Going into watching this, I hadn't realized this was a PBS documentary.
If you were wanting to learn about the Oklahoma City Bombing (OKCB), then you might be disappointed, because they quickly transition to talking about the Aryan Nation at the beginning. Then they talk about The Order (Bob Mathews).
Probably half the film is spent going over Ruby Ridge and Waco. Of course I fully understand SOME screen time for the two events, briefly, because these were alleged to be the catalysts for McVeigh's actions.
Considering The Order and the Aryan Nation have basically nothing to do with OKCB, you can definitely expect there is something awry going on, and the tagline on the cover—"A CAUTIONARY TALE OF HATE IN AMERICA"—reveals the propaganda that will follow.
In other words, typical PBS.
The sad story is told by victims and people who lost loved ones. But any insight by "experts" is from the perspective of the FBI and the $PLC. You might question why that's an issue. I think it's personally reasonable to interview people from each organization.
But both are unwilling to stray from the official narrative and completely gloss over many disturbing details. The FBI regularly made attempts to cover the story up. John Doe No. 2 was thrown out despite ample eyewitness testimony of many people involved who were not Nichols or Fortier. ARA, Elohim City, Andy Strassmeir, Terrence Yeakey, Guthrie, Trentadue, Carol Howe, etc, never get a single mention.
John Doe No. 2 is quickly passed over because ONE witness might have mistook the man McVeigh was with with Todd Bunting:
While they do bear a resemblance, there were actually multiple sketches of John Doe No. 2 and many, many eyewitnesses. There's also no consideration of how different the hats are, nor how common these two hats might be. It's highly disingenuous to hand wave away the possibility of others being involved JUST because of Bunting.
Why don't they want to mention Elohim City? It would seem like an apt segue for a PBS film... what with their white separatist/nationalist beliefs—some could be called neo-nazis and some of them are prone to violence (ARA had members staying at Elohim city, for example; in fact, going back to Aryan Nations... they actually did have some members staying in Elohim City, and while I have no idea who or when these people might have been there, this would have been an effective way to justify and tie in the Aryan Nations footage at the beginning, which makes it even more suspicious).
The reason they don't mention it is because they don't want to link Tim McVeigh to Elohim City. Why? Because both the FBI and $PLC had informants in Elohim City, which could imply foreknowledge or a sting gone wrong or some greater plot beyond the lone bomber theory.
Now, I understand, some people think the evidence linking McVeigh to Elohim City is not strong enough. Fair enough. My problem with this is that Elohim City has a far better connection to the OKCB case than The Order or the Aryan Nation, and including the latter two over Elohim City is suspicious. If they stuck to JUST the OKCB case, then I'd let it slide, but you'd think PBS, a media outlet always itching to demonize any white nationalist movement, would be eager to link Elohim City to McVeigh.
Speaking of $PLC, Mark Potok makes far too many appearances.
Look at that anti-white discount George Lucas.
And here is a larger image with better quality (and European demographic change). It's not clear to me what "Anti-Latino" refers to—perhaps anti-immigration groups.
So here's an example of one of the "experts" used in the documentary. Not only does he demonize any group that likes guns, is nationalist, or separatist, but it appears he probably celebrates the declining white percentage in all of these countries. There's one other person from the $PLC and several others who focus on "hate."
So Aryan Nations has a connection to Randy Weaver (Ruby Ridge). An informant within Aryan Nations pressures Randy Weaver into shortening the barrel of a shotgun to where it will be illegal, thus entrapping him. Not only do government plants listen in and inform on people, they also often stoke the fire.
Then agents in military fatigues, waving rifles around, go to his cabin and a shootout ensues. Yes, he probably should have showed up for his court date or given up in this standoff, but he was acquitted of all crimes except failure to appear to court. The deaths associated with Ruby Ridge were ruled as self defense. His son, wife, and an agent died. It was a terrible embarrassment for the government.
Next was Waco. Another embarrassment for the government, and much more lethal. 82 people died in total, including many children. For the most part, PBS showed how badly the ATF and FBI handled this case. But it's hard to make any excuses for the government, that frequently seemed willing to escalate needlessly rather than deescalate.
The bit of fire shown behind the tank in the footage shown is not indicative of the FBI starting the fire, however, many alleged that pyrotechnic rounds were fired into the windows at key places in the compound (CS gas was everywhere and highly flammable).
It seems pretty clear the FBI was responsible for the fire. Even if the FBI didn't start the fire, they behaved recklessly and irresponsibly, and showed no regard for the people inside the Branch Davidian compound. Unloading tear gas and rifle fire at a building with children in it? Not allowing the fire trucks to put the fire out? Letting the compound and much of the evidence burn? Inexcusable.
And it should also be stated that the Branch Davidians LET the ATF pull away when they called a ceasefire and retreated. They could have slaughtered the ATF at that point, but they let them retreat.
The filmmakers seem willing to lick the wounds of the FBI, but they were set on raiding the compound. Koresh offered an inspection, and if they had to detain Koresh, they could have simply nabbed him when he went to town, or tried a less hostile approach. And with the way they used the audio clips, they tried to make it sound like the Branch Davidians tried to commit suicide via fire, exonerating the FBI of possibly having inadvertently or deliberately starting the fire.
