Flamed, Again.

  • Thread starter Thread starter .
  • Start date Start date
?

.

New member
THE DAILY BRIEF
from
INTELLIGENT NETWORK CONCEPTS, INC.
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 1999
____________________________

NATIONAL

* The FBI yesterday released videotape of an agent obtaining approval to fire flammable tear-gas canisters at the Branch Davidian compound near Waco, Texas, in 1993.
- the approval took place hours before the compound went up in flames, killing most of those inside.



------------------
Mykl
~~~~~
"If you really want to know what's going on;
then, you have to follow the money trail."
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
 
Actually, some might argue that it not only killed all of those inside, but quite a few in Oklahoma as well ... (don't flame me, I heard the theory on Mike Reagans show...)
 
What proof do they have that it was actually tear gas?

------------------
"Supreme authority derives from a mandate from the masses. Not from some farsicle aquatic ceremony."

RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE
The Critic formerly known as Kodiac
 
what are ya' sayin' George? that it might have been something even worse? or that it wasn't even tear gas????

------------------
(O!!!!O)
 
The way that place went up - maybe a thermite was tossed in there...

No I am not saying anything like that... I just doubt EVERYTHING that THEY say.

------------------
"Supreme authority derives from a mandate from the masses. Not from some farsicle aquatic ceremony."

RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE
The Critic formerly known as Kodiac
 
Looking back, the BATF lied to the judge when it got its warrant, stating Koresh was a recluse. Refuted by many disinterested Waco citizens...

The FBI lied and stonewalled for years about "pyrotechnic devices", and now it's all public that they lied. So, the obvious question is, what else did they lie about?

Various hard-to-believe statements have come from the White House folks since January of 1993, about Travelgate, who hired Craig Livingstone, Hilary's papers, etc., even before Monica.

We know from the judge's finding of perjury that we have a proven liar in the highest office.

Does that "crowd" realize that they have a very serious credibility problem, regardless of the subject? How can anybody believe folks who have such a consistent pattern of falsehood?

Sign me, Disgusted
 
The LA Times described the shooting of the 40mm tear-gas grenades as "an attempt to cut off a possible escape route." Why would they want to keep the BD's from escaping the structure? Wasn't "escape/exit" and then apprehension the entire purpose of the FBI's seige?

I hope this was just a typical, poorly worded, Times article.
 
Destructo-
Actually the Feds claim that "the children" had alluded to a "dark secret" of the compound. Thru clever investigative techniques, similar to those used to track the best place to take David Koresh, they determined that ther were a series of "finger-like tunnels" leading from the main building to the "bunker" (a food storage locker or garage, I gather).

Naturally, "armed only with 9mm weapons", they had a concern about the Davidians spreading out thru the tunnels and attacking the Child Rescuers fom behind with illegal, full automatic weapons. Thus the need to gas the compound.

Here's my problems with the scenario:
- There never were any tunnels. Just as there never were any drug factories, hand grenades, automatic weapons or sources for such belief.
- If your goal is to rescue the kids and you have cattle cars full of armed agents and two months to plan, it would seem that bleeding off the shooters into an easily controlled "bunker" would be the smart move.

Think about it: If you learn that the terrorists who just took control of a grade school were planning on mounting a "counter offensive" at the football field, would you tell your guys to "prevent it at all costs", or send up a little prayer to the Keepers of Providence?
Rich
 
But still ask the cattle about Waco right now and you still get either the thousand yard ,dumbed down stare or some crap about how "those crazy people deserved what they got. Without Congress raising up enmasse a`gainst the butchers , nothing will come of this latest "revelations. Where are you Ron Paul and company?
 
Hey, come on now, Ivan, Ron Paul is all over it. Just got hold of his attack today, and he ain't playin' softball.
 
What about the charges that the FBI prevented firefighters from arriving in a timely manner? Anything going with that?
 
The FBI admits that they held off the firetrucks "for the safety of the firemen".

I have to strongly agree with statements above that "we know for a fact they have lied at least once right to our faces...so what can we believe now?".

For example, how about this:

The FBI claims adamantly they they "never fired a single shot".
Seems to me like they are pulling a Clinton: they are not really lying, but emphatically stating a half-truth.
The FBI never fired a shot: the military Special Operatives that were "observing" did the shooting.

Come on now, they "admit" to having Special Operative military people there (only because they can't deny it). But, to lessen the backlash they say that the SpecOps military men were just "observing". Observing what? What do SpecOps military men have to "learn" from the FBI, especially when the FBI claims that it never "attacked" the building? SpecOps military men are good at one thing: going into a situation and kicking ass. Such men would have no interest in "observing" the FBI deal with a negotiation situation.

I say that the SpecOps guys are the ones we saw on the FLIR footage doing the shooting. It would be right up their alley to go in along side a military tank and shoot people in a burning building.
If you had two people to choose to go in along side a military tank and engage in automatic weapons fire in a building, who would you choose: an FBI agent, or a SpecOps military man? The answer is obvious: send the guy that is specialized in that area and the best in the world at it.
Now, the FBI can adamantly say "We did not fire a single shot"...because they didn't! This kind of a non-lie is the kind of thing we have seen a lot of lately in the Clinton era.

[This message has been edited by Red Bull (edited September 05, 1999).]
 
Remember that certain Federal police type folk lied on the stand, manufactured evidence, tampered with evidence, reconstructed photos, etc, and were caught red-handed regarding all of this nonsense during the Weaver trial. Are we really so naive to think that the liars in the Weaver trial have never done this drill before, and it was their first time?

Now we are to believe that the few "bad eggs" are no more, and that Reno et al(ad naseum), are telling the truth.

What was that old saying? A liar can tell the truth many times, and not be believed?

Think about it. The correct answer was/is right in front of you all along. Even the conspirialists(sp) get it right on occasion. ;)



------------------
David H. Wright
Bring this man a
goat and a bowl of fruit
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top