Overwatch

In this edition of Overwatch (the initial installment is here), I want to point you to something Mark Tapscott brought up today. Tapscott has at least once before publicized the work of Jayna Davis. Davis is an investigative reporter from Oklahoma City, and ever since the bombing of the Federal Building there in 1995, Davis has built up a case for Iraqi involvement in that bombing.

Davis has written a book entitled The Third Terrorist about her investigation.

In his post today, Tapscott asked Davis to provide a summary of her evidence.

Davis says of her investigation:

In detailed affidavits, these witnesses confidently identified eight specific Middle Eastern men, the majority of whom were former Iraqi soldiers, colluding with the Oklahoma City bombers, Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols.

All of these suspects immigrated to the United States following the Persian Gulf War, ostensibly seeking political asylum from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein. However, my investigation revealed they were, in fact, false defectors - not outspoken dissidents as they had claimed.
...
Nearly two dozen Oklahomans have signed sworn affidavits in which they accuse these ardent Saddam supporters and ex-enemy combatants of aiding and abetting McVeigh and Nichols during critical stages of the bombing plot.

The most incriminating testimony centered around one man - Hussain Hashem Al-Hussaini. Al-Hussaini not only fit the FBI's physical description in the official arrest warrant for John Doe 2, but according to veteran law enforcement officials, was a dead ringer for the government's profile sketch of the elusive suspect.

I bring this up to say most of the mainstream media (MSM) has virtually ignored Davis's work.

Let me say I have not read Davis's book, and I don't have any vested interest other than as a concerned citizen, but I've read enough of her work to say she raises some serious questions.

I am not a particularly conspiratorial-minded person, but like with any conspiracy, I say if the conspiracy is so patently false, than asking a few question ought to expose that fairly easily. If there is no truth to the allegations, the false charges should fall apart quickly.

Davis raises important questions about what our government knew then, and about what it knows now. As Americans, wouldn't we want to know if our government avoided looking into allegations that another nation committed an act of war? Why are agencies of the US government so uncooperative with Davis?

Isn't this the job of the media? What is the harm into looking into Davis's work and saying either she is full of beans, or that there might be something to her work?

(Note: Much of Davis's summary seems to be taken from this FrontPageMagazine interview.)

Here is a Frank Gaffney column summarizing Davis's work.