Six of the victims of the Waco massacre are due for release.
I mean, hey, the federal government comes in, attacks your church, is a party to the death of your friends and family… and you get 13 years in prison. Right.
|
|||||
|
We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people. Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil LibertiesCommentary
EconomicsSamizdatistas |
Victims releasedApril 20th, 2006 |
 54 comments to Victims released |
Who Are We?The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling. We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
May these six individuals live in peace and privacy for the rest of their lives.
That is all.
I’m kind of hoping they sue the hell out of Janet Reno.
She was the one who ‘accepted responsibility’ for that mess, it’s about time she lived up to those words.
I honestly can’t summon much sympathy for the Branch Davidians. They were a bunch of loonies and probably dangerous given their millenarian, apocalytpic tendancies.
I very much doubt there would be any sympathy for them here if they’d been members of an extreme “Islamic” cult rather than an extreme “Christian” cult.
Unacceptable religious extremism is not just restricted to the towel-heads (though they’re doing their level best to create a monopoly).
The world is well rid of David Koresh.
And other extremist loonies – like libertarians…?
I don’t regard libertarians as extremist. Some may be naive in believing that the market alone can provide and that a purely market economy is in itself a panacea. The market is a good answer to most stuff but it’ll need a while to get fully into kilter following a century of increasing statism.
Anyhow, what’s so “extreme” about wanting maximum personal freedom and minimum tax? If you put Libertarianism like that, most folk will agree with you.
Of course they were loonies (of course from my nonpracticing atheist viewpoint, *all* religions are loony, varying only in the degree to which they make themselves annoying). And they were on private property. They were well armed (2nd amendment) and were dumb enough to try to defend themselves.
If you wish to argue there were valid reasons why one or two of them should perhaps have been arrested, you may have a case. However, there is *NO* possible case for laying seige to their whole facility.
Does anyone believe Kouresh had intentions of going out and blowing up other people? I really think not. In fact, I find the idea absurd.
These are the same Branch Davidians who shot dead four ATF officers who tried to raid the building after it had emerged they had been buying empty grenades? The same ones who had 50 calibre machine guns (for home defense, naturally)? The same ones who torched their own buildings to evade the capture of themselves and their children?
No, I thought not. They weren’t the bunch of heavily armed brainwashed loons following a self-proclaimed Messiah.
Last week Nick M was calling for the mass killing of Muslims and now he’s defending the slaughter at Waco. Well, at least he’s consistent.
When the Branch Davidians shot the federal stormtroopers they were merely defending themselves. It was the ATF that shot first.
You could start your education on the unprovoked attack, massacre and cover-up by seeing Waco: The Rules of Engagement. It’s been shown on BBC2 and can probably be found in the UK without much difficulty.
These are the same Branch Davidians who shot dead four ATF officers who tried to raid the building after it had emerged they had been buying empty grenades? The same ones who had 50 calibre machine guns (for home defense, naturally)? The same ones who torched their own buildings to evade the capture of themselves and their children?
I don’t recall (although my memory may be faulty) any 50 cal machineguns. The ATF _claimed_ that there were AK variants that had been modified to fire fully automatic (read the JPFO’s website for some interesting examples of ATF firearms “expertise”). Also the .50 cal they did had was a rifle (I think a barrett although whether the semi or bolt I don’t remember), and I have purchased empty grenades from my local army surplus store.
It is possible that the Davidians set themselves on fire, although considering the fact that you can watch IR videos of someone getting out of the bradleys and firing automatic rifles into the compound as it burned, it makes it pretty obvious that the government lied during the whole incident.
There was an excellent documentary on this called “The Rules of Engagement”.
Anyone should be free to be nutty religious loons (even nutty Muslim loonies), so long as their lunicy[sp? ‘cos I’m having to post from Windows] does not hurt other people. Where they actively trying to hurt other people then that would justify a response, but being nuts is on it’s own no justification for an assault.
I have no sympathy for the theology of the B.D.s.
But I also have no sympathy for the armed raid by the A.T.F. (which should not exist), to enforce unconstitutional “gun control” regulations. Not that it turned out that the B.D.s had more firepower than other people in that area of Texas.
When the attack failed the A.T.F. were allowed to carry away their wounded – that does not indicate that the B.D.s were aggressive.
And it certainly does not justify what happened later – sending in tanks and fireing star shells that set off fires that burned men, women and children alive.
