On Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:02:09 -0700, John Smith
wrote:

On 4/26/2011 10:41 AM, raven1 wrote:
On Tue, 26 Apr 2011 09:51:32 -0700, John
wrote:

On 4/26/2011 7:06 AM, raven1 wrote:
On Mon, 25 Apr 2011 14:12:55 -0700, John
wrote:


The court hearing(s) and trials on all this are nothing short of
criminal, a sham, a joke ... I am sorry, I find any testimony given by
the victimized surviors of no value,
...

http://www.public-action.com/SkyWrit.../page/b_a.html
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/1999/09/09/waco

I'm not sure as to your point: the second link here is to a survivor's
account blaming the FBI, but the first is an article discrediting his
account as unbelievable, and noting that his story has changed several
times.

http://www.carolmoore.net/waco/waco-speak-out.html

This is testimony of two survivors: Thibodeau, whose account your
first article has already dismissed as unreliable, and a second who
offers no insight as to how the fire started other than that he didn't
hear an order to set it.

But again, what's your point, as you've already stated you hold the
survivors' accounts of no value? Make up your mind.

Combined with what I have already stated,

Stop right there. You're using accounts that you've previously
dismissed as being of "no value" to support your position. Sorry, you
can't have it both ways. Moreover, as I pointed out, the first link
you provided dismisses the testimony from the second (and half of the
testimony from the third) as unbelievable, and the remainder of the
testimony in the third link doesn't implicate either side for starting
the fire, so it's of no aid to you.

and apparently you have
missed, with the resources and open intimidation of lethal force by
public servants, military, police, etc. only fools could oppose these
lethal forces without escaping death ...

Well, yes, if by "opposing" you mean "armed opposition", but several
of the Branch Davidians did peacefully leave the compound unharmed
during the stand-off...

You want absolutes when it is the very nature of the criminals to hide
their crimes ...

No, I just expect accusations to be supported by evidence, not
speculation.

Waco was a simple illegal home invasion perpetrated by government ...
they got their asses handed to them and had to murder the resisters in a
show of force.

"Had to"? Why?

I'd say that is pretty criminal fare done by tyrants
worldwide ... you seem to feel it is OK when American public servants do
crimes.

No, I don't. But I also don't feel it's OK to revise history.

That is all which has happened, that is all that happening ...

Regards,
JS

On 4/26/2011 11:37 AM, raven1 wrote:
On Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:02:09 -0700, John
wrote:

On 4/26/2011 10:41 AM, raven1 wrote:
On Tue, 26 Apr 2011 09:51:32 -0700, John
wrote:

On 4/26/2011 7:06 AM, raven1 wrote:
On Mon, 25 Apr 2011 14:12:55 -0700, John
wrote:


The court hearing(s) and trials on all this are nothing short of
criminal, a sham, a joke ... I am sorry, I find any testimony given by
the victimized surviors of no value,
...

http://www.public-action.com/SkyWrit.../page/b_a.html
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/1999/09/09/waco

I'm not sure as to your point: the second link here is to a survivor's
account blaming the FBI, but the first is an article discrediting his
account as unbelievable, and noting that his story has changed several
times.

http://www.carolmoore.net/waco/waco-speak-out.html

This is testimony of two survivors: Thibodeau, whose account your
first article has already dismissed as unreliable, and a second who
offers no insight as to how the fire started other than that he didn't
hear an order to set it.

But again, what's your point, as you've already stated you hold the
survivors' accounts of no value? Make up your mind.

Combined with what I have already stated,

Stop right there. You're using accounts that you've previously
dismissed as being of "no value" to support your position. Sorry, you
can't have it both ways. Moreover, as I pointed out, the first link
you provided dismisses the testimony from the second (and half of the
testimony from the third) as unbelievable, and the remainder of the
testimony in the third link doesn't implicate either side for starting
the fire, so it's of no aid to you.

and apparently you have
missed, with the resources and open intimidation of lethal force by
public servants, military, police, etc. only fools could oppose these
lethal forces without escaping death ...

