Whenever they execute them quickly, you know there's something fishy. Gore Vidal believes, and persuasively argues, that the government's "Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols, acting alone and out of revenge for Waco, bombed the OK City building" story is either false or, at least, substantially different from what really happened. There's an Atlantic article that I read some time back which went over the whole thing in detail and pointed out quite a few subtle inconsistencies in the state's arguments and rather glaring loose ends in the FBI's investigation which were never pursued. McVeigh was rapidly executed (6 years from date of charges!).
Muhammad's case smells fishy in the same way to me. I remember when Ashcroft reassigned his case to Virginia. At that time, I was nearly neocon in my politics and I cheered the decision's obvious purpose to get him executed ASAP. But reflecting back, I see a lot of weirdness about the case against Muhammed.
First, both McVeigh and Muhammad were executed rapidly. If the government has something to hide or has a weak case, the ideal scenario is to eliminate the one person who knows for a fact they are lying as quickly as possible. Second, both McVeigh and Muhammad are veterans. If a sinister splinter group within government, for example, were going to frame or dupe somebody, a veteran would be the obvious choice because you have full access to their records and can select someone that fits the profile you are looking for. Second, the evidence against Muhammad are all things that would not be difficult for members of a clandestine service to fake. This is similar to the kind of evidence on which Oswald and JFK's killer (can't remember the name) were convicted. Third, Muhammad's bizarre opening statement.
My hypothesis: Muhammad was depressed from his inability to see his children very much. He may have committed a variety of crimes for which he was not caught. The rogue element that wanted to frame Muhammad wanted someone who was depressed and who they already knew was guilty of violent crimes, but which the FBI and local police had not yet pieced together. I can imagine someone saying to an FBI investigator, "the next case you solve, don't press charges, just identify the perpetrator and give us his file... and here's a non-descript briefcase... there's another one like it when you get us that file."
Once they had selected Muhammad, the rogue element commenced operations. Some black ops type(s) were sent into DC with the mission to make random killings in a specific type of car and gun (matching those which Muhammad used). Once they had incited a sufficient degree of terror, they planted the key evidence which would connect Muhammad with the crimes in other states and lead to Muhammad's capture.
Muhammad was caught through the most improbable of channels, an anonymous tipster (who could possibly have known if Muhammad was running as tight a ship as the government alleges??) told a priest to look into an open case in another state. The priest then reported the tip to the cops who eventually matched Muhammad's prints found at one of the scenes to the crime in the other state and fingered Muhammad. This is far more complicated than a pulp-fiction detective mystery novel! I'm not saying it's impossible, but it is highly unlikely, dramatic and unusual. As complex as my hypothesis is, it's not any more complex than the state's hypothesis and the motives of the actors involved actually make sense.
The rogue element planted the necessary evidence then pointed the cops to Muhammad who then immediately picked him up. Muhammad may have had his hands dirty to some degree or another judging by his opening statement given in court - he never protests his innocence. He only claims no connection with the DC shootings. I haven't dug into the evidence of the other crimes, so who knows, he may be guilty as sin. Knowing his kids were his weak spot, the rogue element secretly spoke with him (posing as investigators) and let him know that his children would be safe if he just plea-bargained (i.e. accepted death sentence).
There's definitely something fishy with this DC sniper thing. On the face of it, it just doesn't make any sense. The prosecution can't even offer a coherent theory of his motive, first claiming he was shooting random people in DC to "scare" his wife back in Washington state. Then, they later claimed he was doing it to collect ransom money, based on the testimony of some agent who claims he spoke with Muhammad on the phone (!) and Muhammad made demands for money to stop the shootings. Read Muhammad's opening statement, the lights are very much on upstairs, theories of erratic or random behavior just don't hold water with me. The more I learn, the less I believe people ever act without a reason that, with effort, can be understood by anyone willing to apply critical thinking to the matter.