Or the filthy lies (told by President Clinton, Janet Reno and the rest of the scum) that the B.D.s burned their own children.
Then there was the farce of the “trial” – look up what some of the jury members said about it later.
And the other farce – the “investigation” by the man who is now Senator S. of New York.
You do not attack someone’s property because you do not agree with their religion (using unconstitutional gun control regulations as an excuse).
When your attack fails and you are allowed to take away your wounded, you do not betray this good faith by comming back later (long after your attack) with much greater forces and burn many men, women and children alive.
You do not put on trial and then imprison your surviving victims.
And you do not say they burned their own children.
Yeah, right, whatever.
Let’s set a coupla records straight. I have never called for the mass extermination of muslims, exactly. Things like the Flight 93 transcript and Moussai’s bravura performance in court riled me, though.
Yes, I am consistent. I have very little time for loony-tune cultists of any persuassion whether they be Moqtada al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army, Scientologists, Branch Davidians or whatever.
When they arm themselves heavily I have no time at all for them.
Unlike Dale, I don’t regard all religions as “loony”. I think the difference between, say the Methodists and the Nation of Islam is fairly obvious to any outsider. I may consider the religous to be misguided but that’s their look-out (and mine if they happen to be right!) but this is one issue where the line in the sand is pretty easy to discern.
Now, in an ideal world such nut-jobs should be allowed to hang around in the desert awaiting the rapture and not bothering people. But the Branch Davidians bought an arsenal that violated federal law. When the ATF turned up to feel their collars, a gunfight ensued and four officers were killed. After that, what did they expect?
They were not defending themselves. They were defending the right to own armaments on a level and of a type that no rational person would require unless planning something of the ilk of an armed insurrection. They got into trouble with the law for doing illegal things (as did the Ruby Ridge mentalist). They could’ve surrendered quietly. They didn’t, they fought and were killed. Being killed is one of those things one risks when getting involved in a gunfight.
I know a lot of Americans are wedded to the Second Amendment, but even considering this… Why does anyone care about a bunch of loonies getting taken down? I doubt you’d care if it was a collection of gang-members in South Central LA getting whacked.
That documentary, Rules of Engagement, was utterly chilling.
I later read that many termed the conclusions it drew misleading. For example, that plane circling overhead with an infra-red camera shooting the climax of the siege. This footage picked up a distinctive infra red ‘signature’ of gunfire trained on the building’s exits as it burnt. ‘Experts’ later claimed that this could have simply been reflected sunlight. Regular, staccato flashes as reflected sunlight? Utter rubbish. The feds were shooting at the burning building.
By god, does anyone truly require further evidence that The State Is Not Your Friend?
Elvis wasn’t hiding in there too was he?
Well, let’s see. They were in violation of federal firearms laws for having unlicensed .50 caliber machine guns, a common item in many, many churches.
And let see when the feds came to serve the warrant calling for them to appear before the federal magistrate on the firearms charges (not to arrest them mind you, just ‘please come to town next Tuesday and appear’) they barricaded themselves in and opened fire on the agents presenting the warrant.
But other than that yes they were just a bunch of fine upstanding churchgoing folks.
Well, let’s see. They were in violation of federal firearms laws for having unlicensed .50 caliber machine guns, a common item in many, many churches.
-John Steele
You seem to be unaware that they did not, in fact, have a .50 caliber machine gun. Semi-automatic and bolt-action .50 caliber firearms are legal to possess in most US states, and are no more restricted by federal law than any other firearm.
They may have had AR-15s and AK-47s that had been modified to fire full auto, but where’s the evidence?
IMO, BATF has, due to it’s repeatedly demonstrated incompetence and heavy-handedness, forfeited the benefit of the doubt.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_Ridge
Paul Marks,
“You do not …. and you do not… etc.. etc…”
You do not soot and kill four policemen, no matter what !
And let see when the feds came to serve the warrant calling for them to appear before the federal magistrate on the firearms charges (not to arrest them mind you, just ‘please come to town next Tuesday and appear’) they barricaded themselves in and opened fire on the agents presenting the warrant.
They weren’t presenting a warrant, the ATF were storming the place dressed like ninjas, and they got their asses kicked for their pains.
The BD may or may not have been loony, but they probably had no more guns per head than the average Texan country household. Nor did they live in an isolated “compound”, it was an ordinary house, with no armoured glass or special protection. The local sheriff said that Koresh often used to come into town, and if the ATF wanted to speak to him they could have done just that. Instead they launched a paramilitary raid and were repulsed. After that, the FBI took over, and decided to teach them a lesson. The rest is history.
