274 lines
13 KiB
Plaintext
274 lines
13 KiB
Plaintext
|
||
|
||
Conspiracy Nation -- Vol. 1 Num. 10
|
||
======================================
|
||
("Quid coniuratio est?")
|
||
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
[From an interview with Linda Thompson on the *For the People*
|
||
radio show, Feb. 11, 1994. Host is Chuck Harder.]
|
||
|
||
[Continued...]
|
||
|
||
CHUCK HARDER: We are back. We're talking to Linda Thompson. She
|
||
is an attorney. And she has been studying the Waco matter. She
|
||
has produced a masterful videotape. (I saw the first one. The
|
||
second one, I understand, is just a real, real eye-popper.)
|
||
|
||
Now Linda, you're telling me that the government is throwing the
|
||
trial. What do you mean by "throwing" the trial? What will the
|
||
outcome be?
|
||
|
||
LINDA THOMPSON: The outcome will be... The only damaging
|
||
testimony has been against 2 people, Brad Branch and Livingstone
|
||
Fagan, thus far. There has not been any damaging testimony
|
||
against most of the other Branch Davidians. I think we're going
|
||
to see acquittals of the majority of the Branch Davidians. And
|
||
that is because the government is putting on witnesses that
|
||
*hurt* the government, at least in the eyes of the jury.
|
||
|
||
HARDER: Uh-huh. [Indicates he understands]
|
||
|
||
THOMPSON: Because the government has been able to completely
|
||
control the evidence available to the defense attorneys, for
|
||
instance. There's nobody that's going to challenge, effectively,
|
||
what is being presented. For instance, one glaring example of
|
||
this, at the trial the other day... One of the ATF agents
|
||
testified that they had moved the day of the raid up a day
|
||
because the *Waco Herald-Tribune* was gonna come out with their
|
||
articles on Saturday. And they moved the raid up to Sunday. And
|
||
that they had planned to do the raid, originally, on Monday.
|
||
|
||
That's not true. The [search] warrant was applied for on the
|
||
24th. It expired on the 28th, which was Sunday. And that is the
|
||
day the raid was done, was the 28th. They could not have had any
|
||
other plan to do it on Monday because the warrant would have
|
||
already been expired on Monday.
|
||
|
||
Now this is an example of a little bit of nonsense that they have
|
||
come up with to help bolster their story. You know, that they
|
||
"lost the element of surprise." The claim of losing the element
|
||
of surprise is in itself a lie. But it's being told, not for the
|
||
purpose of admitting that the government is a bunch of bumbling
|
||
boobs, but to reinforce the idea that the Branch Davidians were
|
||
*waiting* for them. When you say you "lost the element of
|
||
surprise," what are you essentially saying -- the Branch
|
||
Davidians had an opportunity to prepare. And that's what they're
|
||
claiming. That is their story: "The Branch Davidians were waiting
|
||
on us. Yes, our guys screwed up. They lost the element of
|
||
surprise." That's the government's official story. And this is
|
||
the kind of evidence that they're putting on, with a series of
|
||
these little "admissions": "Yes, we probably shot our own guys,"
|
||
"Yes, we lost the element of surprise," and so forth.
|
||
|
||
And that is what they're doing at trial, is presenting this
|
||
preconceived story, all of which *is* *a* *lie*. But they're
|
||
making sure that just that version comes out. There's nobody
|
||
there to effectively challenge it. It's going to go straight down
|
||
the way they've told it in the ATF final report. And at the same
|
||
time, the government is making sure that they release just enough
|
||
bad information against themselves that there will be acquittals.
|
||
And you would not do that... I mean, the prosecution does not put
|
||
on witnesses that *hurt* their case, unless they're throwing the
|
||
trial -- and that's what they're doing.
|
||
|
||
HARDER: All right. Why would they want acquittals?
|
||
|
||
THOMPSON: Because some of these people on trial are government
|
||
agents. They're not Branch Davidians.
|
||
|
||
And they're caught in a crack. They cannot reveal to the American
|
||
public that they've got government agents that are on trial.
|
||
Because those were undercover agents. They were plants. They were
|
||
people that you're not supposed to know are not Branch Davidians.
|
||
|
||
HARDER: So they're in a "catch-22".
