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.

Politics : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (9427)	12/22/2004 2:59:07 PM
From: Don Earl	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

I don't know that I agree with all of Valentine's theories, and some of them strike me as being overly speculative, but I do believe she makes a serious effort to research the topics before attempting to connect the dots. I've only casually researched Waco, although I seem to recall looking at some of the related items on her site. Personally I don't think David Koresh was anything along the lines of what I'd tend to think of as a stand up guy. As close as I can tell, he broke more than a few laws, then, rather than deal with the charges through due process, chose instead to engage in a stand off with a very large number of armed men. That is not a formula for a happy ending, and although it was a situation Koresh himself could have defused anytime over the course of many days simply by surrendering to the authorities, he chose not to do so. He could also have chosen to send out the women and children to keep them out of harm's way, but for all practical purposes, chose instead to keep them as a human shield. Did the FBI respond with excessive force? I'd tend to say yes, but with the qualification that head to head with a group of heavily armed law breakers, just how much force is appropriate is a tough one to call. Under the circumstances, the "Poor Dave was a victim of persecution." theory is one I have a bit of trouble with. In general, I'd probably say Valentine's work falls into the category of, "Is it reasonable to reach this conclusion from this evidence?". As I mentioned, I see some of it as being a little bit wild eyed, but I also think much of it provides food for thought even if one disagrees with the conclusions. This is her site if anyone wants to take a look at it: public-action.com