Nick:
John’s right, and you’re ignorant. The “compound” was a farmhouse. DK was a guy who went into town once a week on a known schedule and could have been picked up by any competent law-enforcement officer whenever convenient. We have plenty of guns down here, I know quite a number of people with .50 cal rifles and have never done anything worse than blow their noses, and whether or not you “have any use for” people who have both guns AND bibles is really immaterial to how these people got set up and quite literally shot down.
IF every piece of b.s. propaganda the feds and media came up with were true, AND every piece of data everybody else has on the other sides of this story is wrong, it was STILL a case of absolutely brazen, unmitigated excessive force.
The federal government, just like the UK government, has the right, and was right, in dealing-with by force a group of what were a bunch of mentally unstable, deranged sociopathic terrorists (no matter how fervently certain people on this board with obviously pro-IRA beliefs may try to distort it).
Bottom of the food chain, too bad some of them were incarcerated. They should all have been incinerated.
Bottom of the food chain, too bad some of them were incarcerated. They should all have been incinerated.
Including the children I suppose? Jesus Christ almighty, some people!
Actually the second amendment is exactly for having enough weapons to start an armed insurrection, not simple home defence. Though whether you can call loonies like the Branch Davidians “a well regulated militia” is certainly debatable.
“The federal government, just like the UK government, has the right, and was right, in dealing-with by force a group of what were a bunch of mentally unstable, deranged sociopathic terrorists (no matter how fervently certain people on this board with obviously pro-IRA beliefs may try to distort it).”
But of course they don’t do they? They cringe and cower and make concessions,great at shooting unarmed Brazilians,or loopy sects,if the BDs had been terrorists the government agencies would not have gone near them with a barge pole.
First, I think the Branch Davidians were a bunch of extreme kooks. As Dale said, however, all religions are loony. How else can you define arguing over who has the better imaginary friend? That doesn’t mean you should be burned on earth before going to whatever hell or heaven you choose to believe in.
Second, nope, not an illegal .50 cal machine gun. Supposedly illegally modified Aks. We’ll never know because ATF and FBI agents were the only ones to examine the evidence after the fire. Guess what they said: “Yep, modified all right!” Then they quickly bulldozed the material remains, the human ones having already been smelted down.
Third, ATF decided to deliver their warrant by sending body-armored machine gun toting men through upstairs windows. Curious choice of venues, since Koresh frequently went jogging alone in town and could have been approached and /or apprehended at almost any time. Doubly curious since they had previously used exactly that technique when they questioned him on exactly the same charge (and found him innocent). Triply curious since the ATF actually HAD AN INFORMANT INSIDE monitoring the group. An informant who told the ATF that an armed approach that day would very likely trigger an armed response.
Why would you send a contingent of heavily armed men to deliver a simple warrant? Why alert the media before you do? Unless, maybe, your department funding was in jeopardy and you needed a public show against a bunch of social outcasts?
If that is the case, since we already know how the show ends, the important question is who do we cast next in the role of social outcasts du jour?
BTW, there was a curious parallel to this case 8 years earlier in Philadelphia. Not that I see conspiracies. Just efficiencies
Russ Mitchell,
John might be the most well informed fella this side of Mars but I’m not “ignorant” as you claim.
I followed the whole sorry spectacle at the time. I lived in Nottingham at the time, the original home of a number of the cultists (they were recruited from Seventh Day Adventist churchs in the area) and it was a big deal in local as well as national news. Big enough that I looked into it further.
Yes, I know the original reason for the second amendment. And no they weren’t a “well regulated militia”. Patrick Henry said that the natural manure of the tree of liberty was the blood of “patriots and tyrants”, not the blood of “cultists and the ATF”. Much has been made over the death of children at Waco but what choice did they or the cowed, coerced and brainwashed “followers” of Koresh have at that point?
What choice did the ATF have? I find the concept that they went in “like Ninjas” deeply ridiculous – they wore body armour and face masks – in those circumstances, who wouldn’t?
Scumbags ought to be treated as scumbags. Simple. Without the rule of law there is nothing to stop another Koresh from preaching his vile poison and (via his claim to 140 wives) raping his way to “glory”.
Or do you feel that a “right to bear arms” is more important than the right of of young females to be raped in the name of an obscure higher purpose?
