Xref: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu talk.politics.guns:54329 alt.society.civil-liberties:1583
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,alt.society.civil-liberties
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!magnesium.club.cc.cmu.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!purdue!mentor.cc.purdue.edu!expert.cc.purdue.edu!tmh
From: tmh@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Todd M. Helfter)
Subject: Re: BATF/FBI revenge
Message-ID: <C5sIE7.AJu@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>
Sender: news@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (USENET News)
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
References: <2077@rwing.UUCP> <93110.022209U28037@uicvm.uic.edu>
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1993 16:13:18 GMT
Lines: 172


>Does anyone have any idea about the size of Waco?  I'm just curious because
>if it were a small town that may have something to do with it.  Possibly not.
>It sure didn't take it very long to burn down though.  I was watching ABC and
>it only took like a little over 30 minutes to burn down.

	Waco is a city of about 100,000 people.  The population temporarily
   raised to about 102,000 people when all the feds, and state police officers
   arrived.

	I tell you what, I stayed in a hotel room about 4 miles from the BD
   compound around 3 weeks ago.  I have never felt more paranoid in my whole
   life.  There were at least 100 state police in the hotel.





>
>>The claim "we had the water turned off, so the fire engines had to bring
>>their own" doesn't hold up:  If they had cut off the water, they surely
>>could have turned it back on just as quickly.  They just didn't want to:
>>There were some scores to settle.  Message to anybody else is very clear:
>>"DON'T FUCK WITH US.  WE WILL DO YOU IN..."
>>
>Not that I am one to believe that everything that the government tells us is
>true but if that was the message they wanted to send why did they wait 51 days?
>I think the message would be better sent by charging in there right away - not
>waiting for 51 days and pounding them with sound, etc.
>
>>A bunch of dead BD members are not going to be so able to tell their
>>side of the story, so now all we have is the story according to the BATF
>>and FBI.  Also, Mr "care about the rights of people" Clinton, or his
>>administration approved this action (FBI said 'Washington had approved
>>it').  They FBI said the gas masks used by the BDs have a finite life,
>>and were close to running out.  WHY COULDN'T THEY HAVE JUST WAITED?
>
>Well, there are 9 people supposedly alive.  They can tell their story.  As far
>as Bill Clinton is concerned don't you think he has more pressing matters to
>attend to besides some small group of people in Texas?  How about Bosnia?  Now
>there's a problem......    Why couldn't they have waited?  They waited too long
>as it is.  Something should have been done earlier.
>
>>
>>They gov is trying to say it was a mass suicide.  In the past they had
>>expressed this was a real possibility, but now they decided it wasn't
>>a possibility so they could go on with the raid.  Apparantly what they
>>feel Korash was or was not capable of or going to do was driven by
>>what was most convenient at the time...
>>
>>Now this means that:
>>
>>1: The public and media will forget about all this - having become weary of
>>it.
>
>This has already happened for many people.
>
>>2: There will be no investigation (independent or otherwise) or a whitewash.
>
>Very much a possibility.
>
>>3: There will be no unsealing of the warrant and related documents.
>>4: What anybody will know about this incident will be the BATF version.
>
>With the way our government is I wouldn't doubt it.
>
>>5: The BATF has just been given Carte Blanche for further abuses, with
>>   the effective support and approval of the Administration.
>
>Clinton said on the news that he knew about what was happening but that it was
>all in the hands of the FBI.  That is if you choose to believe the media.
>
>>6: There WILL BE more abuses, with no concern of Administration censure.
>>7: The precident has been established that the Feds can kill in quantity
>>   to achieve their aims.  Especially if the target is excercising their
>>   rights under the Second Amendment, and the rest of the Bill of Rights,
>>   and is a government-declared un-nice fellow.
>
>If they had rocket launchers and such (as the press and gov claims) why
>shouldn't they have done something?  What possible use would a religious cult
