Junior history major
On April 19, 1995, at 9:02 a.m., the Alfred P. Murrah Building in Oklahoma City was partially destroyed by a powerful truck bomb. The explosion wiped out 168 lives and remains the deadliest incident of domestic terrorism to this day. This attack in particular was not committed by a Middle-Eastern Muslim, but by a white American who grew up in rural New York. His name was Timothy McVeigh, and he would meet his end in a detention facility in Indiana six years after the attack.
As he would later admit in interviews and in a letter sent to Fox News, McVeigh bombed the building in response to the controversial Ruby Ridge fiasco and Waco siege that had happened a few years before his attack. Both were raids conducted by the federal government and both incidents led to civilian deaths. The growing militia movement, which still exists today, saw this as evidence of the increasing tyranny of the federal forces. McVeigh himself drove to Waco, Texas, to protest the siege and grew more radical with the passage of time. By late 1994, he scouted Oklahoma City and decided to destroy the aforementioned federal building with the help of co-conspirator Terry Nichols.
In the modern day, government tyranny is still a problem. Whether it is the growth of the police state, prosecutors caught withholding evidence or the tightening of gun laws to allegedly protect us, the growth of government power is alarming. It’s frightening to think there might be more Timothy McVeighs out there who have some legitimate grievance yet are willing to kill the innocent to prove a point or to punish the aggressor.
To make things clear, claiming McVeigh had a legitimate grievance does not mean the bombing was morally justified. The problem is that when the government is actually after our rights and begins to encroach on our lives like a mold, it becomes inevitable that rational and irrational fears will spread. Whether that fear is the belief in a United Nations takeover or that 9/11 was orchestrated by the White House, there is a legitimate grievance behind it. Whether the fear is felt by “angry white men” or their leftist counterparts, it’s perfectly fair to point fingers at the government for allowing this toxic environment to come into existence. In this type of political climate, it is unavoidable that citizens go to extremes, whether it be the left or right.
To cite a specific example, fellow writers have consistently and rightfully pointed out that police militarization is an issue. Can’t we take it a step further and argue that this situation will lead people to become more and more afraid of their government? Can we not also argue that retaliation will become inevitable if the situation is not de-escalated?
To end this column, know that I have no intention of exonerating McVeigh or encouraging violence against the state, regardless of what you think. This column is a reflection of what I’ve learned about the militia movement as well as current events. It seems the debate over government authority versus civil rights is as alive today as it was in McVeigh’s time.
Gonzalo Molinolo is a junior history major. He can be reached at gmolinolodbk@gmail.com.