There should, of course, have been a “not” in the last sentance.
rosignol
Whether they had the machine guns or not is immaterial at that point. Federal officers attempted to serve an order to present themselves (not to arrest them) before a magistrate on charges of possesing illegal firearms. At the hearing they could have presented all the evidence they wanted that they didn’t have the weapons in question and if the magistrate believed them that would have been the end of it. They chose not to accept the warrant but rather open fire on the officers. Its all downhill from there. The weapons charge becomes immaterial
And citing wikipedia hardly constitutes “proof” of anything — you can post any nonsense you want on wikipedia.
The ATF are not your friend. They are, basically the Feds Goon Squad, for when someone like Janet Reno, really absolutely must be sure she proves the size of her balls.
Given the outcome, I am glad the BD took a few of the real scumbags to hell with them.
For gawd’s sake Dale,
You live in Belfast. You must’ve had a gutfull of armed para-military groups.
The ATF are federal agents, enforcing federal law. Some people might not agree with that federal law. They have ways and means to protest and change that law. Those ways and means do not include getting into a gunfight.
Libertarianism is supposed (I always thought) to be a way of thinking which enabled greater material prosperity, and greater protection of that prosperity. I have never thought of it as a justification for some kinda half-assed “Wild West” scenario.
Just face it. The Branch Davidian’s were a bunch of scumbags who got themselves into a situation where they got shot.
That’s how I feel. Timothy McVeigh probably thought differently.
As to the armament they had… pretty pathetic actually. A friend of mine who was into ‘recreational explosives’ had a cannon outside his house in Arizona. They used to compete to see who could make the biggest bang out in the desert… the best ones I’ve heard described were filling an abandoned vertical mine shaft with liquid propane and setting it off with a half stick; and the best one was a a 50 gallon drum of fuel oil tightly wound with dynamite. I understand they got a small mushroom cloud from that one.
Then in Virginia there was an ex Viet vet with AK47 stitching across his torso, who lived across the country road from a buddy of mine. He had an M16 modified to full auto. And then a guy up in Pennsylvania in the 4-wheeler circles who gave us a great fireworks display out in Blue Hole with a tracer every 4th round. One full clip and you could hear sapling falling on the hillside afterwards.
BD well armed? HAH! That’s normal where I come from.
btw, do any of our readers know if that range on the way from Houston Hobby into town still advertises M16’s for use on their range? Sounded like fun, but I never had enough time to go as I was usually in town for either space or LP related events and on a tight schedule.
Wrong on all counts Nick. The problem I find in Belfast is that innocent law abiding people cannot defend themselves. I remember one time when a Para was searching my car and trying to convince me they were protecting me I told him that the only thing they would do in Belfast if someone wanted to kill me was stand and wave their guns around whilethe police shoved me in a bag.
You are not a free man if you did not take responsibility for your own self defense. In the UK, I cannot. In the UK self defense and freedom are criminal acts.
I would not class McVeigh with the BD. They were a slightly loony sect out in the country, mostly minding their own business. McVeigh was a psychopath whose answer to the murder of innocents was to outdo the State in murdering innocents.
Dale,
Fair Dinkum (as the Aussies say) to your mate’s recereational explosions. That sorta thing is something I enjoy (and take part in) as well. Big bangs, yes! Useful weapons, hardly.
My points are (a) the arsenal of the BDs was not like that. They were gathering any kinda weapon they could for the Second Coming. (b) they were not a harmless bunch of religious nutters, Koresh was almost certainly a peadophile who held his subjects in sway by rape and violence. Hardly a libertarian stance?
While I believe in the right to defend oneself and one’s property I also believe that is also the duty of the police. That is what we pay them for and they have frequently done a very good job of it. Your view of human nature seems incredibly Hobbesian to me.
I wonder to what extent your take on Libertarianism regards “The State” as the well-spring of all evil? This is naive. The State may or may not protect but there are many other sources of evil. Many others, and the Branch Davidians were one who were evil.
Do not be so hasty to spring to the defence of the “individual” simply because the “State” seems to be the oppressor. Sometime it is on the side of the angels and sometimes it just does the best it can.
If it were true (and it is mostly Statist propaganda… I have not read of any confirming non-government source) that KD was doing some bad things… that is not in any way an excuse for what happened. If they wanted to arrest him, as many have said, they could easily have done so. They could have left a couple officers on a stake out and picked him up whenever. No big deal. But nooooo, Janet had to make sure everyone knew she was TUFF. Ain’t nothing like a few dead burned babies to prove yer the meanest bitch in DC.
