[LiquidTension]

I just finished watching this documentary a few minutes ago. Lots of good info in it for those of you that haven't seen it. Some very enlightening facts that I was not aware of before were presented.

Charles Schumer is an even bigger #$*&%@! than I previously thought. Throughout the entire hearings after the initial shootout, he vehemently refused to even entertain the idea that his beloved ATF had acted inappropriately. He went so far as to interrupt testimony when the witness even started to say something that he didn't want to hear. These were expert witnesses, people that were there, and he was denying what they were saying. He was so bad that another person on the panel had to call him down once or twice. I am more convinced now than ever that Schumer is one of the biggest threats to national security in my lifetime. If he were to drop dead from say, a massive brain hemorrhage in the next five minutes, there would be zero sympathy from me.

Sorry to sound angry, but this guy is infuriating.

[Zundfolge]

I am more convinced now than ever that Schumer is one of the biggest threats to national security in my lifetime.

No he's not a threat to national security, he's working real hard to preserve the government's security (one plan is to disarm potential insurgents...namely US!).

He's a threat to Liberty (and lately "National Security" is a threat to Liberty)

[labgrade]

If that cheered you up, you really must have a tape of Chuckie when he was in the House/Judiciary Committee overseeing the '94 assault weapons ban.

Choice juice that.

Chuck's total scum, although I must say that he has moderated somewhat, though still a numero uno piece of trash.

"I do swear to uphold the constitution ... yada, yada, .... " :barf: (vomit!)

As much as I'd distain wishing a deadliest disease upon any, at least Sarah is a private citizen & is well within her rights to spew forth any invectives she wishes.

The Chuckster, however, has sworn to uphold & has not that personal luxury once taken.

May he, & his ilk, rot.

"No he's not a threat to national security, ... "

Yes, he is, & for the very reason that you mentioned at your closing.

[Waitone]

The film to which you refer does make public information Dan Rather er al would be reluctant to air.

At the same time beware of the ability of film makers to manipulate visuals and facts. Over the years I've learned all sides of a political cat fight engage in manipulation of facts to move toward a pre-determined conclusion.

There is a lot about Waco to be investigated. There's still unvented rage out there. Just be wary of being manipulated . . . . . by all sides.

[Kamicosmos]

Isn't Jeri Ryan (7 of 9) breifly in that movie as one of the victims/hostages/participants depending on your point of view?

I think I caught the end of that on Lifetime or something once.

Seemed to me that it was on the Fed's side mostly.

[rock jock]

Some very enlightening facts that I was not aware of before were presented.
IMO, very few facts have been presented by either the feds or the anti-feds.

[TheBluesMan]

Waco: The Rules of Engagement isn't a made for TV movie, Kamicosmos. If you *think* you might have seen it, you haven't. It is a documentary that refutes most everything that the mainstream press reported as true.

I bought a used copy at a local movie & CD exchange. It's also available on eBay. Invest a few bucks and buy a copy, then pass it around to friends. It will upset them and make them think.

[bad_dad_brad]

I have to agree that this documentary also made me very angry. A clear cut case of the Federal government exceeding it's powers. I read a book about Ruby Ridge as well (can't think of the title), and all of this hullabalo about a law banning the sale of sawed off shotguns based in prohibition days, resulting in the deaths of essentially innocent people, did make me think.

Well, this incident won't turn me into some kind of revolutionary radical, but when you think about it (besides the stupidity, injustice, and the cost to the tax payers as well), and I agree LiquidTension, that it does tend to piss off a thinking person.

[AZRickD]

I own a copy of the "Producer's Cut." Made my skin crawl.

You can get it at Amazon.com (http://http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1567301738/103-9658512-3788618?v=glance)

There is also "Waco: New Revelations" by the same folk.

W:TROE was nominated for an Academy Award for best documentary, and won both an Emmy and the award at The Sundance Film Festival.

The TV movie you saw is the one that was made just a few weeks after the fire at Mount Carmel. It starred the guy from the NBC comedy "Wings" as David Koresh.

Rick

[Mark Tyson]

Was this the one that purported to show feds firing automatic weapons at the compound?

[AZRickD]

At the very least.

This is the one that FOIAed the government's FLIR (foward looking infrared) image tapes which showed heat signatures which were similar to what one would expect from automatic weapons.

It also showed armored vehicles (modified M60 tanks, Bradley's as I recall) driving over vehicles and graves. These same M60s were shown pumping CS suspended in Methylene Chloride into the building (likely killing people nearly instantly). It showed helicopters strafing the rooftops. It showed tanks driving through the building and collapsing the structure before the fire started. It showed bulldozers destroying the crime scene before anyone could investigate. It showed BATF and FBI bureaucrats getting caught in lies in front of Congressional committees.

Yeah, that one.

Rick

[Don Galt]

I haven't seen the movie, but I read the CATO report.

Pretty devestating for the feds.

The FACTS are pretty clear, and as usual, not in much dispute. Whether they were justified in their actions, or not, is where the lawyers are playing around. (or just ignoring).

This brings up the question again of, what do we do when the justice system fails us.... the courts have done nothing, and convicted some of the waco survivors.