PETER J. BOYER: The siege has gone on now for 23 days, 23
days of two competing solutions: talk and action. [Jeff] Jamar, the
agent-in-charge, has signed on for action. He makes it clear to Sage that his
mind is made up. Byron Sage, the most visible negotiator, then recommends in
writing an escalation of tactical measures, including tear gas.
BYRON SAGE: Absolutely. I mean, this is kind of a radical departure for a
negotiation team to recommend tear-gassing, but we're now what, 20, 23 days into
a siege. Haven't had a child out since the 5th of March.
PETER J. BOYER: The HRT are ready with a plan. It's simple, aggressive and
quick. Under the cover of darkness they would take the compound with Bradley
tanks and gas. The Davidians, overwhelmed, would come out. They are ready to
act, but first the plan must be approved by Washington.
The record shows that using tanks and gas on a compound still holding 25
children was a tough sell to this attorney general. As a local prosecutor, Janet
Reno had built a reputation as a zealous child advocate. And on Monday, April,
12th, she said no to the gas plan.
The FBI didn't relent. They came back at the attorney general. "The
plan's too aggressive,'' she said. Then they'll water it down. She worried the
Davidians might use the children as shields. If they did, the FBI promised to
back off. Most of all, she worried that the gas would permanently damage the
children. A military expert assured her the gas was safe.
For five days the FBI tried to eliminate her objections. After the Waco fire,
Reno would say again and again that she authorized the gas plan because children
were being abused.
JANET RENO: [ABC News "Nightline''] We had had reports that they had
been sexually abused, that babies had actually been beaten. I asked when I
first heard that for them to verify it and, again, that was the report that was
brought back.
PETER J. BOYER: When she said, "I was told that babies were being beaten
and I said, 'What do you mean? Babies are being picked up and beaten?' 'Yes,' I
was told, 'babies were being beaten' ''_
WILLIAM SESSIONS: Then she will have to say who told her that. Certainly, I
did not.
PETER J. BOYER: She says she doesn't remember.
WILLIAM SESSIONS: Well, if it was impressive_ something that impressed her
tremendously, then she's responsible for what she heard.
PETER J. BOYER: But FBI documents uncovered by FRONTLINE confirm that as
the Bureau was pressuring Reno to approve the gas plan, someone in the FBI told
her that children were being abused at Waco. But the FBI knew that children were
not being beaten during the stand-off. [interviewing] At the time, what she
said was, "I was told that babies were being beaten.'' She told me that she
was told that. Web Hubbel [(sic)] told me that he heard her being told that. Did
you tell her that?
PETER J. BOYER: It is still not known who had told Reno about the child
abuse, but on Friday, April 16th, she changed her mind and approved the gas
plan. The FBI is ready, but will the Davidians play the role the FBI has
scripted for them? When the gas goes in, will they come out?
I posted this to make sure that it is understood that Reno's ignorance of the
facts is not enough to get her off the hook. She has got to explain who gave her
the story of the abused kids, which, if Boyer is accurate, seems to have
been a carefully contrived lie to sway her to action.
That person must be called on the carpet with the full weight of the
bloodguilt for spurring the final deadly assault.
If she can't or won't answer the question, the guilt shifts back to her. We
should not tolerate the idea of a "Deep Throat" telling Reno "the
kids are being beaten" in a parking garage.
(BTW, has Webster Hubbell been asked who told Reno the kids were being
beaten? I don't know where I can find a transcript of the original hearings
online.)
I am sure that some will suggest that this would be going over old ground,
but it should be pointed out that with the new revelations, no ground is
"old" anymore.
To: L.N. Smithee
I am wondering the same thing-since Web Hubbell says in the
above article that he was there when Reno was told of the child abuse-it just
does not make sense that he has not been asked WHO told her. If he can remember
being there when she was told, then he can remember who was doing the telling,
even if Reno cannot. But if Reno had to be persuaded to let the gas and tanks
begin their assault, then I do not believe for ONE MINUTE that she has forgotten
who was persuading her...according to the above it took days to convince her to
use the CS gas.
It seems crucial that we find out WHO was doing this persuading, and WHO made
up the child abuse crap? This is important to know....My guess is Web Hubbell's
contacts in the WH made up the child abuse. Whoever did it (may be more than
one), is responsible for Reno's decision to attack the Davidians (after all,
babies were being beaten, BABIES, pretty sick stuff). And if this lie came from
somewhere beyond Reno, like over at Penn avenue, routed thru Webby Hubbell, the
Waco - White House - Justice Dept contact, we gotta know.