And of course if there were children being mistreated (something I actually don’t believe… it seems to be the first dirt the State throws when they want to take someone down), then I guess the Government fellas figured that since the kids were having a fate worth than death, they might as well help them out by killing them.
If the welfare of children was even on their agenda at *all*… they would not have done what they did.
The government did not give a rats ass whether those kids lived or died.
c.f. Winston Churchill and the anarchists. What’s wrong with showing you’re tough with evil?
Doin’ good don’t have no end!
Dale,
Either gov lied, or the nutters torched the kids. I suspect the later. You clearly suspect the former because you are ready to believe any iniquity as long as it is laid on the state. Perhaps you have similar thoughts about the death of Diana and alien abductions?
You mean Diana really died in a car crash?
Bugger, I thought MI6 slashed the brakelines – must be those alien implants …
Could those of you comparing the Branch Davidians to the IRA (or UVF/UDA/Real IRA etc) tell us how many people were murdered, bombed out of their homes, or kneecapped by the BD?
Koresh prophesied that the government was in league with the Antichrist, and the government did its best to prove him right.
Careful Nick, you’re going to get one of our favorite commenters similarly made dead by the forces of law and order. An extremely anti-social type made the following confession here on Samizdata recently.
This person did this in a residential neighborhood! The authorities will of course time this person’s ‘arrest’ for when they’ve had (quite) a few and are totally, beligerantly pissed. It helps to make their case to the public. Because, after all, this clearly is a dangerous person. Someone totally not deserving of the public’s sympathies. What if children had gotten hurt?
😉
In an effort to not show gender, I confused the statement. The authorities won’t wait until the authorities are pissed, they will wait until the perpetrator is thoroughly pissed. That and a friendly news crew so every one will see and understand why shooting him was ‘unfortunate but unavoidable’.
John Steele suggested:
“Federal officers attempted to serve an order to present themselves (not to arrest them) before a magistrate on charges of possesing illegal firearms.”
Let’s see. We have to serve court papers on a bunch of people who are believed to be well armed and to have apocalytpic beliefs. Tell you what — instead of leaving the guns at the gate, walking up to the door, and handing them the court papers — let’s load up on weapons, climb up on the roof, and try to sneak in the window. That will put their crazy minds at ease!
When they OK’d that, Bill “Bubba” Clinton and Big Janet must have been sharing a bong & thinking about that old Beatles song — “She came in through the bathroom window”.
Sad thing is, the authorities got away with it.
Whether they had the machine guns or not is immaterial at that point.
Nonsense. Possession of machine guns was the reason this mess happened in the first place.
Federal officers attempted to serve an order to present themselves (not to arrest them) before a magistrate on charges of possesing illegal firearms.
By armoring up with baklavas and mp-5s and trying to sneak in.
Tell me, is this standard procedure for serving an order to present in your jurisdiction?
Dunno about you, but if I see someone dressed in black with their face concealed trying to come in a second-floor window, my initial reaction is not going to be “Oh, that must be a policeman, I should give him a hand”.
At the hearing they could have presented all the evidence they wanted that they didn’t have the weapons in question and if the magistrate believed them that would have been the end of it.
What?
Are you familiar with a concept known as “the burden of proof”? Something about “innocent until proven guilty”?
They chose not to accept the warrant but rather open fire on the officers. Its all downhill from there. The weapons charge becomes immaterial
Again, in your jurisdiction, are warrants commonly served by armed and armored people via second-floor windows?
Of course, I meant balaklavas.
Then there’s always the flip side. Where you invite some new people to hang out over at your house and one them happens to be a psycho who grabs a shotgun, blows away 6 people and then himself when the cops show up.
Seattle has been grim.
Midwesterner,
You misunderstand. They were clearly dangerous apocalyptic terrorists. I on the other hand am a noble freedom-fighter 😉
I did like the idea of the ATF ninjas wearing Greek sweetmeats as they assaulted the compound.
Seriously though, this thread has been instructive. It has been interesting to see how people can rationalise something like Waco by accepting the government’s various big lies, viz “They were evil, they had machine guns” or “the ATF were just trying to serve a warrant.” The only reason anyone believes that shit is because they want to believe it. They really, really want to believe it. Why? Maybe because they don’t want to accept that their lives just don’t matter to these government agents. If they want to make an example of them, even kill them, for the sake of publicity or budget politicking, they will. It happened, but the reality is so uncomfortable some people don’t want to confront it. Easier I suppose to rationalise that the victims were somehow evil and deserved it.
