Talk:Oklahoma City bombing/cutting room floor

This page contains a list of the sections or sentences that have been redacted from the main article during my 2-day editing session. --Otheus 15:50, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Rescue efforts

 * The area was flooded with rescue workers from around the nation and aid agencies coming to assist the survivors.
 * Rescue workers communicated via hand-held radios instead of cell phones due to the system overload of cell phone usage directly after the bombing.

should have been established. If the MERCC had existed, hospitals would have been able to communicate patient information. Ambulance services could then coordinate with hospitals patient flow, and communications with the Incident Command Post could have been established.
 * Many of these rescue workers developed post-traumatic stress disorder as a result.
 * Maybe this should go back in, described as "secondary victims" ?
 * Due to the large amount of shattered glass on the ground, the dogs wore specially-designed booties to protect their feet.
 * Aw, that's sooo cute! Do we have a picture??
 * The Final Report of the American Psychological Association, (APA), suggested that a Medical Emergency Response Communications Center, (MERCC),
 * this is taken out until someone can tell my why it should be in there. I mean, it's speculation on someone else's part. Should we have a pragraph on every "what if"?

Humanitarian Aid

 * (paraphrasing) Requests by rescue workers for lights, etc.
 * Were the requests met? Presumably, so if someone can find a citation... It's a minor point, but unless the requests were met, it doesn't flow in well with the section.

Federal and state government aid

 * The 15 million in disaster relief compared to the $15 billion in the 9/11 survivors fund.
 * The 9/11 disaster killed 20 times as many as the OK city bombing. Even after 16 years's inflation, the amounts are

Media involvement

 * Several reporters were arrested for interfering with rescue efforts and trespassing in unauthorized areas.
 * *yawn*
 * The national focus climaxed on April 23, when President Bill Clinton spoke in Oklahoma City

Trials and sentencing of the conspirators

 * the Talley reference does not mention the investigation

Timothy McVeigh
A mob had formed outside the police station he was being held in after learning he was possibly the orchestrator of the bombing).
 * McVeigh is thought to have modeled the bombing from a similar event described in The Turner Diaries, a white supremacist novel that was found with McVeigh when he was arrested.
 * Alluded to in the section on his arrest. Also, the ADL ref is redundant since the TMT refs also mention this
 * McVeigh's initial court-appointed lawyers were John W. Coyle III and Susan Otto. Before his arraignment, me met briefly with them and admitted to the bombings.
 * I cannot see relevance, and the "before" conflicts with the confession, which is much more important
 * When McVeigh spoke about the bombing, he called the casualties in the bombing "collateral damage" and compared the bombing to actions he had taken during the Gulf War.
 * Where does this fit in?
 * McVeigh's court-appointed attorney, Steven Jones, summarized the initial rush to blame the Oklahoma City Bombing on Muslim terrorists while arguing for a motion to review CIA investigations following the blast.
 * Makes no sense as is. I think this got over-edited
 * Before Timothy McVeigh's hearing, he was moved for his safety from Perry, Oklahoma to Tinker Air Force Base.
 * Okay, so he was unpopular.
 * apparently redundant, secondary source on McVeigh's motivations
 * apparently redundant, secondary source on McVeigh's motivations

Terry Nichols

 * the federal government reopened their investigation into the bombing after FBI agents, investigating the Midwest Bank Robbers, a white supremacist gang McVeigh had associated with, discovered blasting caps of the same type used in the Oklahoma City bombing.
 * This is highly misleading. The article says the retired investigative chief would have reopened the case, if he weren't retired. And I do not think this article is actually a reprint from the AP.
 * But if the above does make it back in, then this should also be put back in:
 * Judge Steven W. Taylor found there to be no credible, relevant, or legally admissible evidence of any persons other than McVeigh and Nichols having directly participated in the bombing of the Murrah federal building.
 * By the way, yes, I think it's obvious more people were involved, but so what? Both the US Govt and McVeigh were pretty happy that he was the fall guy.
 * Comment: Neutral party here, but see Paris is in France. I saw a couple other things I would comment on but at the risk of DQing myself as reviewer I will hold off.A mcmurray (talk • contribs) 14:13, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Reply: Cool. I feel the section needs expanding, and so this should go back in. However, given that it's likely to spur the conspiracy crowd, I'd rather keep it out for now. --Otheus 15:48, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Understandable. Just pointing it out. A mcmurray (talk • contribs) 16:28, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * As an additional note I am sure it can be reworded so that it doesn't basically speak directly to conspiracy theories, which I think it does as is.A mcmurray (talk • contribs) 16:30, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I already gave it a shot. --Otheus 17:22, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Aftermath

 * In December 2003, one block away from the site of the bombing, a new federal campus, designed with a special focus on security, opened.
 * needs more relvent info or to be cut
 * In many ways the Oklahoma City bombing spelled the end of the anti-government militia movement. During the following years, such groups either disbanded or were pushed farther to the fringes of American politics.
 * Very good topic for more paragraphs, but a useful citation needed here (existing one wasn't very good)

Oklahoma City National Memorial & Museum

 * On February 1, 2007, the American Association of Museums awarded the museum with the highest award for a museum.
 * poorly worded summary of the award (see ref). It's an accreditation, and not really an award per se. It's also trivia, even for the sub article.