Waco: The Rules of Engagement

abcnews.htmN SPECTATOR

PRESS

| Home | Premiere | Showings | FAQ | Gallery | Order | Email |

AMERICAN SPECTATOR
December 1999
Waco Returns: But will John Danforth use all the new evidence?

By James Bovard

When the House hearings on Waco ended in August 1995, many Americans believed that the Justice Department, FBI, and Clinton administration had been caught repeatedly lying about what happened to the Branch Davidians on April 19, 1993. But indifference on the part of politicians and press alike allowed the story to return to hibernation. Then last June 30, a federal judge shocked the Clinton administration by allowing wrongful death lawsuits against the feds by Davidian survivors and relatives to proceed. Private investigations, an Academy Award nominated documentary, and damning responses from Freedom of Information Act requests caused a growing surge of new information that eventually broke the dam of political and media apathy in August 1999.
News leaked out that the feds knowingly suppressed information about using pyrotechnics that might have started fires that killed scores of women and children. A shaken Attorney General Janet Reno announced: "I am very, very upset. I don't think it's very good for my credibility." Reno played the victim, lashing out at the FBI for supposedly withholding key information from her. But Reno bears responsibility for whatever she did not find out—since she orchestrated the initial Justice Department investigation to whitewash both herself and the FBI.
Incriminating revelations are trickling out practically every week:
•The U.S. military was far more involved at Waco than previously admitted. At the press conference in July 1996 releasing the House report on Waco, I asked co-chairmen Bill Zelliff and Bill McCollum how much cooperation they had received from federal agencies. They said the cooperation had been pretty good—except for the Pentagon, which had refused to give them almost any information.
•Former CIA officer Gene Cullen told the Dallas Morning News in late August that Delta Force commandos were "present, up front and close" in tanks in the final day's action at Waco. Delta members bragged to him of their role when he subsequently served with them in Europe. James B. Francis, Jr., chairman of the Texas Department of Public Safety, confirmed there is evidence that the Delta Force participated in the final assault against the Davidians.
•The "national security" excuse repeatedly invoked for not turning over key files to congressional investigators is wearing thin. According to the Dallas Morning News, "The military has estimated that at least 6,000 pages of its documents are classified, and CIA, FBI, Treasury, ATF [Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms] and Justice Department officials have indicated that their agencies have a number of secret documents relating to the standoff." In September, the Texas Department of Public Safety blocked the release of a report listing all the evidence it collected after the fire because the information contained military secrets. If there's so much to hide, was the military testing new weapons on American citizens during the standoff?
•In early October the FBI turned over thousands of key documents to congressional investigators—information previously withheld because it had supposedly been mislaid in boxes kept at Quantico, Virginia, home base of the FBI's Hostage Rescue Team. Throughout the 51-day siege, FBI spokesmen bitterly complained that none of the Branch Davidians would leave their compound. But according to these documents, in at least seven instances FBI agents threw flash-bang hand grenades at people who had left the residence, effectively driving them back into the building. Flash-bangs emit a deafening explosion and blinding flash—just the sort of weapon to strike terror into its intended target.
•Infrared footage from an FBI plane circling 9,000 feet above the Davidians' home on the final day reveals that federal agents fired machine guns at or into the back of the building—either shortly before or just after the fire had broken out. According to former Pentagon infrared expert Edward Allard, who was consulted by Rep. Dan Burton's House Government Reform and Oversight Committee, and other knowledgeable individuals who have scrutinized the footage, the film does indeed show such gunfire directed at the Davidians. Additional newly released infrared footage made by an FBI plane, featured in the just-released movie, Waco: A New Revelation (made by Mike McNulty, one of masterminds of the 1997 Emmy-award winning Waco: Rules of Engagement), shows two figures exiting from the back of a tank and then spraying the back of the Davidians' residence with automatic weapons fire. One FBI agent stated in an after-action report that he heard gunfire from the sniper post occupied by Lon Horiuchi, the same FBI agent who killed Vicki Weaver as she held her baby daughter in the cabin door of her Idaho home in 1992. Clinton declaimed on the day after the fire: "I do not think the U.S. government is responsible for the fact that a bunch of religious fanatics decided to kill themselves." More likely, the FBI tried to keep the Davidians inside while its tanks crushed in the walls and collapsed the roofs—long after the air inside was nearly unbreathable because of a massive six-hour attack with CS gas.
•The FBI deceived Congress and a federal judge by withholding information that it had six closed-circuit television cameras monitoring the Davidians' home throughout the siege. The resulting films may contain information to resolve the major issues of Waco. Incredibly, the FBI claims none of the cameras contained tape—the very same excuse made by the ATF, which had cameras both in the helicopters and on the ground when it launched its February 28 commando-style raid on the Davidians' home. > •Lawyers for surviving Branch Davidians were given a massively doctored infrared FBI tape of the final day's assault. The tape has large gaps—including a suspicious gap just before the fire started. The tape was also spliced numerous times.
It is now clear that a massive cover-up has occurred—in either the FBI or the Justice Department, or both. Newsweek reported that, according to a senior FBI official, "as many as 100 FBI agents and officials may have known about" the military-style explosive devices used by the FBI at Waco—despite Reno's and the FBI's endless denials that such devices were used. Growing evidence of federal deceit over Waco notwithstanding, not a single official has been charged with perjury or obstruction of justice. Phil Chojnacki, one of the two ATF commanders on February 28, was fired after Treasury Department bosses concluded he lied about knowing that the "element of surprise" was lost in the initial assault that saw four ATF agents killed. But Treasury rehired Chojnacki to serve as an expert witness for the feds in court trials.
The Clinton administration is racing to defuse the latest Waco crisis. Janet Reno could have recused herself and allowed her deputy, Eric Holder, to appoint a special investigator. Instead, she personally chose former Senator John Danforth to head the re-investigation. It is peculiar that someone implicated in six years of perjury could be allowed to choose the person who investigates her and her department.
Danforth's credibility suffered further when he promptly chose federal attorney Edward Dowd as his chief investigator. Last year Dowd used federal funds to oppose a Missouri state referendum on concealed firearms. As Yale Law School's John Lott, who favored the referendum, recalled, "Dowd used taxpayer money to set up a 1-800 line to answer people's questions about the initiative. He also used federal money to send out a letter to state law enforcement to try to get them to oppose the initiative." A Justice Department inspector general was investigating Dowd when Danforth picked him. The same day the Washington Times broke news of the investigation, the Justice Department cleared Dowd of all charges. When Sen. Kit Bond of Missouri asked to see the official report, the Justice Department refused to comply, citing the Privacy Act.
Danforth then announced that he would investigate only the final day's action—effectively giving the ATF a free pass. Yet new evidence uncovered by investigator David Hardy through FOIA requests disintegrates the ATF's pretext for assaulting the Davidians' home—that Koresh could not be apprehended outside the compound. Nine days before the February 28 raid, "ATF agents went over and asked David Koresh to go shooting. He agreed. In fact, he provided the ammunition. And the agents handed him their guns."
Danforth also asked federal Judge Walter Smith to bar private lawyers in the wrongful death suit from interviewing key witnesses. The judge granted a 30-day freeze and Danforth may ask for further delays. Along with administration requests for still more time to produce documents, Danforth's actions have already resulted in a six-month delay of the trial. Instead of late October it is now scheduled to begin on May 15, 2000—more than seven years after the Davidians' mass deaths.
The delay is a godsend for the administration. Clinton appointees excel at "telling the truth slowly," in the words of former White House Press Secretary Mike McCurry—in rationing out the truth into small enough dribbles to blunt its impact. The Justice Department may try to run the clock out on both the Clinton administration's tenure and on the attention span of the American public. Some experts fear that Danforth will impanel a grand jury as he said he might—and then announce that all the evidence must be sealed in order to protect the grand jury proceedings.
The wrongful death lawsuits could yet be derailed by Judge Smith. At the 1994 murder trial of Branch Davidian survivors over which he presided, Smith began by announcing that "the government is not on trial" and blocked defense attorneys from offering any evidence that the Davidians acted in self-defense after the ATF attacked. Smith even prohibited the attorneys from introducing into evidence the official Treasury Department report on ATF action at Waco. Smith proclaimed his hope that the coming trial will "help restore the public's confidence in the government."
The Justice Department may choose to settle the wrongful death lawsuits the same way it settled the Weaver family's lawsuit on the eve of Senate hearings on Ruby Ridge in 1995. It is far easier for the Justice Department to write someone a check (it's not its money, after all) than to suffer the indignities of a trial. The payoff would generate a few days' bad press and an uproar on the Internet, but then it would blow over.
Some Republicans wouldn't be upset to see Waco go away. In responding to the recent deluge of new evidence of federal bad faith, House Majority Leader Dick Armey said on October 7 that he saw no compelling need for House hearings since "everybody believes that Danforth is fully functioning and fully focused on the job." (Danforth is doing the investigation part-time—retaining his job at a big St. Louis law firm.) Rep. Mark Souder pleaded "Waco fatigue." Among Republicans, he said, "there's a feeling that the political risk may be higher than the political gain of pursuing this subject at this time." Rep. Bob Barr and Sen. Arlen Specter are two encouraging exceptions to Republican lethargy on an issue that is in danger of being re-swept under the rug.
James Bovard is the author of Freedom in Chains: The Rise of the State and the Demise of the Citizen (St. Martin's Press).

© 1999 AMERICAN SPECTATOR

LinkExchange Member

Copyright ©1996-98, Fifth Estate Productions. All Rights Reserved.

on |

The Arizona Republic
April 17, 1998

MOVIE REVIEW ( Graphics )

"Waco: The Rules of Engagement"
Thoughtful Documentary is About Waco, Not Wackos

By Bob Fenster

I assumed I'd be watching two hours of conspiracy nuts lambasting the government with theories better suited to The X-Files than anything claiming to be a fair and accurate portrayal of the 1993 tragedy at Waco.