8 Posted on 09/06/1999 05:53:29 PDT by republic
To: L.N. Smithee
Well, Boyer said Reno changed her mind on Apr. 16th, but,
according to the story on this thread, http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a37d17b874824.htm
, she changed her mind six days after Apr. 12th, i.e., on the 18th, the same
day that she had a conversation with Clinton and he approved the attack-plan.
I strongly suspect she changed her mind because she was ordered or at least
strongly encouraged to do so by Clinton. I think there is also a good chance
that the child-abuse story was told to her by Bill or Hillary, and that that is
the reason why it has been impossible to pin down who told Reno this.
9 Posted on 09/06/1999 05:54:41 PDT by aristeides ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
To: Ann Archy
"The record shows that using tanks and gas on a
compound still holding 25 children was a tough sell to this attorney general. As
a local prosecutor, Janet Reno had built a reputation as a zealous child
advocate. And on Monday, April, 12th, she said no to the gas plan."
My comments on this statement:
1. You don't wipe out the entire Waco "compound" (men, women, AND
CHILDREN if your a child advocate. You attempt peaceful means to resolve issues.
2. Ms. Reno does not come across as a child advocate. There have been stories
(unconfirmed) that Reno is a lesbian. I find it hard to put these two concepts
together in the same body (lesbian and child advocacy). Now, if she had
experience in actually raising children, then maybe this statement would fly;
otherwise more propaganda.
3. Ms. Reno's pursuit of the truth leaves something to be desired. One minute
she stating "the buck stops here", and the next minute "well,
maybe the buck stopped over at the FBI...you know, at that Freeh guys desk"
(Freeh was not FBI director during the Waco incident).
What type of character is required to enter politics these days? It seems
that integrity and responsibliity is discarded. Family values are a smokescreen.
Look at the members that we have in this administration who perpetually lie
(Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, Janet Reno, their lawyers, to name just
a few). If there not lying, they're dying, literally. (See Clinton 500 list)
I am extremely frustrated with this pack of thieves. The FreeRepubs know what
we stand for, and know what values we want are representatives to carry. We are
not a bunch of anti-government types. We strongly believe in the U.S.
Constitution and Bill of Rights, and we practice many of those rights on a
day-to-day basis.
I truly believe that it is our responsibility to educate the masses to the
truths (as well as the injustices being committed by our current government
administration). To educate the masses, we must spread the word that
FreeRepublic lives, and that we need other citizens to participate in our cause.
We are all modern day Paul Revere's. Spread the word, and let's wake up the
sleeping eagle. We WILL take back OUR government, and send these bums on their
way.
WE HAVE THE POWER OF THIS NEW MEDIUM CALLED THE INTERNET. LET'S USE
IT...
16 Posted on 09/06/1999 06:42:12 PDT by Wethepeople...
To: L.N. Smithee
Excellent post!
...As a local prosecutor, Janet Reno had built a reputation as a zealous
child advocate...
Actually, we now know that she built her reputation as an abuser of power in
the first order. I believe you could get Grant Snowden to accede to that
viewpoint.
If this walking caricature of a woman refuses to remember who told her about
the abuse of kids and babies, the whole thing gets me so damned irritated that I
can't stand it. Oh, and asking Hubbell, oh yeah, that should work.
I have said for years that clinton, when he is in the afterglow of personal
satisfaction, which is the only time he thinks about anything, realizes that he
is all dead inside. The only way he can feel content is if he makes everything
dead around him. Reno is nothing but a conduit in this case.
We are being lead by evil, as deep as any that has ever existed on Earth.
Sorry for this total lack of coherence. This issue is way beyond the pale.
I still want to know why the Texas Rangers didn't blow the whistle on this
cell several years ago.
18 Posted on 09/06/1999 06:51:37 PDT by stevem ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
To: Wethepeople...
"You don't wipe out the entire Waco
"compound" (men, women, AND CHILDREN if your a child advocate. You
attempt peaceful means to resolve issues."
"It was necessary to fry the children in order to save them."
Actually, child abuse is not a Federal offense...it is a local and
state offense, and under local/state jurisdiction. So even if there were
evidence of child abuse--which there was not--Reno would have had no reason to
order the attack.
On the positive side, though, nobody'll ever abuse those kids again!
--Boris, who thinks the worst "abuse" is being burned alive by your
government.
20 Posted on 09/06/1999 07:06:15 PDT by boris
To: L.N. Smithee
I cannot remember the man's name, nor the organization he
represents, but HE was responsible for the origional lie.
It has something about "child abuse" in the name. There was also a
post on FR several days ago that named him and the organization.