|
||
|
||
THOMPSON: Well it's not really a "catch-22". It's really pretty
|
||
clever because they can use these same people to convict the ones
|
||
they need to convict, and yet use their own testimony of agents
|
||
that get up on the stand to give away just enough information to
|
||
*acquit* the ones they want acquitted. For instance, if you've
|
||
got somebody on the stand says, "Well I didn't see this guy with
|
||
a gun," and "He didn't do anything," while you've got another one
|
||
getting on the stand pointing a finger at a specific one, you can
|
||
tell who they're targeting. They're intending to get convictions
|
||
of a few of them and acquittals of others by the direct
|
||
testimony. They're manipulating this trial very effectively.
|
||
|
||
HARDER: I'm surprised that nobody moved to sever any of these
|
||
people. [CN -- By this, "sever", I think is meant to move for a
|
||
separate trial for a particular defendant.]
|
||
|
||
THOMPSON: Well I think they did, actually. There was one attorney
|
||
(that is not appointed) and he did move to sever. And the motion
|
||
was denied. That would be the basis for an appeal.
|
||
|
||
But there's a lot of things that I would have expected to see
|
||
from the defense attorneys that has not occurred. Such as
|
||
*endless* fights over the evidence. For instance, they should
|
||
have been entitled to all... All this stuff is filmed; every bit
|
||
of it was filmed...
|
||
|
||
HARDER: Right.
|
||
|
||
THOMPSON: ...top to bottom, inside-out. They should have been
|
||
entitled to those videos. They haven't been able to get 'em. And
|
||
rather than allow it to proceed to trial without that evidence,
|
||
my personal preference would have been to go on and appeal it
|
||
right then. You can get what's called an "interlocutory appeal,"
|
||
*demand* that you get this evidence. Because you're entitled to
|
||
it. By law you are entitled to anything that tends to prove that
|
||
your client is not guilty. We know from one of the pictures that
|
||
*is* available and has been shown at trial -- in fact it's in our
|
||
video... It's a picture of the front door. That is absolutely
|
||
good for the Branch Davidians because it shows that the ATF is
|
||
standing there shooting at the front door. There's no one at any
|
||
of the front windows. This is a dead-on picture. You'll see it in
|
||
"Waco II". It's not in "Waco I". But it's a picture of the front
|
||
door; no one at any of the windows. The front door is cracked
|
||
open; it opens inward. And the ATF has said, "The Branch
|
||
Davidians were at all the windows. They shot out through the
|
||
front door with such force that it bowed the door." You can't bow
|
||
a door that's open. You know, if it opens inward, the force of
|
||
bullets coming from inside would have slammed the door shut...
|
||
|
||
HARDER: Right.
|
||
|
||
THOMPSON: ...before it bowed the door.
|
||
|
||
Well the door's open, there's a lot of bullet holes in it.
|
||
They're all from the outside. There's not a single Branch
|
||
Davidian at any of the windows. And there's only *one* window
|
||
that's even broken -- and that's the window that ATF is shooting
|
||
into.
|
||
|
||
But the most *damning* pieces of evidence is that there's a
|
||
little child out front, as all this is going on, and then we've
|
||
got video footage that shows them taking another child, in a
|
||
little black body bag, to an ambulance. So they killed kids that
|
||
first day.
|
||
|
||
Now we've got proof that the first shots were fired by the
|
||
overhead helicopter; not by the Branch Davidians and not by ATF,
|
||
but by the helicopter that flew over and fired into the roof
|
||
where the women and children were. And they killed kids in there
|
||
too!
|
||
|
||
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
|
||
|
||
[CN Editor -- Now seems like a good time to insert the
|
||
following section from the Report of the Committee for
|
||
Waco Justice. Excerpts only.]
|
||
|
||
ALLEGATIONS AGENTS SHOT INDISCRIMINATELY AND FROM HELICOPTERS
|
||
(Section 13, BATF-Treasury section of report)
|
||
|
||
The Treasury report states that BATF agents "returned fire when
|
||
possible, but conserved their ammunition. They also fired only
|
||
when they saw an individual engage in a threatening action, such
|
||
as pointing a weapon." (TDR:101) However, Branch Davidians claim
|
||
BATF agents fired indiscriminately, including through walls, and
|
||
that helicopters sprayed the building with bullets. News video
|
||
tapes clearly show agents exercising little control over their
|
||
firing as they fire over vehicles with little or no view of what
|
||
they were shooting at. Both BATF Director Higgins at an April 2nd
|
||
Congressional hearing and Treasury Secretary Bentsen during the
|
||
September 1993 Treasury Department press conference denied
|
||
allegations that agents fired indiscriminately. {1}.