>have for a rocket launcher?  Also, is child abuse covered by the Bill of
>Rights?
>
>> : LLs and CLAMs will be pleased.  Dung Tsow Ping(sp) will be pleased.
>>   Saddam Hussein(sp) will be pleased.  Idi Amin would be pleased.  Stalin
>>   would be pleased.  Even Hitler would be pleased.  Any self-respecting
>>   despot would nod and say "Well Done, Bill Clinton!!"
>>
>Well, then there are probably a lot of self-respecting despots in the US cause
>I'm sure they feel the same way.
>
>>God Bless America - Land of the Free!!!  (past tense).
>>
>>Well, maybe I AM overreacting.  But I see on the TV as I am typing where
>
>Maybe, maybe not.  There are a lot of questions that should be raised about
>this incident.  The problem is, who will do it and be heard?
>
>>govt spoksewoman (the new attorney general, known to be almost rabid
>>about private ownership of guns - wants to ban 'assault guns' and just
>>about everything else), is saying the FBI had "amazing restraint", then
>>falls back into the official goverenment line about how the BD were
>>guity of child abuse, and were into it in an on-going basis, and so on.
>>Note that according to the Liberal Elite, giving a child a spanking is
>>regarded as child abuse (seriously - if it gets known, the STATE can
>>take your child away from you if you spank your kid).  She also is saying
>
>Which state is that?  The federal government  or an individual state government
>?
>
>>CLINTON PERSONALLY APPROVED THIS OPERATION - she "told him it was
>>appropriate and so on, and he SAID OK, DO IT".  Somehow, I am not
>>surprised - the people MUST KNOW WHO IS BOSS - WHO IS IN CHARGE!!!
>>And it is obviouly no longer the people.
>>
>It seems to me that the people haven't been in charge for a long time.  If they
>really were I don't think the government would be doing as many things as it
>has in the past.
>
>>And I maintain the appropriate response, as far as this raid by BATF is
>>concerned, regarding child abuse is "so what?".  BATF are not our Child
>>Protective Services Police.  Yet.  After all the BD had been TRIED on
>>that charge before and found NOT GUILTY.  The gov't people have pretty
>>much gone silent on the terrible illegal guns BD supposedly has, and
>>stress the "continued child abuse" (apparantly to make it a seem as sort
>>of a 'rescue' operation, figuring everyone hates child abusers, and
>>anything is OK to use against them).  Occasional references to ammunition
>>possesed by the BDs and so on is irrelevant: it is NOT ILLEGAL to have
>>ammunition (yet).
>>
>True but is it illegal to have a rocket launcher?
>
>>Am I having a vain hope that an honest investigation will occur on this
>>thing?  Or will it simply be whitewashed under the rug, and Business
>>as Usual will continue to be the Order of the Day in the New Order?
>>Who will be given the official title of "Thought Police", I wonder...?
>>
>>And if Clinton and friends have their way, (highly likely at this point)
>>the New Order Government will also have all the guns...  So what if
>>"1984" is going to be ten years late...  I think we are going to discover
>>that we will be paying DEARLY for putting this fellow in office for decades
>>to come.  Even some die-hard supporters are having serious doubts about
>>their Savior.
>>
>Shit, if people dont get what they want right away there is an instant problem.
>Clinton has only been in office for a few months.  Give him a chance to get
>something done.  The guy had a lot of shit thrown in his lap in the beginning.
>Give him a chance to work on things a little.  As they say - Rome wasn't built
>in a day.
>
>>Yes, I am UPSET.  I see NO GOOD as far as civil/individual rights to
>>come of any of his proposals/decisions for the last month or so...
>>We have really been HAD.  Or Bill of Rights is now nothing but a quaint
>>curiosity.
>>
>I highly doubt that it is that bad yet.  How about the Rodney King trial?  The
>two people who were most responsible got the axe.  How bad the axe falls tho
>is yet to be seen.
>
>>Anybody for impeachment?
>>
>Nope.   I would prefer to give Bill a little more than four or five months to
>solve the nations problems.
>>--
>>pat@rwing.uucp      [Without prejudice UCC 1-207]     (Pat Myrto) Seattle, WA
>>         If all else fails, try:       ...!uunet!pilchuck!rwing!pat
>>WISDOM: "Only two things are infinite; the universe and human stupidity,
>>         and I am not sure about the former."              - Albert Einstien
>
>Jason - u28037@uicvm.cc.uic.edu


