WACO: MORE EVIDENCE & MORE QUESTIONS
(c) (8/26/99) Ian Williams Goddard
In addition to recently uncovered pyrotechnic
projectiles in debris from the Waco fire, The
Washington Post reports that there's also video
which supposedly shows a helicopter firing down
into the Davidian church on the last day of the
Waco siege. It's been said that such occurred on
the first day, but it's news to this author that
it may have also occurred on the last day (the
official FLIR video shows ground-based machine
gun fire at the church). As The Post reports:
"Another never-before-seen piece of evidence
on the siege is a videotape shot by the Texas
Department of Public Safety that some experts
say appears to show machine gun fire directed
at the compound's occupants from an FBI
helicopter the morning of April 19. Federal
officials have said that no federal agents
ever fired on the Davidians. The video was
obtained by a Colorado filmmaker, Michael
McNulty, who helped produce the documentary
'Waco: The Rules of Engagement.'" [1]
Two days ago the deputy assistant FBI director at
the time of the Waco siege, Danny Coulson, admitted
that the FBI did use two pyrotechnic devices during
the final siege on April 19, 1993. [2] But he claims,
that they were used away from the main building,
hours before the fire -- a claim that the official
FLIR video suggest does not apply to devices other
than the two devices Coulson refers to. His admission
came after the discovery of what appears to be two
pyrotechnic devices in previously-hidden debris. [3]
Danny Coulson also told The Washington Post: "I only
found out a week ago that these [pyrotechnic] rounds
were fired." [1] That's a relevant point he made
since I've been wondering where Mr Coulson was when
federal officials swore under oath that there were
absolutely NO pyrotechnic devices used. The Dallas
Morning News reports that Mr Coulson also "said that
they [pyrotechnic devices] were used with permission
from FBI supervisors." [2] Mr Coulson was himself
an FBI supervisor at the time, so this seems to
suggest that approval came from supervisors over
his head. These facts raise these obvious questions:
1) What "FBI supervisors" approved
the use of these pyrotechnic devices?
2) Why would pyrotechnic devices be approved
in conjunction with a gas attack that flooded
the area with potential flammable CS power and
its carrier, the solvent methylene chloride?[4]
3) Who told Danny Coulson a week ago that
at least two pyrotechnic devices were used?
4) Why was Mr Coulson, founding commander of
the FBI's Hostage Rescue Team and on duty at
the time of the incident, not informed of the
use of these devices until six-years later?
Breaking news from Janet Reno [5] claims that she
had no idea about the use of these pyrotechnic
devices, which adds another question to my list:
5) Are we to believe that leaders are placed at
the head of federal agencies so that underlings
can run everything themselves in moments of the
highest magnitude without direction from or even
the knowledge of their agency heads? Come on!
The Dallas Morning News also reported: "'The stance
has always been that they used no pyrotechnics out
there that day,' said David Byrne, who retired from
the agency in August 1996. 'There are some serious
criminal violations if they did. They have testified.
They have done it before Congress. They've done it
in court. They've caused other people to testify that
there were no pyrotechnics used. If that turns out
not to be right, then somebody will have some serious
problems on a federal level,' Capt. Byrne said." [2]
Frankly, I'll be interested to see how it comes to
pass that nobody or only lowly underlings will have
serious problems over this. Since Danny Coulson
implies that pyrotechnic devices were only used away
from the main building and hours before the fire (an
implication that the FLIR video calls into question),
his admission strikes me as a cover story necessitated
by the unescapable fact that two devices were found
and therefore they must be accounted for some how.
It will be interesting to see Mike McNulty's new
documentary and how these latest findings unfold.
____________________________________________________
[1] The Washington Post: "FBI Reverses Position On
Actions in Waco Siege FBI Reveals Waco Munitions
Were Potentially Incendiary." By Richard Leiby
Thursday, August 26, 1999; Page A01.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/
1999-08/26/142l-082699-idx.html
[2] The Dallas Morning News: "Ex-agent says device
fired at Waco compound, Justice Department denies
item used." By Lee Hancock, 08/24/99.
http://dallasnews.com/texas_southwest/0824tsw1teargas.htm
[3] The Dallas Morning News: "Official disputes FBI
account of Davidian fire." 07/28/99. http://dallasnews
.com/texas_southwest/0728tsw100davidians.htm
[4] UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT
OF TEXAS http://www.indirect.com/www/dhardy/larsen.html
[5] The Washington Post: "Reno, Angry, Vows to Press
FBI on Waco." By Edward Walsh, Thursday, August 26,
1999; 12:47 p.m. EDT http://www.washingtonpost.com/
wp-srv/national/daily/aug99/reno26.htm
------------------------------------------------------------
GODDARD'S JOURNAL: http://www.erols.com/igoddard/journal.htm
____________________________________________________________