But Waco: The Rules of Engagement is exactly the opposite: a meticulous documentary that takes sides against the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and the FBI but still offers views from the government agents involved.

The movie starts by exploring the history and religious beliefs of the Branch Davidians. It then provides a detailed recounting of the of events leading to the war between the ATF and the FBI on one side and the doomed members of a Texas religious group on the other.

The movie was nominated for an Oscar as Best Documentary in 1997. Although it didn't win, Waco: is a riveting film that will absorb your intelligence and shock your beliefs in our systems of law enforcement and justice.

The movie investigates several key points in the tragedy:

Were the Branch Davidians a bizarre cult led by an insane zealot? Or were they a minority religion being persecuted for their unusual beliefs?

Were four ATF agents murdered trying to serve a search warrant for possession of illegal firearms in a Branch Davidian compound? Or were they shot by people defending their home against an unjustified attack by a government military force?

Could the 51-day siege in Waco have been resolved peacefully? Or did government agents provoke a battle so they could win the war?

Did the Branch Davidians commit mass suicide by starting the fire that killed 76 men, women and children? Or were they executed by the FBI?

Whatever your beliefs on these issues, the movie will shake you up.

Director William Gazecki has put together a detailed investigative report. He uses film footage of the event and testimony from a wide range of experts including military and law enforcement authorities, who accuse agents of the federal government with a cover-up of illegal and immoral activities.

Much of Gazecki's accusations are based on infrared film of the attack on the Branch Davidian compound, as analyzed by a former supervisor of the Army's Night Vision Lab.
None of his charges is new. These accusations have been made in other media and other forums.

That's not the fault of the film. Documentaries such as Waco: typically take a long time to travel around the country. The producers make only a few copies of the film because of the small audiences. The films then play city by city. Phoenix was obviously not at the top of their list.

Waco: reaches the Valley just in time for the fifth anniversary of the April 19 tragedy. I doubt that anyone will walk away from this movie unaffected.

Unrated, Waco: The Rules of Engagement contains light profanity and grim footage of the carnage. It opens Saturday and plays only at the Valley Art Theatre in downtown Tempe.

ent-Type" CONTENT="text/html;CHARSET=iso-8859-1"> Waco: The Rules of Engagement - Associated Press

PRESS

| Home | Premiere | Showings | FAQ | Gallery | Order | Email |

Associated Press
Published in Washington, D.C.
Wednesday, September 1, 1999; 9:42 p.m. EDT
Marshals Impound FBI Waco Evidence

By Michelle Mittelstadt
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Federal marshals were dispatched Wednesday to the FBI's headquarters to impound previously undisclosed evidence in the 1993 assault by federal agents on the Branch Davidian compound, Justice and FBI officials said Wednesday night.
The marshals took custody of infrared tapes recorded during the early morning of April 19 when incendiary tear gas canisters were lobbed at a concrete bunker adjacent to the Davidians' compound near Waco, Texas, an FBI source said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
Hours later, the wooden compound erupted into flames. Cult leader David Koresh and some 80 followers died during the inferno. Justice Department officials dispatched the marshals to the FBI building less than a block away after the FBI informed them it had uncovered in its files additional information about the tear gas.
Department sources said Attorney General Janet Reno and her top aides were angered at the latest turn of events. Just a week ago, the FBI was forced to recant six years of denials that it had used incendiary tear gas during the final hours of the 51-day siege.
That belated admission prompted a furor on Capitol Hill, where congressional Republicans are readying hearings for the fall. A frustrated Reno also ordered an investigation to determine why combustible tear gas was used against her orders.
The FBI source said the new material, found in the offices of the FBI's Hostage Rescue Team in Quantico, Va., was turned up as part of FBI Director Louis Freeh's mandate that all files be searched for relevant information in advance of the investigation.
The Hostage Rescue Team was in charge of the FBI's operation during the siege and the final tear-gas assault.
After the evidence was found, it was transferred to FBI headquarters in Washington, where the marshals took possession.
"Earlier this afternoon, senior main Justice Department officials learned from the FBI that the FBI had found additional materials in its possession regarding the shooting of military CS gas rounds on the morning of April 19," said Justice spokesman Myron Marlin.
The Justice officials "immediately directed the United States Marshals Service to take possession and inventory the materials," Marlin added. The FBI concurred, said bureau spokesman John Collingwood.
"We are anxious to identify and preserve for outside review and congressional oversight anything that may bear on the firing of the military gas rounds," Collingwood said. "In the end, the only way we can completely restore our credibility is to identify every scrap of information we have and immediately turn it over to whomever is doing the review."
It appeared increasingly likely Wednesday that Reno will order an independent inquiry, sidestepping the investigative resources of the FBI.
Joining a chorus of voices on and off Capitol Hill, the White House has made clear its preference for an independent investigation, a White House official said Wednesday.
"We would support a thorough and independent look at this," said the official, who asked not to be identified.
Freeh, who wants to head off any perception of conflict of interest, earlier this week indicated support for an inquiry free of involvement from the FBI or the Justice Department.
Reno, who is out of the country on official business through Thursday, has not reached a final decision, Marlin said.
Justice sources, however, described Reno as leaning strongly in favor of an independent investigation and forgoing the use of a team of 40 FBI agents that had been assembled to re-interview all of the participants in the FBI operation.
The government's conclusion that the 1993 fire was set by Davidian cult members has long been doubted by conspiracy theorists and others who allege the government engaged in a widespread cover-up.
The FBI and Reno have said there is no evidence to suggest the blaze was set by the incendiary tear gas canisters. After insisting that only non-flammable devices were used, the FBI said last week that a "very limited number" of combustible canisters were lobbed at a concrete bunker 40 yards from the compound a few hours before the fire erupted.
The House Judiciary Committee is drafting legislation to establish a congressional commission to investigate the matter -- a step that in Chairman Henry Hyde's view could avoid the partisanship exhibited during earlier Waco hearings.
The House Government Reform Committee, which is already planning hearings, will issue subpoenas Thursday to the White House, Justice and Defense Departments, the FBI and Texas Rangers seeking documents and other Waco-related information, said spokesman Mark Corallo.
Sen. Phil Gramm, R-Texas, on Wednesday became the one of the first members of Congress to urge Reno to resign over the Waco controversy.
"I think the attorney general should step down," Gramm said. "This is another example of where she has either lied to the American people or allowed the American people to be lied to."

© Copyright 1999 The Associated Press

LinkExchange Member

Copyright ©1996-98, Fifth Estate Productions. All Rights Reserved.

0">

PRESS

| Home | Premiere | Showings | FAQ | Gallery | Order | Email |

Associated Press
09/20/1999
Volunteers rebuild Davidian church

WACO, Texas (AP) - A libertarian talk show host led a convoy of volunteers with shovels and pickaxes to Waco Sunday to initiate the rebuilding of the Branch Davidians' compound church. A fire during a government raid six years ago leveled the compound, killing leader David Koresh and about 80 followers. Austin talk show host Alex Jones, 25, said Sunday he wants to rebuild the church as a memorial and to increase publicity about the FBI's possible role in the fire. "This is about saying the witch hunt of 1993 is over," Jones said as he and about 60 people began digging foundations for a 38-by-40 frame church. The deadly fire April 19, 1993, ended a 51-day standoff between Koresh and the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and FBI. Jones said he chose now to build a memorial and church because of a recent admission by the FBI that agents had fired potentially incendiary tear gas canisters at the compound the day it burned, despite years of statements to the contrary. Attorney General Janet Reno earlier this month appointed a special counsel to investigate. Government officials maintain that Branch Davidians, and not federal agents, set the fatal fire. Koresh follower Clive Doyle, who survived the 1993 fire, said Sunday he has been leading 12 to 20 people in Bible studies near Waco and likely will lead services at the new church.

© Associated Press

LinkExchange Member

Copyright ©1996-98, Fifth Estate Productions. All Rights Reserved.

hat they cannot interpret on their own. Even with such a convincing witness as Allard, the FLIR material -- although admittedly compelling -- may not be as conclusive as the filmmakers would like it to be.

Koresh As Saint

Still, "Waco" doesn't have to be conclusive to make its point, which is that there are still some tough questions about Waco that demand attention.

The film pays short shrift to Koresh's responsibility for putting his followers and their children in harm's way, and its treatment of the two charges that ostensibly brought the government to Waco in the first place -- child sexual abuse and weapons stockpiling -- is superficial and contradictory. (Koresh is shown admitting that he's hoarding guns because he believes he might need them to fight the federal government, then a Davidian survivor dismisses the stockpile as the collection of a hobbyist.)

The filmmakers' efforts to humanize Koresh and his followers are understandable and even laudable. But it isn't necessary to portray Koresh as a saint in order to lend credence to the theory that the government -- and its agents who went "off the shelf" -- was responsible for what happened at Waco, and blatantly covered up its culpability to a credulous Congress.

The most chilling scene of "Waco" isn't in the FLIR tapes, nor the sickening photographs of children who were burnt and bent beyond recognition. It's when the first tank rams its way into the Davidian compound, pumping the building with toxic gas. After all that's gone before, it is impossible at that particular moment to remember what the argument was originally about. And the nagging sensation one comes away with from "Waco: The Rules of Engagement" is that the men driving the tanks -- and their bosses in Washington -- couldn't remember, either.

LinkExchange Member

Copyright ©1996-98, Fifth Estate Productions. All Rights Reserved.

40" ALIGN="BOTTOM" ALT="LinkExchange" BORDER="1" ISMAP>
LinkExchange Member

fair-minded person could reach an independent judgment. But the report is written as if to protect the agency. The authors demonize the Branch Davidians and give the agents the benefit of every doubt. Most troubling to me was the report's uninformed and unwarranted portrayal of the Branch Davidians as cold-blooded killers: "On February 28, Koresh and his followers knew ATF agents were coming and decided to kill them"; they "prepare[d] a deadly ambush." Despite these distortions, the report singled out for sanctions the two agents who were in charge of the dynamic entry, and they were forced out of the ATF. The Branch Davidians insisted throughout the stand-off that these men should go to prison and the report certainly did not exonerate them. Still, they were able to appeal the sanctions, and were later restored to their previous standing.

