The McVeigh Tapes: Confessions of an American Terrorist

[Make7]

On the 15th anniversary of the Oklahoma City Bombing, MSNBC aired a documentary with audio from interviews of Timothy McVeigh conducted by Buffalo News reporters Dan Herbeck and Lou Michel.

The McVeigh Tapes
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7
Part 8
Part 9
Part 10
Part 11
Conclusion
 

[jberryhill]

1. Cue the "lone nut" defenders

The indefatiguable defenders of the criminally insane will be along shortly.

[k-robjoe]

2. "Lone nut 2"

I´m just wondering, isn´t it pretty much established that there was a third person involved, apart from McVeigh and Nichols (?)?

"John Doe 2" ?

And that this guy stayed in the Ryder truck after McVeigh got out? Then John Doe 2 got out and left?

Does this make me a McVeigh defender?

[KDLarsen]

3. I think McVeigh said it best himself:

"For those die-hard conspiracy theorists who will refuse to believe this, I turn the tables and say: Show me where I needed anyone else," he wrote. "Financing? Logistics? Specialized tech skills? Brainpower? Strategy? ... Show me where I needed a dark, mysterious 'Mr. X!"

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/serial_killers/notorious/mcveigh/updates.html

[k-robjoe]

4. But if the surveillance tape shows

a third complicit, leaving the Ryder truck, then you´ll have to trust the tape over McVeigh.

So what do we make of the news segment 14 minutes out in this videoclip, where they tell about the tape showing a third complicit leaving the Ryder truck some time after McVeigh got out and left?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CloZVvjEdK4&feature=player_embedded

[apocalypsehow]

5. "where they tell about the tape" - They "tell" about it? They can't produce it? Can you?

I'd sure like to see this tape showing a "third complicit" getting out of the Ryder truck after McVeigh - especially since it wasn't more than a few seconds after McVeigh departed that vehicle that it blew into a million pieces.

Got a link to this tape? :shrug:

(...wait for it...wait for it..."I'm just asking questions...why are you so hostile?...if you watch this video link to some CT'er loon site I've provided you'll see they prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the grassy knoll shooter stole the tape in question, and buried it in a field in Somerset County, Pennsylvania...")

[k-robjoe]

7. Yes, I´m still asking questions

And yes, you are extremely hostile.

But no, the tape is not stolen. Maybe somebody else here knows why we haven´t seen the tape?

From what I understand there were also eyewitnesses who reported seeing this guy :

"Mr Coulson spent 31 years in the FBI. Between 1991 and 1997 he was the deputy assistant director of the Criminal Division of the FBI in Washington, responsible for all violent crime cases in the United States.

Mr Coulson said there were some "very strong indicators" that other people were involved with Timothy McVeigh.

The FBI interviewed 24 people who claimed to have seen McVeigh in Oklahoma City with someone else on the morning of the attack, yet the only known accomplice of McVeigh, Terry Nichols, was at home in Kansas over 200 miles away on that day.

The FBI's investigation concluded that the eyewitnesses were unreliable. However, Danny Coulson says they were "extremely credible" and had no reason to make it up."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/6275147.stm

[apocalypsehow]

8. No, no, no, no - that's not how it works. You made the following assertions in the reply above:

"But if the surveillance tape shows...a third complicit, leaving the Ryder truck, then you´ll have to trust the tape over McVeigh.

So what do we make of the news segment 14 minutes out in this videoclip, where they tell about the tape showing a third complicit leaving the Ryder truck some time after McVeigh got out and left?" (all emphases added)

Three different claims of a "tape" in those sentences you typed, and what that tape allegedly "showed," i.e., "a third complicit leaving the Ryder truck some time after McVeigh got out and left"

And I asked you to either produce that tape, or provide a link to where it's contents would be available for all of us to peruse. You made the claims, all I'm asking you to do is provide the proof to back up the assertion of "a third complicit leaving the Ryder truck some time after McVeigh got out and left"

What I didn't ask about was any of this follow-up jazz:

"Maybe somebody else here knows why we haven´t seen the tape?

From what I understand there were also eyewitnesses who reported seeing this guy :

"Mr Coulson spent 31 years in the FBI. Between 1991 and 1997 he was the deputy assistant director of the Criminal Division of the FBI in Washington, responsible for all violent crime cases in the United States.

Mr Coulson said there were some "very strong indicators" that other people were involved with Timothy McVeigh.

The FBI interviewed 24 people who claimed to have seen McVeigh in Oklahoma City with someone else on the morning of the attack, yet the only known accomplice of McVeigh, Terry Nichols, was at home in Kansas over 200 miles away on that day.

