The Final Word On Timothy McVeigh
By Clyde Lewis

"Who will kill Cock Robin? I, said the Sparrow, with my bow and arrow, I will kill Cock Robin. Who will watch him die? I, said the Fly, with my little eye, I will watch him die. Who will catch the blood? We will with a bowl, when we hear the bell toll for poor Cock Robin."

A young man approached a wizened elder and said, " I know you have wisdom and know all things. I hold in my hand a small bird behind my back.

Tell me, wise one, is the bird alive or dead." The wise master knew that he was being set up for a trap and so he thought very deeply about his decision.

The old master knew if he said dead, the young man would bring his cupped hands forward and release the bird alive. If he said the bird was alive, the young man with his hand hidden behind his back could quickly crush the bird and produce it dead.

The wisdom of the old savant prevailed and he responded, "The bird is as you will it. It is either alive or dead. In your hands you hold its fate."

In old fables we find some of the most precious treasures.

We live in times where action speaks out loud and sometimes drowns out the liberty of free will, and the wisdom that we have been admonished to use with that free will.

Some have already surrendered their ability to think for themselves and so they rely on what the majority thinks. They do not have the courage to stand up and speak out against the majority for fear of losing their popularity with their peers.

We all know that it is harder to have a viewpoint that is different. We all know that using wisdom in the face of indulgence is a chore and is no fun. We all know that to sin is to live without conscience, and to not fear the consequence.

It is also difficult to find the ugly truth and then realize that there is nothing you can do to change it.

Now more than ever it seems that we are becoming more and more like the Romans of antiquity, looking for ritual, and clamoring for the ancient rite of blood sport.

Take a look at history and understand we should always be looking for the smothering secrecy and faceless oppression and murderous activities of the state. We should try to observe the conspirators who plot the implosion of justice and use fear and blood as triggers for actions that are put into motion without wisdom.

They hold in their hands the bird. They ask us if it be alive or dead. We choose our answer, but we do not always choose wisely. We tend to forget that those whom we trust can crush the bird and tell us that it was dead all along.

I try to give you cautionary tales that hopefully convince you that you should not always think that the popular idea or choice is always the best one.

Itís not a popular stance, and I always ask myself why I continue to say what I say. I always wonder if everyone thinks that I am completely nuts. I struggle with my show on a daily basis and when I speak I wonder if I am truly alone in the way I feel.

I resolve that I have lost my mind. I have rendered myself peculiar.

I then laugh and rationalize that it is easier to be crazy these days.

Anyone who questions the nightly news, or rejects the latest fad, or opposes the latest military action is considered a subversive and is always under suspicion.

However I can say that I am very sensitive to what I am being told and who is telling it. I may even find truths in the most nefarious of people, and the most holy. Sometimes the ramblings of the demented can be treasured as nuggets of pure gold.

Sometimes even Government can have the right idea.

But nothing is perfect. I wouldnít be too quick in anthropomorphizing government into some all knowing entity with godlike powers.

But our government seems to think they know all things and they do decide who lives and who dies.

They always seem to think that they have the truth that matters.

The real truth that matters is the truth that matters for you. That fills, or fulfills, your particular personal needs.

It is, as you desire it to be.

I know how intelligence and counter intelligence can be used to sway public opinion. It is called the "truth" or it is an "exclusive" it is the big secret that everyone wants to be in on.

It definitely can be the "truth" but the truth can be delivered in varying degrees. While there are truths that have applied, hard, demonstrable evidence to back them up Ė there are other truths that you basically take on faith. It can be said that they could also not be the whole truth. Perhaps they are the closest things to the truth.

Or perhaps not. I know itís confusing because we have all been programmed into thinking that truth is the final word. That it sets us free.

We must understand that more subjective truth, can be altered or manipulated according to the dictates or the needs of what truth is supposed to be.

Propagandists and counter intelligence people are experts at that sort of thing.

They all have a vested interest in getting you to sway in different directions.

They use print, the Internet, movies and television, to get you to believe in their ideas. If you choose to absorb without your own discovery, if you choose to jump on board the popular idea without realizing what it is thoroughly, then you have become an easy mark for a "cooperative endeavor" with the devil.

