The Passing of the Torch
Outpost of Freedom
June 11, 2001
This morning, a perversion of justice and the Constitution succeeded in taking the life of an American Patriot. Timothy James McVeigh was executed, by lethal injection, in Terre Haute, Indiana. His crime, say the courts, was the murder of federal agents.
McVeigh’s death might be more appropriately ascribed to the inability of the US government to function, in any judicial capacity, in a manner consistent with the authority granted government by the Constitution.
After a failure of the Articles of Confederation, the Constitution was created and adopted (ratified) to enable a new government, with more power in the exercise of government, but, with specific limitations established with regard to its jurisdiction, authority and imposing upon it an obligation to protect certain rights which had been deemed, by the Constitution and other founding documents, to have been granted to the People -- by God.
In the matter of Jurisdiction, the Constitution clearly sets forth the ability of the federal government to extend "exclusive jurisdiction" over a few enumerated locations. Even considering the expansion of those locations by the Northwest Ordinance, those limitations were upheld by the Supreme Court for many years. Federal authority over the actions of individuals was extremely limited, and with few exceptions, existed only when authorized by Constitutional Amendment. Hence the absence of federal statutes against assassination or murder, until recently.
Likewise, the jurisdiction of federal agencies was severally limited, and extended only to those cases which were well within the Interstate Commerce provisions. The Supreme Court has struck down a number of laws, which, though they attempted to appeal to the interstate Commerce provision, were tied to the provision by such a stretch as to be deemed without Constitutional authority. The striking down of the federal "gun free school zones" is an example of an unlawful presumption on the authority of the federal government.
Many federal agencies were created with a specific purpose. For example, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) was instituted to act as a tax collection agency, under the Treasury Department. Tax matters have always been considered, in this country, to be civil in nature, not criminal.
Within the Department of Justice, there was an agency created whose purpose was to investigate criminal activity. The authority for it to "enforce" laws was written in to its directive in 1994, and is a gross violation of the intention of the Founders. They had always sought a separation between force and civil authority. Never had it been contemplated that an agency could use force without civil authority. The Federal Bureau of Investigation was within that scope – until it began, even prior to its description being changed – enforcing rather than simply investigating.
These two agencies came together in 1993 in an attack on a religious group in Waco, Texas. The incident began when the tax collection agency (BATF) entered upon lands recognized by McClellan County and the state of Texas, as a Church. When they entered, they entered with guns drawn and with every intention of entering the Church through windows and doors, without obtaining the consent of the Pastor of that Church. They also intended to shoot anyone who opposed that entry. And, they succeeded in both.
After having four of their own killed (and killing seven of the Church members), they withdrew from their combat positions and regrouped, just a few hundred yards away from the Church – limiting access to only those deemed acceptable by the tax collection agency.
Soon, they were reinforced by the investigators. Of course, they lied, but just a little bit, about what had occurred, so their bigger brother, the investigators, took family under wing and began an investigation which resulted in an armed camp, much akin to a military installation, and a defensive perimeter (crime scene) larger than any before ever envisioned.
For fifty-one days, the tax collectors and investigators imposed every sort of mental anguish and abuse that they could concoct – upon the parishioners huddling, scared for their lives, inside of their flimsy Church.
During the course of the fifty-one day siege, the agencies, and their compatriots in Washington, D.C., began a campaign of deceit in an effort to demonize the pastor and his congregation – and, detract from an honest evaluation of the circumstance by both the public and the government.
However, the biggest problem was that for the near first time in the history of this country, the agencies, not the Congress or the President, determined what they would do, how they would do it and what the rules would be by which all would play.
Many people observed, first hand, the encampment of federal ‘soldiers’ just outside of a quiet Texas town. They also observed the support troops, which had been deputized by the FBI to act as a perimeter guard to the ‘crime scene’. These deputies, who had sworn to uphold the Constitution in the performance of their duties had turned their backs on that oath, and blindly obeyed the unlawful orders given by this civilian agency with guns. Timothy McVeigh was among those observers.
Timothy, like so many others around the country, had sought, by peaceful means, to bring about a return to Constitutional limitations of governmental authority. After all, being a decorated veteran and hero of Desert Storm, Timothy had demonstrated his willingness to put his life on the line in defense of that Constitution. He had no choice but to express his discontent with the government’s usurpation of authority by peaceful means.
Then, on April 19, 1993, as the world watched, a tragedy of epic proportions occurred in the area controlled, absolutely, by those federal agents. Regardless of blame over who started the fire that consumed over eighty lives -- men, women and children, the precautions which could have prevented the disaster, or, at least, minimized the degree of death and destruction, failed to do so. By any stretch of the imagination, this would be nothing less than gross negligence. But, considering the obligation of the government to safeguard life and property, the failure to do so constitutes a far more serious breach of public trust than would at first be recognized.
As time went on, it became apparent that federal agents told lies to federal agents, Congressional committees and the public. Evidence was lost, misplaced or hidden. Eventually, in 1994, when those who had escaped with their lives stood trial, these same agents committed perjury.
Unlike the events in Boston, in 1775, no government agents ever stood trial so that the People might judge whether they had violated the laws, or the Constitution. Instead their only judgment came from their superiors within their respective agencies – the same superiors who authorized these unlawful activities in the first place.