P.S. - For those who read my 9/11 numerology post, I just found two more! McVeigh was executed on 6/11/2001... 611, and, I realized that the USS Cole attack date, 10/12 could be "112" since, in occultic numerology, you ignore all zeros. Slowly, but surely, I'm connecting the dots!!
Muhammad's case smells fishy in the same way to me. I remember when Ashcroft reassigned his case to Virginia. At that time, I was nearly neocon in my politics and I cheered the decision's obvious purpose to get him executed ASAP. But reflecting back, I see a lot of weirdness about the case against Muhammed.
First, both McVeigh and Muhammad were executed rapidly. If the government has something to hide or has a weak case, the ideal scenario is to eliminate the one person who knows for a fact they are lying as quickly as possible. Second, both McVeigh and Muhammad are veterans. If a sinister splinter group within government, for example, were going to frame or dupe somebody, a veteran would be the obvious choice because you have full access to their records and can select someone that fits the profile you are looking for. Second, the evidence against Muhammad are all things that would not be difficult for members of a clandestine service to fake. This is similar to the kind of evidence on which Oswald and JFK's killer (can't remember the name) were convicted. Third, Muhammad's bizarre opening statement.
My hypothesis: Muhammad was depressed from his inability to see his children very much. He may have committed a variety of crimes for which he was not caught. The rogue element that wanted to frame Muhammad wanted someone who was depressed and who they already knew was guilty of violent crimes, but which the FBI and local police had not yet pieced together. I can imagine someone saying to an FBI investigator, "the next case you solve, don't press charges, just identify the perpetrator and give us his file... and here's a non-descript briefcase... there's another one like it when you get us that file."
Once they had selected Muhammad, the rogue element commenced operations. Some black ops type(s) were sent into DC with the mission to make random killings in a specific type of car and gun (matching those which Muhammad used). Once they had incited a sufficient degree of terror, they planted the key evidence which would connect Muhammad with the crimes in other states and lead to Muhammad's capture.Muhammad was caught through the most improbable of channels, an anonymous tipster (who could possibly have known if Muhammad was running as tight a ship as the government alleges??) told a priest to look into an open case in another state. The priest then reported the tip to the cops who eventually matched Muhammad's prints found at one of the scenes to the crime in the other state and fingered Muhammad. This is far more complicated than a pulp-fiction detective mystery novel! I'm not saying it's impossible, but it is highly unlikely, dramatic and unusual. As complex as my hypothesis is, it's not any more complex than the state's hypothesis and the motives of the actors involved actually make sense.
The rogue element planted the necessary evidence then pointed the cops to Muhammad who then immediately picked him up. Muhammad may have had his hands dirty to some degree or another judging by his opening statement given in court - he never protests his innocence. He only claims no connection with the DC shootings. I haven't dug into the evidence of the other crimes, so who knows, he may be guilty as sin. Knowing his kids were his weak spot, the rogue element secretly spoke with him (posing as investigators) and let him know that his children would be safe if he just plea-bargained (i.e. accepted death sentence).
There's definitely something fishy with this DC sniper thing. On the face of it, it just doesn't make any sense. The prosecution can't even offer a coherent theory of his motive, first claiming he was shooting random people in DC to "scare" his wife back in Washington state. Then, they later claimed he was doing it to collect ransom money, based on the testimony of some agent who claims he spoke with Muhammad on the phone (!) and Muhammad made demands for money to stop the shootings. Read Muhammad's opening statement, the lights are very much on upstairs, theories of erratic or random behavior just don't hold water with me. The more I learn, the less I believe people ever act without a reason that, with effort, can be understood by anyone willing to apply critical thinking to the matter.
P.S. - For those who read my 9/11 numerology post, I just found two more! McVeigh was executed on 6/11/2001... 611, and, I realized that the USS Cole attack date, 10/12 could be "112" since, in occultic numerology, you ignore all zeros. Slowly, but surely, I'm connecting the dots!!
Comments