On the Branch Davidians' side, in addition to the six killed in the ATF raid and the more than eighty dead in the fire, several of the survivors were convicted of federal offenses involving firearms and sentenced to long prison terms. The authorities bulldozed the ruins of the Waco compound and quite literally covered it up; there could be no further possibility of physical evidence turning up that would raise new questions about the alleged wrongdoings of federal agents at Waco. Case closed.

Then, exactly two years later, came the enormity of Oklahoma City, home-grown American terrorism--Timothy McVeigh's Turner Diaries revenge, memorializing the anniversary of Waco with a new and even greater horror. The tragedy forced America to look back at Waco just as McVeigh intended. The moment was perfect for Gazecki's documentary; unfortunately, he was still filming. By the time he was finished, the soul-searching was over, the McVeigh trial had begun, and the Waco justification was now rubbing salt in the wounds of Oklahoma City. If Gazecki thought the McVeigh trial would help his documentary, he seriously misjudged the mood of Americans.

Stephen Jones, McVeigh's lawyer, seems to have similarly miscalculated. He thought an American jury contemplating the death penalty would sympathize with McVeigh if they knew his motive was retaliation for Waco. Like Gazecki, Jones also called to enlist my support. He had read my report and wanted me to testify about Waco at the capital sentencing phase of the McVeigh trial. His words were, "you owe it to your country." The argument was dramatic but unconvincing. Unlike Waco conspiracy theorists, I believe the tragedy at Waco was the result of incompetence and over-reaching: bad judgment and bad decisions, not intentional wrongdoing and a plot against the people. Nor do I believe there was a government conspiracy to cover up these failings. Instead, law enforcement agents closed ranks out of self-interest and group solidarity, and the subsequent investigations turned into bureaucratic damage control. On no moral calculus does the government's incompetence at Waco justify or mitigate the intentional slaughter of 168 innocent victims in Oklahoma City.

If Gazecki is right, however, Waco was much more than a case of government incompetence. According to his film, federal agents acting under color of law behaved like outlaws, rogue agents murdered Branch Davidians, and the responsible authorities covered up.

The bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building produced a spate of media attention and a new round of congressional hearings--sponsored, it is said, by the National Rifle Association's lobby. Members of the NRA could empathize with the Branch Davidians, whose large private armory was the original target of the ATF. Politics "makes strange bed-fellows," we are told, and after Waco, as I can personally attest, sleeping arrangements could not have been more perverse.

Left-wingers, liberal democrats, and minorities have traditionally been the critics of federal law enforcement agencies that overstep their authority, and conservative Republicans have traditionally been the defenders of law and order who support law enforcement even when it over-reaches. Waco produced a role reversal. The Gingrich Republicans were now in control of Congress and they decided to reopen Waco.

Congressman Conyers, now on the minority side of the aisle, was again in the spotlight during the second round of partisan congressional hearings, though this time as a defender of Janet Reno and federal law enforcement. A frequent critic of police brutality, as in the Rodney King case, he burst out laughing as he incredulously read a statement prepared for him by his own staff which extolled the virtues of the Los Angeles Police Department's SWAT team, whose former chief was testifying on behalf of the FBI. But the Democrats had a better strategy than praising law enforcement.

During the stand-off at Waco, President Clinton had charged David Koresh with sexual abuse of the Branch Davidians' children. Reno made similar claims about child abuse to justify her own decisions to approve the gas-attack. These allegations profoundly influenced public opinion against Koresh and the Branch Davidians. On that basis alone, many Americans were convinced that Koresh was evil and that was enough to close their minds about possible over-reaching and wrongdoings by federal authorities.

In the second round of congressional hearings, the Democrats deployed the same strategy. At the outset of the hearings a young adolescent girl, under New York Congressman Charles Schumer's gentle questioning, testified in an entirely believable manner about David Koresh forcing her to submit to sexual intercourse. It was Oprah-style television and the most genuinely gripping moment during the long, tedious, and unproductive hearings that followed. The Democrats put a human face on Waco and the battle for public opinion was lost: before the Republicans got started, they found themselves defending a child-molester. Because these allegations have played such an important part in the American public's moral judgments about the Branch Davidians and the events at Waco, one might have expected a documentary to clarify this matter, or at least face up to it with candor. Instead the issue is fudged. Here and in other places Gazecki's long documentary is not long enough to encompass the complex background of the Waco tragedy. As the title advertises, his documentary is primarily about the misdeeds of federal agents and their violations of the "rules of engagement."

Before considering those misdeeds it is worth confronting the allegations of sexual and child abuse lodged against Koresh. The film deals with them briefly and gingerly. Gazecki includes some footage of the young teenage girl testifying before Congress; one of Koresh's lawyers then undermines her testimony by referring to similar claims the girl made in a custody dispute. Gazecki leaves us with the impression that she might be lying. This portrayal is irresponsible and misleading. Koresh had convinced his followers that he was the Lamb of God prophesied in the Bible. He possessed the good seed and his offspring would occupy a special place in the Kingdom of Heaven. Koresh apparently had memorized many passages in the Bible and could quote relevant scripture to support his claim. You may think this is madness, but Koresh's followers, many of them well-educated and deeply religious, had faith in his special powers. Husbands practiced abstinence while they allowed Koresh to cohabit with their wives. Parents permitted Koresh to have sex with their pubescent daughters. Many of the children who died in the compound were Koresh's biological offspring. Though the children were subject to strict physical discipline, lengthy religious instruction, and a diet free of artificial ingredients, caffeine, and candy, there was never any evidence of child abuse in the sense of neglect or battering that concerned Janet Reno. Nor is there evidence that Koresh molested prepubescent girls. Instead, girls who had reached menarche were induced to have intercourse with Koresh in expectation that his "brides" would have the privilege of bearing his special children. Koresh and the Branch Davidians certainly knew that outsiders would disapprove of these sexual practices and downplayed them in public. Still, the secular state apparently had sufficient evidence to charge Koresh with statutory rape. But despite complaints by outsider parents who were not believers, Koresh was never prosecuted.

The only "apologists" for Koresh's behavior seem to be academic religionists whose studies show that such practices are common in the early stages of new religious sects. They also defend the Branch Davidians--a branch of an earlier apocalyptic branch of the Seventh Day Adventists--as a religious sect, not a mind-controlling cult. To understand what happened at Waco, you must appreciate that his diverse followers, who came from as far away as Australia, Great Britain, and Israel, believed that Koresh was the Lamb of God who would reveal the secrets of the Seven Seals. They called their compound "Mount Carmel," and like other millennial believers expected the world was coming to an end. Everyone who has carefully studied the Branch Davidians, and that should include Gazecki, agrees that Koresh, justifying his behavior by scripture, had sexual intercourse with legally underage females.

A documentary of this kind, which aims to set the record straight, has a truth-telling obligation. And since Gazecki's film is essentially an indictment of federal law enforcement agencies, his cause might have been better served by eliminating this issue from the film rather than undermining his own bona fides by equivocating. Statutory rape is a crime, and so is the possession of illegal weapons, but neither of these offenses justifies the ATF's initial life-threatening, commando-style raid on a compound full of women and children.

Gazecki constructs his film through a series of juxtapositions that powerfully carry his argument about official misconduct and distortion. We see liberal Democratic congressman Tom Lantos of California belligerently asserting that David Koresh was a madman with fanatic followers and that anyone who thinks differently must also be mad. Then we are shown scenes of a calm and sensible Koresh explaining scripture and talking reasonably to his followers, who look like ordinary church-goers. As a result, the usually clear-thinking Lantos looks like the madman. In this fashion virtually all of the government officials from Attorney General Reno on down are made to look like fools or hypocrites. Trying to explain how it came about that the FBI was using tanks, Reno maladroitly compares the arrangement to renting a car: this, after we have watched the "rented" tanks demolishing the compound's walls. ATF and FBI spokesmen appear constantly in these juxtapositions to be dissembling, deceiving, or misleading in their communications to the media, Congress, and the American people.

Gazecki also uses juxtaposition to support critics of the government's handling of Waco. In my report, I had suggested that the FBI's psychological warfare strategy had nothing to do with the psychology of Koresh or the Branch Davidians, that it was instead a function of the FBI's own group psychology--that agents were determined to show Koresh that they were in control. The film shows me reiterating this interpretation, and then cuts to an FBI spokesman in a press conference who is explaining the FBI's new aggressive tactics during the stand-off. The agent, obviously hot under the collar and fed up, is shown walking off the podium and stating: "We are going to show them that we control the compound and they are impotent." I had never seen that footage before, but could not have invented a more perfect illustration of what I had written.

Gazecki's editorial juxtapositions suggest a pervasive pattern of misinformation by the Justice Department, FBI, and ATF to mislead the American people, cover up misdeeds, and demonize the Branch Davidians. Interviewed after Oklahoma City, President Clinton unfairly dismissed the Branch Davidians as common criminals. The film should correct that unfortunate verdict, which is apparently shared by most Americans. The Branch Davidians may have been misguided religious extremists, but they were also decent human beings seeking a place in heaven and they believed Koresh could show them the way.

Indeed, during the long stand-off the Branch Davidians realized they were being smeared, and made a video to show their human faces to the American people. Men, women, and teenagers (many of them persons of color) explain why they came to Waco and why they are remaining in the compound. They believed God was on their side and--seen from their perspective--one begins to recognize that the Branch Davidians were subjected to great injustices. The ATF investigation concedes that after the raid, in an effort to cover up mistakes, the ATF hierarchy provided the public with "misleading or wrong" information. The Branch Davidians express their indignation about all this in their video. But the FBI prevented the release of that video for months after the tragedy. Parts of it are presented in the documentary, and they will come as a startling revelation. If Americans had seen the video, the Waco tragedy would have left us all with a guilty conscience; perhaps the final tragedy would not even have happened. Ironically, the Justice Department's Dennis Report specifically notes the FBI's concern "that if the tape were released to the media Koresh would gain much sympathy." The FBI waged a misguided public relations campaign to keep Americans from sympathizing with the Branch Davidians. The American media bought it and pressured the FBI to take more aggressive measures against the "Waco Wackos."

