- Dec 27, 2001
- 11,272
- 1
- 0
I was just a punk college student back then, but I don't remember any witch hunt or public brow-beating of the Clinton Administration back then for not preventing it.
Originally posted by: beer
The OKC bombing wasn't a complete and total lapse of national security agencies like 9/11 was. It was about a few individuals and not about dozens of (known suspect) individuals moving in and out of the country and getting aircraft training.
Originally posted by: josphII
Originally posted by: beer
The OKC bombing wasn't a complete and total lapse of national security agencies like 9/11 was. It was about a few individuals and not about dozens of (known suspect) individuals moving in and out of the country and getting aircraft training.
*cough* double standard *cough*
Originally posted by: beer
Originally posted by: josphII
Originally posted by: beer
The OKC bombing wasn't a complete and total lapse of national security agencies like 9/11 was. It was about a few individuals and not about dozens of (known suspect) individuals moving in and out of the country and getting aircraft training.
*cough* double standard *cough*
explain how so please
Originally posted by: Mill
There was a local, state, and federal investigation as well as hearings. There was publicity back then, but 168 dead due to a group of domestic terrorists isn't as scary to the American people as 9/11 was. That's the pure simplicity of it all. When you are dealing with that many deaths, extreme economic disruption, foreign "invasion" and panic you'll have hearings such as the 9/11 commission as a panacea to the people. I feel sorry for the 168 that died in OKC, but reality tells me it is a much smaller blip on people's radar than 9/11. New York was the pinnacle of American civilization, and two of that city's major landmarks were just destroyed. You can't act as if the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building had the same historic symbolism.
That's how I logically see it.
