Can someone please educate me about Waco and Ruby Ridge?

Status
Not open for further replies.
telewinz,

Upon my review of the EVIDENCE

You haven't reviewed ANY evidence.

You refuse to review any evidence.

You mock people who try to present you with any evidence.

Welcome to my Ignore List. Consider it an honor, as you're only its second inhabitant.



(Misinformation I can deal with; willful ignorance is merely annoying.)
 
...did Randy stand trial for ALL the felonies he MAY have committed?

Have YOU? Have I? Has everyone on this website?

Only the Thought Police know for sure.


...Randy is as innocent as OJ. And both are free men as we speak...

...the majority of the guilt should not lie with the Feds. But it's the World we live in, misfits and failures who rely on the "Turner Diaries" to explain and excuse their past mistakes and poor judgement...

...Bear in mind that the "Turner Diaries" is fiction written by a neo-nazi...

I'm not sure if you're using "circular" logic, "expansionist" logic, "zero" logic or "super-hyper-w.t.f does this have to do with the question" logic, but you certainly have me confused.
 
I accept the Government report/information as the best available, most reliable...

Hey! I did a search on "government report" and came up with this:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=15427

"We are cracking down on gun traffickers and making it harder and harder for criminals to obtain guns illegally," said Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, according to a statement. "But, this report also shows that we must do more to close every trafficking channel, starting with closing the gun show loophole..."

"...Specifically, the report said guns sold via gun shows "were associated with the second highest number of trafficked firearms per investigation..."

I guess I'd better establish some evidence to prove my innocence the next time I visit a gun show.:rolleyes:

Just because I'm paranoid it doesn't mean that federal agancies don't cook the "facts" when it suits someone's political aspirations.

Eternal Vigilance! Or that star spangled banner will stop waving over the land of the free and the home of the brave.

I'm probably closer to Al Gore :barf: than Koresh and Weaver on the political spectrum, but I don't think either of their actions justified the force applied by the Federal Government. Both were in the realm of "a shiny new toy" and I pray that the protagonists and their replacements regret and learn from the bad decisions in these tragic events.
 
Tamara, you keep missing the point...

I have no problem listening to your evidence or reading the book(s) you base your opinions on. But the evidence you cite is seldom uncontested and is often conflicting. People (on both sides) often let their emotions dictate their evidence, that is why cross examination and sworn testamony are so valuable. It requires a person(s) to stop and think and it separates those that "think" they know vs those that do know.

Case in point: Vicki Weaver "murdered by a sniper while she held her baby" yet (from both sides)sworn testamony states that she was standing behind a CURTAINED, closed door when the fatal shot was fired. Just what kind of scope was on that rifle that the sniper could see/aim thru a door AND curtain. and still hit his supposed "target"? Worse case, it was involuntary homicide (he missed his intended target) it was accidental, yet it sounds better to say "murdered while holding a baby".

Evidence indicates that the Feds HAD no idea that Sammy and Vicki were even dead until afterwards. Yet the conspiracy theory cuts the government no slack and assigns godlike abilities to their agents. They came see trough doors on demand with ordinary rifles scopes.

Sworn testamony states that the agents were chased by ARMED members of the Weaver clan. Are you telling me that a great many (if not the majority) CCW's here on THR would NOT have fired (maybe even the 1st shot?) in a similar circumstance? Sammy was carrying a loaded firearm, who fired first is UNCLEAR. The agents were legally on the Weaver property in the performance of their duty. Also sworn testamony states that Weaver had often said he would use armed violence against any LE agent who showed up on his property. Given Weaver's known mindset, the events that occurred could hardly be a unexplainable.

You still insist on placing the information in your books on the same plane as sworn evidence. Are not many of the facts in your book(s) contested and therfore conflicting ? It has gotten excellent reviews but it's nothing more than a newspaper account. What percent of he information is obtained through sworn statements 10%, 25%? How much of it has been cross examined by experts to establish it's ACCURACY, in reviews it gets high marks for even-handedness, that mean fair not accurate. It still does not carry the same weight as sworn testamony, and should not.

As far as being on your ignore list, this "loon" has taken a great deal of heat over this subject because of a very unpopular stance on a pro-gun forum. Maybe you would prefere I be banned for my lack of PC views? There are at least two sides to every story and that seems to upset you, I have heard your comments but it is my decision not to except your conclusions based on the evidence that meets my standards not yours. If the information in your books are so valid why have they not been entered into the court record, or forced Congree to reopen it's hearings?

You disappoint me in that you tuck tail and run, thats not like you. Why do you feel you have to convert me over to your beliefs? You have made your points and I have made mine. Niether of us stand alone in our views (except here on THR) You will continue to run up against better opposition than me if you get involved with issues of the 2nd amendment. Or do you just preach to the choir?
 
