Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : The Truth about Waco -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: James F. Hopkins who wrote (589)	9/5/1999 3:21:00 PM
From: gao seng	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1449

I agree - both sides should play by the same rules. If a witness says one thing that is false, then their entire testimony should be disregarded. I overlooked that part about the 20 helicopters being there at one time. I assumed that the 20 helicopters were reserved for use for the operation, but only 2 or 3 were actually used at one time. The witness' assertion that they were all present at one time does contaminate their entire testimony. But the fireball testimony by the survivors has more than piqued my curiosity. I watched a C-SPAN conference the other day about the downing of TWA 800, and I am practically convinced that it was shot down by missiles. Even Admiral Moore, retired, former Chief of Staff I believe, says that there is no doubt that it was shot down, but not by the Navy. Over 120 witnesses report seeing fireballs rising from the surface. Also, I was watching some old testimony on Waco yesterday, and the panel said that since the U.S. hadn't signed the international agreements not to use CS and other chemical weapons, etc., that they are legal for use in domestic situations. First I heard about flame throwing tanks. One thing that perturbs me about them is that after the fire started, the tanks kept bashing the house. One other point before I go back to watching Nascar, the best FBI evidence to support their case are tape recordings. IMO, these should be inadmissable as evidence. It is highly probable that if there is a cover-up, these tapes are contaminated.

To: James F. Hopkins who wrote (589)	9/5/1999 3:36:00 PM
From: gao seng	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1449

Also, though, Riley was speaking about what she heard from another person, who may be a credible witness. --------------------------- No way out of inferno for Waco women and children WASHINGTON, Sept 5 (AFP) - Women and children among the 80 dead in the FBI siege at Waco, Texas in 1993, faced the choice of being burned alive in an inferno or shot to death by FBI agents blocking their escape, critics of the siege alleged Sunday. Michael McNulty, producer of a new film on the siege of the Branch Davidian compound, told "Fox New Sunday" talk show he had evidence that FBI sharpshooters were blocking the only exit from the burning building. He said he had footage of "individuals at the back of the building engaged in a gunfight" who were blocking the only escape route unmolested by tanks. "Once that building caught on fire, the women and the children and the adults inside that building had no way out," he said. "They had a choice of being shot to death or burning to death." New controversy has flared in recent days over the 51-day siege which led to the destruction of the compound and the deaths of 80 people, including four federal agents and the sect's leader David Koresh, a self-proclaimed messiah. Former FBI special agent Richard Schwein, one of those in charge of the siege, denied the exit was blocked. "Absolutely false. No FBI agent fired a round from their weapons at Waco," he stressed. He also denied that army Delta Force or special services agents had used weapons. "Everyone on our side, and the FBI side, were in armored vehicles so I don't know how you would have film of anyone firing into the back of the building," he said. "Not one round was fired by an FBI agent during that tragic day." The FBI admitted last week for the first time that it had used incendiary rounds during the siege, a fact denied by the agency and the US Justice Department for six years. Critics of the FBI siege suggest that the incendiary projectiles caused the inferno that resulted in massive loss of life at the compound. "I think by the end of the day there is a good chance that (the) FBI was getting desperate," said David Hardy, an Arizona attorney investigating the siege. "They had exceeded the orders that they had been given by the attorney general. No one had come out of the building yet. They were going to look like the laughing stocks of the world. "And I think there is a good chance that some people decided to add a few pyrotechnic projectiles into the building to see if fire wouldn't move them out when tear gas had failed." Republican Dan Burton, chairman of the Government Reform Committee of the House of Representatives, was among legislators demanding an inquiry. Asked whether he now doubted that the fire had been set by Koresh himself, as investigators had reported, he told CBS's "Face the Nation": "That's a question that needs to be answered." "I think everyone has to question what went on down there," he added. Asa Hutchinson, a Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, said no evidence existed to suggest that anyone other than Koresh set the fire. "But that is the ultimate fact-finding mission and we have to reaffirm the previous findings," he told CBS. Attorney General Janet Reno announced plans Friday for an independent investigation to "get to the truth," of what happened at Waco. According to media reports former Senator John Danforth has agreed to head up an independent inquiry into the FBI Waco raid. Danforth, a Republican who served in the US Senate for 18 years before retiring in 1994, is pursuing a private law practice in St. Louis Missouri.