Oklahoma city and Tim McVeigh

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:

Thank you! This is my favorite Non-Columbine related thread

Tim McVeigh is very interesting..

Indeed he was.

Also just the whole case is interesting to say the least. SO many twists and turns, suspected cover-ups, etc. It's the kind of case that could make a die hard conspiracy theorist have wet dreams!  

Yes! It is so interesting to revisit it at this age. I was 13 when it happened. I never really looked into it or any true crime, it was all what the media said and what my family said "oh he was just a terrorist" I remember a story that he refused to look at any of the victims pictures... but again that was a long time ago so I could be misremembering.

I find this and Columbine to be very different for me as I get older. Columbine when I was 17 and I certainly felt differently then. I mean some things are still the same but I have a clearer head.

@Screamingophelia wrote:

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

@Screamingophelia wrote:

Thank you! This is my favorite Non-Columbine related thread

Tim McVeigh is very interesting..

Indeed he was.

Also just the whole case is interesting to say the least. SO many twists and turns, suspected cover-ups, etc. It's the kind of case that could make a die hard conspiracy theorist have wet dreams!  

I remember a story that he refused to look at any of the victims pictures... but again that was a long time ago so I could be misremembering.

You are remembering correct.

McVeigh always had issues with looking at the pictures or even talking about the victims in depth. His lawyers several times stated that his whole demeanor would change, and likened it to a flip of a switch. Like he would just turn off his emotions whenever he had to talk about those killed in the bombing, especially the children.

This is why I think the times he did talk about the victims came off as cold hearted, and that he had no remorse, felt no guilt, etc. Simply because he tried to shut himself down from having any emotional reaction/response to it.

McVeigh was a very complex individual. This is why I have dived back into the "Rabbit Hole" so much with this one. Also even today, shit is still being dig up here and there that makes you question every damn thing you have ever heard about the case.

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:

Thank you! This is my favorite Non-Columbine related thread

Tim McVeigh is very interesting..

Indeed he was.

Also just the whole case is interesting to say the least. SO many twists and turns, suspected cover-ups, etc. It's the kind of case that could make a die hard conspiracy theorist have wet dreams!  

I remember a story that he refused to look at any of the victims pictures... but again that was a long time ago so I could be misremembering.

You are remembering correct.

McVeigh always had issues with looking at the pictures or even talking about the victims in depth. His lawyers several times stated that his whole demeanor would change, and likened it to a flip of a switch. Like he would just turn off his emotions whenever he had to talk about those killed in the bombing, especially the children.

This is why I think the times he did talk about the victims came off as cold hearted, and that he had no remorse, felt no guilt, etc. Simply because he tried to shut himself down from having any emotional reaction/response to it.

McVeigh was a very complex individual. This is why I have dived back into the "Rabbit Hole" so much with this one. Also even today, shit is still being dig up here and there that makes you question every damn thing you have ever heard about the case.

I imagine, and I am speculating that comes from his military training too. In his mind it was something he had to do and yes innocent people were going to die but in his mind they were maybe collateral damage?

Reminds me again of Eric and him saying he had to turn his emotions off and another reason he wanted to blow the school up and not just go in and start shooting.


It is interesting about the kids too because James Holmes also got upset when he heard a child died. He chose a midnight movie because he thought there wouldn't be any there.

I sometimes think even though Dylan "let people go" and seemed to not want to hear anyone cry or scream he was more at ease at watching people die, wanting to knife them where as Eric wanted to be completely disconnected. Bomb the school and shoot people at a distance.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:

Reminds me again of Eric and him saying he had to turn his emotions off and another reason he wanted to blow the school up and not just go in and start shooting.


It is interesting about the kids too because James Holmes also got upset when he heard a child died. He chose a midnight movie because he thought there wouldn't be any there.

I sometimes think even though Dylan "let people go" and seemed to not want to hear anyone cry or scream he was more at ease at watching people die, wanting to knife them where as Eric wanted to be completely disconnected. Bomb the school and shoot people at a distance.

I agree, I think killing is very different from making people suffering. I should read the whole journal again to check if it is true but IIRC Eric never wrote about inflecting pain in his journal. I mentioned it in another thread a few days ago (the thread about rape I think), even in the passage where he said he wanted to torture someone, it seems that he destroyed a body but without making his victim suffer, as if the victim was already dead and Eric was only being brutal to the corpse. There is no pain, only blood, guts, flesh...