He is a self-styled "investigator" many use to falsely
"identify" (sic) child abusers. His targets are usually churches. The
Davidians were not the first to suffer from this sicko's attacks. For some time
he was "proving" (falsely, I might add) Catholic preists of sodomy.
The man loaths anything Christian.
Someone with better skills that I can do a search here on FR for the info.
24 Posted on 09/06/1999 07:16:03 PDT by Budge
To: L.N. Smithee
I appreciate your posts on this very much. I think most
people haven't focused yet on how Web Hubbell manipulated Reno. I agree with you
that ultimately she is responsible, but after watching the 1993 Waco hearings,
and her testimony, I'm more convinced than ever that she was Hubbell's puppet
through out the siege. It was mutually beneficial for her to defer to Hubbell.
thanks again for your valuable posts.
Hubbell needs to be put under oath NOW.
Reno can say "I'm responsible, the buck stops here", and all the
other distracting grandstanding crap she likes, the one really responsible is
Bill Clinton. Through the White House Counsel's office, Web Hubbell was making
certain that everyone was on board to make Waco "go down" the best way
possible for Bill Clinton's advantage.
25 Posted on 09/06/1999 07:26:40 PDT by yaya123 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
To: L.N. Smithee
Here is more information to add to your excellent thread,
about how Hubbell kept pertinent information from Reno. His motive is obvious:
He wants her to sign off on the assault.
"PRESS RELEASE: COMMITTEE FOR WACO JUSTICE TO DISTRIBUTE DAVID KORESH
"PROMISE TO SURRENDER" LETTER IN FRONT OF JANET RENO'S OFFICE AND FBI
On Thursday, April 14 between 12:30 and 1:30 p.m. members of the Committee
for Waco Justice will distribute copies of David Koresh's April 14, 1993
"promise to surrender letter" outside of Attorney General Janet Reno's
office at the Justice Department, Pennsylvania Avenue and 10th Streets, N.W.,
and outside the FBI building across the street from it. (A typed copy of that
letter is below.)
The Committee for Waco Justice's report "The Massacre of the Branch
Davidians," reveals that either FBI agents in Waco or FBI or Justice
officials withheld this letter from top FBI officials and from Attorney General
Janet Reno. We know that Koresh's April 14 promise to surrender letter was
withheld because: * The Justice Department report states that Reno received only
Koresh's early, defiant letters: "The FBI provided the Attorney General
with copies of the memoranda prepared by Dr. Miron and Dr. Krofcheck and SSA Van
Zandt analyzing Koresh's April 9th letter." (p. 274)
It does not mention if FBI negotiator Byron Sage discussed the April 14th
letter to then assistant to the Attorney General Webster Hubbell during their
April 15th conversation about the status of negotiations or if Hubbell passed
this information on to Reno. (pgs. 270-271)
* At the April 28, 1993, House Judiciary Committee hearing, both FBI Director
Sessions and FBI Deputy Director Clarke mention only Koresh earlier defiant
letters. Clarke stated that Koresh had "his own game plan" and the
"snare had been set."
* During FBI officials' briefings of both reporters and outside experts asked
to review the governments actions, only Koresh's April 9th and 10th letters were
displayed.
(Washington Post, April 22, 1993; analysis of Justice Report; correspondence
from one outside expert.)
Whoever withheld Koresh's April 14th letter from top FBI and Justice
Department officials--while promoting the earlier defiant letters--wanted to
make sure that Janet Reno would not cancel the plan to gas the Branch Davidians.
Those individuals are guilty of a grave crime and should be prosecuted.
We are asking any Justice Department or Federal Bureau of Investigation
employees who have information on who is guilty of this and other crimes against
the Branch Davidians to report that information to Representatives Jack Brooks
and Don Edwards of the House Judiciary Committee and their committee counsels,
and to attorneys conducting civil suits for Branch Davidians, including Kirk
Lyons, the Cause Foundation, Black Mountain, N.C. and John P. Coale, Washington,
D.C.
The Committee for Waco Justice is calling for Congress to hold in-depth
Congressional hearings into crimes against the Branch Davidians.
(Note: In the 1995 House Waco hearings FBI chief negotiator Byron Sage
admitted he provided little information to his superiors about what even
representatives began to call "Koresh's promise-to-surrender." He sent
a copy of David Koresh's April 14 surrender letter solely to FBI analysts in
Washington who sent it to FBI consultant Murray Miron. Only this analysis was
forwarded to FBI officials and Attorney General Janet Reno. )
The above information confirms testimony from the 1995 Waco Hearings. I
watched and took careful notes as I watched the C-Span replay: FBI Analyst Pete
Smerik testified that he and other FBI agents were recommending patience, and
longer negotiations, that they sent memos to Washington headquarters,
recommending that the FBI should hold out for a peaceful end to the siege.