The FBI's investigation concluded that the eyewitnesses were unreliable. However, Danny Coulson says they were "extremely credible" and had no reason to make it up."

I didn't ask about any of that, got it? It is utterly irrelevant to the question I did ask. Why are you replying to me with it? Well, we know why: you neither have access to such a tape nor a link to it.

But let's put that aside - I ask you again: do you have access to this tape or can you provide a link to it? Not some link to a newscast, or another diversionary link to the BBC or any other media outlet, but to the tape that supposedly shows "a third complicit leaving the Ryder truck some time after McVeigh got out and left"?

Can you provide such a link or post a video of said tape here directly? Yes or no?

[k-robjoe]

9. Well no. I don´t have the tape, nor a link

But ofcourse my "assertion", that :

"if the surveillance tape shows...a third complicit, leaving the Ryder truck, then you´ll have to trust the tape over McVeigh."

still stands.

So naturally all of us would like to get to the bottom of this. All of us would like to see the tape, to see if there´s this John Doe2 leaving the truck, after McVeigh got out and left.

Apparently there´s more than one tape. This link has the same news segment, but starts up with another one, where they say they have it from "numerous sources" that the tapes exist, and that they reveal more than one bomber :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5v8v4P1-Qc&feature=related

[apocalypsehow]

10. So, once again no actual evidence of a "third complicit," just innocent 'ole "questions being asked"

Per usual.

"All of us would like to see the tape"

Here you are with "the tape" business again, when you just admitted above "I don´t have the tape, nor a link".

What evidence is there, given that admission, that such a "tape" exists? None. Just some airy talk on an ancient newscast and your assertions in 2010 that, although you do not have access to such a video and have never seen such footage, you still presume that it exists! Dog have mercy. :eyes:

"Apparently there´s more than one tape"

Okay, then, do you have a link to that tape, or are you able to post it directly here? :shrug:

[k-robjoe]

11. It appears that some tapes have been released

Here´s something about it, from last September :

"The FBI has released surveillance tapes showing the Okahoma City bombing from several angles. The videos have been kept secret for years by the FBI and were only released in response to a Freedom of Information Act action by Salt Lake City attorney Jesse Trentadue.

(...)

Speaking to the Associated Press, Trentadue said:

"Four cameras in four different locations going blank at basically the same time on the morning of April 19, 1995. There ain't no such thing as a coincidence," Trentadue said.

He said government officials claim the security cameras did not record the minutes before the bombing because "they had run out of tape" or "the tape was being replaced."

"The interesting thing is they spring back on after 9:02," he said. "The absence of footage from these crucial time intervals is evidence that there is something there that the FBI doesn't want anybody to see." "

http://news.intelwire.com/2009_09_01_archive.html

[apocalypsehow]

12. Non-responsive - neither of those videos shows anything remotely close to a "third complicit"

getting out of any vehicle anywhere.

Why did you post this reply? It is not what I am asking you to produce. I am asking you to produce a link or post directly here a video that shows a "third complicit" getting out of the Ryder truck Tim McVeigh rented to blow up the Murrah building on April 19th, 1995 in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.

What is so difficult to understand about that simple request? :shrug:

We know what: you have no such video evidence, and are simply using the cover of ongoing replies to me to slip more CT'er fairy tales into the mix, such as the rambling babble of the likes of Jesse Trentadue.

About what I expected.

[k-robjoe]

13. I told you allready that I do not have the videos

or a link to them. There´s no change in that.

----------

Right now I´m watching a BBC program about this. And they say that McVeigh was subjected to a lie detector, and when he was asked if there were other people with him, and said there were not, the liedetector indicated that his answer was deceptive.

About 15 minutes out :

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5977554184697409940#

[apocalypsehow]

14. It being difficult to possess something that doesn't exist showing something that never happened,

of course you don't. You never did. Again.

Does this constantly getting called & owned on "facts" that turn out not to be facts and evidence that turns out not to be "evidence" ever give you - or any other CT'er who wishes to weigh in here - the slightest pause? Or the slightest blush of embarrassment?

Apparently not.

BTW, nice way to work into your latest reply more bizarre CT'er speculation ("subjected (! :rofl:) to a lie detector...indicated...deceptive" - weasel words all, whatever you're watching), despite the fact I didn't ask you how you were wasting your time now and could really care less.

