Friday, April 16, 2004
* A posting by Stuart Buck
NOTE: I found this post, which I had labeled as a draft. Here it is.
In the spirit of Howard Dean, I offer a couple of interesting theories that may or may not be true:
1. Al Qaeda had something to do with the Oklahoma City bombing. This theory comes from the ubiquitous Richard Clarke, whose new book has a passage that can be summarized:
On Page 127 [of his new "Against All Enemies"], Clarke notes that it's possible that al-Qaida operatives in the Philippines "taught Terry Nichols how to blow up the Oklahoma Federal Building." Intelligence places Nichols there on the same days as Ramzi Yousef, and "we do know that Nichols's bombs did not work before his Philippines stay and were deadly when he returned."
story time: i'm a lawyer. i only do election law. but now and then you get these calls. so shortly before the mcviegh killing, i get this call. the guy wants me to file suit, saying mcveigh's body is evidence, and can't be destroyed.
took me awhile to sort out he meant mcveigh had information, and killing him
would destroy the info, so he had to kept alive. i didn't take the case,
but it was a cute theory. (I only take cases where i'm certain i'm right on the law; that sounded iffy.)
NOTE: I found this post, which I had labeled as a draft. Here it is.
In the spirit of Howard Dean, I offer a couple of interesting theories that may or may not be true:
1. Al Qaeda had something to do with the Oklahoma City bombing. This theory comes from the ubiquitous Richard Clarke, whose new book has a passage that can be summarized:
On Page 127 [of his new "Against All Enemies"], Clarke notes that it's possible that al-Qaida operatives in the Philippines "taught Terry Nichols how to blow up the Oklahoma Federal Building." Intelligence places Nichols there on the same days as Ramzi Yousef, and "we do know that Nichols's bombs did not work before his Philippines stay and were deadly when he returned."
story time: i'm a lawyer. i only do election law. but now and then you get these calls. so shortly before the mcviegh killing, i get this call. the guy wants me to file suit, saying mcveigh's body is evidence, and can't be destroyed.
took me awhile to sort out he meant mcveigh had information, and killing him
would destroy the info, so he had to kept alive. i didn't take the case,
but it was a cute theory. (I only take cases where i'm certain i'm right on the law; that sounded iffy.)
Comments:
Post a Comment