So, if we are to believe the truth as we read it in print, or in factual evidence supposedly given by vested interests, should we really accept that as truth simply because it is put down by those experts?

Only you can make that choice. In these times I suggest that it should be the wise choice. We should think long and hard before we act.

Everyone knows who shot Kennedy right? It was Lee Harvey Oswald. At least that is what history has told us. But of course history has evolved somewhat and leaks have found there way into the minds of the consensus and now it seems that no one actually believes this story anymore.

Werenít we told the truth by the Warren Commission?

Did the truth change?

Even after viewing the Zapruder film and hearing magic bullet theories being debunked, there are those that still laugh at anyone who decides to question those dangling loose ends.

It is interesting to point out that after the attitudes of the people mellow it really doesnít matter that there are all sorts of threads that make up a tapestry of deceit with regard to the mystery of "Who Killed Kennedy."

There are threads that lead us into the old conspiracy theory that it was carried out by Mafia hit men, or the Cubans, or embittered CIA operatives that somehow did it on the grassy knoll in front of everyone.

There are those who believe that secret societies rubbed him out and I have heard countless other arguments as to who or what where and how.

The truth is that the conspiracy theory can spin out of control when someone feels that they havenít been given the truth.

The word Conspiracy has been walked all over, trampled, and ridiculed. The mainstream media and big government has made it the flight of fancy for paranoid dupes, who allegedly sit with their tinfoil hats on their heads to block out unnecessary mind controls, while listening to their rock music backwards on an old "close and play" record player.

But the truth is that a conspiracy, while being the buzz word that might mean the immediate discrediting of anyone who screams it out , is a cooperative endeavor that is very real.

My definition of a Conspiracy is when a group secretly plots a course of action to bring about an end result for their benefit, good or bad.

The United States was founded on a conspiracy against the throne of King George. It was the cooperative endeavor, which led to a revolution.

Americans are awaiting a revolution now. They say that they like it, some are begging for it, but unfortunately they forget that revolutions are bloody and fearful. When there is a cooperative endeavor or a conspiracy to send a violent message that people are fed up with the way their government is running itself, people are injured and some die.

Others who are not in on the conspiracy become fearful of terrorism. They demand protection, to the point of sacrificing their freedoms.

Revolution is where there is bloodshed and lives lost for an end result that benefits the revolutionaries.

The winners then spin tall tales of their truth that are told and retold in the annals of history and they are accepted as unquestionable facts.

Revolution sounds so glamorous to some people.

Others are just settled in a cooperative effort of denial and apathy.

Americans do not want revolution. They are coddled in the safe arms of their government. They are becoming comfortable with the police state, and they are happy with the bread an circus mentality, where money is as easy as giving a well groomed game show host the "Final answer."

They are told on television shows that a "conspiracy" or a "networking" of people is always some group of rich guys sitting in a smoky hotel room in Switzerland.

Itís laughable fiction.

Itís kind of like the old stereotype that aliens only abduct stupid, backwater, white trash. I have heard so many people say that there canít be some secret group plotting an overthrow of any of the liberties we cherish.

There seems to be this idea that an attempted overthrow of our government is always done by the "brave" or "stupid" lone nut.

When Lincoln was assassinated it was eventually proven to be a conspiracy and yet we fixate our beliefs that an alienated loner did it all.

We are programmed to somehow believe that there can be no other "shadowy figures" that mastermind these horrible acts of insurgence.

I guess it is safe to think that there is always a lone bogeyman that can be caught and jailed, or put to death, but when there is proof of a conspiracy that is withheld, and people try to get the message out they are called conspiracy nuts, or paranoid spinsters.

If you are tired of the labels then why donít we find other ways of describing a conspiracy?

Why donít we play the game of the politicians who use doublethink and double speak to call a conspiracy something more politically correct like perhaps "Coordinated Treachery," or "Cooperative Malevolence."

There thatís more like it.