Well, yes, if by "opposing" you mean "armed opposition", but several
of the Branch Davidians did peacefully leave the compound unharmed
during the stand-off...

You want absolutes when it is the very nature of the criminals to hide
their crimes ...

No, I just expect accusations to be supported by evidence, not
speculation.

Waco was a simple illegal home invasion perpetrated by government ...
they got their asses handed to them and had to murder the resisters in a
show of force.

"Had to"? Why?

I'd say that is pretty criminal fare done by tyrants
worldwide ... you seem to feel it is OK when American public servants do
crimes.

No, I don't. But I also don't feel it's OK to revise history.

That is all which has happened, that is all that happening ...

Regards,
JS

You are moron with desperate arguments ... watch Waco Rules of
Engagement, if you can't figure out Waco was a total crime for the
reasons already mentioned, you are simply attempting to pursue a "last
man standing argument", a tool of fools who have already lost the
argument and now fall upon their last hope ...

Regards,
JS

On Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:46:47 -0700, John Smith
wrote:

On 4/26/2011 11:37 AM, raven1 wrote:
On Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:02:09 -0700, John
wrote:

On 4/26/2011 10:41 AM, raven1 wrote:
On Tue, 26 Apr 2011 09:51:32 -0700, John
wrote:

On 4/26/2011 7:06 AM, raven1 wrote:
On Mon, 25 Apr 2011 14:12:55 -0700, John
wrote:


The court hearing(s) and trials on all this are nothing short of
criminal, a sham, a joke ... I am sorry, I find any testimony given by
the victimized surviors of no value,
...

http://www.public-action.com/SkyWrit.../page/b_a.html
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/1999/09/09/waco

I'm not sure as to your point: the second link here is to a survivor's
account blaming the FBI, but the first is an article discrediting his
account as unbelievable, and noting that his story has changed several
times.

http://www.carolmoore.net/waco/waco-speak-out.html

This is testimony of two survivors: Thibodeau, whose account your
first article has already dismissed as unreliable, and a second who
offers no insight as to how the fire started other than that he didn't
hear an order to set it.

But again, what's your point, as you've already stated you hold the
survivors' accounts of no value? Make up your mind.

Combined with what I have already stated,

Stop right there. You're using accounts that you've previously
dismissed as being of "no value" to support your position. Sorry, you
can't have it both ways. Moreover, as I pointed out, the first link
you provided dismisses the testimony from the second (and half of the
testimony from the third) as unbelievable, and the remainder of the
testimony in the third link doesn't implicate either side for starting
the fire, so it's of no aid to you.

and apparently you have
missed, with the resources and open intimidation of lethal force by
public servants, military, police, etc. only fools could oppose these
lethal forces without escaping death ...

Well, yes, if by "opposing" you mean "armed opposition", but several
of the Branch Davidians did peacefully leave the compound unharmed
during the stand-off...

You want absolutes when it is the very nature of the criminals to hide
their crimes ...

No, I just expect accusations to be supported by evidence, not
speculation.

Waco was a simple illegal home invasion perpetrated by government ...
they got their asses handed to them and had to murder the resisters in a
show of force.

"Had to"? Why?

I'd say that is pretty criminal fare done by tyrants
worldwide ... you seem to feel it is OK when American public servants do
crimes.

No, I don't. But I also don't feel it's OK to revise history.

That is all which has happened, that is all that happening ...

Regards,
JS

You are moron with desperate arguments ... watch Waco Rules of
Engagement, if you can't figure out Waco was a total crime for the
reasons already mentioned, you are simply attempting to pursue a "last
man standing argument", a tool of fools who have already lost the
argument and now fall upon their last hope ...

Your posturing aside, you failed to address anything I said above,
including your attempt to support your position with testimony you've
already dismissed as valueless. It doesn't seem like I'm the desperate
moron here.