Comments: April 19

though, there is one human leg that does not belong to any of the 168 victims, unaccounted for. The leg is either from a very short man or an average woman, and the fact that none of teh rest of that body was recovered suggests that the person was staning very close to the bomb.

The 169th victim? given that there hasnt been any missing-persons outcry from people who were supposed to be at the Federal building that day, its likely someone who was not supposed to be there...

Posted by Aziz at April 20, 2004 02:11 PM

Yeah, I saw that. I think it's entirely possible that the leg belongs to no one involved in the bombing.

I think there are a lot of unanswered questions about the Oklahoma City case, and like I said, one doesn't have to believe in black helicopters to think so.

Posted by Bill at April 20, 2004 06:25 PM

heh, but the Mystery Leg sounds so... coool.

Posted by Aziz at April 21, 2004 08:48 AM

One of the things I came across in the Jones book bearing on the leg:

Jones was convinced, as noted, that McVeigh went to great lengths to take the fall for the bombing, to the exclusion of the "Others Unknown." Jones had McVeigh take a polygraph test at one point -- sort of saying to McVeigh, "Okay, you're so proud you had no help, are you willing to put it to the test on a polygraph to prove it to us?"

On three questions dealing with other accomplices, McVeigh's responses suggested he was not telling the truth.

They also asked him, "Do you know who that leg belongs to?" McVeigh, according to the machine truthfully, answered no.

Again, nothing definitive one way or the other, but interesting nonetheless.

Posted by Bill at April 21, 2004 12:51 PM


I don't know much about the case, but if McVeigh was going to great lengths to take the blame to the exclusion of others, why did he plead not guilty and go to trial?

Posted by Abu Noor al-Irlandee at April 21, 2004 02:51 PM

Sorry for not responding sooner. McVeigh, according to Jones, wanted to be acquitted for the bombing; that may sound contradictory to his claim of sole responsibility for the bombing, but there it is.

I'll try to explain more in another post on the book tonight.

Posted by Bill at April 22, 2004 01:06 PM