Now you shout out loud the words "Cooperative Endeavor" instead of "Secret Society," or "Illuminati" and no one will suspect that you are a "Coordinated Treachery" theorist.

The new government that we are seeing unfold has been so successful in creating catch phrases that seem to take hold. Things like "stealing an election" or "faith based" or some other sound bite that non-thinking sheeple mimic like a parrot sitting on a pirateís back.

People are desperately seeking a point of view on what and what isnít reality. Itís sad to see that the media has got a hold of the minds of the majority and have basically given them a template in which to put their ideas. They seem to be the first word and the last word on anything.

They will either vote you off the island, or call you the weakest linkÖ. Goo bye!

If the media isnít pounding home the ideas that Americans should form, the religion takes over. It has the power to lead people into ideas that are good in some respects and ugly and undeniably intolerant in others.

No one is immune to the influences of such things.

At the risk of boring you with religious dogma I need to point out that Jesus Christ, who is believed to be the incarnate God and savior of all mankind was indeed a "lone nut" in his day.

To say such things would mark me as a blasphemous, hateful heretic.

I am what you desire me to be.

Christ taught many wonderful things 2000 years ago. He was then brought before the Romans and was executed as a common criminal. He became a martyr for a cause. He died as a result of a "Cooperative endeavor" between Judas Iscariot and the Romans.

It was something that has affected the World for 2000 years. A martyr sparked a movement. Some people believed that Christ deserved the death penalty and others felt that he was the victim of a conspiracy, and was given an unfair trial. Others also believed that Christ did nothing to prevent the execution and so it was a consensual execution, which is an assisted suicide at the carefully washed hands of government.

Whatever you think it was, depends on your feelings about Jesus.

If he is not divine, then he was a lunatic, a revolutionary that tried to get the Jews to rebel against the government. He hung out with prostitutes, lawyers, tax collectors, and organized a group that had an idea that was unpopular.

If you strip away his divinity he stands before his accusers as a common man with a grudge. If you take away his atoning sacrifice he is nothing more than some revolutionary that rebelled against Rome.

His divinity is all a part of belief.

If you donít believe he was the incarnate God then what is Christ?

He is a dead man who organized a group to level the foundation of what he and his followers thought was a corrupt system. His influence has generated into a Religion and his words and his story are the most moving, and touching of any stories ever told.

And again if you donít believe he was a son of God, then he is just another statistic. Another religious zealot who ended up in a pile of other Zealots like Marshall Applewhite, Jim Jones, and Joseph Smith.

The mistake of the Romans was they felt that if they killed Christ they would kill his movement. If they killed off the head, the remaining body would die, that it would be powerless.

They figured that a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

I have pointed out that time is cyclical. We continue to play out the same old tired and true narratives where point of view is fragmented yet the exercise is roughly the same.

The killing of the revolutionary, the martyrdom of some fanatic with a crusade.

Now I know that I have set this up pretty nicely to give you the heavy handed conclusion.

We are all mixed on our feelings about execution. Timothy McViegh the man who now has confessed to acting alone in the murders of 168 people during the Oklahoma City Bombing will be executed.

While the facts present themselves as being accurate and his guilt is quite clear there are still those who wonder why I am against his execution.

I have made my arguments against the death penalty on other radio shows, and articles but they obviously do not apply to Mr. McVeigh.

I can easily see why people who are very strongly against the death penalty can let this guy die by lethal injection.

I acknowledge that what he did was horrible. I canít even fathom the continuing grief and sorrow that the families of the victims have to endure. McVeigh says that he would do it again if he had the chance. There old argument of of racial bias in the courts decision does not apply in this case, he was found guilty, he wasnít poor, and he was in the military. None of the standard arguments can apply to McVeigh.

People who are against the death penalty have met their match.

An white, middle income, unrepentant bastard, who deserves to die.

The devil seems to always invent a better trap.

Itís pretty clever of him to devise the ultimate paradox. Anyone who says that McVeigh doesnít deserve to die, is lying to themselves.

He does deserve to die.

But then again a lot of people do.

Have you ever wanted someone dead because you feel they deserved it?