If Waco: The Rules of Engagement had done no more than show Americans that we had once more fallen into the trap of dehumanizing and demonizing our victims it would have served a useful purpose. But Gazecki goes further: he seems almost determined to dehumanize and demonize the ATF and FBI. Some of the documentary's allegations about federal agents seem reasonable, and correspond to what I learned from my own efforts to understand what happened at Waco. Other allegations push the envelope of credibility and some strain credulity to the breaking point. There is, however, enough in the documentary to shake up anyone's preconceived notions. As someone deeply critical of law enforcement's behavior at Waco, the film made me worry that I had not been critical enough. Even if the documentary does not provide definitive answers, it raises serious questions both about the ATF's February 28 raid and the FBI's conduct on April 19.

Gazecki's film argues that ATF agents fired the first shots, and that they directed automatic gunfire from their helicopters into the compound. These assertions directly contradict the official ATF investigation. If they are accurate, the ATF violated the "rules of engagement," successfully covered up this violation, and then lied under oath before Congress. More startling, Gazecki assembles evidence to argue that federal agents (presumably the FBI) on the final day of the conflagration were firing automatic weapons into the side of the compound hidden from the TV cameras, and that those tanks we saw on television were not just injecting gas but intentionally smashing sections of the compound and crushing the inhabitants. Footage in the film shows one of these tanks becoming disabled because something red is caught in its tracks. The narrator suggests that this may be part of the body of a Branch Davidian and his red coat. To support allegations about automatic weapon fire, Gazecki shows heat-sensitive film made by the government's own surveillance aircraft, and his assertions are supported in the film by knowledgeable experts. All this is in direct contradiction of the FBI's repeated claims, backed up by the Justice Department's investigation and the Dennis Report, that their purpose on April 19 was to get the Branch Davidians out safely, that the tanks were not attacking, and that they never fired a shot.

What is one to make of these allegations? Let us begin with the ATF raid. The ATF had been gathering intelligence for months and knew that there were many women and children in the compound whose lives would be at risk in a fire-fight. They believed that the Branch Davidians had powerful weapons, thought the end of the world was at hand, and might resist an armed assault by the ATF--the modern day soldiers of Assyria, according to Koresh.

Nonetheless, the ATF planned the largest armed raid in the bureau's history. The bureau received military training from the US Army at Fort Hood to prepare agents who had never before participated in such an effort. The ATF clearly misled Texas's then-Governor Ann Richards by falsely claiming that illegal drugs were involved. (The Branch Davidians, like the Seventh Day Adventists, reject all such drugs as a matter of religious tenet.) The illegal drug story was required under federal statute for the ATF to obtain the use of the Texas National Guard's military helicopters. Those helicopters were supposed to arrive first at the compound to create the diversion and surprise necessary for a "dynamic entry": diversion and surprise would allow ATF agents to put up ladders and invade the compound through the second floor window--beyond which, according to their faulty intelligence, lay the locked armory to which only David Koresh had the key. The ATF plan was to get there before Koresh could unlock it. If the timing failed, the plan put at risk the lives of 80 federal agents and more than 100 Branch Davidians. Given the alleged offense--violations of an illegal-firearms statute--the entire project seems ill-conceived. Indeed, many commentators later suggested that a single agent could have peacefully served a warrant. Even at the time, the acting Assistant Treasury Secretary in charge of law enforcement thought the plan was unwise and unnecessary when it was laid out to him just hours before the operation started. His first response, like Janet Reno's, was to say no. But he was misled by the agents in charge who convinced him that the Branch Davidians posed a real threat of violence to their neighbors. The official investigatory report concedes that the plan was inept if not irrational. But it maintains that the Branch Davidians were violent and ignores the possibility that the ATF raid was a dangerous provocation.

As is now well known, the ATF had an agent, Robert Rodriguez, inside the compound on the day of the raid. Rodriguez was pretending to be interested in the Branch Davidians' faith in order to gather intelligence. David Koresh knew all along that Rodriguez was an ATF agent; in fact, many days earlier Koresh had learned from his neighbors that the ATF had the compound under surveillance. Still, Koresh tried to proselytize Rodriguez. On the morning of the raid, when Koresh learned that the ATF was coming, he told Rodriguez that the Branch Davidians knew he was an agent and that they had been informed of the impending raid. Permitted to beat a hasty retreat (by these supposed killers), the agent informed his superiors that they had lost the essential element of surprise. Everyone in the ATF had agreed that if the element of surprise was lost they would call the operation off: because the main objective was to seize the locked armory before Koresh could distribute weapons to his followers, any other decision was completely irrational. Yet the ATF pushed ahead.

As Gazecki demonstrates, Koresh's warning resulted in part from the ATF's own inept attempts to get media attention. We see an agent lamely explaining that she called the local television stations only to make sure she had their weekend telephone numbers so she could contact them after the raid. In another remarkable failure of security, uniformed ATF agents were seen in Waco hotels, restaurants, and cocktail lounges the night before the raid. As a result of these gaffes, local TV stations had crews out looking for the compound long before the raid; when they explained what they were doing and asked a Branch Davidian for directions, he was able to warn Koresh.

Gazecki's documentary shows ATF agent Rodriguez weeping as he testifies before Congress about how he told his superiors, how they ignored his warning, and how those superiors had been lying to Congress. Gazecki has him nicely juxtaposed with one of the superiors who in bureaucratic "double speak" is explaining to Congress why a warning is not a warning. The ATF leaders must have learned something from Rodriguez as they hurriedly decided to advance the time of their assault. But because of the ATF's almost-unbelievable incompetence in failing to coordinate radio wave bands, the helicopters did not learn of the changes, kept to the original plan, arrived late, and failed to serve their diversionary function. With neither diversion nor surprise, tragedy was inevitable.

Why on earth did the ATF go ahead? The most realistic answer I have heard is that the ATF was worried about its own morale and standing. The ATF has had many critics over the years and been the object of scorn and ridicule by other law enforcement agencies. (Competition and bad blood among federal law enforcement agencies is well-known inside the Beltway.) It has frequently been suggested that the ATF be dismantled and its functions assigned to the FBI. The ATF wanted to pull off a bold military-style coup that would be widely publicized on television and allow it to display a huge collection of illegal weapons confiscated by its competent and courageous agents. Such a coup, it was thought, would strengthen and protect the ATF, impress Congress, enhance the agency's prestige, perhaps even increase its budget allocation.

The idea that the ATF acted out of bureaucratic self-interest and was looking for a public relations coup may seem ridiculous, but it is the only credible explanation of its conduct. Several years earlier the ATF had laid siege to a right-wing stronghold. The stand-off was resolved by the FBI and third-party negotiators, but the illegal weapons were all dismantled before the surrender and the ATF lost all the evidence it was hoping to obtain. The ATF had invested an extraordinary amount of time, energy, and resources in the Waco plan, as agents, many of them without previous SWAT-team or incident-response experience, prepared for their commando mission. Gazecki's film captures the "children-playing-soldier" mood of the ATF in video footage the agents made of themselves as they prepared for their escapade. Indeed, the momentum was so great it obviously overwhelmed the rational judgment of leaders who discounted their own agent's warning.

Though the agency's conduct does not constitute a government conspiracy, it is equally preposterous to describe what transpired at the compound as an "ambush," as the ATF report does. Having been warned, and expecting to be attacked, the Branch Davidians had more than enough time to open their armory and distribute weapons. Whether illegal automatics or legal semiautomatics, their weapons had enormous killing power. Military experts who have examined Waco agree that if the Branch Davidians had decided to kill the agents, as the ATF report claims, they could easily have slaughtered them. They had time to station themselves in strategic positions, including a tower that rose above the compound. Armed with automatic weapons, two or three of them could have fired on the cattle cars in which the agents arrived at the compound (the ATF's idea of Texas camouflage)--had there been a real ambush, most of the agents would have been killed before they even dismounted from the cattle cars, and many more as they jumped down. Even after the ATF took cover, the Branch Davidians' strategic firing positions in the tower made the agents visible targets.

The four agents who were killed were among those who went ahead with the planned dynamic entry from the roof of the compound, whose whole purpose was to get to the locked second-floor armory. But as the element of surprise had been lost, the armory had already been opened and the weapons disbursed. As soon as gunfire was exchanged--whoever started it--the ATF had to realize that no purpose could be served by mounting the roof. What we witnessed on television, then, was a tragic exercise in futility. The ATF leaders had put their own agents in a situation where there was nothing to be gained and where lives could be and were lost. Viewers of Gazecki's film will see again those desperate moments on the compound roof, as one of the agents goes through the window. But the narrator says nothing about the insanity of what is taking place before our eyes. Federal agents killing and being killed for no reason!

Both Gazecki's documentary and the ATF's official investigation are misleading about all this. The ATF investigation constructed a narrative in which federal agents were caught in a killing ambush and fired in self-defense. Gazecki's film, by focusing particularly on the helicopters, makes the ATF out to be the killers. But ATF agents are not killers, and neither were the Branch Davidians. The agents were desperately trying to follow the ill-conceived and futile plan conceived by their superiors. The Branch Davidians were defending their holy ground in the face of violent provocation. Both sides had weapons and were firing them. Indeed, the extraordinary thing, missed by both narratives, is how few lives were lost in this huge display of firepower.

