----- Original Message ----- From: "Gautam Mukunda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 4:51 PM Subject: Re: Ruby Ridge..
> --- Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Are you saying that the report of the official > > investigation was false, or > > are you just interpreting it in a far different > > manner than I do? > > > > http://www.byington.org/Carl/ruby/ruby1.htm > > > > As far as I can tell, the orders were consistent > > with SOP for Houston drug > > enforcement. > > > > Dan M. > > Just from reading the introduction "the FBI's Hostage > Rescue Team . . . instituted a shoot on sight policy . > . .." That's what I was referring to.
Rogers explained his initial thoughts about the Rules of Engagement:
In this particular situation, after hearing the description of what had taken place, specifically the fire-fight, the loss of a marshal, it was clear to me that there was a shooting situation taking place at this location.
And had the marshal not fired first and killed the dog, who was hardly likely to have been pointing a firearm at him, he would not have gotten shot. Nor would he have shot a teenage boy in the back.
-- Ronn! :)
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