As for Timothy McVeigh, the attack was an act of terrorism, he did this for his ideology so making people suffer or enjoying that people suffer or die would have dehumanized him, so it could have been negative to his message (but I don't think he liked killing anyway). Terrorists have to face a dilemma and chose a strategy after their attack. McVeigh could have kept spreading his message the best he could by showing that he felt very bad for the dead, in order to make him more human to those who were shocked by the attack. Maybe the average American would have been more supportive or at least less judgmental if they saw that he felt sorry and was aware that it was a tragedy, but unfortunately a necessarily strategy. And yet, in a way showing no regrets, just like Dylann Roof and Breivik, shows that he still thinks the attack was necessary and that the message was above a few humans lives. Being uncompromising may be important to keep the support of those who already supported you before the attack.

I read a French white-supremacist article on a blog and many people, including the author of the article, thought that Dylann Roof made the good decision by not killing himself and not showing any remorse at all, because that way he was showing that he was standing right by his convictions. They also praised Breivik for doing the same. Other white-supremacists (but they were much less numerous) thought the strategy was bad because people who slightly leaned toward far-right (but were not racist) and needed to be convinced would never accept such a cruel attack and the pity-less and cold attitude of the shooter after his arrest.

And on top of these two strategies, terrorists also have to deal with their emotions, guilt and regrets... I don't think Timothy McVeigh went beyond that. I think the only way for him was to turn off his emotions, so it was not even part of a strategy toward his message. It was only for his well-being.

My friend from my hometown (and Tim McVeigh's) just posted this and I wanted to share it. It's from Politico but I remember that time of the Bills loses... ah the 90's.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

@Screamingophelia wrote:

My friend from my hometown (and Tim McVeigh's) just posted this and I wanted to share it. It's from Politico but I remember that time of the Bills loses... ah the 90's.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/09/02/how-football-fed-timothy-mcveighs-despair-219625

Yes Timmy indeed liked the Bills.    

Although I highly doubt that his team sucking was the straw that broke the camel's back. But then again I am looking at this from a purely female perspective, and I'm not a HUGE fan of football.

The article is interesting to say the least.

It is certainly a stretch!

I have seen people in tears of happiness when their team have won the superbowl so I am not entirely sure that POV.

@Screamingophelia wrote:

It is certainly a stretch!

I have seen people in tears of happiness when their team have won the superbowl so I am not entirely sure that POV.

Agreed! Men and sports can get kinda weird sometimes!

[quote="ShadowedGoddess"]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:

It is certainly a stretch!

I have seen people in tears of happiness when their team have won the superbowl so I am not entirely sure that POV.

Agreed! Men and sports can get kinda weird sometimes! [/quote

A friend of mine said her husband cried more at a super bowl win than when their baby was born but he denies it vehemently.

I was very young but I have to wonder with living in the area if I was in the same place as him just doing normal things with my family. The town is not huge. I know, weird. Maybe we were at the same Bills game? Stuff like that.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:

I imagine, and I am speculating that comes from his military training too. In his mind it was something he had to do and yes innocent people were going to die but in his mind they were maybe collateral damage?

Well he did say his actions were morally equivalent to American bombings in Iraq...

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:

I read a French white-supremacist article on a blog and many people, including the author of the article, thought that Dylann Roof made the good decision by not killing himself and not showing any remorse at all, because that way he was showing that he was standing right by his convictions. They also praised Breivik for doing the same. Other white-supremacists (but they were much less numerous) thought the strategy was bad because people who slightly leaned toward far-right (but were not racist) and needed to be convinced would never accept such a cruel attack and the pity-less and cold attitude of the shooter after his arrest.

I know you weren't the one who wrote it but I feel compelled to respond that the masses will accept cruel and terrible moral actions so long as they are convinced that their enemies are the scum of the Earth. Nazi Germany is the prime example of this but there are plenty of others I could pick and choose from.

@QuestionMark wrote:

I know you weren't the one who wrote it but I feel compelled to respond that the masses will accept cruel and terrible moral actions so long as they are convinced that their enemies are the scum of the Earth.

True. As long as the public are told its for the greater good, for their own protection, etc. they will for the most part allow anything to happen and not bat an eye.