Why didnít you murder that person?

Why donít we all just kill people who deserve it? Make it a better place if we all just killed off those who deserved to die.

Do you know why we donít?

We are supposed to have a higher moral standard. It is the alleged American Christian attitude that we are to turn the other cheek. We donít lower ourselves to the basest reactionary response to kill each other to eliminate those who have wronged us or get in our way.

Or am I wrong?

Lets have a little fun with the devil shall we?

Sixteen year old Luke Woodham, came home one day and stabbed his mother to death he then went to his high school and opened fire, killing two students and wounding seven. When asked why he did it he replied the world has wronged me.

Marsha Knight who is the mother of an Oklahoma city bombing victim had this to say about the man who wronged her, Timothy McVeigh.

"Killing McVeigh 168 times would still not fill the void that I have in my heart at losing my child"óMarsha Knight

Timothy Mcveigh killed 168 people because he believed that Government had become a bully. That the Government intentionally killed the Branch Davidians in Waco and his attack was in retaliation for the event.

Lets see what kind of examples we can pull out of history where this cycle of tit for tat oozes all over everyone including our Children.

Fourteen year old Michael Carneal of West Paducah Kentucky started shooting one day, killing three students and wounding five saying he was tired of being bullied and warned his councilor he was going to do something about it.

Michael thought that his classmates deserved it for bullying him. Why doesnít someone with enough balls walk up to the families of the victims and tell them that their kids "deserved to die" because they just happened to be bullies.

Jim Denny another victim who lost a loved one in the Oklahoma City bombing said with such conviction, that the act of putting Mcveigh to death has nothing to do with vengeance.

He says that Americans value life and we must tell our children this. We must also tell them that the death penalty just doesnít happen to anyone.

"It's very hard to explain to children what is justice; you know we want to make sure that they know that he (McVeigh) is not getting this punishment because of any anger or hatred, he's getting it because it's the law, and we also want them to understand that life is the most precious thing on the face of the Earth. We don't do this lightly to people, it's something that takes a lot of thought and a real long process, and I think we went through the process and it worked"óJim Denny

Emotional outbursts make people look a little silly sometimes.

There are so many holes in his statement and knowing his duress, I wonít kick him around, but you can read the facts and figures about the death penalty and how it is disproportionately imposed. That the process of determining guilt isnít perfect. For him the process worked.

Because it was as he desired it to be.

You can read that we have executed more prisoners in Texas in the last 25 years than the total of people that died in Oklahoma City bombing in 1995. So it doesnít take a lot of thought, to put a guy to death.

It all depends on who you believe and what you believe. If the system is worked as Mr. Denny put it, then why is it that we have ignored the FBI documents that were conveniently left out of the trial and that were discovered just prior to McVeighís first scheduled May 16th execution?

The truth is that if McVeigh goes to his death now, there may be some good argument to conclude that he never got a fair trial.

Guilty or not we now know that the FBI withheld documents in a capital murder case. This is an obstruction of justice.

Allowing it to slip by is sending a signal that law enforcement can withhold evidence, even make up evidence to change the outcome of a trial. They can do this with impunity and to anyone. Donít let your hate cloud the issue. Donít let the 168 dead get in the way of what our system is designed to do. It is there to protect everyone who stands accused.

We should not use our collective guilt or worse still our collective hatred or vengeance as an excuse to obstruct justice.

If you were on trial for a capital crime, and law enforcement kept documents and evidence away from the courts you would demand a retrial. You know you would.

I can already hear people saying "Clyde he confessed to the bombing why have a trial again when you know heís guilty, he said he was!"

Well, sure he did, but can we ignore that fact that when McVeigh took a lie detector test in 1995 the test showed that he was lying.

Even about acting alone?

At least that is what his former lawyer claims. Stephen Jones spilled the beans to the Chicago Sun Times about how McVeigh from day one lied to cover-up the fact that there were other accomplices to the crime.

Attorney-client confidentiality normally prohibits such disclosures. But Jones said he believes McVeigh has waived that privilege by attacking him in his new biography, "American Terrorist"

Jones went on to say that McVeigh, admitted in early defense interviews that there was a second person who walked into the Ryder truck rental shop when he rented the truck that carried the bomb.

