Apocalypse in Oklahoma: Waco and Ruby Ridge Revenged

Rating:
Summary: Solid overview of Oklahoma City bombing
Review: Despite the overwrought title, "Apocalypse in Oklahoma" is a sober look at the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building and at Timothy McVeigh. The book is superior to "American Terrorist" (Lou Michel & Dan Herbeck) in that it portrays McVeigh even-handedly where "Terrorist" gets too close to McVeigh & is at times overly sympathetic towards him. "Apocalypse" is refreshing in resisting the temptation to get drawn into silly conspiracy theories. The book's greatest weakness is an unnecessarily negative, broad-brushed, ill-informed portrayal of the U.S. Army & soldiers. It is clear that Hamm lacks knowledge about the Army. As a soldier, I found his portrayal inaccurate, verging on offensive. If the characterization of the Army had been more accurate, I would have given the book more stars. Otherwise, the book is a solid broad description of the bombing & the events & personalities surrounding it.

Rating:
Summary: Solid overview of Oklahoma City bombing
Review: Despite the overwrought title, "Apocalypse in Oklahoma" is a sober look at the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building and at Timothy McVeigh. The book is superior to "American Terrorist" (Lou Michel & Dan Herbeck) in that it portrays McVeigh even-handedly where "Terrorist" gets too close to McVeigh & is at times overly sympathetic towards him. "Apocalypse" is refreshing in resisting the temptation to get drawn into silly conspiracy theories. The book's greatest weakness is an unnecessarily negative, broad-brushed, ill-informed portrayal of the U.S. Army & soldiers. It is clear that Hamm lacks knowledge about the Army. As a soldier, I found his portrayal inaccurate, verging on offensive. If the characterization of the Army had been more accurate, I would have given the book more stars. Otherwise, the book is a solid broad description of the bombing & the events & personalities surrounding it.

Rating:
Summary: Contributes to sorting through the rubble of civil disorder
Review: Highly worth reading to better understand the dynamics of terrorism, politics, and injustice in America. Yet, the rubble and confusion left in the wake of the assaults upon Ruby Ridge and Waco as well as the bombing of the Murrah Building remain an inadequately explained, interdependent set of critical incidents. Professor Hamm offers a useful but incomplete explanation of the bombing of the Murrah Building. He fails to offer anything approaching a viable explanation of how some high ranking federal law enforcement authorities could have made such undemocratic and administratively poor judgments as plainly occurred at Ruby Ridge and Waco. Nor does Professor Hamm adequately address the question of why President Clinton and Attorney General Janet Reno found themselves supporting such poor and unconstitutional use of force policies and actions. It also is highly problematic that the bombing of the Murrah Building was our nation's greatest act of terrorism. That issue needs further study and clarification in the empirical light of our nation's abusive and terroristic treatment of Native Americans and African Americans.

Kelman and Hamilton's (1989) book, "Crimes of Obedience: Toward a Social Psychology of Authority and Responsibility," could help Professor Hamm put these pieces of the justice puzzle and bureaucratic mismanagement into a more meaningful conceptual framework that would better address our nation's democratic and constitutional values. Additional clarity could be achieved by exploring the fact that neither the disciplines of criminology nor criminal justice have achieved anything approaching an adequate consensual definition of the meaning of "justice" or of the mission of "criminal justice."

In effect, the most critical shortcomings of Professor Hamm's study are rooted not in his inadequacy but in the neophyte professional status of criminology and criminal justice as academic disciplines (neither of which, incidentally, has a functional code of research ethics). Both disciplines are a long way from understanding how to sort through the ruins from Ruby Ridge, Waco, or the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. For example, despite supporting evidence from social psychology, neither discipline emphasizes the importance of procedural justice and the contribution that it can make to the rule of law (see Tom Tyler et al., 1997, "Social Justice in a Diverse Society). Despite some steps, neither discipline emphasizes the value of prosocial values (see one of the exceptions, John Fuller, 1998, "Criminal Justice: A Peacemaking Perspective"). Neither disicpline adequately addresses the moral implications of developmental psychology and neurobiology (see Daniel Goleman, 1995, "Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ"; May, Friedman, & Clark (Eds.), 1996, "Mind and Morals: Essays on Cognitive Science and Ethics").

At the end of the last chapter Professor Hamm focuses upon the important role played by volunteers and religious communities in Oklahoma City in the hours, days, and months after the bombing occurred. Although a reader may not agree with everything that is said, the key point in my view is that the author's research found religion to be so important following this incredibly destructive event. In his words, "It was from the pulpits of Oklahoma City's churches--not from the White House, the Department of Justice, or the radio airwaves--that there emerged the real story of how a community comes to grips with terrorism in the modern world" (pp. 232-233). In this conclusion the author flags another highly neglected area within the disciplines of criminology and criminal justice: religion. (See the relevant works of I. Kramnick & R.L. Moore, 1996, "The Godless Constitution"; R. Stark & W.S. Bainbridge, 1997, "Religion, Deviance, & Social Control").

Rating:
Summary: Wonderful Discovery
Review: I must admit that I was late to discover this book. What a pleasant surprise. Dr. Hamm presents important and insightful facts into the terrible crime that far too many researchers overlooked. History will treat this book well. It is a must read for any person who wants to understand the motivations behind McVeigh and his "brotherhood." JD Cash

Rating:
Summary: So Good, And Yet So Bad
Review: Rather than simply repeat the perfectly useful book reviews already available here, I'll simply highlight a few strengths and weaknesses as I see them...