Last edited:
I has been reported that in the aftermath of the shooting of Vickie, Horiuchi drew a sketch of his sight picture on an incident report that showed 2 heads behind the mullions of the window in the door. I wasn't there, don't know, but I heard this very soon after it happened, and it came out for some reason. Maybe someone changed the report.
As to mindsets, mine was much better before this happened. I am much more likely to have an attitude problem with anyone coming on my land. It was not handled properly, Vickie and Sammy did not have to die and it was all due to government attitude about armed peasants. If it was intended, as I suspect, to intimidate, it failed. It just pissed a lot of us off. From that moment on I have had to suspect that any LEO approaching my door is there to disarm me. My innocence or guilt does not figure. They will make me out to be just as guilty as they need to. Don't give me the line about how If I have nothing to hide I have nothing to fear. This whole situation breaks my heart, but people like me didn't start it. The government has a long way to go to regain the trust they destroyed that day.
 
Remember, folks, this was supposed to be enforcement of a tax matter. When was the last time you saw the IRS surrounding someone's house because they misfiled their income taxes and were off by a few dollars? It's absolutely ridiculous that we even accept the existence of an agency like the BATFE, which uses deadly force to enforce a $200 tax (actually, in Weaver's case, it may have only been a $5 tax, I believe a shortened shotgun is only an AOW). And doing "stings" to try and get people to violate little-known laws, such as the "overall length" law that Weaver supposedly violated, and somehow justified this raid by the ATF? How is a shotgun that has a stock that may or may not be a couple of fractions of an inch shorter than is allowed going to hurt anyone? And the ATF deemed it necessary to kill this man's dog, son, wife, and friend over it? How is what the BATFE does a proper function of government?

The "EVIDENCE" shows that the ATF should be disbanded, for the safety of the people of the United States.
 
telewinz, please correct your erroneous statement. Here's the sketch that sniper Lon Horiuchi himself drew during an initial FBI interview.
horiuchi.gif
No curtains, two heads behind the window.

The following narrative is from Gerry Spence's book:

And, of course, we remember that Lon Horiuchi, who had taken the stand, had testified that, indeed, he had intended to kill Kevin Harris, who was running for his life, his back to the sniper. Yet the prosecution claimed that the sniper, who admittedly could see and hit a fly at two hundred yards with his ten-power scope, could not see the head of Vicki Weaver through the glass window of the open door. Instead, the prosecution attempted to make the jury believe that the curtains were closed. But from my own discussion with Randy that fact seemed in question, especially after the government failed to produce a crucial Horiuchi drawing of what the sniper had seen when fired.

From the drawing made by Horiuchi during an interview with the FBI at a hotel, on hotel stationery, he draws in no closed curtains at all. In the lower right-hand corner of the window we see two partial heads as if people were squatting there. Indeed, Randy and Sara had dived into the house just ahead of Kevin Harris. And it was Harris, not Weaver, who presumably had killed a federal officer, and who Horiuchi himself was admittedly trying to kill, whether or not he was carrying out the unwritten law that seemed to doom the cop-killer. Be that as it may, the method of hitting a running target is for the shooter to place the "mildot" seen in the scope on the target -- harris in this case -- which places the crosshairs ahead of the target, thus leading the target, so the bullet and the target will arrive simultaneously. Shortly after the killing this is exactly as Horiuchi himself drew it for the FBI interrogator.

Horiuchi's drawing shows us that he must have known that human beings were behind the flimsy door. He had to know that someone, presumably Vicki or ten-year-old Rachel, was likely standing behind the door to hold it open. Moreover, the drawing proves he knew exactly where it did strike -- at the cross, as he shows it in the drawing. Vicki Weaver's head was behind the cross, that apocalyptic symbol, which served also as the point of aim for the killer.
 
telewinz,

You place great store in sworn testimony. What is your stance on the sworn testimony during the government's investigation of Waco that no gas devices were used at Waco capable of causing a fire? Testimony that was later found to be perjured by the locating of said devices at the Branch Davidians compound. Found in positions held by federal agents during the siege.


What's your opinion of that sworn testimony...and the government agents who gave it? What about the US attorney who has failed to prosecute those agents for perjury?
 
Maybe those 2 objects in the window in the above drawing weren't heads.
Don't you wonder if that wasn't discussed by Horiuchi's defense lawyers. "Hey, they could have been a couple of pots in the kitchen!" :mad: geegee
 
Don't you wonder if that wasn't discussed by Horiuchi's defense lawyers. "Hey, they could have been a couple of pots in the kitchen!" geegee


This is trained person with a precision rifle and a spotter?








This just in.................. Maybe those were Mrs. Weaver's breasts and the sniper got excited and his gun went off early.
 
