Xref: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu talk.politics.guns:54588 soc.culture.usa:13831 alt.rush-limbaugh:23728
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,soc.culture.usa,alt.rush-limbaugh
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news.harvard.edu!noc.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.cso.uiuc.edu!uxh.cso.uiuc.edu!irvine
From: irvine@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (Brent Irvine)
Subject: Re: ATF BURNS DIVIDIAN RANCH - UPDATE
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1993 16:30:10 GMT
Message-ID: <C5y36B.8MG@news.cso.uiuc.edu>
Distribution: usa
References: <C5uHuo.Awq@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> <C5v9Fv.Krt@news.cso.uiuc.edu> <1r6klv$64f@transfer.stratus.com>
Sender: usenet@news.cso.uiuc.edu (Net Noise owner)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Lines: 61

In article <1r6klv$64f@transfer.stratus.com> cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares) writes:
>In article <C5v9Fv.Krt@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, irvine@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (Brent Irvine) writes:
>> In article <C5uHuo.Awq@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> wwarf@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Wayne J. Warf) writes:
>> >In article <nate.1485.735408842@psygate.psych.indiana.edu> nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle) writes:
>> >>    Yeah, as information trickles in... funny how that works...
>> >
>> >Funny, yeah, funny how you didn't wait for the FBI spokesdroid 
>> >latest reversal of "facts" before proclaiming the BD's burned
>> >themselves to death.
>> 
>> If you won't believe anything the government says, and the press
>> is not reliable according to the same logic, then what do you base
>> your statements on?  Wild speculation laced with a healthy dose
>> of paranoia?
>
>Funny, Brent, but so far we have heard two versions of the "facts:"
>
>1) What the government says.  This includes what the government says that
>   two survivors have said.
>
>2) What Koresh's lawyer (who was actually inside the compound) says,
>   including what he says that most of the survivors have said.
>
>Strange, but they seem to disagree in most important particulars.
>
>If anyone has actually seen news reports of any of the survivors
>speaking first-hand, feel free ot pitch in.  I may have missed it.
>But my money is that their story will sound a hell of a lot like
>case 2, and not at all like case 1.

Since neither side would be particularly interested in telling the truth,
you have to weigh the 'facts' given by each yourself, and weigh it with
the newsreporting if you care.

Many cult members will probably side with the attorney, and if he
is lying, change their stories to match his.  And if the Feds also
lie, the cult members who become disillusioned will change their
stories to match the Feds.  

Neither sides are interested in the truth.  The Media is more interested,
but usually either don't have the time to get it straight or tie themselves
to the ratings and deliberately distort.  

For me, though, the black soot billowing outside the compound added with
how fast the fire spread ponted to *someone* dousing large parts of the
compound with some sort of gasoline or fire-starter.  I doubt the Feds
did that as they were more interested in arresting Vernon.  The real
unbalanced one (at least the one that lost his cool) was Vernon, so
I figured that he was more likely to do it (after all he was Jesus 
being persecuted by the authorities, and had followers to hold onto,
so made the decision.  He and his followers also probably felt that they
were rocketing to heaven by doing this stuff).  Thsi conclusion, I came
to after umpteen million hours of listening to NPR and other radio
shows (I always have the radio going when I am in my office on some
innocuous talk-show or news program as background noise).


-- 
<><><><><><><><><><> Personal opinions? Why,  <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<>  BRENT IRVINE  <> yes.  What did you think <> irvine@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu  <>
<><><><><><><><><><> they were?.......        <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