Smerik thought Koresh would come out peacefully. Smerik then testified that
through his supervisor at Quantico, John Douglas, he got the word,
"Sessions is not happy with your memos." Smerik testifed that he began
changing the tone of his memos to recommending the FBI end the siege by forcing
Koresh out. He said this change in tone was not because he feared reprisals from
his superiors, but maybe it was an unconscious desire on his part to be a team
player.
28 Posted on 09/06/1999 08:23:25 PDT by yaya123 (yaya123@I'll Post The URL Source For
This Quote Next.com)
To: Ann Archy
Rogers' plan first was introduced to Attorney General Reno
and Associate Attorney General Webster Hubbell on April 12th, with a suggested
implementation date of April 14th. Reno asked, "Why now? Why not
wait?" and refused to approve the plan.9/
On April 13th (though the Justice report claims none of the participants
could recall the exact date) Hubbell explained the gassing plan to White House
Counsel Bernard Nussbaum, Deputy Counsel Vince Foster, and presidential advisor
Bruce Lindsey. No one objected to it. Doubtless, this regarded it as a
convenient way to end a politcally embarrassing situation. Nussbaum then met
with President Clinton about the plan and told him that the "handling of
the standoff was `a Department of Justice call, not a White House call'."
Clinton responded that he had great confidence in the Attorney General and the
FBI.10/
Whether Hubbell and Clinton had any private conversations about the matter
remains a subject of conjecture. Reno, Hubbell and FBI officials attended
further meetings to discuss the effects of the gas on April 14th. Richard Rogers
himself traveled to Washington to promote the plan. However, Reno was not ready
to act.11/
From The Davidian Massacre/chapt.9, by Carol Moore
As you can see the ususal suspects are involved, however the Kaiser Sousa
(sp) of this is Hitlery Clinton. Why would Vince Foster in his "suicide
" Note mention that no one would believe that the Clintons (emphasis on
plueral) were not involved. Or innocent, what ever he said.
Also remember Rogers had just come from Ruby Ridge, he was sure he had got
away with assinating (sp) Vicky Weaver as she held her baby. He was in charge at
Ruby Ridge.
30 Posted on 09/06/1999 08:27:13 PDT by marty60
To: aristeides
"I think there is also a good chance that the
child-abuse story was told to her by Bill or Hillary, and that that is the
reason why it has been impossible to pin down who told Reno this."
The evidence is mounting that the Branch Davidians may have been targeted as
early as November, 1992 -- immediately after Clinton was elected, but before he
took office.
Recall that the Little Rock BATF head, Buford, an alleged FOB, began sniffing
around Waco as early as November -- pursuing allegations of child abuse!
Who, I wonder, would have put him up to this...?
This thread fills in another piece of the puzzle. Janet Reno was apparently
being recalcitrant, not performing her role as planned. Somebody wanted to take
the Branch Davidians down...almost certainly the same somebody who got Buford
involved. And Janet Reno wasn't letting it happen...
That somebody also knew that Janet's "hot button" was "child
abuse" (the often over-zealous prosecution of same having been the way she
made her reputation in Miami). In frustration, that somebody presented Janet
with the alleged "child abuse" to get her on board for the planned
assault -- which that somebody wanted to make happen.
Obviously, some of the key questions any investigation should resolve are:
1. Who is the "somebody" who told Reno about child abuse, thereby
getting her to sign off on the raid.
2. Who were the two "unidentified White House representatives" at
the April 12 meeting involving, among others, the FBI (Sessions and Rogers), DOJ
(Reno and Hubbell) and the military (Boykin and Schoomaker). Was Vince Foster
one of them? And what was his role in the affair?
3. How deeply was Delta Force and the military involved in the operation?
And, of course, who authorized their actions?
4. What happened in the BATF, from November, 1992 forward, leading up
to the raid. And who authorized it?
If the investigation actually pursues these questions -- and uncovers answers
for them -- we'll know what we need to know!
33 Posted on 09/06/1999 09:23:30 PDT by okie01
To: po'boy
Does Sharon Wheeler as PR person for the ATF sound right to
you?
I don't think she gets all the credit for the child abuse stuff.
Reno's Miami reputation was rabid on child abuse to the neglect of white
collar crime and just about everything else... like child abuse was Reno's
personal hot button and personal crusade.