Complicit with these agents, the court gave instructions which some of the jurors later complained left no alternative but to convict those Church members on trial, though the lowest possible ‘crime’ was the choice of the jurors who felt that if there was a crime, it was more technical than destructive. The court became even more contemptuous when it imposed maximum sentences, and even came to some conclusions, which the jury had not, resulting in the judge increasing sentences to up to forty years for some of the defendants.
Many of the same observers of the events in Waco watched the judicial process to see if the government was, in the least, capable of applying justice to the matter, or whether it was more intent on preserving an air of respectability to the actions of the forces which had already decimated the Church to a handful of followers.
The conclusion, by those observers, which has been proven to be correct in the ensuing years, was that the government had determined that the government (king) could do no wrong.
As a result of the conviction of the Church members, the Constitutionalist community, throughout the country, became outraged. Many advocates openly expressed their intentions to go to Washington and "hang the Congress from light posts." Others advocated blowing up government buildings, killing government agents and taking any action necessary to force the government back in to obedience to the Constitution.
Among all the words, however, only one man began planning an action consistent with the words of others. He began traveling around the country, securing funding, expanding his knowledge of explosive, visiting potential targets and preparing a plan of action that would come to fruition just two years, to the day, after the destructive conclusion of the vents at the little Church in Waco.
To carry out his plan, he realized that there was risk. Government infiltration of Constitutionalist groups had probably reached epic proportions. Whether Louis Beam’s "Leaderless Resistance" was a part of his study, or not, it was apparent that he recognized the risk of a broad base of support, so he settled on enlisting the help of two people who he had known for many years.
Had he sought a larger base of support, he might well have had the advantage of sophisticated explosives, timers and delivery methods. Instead, he opted for a homemade bomb, using the best materials readily available.
On April 19, 1995, Timothy James McVeigh completed the execution of his plan. Though he had anticipated even more destruction than occurred, he was successful in bringing attention to his actions throughout the world. He had little doubt, considering both the historical and recent attributes of the date that the reasoning behind the bombing would be obvious. He was sure that government would understand his message, and, he was equally sure that he had just committed an act that consummated his status as an enemy of the US government. He was, finally, involved in a war to restore Constitutional government to the United States of America.
- - - - - - -
In 1995, The Prosecuting Attorney and the Defense Attorney, in the United States vs. Timothy James McVeigh proceedings, formally agreed that ALL documents obtained by the government, regarding the investigation of the Oklahoma City Bombing, be provided to the Defense Team. This agreement was affirmed and ordered by Judge Matsch, who was also the trial judge. As a result of this agreement, a new database was set up to track all documents relating to the case. Virtually every document relating to the investigation was to be logged into the database.
Early on, however, Defense Attorney Stephen Jones asked for documents that were referred to in other documents, but were not listed in the database. Frequently, he was told that there were no other documents. He had little choice but to proceed with what was available.
On May 9, 2001, just a few days before the scheduled execution of Timothy McVeigh, and after months of knowing of the existence of thousands of documents which had been excluded from the database, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (remember them from Waco?) went public with the fact that over three thousand documents had been ‘found’ that were not included in the database, nor were they provided to the Defense Team – in direct violation of the agreement, the order and the law.
The next day, the Attorney General, John Ashcroft, stayed the execution of Timothy McVeigh until June 11, 2001. This, he said, was sufficient time for the Defense Team to study all three thousand documents and conclude that there was nothing that would clear their client – who had, by the way, already confessed to the crime.
As time went on, the number of documents that had been excluded approached five thousand. Many of them dealt with the possibility of witnesses to more than just McVeigh and his two army buddies, Michael Fortier and Terry Nichols. Perhaps so, but if justice is to prevail, all of the facts – especially those which are required to be turned over to satisfy Due Process – must be made available to the Defense Team. Due Process, after all, requires a rigid adherence to the law. If failure to advise someone that he has the right to the presence of a lawyer is a violation of Due Process, then, surely, denial of access to all evidence is, likewise, a denial of Due Process.
And, as for confessions, are the valid if they are not sworn to, or if they come through third party writings? Evidence, perhaps, but not sufficient to deny someone Due Process of Law.
Even Judge Matsch realized the severity of the problem of the missing documents when he berated the FBI for their failure to comply with his order. But, then, Judge Matsch, just a few minutes later, denied a stay of execution to allow the Defense Team to complete their review of the documents.
- - - - - - -
Timothy McVeigh acted as he did because he saw that government was incapable of conducting itself with principle and integrity. He saw a government resorting to "brute force" in dealing with other nations of the world, as well as its own people. He wanted to expose the actions of the government – to bring attention to the fact that it was no longer operating as was intended. He was willing to die to reveal these truths – but the government continued to insist that it was operating properly, and was capable of acting within the laws.
As his execution date approached, the FBI, in true form, once again exposed itself as a bungling, incompetent investigative agency in its inability to keep track of its own records. Final proof of the need to protect Americans from a government who has set itself has the almighty knower of all truths.
Unlike the government, Timothy McVeigh’s head IS "bloody but unbowed"!
But, today, Timothy McVeigh is dead. And, it is time to pass the torch.
Will you receive it?
Return to McVeigh"s Forum