he was making and selling crystal meth; he was also—what else in these sick times?—not a Man of God but a Pedophile."

"Apparently"? I'm sorry? I think he means allegedly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQjlpK9OzNM

Just another dosing of the truth blanantly mixed with poison. No wonder this got stickied.

not a Man of God but a Pedophile.

That's interesting since most the pedophiles I've seen lately were men of god. In fact, they even had robes and funny hats to signify it. Fucking hypocrisy.

I'm sorry, but I'm interested in the truth, not some old fart's speculation. This is just a trash piece from a writer with no journalistic integrity.

Gore Vidal, no journalistic integrity....

Sure thing buddy.

Since you decided to quit reading after the 4th paragraph I am not even going to ask if you have read any of his books.

You're speculating on his intentions. However, I'm pointing out what he wrote and that a more correct word was not just intuitive, but not something to overlook. I misunderstood nothing sir.

"Apparently" is the correct word in the context because he is saying it in a sarcastic tone which aligns with his further comments about how much the media sensationalizes and distorts reality.

But it is nice to see that you actually made it to the 4th paragraph of an article that spans nine pages before finding a lame excuse to give up.

Just another dosing of the truth blanantly mixed with poison.

Are you actually drawing this conclusion based on the fact that the author chose to use the word "apparently" versus "allegedly"?

I believe in a subtle information game being played, even on this sub-reddit. I will not bother explaining my experiences in this and why I honed in on this case, I will only ask you this: does he [in this article] explain that all of these allegations have been dropped as there was insufficient proof? Something can subtly lend itself to previously primed points of propaganga without an all-out supporting of the lie. It's done in our media constantly.

I don't generally continue reading something once it's evident to me the author is compromising truth, even subtly. I'm not judging the other works by this author, just this piece.

You mean allegations against the guy at Waco?

Vidal is definitely implying that the media calling him a meth-dealer and a pedo is complete bullshit. So yeah, he is inferring that there was insufficient proof to make those claims.

I'll take that answer as a 'no', since it doesn't directly answer my question at all.

If I say:

"Apparently reddit is full of shills" and never re-address the validity of that statement to it's credit or discredit, in the context of previous conversations throughout reddit, I could easily be lending myself to whichever bias the reader already has. However if I am merely wanting to cite previous opinions, while clearly not addressing their validity, I think "allegedly" is required.

We are doomed to repeat history if we don't address these kind of details in earnest. I could probably pick the rest of this writing apart in consistent fashion, but as I've already posted a few alternatives, I'll let the readers of reddit decide what to fill their minds with.

Listen, I agree with almost everything you have been saying after the first comment.

But check out this detail.

"Apparently reddit is full of shills."

"Apparently, reddit is full of shills."

That comma in the second one speaks volumes. Especially when taking into account the context of the sentence as in:

• "Meanwhile, the Media were briefed regularly on the evils of David Koresh. Apparently, he was making and selling crystal meth; he was also—what else in these sick times?—not a Man of God but a Pedophile."

Do you sense the sarcasm added by the added thought "what else in these sick times?"

Do you see the comma after the word "apparently" asking the reader to pause after that word before continuing the sentence?

Vidals words are full of these subtle hints of sarcasm and mockery. Even later in the same paragraph:

• God saw to it that no F.B.I. man was hurt while more than 80 cult members were killed, of whom 27 were children.

Those four words also define the rest of the sentence as sarcasm.

I am of the opinion that It doesn't and won't speak volumes to the average reader who is most likely primed from the 90's to believe Koresh was a pedo, but I'll comment that I'm drawing a very blurry line in the sand if only focusing on this one sentence. I tried providing the more overarching reason I found this sentence to perturb me in a larger relation to this article.

I remember when this happened. Every day, they were coming up with new ways to make him seem like a monster.

It was pretty disturbing.

It's when I first actually noticed double speak in the media.

I'm pretty sure the incredulity at the claims was implied. I'm also pretty sure Vidal meant exactly what he wrote. He did have quite a bit of practice at writing.

It's no accident that this supports the common narrative more than dispels the lies. These are the blurred lines that should be railed against and never justified.

Once again, if you had bothered to read past the 4th paragraph you would see that this article raises numerous questions that are far from the "common narrative".

"The meaning of Timothy McVeigh, what you think you know about the OKC bombing and what you should know about Waco."

Proceeds to list 1 source of a secondhand account of what Timothy McVeigh allegedly told Gore Vidial while on death row in a vanity fair article in 2001.

Ah Gore Videl

Upon his death, his nephew, Burr Steers, told the New York Times:

"Mr. Steers said Mr. Vidal was terrified that Mr. Buckley had evidence that Mr. Vidal had sex with underage men. “Jerry Sandusky acts,” Ms. Straight said, referring to the former Penn State assistant football coach convicted of child molestation.

