Re: Waco: Govt Set Fire

Ian Goddard (
Mon, 13 Sep 1999 06:02:21 -0400

At 10:29 PM 9/11/99 -0700, Robert J. Bradbury wrote:

>> IAN: You could guarantee that destroying
>> the building and killing witnesses will
>> destroy the evidence of the aerial attack
>> on the first day and silence witnesses.
>It silences the *VICTIMS*, it does not silence
>the witnesses who participated in the actions!

IAN: Ever notice how more victims come forward to report crimes than perpetrators come forward to confess?! I'm not impressed that perpetrators of mass murder are inclined to rush forward to confess their crime, and I expect the planners of such a crime are also aware of the same. Perhaps one will want to write a book and make a lot of money so he can refurbish his prison cell, but I also think most people don't like jail.

Also, the fact that an ex-CIA agent recently came forward to report that the Delta Force was firing at Mt Carmel and he's now hiding after death threats to himself and his son gives us a little hint about the forces at play that can help ensure silence. I'm not impressed that most people desire death for themselves or their family members.

>But, you still haven't addressed my fundamental points
> (1) Why would the government create a conspiricy
> involving dozens or hundreds of individuals
> to commit mass murder?

IAN: I've already given some answers to that. If we have videotape of someone committing a crime, the question of why is academic. If we have video of Smith killing Jones, Smith wont get off if a motive isn't established.

As to your baseless assertion that the FLIR may be faked. The FLIR came from the FBI and the FBI claims the flashes in question are sunlight reflections. I'm not impressed that the FBI would doctor the FLIR in such a way that frames themselves for mass murder since expert analysis confirms that they are not sunlight reflections but gun-muzzle flashes. Here's another expert analysis of the flashes:

> (2) How would they hope to protect such an action
> from exposure?

IAN: Concealing and "losing" evidence and other things that they've done and are doing. Is this really so difficult to figure out??? I'm not impressed that crimes involving a lot of people are impossible or that there's an overwhelming tendency for those involved in mass murder to rush forward to confess. But even if I was, the bottom line is the facts in the case, since someone could confess to a crime that wasn't committed.