Last edited:
Leading a moving target

That seems like an awfully big lead. IIRC from the military manuals, you generally don't need more than the width of your front post unless you're shooting @ great distances. At "normal distances", in the neighborhood of 200 yds or so, you target the leading edge of the subject.


On second though, looking at the drawing again, perhaps it isn't too long. I had to mentally "bulk out" the stick figure to human proportions, and having done that, it seems somewhat reasonable.
 
This may be a slightly off topic, but I've often wondered why the Branch Davidians didn't open up on the Feds with those horrible .50 cal machine guns they were alleged to have had? Wouldn't .50 cal BMG rounds have made hiding behind a car a moot point? (as in the rounds would have gone clean thru car and killed anyone on the other side?)
 
This may be a slightly off topic, but I've often wondered why the Branch Davidians didn't open up on the Feds with those horrible .50 cal machine guns they were alleged to have had? Wouldn't .50 cal BMG rounds have made hiding behind a car a moot point? (as in the rounds would have gone clean thru car and killed anyone on the other side?)

Well, since the Feds hauled off all the cars sitting out there (including the ones "shot up" by the Davidians) and destroyed them before independent and defense experts could examine them, we'll never really know. (Guess we should take the Fed's word for this...:fire: )

The upshot to both of these events is that, had ATF & FBI used the same procedures for carrying out a criminal warrant as they had in previous situations (no SWAT, local LEO's involved), then 80 Branch Davidians would still be alive, Vicki Weaver would be dropping her son off at school, and people would be working in the Murrah building today.

But they didn't... :cuss:
 
If the information in your books are so valid why have they not been entered into the court record, or forced Congree to reopen it's hearings?
The evidence that Tamara and others have cited, was sufficient for Randy Weaver to not only be aquitted, but also suficient for him to recieve millions of dollars in compensation for wrongful death of family members at the hands of thugs. Oh, but wait, those verdicts were handed down by American citizens, not your all knowing Masters. :rolleyes: :barf: :barf: :barf: :barf: :barf:

Oh, and one other thing. Be sure to never break a tax law. I wouldn't want the government to have come to your house and shoot your wife and kid, and then taunt you with loudspeakers about it. :fire: :fire:
 
wow.. so many reponses... soory of this is a repea,t i skimmed much of them.

it smy understanding that Weaver didnt show up for the first trial becuase the letter he got had the wrong date.

slightly off topic, but why would a liberal anti gun lawyer like Gerry Spence defend weaver if he thought he was guilty ?

Anyway, as to Waco, the .gov could have arrested Koresh anytime they wanted, he routiniely jogged around town and went shoping in the market in town. why did they throw apress conference BEFORE the raid ?
Also check the research on the FLIR tapes.. the eveidence that they only had a day or 3 left of water in their water tower suggests they would have come out sooner or later.

both topics are hot buttons for freedom loving people because of the force in which the .gov applied... not neccasarily the crimes that the alleged perps may or may not have committed..

the branch davidians had some some kooky beliefs and so did the weavers
its not illegal to have nutty views yet... in this country.
 
I'll tell you what, Telewinz. If it will induce you to read the book and draw your own conclusions, PM me your address and I'll send you my copy of Every Knee Shall Bow. You can keep it, I've read it several times. I'm going to replace it with some of the others suggested on this thread.

If you can read Every Knee Shall Bow and come away really believing the author has some kind of bias against the government or in favor of Randy Weaver, you must be trying harder than I am. There are very few sympathetic figures in the whole thing.

As for this:
Case in point: Vicki Weaver "murdered by a sniper while she held her baby" yet (from both sides)sworn testamony states that she was standing behind a CURTAINED, closed door when the fatal shot was fired. Just what kind of scope was on that rifle that the sniper could see/aim thru a door AND curtain. and still hit his supposed "target"? Worse case, it was involuntary homicide (he missed his intended target) it was accidental, yet it sounds better to say "murdered while holding a baby".
You can find the answer to that in Every Knee Shall Bow. One of the only sympathetic characters in the book was the federal prosecutor who got the case against Randy Weaver (and all the fun of dealing with Gerry Spence, who also doesn't come off well) dumped in his lap and had to fight both the defense and his own government agencies which continually withheld evidence even from him.
One piece of evidence that conveniently disappeared for a long time was a sketch Lon Horiuchi made on hotel stationery the night of the shooting. It showed the Weavers' door. The curtains are tied aside in the sketch and there's a rough outline of a woman with a circle for a head. A smaller outline marks the baby. In other words, he knew exactly who was behind that door. When the prosecutor finally got that bit of evidence, he was livid, according to Every Knee. Throughout the trial he was deeply frustrated by the way his own agencies stonewalled him and acted as if they were covering things up.
The standing orders of the day were to shoot on sight any adult believed to be armed--and the bulletins before that had told the agents to assume that all the adults were armed. Note that the standing orders do not mention a threat. They amount to "shoot on sight" orders. The FBI later found it very difficult to remember who issued those orders, but a guy named Potter must have figured prominently. Of course, nothing happened to him.
 
based on volumn..I'm about ready to give up

I do not pretend to be an expert wittness on this subject, nor do I wish to be.