In earlier investigations by local DSS they gave Koresh and the Davidians a
pass on abuse UNLESS you consider sending a kid to bed without supper abuse.
It's an interesting SPIN... If you say COMPOUND,BUNKER,DRUGS,CHILD
ABUSE,CULT, GUNS, FANATIC,SUICIDE,MIND CONTROL enough times reason and due
process goes out the window.
Listen carefully to the LANGUAGE of both the 1993 and the 1995 hearings. The
language was calculated to prejudice and inflame, NOT get to the truth.
37 Posted on 09/06/1999 10:44:44 PDT by astonished
To: astonished
Thank you, yes, it is Sharon Wheeler I was remembering. As
the local PR person for the BATF, I believe she was passing on the child abuse
allegations. As in "we hear there might be child abuse going on in the
"compound"".
I use to have many 8 hour tapes of raw footage etc from news xmits relating
to the religious group in Waco.
My wife got tired of the spare bedroom being a storage shed for my many boxes
of VCR tapes and I had to get rid of many of them. I looked through the ones I
kept but I havent been able to find the ones I thought I heard her on.
I do believe this was being reported before Clintoon was sworn in.
38 Posted on 09/06/1999 10:59:08 PDT by po'boy
To: VeritatisSplendor
This is not babies being beaten, but it is child abuse.
Not according to Texas law. Previous to the raid, the Davidians were
investigated by child services and the Waco sheriff's office. Neither found
anything to take action over.
&, at any rate, does child-bridism strike you as a valid reason to launch
a military assault on a house full of babies?
For that matter, does physical beatings of babies strike you as a valid
reason? Compared to the number beaten, few babies die of crib beating. None,
that I have ever heard of, die in that manner in the stifling presence of large
numbers of other mothers. But all babies predictably die in painful, agonized
rickus when exposed to heavy doses of CN compounds and smoke and flames.
41 Posted on 09/06/1999 11:50:32 PDT by donh
To: L.N. Smithee
she should resign for acting on it before confirming it.
RESIGN?????? No, she should go to prison for the rest of her life, along with
anyone else involved in it. This business of "I was told so-and-so"
doesn't cut it. Go look at the photographs of the incinerated children.
Also this CS gas. We are told that it it illegal to use it against the enemy
in war, but it is is legal to use against your own citizens. Of course NO
country would do that except for one ran by a power-mad despot who practiced
tyrany against his own people. Guess we can say the shoe fits.
I don't want anyone wiggling out of this massacre at Waco. Whoever involved
should be severely punished.
44 Posted on 09/06/1999 12:16:41 PDT by powell
To: hinckley buzzard
Reno is irrational and gets crazy when "child
abuse" is raised. As a prosecutor she was caught up in the day care/
Satanic cult/child sexual abuse/ hysteria some years back. Colluded with a
formerly respectable expert in clinical hypnosis to fabricate evidence and send
innocent people to prison.
The sad and grand irony is that it is the overzealousness of Reno, Ira Reiner
(L.A. D.A. for the infamous McMartin trial) and other prosecutors in pursuing
untrue child abuse allegations that gives cover to the people who are seeking to
legitimize "intergenerational sex."
Bruce Rind, one of the authors of the controversial, widely condemned study
soft-pedaling "adult-child sex" published in the American
Psychological Association's monthly journal, wrote an entire book about the
hysteria (mostly caused by improperly trained counselors interviewing the
alleged victims and the fantasy of "repressed memory syndrome") and
the scandal involving Reno figured largely in it. In my research for a story
(still in development) about an octogenarian children's sports philanthropist
who funded publication of a collection of papers written by pedophile
apologists, he told me his goal was partly to eliminate the "hysteria"
causing the mass false charges.
The pendulum swung too far in the right direction before, and the amoral
among us is trying to swing us as far as possible the wrong way.
48 Posted on 09/06/1999 14:22:50 PDT by L.N. Smithee
To: donh, bvw, Gypsy II
Why are you attacking me? I agree that the Waco raid
was wrong in every possible respect, including all the ones you three people
stated, and that child abuse is not a federal issue, yada yada yada.
I was just trying to point out that by many reasonable standards Koresh
was a child abuser, and this serves to explain the origin of his
reputation as such, which was later falsely inflated to paint him as a WORSE
child abuser who beat babies. Sheesh! If you look at my reply you will see that
I said NOTHING in defense of any action of the U.S. government; this thread is
about how the child abuse lies could have started, and I was pointing out an
answer to this "main question" that the previous posters on this
thread had missed, that's all.
49 Posted on 09/06/1999 20:28:18 PDT by VeritatisSplendor
