Just who are the real terrorists?
For more than a year Democrats and their mainstream media lapdogs have sought to portray Tea partiers as everything from ignoramuses to racist skinheads to gun-wielding, Bible-toting terrorists.
Now former President Bill Clinton has taken it up a notch, likening them to Oklahoma City bombing suspect Timothy McVeigh.
Leading up to the April 19th Anniversary of the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, Clinton was back to playing a game he played 15 years before; blaming conservatives and talk radio for the actions of the admitted bomber, Timothy McVeigh.
And he did it under the guise of a warning: that angry, anti-government rhetoric coming from some conservatives, talk radio and Tea partiers could potentially spark another such incident.
But again; exactly who are the terrorists?
A strong case could be made that the Clinton White House was, in fact, a terror organization. Remember Ruby Ridge, Idaho, and the Randy Weaver family?
Weaver moved his family to northern Idaho to escape what he saw as a corrupted world. The family built a cabin and began home schooling their children. He appeared on the radar of Federal law enforcement agencies after a neighbor with whom he had a land dispute wrote letters to the Federal government and local law enforcement saying that Weaver had threatened the kill the Pope and President Ronald Reagan in the mid-1980s.
For the next several years agents from The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) sought to either entrap him or get him to work as an informant and infiltrate local militia groups. They finally entrapped him—as an Idaho jury found—when they bought shotguns from him then sawed them off below the legal limit and accused Weaver of selling illegal weapons. He was indicted in December 1990.
The Federal Court system then went to work on Weaver’s case and he was cited for failure to appear in court when he missed a court date that didn’t match the one on a letter sent to him and his court-appointed attorney (an attorney Weaver had no communication with).
Because Weaver was a former green beret who lived in an isolated area and sought to escape an oppressive Federal government that had for several years sought to entrap him, Weaver was considered a terrorist threat by the Clinton Justice Department (sound familiar?).
So United States Marshals dressed in camouflage and equipped with night vision goggles and M16 rifles surrounded his cabin and began to search for a place to ambush and arrest him.
One of the marshals threw rocks against the cabin walls to test the reaction of the Weaver’s dogs. When the dogs began barking Weaver’s 14-year-old son Sammie and family friend Kevin Harris came outside to investigate. They followed the dog to see what had him upset.
Marshal Art Roderick shot the dog. Sammie cursed Roderick then shot at him. Marshal Bill Degan came out of the woods shooting and hit Sammie in the arm. Harris fired back, shooting Degan in the chest. A third Marshal, Larry Cooper, exchanged gunfire with Harris and Sammie was shot in the back and killed.
The next day members of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) hostage rescue team were deployed with the green light to shoot on sight. Agent Lon Horiuchi took the order to heart. When Weaver went to a shed where his dead son lay, Horiuchi shot him in the back. Horiuchi then shot Weaver’s wife Vicki in the head as she stood inside her cabin holding her 10-month-old baby.
At about the same time the ATF was seeking to make a firearms case against the leader of a religious cult called the Branch Davidians outside of Waco, Texas.
On Feb. 28, 1993, ATF agents swarmed the Davidian’s compound, arriving in cattle trailers pulled by the personal vehicles of ATF agents. When Davidian leader David Koresh saw them—he had already been tipped off they were coming—he went outside to ask what they wanted. Shots were fired and Koresh was wounded and his father-in-law and another Davidian were killed.
During the ensuing shootout four ATF agents and four more Davidians died. The ATF then began a siege that lasted 50 days. It finally ended when the ATF used tanks to puncture holes in the walls and gas the inhabitants. The FBI fired military rounds into the compound and Texas Rangers fired tear gas rounds into the buildings. The buildings caught fire and 75 people died in the inferno.
According to McVeigh’s testimony, the Federal government’s attacks on the Weaver family and the Branch Davidians—plus other violent raids by Federal agents—were the events that triggered him to blow up the Murrah building on April 19, 1995.
Of course the government’s official line and the one readily accepted and regurgitated by the lamestream media is that McVeigh and Terry Nichols were solely responsible for the bombing. McVeigh was executed and Nichols is serving a life sentence for conspiracy and manslaughter.
But there is much about the official story that fails the smell test. In fact, there are so many discrepancies between the official story and the facts that have since surfaced that they can’t all be covered—but here are some highlights:
- There’s John Doe #2, the second suspect described by witnesses as being in McVeigh’s company in the days leading up to the bombing—including accompanying McVeigh when he rented the Ryder truck. Soon after McVeigh’s arrest, Federal agents quashed the search for John Doe #2. Oklahoma reporter Jayna Davis, who covered the story for an Oklahoma television station and has written a book about it, has appeared on news programs saying her investigation revealed that there was indeed a John Doe #2 and he was Hussain Al-Hussaini, an Iraqi and a member of Saddam Hussein’s Republican Guard. She also uncovered ties Nichols had to the first World Trade Center bomber, Ramzi Yousef, and Yousef’s ties to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida.
- There is the testimony of witnesses plus audio evidence of multiple explosions at the Murrah building, not just one from the Ryder truck. Also, explosives experts have said that the truck bomb alone would not have brought down the building in the manner that it came down; that explosive charges planted inside the building would have had to have been used.
- There are reports from survivors of the blast who say they saw McVeigh inside the building in the days before the bombing meeting with Federal agents. One survivor, Jane Graham, has said there were many unusual people in the building—some carrying building plans—in the days prior to the bombing. She has also said she recognized two men caught on camera leaving the building and talking on walkie-talkies in the bombing’s aftermath that she had seen previously inside the building wearing General Service Administration (GSA) uniforms.
- Davis, Graham and others who say they have information relevant to the investigation claim they were repeatedly rebuffed, if not treated in a hostile manner, when they tried to present that information to Federal agents.
In other words; there is evidence of possible complicity in the bombing by agents of the U.S. government and there certainly has been a suppression of the truth.
Byron York of The Washington Examiner wrote a column April 18, 2010, about Clinton’s remarks. In it he said that Clinton, aided by his pollster and advisor Dick Morris, exploited the bombing to make a political comeback at one of the lowest points of his presidency to that time. He said that Clinton was in deep political trouble and polls showed the public viewed him as weak, incompetent and ineffective.
“Morris began polling about Oklahoma City almost immediately after the bombing. On April 23, four days after the attack, Clinton appeared to point the finger straight at his political opponents during a speech in Minneapolis. ‘We hear so many loud and angry voices in America today whose sole goal seems to be to try to keep some people as paranoid as possible and the rest of us all torn up and upset with each other,’ he said. ‘They spread hate. They leave the impression that, by their very words, that violence is acceptable,’ wrote York.
The question is: Did Clinton simply exploit an opportunity to deflect attention away from himself and try to score points against a growing conservative tide, or was something more sinister involved?
Regardless, whether it’s Clinton, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, liberal media pundits, left-wing talking-point regurgitators or unthinking sheeple who are constantly calling Tea partiers terrorists; that doesn’t make it so.
Tea party participants are normal, everyday Americans concerned about the course of their government. They are not terrorists seeking a building to blow up. There have been no instances of violence during Tea party rallies. In fact, Tea partiers even clean up their messes before leaving their rally locations.
Exercising a right guaranteed by the First Amendment to speak freely, assemble peaceably and petition the Government for a redress of grievances does not make one a terrorist. It is a uniquely American experience.
Maybe Clinton should think a little harder about who the terrorists might be.