Testamony on Vicki Weaver (not mine)

It is our conclusion that the sniper/observer who took the second shot intended to shoot Kevin Harris but accidentally killed Vicki Weaver whom he did not see behind the curtained door."


The methylene chloride in the CS riot control agent used by the FBI did not cause the fire.

One of the theories forwarded to the Subcommittees comcerning the origin of the fire is that methylene chloride, a chemical used as a dispersant to carry the CS riot control agent injected into the Branch Davidian residence, may have ignited and started the fire. During the hearings Dr. Quintiere testified that it was his opinion that the methylene chloride in the CS agent neither caused nor contributed to the spread of the fire.

In light of this testimony, and the other information reviewed by the Subcommittees concerning the flammability of methylene chloride, the Subcommittees conclude that the presence of methylene chloride in the Branch Davidian residence did not cause the fire nor contribute to its spread.

Don, thanks for the offer but I'll obtain a copy shortly. It is a well regarded book by readers. If this thread ever dies (1-2 years?) I'll take a rest and some nerve medicine, and I won't read any of my emails ever again!

And Duncan...get a life, I'm not responsible for my governments actions and I still don't feel they are part of the EVIL EMPIRE.
 
Nothing continues to happen to Assistant Director Larry Potts.

He was promoted, then he was allowed to quietly retire. They even threw a shindig for him.

Between Larry Potts, E. Michael Kahoe, and Lon Horiuchi, it boils down to a minor variation on the Nurenberg defense.

And we hanged the defendants who used the Nurenberg defense.

Randy Weaver got $3.1 million to not talk about it.
 
In the case of Ruby Ridge, it would have been much better to stop wasting taxpayer dollars trying to catch the evil maker of a shotgun an inch too short (oh my!). Nothing should have been done. The family should have been LEFT ALONE, something the gov'ment never likes to do.

In the case of Waco, the whole thing could have been solved if the feds had gone through local LEOs who were far more familiar with the group (and with whom the group was also much more familiar).

In both cases, the feds suffered from WAY too much money and time on their hands coupled with a militant attitude which made the suspects into "the enemy" in some sort of demented war.

Both provide perfect examples of why the feds were never supposed to be involved in crime fighting at this scale.
 
Potts! That's it. Thanks.

Telewinz, the point so many people keep setting in front of you is that a government document which names a government committee's decision is not evidence that said decision was correct. You can post that a Congressional committee came to such and such a conclusion all day long, but unless you know what evidence they examined and have weighed the evidence yourself, you don't know how or why they came to that conclusion. When their conclusions--every single one of them--conveniently go the way most favorable to them, skepticism would be in order.

The Congressional committee can conclude whatever it wants, but in view of the sketch I mentioned earlier, not to mention the firefight with a dog and a couple of kids, I can't imagine how they came to that conclusion.

You have produced no evidence for your point of view. It's possible that you're right, sure. Without any evidence to suggest that, however, it's unreasonable to expect people to embrace your point of view when the known facts contradict it.
 
Cosmo...

Your views sound wise to me but if we let the Weavers off then we should let ALL minor felons off. Are we tough on crime or are we still picking and choosing? Why not do it right and just have the minor felonies taken off the books? More 14 year old drunks, pot parties for back to school 3rd graders, and private sales of explosives and weapons to know mental defectives and a wealthy terrorist or two. I'm pro-gun and law abiding, the gun laws only hinder me. But I don't know about the "other" minor laws.:uhoh:
 
I am not trying to steer the thread in a different direction.

I just found out something that floored me. I had no clue. Seems that former General and future presidential candidate Wesley Clark was the commanding general of Ft Hood during the Waco incident. As such, Ms. Reno request for military assistance would have gone directly to General Clark. General Clark would have had to agree to loaning both armored assets and troops. He would have also had to ok's training of bATF and FBI types.

Maybe this info is old hat to yous guys, but it is completely new to me.

http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=9522

http://www.counterpunch.org/waco2.html

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/clark.htm

No, it is not sworn testimony but it is a compilation of information from gov't reports.

Truly interesting.
 
Your views sound wise to me but if we let the Weavers off then we should let ALL minor felons off.

We don't have to let them off. Just withhold the $5 (and any associated fines and penalties) from his income taxes and forget about it!

Keith
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top