[k-robjoe]

15. There is no way of telling

what the facts are. Ofcourse if the news reports are telling the truth about what the tapes their sources saw show, then there would be a way of telling, if one could get hold of those tapes. ( Unedited )

[apocalypsehow]

16. Yes there is. The "facts" have been established beyond a reasonable doubt, by a Federal jury that

convicted him upon the presentation of the government's irrefutable evidence; by numerous independent accounts/inquiries by news outlets and media sources the world over; and by the very words of Timothy McVeigh himself, in those numerous hours of tapes he made without the slightest threat of coercion or inducement to gain of any kind.

"Ofcourse if the news reports are telling the truth about what the tapes their sources saw show, then there would be a way of telling, if one could get hold of those tapes."

Asked & answered: the "tapes" in question do not exist, and the events the "source(s)" of that ancient, eleven minute snip of a broadcast all those years ago describe never happened.

And yet you continue to pretend the issue is still one of credible speculation.

I ask again: even the slightest pause or blush of embarrassment? :shrug:

[k-robjoe]

17. No, no embarrassment

In my opinion the facts are not established. It could very well be that all the witnesses reporting seeing this John Doe 2 were absolutely correct.

And it could very well be that the sources telling about the surveillance tapes were telling the truth.

And McVeighs statement that he was alone at the time, is rather another reason to believe that he wasn´t alone, since the liedetector test indicated that he was lying about this.

( It´s bedtime in Norway. )

[apocalypsehow]

18. Then you possess no self-awareness of how your numerous replies/assertions are picked apart so

easily, and shown consistently to have little regard for actual facts that can be verified in the real world.

'Tis a pity, that.

"In my opinion the facts are not established"

Then you haven't been paying attention. Thank you for admitting that all you have is an opinion, not any actual facts, though. Very thoughtful of you.

"It could very well be that all the witnesses reporting seeing this John Doe 2 were absolutely correct"

Except you have no substantive proof. Neither does anyone else making that claim. What is so difficult to grasp among the CT'er community about the necessity for verifiable evidence to substantiate a claim/assertion? What? :shrug:

"And it could very well be that the sources telling about the surveillance tapes were telling the truth"

And it could very well be that, as the flat-earthers maintain, the entire planet rests on the back of four elephants and a turtle. Except there is one little problem: like you, they have no actual evidence for their opinions.

You certainly have none for yours.

"( It´s bedtime in Norway.) "

Uh-huh (:eyes:): current local time there is nearly 2:30 a.m.

I'll take that instead as what it no doubt is: "I've had enough."

Message received, and understood.

[apocalypsehow]

19. This is CT'er "logic" in its rawest form:

"And McVeighs statement that he was alone at the time, is rather another reason to believe that he wasn´t alone, since the liedetector test indicated that he was lying about this"

You want to believe this, so you take an "indication" on a single polygraph test, a test that is considered so unreliable that admission of its results are not allowed to be heard by any jury in any state other than New Mexico, that it is true, in the face of the mountain of actual, credible evidence sworn to in court by numerous witnesses and elsewhere (including the defendant himself!) that no such person ever existed.

And, of course, you can present no visual evidence to substantiate this peculiar belief, despite the fact that you've tried to play footsie all up and down this thread pretending that that non-existent tape showing things that never occurred is "out there" somewhere, if only someone could lay their hands on it....

If a "debunker" tried to "debunk" a conspiracy theory using such flimsy evidence, he/she would (rightly) be hooted off the forum in derision.

And the CT'er "community" tries to pretend like they are shocked that so few sensible people here and about anywhere take them seriously, and view their "questions" as little more than laughable.



"I'll tell you, Ricky, I'm shocked - SHOCKED, I tell you! - that you won't accept my lack of evidence to back up my claim as evidence itself that my claim is true! ...Who are you working for?"

[k-robjoe]

22. You get all worked up about this

but people will just have to judge for themselves. Maybe watch the BBC documentary.

( Yes, I went to bed at 2.15 last night. It was really past bedtime. )

[apocalypsehow]

23. Still no evidence for your assertions, eh? Rejoin the thread when you have some.

All rest is just puffery.

[k-robjoe]

24. You´re the one who can´t live with

me saying I don´t know what happened.

So if you can´t live with it, you´ll have to come up with the evidence to convince me.

[apocalypsehow]

25. Oh, I don't really care what some anonymous poster on a discussion board thinks, for starters.

But when you type nonsense and pretend it's somehow "factual," you're gonna get called on it, whether it's by me or any number of other sensible folks around here.

Second, I'm not the one making assertions I can't prove - you are. So it's not incumbent upon me to to "convince" you of anything.

