Site Map

THE FRANKLIN COVER-UP -- CHILD ABUSE, SATANISM, AND MURDER IN NEBRASKA

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108.  IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.

CHAPTER 23:  THE OKLAHOMA BOMBING -- THE REAL STORY

Since the bomb -- or bombs -- ripped through the Oklahoma City Federal Building on April 19, 1995, I have received through fluke or fate, a huge amount of information about the bombing. Based on this, I will give here my best assessment of what actually happened -- what Americans in future years will understand about the events in Oklahoma City.

As noted, my first involvement came when the F.B.I. sought my assistance, because of my successful representation of various militia groups across the United States.

Then, certain bombing victims asked me to file civil litigation against whomever caused their injuries. Some of these victims were in hospitals at the time, severely injured, and able to speak only through writing notes to others to deliver to me.

I immediately put together an investigative team to look at the event and to try to determine what had actually occurred. The head of that team was Ted Gunderson, the former Special Agent in Charge (SAC) of the FBI's Los Angeles field office, who had had 800 agents working under him, and with whom I had collaborated in the Franklin case. Ted and his team arrived in Oklahoma before the dust had even settled from the explosion.

"Unknown to me at the time, I had taken a quantum leap in the direction of the Octopus when I contacted Ted Gunderson. ... He had been Senior Special Agent in Charge (SAC) at Los Angeles FBI headquarters from 1977 to 1979 when he retired from the FBI and went to work as chief investigator for F. Lee Bailey, Esq. Prior to that, from 1960 to 1965, Gunderson was Special Agent Supervisor at FBI headquarters in Washington, D.C. Interestingly, amongst a prestigious list of positions nationwide, he was also SAC from 1973 to 1977 in Dallas, Texas (where he became friends with Clint Murchison, Jr., according to his live-in partner, J.M. J.M. stated in phone interviews that she and Gunderson attended parties with Murchison in Dallas, and Gunderson phoned him often from their Manhattan Beach home). ... If in fact, F.I.D.C.O. was a vehicle of The Octopus, then the tentacles of its Board of Directors lead straight to the head. Clint Murchison, Jr. of Dallas, Texas was the son of Clint Murchison, Sr. who, according to Dick Russell, author of the book, "The Man Who Knew Too Much," (pp. 521523) was cut from the same political cloth as H.L. Hunt." 

 -- Carol Marshall, "The Last Circle"

Much later, after this initial work was completed, I became the attorney for a man named Hoppi Heidelberg, who was one of the federal grand jurors who had helped to indict Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols for the Oklahoma City bombing. Hoppi came to me because he believed the government planned to indict him for his work on the grand jury. It seems that Heidelberg had read his instructions on his responsibility and authority as a member of a federal grand jury, and was determined to do his job. Hoppi Heidelberg is a true patriot.

Hoppi had come to the conclusion that the government was covering up facts, was refusing to deal properly with the grand jury, and was trying to narrow the case to Mr. McVeigh and Mr. Nichols. Hoppi has said on talk shows nationwide, that he believes that there is a "John Doe 2" -- and probably 3 and 4 -- and that the government is refusing to share that information with the American people. Hoppi was in fact removed from the grand jury -- after the indictments of McVeigh and Nichols.

I emphasize at this point that nothing I say here violates, in my opinion, any information I learned from grand juror Hoppi Heidelberg, either from the standpoint of violating federal grand jury laws or violating attorney client relationships. All information disclosed here, was obtained by me from my own separate investigations.

With respect to my own investigation of the bombing on behalf of injured victims, the following events raised serious questions in my mind in regards to the case:

1. Our investigation revealed that the so-called fertilizer bomb could not, by itself, have caused the destruction of the Federal Building, and in the manner described. Today, there are many theories, including the "Hydro-Dynamic" theory of a "hydrodynamic" super-bomb, which is highly classified, and which would have been used in conjunction with the basic fertilizer bomb. There are also the theories of General Partin, a well-known retired army general, of bombs of different types, including the possibility that bombs were placed inside at key points in the building to destroy its supports.