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:

I know you weren't the one who wrote it but I feel compelled to respond that the masses will accept cruel and terrible moral actions so long as they are convinced that their enemies are the scum of the Earth.

True. As long as the public are told its for the greater good, for their own protection, etc. they will for the most part allow anything to happen and not bat an eye.

I agree but allowing something to happen is not exactly the same as agreeing something. White supremacist didn't only want people to accept them, they wanted people to support them. And I think that not being that shocked and moved by the Charleston shooting doesn't mean that people were supportive of it.

I don't know to what extent it is true but I read somewhere that the nazis didn't really want the German people to be fully aware of the horrible things that were going on because they thought the "masses" was still too sensitive and emotional and thus not ready yet to accept what they thought was the harsh but necessary action. This is why they used euphemism such as "the final solution", "euthanasia", "mercy death", "special treatment"... The simple fact that nazis and white supremacists need to dehumanize their enemies/victims to be able to hurt them shows that people's acceptance to cruelty against other human beings has limits. After Charleston, some white supremacists thought that the killing of innocent black people, and then the images of their crying families would move people, which is the opposite of dehumanization. This is what they meant in their comments on the blog I think.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:

Thank you! This is my favorite Non-Columbine related thread

Tim McVeigh is very interesting..

Agreed.

I watched a documentary on Netflix a year or so ago along with the Zero Hour episode on YouTube and some more conspiratorial stuff.

I was gonna buy "American Terrorist" but never did and lost interest. This thread has reignited my interest in the case.

Now that they have revisited OJ and Waco with documentaries and mini-series, I'm wondering if we are gonna get something on Oklahoma City? (then Columbine? to complete the revisit of 90's events).

@W.A.R. wrote:

Now that they have revisited OJ and Waco with documentaries and mini-series, I'm wondering if we are gonna get something on Oklahoma City? (then Columbine? to complete the revisit of 90's events).

That's a great question, i hope they do because those would be very interesting to see what they do with it.

@W.A.R. wrote:

@Screamingophelia wrote:

Thank you! This is my favorite Non-Columbine related thread

Tim McVeigh is very interesting..

Agreed.

I watched a documentary on Netflix a year or so ago along with the Zero Hour episode on YouTube and some more conspiratorial stuff.

I was gonna buy "American Terrorist" but never did and lost interest. This thread has reignited my interest in the case.

Glad to re-spark your interest!     I will fully admit to having completely lost myself in the case once again. I researched it a few years back, and stepped away after I blew thru most of the available content at the time.

Then recently I was cleaning out some old files/folders and found my McVeigh info, and here I am revisiting and researching almost obsessively again.  

But once you know certain things it makes it hard to stop digging. Sadly with the case there is SO much that just makes very little sense and doesn't add up at all.  Not to mention all the conspiracy theories that surround McVeigh and the case as well. An I LOVE a good conspiracy.

@W.A.R. wrote:

Now that they have revisited OJ and Waco with documentaries and mini-series, I'm wondering if we are gonna get something on Oklahoma City? (then Columbine? to complete the revisit of 90's events).

I truly hope so! Especially on Oklahoma City. Although something new on Columbine would be nice as well.

Timmy's official Army "yearbook" picture.

Also just wanted to list the books on Tim McVeigh/Oklahoma City that I currently own. Here they are in no particular order.



American Terrorist  -By Lou Michel & Dan Herbeck

All American Monster  -By Brandon Stickney

Aberration in the Heartland of the Real: The Secret Lives of Timothy McVeigh  -By Wendy Painting

Others Unknown  -By Stephan Jones & Peter Israel

Secrets Worth Dying For: Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City Bombing  -By David Paul Hammer & Jeffery William Paul

Deadly Secrets: Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City Bombing  -By David Paul Hammer

Final Report on the Bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building  -By The Oklahoma Bombing Investigation Committee

One of Ours: Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City Bombing  -By Richard A. Serrano



EDIT- Had to add the two newest books that I just bought on the subject. 

Oklahoma City : What the Investigation Missed -- And Why It Still Matters  -By Andrew Gumbel and Roger G. Charles

Oklahoma City: Day One: A Detailed Account of the Bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building  -By Michele Marie Moore

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:

Now that they have revisited OJ and Waco with documentaries and mini-series, I'm wondering if we are gonna get something on Oklahoma City? (then Columbine? to complete the revisit of 90's events).