It is your job, on the other hand, as the one always "asking questions" which are really assertions and conspiracy claims to provide evidence that they are factual. It's a job you are an abysmal failure at so far, as the record above and in virtually every other thread I've ever seen you participate in bears clear witness.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[k-robjoe]

27. Let´s just get this straight

What is it that makes you think I don´t live in Norway?

( Norwegian : Hva er det som får deg til å tro at jeg ikke bor i Norge? )

[apocalypsehow]

28. There's nothing to "get straight": I don't believe you. Peddle it to someone who buys it. n/t.

[k-robjoe]

29. But you do have a reason not to believe me?

Otherwise it´s just too silly, isn´t it?

[apocalypsehow]

30. I don't believe you, and I'm not going to believe you no matter how many subsequent replies you post

and even if you add cute little personal attacks to the mix of those replies.

So if you wish to give your fingers a work out, by all means keep typing, but:

I. Don't. Believe. You.

I do note how interesting it is how eager you are to quit talking about your lack of facts when it comes to conspiracy theories for which you have not a shred of factual evidence (as been shown), and instead wish to discuss your place of residence. It indicates a desire to talk about anything other the lack of facts you possess for this topic, among others. I would, too, were the roles reversed.

Edit: misplaced punctuation.

[k-robjoe]

31. Well, for anybody else reading this

I´m a norwegian, living in Levanger, in Trøndelag, in the middle of Norway.

[k-robjoe]

32. Re : I don't believe you, and I'm not going to believe you no matter how many subsequent replies

This is really really kafkaesque and weird.

But I got the idea that I could write a message on my profile on a norwegian internetforum.

http://vgd.no/system/profile/

The message goes "Hallo "apocalypsehow" ".

I´ve been posting on the board for almost five years.

( Edit : It didn´t work quite as planned. After clicking the link, you have to click on "din profil" to get to the message. )

( I remember now, you need to be a member to get to see the profiles. I`ll get back to this, and try another forum, but right now I got a visit. )

[k-robjoe]

33. OK. This should work

I put the message on the forum. Third post down on this page :

http://vgd.no/musikk-tv-og-film/musikk/tema/1328433/tittel/dagens-laat-m-video/innlegg/27536599/

( Together with a cool music video from a local band. )

And here is my backlog on the forum, going back to 2005 :

http://vgd.no/system/search/?q=&qF=0&qN=kaptklok&qA=

[OnTheOtherHand]

34. I agree n/t

[k-robjoe]

35. Re : "Numerous witnesses"

You write about John Doe2, that there is "credible evidence sworn to in court by numerous witnesses and elsewhere (including the defendant himself!) that no such person ever existed."

But in the news clip 11:45 out in this video clip, they say that not a single witness testified in the trial, that could place McVeigh in Oklahoma on the day of the bombing :

http://eclipptv.com/viewVideo.php?video_id=11668


">Are you telling me that no witnesses who saw McVeigh driving a truck in the vicinity of the federal building on the morning of the bombing testified at the grand jury?

>That's right! And why do you think that was. Because those witnesses saw other people with McVeigh and those other people might have been able to tie the crime to the government because some of those other people were --

>Government informants or agents.

>Yeah."

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/okcjuror.htm#topofdoc

I would like to know more about the "numerous witnesses" that have sworn in court that there was no John Doe2 with McVeigh in the Ryder truck.

[SDuderstadt]

36. From the Rappoport article link....

Do you think, sitting in jail, McVeigh hasn't figured out these recruiters set him up as the patsy?
I don't know. That license plate on his Mercury Marquis -- the car he was arrested in. The license had fallen off. He has to wonder about that, about someone loosening the nuts on those bolts. That's why the Oklahoma highway trooper stopped his car in the first place. That's how it all unraveled. McVeigh has to be wondering about that.

Really? Actually McVeigh stated he deliberately removed the license plate. Why anyone would think this is some mystery is beyond me.

[deconstruct911]

38. LOL

aren’t these people as credible as the pentagon attack witnesses? No videos of that either.... Well any that are definitive!

[apocalypsehow]

6. And not only that; he also explicitly stated:

"You can't handle the truth. Because the truth is, I blew up the Murrah Building and isn't it kind of scary that one man could wreak this kind of hell?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_McVeigh#Oklahoma_City_bombing

[CrunchMaster]

20. He obviously didn't blow up the OKC Murrah Federal building alone... he is protecting a network

He had a network of American and apparently at least one German Neo-Nazi(Andreas Strassmeier) that he was working with. If McVeigh was working alone he would have been busted and stopped since the FBI and ATF were all over him and Elohim City before the bombing. Like all major terror attacks against the USA the only reason he got away with it is because of his Neo-Nazi mole buddies embedded on the inside of the U.S. goverment.