Either gov lied, or the nutters torched the kids. I suspect the later.
-Nick M
While I am willing to believe all kinds of things about ATF’s incompetence, arrogance, heavy-handedness, and assorted other faults, I do not think they deliberately torched the place. Nor do I think the Davidians would have decided to die by fire- one of the most painful ways to go- when they certainly had more than a few legal firearms at hand.
Something to consider:
One of the things US law enforcement does in that situation is cut the power.
When the power’s out, what do you use for light?
Flammible things, mostly. Candles, kerosene-fueled lanterns, that sort of thing.
What do you expect to happen when a ‘stun’ grenade goes off near a kerosene lantern?
IMO, the most likely scenario is a catastrophic fuckup on ATF’s part, for which no one was ever held accountable.
Whether that specific sequence or not we’ll never know… but I do expect it was something like that. This was an issue of chest-puffing and plumage display. We is badder than them type display. The Feds went in like a bunch of maniacs where they were not needed and the result was a fire that killed all those people.
If I were to chuck a flash grenade through your livingroom window, set the curtains alight and toast you and your family upstairs, I would be tried for murder. I do not consider these ATF morons as any less culpable.
The name McVeigh was brought up earlier. I actually class McVeigh with the dead ATF… they are probably sharing a room together in hell, along with the Nazi who torched a church full of people in Poland and the arabs who rammed airplanes into buildings, guys who blow up pubs, people who blow themselves up in Disco’s…. I’d almost like to be a believer just to savour the idea of them all roasting together for eternity.
The A.T.F. are not “police”. Neither are the F.B.I. – especially not the paramilitary wing that was created in 1974.
“Oh you are one of the black helecopter people” – no, the helecopters are dark blue.
The A.T.F. did not come and peacefully present a warrent – it was an armed raid which they had been training for over several weeks.
Nor was it just “a Church” – it was a more like a small village.
Like many people in American history (going back to the Mayflower folk) the B.D.s has set up a little community. The government did not like this community and so came to destroy it.
It was act of calculated aggression – and yes four A.T.F. agents were killed.
An organization that should not exist lauched an armed raid, using the excuse of unconstitutional regulations (regulations that violate the 2nd, 9th and 10th Amendments to the Constitution of the United States), to destroy a religious community (thus violating the 1st Amendment to the Constitution of the United States).
The government forces were allowed to take away their wounded (men who had lauched an armed attack on people who had done noone any harm). This mercy was rewarded by bad faith – a siege.
Quite some time later (and in cold blood) the government lauched a massive attack, their star shells were fired into buildings, their altered tanks knocked down walls – they created fires that burnt men, women and children alive.
The government then told a pack of lies to pretend that the B.D.s had burnt their own children.
I’m surprised that no one has brought up the famous words from the loudspeaker (loud-hailer) as the tank(s) smashed into the walls: “This is not an assault.” The government said that the smashing of the tanks into the walls was to create openings through which the women and children could escape, and that the loud message was to reassure the objects of the rescue attempt.
There are very few evildoers who believe themselves wicked; 99% of them believe they are doing the right thing.
Yes, the ATF *claimed* the BDs were doing lots of things, like running a meth lab. False. “They had .50 cal machine guns.” False. “They ambushed us with automatic weapons.” False. Just watch the video. If the BDs had opened fire from ambush with automatic weapons, there would’ve been 40 dead agents, not 4. Conveniently for the ATF, all video of the initial assault had the first few minutes “accidently” erased. I think it’s safe to say that if the video backed up the ATF claims that they were fired on first, it would’ve been all over that evening’s news broadcasts. The BDs claimed the ATF opened fire first and since the ATF destroyed all evidence that could prove one way or the other who’s telling the truth, I think it’s safe to say the ATF is lying.
My father-in-law was an FBI Special Agent, a founding member of their SWAT team, and then worked undercover. He had no respect whatsoever for ATF back then (says they were incompetent, ham-fisted thugs and “tactical” wannabes) and doesn’t think they’ve changed at all. That seems to be a common view of ATF in US law enforcement.
That seems to be a common view of ATF in US law enforcement.
That’s consistent with a rumor I heard.
Allegedly, after the disaster at Waco, there was a quiet move to disband BATF. The reason nothing came of it was that no other federal agency would take the former BATF personnel.