Was the Oklahoma City Bombing blowback?

[Ekrub]

I just finished watching the doc someone posted in another thread on Waco. It left me feeling very gross inside, knowing that our government, the ATF and FBI had done that. While I (and any rational person) don't believe that McVeigh was justified in his bombing, in his interviews he noted his distrust and disgust of our government because of the Waco incident, and I agree with him. Was the OKC bombing blowback from Waco? Or am I missing this concept of blowback :confused:

I'm just curious if this is a proper definition of blowback because I think I would find it very helpful in debating how our foreign policy has lead to events such as 9/11.

Thanks!

[dannno]

OKC was a false flag attack that was meant to portray a blowback scenario. McVeigh was involved with various federal agents and was even an admitted federal agent according to a letter a he wrote to his girlfriend. There were several bombs that were confirmed by the Justice Dept. that were found inside the buildings after the attack. Un-exploded.

You are correct that the event was supposed to display a portrayal of blowback, the militia community vs. the Fed Govt., however McVeigh didn't actually have any militia connections. He was not a member of any militias. He was a patsy.

There is some pretty good information on this and other similar incidents in the film Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=241304

[Anti Federalist]

Certainly it could be described as "blowback".

But, just like 9/11, there is very credible evidence to suggest government actually played a role in making that event happen.

LoL - not inb4 danno.

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

OKC attack seems even more clear cut than 9/11. The evidence that government entities were involved helping McVeigh is nearly irrefutable.

[Ekrub]

Any other links or short youtubes explaining this?

[Alawn]

No it was a false flag

[osan]

I just finished watching the doc someone posted in another thread on Waco. It left me feeling very gross inside, knowing that our government, the ATF and FBI had done that. While I (and any rational person) don't believe that McVeigh was justified in his bombing, in his interviews he noted his distrust and disgust of our government because of the Waco incident, and I agree with him. Was the OKC bombing blowback from Waco? Or am I missing this concept of blowback

OKC was an inside job. If you recall the live coverage, police, fire, and other emergency personnel were frantically relaying reports of undetonated ordnance all over the building then they entered the scene. After a day or so the media faded to black on this tidbit.

I do not know what part McVeigh played in all of it, but I can tell you that 4000# of ANFO could not have taken that building down. I will also note that had the explosion had that much power, most of the blast wave would have been redirected ALONG the street. There would have been all kinds of damage to the surrounding buildings and people on the street would have be killed real dead. AFAIK, nobody on the street died in the blast. The official story stinks to heaven. I do not know who took that building down or why, but I do know that the official story is a pack of lies.

[1000-points-of-fright]

Regardless of whether or not you think OKC was an inside job, it is rather amusing to hear all these neo-cons explaining how we need to understand McVeigh's motivations regarding Waco while not condoning his actions.

Where was this enlightenment when Ron Paul was trying to explain the concept of blowback and foreign policy?

[brandon]

Yep, blowback.

You should watch a documentary on Ruby Ridge as well.

[lynnf]

Any other links or short youtubes explaining this?



haven't listened to it but try this on Chris Emery, who seems to be the expert on
OKC incident affairs


http://cdn2.libsyn.com/visibility911/visibility_911_chris_emery_08.mp3?nvb=201004220204 21&nva=20100423021421&t=0515c1affd49f8094f8b4


www.okcbombing.net

oh, and OKC was definitely a false-flag disguised as blowback

[Freedom 4 all]

Where was this enlightenment when Ron Paul was trying to explain the concept of blowback and foreign policy?

I'm going to go out on a limb here, but it MAY have something to do with the fact that McVeigh was a white non-Muslim.

[Toureg89]

I just finished watching the doc someone posted in another thread on Waco. It left me feeling very gross inside, knowing that our government, the ATF and FBI had done that. While I (and any rational person) don't believe that McVeigh was justified in his bombing, in his interviews he noted his distrust and disgust of our government because of the Waco incident, and I agree with him. Was the OKC bombing blowback from Waco? Or am I missing this concept of blowback :confused:

I'm just curious if this is a proper definition of blowback because I think I would find it very helpful in debating how our foreign policy has lead to events such as 9/11.

Thanks!
yes. it CLEARLY was:

that would be obvious for anyone that tries to do a vague google search
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=mcveigh+waco+letter+fox+


The following letter has been authenticated and was sent to Fox News Correspondent Rita Cosby on April 26, 2001. The opening statement was a photocopied statement in McVeigh's writing. The question-and-answer section following it is clearly an original version in McVeigh's writing.

I explain herein why I bombed the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. I explain this not for publicity, nor seeking to win an argument of right or wrong. I explain so that the record is clear as to my thinking and motivations in bombing a government installation.

I chose to bomb a federal building because such an action served more purposes than other options. Foremost, the bombing was a retaliatory strike; a counter attack, for the cumulative raids (and subsequent violence and damage) that federal agents had participated in over the preceding years (including, but not limited to, Waco.) From the formation of such units as the FBI's "Hostage Rescue" and other assault teams amongst federal agencies during the '80's; culminating in the Waco incident, federal actions grew increasingly militaristic and violent, to the point where at Waco, our government - like the Chinese - was deploying tanks against its own citizens.

Knowledge of these multiple and ever-more aggressive raids across the country constituted an identifiable pattern of conduct within and by the federal government and amongst its various agencies. (see enclosed) For all intents and purposes, federal agents had become "soldiers" (using military training, tactics, techniques, equipment, language, dress, organization, and mindset) and they were escalating their behavior. Therefore, this bombing was also meant as a pre-emptive (or pro-active) strike against these forces and their command and control centers within the federal building. When an aggressor force continually launches attacks from a particular base of operation, it is sound military strategy to take the fight to the enemy.
atleast, to assume that it WAS blowback is to assume that this letter is authentic and mcveigh had atleast partial involvement in the bombing.

as for collusion with, or being frame by government agencies, i've never even heard of, let alone explorer such possibilities (not to open a can of worms and say such ideas are outside the realm of possibility, i've just never considered them, and haven't viewed the arguments for such claims in order to have an educated opinion to say that i dont believe them to be true)

[AxXiom]

http://www.corbettreport.com/index.php?ii=74&i=Documentation

[tremendoustie]

I just finished watching the doc someone posted in another thread on Waco. It left me feeling very gross inside, knowing that our government, the ATF and FBI had done that. While I (and any rational person) don't believe that McVeigh was justified in his bombing, in his interviews he noted his distrust and disgust of our government because of the Waco incident, and I agree with him. Was the OKC bombing blowback from Waco? Or am I missing this concept of blowback :confused:

I'm just curious if this is a proper definition of blowback because I think I would find it very helpful in debating how our foreign policy has lead to events such as 9/11.

Thanks!

Yep, it's blowback. It happened on the anniversary of Waco too.

Neither McVeigh, nor Al Qaeda, were justified in their actions -- they both are murderers who attacked innocent people. But, niether of their actions would have occurred, if it were not for Waco, and ongoing interventionism, respectively.