REVIEWSrnDirty for Dirtyrnby Samuel Francisrn”Nothing is easier than to blame the dead.”rn-Julius CaesarrnAmerican Terrorist: Timothy McVeighrnand the Oklahoma City Bombingrnhv lx)it Michel and Dan HerheckrnNew York: ReganBooks;rn426 pp., $26.00rnIn the 1944 movie Thirt)’ Seconds OverrnTokyo, Spencer Tracy, playing Col.rnJimmy Doolittle, briefs his flyers beforernthcv take off to bomb tlieir Japanese targetsrnb’ telling them that the}’ are almostrncertain to be killing civilians and that, ifrnanv of them have any moral problemsrnwith that, thev can back out now. No onerndocs, and the problem is never raisedrnagain.rnh is not known if the late, unlanientcdrnTimothy J. McVeigh ever saw DaltonrnTrumbo’s chest-thumping war moviernthat blatanriy propagandizes on behalf ofrnblowing the filtliy little Japs to smithereens.rnHis taste ran to rather more modernrnfilms, such as Star Trek and — hisrnfavorite —Clint Eastwood’s Vnforgiven,rnbut it is doubtful that he had am morernproblem with killing civihans than thernAmerican Ireroes of World War II did.rnAccording to American Terrorist, an exhaustixernand not unsympathetic accountrnof the life and thought of Timothy Mc-rnX’eigh by two Buffalo News reporters inrnwhom he confided, McVeigh did havernproblems with the Gulf War, in which hernscrcd with distinction, and with his ownrnkilling of two Iraqi soldiers in the coursernof combat. McVeigh had doubts aboutrntlie propriets’ of the Gulf War from thernSamuel Francis is the Washington editorrnfor Chronicles.rnbeginning, but he was also a professionalrnsoldier (a “warrior,” in his view) whornprided himself on being able to performrnhis mission without hesitation or complaint.rnIt was precisely the same professionalrnmilitary mentalit)’ that he broughtrnto the planning and perpetration of thernlargest act of terrorism and mass nrurdcrrnin Anrerican histor), the Oklahoma Citv’rnbombing of April 19, 1995, for which hernwas executed last June.rnMichel and Herbeck’s American Terroristrnhas been savaged for its supposedrnwhitewashing of Timothy McVeigh andrnfor providing the murderer a platformrnfrom which he was allowed to publicizernhis political beliefs and justiiy’ his actions.rnAttorney General John Ashcroft publiclyrnbegged the news media not to becomern”Timothy McVeigh’s co-conspirator inrnhis assault on America’s public safet) andrnupon America itself,” as though whatrnMcVeigh had to say was itself an act ofrnterrorism.rnMcVeigh, of course, had every right tornsay what he wanted to say, and even ifrnever,’ bit of it were chicken droppings, itrnwoidd still provide a valuable insight intornhis mind and motivations. And althoughrnmuch of what McVeigh did have to say isrnbanal in the extreme, his core messagernwas one that Americans ought to listen tornand think about.rnBy now, it is generally known thatrnMcVeigh admitted for the first time inrnMichel and Herbeck’s book that hernplanned, built, and planted the bombrnthat destroyed the Alfred P. MurrahrnBuilding and killed 168 people and that hernclaimed he acted largely alone, with onl)-rnminimal assistance from his friends, TerryrnNichols and Michael Fortier. Some,rnespecially those on the American right,rnwill faidt the book for not exploring morernintensely the various conspiracy theoriesrnthat have sprouted around McVeigh andrnthe bombing. Nowhere does the book referrnto the analysis of the bomb by retiredrnBrig. Gen. Benton K. Parhn of the U.S.rnAir Force, an explosives-technology expert,rnthat challenges the official view thatrna single bomb outside the building couldrnhave inflicted tire kind of danrage tiiat occurred.rnNor does it explore the conspiracyrntheory, woven by the New Americanrnand tire Spotlight, that seeks to implicaterna wide range of neo-Nazis, Satanists, U.S.rnand European intelligence agencies, andrnthe Clinton administration (among otherrndemons) in planning and mastermindingrnthe bombing as a kind of Reichstagrnfire with which the right-\ ing politicalrnopponents of the New World Orderrncould be smeared and discredited or suppressed.rnThe Oklahoma City bombing didrnserve that purpose, as the hysterical left-rnAUGUST 2001/21rnrnrn