Yes, Baylee. Her limp body became the face of the bombing. I cannot imagine the horror of the poor parents who took their babies to daycare that morning, went to work, then heard that explosion. I'm not sure how the parents have survived these 15 years. They must be haunted daily.
Yes and no!:lol: I think your premise is wrong here. Lets say that OKC never happened. Clinton is still at fault for Waco and Bush is still at fault for Ruby Ridge. I have NEVER said OKC was justified for what Clinton did at Waco. They BOTH make me very SAD and Upset but the innocent people, children at Waco have been forgotten. You should have looked me up and we could have went to the game together!:dis: Little town? I guess compared to where you are coming from!:lol: I can't wait to move to Crawford, Co in the middle of the Rockies in a few years. I hate the traffic here, it gets worse every year!
Yes I pretty much agree with you but the government could have handled these cases a little differently. Did they really need to use torture tactics here like they did at Waco? Loud music all nite, tanks, etc. I would have no problem with what had happened if they would have waited out the dividians and got those children out of there. I haven't defended the kooks here. I have just pointed out that there was a lot of innocent babies and children who died at Waco. No one remembers the innocent children there only these other tragedys. Just because I find fault in the actions of the government doesn't mean I am on the kooks side. You are putting words in my mouth that simply isn't true. Heck we didn't use some of the torture technics used against the Dividians against Al Quada when Clinton was president.
I guess it's just off-putting that you keep bringing up these cases where poor children were put in awful, dangerous situations by their parents. This on a date when so many children died in OKC. I'm not saying that those children are somehow less victims; they aren't at all. But you know as a parent that we shouldn't put our children in life-threatening situations like the parents did at Ruby Ridge and Waco. The parents in OKC lost their children at the hands of a madman who parked his stupid rental van on the very wrong side of a building--justifying his actions with anti-government rhetoric. Which some people buy enough to think the villain had a point and a purpose. I mean, apart from murder and violence.
I pretty much agree with you here but the government used torture tactics on these people and didn't wait them out to get the 20 children out of the compound. I never said David Koresh or some of his followers were innocent. I hope they burn in hell for what they did. I am talking about there were some innocent people there including 20 babies, even if they were babies, babies weren't kooks like some try and say. I don't necessarily believe the official government story of JFK,Ruby Ridge, Waco, OKC or WTC, etc. btw. I don't believe a panel of politicians can get to the truth of the matter or release all of the truth.
Gee that was only 15 years ago?:shock: What is so surprising about a story that you may or may not remember exactly how it went down after 15 years? If you want to be critical by all means be my guest!
I agree with you but I think our government needs to be accountable and more responsible for their actions. When something goes wrong someone has to be accountable. I think they could have waited these people out, they would have to leave sooner or later for food or other reasons. I agree with you but unfortunately these kind of things happen and will continue too. I agree with you here.
I don't choose to ignore the governments role in any of this but that doesn't mean that I have taken the kooks side. Remember Ruby Ridge | Tim Lynch | Cato Institute: Daily Commentary Quote: Embarrassed by the outcome, FBI officials told the world that there would be a thorough review of the case, but the Bureau closed ranks and covered up the mess. FBI director Louis Freeh went so far as to promote one of the agents involved, Larry Potts, to the Bureau's number-two position. When Weaver sued the federal government for the wrongful death of his wife and son, the government that had tried to kill him twice now sought an out-of-court settlement. In August 1995 the U.S. government paid the Weaver family $3.1 million. On the condition that his name not be used in an article, one Department of Justice official told the Washington Post that if Weaver's suit had gone to trial in Idaho, he probably would have been awarded $200 million. With the intervening events at Waco, more and more people began to question the veracity of Department of Justice and FBI accounts and whether the federal government had the capacity to hold its own agents accountable for criminal misconduct. Like the Watergate scandal, however, the response to the initial illegality turned out to be even more shocking and disturbing. When an FBI supervisor, Michael Kahoe, admitted to destroying evidence and obstructing justice, he was eventually prosecuted but only after being kept on the FBI payroll until his 50th birthday -- so that he would be eligible for his retirement pension. And when Larry Potts was finally forced into retirement, FBI officials flew into Washington from around the country for his going-away bash. Those officials claimed to be on "official business" so they billed the taxpayers for the trip. After the fraud was leaked to the press by some anonymous and apparently sickened FBI agent, the merry band of partygoers were not discharged from service. Instead, a letter was placed in their personnel file, chiding them with "inattention to detail." An Idaho prosecutor did bring manslaughter charges against the FBI sniper who shot Vicki Weaver. That move really outraged the feds because they insisted that they were capable of policing their own -- so long as they did not have any outside "interference." The Department of Justice was so disturbed by the indictment of its agent that they dispatched the solicitor general to a federal appellate court to argue that the charges should be dismissed. (The solicitor general ordinarily only makes oral arguments to the Supreme Court). The solicitor general told the judicial panel that even if the evidence supported the charges, the case should be thrown out because "federal law enforcement agents are privileged to do what would otherwise be unlawful if done by a private citizen." The appeals court rejected that sweeping argument for a license to kill, but by the time that ruling came down last June, a new local prosecutor was in office in Boundary County, Idaho, and he announced that it was time to put this whole unpleasant episode behind us and to "move on." Thus, the criminal case against the sniper was dropped.