Mr. Steers said: "I know Buckley had a file on him that Gore feared. It would make sense if that material was about him having underage sex. Gore spent a lot of time in Bangkok, after all. Gore also had a very weird take on the abuse perpetrated by Catholic priests. He would say that the young guys involved were hustlers who were sending signals.”[109]

What a great source you found

Vidal was reported to have suffered from "Wernicke-Korsakoff, a syndrome characterized by a number of symptoms, including confusion and hallucination" in his final years and to have been a heavy and consistent drinker after the death of Austen in 2003.[109]

Wanna find another source, bro?

Article written in 2001. Gore supposedly an alcoholic after 2003. Also "suffered hallucinations" in the final years of his life (died in 2012). So, how does any of what you say harm credibility of the article in the OP?

Gattaca Edit: in all seriousness it's an interesting perspective but is not everything you need to know about mcveigh, or Waco and didn't really introduce any new information to me. If you want an interesting read about Waco read the investigation files, read about david koresh (the head of the camp davidians) and how he thought parts of the bible were written specifically about him... You know since he was Jesus reincarnated. How he willing put all those children in danger because he refused to cooperate with authorities who had a warrant. How the fire was started from 3 points of origin from the inside of the bunker by the camp davidians. How Timothy mcveigh was reprimanded in the military for trying to wear a white power shirt. How he thought he was Luke skywalker. How this whole story is just covered in crazy.

Its probably impossible to know everything there is to know about either event. I am pretty well read in both subjects. Just thought this alternate perspective added to the understanding or lack thereof, of McVeigh.

My comment was pointing out that while it's well written, doesn't even scratch the surface of what you need to know about mcveigh or Waco or the okc bombing

Agreed, I misunderstood your original point.

Article seems lacking in more detail.

I like it, I just want to see more background on everything.

Maybe I missed something.

The one thing this article is not lacking, is detail.

Wow, I guess I never thought about it like that. The US government has done some naughty stuff so it's ok, nay, good to drive a pickup truck packed with explosives to a federal office building and blow up hundreds of people, including kids. Those lil' shills should have known better than to stand in the way of a white nationalist patriot at war with the US government.

I don't think the article was meant to make excuses for the bombing. If that's all you want to take from it then that's your choice, but it seems churlish to ignore the vast majority of the content which is absolutely not about justification.

So in your mind, anyone who asks the question "why" = a full on supporter of the crimes committed.

Congrats, the media turned you out perfectly.

I don't think it was the media

Seriously, you people are fucking disgusting to have the gall to defend Timothy McVeigh. Spew all the small governnt NWO BS you want, the man was a skinhead who killed 19 KIDS under the age of 6.

Did you read Gore Vidal's essay? Care to discuss it? Thats what this thread is for...

Not sure anyone is defending him they're just interested in what happened and who the man himself is.

How many children are killed in war?

If a government building has a daycare center inside of it, then it can't be bombed right? Because those are the rules the US uses when bombing government buildings all over the world. Right?

As a child of the 80's I feel like I'm obligated to read this. I grew up in a culture where the name McVeigh was a household name synonymous with a crazy, malicious killer.

I was too young to follow the story when it happened, but I still want to know the truth.

How many children are killed in war?

If a government building has a daycare center inside of it, then it can't be bombed right? Because those are the rules the US uses when bombing government buildings all over the world. Right?

You mean allegations against the guy at Waco?

Vidal is definitely implying that the media calling him a meth-dealer and a pedo is complete bullshit. So yeah, he is inferring that there was insufficient proof to make those claims.

Did you read Gore Vidal's essay? Care to discuss it? Thats what this thread is for...

OKC was the test run.

Controlled Demolition Inc.

The same company on both cleanups with "Controlled Demolition" as the business name. How crazy is that?!

No evidence.

Not sure anyone is defending him they're just interested in what happened and who the man himself is.

Yeah, that's probably it. OWS in its original form was still doomed to fail.

They needed a clearer message than "We don't like everything, and we want to you to change / fix everything!".

There's nothing the guys are the top are going to be able to do with that, even if they wanted to change / fix everything, which they don't.

Lots of hits by simple google search... but:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/06/30/1220039/-FBI-Kept-Quiet-About-OWS-Assasination-Plot-FOIA-Obtained-Docs-Show

Do you realize what sub you're in bro? It's Obama!!

Possibly, but how do you know how deep the rabbit hole may be? This is a long time scheme the US govt has played involving guns, drugs, money and cartels, and not just in Latin/South America. We do this shit globally on a scale unimaginable by the average pinhead.

Fast and Furious was just the tip of the iceberg.