If not a result of conspiracy or ambush, why were the first shots fired? The answer may be painfully banal. The complex ATF plan (of which there was never a written copy) called for the first agents who dismounted to use fire extinguishers to fend off the Branch Davidians' watch-dogs. As this began, Koresh, who said he had stationed his people to defend the compound, came to the door unarmed to confront the ATF. The ATF report incredibly has the Branch Davidians greeting the cattle cars with a hail of bullets and grenades while Koresh comes to the open door unarmed. It is impossible to believe that these events happened simultaneously as described. Koresh consistently maintained that he could not believe that ATF agents in full battle gear would assault the compound if they knew there were women and children inside. He came to the door to try to explain the situation to them. The first gun shots were then fired by agents at the dogs when their fire extinguishers failed to control them. One of Koresh's bodyguards, on his own initiative, then fired at those agents; agents responded by opening fire on the compound. The agent closest to Koresh, who was still at the open door, dropped to the ground and shot the unarmed Koresh through the pelvis and wrist. The door closed and gunfire broke out on all sides leading to the battle already described.

In short, the ATF did not go to the compound intending to shoot first and serve warrants later, as Gazecki suggests. Nor did the Branch Davidians intend an ambush to maximize their kill of federal agents, as the ATF's official report insists. Indeed, when the firing began, Wayne Martin, a Branch Davidian and an African-American graduate of Harvard Law School, called 911. Portions of the tapes can be heard in Gazecki's documentary. Martin's spontaneous reactions do not suggest a man participating in an ambush. A trained lawyer and minister, Martin was obviously shocked that armed troops were firing on women and children.

As to Gazecki's charges that the ATF's borrowed helicopters fired on the compound, he has presented convincing circumstantial evidence. Three helicopters arrived late on the scene as the fire-fight began. The occupants of the helicopters could not communicate with the leaders on the ground because of the radio-band problem. The agents in the helicopters with automatic weapons had no idea what was happening, and may well have joined in the fire-fight. Gazecki has compelling audiotape of the exchange between ATF agent Cavanaugh and the Branch Davidians during those exact moments. Early in the raid, the two sides had no way to communicate; Martin had reached the local police on their 911 line but they could not contact the ATF. On the tape, telephone communication has been established and we hear a Branch Davidian desperately telling Cavanaugh that the helicopters are shooting automatic weapons into the compound. Cavanaugh denies this. Koresh, though he had already been wounded, comes on and tells the agent they are not going to talk any longer if Cavanaugh refuses to acknowledge the reality that the compound is taking automatic weapon fire from the helicopters. Koresh had no reason to invent this complaint at that time, and Cavanaugh had no way of knowing what was going on in the helicopters. Cavanaugh ingeniously resolves this dispute over the phone by saying he intended only to deny that the helicopters had mounted automatic weapons. Subsequently, the ATF denied that agents ever fired from helicopters. Before Congress, Cavanaugh wept and swore that it was impossible for anyone to think that ATF agents would fire from helicopters. If he believed that they had, he claimed, he would throw away his badge. Gazecki's film contains a convincing refutation of Cavanaugh's testimony about the helicopters. Regrettably, Congress never heard it, as no member of Congress confronted or cross-examined him.

Gazecki is less than objective in failing to emphasize that the Branch Davidians fired on the helicopters. This is yet another example of the adversarial style on both sides. In the film, one actually seems to hear the Branch Davidians taking automatic weapon fire from the demonic ATF. In the ATF report we are shown the unarmed helicopters and the bullet holes caused by demonic Branch Davidians.

The ATF raid left dead and dying on both sides and led to a cease-fire agreement. Even the ATF official report acknowledges "chaos at the command post" after the shoot-out. A complex negotiation between the ATF and the FBI followed, resulting in the FBI's own 51-day siege.

When the FBI replaced the ATF at Waco, their initial strategy of negotiating with the Brach Davidians soon shifted to a declaration of all-out psychological warfare. Most behavioral scientists who have studied the events have questioned the FBI's decision. Because of the Branch Davidians' religious beliefs, end-of-the-world expectations, and acceptance of Koresh as the Lamb of God, such tactics might have driven members to mass suicide. When I and the other panelists appointed by the Justice Department met with representatives of the FBI's behavioral science group for briefings on July 1, 1993, we were told in no uncertain terms that they had decided Koresh was a sociopath who had conned his followers. Their spokesman opined that, when push comes to shove, common criminals such as Koresh, who have antisocial personality disorders, act in their own self-interest. This was presented to us as the behavioral science input into FBI decision-making. These views suggested to the panelists an astonishing ignorance of religious beliefs and of individual and group psychology. But as it turned out this initial part of our briefing was misleading.

The arrangements of the Justice Department for its investigation of Waco in my opinion were not designed to produce a searching inquiry. The panelists were briefed by law enforcement officials who had not been directly involved in Waco, and we were asked to prepare individual reports suggesting improvements in federal law enforcement for the future without a detailed understanding of what happened at Waco. Career Justice Department lawyers were to conduct the separate factual investigation; the so-called independent investigator, Edward Dennis, was to prepare his report based on the Justice Department's self-examination, and we were instructed not to ask questions about this ongoing investigation. My objection to these arrangements was considered an aberration, indicative of some personal psychopathology. And my subsequent criticism of the process and its findings was taken as a further proof of my bad judgment and "paranoia." At one point, it seemed as though the Justice Department had removed me from the panel. Eventually it was agreed that I would delay my own report until I had studied the factual report and could pursue any unanswered questions with Justice Department lawyers or the FBI. During this subsequent process I discovered that Peter Smerik, the agent who actually provided behavioral science input at Waco, had submitted two remarkably contradictory memoranda to his superiors. In the first, with impressive psychological insight and prescience, he had noted that Koresh was a religious fanatic, not a con-man sociopath, and that his followers were true religious adherents. He warned his superiors that psychological warfare might drive the Branch Davidians to collective suicide. Twenty-four hours later, he sent a memo advising the FBI to press ahead with psychological warfare. According to the Dennis Report, this psychological warfare memo was the last submitted at Waco by the behavioral science group. Neither the Justice Department's investigators nor the Dennis Report delved into these strange circumstances.

In the fall of 1993, I asked Smerik about his 180º turnabout. His response, clear and unmistakable, was: "my superior told me I was tying his hands." He had caved into the pressure and had provided his superiors the advice they wanted to hear. During the congressional hearings in 1995, I sat behind him and heard him testify under oath that no one had actually said those words to him, that no one had pressured him. He testified that it was all in his own head: he had pressured himself. None of the members of Congress present seemed to recognize that Smerik was recanting and had closed ranks with his fellow agents. Smerik's original story had been the linch-pin of my understanding about what went wrong in the FBI's management of the stand-off at Waco, and it had been confirmed by several other FBI sources.

There were two warring psychological camps inside the FBI at Waco. The first was the tactical forces, consisting of hostage rescue team members, SWAT-team trained marksmen, and other Green Beret types whose imperative is immediate action. The second camp consisted of negotiators and behavioral scientists, who were prepared to talk the thing through indefinitely to avoid loss of life. Friction between the two camps increased as the stand-off dragged on. The tactical forces pressed for more aggressive and harassing measures, at times even acting independently and undercutting ongoing FBI negotiations. Smerik's turnabout was only one symptom of this pathology of divided camps. Eventually, the tactical forces were calling all the shots and acting on their plan to tighten a noose of tanks around the compound and then inject the CS gas to drive the Davidians out. As one of my informants told me, by the time the plan was presented to Janet Reno, there were three options: gas, gas, or gas. The FBI's choice of strategy was not based on insufficient appreciation of apocalyptic religious beliefs or inadequate behavioral science. It was based on the action imperative of tactical law enforcement.

Gazecki compellingly substantiates this conflict inside the FBI. He presents excerpts culled from the reels of negotiation tape in which the negotiator apologizes for behavior by the tactical forces that violated promises made to the Branch Davidians. These tapes indicate that federal agents at times behaved not like professionals but like hooligans--for example, pulling down their pants and mooning the people in the compound. The film also substantiates my opinion, shared by many commentators, that third-party negotiation should have been utilized. On the tapes we hear the Branch Davidians insisting that negotiation with the FBI has reached a dead end and asking for third-party negotiators.

Though it supports all the criticisms contained in my report, and which I reiterate as a talking head on-screen, the documentary suggests that my ultimate conclusion about the Branch Davidians being inadvertently driven to mass suicide is entirely mistaken. Gazecki claims to show us something far more despicable. He believes that on the day of the gas attack some of the FBI's tactical forces began shooting their automatic weapons into the compound and crushing Branch Davidians under the tanks. According to the autopsy reports at least 20 corpses had bullet holes in them and some of the bodies were maimed. The Justice Department's explanation of the bullet holes was that fanatic leaders had shot church members; it gave no explanation of the maimed bodies. Until I saw Gazecki's film I had accepted this explanation, with the proviso that these shootings may have been suicides or mercy killings of people who were dying in agony. Koresh's own corpse had been shot between the eyes, and I do not believe any Branch Davidian still in the compound would have done that to the "Lamb of God" in malice. Gazecki forces us to ask whether some of those bullet holes were made by federal agents and whether some of the strangely mutilated corpses were the result of tank treads.

When the panelists were assembled on the first day at the Justice Department we were told that we would be given information about the final conflagration that had been gathered through top-secret technology. We were informed that all such information would be redacted from the published investigation under a federal statute--it was--and we were sworn to secrecy. Though the London Times shortly thereafter published photographs of the listening devices used at Waco and described how they had been deployed, I honored the secrecy request until I testified before Congress two years later and was told to reveal what the panel had been told. Gazecki's documentary has been profoundly disturbing to me on this very matter.

The panel was told that the FBI's top-secret listening devices picked up all sorts of extraneous noise and conversation, making it impossible to decipher meaningful information as it was recorded. We were also told that well after the fire FBI experts had deciphered a conversation in which the Branch Davidians' inner circle reported that on the night of the final day Koresh had decided it would end with them "stepping out onto the surface of the sun." Obviously, we were told, if the FBI had heard that information in real time, they would have taken a different course the next morning. But here was the convincing but secret evidence that the Branch Davidians had committed mass suicide. The FBI never played that tape for the panel nor were we ever given a transcript. Nonetheless, I accepted this oral information as the basic factual premise of my report and concluded that the FBI had inadvertently driven the Branch Davidians to this extremity. To my knowledge this "secret" information convinced the other panelists as well that Waco had ended in mass suicide.