Our investigation shows that the fertilizer bomb -- as it has been described by government officials as the single source of the explosive -- is not accurate. Highly qualified military personnel have observed, that if the explosion were to have been the result of only the fertilizer bomb, then a degree of expertise would have been required for its construction and placement, far beyond the capabilities of either McVeigh or Nichols. Such a fertilizer bomb would have to be a precisely constructed "shape charge," all of whose force would have to  be directed at the building's supports, and at precisely the right angle.

2. In the investigation, I retained the most respected (and expensive) bomb experts in the world, John A. Kennedy and Associates, Inc., out of Hoffman Estates, Illinois. They had investigated the World Trade Center bombing, and are recognized as one of the world's best, if not the best, in the field.

3. I prepared documents to go to court to force the government to keep the Federal Building standing long enough for experts to examine the building, the soil, and environs, to establish what caused the destruction, in particular what type of explosive was used.

4. Only hours before I was to file the legal papers for a civil action to keep the building standing, I was contacted by Timothy McVeigh's attorneys, who presented me with two major requests.

First, they asked that I allow them to file the motions to keep the building standing so that the investigation could be conducted. They had cogent legal arguments for this request: because McVeigh was/is under federal criminal charges, he had the definite legal right to keep the building standing under Federal rules of evidence which grant criminal defendants the right to preserve evidence that would significantly impact their defense. It was clear that if McVeigh's attorneys believed, or even suspected government cover-up, they would definitely want the building examined.

Their second request was that I release from retainer the bomb investigation team I had assembled -- John A. Kennedy and Associates -- which, they claimed, they wanted to hire. I granted these requests to McVeigh's attorneys.

A few hours later, I watched in horror as CNN and all the national news channels reported that McVeigh's attorneys had no intent to file any motions to keep the Federal Building standing. They had "just reached agreement with the government," the reporters explained, to permit the building to be destroyed almost immediately.

Angry beyond belief, I called McVeigh's attorney and asked what they were doing. Since this all occurred on a weekend I could take no legal action to stop the building's destruction. McVeigh's attorney told me, "Oh yes, we are going to allow the building to be destroyed." "Why?" I demanded. "Because we could not afford to pay the retainer fee that the Kennedy and Associates firm wanted," he answered.

Shocked by this feeble explanation, I asked, "Well, just how much do they want?" McVeigh's attorney floored me: "$30,000," he said. "And we have no resources to pay it, because we are a court-appointed attorney and there are no funds for this purpose."

"For God's sake!" I screamed at him. "I will raise the money! I will pay the fee! There is too much at stake for America. How," I demanded, "can McVeigh go along with wanting that building destroyed, when that building is the one thing that can tell America the story of what really happened? I will get you the money, somehow, but don't refuse to keep the building up for that reason!"

My protests were futile. Within hours of my call, by mutual agreement between McVeigh's attorneys and the government prosecutors, the building was destroyed, and any evidence was destroyed with it.

***

What really did happen in Oklahoma City? Without violating any federal laws, the following is my best estimate on what transpired and how, based upon countless meetings with witnesses, victims, experts, and information gathered by my own investigative team led by Ted Gunderson. The "why" of all of this, is what I do not know in detail -- at least not yet.

The United States government -- probably as it should have -- was investigating a group of individuals, in particular Timothy McVeigh, who were inclined to want to "get even with the government for what they perceived to be its excesses and violations of the Constitution. The government infiltrated the McVeigh group, a standard operating procedure in such investigations.

Unfortunately, the government, was using low-quality, unreliable informants and infiltrators who were themselves more dangerous than either McVeigh or Nichols.

The government supervisors actively provided government resources and assistance -- through their informants and infiltrators -- to McVeigh and Nichols. They may have even provided certain chemicals and materiel. Most importantly, the government supervisors were aware of the planning of the bomb, the personalities involved, and the resources available.