What McVeigh did was take one for his Neo-Nazi brethren.

ATF informant Carol Howe and others explicitly stated that it was the Neo-Nazi and FBI infiltrated and assisted Elohim City compound that was the source of where the OKC attack was being planned. Elohim City was infiltrated by, run and protected by Neo-Nazi provocateurs working for the FBI(similar to Hal Turner). The guy who ran Elohim City was a protected Neo-Nazi on the FBI payroll. Before the OKC bombing McVeigh had called KKK lawyer Kirk Lyons in North Carolina. After the OKC bombing Kirk Lyons helped hide German provocateur Andreas Strassmeier in North Carolina and then helped him flee back to Germany. Did you know alleged 9/11 "mastermind" Khalid Sheihk Mohammed had also lived in North Carolina where he attended a Christian school before becoming 9/11 mastermind? And in addition to that, the Philippines plot was directly tied to North Carolina by way of Ahmed Saeed(Abdul Hakim Murad) who trained for suicide attacks in North Carolina. Murad was an associate of Ramzi Yousef in the Phillippines. Did I mention already how North Carolina Black Water's Cofer Black was in charge of hunting down and killing 9/11 suspects after they helped let them in the country?

Blackwater Director Let 9/11 Hijackers into US, then Killed, Tortured the Remaining Witnesses
from Duer leveymg : http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x265254

And besides, Terry Nichols was busted for his involvement proving this was not the case of a lone nut. Terry Nichols had ties to the Philippines. Undercover Filipino Abu-Sayeff informant/terrorist Edwin Angeles says that Terry Nichols had been in the Philippines in the months before the OKC bombing meeting with Abu Sayeff terrorists(specifically Ramzi Yousef of 9/11 fame). The Philippines is where we are told the pre-cursor to 9/11, the bojinka plot was planned. Oklahoma and the Philippines therefore played a part in at least TWO MAJOR TERROR ATTACKS AGAINST THE USA, the OKC bombing and 9/11. (Some of the 9/11 hijackers took flight school lessons in Oklahoma) So McVeigh took one for the team to protect the network of American Neo-Nazi TRAITORS who have been attacking the USA Federal government since the early 80s and are still attacking it today(Teabaggers). The evidence shows he did not act alone.

The connections are clear.

The only reason they are not more clear is because this is the USA and we have folkkks here in the good ol' USA who have been committing TREASON by involvement with FOREIGNERS to destroy the US federal government. And they work very hard to keep that on the down low.

Like all good American Neo-Nazi terrorists, McVeigh was protected by other Neo-Nazis on the inside who have a vested interest in pushing the "lone nut" theory. Same with JFK, same with 9/11, same with the Anthrax mailings that the FBI covered up and pinned on one guy.

The problem is the Neo-Nazis embedded in the U.S. government who push "lone nut" theories so the larger network is not exposed.

[apocalypsehow]

21. "he is protecting a network" - Told you this in a seance, did he?

Tell me: did he also clue you in on where Jimmy Hoffa is buried while he was at it? Now that would be useful information, alrighty: I hear there's still a cash reward available in that case.

Say, why not next time you & Timmy are communicating through the veil of the spirit world, why don't you hit him up about that? Cut me in for a finder's fee, and we'll be good. :toast:

[deconstruct911]

37. Fertilizer? Box cutters? Planes? Ryder trucks? The planes and trucks are a distraction

Didnt anyone watch the news back in the 80's/90's???

Its like the Dan Rathers report about the FBI/93 sting....

Or all the BCCI-Iran/Contra news coverage of the CIA running drugs...

Here is a start!

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=&search_query=okc+bombs (RARE FOOTAGE)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upk767RMYsM

[SDuderstadt]

39. There is, apparently....

no end to your silliness.

[deconstruct911]

40. HAHA PLEASE!

I see you keep busy monitoring the 9/11 section for CT!

Quick call in the feds! there is no end to the madness!!!!

[SDuderstadt]

42. I see you keep filling this area up with....

absurd conspiracy theories. I'd say we're pretty evenly matched. Well, except for the part where you thin Tom Flocco and AFP are reliable sources.

Just so you know, it violates DU rules to cite AFP, even here in the 9/11 forum.

[deconstruct911]

41. Better yet

You should invest in creating "conspiracy theory repellant spray"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FZYLJNNJlo

[SDuderstadt]

43. You should stop embarrassing DU....

with your goofy bullshit.

[k-robjoe]

44. Thanks

Thanks for that last link. Well worth watching.