Gazecki's film argues that I got it wrong, as has everyone else who believed the Justice Department's investigation and the Dennis Report. The film presents three kinds of evidence about that final day. First, there is a still photograph, apparently taken by authorities after the tragedy, of a ferret round of CS gas that was fired into the compound. A Branch Davidian survivor has testified that many such rounds were fired and that they sounded like mortar fire. This information is confirmed by the Dennis Report, which describes the ferret rounds as "non-burning." Gazecki's film, however, claims that they are pyrotechnic devices that explode to deliver the gas, and further argues that these devices, not the Branch Davidians, set fire to the compound. Ferret rounds are either pyrotechnic or not: that question can easily be resolved. However, as the CS gas is in fact a powder that must be dispersed, it is not inconceivable that the canister includes some mechanism for that purpose. The Dennis Report's description of these rounds as "non-burning" seems evasive rather than definitive. And as the compound was filled with highly volatile fumes, pyrotechnic devices could have sparked the fire.

The documentary's second kind of evidence consists of films, presented at the congressional hearings, that show a tank ramming back and forth repeatedly through a section of the compound until it collapses. The panelists were never told that this was part of the FBI's "not an assault" plan. Yet Gazecki also has tape of an FBI spokesman saying that they knew in advance that the women and children might be placed in a bunker near the kitchen, and so intentionally rammed the tank through the wall to deposit gas in the bunker area. The Justice Department has consistently argued that tanks were used only to inject gas or to create exits so that the Branch Davidians could escape. But the Dennis Report reveals that one of the tanks was ordered to clear a path through the compound to the main tower so that another tank could insert CS gas in that area; that during that "endeavor" a portion of the roof collapsed; and that "an apparent deviation from the approved plan began that involved . . . dismantl[ing] the building."

These uses of the tanks could not have occurred without risk of injury to the occupants. Did Attorney General Reno know the tanks would be used in this risky destructive fashion when she approved the plan? On the day of the tank assault Reno was scheduled to give a talk in Baltimore. She testified that the FBI advised her to go ahead with the talk so as not to create unwarranted concern. She was therefore not in the Washington situation room when the tanks began demolishing the walls of the compound. The documentary argues that the maimed bodies described at autopsy were in fact mangled by the tanks. We see film of the disabled tank being towed away and a Congressman at the hearing complains that after two years there has still been no report of what caused the tread to come off. Gazecki leaves viewers with the impression that a Branch Davidian's body may have been caught in the tread and that the truth has been covered up.

Because I was very concerned about the lethal risks to small children of prolonged exposure to CS gas, I asked many questions about the tank plan. Not until Gazecki's film, however, did I learn that the FBI intended to deposit the noxious substance directly on the bunker where they believed the children would be. Nor was I informed that tanks would push down walls to reach that location. The FBI plan in fact imposed much greater risk of loss of life than I was told or had imagined. Gazecki may therefore be correct in believing that some Branch Davidians were crushed by tanks. I had never before considered that possibility.

The documentary's third kind of evidence is based entirely on heat-sensitive film and an expert's interpretation of it. The expert repeatedly points to flashing lights on the film which he claims are bursts of heat that do not occur in nature and can only be made by automatic weapons. He asserts that those weapons are firing into the compound on the side away from the television cameras. There has already been enough discussion of this heat-sensitive evidence in the media to suggest that Gazecki's expert has given a plausible but not irrefutable opinion. If it is true, then many FBI agents knew about it and there was a massive cover-up.

Gazecki seems to want us to believe that FBI agents intentionally crushed Branch Davidians with their tanks and slaughtered them with their automatic weapons. Again, this is a mirror image account of the FBI's description of the Branch Davidians killing their own people rather than letting them escape the mass suicide. Surely the human truth lies somewhere between these extremes. There is no doubt in my mind that the FBI's plan for the last day went awry, just as the ATF's did on the first day. Some of the FBI agents obviously did not follow the established plan. Even the Dennis Report acknowledges this much. The FBI may have circled their wagons after the fact, honoring the law enforcement code of silence. They would not be the first or last law enforcement group to do so. But the Justice Department's job was to dig out the truth; that was what the Attorney General promised the American people.

One might naively think that the highest priority after a tragedy like Waco would be for everyone involved to consider what went wrong and what they would now do differently. The ATF conceded errors but never acknowledged that the raid was tragically unnecessary. Neither the FBI nor the Justice Department conceded any errors. The government's self-investigation glossed over the evidence of conflict within the FBI at Waco; it denied the lethal risk of CS gas to infants; it never explained the "apparent deviation" in the tank plan; it never described how decisions were made at Justice or who made them; it never offered convincing reasons for its failure to use third-party negotiations; and it never questioned the wisdom or the practical consequences of demonizing the Branch Davidians. The film documents each of these failings, and Gazecki builds the viewers' sense of moral outrage by his method of juxtaposition. Because much of what he shows us does seem to be true, his further allegations of extreme wrongdoing become more believable.

Gazecki stops short of suggesting that Waco was a government conspiracy, but he gives conspiracy theorists all the ammunition they will need. Unfortunately, the responsible officials did such an inadequate job of investigating Waco that most viewers will have almost no realistic basis against which to measure Gazecki's film. Waco: The Rules of Engagement will be another reason for people to distrust their government.

Also see: Alan Stone's original report to the Justice Department.

Copyright © 1997 Boston Review

ult leader, and his glassy-eyed followers were dangerous zombies

who would do anything for him at the snap of his fingers.

At least, that's the spin we got from the FBI during the 51-day standoff with the Branch Davidians in Waco, Texas, in the spring of 1993. After all, hadn't this gun-happy cult already murdered four ATF agents? At any moment they could load up with their cache of illegal weapons and open fire again. The situation was tense and delicate, requiring military-level tact and strategy.

That would include repeatedly running a tank over the grave of a Branch Davidian like teenagers doing "donuts" with a Camaro in a parking lot; shining bright lights into the compound all night long; blasting jungle noises and Nancy Sinatra's "These Boots Are Made for Walking" over a loudspeaker system; dropping their pants to "moon" their adversaries; posing for pictures atop tanks; and flipping off the Branch Davidians.

In other words, acting like a bunch of weekend warriors playing paint ball, rather than a team of highly trained marksmen fearing for their safety while bravely protecting the American people from this supposedly evil cult.

If Koresh was such a ticking time bomb, was this really the smartest strategy to peacefully flush him and his followers out of hiding?

I don't know. It seems, well, idiotic.

***

More than four years after the U.S. government's siege of the Branch Davidian compound ended with a deadly fire that claimed the lives of 70 people, many questions remain unanswered. But when you watch the gripping and at times horrific documentary film "Waco: The Rules of Engagement" (opening Friday at Facets), one truth seems irrefutable. None of this was really necessary.

Koresh was a babbling fool, but was he dangerous or just weird? "Waco" makes a strong case for the Branch Davidians as essentially innocent victims of a government that acted stupidly and perhaps even criminally.

This is not some cheesy propaganda mail-order video put together by militia paranoids. It's a well-crafted, serious piece of advocacy journalism produced at a cost of about $1 million by a team of respected filmmakers, including director/editor William Gazecki, producer Michael McNulty and executive producers Dan Gifford and Amy Sommer Gifford.

Containing little narration, the 165-minute film relies on captivating footage, including excerpts from congressional hearings, news footage, home video made by the Davidians and amateur video shot by the FBI. Perhaps even more dramatic are the audio excerpts of conversations between FBI and Branch Davidian leaders, and recordings of 911 calls made during the final raid.

There are any number of unforgettable visuals, but nothing can prepare you for the unblinking close-ups of the bodies of women and children who were killed in the raid, twisted and burned beyond human recognition. You want to grab Janet Reno by the lapels and ask one again: Why?

It's a question Reno seems incapable of addressing. Asked why she went ahead with plans to give a speech in Baltimore while the raid was already under way on the morning of April 19, 1993, Reno said she didn't want to tip her hand and let anyone know that something unusual was going on.

Too late, Madame Attorney General! The chaos was already in motion. With her fumbling denials and lame excuses, Reno comes across as nothing more than a federal version of Daryl Gates.

***

How did the trouble start between the government and the Branch Davidians? The common wisdom is that the sect was "stockpiling illegal weapons," hence the ill-fated raid of February 28, 1993.

It is true that some of the weapons found in the compound had been illegally modified, but as the documentary explains, the sect was legally dealing guns, as do many other individuals and groups in Texas. There seems to be no proof the Davidians were planning any sort of attack on anyone.

The February 28 raid seems to have been concocted as a public relations coup. A few days earlier, a PR person for the FBI actually tipped off some Texas news organizations, telling them, "We might have something going on this weekend." The sect also seemed to be aware of the "surprise" ambush, and while it's unclear who fired first, it's painfully obvious the ATF was woefully unprepared for an exchange of gunfire. Emergency vehicles were not alerted, and the government ran out of ammunition and had to retreat, hands in the air. It was a colossal, tragic embarrassment.

After that debacle--and nearly two months of sometimes insanely comical posturing on both sides--all bets were off. Frustrated by the standoff and seemingly aching for revenge, the FBI used a tank to steamroll into the compound while spraying the powder CS mixed with paint thinner. (When ignited, the powder produces hydrogen cyanide, the same ingredient used in prison gas chambers.)

Who started the deadly inferno on April 19, 1993? The makers of "Waco" believe the government did it by igniting the chemical spray with gunfire. Images taken with a Forward- Looking Infra-Red camera seem to illustrate shots coming form the government tanks--although other experts have said this could be reflected light.