Aside from these two events serving as catalysts, McVeigh is camped out near the Branch Davidian compound, along with many others who are sympathetic, finally connecting him to the narrative and focusing on OKCB.
Some of the footage is good, but it's just the official narrative. Nothing too interesting. You won't learn anything here about OKCB that isn't on Wikipedia.
They go on to hand wave away "conspiracy theories" and go with the lone bomber theory—except, no they don't. They connect his act of terror with white supremacy, neo-nazis, and the militia movement, as well as gun shows.
"The idea that there is no connection to this event and the white supremacist movement is patently false," said one of the interviewers toward the end.
"According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, more than 500 militant white supremacist groups are currently active in the United States."
Like anyone should take what the $PLC says seriously. They are biased, never do anything but slander others, and have no credibility. While it's true that some of the organizations or people they have brought attention to are violent, many of them are non-violent.
Here is an example of a terrorist attack motivated by the rhetoric of the $PLC:
Corkins -- who had chosen the research council as his target after finding it listed as an anti-gay group on the website of the Southern Poverty Law Center -- had planned to stride into the building and open fire on the people inside in an effort to kill as many as possible, he told investigators, according to the court documents.
If he'd been successful and escaped, his plan was to go to another conservative group to continue the attack, prosecutors said. A handwritten list naming three other groups he planned to attack was found among his belongings, prosecutors said.
Now, I get it, you might say someone like Dylann Roof is motivated by the rhetoric of sites like Stormfront. But Stormfront is a message board filled with many people who possess different views. It's a site for dissidents to discuss a variety of topics. It's not an authoritative site with any real power. The $PLC, on the other hand, has a lot of money behind it, and they're an informal wing of the FBI's intelligence gathering network. Many mainstream news sites quote them as an authoritative source—too many to name! When we're talking about actual tangible power, Stormfront and other similar sites are on the fringes, while the $PLC is a mainstream force of defamation that is seen as having credibility because of the authoritative pedestal mainstream media outlets place it upon.
Key members have recently been fired and/or resigned with what appears to be some kind of scandal in the works. So they might be breathing their last dying gasps at this point. Perhaps they will recover from this. Either way, they've done incredible amount of harm to the U.S. political discourse.
They try to tie McVeigh's actions to "white supremacy" of the past and hitherto. Yet they don't seem to think he has any connections to a larger web of "white supremacists" or anyone else. There's no conspiracy, according to one of the commentators. Evidently they believe such movements were a big influence on him. Is McVeigh even a white supremacist? The term white supremacist is also outdated and hardly applies to anyone. Most people lumped into being white supremacists are simply immigration restrictionists, nationalists, or separatists. Wishing to maintain homogeneity or be around similar people is somehow "supremacist."
Randy Weaver was a white nationalist, but he didn't have a criminal record before the FBI tried to pull a fast one on him, and Ruby Ridge wouldn't even be part of history if not for their entrapment. Waco didn't have anything to do with "white supremacy." Maybe McVeigh was a "white supremacist" or whatever PBS wants to call him, but this seemed very specifically an anti-government action in response to Ruby Ridge and Waco—and a lot of people who aren't in "white supremacist" circles were appalled by those two events.
Essentially, PBS is hoping you'll equate "white supremacy" with any pro-white beliefs. One must remember: just because a person is labeled as a "white supremacist," or even is one, does not mean a crime is motivated by the ideology they hold. It could be, but there are other possibilities.
You'd think they could tell the story of the OKCB without trying to tie the case to white nationalism or white separatism. As is typical with the $PLC and PBS, the propaganda is really just a thinly veiled attack on whites in general, especially those acting in their own interests. Violent "white supremacist" boogiemen who commit terrorist attacks are a very small minority. High crime areas filled with blacks, like Detroit or Chicago, result in FAR more deaths per year than any "white supremacists."
Gangs, which are HIGHLY disproportionately black and hispanic, are responsible for an enormous amount of crime, and without them, we'd be about on par with much of Europe in terms of crime. So why does the $PLC spend so much time worrying about "white supremacists" instead of gangs?
Because they're anti-white, and they only care about demonizing whites into being afraid to speak out in pursuit of their own interests (blacks and other groups can advocate for their own specific interests; whites can't without being demonized, and they're quickly becoming a plurality, and not long after that, probably a minority).
And then, one must ask, why are there "white supremacists" in the first place? Probably because of forced non-white immigration (which was not the norm before 1965), forced integration, no freedom of association, affirmative action, white flight, anti-white messages in media, etc. When you make large sweeping changes and force people together who simply don't get along, you should expect some backlash.
And they have the gall to bring on someone like Potok, who not only regularly advocates against the interests of whites, but gleefully keeps a record of declining white demographics on his office wall. The $PLC is one of the sources of the problem rather than a cure to "hate."
The audio quality is very poor, but this gives some further insight on what kind of organization the $PLC is, and they not only admit the shifting demographics they advocate for are a large part of the reason for existing "hate" groups or any rise of said groups. She even says that it's been in planning for a long while, with the passage of the 1965 Immigration Act.
Post a Comment