According to the Chicago Sun Times

"McVeigh adamantly denied that this second person--the never-identified "John Doe 2" of the bombing case--was with him. He explained him away to Jones as just a bystander.

All four other people who were at the Ryder shop that afternoon, two days before the bombing, saw McVeigh enter with this second man. Business records show there was no other transaction besides McVeigh's that afternoon and the Ryder employees assumed the man was with McVeigh. The FBI and prosecutors, unable to come up with an identity for him, later resolved it by saying the witnesses were mistaken and that McVeigh was alone.

In a polygraph test given by a defense expert in 1995, McVeigh was asked a series of questions about the crime.

Three questions dealt with whether some as-yet-unknown person had given him any help and whether he was lying in the test. On those three, out of a dozen, McVeigh showed "indications of deception," the polygraph examiner reported."

But why would McVeigh Lie? Why would he want to take the fall?

Well once again we need to look at history and a little something called "Consensual Executions." It is where a condemned prisoner rejects all appeals and demands that the state carry out the executions. Gary Mark Gilmore was one of the convicted murderers in history that demanded that his appeals stop and that the execution be carried out without the "foot dragging."

What this does is sets the wheels in motion for the prisoner. It actually gives him the right to decide his fate. We donít allow innocent people who are riddled with cancer the right to choose the right to die, yet we let an unrepentent bastard like McVeigh decide if he gets to rot in prison?

It literally gives McVeigh control of the situation and the majority plays into it.

Because he deserves to die.

Some have expressed concern that he is attempting to turn himself into a martyr figure, and that his execution may lead to acts of retaliatory violence by individuals who share his political beliefs. That might be, but as I have said before do Americans really want a revolution?

For this idiot?

I am no fan of McVeigh, I donít sympathize with him and I donít tolerate or excuse his killing of innocent people and his reducing them to "collateral damage."

My argument is that if we rush to execute McVeigh we are killing a key witness to what may be an even bigger conspiracy. An even bigger network or cooperative endeavor that is hell bent on overthrowing the government.

Timothy McVeighís lawyers asked a federal appeals court to stop his execution because the FBI held back evidence that someone else could have "masterminded" the terrorist attack.

The attorneys said evidence that someone else had masterminded the attack and others had participated could have made a critical difference to the jury that decided in 1997 that McVeigh should die instead of serving a life prison term.

So now, more and more evidence is pointing that McVeigh did not act alone.

We are now seeing an even darker picture to the execution.

The rushing to carry out the death of McVeigh may even jeopardize national security.

If the truth points to many conspirators in the Oklahoma City case then there is a terrorist network within the United States that is still at large.

It is obvious that the FBI had already determined that a lone nut assassin carried out the horrible act of the murder of 168 people early in the investigation and suppressed anything that would have deterred that conclusion.

This would mean in essence that Attorney General John Ashcroft is deliberately compounding the threat of a terrorist network by rushing the execution of one of the main leads to finding out who may have worked in tandem with McVeigh and Terri Nichols.

The FBI is still uncovering documents to this day.

Canít we see this?

Is it better to kill McVeigh in order to satisfy the entire countryís need for retaliatory "justice" or is it better for the countryís national security that we go lightly and grant the appeal and try and find all the culprits?

As far as I can tell that the majority of the 300 victims, the majority of the United States, and the media that a bird in the hand is better than two in the bush.

Well, that might be, but what kind of birds are we allowing to lurk in the bushes?

The bird that is in the hand can either die or live. The wisdom of the old savant fits in this case now more than ever. Either way we are damned unless we use wisdom. If we kill McVeigh, we run the risk of unleashing a terrorist network who will keep him and his terror very much alive.

"The bird is as you will it. It is either alive or dead. In your hands you hold its fate."

The fate of the bird is that it will be crushed on June 11th, 2001.

But will it truly die?

As you desire it so it shall be.

Return To Ground Zero

Voice Your Opinion