It may not be conclusive proof, but it's damning evidence. There's certainly nothing on the other side of the argument to back up the assertion that the Branch Davidians suddenly decided to participate in a mass suicide that involved not only setting fire to their home, but in more than 20 cases, shooting one another to death. And there are all sorts of other curiosities, including the mysterious disappearance of key evidence, and assertions from Texas lawmen and a coroner that their work was bigfooted by the feds.

Perhaps most obscene of all is an FBI spokesman's explanation for the unprovoked raid. "We thought their instincts, their motherly instincts, would take place and they would want their children out. It appears they don't care that much about their children which is unfortunate."

In other words, the U.S. government is admitting it gambled the lives of innocent children and helpless old people in the hopes of getting the Davidians to surrender. Incredible.

This is not to say Koresh was a benign prophet and all of his followers were innocent lambs led to their slaughter. The issue of Koresh's alleged sexual abuse of young sect members is glossed over, and there's no disputing that four ATF agents were gunned down in that initial raid. Why didn't the Davidians throw down their weapons and surrender peacefully?

The children, though. Nobody can explain why the children had to be killed.

You could make a 20-hour documentary and still not fill in all the missing pieces of this tragic puzzle. But after watching "Waco: The Rules of Engagement," one can't help but feel that this story bears more resemblance to Wounded Knee or Kent State than Jonestown or Heaven's Gate.

© 1997 Chicago Sun-Times

e. - Given that CONTROL is the likely ultimate purpose, INVOLUNTARY test subjects become a necessity. Thus, the phenomenon of people apparently being chosen at random for this "work". - Given a requirement for INVOLUNTARY test subjects, the ONLY group with the necessary funds and legal powers is GOVERNMENT. Private contractors are no doubt the main perpetrators to keep the "work" well covered, but without secret complicity of GOVERNMENT, this expensive, extensive, and illegal atrocity simply could not happen. The effect types categorized: Here is a list of most of the common effects. It is not exhaustive, but is intended to show the reader how the perpetrators' pallette of stress effects is broken down. Indent levels are used to show categories and sub-categories: 1. Invasive At-a-Distance Body Effects (including mind) a. Sleep deprivation and fatigue i. Silent but instantaneous application of "electronic caffeine" signal, forces awake and keeps awake ii. Loud noise from neighbours, usually synchronized to attempts to fall asleep iii.Precision-to-the-second "allowed sleep" and "forced awakening"; far too precise and repeated to be natural iv. Daytime "fatigue attacks", can force the victim to sleep and/or weaken the muscles to the point of collapse b. Audible Voice to Skull (V2S) i. Delivered by apparent at a distance radio signal ii. Made to appear as emanating from thin air iii.Voices or sound effects only the victim can hear c. Inaudible Voice to Skull (Silent Sound) i. Delivered by apparent at a distance radio signal; manifested by sudden urges to do something/go somewhere you would not otherwise want to; silent (ultrasonic) hypnosis presumed ii. Programming hypnotic "triggers" - i.e. specific phrases or other cues which cause specific involuntary actions d. Violent muscle triggering (flailing of limbs) i. Leg or arm jerks to violently force awake and keep awake ii. Whole body jerks, as if body had been hit by large jolt of electricity iii.Violent shaking of body; seemingly as if on a vibrating surface but where surface is in reality not vibrating e. Precision manipulation of body parts (slow, specific purpose) i. Manipulation of hands, forced to synchronize with closed-eyes but FULLY AWAKE vision of previous day; very powerful and coercive, not a dream ii. Slow bending almost 90 degrees BACKWARDS of one toe at a time or one finger at a time iii.Direct at-a-distance control of breathing and vocal cords; including involuntary speech iv. Spot blanking of memory, long and shor term f. Reading said-silently-to-self thoughts i. Engineered skits where your thoughts are spoken to you by strangers on street or events requiring knowledge of what you were thinking ii. Real time reading subvocalized words, as while the victim reads a book, and BROADCASTING those words to nearby people who form an amazed audience around the victim g. Direct application of pain to body parts i. Hot-needles-deep-in-flesh sensation ii. Electric shocks (no wires whatsoever applied) iii.Powerful and unquenchable itching, often applied precisely when victim attempts to do something to expose this "work" iv. "Artificial fever", sudden, no illness present v. Sudden racing heartbeat, relaxed situation h. Surveillance and tracking i. Thru wall radar and rapping under your feet as you move about your apartment, on ceiling of apartment below ii. Thru wall radar used to monitor starting and stopping of your urination - water below turned on and off in sync with your urine stream iii.Loud, raucous artificial bird calls everywhere the victim goes, even into the wilderness 2. Invasive Physical Effects at a Distance, non-body a. Stoppage of power to appliances (temporary, breaker ON) b. Manipulation of appliance settings c. Temporary failures that "fix themselves" d. Flinging of objects, including non-metallic e. Precision manipulation of switches and controls f. Forced, obviously premature failure of appliance or parts 3. External Stress-Generating "Skits" a. Participation of strangers, neighbours, and in some cases close friends and family members in harassment i. Rudeness for no cause ii. Tradesmen always have "problems", block your car, etc. iii.Purchases delayed, spoiled, or lost at a high rate iv. Unusually loud music, noise, far beyond normal b. Break-ins/sabotage at home i. Shredding of clothing ii. Destruction of furniture iii.Petty theft iv. Engineered failures of utilities c. Sabotage at work i. Repetitive damage to furniture ii. Deletion/corruption of computer files iii.Planting viruses which could not have come from your computer usage pattern iv. Delivered goods delayed, spoiled, or lost at a high rate v. Spreading of rumors, sabotage to your working reputation vi. Direct sabotage and theft of completed work; tradesmen often involved and showing obvious pleasure
Up to Contents =========================================================================== IV. MAJOR TECHNOLOGY CLASSES These technology classes are for the UNclassified and commercial equipment which can emulate the "real" classified mind control equipment. Effect section 2, "Invasive Physical Effects at-a-Distance", clearly establishes the existence of remote precision manipulation of objects which is far beyond the capabilities of unclassified and commercial equipment at the time of writing. REMOTE PHYSICAL MANIPULATION is not covered in this article, but the reader should know that both NASA and IEEE have noted successes in creating very small antigravity effects (which are not due to simple magnetism.) The two major TRANSMISSION METHODS FOR NEURO-EFFECTIVE SIGNALS are: - pulsed microwave (i.e. like radar signals) - ultrasound (transmitted throught the air) INAUDIBLE (ULTRASOUND) HYPNOTIC TRIGGERS, one of the main effects of the institutional/drug/child abuse phases of the CIA MKULTRA atrocities (1950's through 1970's). These triggers are planted using either of the above two transmission methods. The major THROUGH-WALL SURVEILLANCE METHOD is so-called "millimeter wave" scanning. This method uses the very top end of the microwave radio signal spectrum just below infra-red. To view small objects or people clearly, the highest frequency that will penetrate non-conductive or poorly- conductive walls is used. Millimeter wave scanning radar can be used in two modes: - passive (no signal radiated, uses background radiation already in the area to be scanned, totally UNdetectable) - active (low power millimeter wave "flashlight" attached to the scanner just as a conventional light mounted on a camcorder) THOUGHT READING can be classed as a "through wall surveillance" technology. Thought reading, in the unclassified/commercial realm, can be broken down as follows: - thru-skull microwave reading - magnetic skull-proximity reading BRAIN ENTRAINMENT is the reverse of biofeedback. Those low frequency electrical brain rhythms which are characteristics of various moods and states of sleep can not only be read out using biofeedback equipment or EEG machines, but using radio, sound, contact electrodes, or flashing lights, the moods and sleep states can be generated or at least encour- aged using brain entrainment devices. Brain entrainment cannot carry voice, which is a much higher frequency range. Brain entrainment can, however, be used to "set up" a target to make him/her more susceptible to hypnosis. These major technology classes can produce some of the observed mind control effects, from hiding, undetectably, with the exception of remote physical manipulation. Up to Contents =========================================================================== V. PULSED MICROWAVE Pulsed microwave voice-to-skull (or other-sound-to-skull) transmission was discovered during World War II by radar technicians who found they could hear the buzz of the train of pulses being transmitted by radar equipment they were working on. This phenomenon has been studied extensively by Dr. Allan Frey, whose work has been published in a number of reference books. What Dr. Frey found was that single pulses of microwave could be heard by some people as "pops" or "clicks", while a train of uniform pulses could be heard as a buzz, without benefit of any type of receiver. Dr. Frey also found that a wide range of frequencies, as low as 125 MHz (well below microwave) worked for some combination of pulse power and pulse width. Detailed unclassified studies mapped out those frequencies and pulse characteristics which are optimum for generation of "microwave hearing". Very significantly, when discussing electronic mind control, is the fact that the PEAK PULSE POWER required is modest - something like 0.3 watts per square centimeter of skull surface, and this power level is only applied for a very small percentage of each pulse's cycle time. 0.3 watts/sq cm is about what you get under a 250 watt heat lamp at a distance of one meter. It is not a lot of power. When you take into account that the pulse train is OFF (no signal) for most of each cycle, the average power is so low as to be nearly undetectable. Frequencies that act as voice-to-skull carriers are not single freq- uencies, as, for example TV or cell phone channels are. Each sensitive frequency is actually a range or "band" of frequencies. A technology used to reduce both interference and detection is called "spread spectrum". Spread spectrum signals have the carrier frequency "hop" around within a specified band. Unless a receiver "knows" the hop schedule in advance, there is virtually no chance of receiving or detecting a coherent readable signal. Spectrum analyzers, used for detection, are receivers with a screen. A spread spectrum signal received on a spectrum analyzer appears as just more "static" or noise. In spite of my organization's offer of a $300 US reward for documentation of the first unclassified successful transmission of WORDS using voice- to-skull technolgy (by Dr. Joseph Sharp, Walter Reed Army Institute of Research in the early 70s) no one is yet able to find an actual article describing the success in detail. What we do have are articles mainly describing in detail the hearing of clicks or pops (for single pulses) or buzzing (for a train of uniform pulses.) A pattern seems to be emerging where research which could be used for mind control starts working, the UNclassified researchers lose funding, and in some cases their notes have been confiscated, and no further information on that research track is heard in the unclassified press. Pulsed microwave voice-to-skull research is one such track.