I have a bad feeling that whatever is made about either OKC or Columbine is going to end up biased or misinformed in some ways. Hell, I wouldn't be shocked if a series on the latter is considered unmarketable and subsequently scrapped considering how mass shootings keep happening every couple of months. Doesn't help that a lot of those mass shootings are copycats of Eric and Dylan either.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1997-06-10/news/9706100284_1_timothy-mcveigh-model-soldier-outstanding-soldier

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/565565/Friends-recall-how-McVeigh-was-class-clown.html

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1997-06-10/news/1997161129_1_mcveigh-soldier-drzyzga


"Former Army Sgt. William Dilly testified that McVeigh was a top soldier with a weakness for Pop Tarts and the Buffalo Bills football team."

"He was charming at times, a young man who admired fairness. He loved strawberry Pop-Tarts. Friends and Army comrades said McVeigh was all of those things before he dropped out of their lives more than three years before the Oklahoma City bombing."

"Capt. James Rodriguez made McVeigh laugh when he recalled him as a generous soldier -- but one who didn't like to share strawberry Pop-Tarts sent from home."




Apparently Timmy was a wee bit stingy with his strawberry Poptarts!  

But I will say Toaster Strudel is SO much better then Poptarts! Poptarts are just horribly nasty. Toaster Strudel was around back then, so I refuse to believe that Tim actually preferred PopTarts over Toaster Strudel. This I can not accept! It had to have been that simple fact of Poptarts not needing refrigeration, while Strudel needs to be kept frozen. I will accept no other explanation!

But seriously Poptarts make me wanna gag.

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


"Former Army Sgt. William Dilly testified that McVeigh was a top soldier with a weakness for Pop Tarts and the Buffalo Bills football team."

"He was charming at times, a young man who admired fairness. He loved strawberry Pop-Tarts. Friends and Army comrades said McVeigh was all of those things before he dropped out of their lives more than three years before the Oklahoma City bombing."

"Capt. James Rodriguez made McVeigh laugh when he recalled him as a generous soldier -- but one who didn't like to share strawberry Pop-Tarts sent from home."




Apparently Timmy was a wee bit stingy with his strawberry Poptarts!  

But I will say Toaster Strudel is SO much better then Poptarts! Poptarts are just horribly nasty. Toaster Strudel was around back then, so I refuse to believe that Tim actually preferred PopTarts over Toaster Strudel. This I can not accept! It had to have been that simple fact of Poptarts not needing refrigeration, while Strudel needs to be kept frozen. I will accept no other explanation!

But seriously Poptarts make me wanna gag.

This is what I believe too because pop tarts were and are revolting.

My mom would buy toaster strudel on rare occasions.

@Screamingophelia wrote:

This is what I believe too because pop tarts were and are revolting.

My mom would buy toaster strudel on rare occasions.

That OR maybe he was simply looking at it from a survivalist's perspective.  Cause those bastards would probably have a decent shelf life.

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

Poptarts are just horribly nasty. Toaster Strudel was around back then, so I refuse to believe that Tim actually preferred PopTarts over Toaster Strudel. This I can not accept! It had to have been that simple fact of Poptarts not needing refrigeration, while Strudel needs to be kept frozen. I will accept no other explanation!

But seriously Poptarts make me wanna gag.

Well, i'm glad i never had a Poptart.

Halcyon666 wrote:

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

Poptarts are just horribly nasty. Toaster Strudel was around back then, so I refuse to believe that Tim actually preferred PopTarts over Toaster Strudel. This I can not accept! It had to have been that simple fact of Poptarts not needing refrigeration, while Strudel needs to be kept frozen. I will accept no other explanation!

But seriously Poptarts make me wanna gag.

Well, i'm glad i never had a Poptart.

@Halcyon666  BAHAHAH! I may be a little bias, but nothing holds a candle to my beloved Toaster Strudel.

http://edition.cnn.com/2001/LAW/03/19/mcveigh.autopsy.04/

An informal agreement by a coroner not to conduct an autopsy on Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh apparently will stand after a federal judge ruled Monday he had no jurisdiction.

McVeigh, convicted of killing 168 people in the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, is in a federal prison in Terre Haute, Indiana, and is scheduled for execution May 16.

