I know you're not advocating the position, but I don't buy that at all. Wouldn't it be in McVeigh's interest to publicize the wider conspiracy (without naming names) to give his war a better veneer of legitimacy and credibility? He could also increase the terror inflicted by the attack.
The OKC bombing story is already filled with so many holes from the FBI and mysterious 'suicides' that it's hard for me to be surprised by anything new. Yea McVeigh 'admitted' to it, but that guy was likely under some serious mind control substances and is the classic patsy type for these types of things. BTW how come it took this long for us to find out that the video was edited? I wonder how irate the public would be if this had been brought to attention 15 years ago? (yet another coincidence)
I know a guy at the ATF who works in that same building in OKC. He alluded that we'll never know the whole story, even he doesn't but there is a reason that every fact is not on the table. It's not an evil conspiracy, not even close. It's simply not to give anyone else a guideline of how to successfully take out a Govm't building. Drive a truck filled with cow poo and blow up 3/4 of the building.....yeah right.
...makes sense to me. (or I at least bought it....lol). Another thing he mentioned over beers was that the gov't NEVER releases all the info. There is always something that a terrorist/nutcase shooter/(fill in blank) actually gets right. Why publish the playbook? This guy, who has actually advanced VERY nicely in his career doesn't know the 'whys' and stuff. He just does his job as mandated by his superior, whoever that would be at the time. One interesting theory he had or acutally a question he posed to me was this: If there was no one 'Evil' to go after or rally support against, then everyone is content and uninterested, therefore no need for defense, security, etc, etc...... Hey even a guy that's semi in the know can have his own conspiracy theory can't he?
The obvious. The head of security at the building or some bureaucrat trying to keep from getting fired because it happend. People CYA all the time at work. Haven't you noticed.
I don't imagine the bureaucrat who would be held responsible for any security lapse would have access to control these tapes in the ensuing investigation. Also, I can't imagine what could be shown on a couple of minutes of tape that can expose a lapse in upper management performance. At best, it would show an operational mistake by a low-rank security officer who obviously wouldn't have any power to cover anything.