There was a John Doe 1 and a John Doe 2 and probably several other John Does -- but they were the government infiltrators the government dare not admit existed, lest the American public find out just how deeply involved the government was.

There is still the open question of terrorism against the United States by a foreign power -- but this would involve complicity with at least certain U.S. agencies or personnel.

It is certain that the government knew from the beginning, that there were no organized militias or militia conspiracy involved in the bombing as such. Yet, government spokesmen in a coordinated fashion fostered the idea that the militias were involved, and that the militias were the most dangerous animal facing all Americans. For months after the Oklahoma bombing, witch hunts against the militias were carried out under the government cover of "national security" -- the same cover used and abused far too often in the last two decades of American history, including in the Iran/Contra trial.

WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?  JOHN W. DECAMP:  DOUBLE AGENT?

"John, it sounds to me like you have the makings of another book. Believe me, I know this Militia/Patriot movement is more significant than most Americans, and particularly the press and politicians, could ever realize. I fear that our government does not understand the nature of this movement, nor its potential significance to this country.  I watched the Anti-War Movement render it impossible for this country to conduct or win the Vietnam War. I tell you, dear friend, that this Militia and Patriot movement in which, as an attorney, you have become one of the centerpieces, is far more significant and far more dangerous for America than the Anti-War Movement ever was, if it is not intelligently dealt with. And I really mean this.  It is not because these people are armed, that America need be concerned, it is not that these people stockpile weapons and have paramilitary training sessions, that they are dangerous.  What concerns me is something far more serious, that I fear our politicians do not see, cannot see, and and refuse to deal with.  They are dangerous because these people are, in most cases mature citizens who have done everything you just described and who, tragically and in many cases very justifiably, have lost faith in the integrity and honesty of their own government. Yes, they are dangerous because, to use your words, John, they are true patriots who are disenchanted with the government and the system they have grown up loving, supporting and giving their lives and talents for from the moment they were born. For many of them, it is as if they learned their mother was a prostitute and that they are bastards. It really is that traumatic. They are dangerous, John, because there are so many of them. It is one thing to have a few nuts or dissidents. They can be dealt with, justly or otherwise, so that they do not pose a danger to the system. It is quite another situation when you have a true movement -- millions of citizens -- believing something -- particularly when the movement is made up of society's average, successful citizens. The handwriting is on the wall in several places.  We know from CNN and USA Today polls that about three out of every four Americans no longer trust their own government. And the distance between the government and the citizens is increasing instead of decreasing. And that means, quite simply, John, that there is a base of support for the patriot and militia community which is not visible and may not be seen or understood by our government. Our government and political leaders are still in the mode of viewing the outspoken and visible members of the so-called patriot movement as simply a few nuts who need to be shut up. This is a very dangerous trend. It is time for government and the media to begin closing the gap between the government, the media and the patriot movement, rather than exacerbating it. The first step in that process is communication. John, someone needs to step into the forefront and tell the story of the militias and the patriot movement -- what it is, why it has developed, what it means to America if not properly addressed by government; who is involved and just how broad-based this movement or attitude is; where it is strongest, and how this movement can be positively directed, rather than negatively directed -- perhaps by foreign powers. That is what your next book should be, and it must be written, rather than simply spoken to me. And yes, John, I will do everything to help you do this book and tell this story. Your book must become the communications device where both sides of this controversy can go to learn about themselves but, more important, to learn about the other side. And you can and must do that because you are really in the perfect position, and have the capability to do it. In fact, right now maybe you are the only one in that position. Should be a best seller. Start on it right away in fact. OK?"

 -- William Colby to John Van De Camp

The government's legitimate concern with national security has been turned into a banner under which government officials and judges and agencies and politicians can, and do get away with almost anything and everything. They cover their mistakes. They cover their expenditures. They cover their sins. And they are covering up the true story of the Oklahoma bombing, not necessarily because they intend to be evil (I hope), but most likely because they cannot admit how their own negligence contributed to it.

At least, that is what I believe at this point.

Go to Next Page