|
||
|
||
(a) Bullet Evidence in Doors, Walls and Roof
|
||
Branch Davidians, and attorneys Dick DeGuerin and Jack Zimmerman
|
||
who visited Mount Carmel during the siege, insist that there was
|
||
extensive evidence that BATF agents shot indiscriminately through
|
||
Mount Carmel Center's front door, walls and roof. They were very
|
||
concerned with preserving this evidence of an out-of-control
|
||
assault.
|
||
|
||
The *New York Times* reported, "both lawyers clearly believed
|
||
that helicopters flying over the compound during the raid had
|
||
fired into upper floors of the main building from above." {2}.
|
||
Except for half the front door, all this evidence was destroyed
|
||
by the April 19 tank rammings, the fire, and the bulldozing of
|
||
still burning walls into the rubble.
|
||
|
||
(b) Wayne Martin Allegations on 911 Tape
|
||
Wayne Martin and an unidentified Branch Davidian complain
|
||
frantically to Lieutenant Lynch 15 minutes after the start of the
|
||
raid about the continuing gun fire from BATF agents, even as they
|
||
themselves withhold fire. Nearly continuous gunfire can be heard
|
||
in the background of the tape.
|
||
|
||
MARTIN: Another chopper with more people; more guns
|
||
going off. They're firing. That's them, not us.
|
||
UNIDENTIFIED DAVIDIAN: There's a chopper with more of
|
||
them.
|
||
LYNCH: What!?
|
||
DAVIDIAN: Another chopper with more people and more guns
|
||
going off. Here they come!
|
||
|
||
(d) Catherine Matteson Allegation
|
||
"I seen (sic) those trailers drive up. I was downstairs. I
|
||
thought it strange, but I figured they were delivering firewood
|
||
or something. I picked up the Sunday paper and went upstairs to
|
||
my room, and started reading. When next, bullets came through the
|
||
roof. I could hear the helicopters overhead, I got under my bed."
|
||
{3}.
|
||
|
||
(e) Children's Pictures of Bullets Through Roof
|
||
A story about psychologist Bruce D. Perry's interviews with
|
||
Branch Davidian children who left Mount Carmel after the raid
|
||
mentions, "Still another child created a picture of a house
|
||
beneath a rainbow. When Perry asked, 'Is there anything else?'
|
||
the child calmly added bullet holes in the roof. That was an
|
||
allusion to the Feb. 28 shootout with federal agents that marked
|
||
the beginning of a 51-day standoff and left the compound near
|
||
Waco scarred with bullet holes." {4}. A May 19, 1993 *Newsweek*
|
||
story shows this picture with the caption, "A girl drew her
|
||
home's dotted roof. 'Bullets,' she said."
|
||
|
||
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
|
||
|
||
HARDER: We're talking about helicopter gunships firing against
|
||
American citizens. [CN Editor -- Yes, *and* indiscriminately
|
||
*and* at children.]
|
||
|
||
THOMPSON: Yeah, absolutely. And the thing is, in the ATF report,
|
||
they do very deceitful things. They say that... [music signalling a
|
||
break begins to be audible]... oh, sorry.
|
||
|
||
HARDER: All right. Let's do a short break here. This almost
|
||
sounds like George Orwell stuff. We'll be right back.
|
||
|
||
(to be continued)
|
||
|
||
--------------------------<< Notes >>----------------------------
|
||
{1} "Sect's Lawyers Dispute Gunfight Details," *New York Times*,
|
||
April 5, 1993, A10 and transcript of September 30, 1993 Treasury
|
||
Department press conference.
|
||
{2} *New York Times*, April 5, 1993, A10.
|
||
{3} Interview with Catherine Matteson, August 30, 1993, on file
|
||
at Gun Owners of America.
|
||
{4} Sue Anne Pressley, May 5, 1993, A17. [*New York Times*(??)]
|
||
|
||
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
|
||
|
||
*The Massacre of the Branch Davidians*. Report of the Committee
|
||
for Waco Justice. Committee for Waco Justice, PO Box 33037,
|
||
Washington, DC 20033. Phone: 202/986-1847 & 202/797-9877
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
I encourage distribution of "Conspiracy Nation."
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
If you would like "Conspiracy Nation" sent to your e-mail
|
||
address, send a message in the form "subscribe my-email@address"
|
||
to bigxc@prairienet.org -- To cancel, send a message in the form
|
||
"cancel my-email@address." && Articles sent in are considered.
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
Aperi os tuum muto, et causis omnium filiorum qui pertranseunt.
|
||
Aperi os tuum, decerne quod justum est, et judica inopem et
|
||
pauperem. -- Liber Proverbiorum XXXI: 8-9
|
||
|
||
|