McVeigh's attorneys asked U.S. District Judge Richard Matsch to approve an informal agreement under which the Vigo County, Indiana, Coroner Susan Amos agreed not to conduct any "invasive procedure" on McVeigh following his execution.
 
After listening to presentations from McVeigh's attorneys, prosecutors and the Vigo County attorney, Matsch said he had no objection to the plan but had no jurisdiction.

"My jurisdiction ends when Timothy McVeigh ends," said Matsch, who presided over McVeigh's case on a change of venue from Oklahoma.

Under the agreement, on the day of his execution McVeigh will disrobe for a visual examination through a window of his death row cell for any signs of physical abuse. The coroner has said autopsy results could be used to defend lawsuits filed by death-row inmates who allege mistreatment or abuse.

McVeigh also agreed to sign a statement that he has not been abused in custody. If he refuses to sign it or claims he was abused, an autopsy will be performed.

The coroner will examine the body again after McVeigh's execution, taking photographs and X-rays if necessary. If Amos finds evidence of abuse, she could then perform an autopsy if McVeigh's attorney approves.

McVeigh, 32, an Army veteran of the Gulf War, ended all appeals of his death sentence in December, but said he opposed "the planned mutilation of my corpse."

McVeigh attorney Rob Nigh told reporters before court convened Monday that McVeigh opposed an autopsy for ethical and philosophical reasons.

After Matsch ruled he had no jurisdiction, Nigh said McVeigh would not take the issue to another court.

Federal officials told CNN that they have no rules set up to cover autopsies because the last federal execution was a hanging in 1963.

"We don't have any protocol on this," said one official.

Vigo County attorney Timothy Fears said that under Indiana law a county coroner may conduct an autopsy in the case of an "unnatural death" -- including an execution -- but does not have to. He argued the federal court should honor the coroner's discretion under state law.

McVeigh's other attorney, Nathan Chambers, told CNN there is no standard for autopsy in federal executions because the last federal execution occurred 38 years ago.

"This is new territory," Chambers said. The issue is complicated, he said, because federal rules say autopsy is to be handled in accordance with the law where the sentence was imposed. The sentence was imposed in Colorado, but it will be carried out in Indiana.

"Even more complex is the question as to what extent a local coroner has jurisdiction on federal property," Chambers said, adding that there is no federal coroner.

McVeigh was convicted of murder, conspiracy and weapons-related charges in the April 19, 1995, bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City.










McVeigh's will.

Tim was VERY adamant about not wanting an autopsy performed on him. He even took it to court and actually won out on that issue.  There are many conspiracies surrounding "WHY" Tim was so against having an autopsy done on him.



http://news.findlaw.com/cnn/docs/mcveigh/mcveighautopsyagr.pdf


Also here is a link to the PDF file agreement Tim made with the coroner.

Just saw on Tumblr someone saying that the correct pronunciation of Timothy McVeigh was Timothy McBae!  

Yet I detest that fucking word!

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

Yet I detest that fucking word!

Same.

"To: All attorneys assigned to U.S. vs. McVeigh

From: Tim McVeigh
Date: November 24, 1996
Re: Defense strategy

As official notice, let it be known that I do not approve of a trial strategy in which Terry Nichols is attacked, blamed, or otherwise implicated in any crimes. Further, I do not approve of pointing the finger of responsibility at anyone else who I know is not responsible or is in no way deserving of such scrutiny.

I have relayed this wish orally for 18 months not only concerning Terry Nichols, but also addressing the “foreign” investigations and the “neo-nazi” investigations. My oral requests have been basically ignored for the past 18 months and it is only recently that Judge Matsch has forced the defense into partial compliance with my wish. However, the defense still tries to ignore my wishes/demands where Terry Nichols is concerned.

I will not allow you to coerce me into lowering my moral and ethical values to that of attorneys and lawyers."





A November 24, 1996 letter McVeigh wrote to his lawyers stating his displeasure of them continuing to look for other people who may have, and likely were involved with the planning of and the actual bombing. He had been fighting with his lead attorney Stephen Jones about this for many months.

McVeigh wanted nothing found or investigated that would/could have taken the blame off himself, or lessened his "Lone Wolf" narrative.

So many conspiracies.   Also SO many questions that need answered. Still so many things that just don't add up.   But it's clear McVeigh didn't do this alone.

No matter that he mostly took the fall for it all,  there's just not a doubt in my mind that he protected the other people involved for whatever reason.