STRENGTHS:

Hamm's description of the actual morning of the event, including accounts of those inside the building at the time of the blast, their suffering, and sometimes their gruesome deaths, is absolutely gripping. Without wallowing unnecessarily in graphic details, he brings the horrors of that day into painful focus and full color. Such painful recollections are certainly appropriate, but definitely not for the squeamish.

He also gives a fascinating and understandable picture of some of white supremacy groups and odd religious groups which were connected, at least peripherally, to events at Ruby Ridge and Waco. The backgrounds on Ruby Ridge and Waco are decent enough to give the rest of his story context, but because of the controversy behind each of these, some readers may wish to pursue them in more depth elsewhere. As with the bombing itself (or the Kennedy assassination, or Area 51, or whatever), the facts may be in dispute and conspiracy theories abound, so this is hardly the final word. Hamm gives a plausible account, however, and makes no effort to justify the actions of the individuals or agencies involved in each.

His basic portrayals of McVeigh, Nichols, and other characters associated with the bombing are engaging and plausible. While certainly subject to dispute (like anything biographical), Hamm at least gives us some explanation for the who, what, why & how behind such a nightmare.

WEAKNESSES:

Hamm simply ADORES President Clinton throughout the first half of the book. He compares him to JFK and praises his leadership time and time again. Perhaps he simply wants to seem fair and balanced when he later criticizes some of Clinton's actions, but the initial homage is so lavish I found myself embarrassed for the author. It nearly derailed his narrative.

He's much less fond of President Bush (#41), and clearly abhorred the Gulf War of 1990. The loaded language he uses and the portrayal of the entire conflict as a "massacre" of presumably innocent men, women, and children, is again a rather embarrassing detraction from the subject at hand. He all but directly blames the armed forces and the Gulf War for McVeigh's involvement in the Oklahoma City Bombing, and refers repeatedly to McVeigh's "post-traumatic stress disorder" without so much as a footnote justifying such a diagnosis. He openly despises the NRA, guns, the army, and anything remotely associated with them. Such venom comes close to discrediting the rest of his work.

Finally, while his investigations are generally thorough, Hamm tries to fill in uncertainties with 'speculation'. This he takes to a whole new level. The liberties he takes with the POSSIBLE relationship between McVeigh and Nichols in the army are troubling to say the least. Even worse are his forays away from journalism into not only political science, but psychology, theology, sociology, pathology, and anything else that helps him conveniently fill in the blanks. Sometimes it's better just to identify the unknowns as unknowns.

These huge leaps of logic and major assumptions with few or no justifying footnotes are absolutely maddening--especially since this recklessness alternates with the truly persuasive and occasionally moving sections of the book.

SUMMARY: This is a decent foundational narrative for the main (known) players involved in the OKC Bombing. I didn't feel like I'd wasted the time I spent reading it, but I'll continue looking for a satisfying history of this terrible event. Mr. Hamm has some journalistic skill... it's just that his issues are showing and tend to stain an otherwise impressive work.

Rating:
Summary: Intriguing but Not Convincing
Review: This book was poorly researched, and is lacking in factual content. The Ruby Ridge incident was described with many errors, and the fact that this book was written 5 years after the incident occurred, when many of the actual facts were known, and proven in court, the author should have had the facts on this issue straight. If you are thoroughly knowledgeable about what happened at Ruby Ridge, you can begin to realize that this book is biased, and full of untruths. From the point of the Ruby Ridge description on, I did not take the book as factual or objectively written.

Rating:
Summary: Intriguing but Not Convincing
Review: Who bombed the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City and why? Was it just a meth snorting, ex-soldier, down-and-out, government-hating punk, or is there more to this than that? Could the government itself be behind the attack or at least involved in some way? If you want a serious look at these questions then this book is definitely NOT what you want to read.

I found this book to be a very well written and clear reporting of the party line that Tim McVeigh and Terry Nichols were solely responsible for the OKC bombing; them and no one else. This could be, but there is significant other evidence and testimony to the contrary that the government just doesn't want to address head on and this book doesn't either. The author does address some of this other evidence but only in the most cursory and unconvincing fashion. For instance, an Air Force general with a background in weapons systems claimed in writing that the bomb McVeigh supposedly used could NOT have done the kind of damage inflicted on the A. P. Murrah Federal Building and that there must have been more or different bombs involved. This stunning claim is waved off by the author with a single valueless sentence: "This thesis is disputed by physicists on the grounds that the five-thousand-pound truck bomb did have the capacity to blast upward and outward, like a balloon". What kind of "evidence" is that? Who are these physicists and why should they be believed? It's things like this (and there are other examples) that make this book seem like government spin doctoring and not a serious look at who is behind the biggest single act of terrorism on U.S. soil and why it was committed.

The author addresses the Ruby Ridge and Waco incidents in a similarly odd way. He does say that the government botched both of those raids but he does so in the absolutely least offensive and most excusable way to downplay the government's mistakes. He leaves out critical details, downplays significant events and gets some things completely wrong that are not disputed facts regarding these cases. This kind of writing lacks credibility in my mind.

This author would have you believe that everything's just fine now that McVeigh has been caught and that you are a twit if you believe anybody but the government. Don't fall for this and, for that matter, don't fall for every conspiracy theory you hear either. By all means read this book but also read others like "The Oklahoma City Bombing and the Politics of Terror", "Others Unknown: Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City Bombing Conspiracy" and others and then THINK about what is or isn't the truth based on credible evidence. There's more to this than we're being told and the folks who died in this attack deserve better from us than to just shrug our shoulders and go back to what we were doing just because the government says it's OK now.