|
April 19, 2005
And the story still has legs!
Today is the tenth anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing, and considering that there are so many unanswered questions, it's worth giving this whole matter another look. I've posted about this (repeatedly), and the most comprehensive post I've seen recently in the blogosphere is this one by Bizblogger (which includes a review of Jayna Davis's book.) You don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to agree with a former CIA Director (James Woolsey), and a former CIA and FBI director (William Webster) that something stinks. For starters, they still haven't listed the correct number of victims. Glenn Reynolds (who was kind enough to link my missing leg post) offers an excellent retrospective on Oklahoma City, featuring his observations on the country's mood at the time. His closing words are just as true now (if for different reasons): This country's political establishment should think about what it has done to inspire such distrust--and what it can do to regain the trust and loyalty of many Americans who no longer grant it either.The distrust is still there, but it's far more cynical, and I think it's the type of cynicism which comes from coverup after coverup after coverup. Coverups inspire distrust. The problem is, once coverups get started, they cannot be undone because of the Dreyfus principle -- fear of public exposure of the fact of a coverup. So even if we assume for the sake of argument that foreign involvement in the Oklahoma City attack is being covered up, it must and will continue to be covered up. Regardless of the soundness of their arguments, those who suspect coverups are condescendingly dismissed as "conspiracy theorists," and lumped in with genuine nuts. That's why the best allies of coverups are always wackos like these. I'm not easily excited by wacko theories and I try to practice what I described last year: While I am very skeptical of conspiracy theories, the fact is that occasionally, there are unexplained conspiracies. By definition, unexplained conspiracies (until they are explained) logically demand the utilization of (for lack of a better phrase) conspiracy theories as a tool of examination. There is no question that terrorism -- whether domestic or international -- always involves a conspiracy. In attempting to analyze unsettled and vexing stories, I try to avoid the following common pitfalls:Frankly, I just wish the Oklahoma City discrepancies could be cleared up, and I'm tempted to acquiesce to what I think is a coverup, because it would be easier than writing another post about this out of a sense of "obligation" I don't have. I'd rather not think about it at all. (Couldn't they have just buried that leg? I'm tired to death of digging this stuff up....) MORE: Rand Simberg proposes calling today "National Self Defense Day" as he reminds us that it's also the anniversary of Lexington Concord, the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, and the massacre at Waco. (Via Glenn Reynolds.) posted by Eric on 04.19.05 at 04:07 PM |
|
December 2006
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
December 2006
November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
Laughing at the failure of discourse?
Holiday Blogging The right to be irrational? I'm cool with the passion fashion Climate change meltdown at the polls? If you're wrong, then so is God? Have a nice day, asshole! Scarlet "R"? Consuming power while empowering consumption Shrinking is growth!
Links
Site Credits
|
|