Appended articles: PM1 http://home.nas.net/~raven1/lida.htm, photo and description of the Korean War LIDA machine, a radio frequency BRAIN ENTRAINMENT device developed by Soviet Russia and used in the Korean War on allied prisoners of war. BRAIN ENTRAINMENT IS INCLUDED IN THE RADIO FREQUENCY SECTION BECAUSE THE MOST INSIDIOUS METHOD OF BRAIN ENTRAINMENT IS SILENTLY, USING RADIO SIGNALS. PM2 http://home.nas.net/~raven1/frey.htm, Human Auditory System Response To Modulated Electromagnetic Energy, Allan H. Frey, General Electric Advanced Electronics Center, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York PM3 http://home.nas.net/~raven1/v2s-nasa.htm, NASA technical report abstract stating that speech-to-skull is feasible PM4 http://home.nas.net/~raven1/v2s-kohn.htm, DOD/EPA small business initiative (SBIR) project to study the UNclassified use of voice-to- skull technology for military uses. (The recipient, Science and Engin- eering Associates, Albuquerque NM, would not provide me details on the telephone) PM5 http://home.nas.net/~raven1/bioamp.htm, Excerpts, Proceedings of Joint Symposium on Interactions of Electromagnetic Waves with Biological Systems, 22nd General Assembly of the International Union of Radio Science, Aug 25 - Sep 2, 1987, Tel Aviv, Israel SHOWS BIOLOGICAL AMPLIFICATION OF EM SIGNALS, pointing to relative ease with which neuro-electromagnetic signals can trigger effects Up to Contents =========================================================================== VI. ULTRASOUND Ultrasound is vibration of the air, a liquid, or a solid, above the upper limit of human hearing which is roughly 20,000 Hz. There is no theoretical upper limit - there are transducers (like small speakers) which can transmit 100 megahertz ultrasound. The very high ultrasound signals are used mainly for non-destructive testing of solids. Ultrasound can be transmitted for mind control purposes in these ways: - directly through the air using "air type transducers" - directly to the brain using a modulated microwave pulse train - through the air by piggybacking an ultrasound message on top of commercial radio or television The use of commercial radio or television requires that the input signal at the transmitter be relatively powerful, since radio and TV receivers are not designed to pass on ultrasound messages. However, the average radio and TV receiver does not simply stop ultrasound, rather, the ability to pass ultrasound messages "rolls off", i.e. degrades, as the frequency is increased. Today's radios and TVs can carry enough ultrasound messaging to be "heard" by the human brain (though not the ear) to be effective in conveying hypnosis. This was proven by the U.S. military forces in the Gulf War. Ultrasound's main advantage in mind control work is that it can carry HYPNOSIS. Take a telephone voice converter which can convert a deep voice to a high-pitched voice. Tune the converter so that the high pitch is just above the top of the human hearing range. The brain CAN "hear" and understand this inaudible voice, while the ear cannot. Once you can convey hypnotic suggestion which cannot be consciously heard, you have eliminated a major barrier to the subject's acceptance of the words being transmitted. In previous decades, "subliminal advertising" using voice and images at normal frequencies were "time sliced" into an apparently normal radio or TV broadcast. This apparently did not work well, as the articles about the Gulf War's use of "Silent Sound" show ultrasound as superior.

One method for projecting either audible voice or ultrasound voice over long distances, virtually undectable if line of sight, is the "acoustic heterodyne" or "HyperSonic Sound" system, patented by American Technologies Corporation, San Diego CA, http://www.atcsd.com

Appended articles: US1 http://home.nas.net/~raven1/silsoun2.htm, ITV Silent Sound report with comments by Judy Wall, Editor, Resonance, newsletter of MENSA's bioelectromagnetic special interest group Up to Contents =========================================================================== VII. THROUGH-WALL RADAR When "millimeter wave" microwave signals are received, the waves are so small that they can display a two-dimensional outline of an object. Lower frequency radar can only show a "blip" which indicates an object's presence or motion, but not it's outline. A millimeter wave dish acts as a camera lens to focus incoming millimeter wave signals on to a plate with a two-dimensional array of elements sensitive to millimeter wave frequencies, in exactly the same way a camera focusses light on to a piece of film. Each of the sensitive elements is scanned in a definite order, just as with a TV camera and screen, and a picture showing the outline of an object is formed. If no signal is sent out by the scanner, it is called "passive" millimeter wave radar. If the subject is illuminated by a separate source of millimeter wave signals, it is an "active" scanner. Since passive systems can penetrate clothing and non-conductive walls UNDETECTABLY, it is obvious that with just a small millimeter wave "flashlight", non-conductive walls can be scanned through and still very little detectable signal is present. Millimeter wave through-clothing, through-luggage is currently in use at airports. In addition to mind control experimental observation, millimeter wave scanners are ideal for stalkers and voyeurs, since the subject is portrayed in the nude. Millimeter wave scanners can be purchased from Millivision Corp., Northampton MA, info at http://www.millivision.com Appended articles: TWR1 http://home.nas.net/~raven1/lads.htm, LADS, Life Assessment Detector System, a product of VSE Corporation, can scan through more than a hundred feet of non-conductive or poorly-conductive material to detect a beating human heart TWR2 http://home.nas.net/~raven1/nij_p44.htm, Prototype version of the "radar flashlight", which is a more portable version of the LADS system above. Can also be used to illuminate a subject for use with a Millivision thru-clothing/thru-nonconductive wall scanner TWR3 http://home.nas.net/~raven1/millitec.htm, October 1995 blurb from Popular Mechanics, with photos showing hidden guns used for demo purposes (Millitech sold the rights to Millivision) Up to Contents =========================================================================== VIII. THOUGHT READING "Thought reading" appears to be one of the EASIER components of electronic mind control, given that commercial and unclassified thought reading devices are available and being actively developed. Thought reading is an enhanced version of computer speech recognition, with EEG waves being substituted for sound waves. The easiest "thought" reading is actually remote picking up of the electro- magnetic activity of the speech-control muscles. When we "say words to ourselves, silently", or, read a book, we can actually FEEL the slight sensations of those words in our vocal muscles - all that is absent is the passage of air. Coordinated speech signals are relatively strong and relatively consistent. The other kind of "thought reading", i.e. "MINING" someone's brain for information from a distance is SPECULATIVE. We targetted individuals have no way to verify that is happening, however, we do know that we are "fed" hypnotic signals to force consistent "neutral" content (but of different character than prior to becoming test subjects,) DREAMS. These forced, neutral content ("bland" content) dreams occur every single night and may represent the experimenters' efforts to have our experiences portray themselves in such dreams, in effect, MINING our experiences. Again, this is SPECULATION, but it seems very logical. Appendix TR4, referenced below, confirms the ability of current unclassified technology to actually see what a living animal sees, electronically. It is therefore extremely likely that these forced dreams can be displayed on the experimenters' screens in an adjacent apartment or adjacent house, (which are made obvious to the involuntary experimentee.) Finally, among the 300 known neuro-electromagnetic experimentees, we often have strangers either tell us what we are thinking, say they can pick up our broadcast thoughts, or tell us about events inside our homes at times when they could not have seen from the outside. BUGS are not used, and they have been searched for. =========================================================================== IX. IMPLANTS Electronic implants are actually one of the older forms of electronic mind control technology. Implants can either receive instructions via radio signals, passing them to the brain, or, can be interrogated via external radio signals to read brain activity at a distance. Many of the about 300 known involuntary neuro-electromagnetic experimentees do not have implants, but have an aggressive and thorough regimen of mind control effects anyway. IMPLANTS ARE STILL SIGNIFICANT, though, for these reasons: 1. Their use, since World War II and continuing to the present day, associated with MKULTRA atrocities, is a crystal clear indication that a MOTIVE POOL of unethical researchers has existed through the late 1970s. The same people, none jailed, are still working, by and large. The reader can see that the existence of the same motive pool is overwhelmingly likely, given that no social changes have occurred which would prevent that. 2. The fact that to date (autumn 1999) no victim who has had implants removed has ever been able to get custody of the removed implant shows that research programmes using implants are still quite active and obviously quite important to someone. See http://www.morethanconquerors.simplenet.com/MCF/, the Mind Control Forum for details on involuntary experimentees' implantation and removal experiences. 3. The use of implants shows that, in the field of involuntary human experimentation, not every perpetrator group has access to the most sophisticated (implant-less) technology. Since implants for beneficial purposes are actively being promoted by NIH, it is obvious they will not disappear any time soon. Appended articles: IMP1 http://home.nas.net/~raven1/centneur.htm, an article showing that human implantation is being done and even encouraged by the U.S. NIH (National Institutes of Health). While this public information is for the public good, it is a small step to move from publicly known and VOLUNTARY implantation to CONCEALED implantation for INvoluntary and criminal purposes. IMP2 http://home.nas.net/~raven1/italydoc.htm, a testimonial by an Italian psychiatrist who has been assisting involuntary experimentees; this doctor began by assisting [Satanic or other] ritual abuse victims. Apparently involuntary brain implantation is alive and well in Italy, why not elsewhere? Up to Contents =========================================================================== X. CONCLUSION Conclusion? While the documentary evidence in this report does not exactly "prove" we are being targetted by intelligence/defence contractors using classified electronic weapons, it certainly eliminates the argument that such devices are impossible or don't exist. Add in the experiences of victims of the Tuskegee untreated syphilis exper- iments, the feeding of radioactive food to uninformed U.S. citizens, and the atrocities perpetrated under the institutional/drug/child abuse phases of the CIA's MKULTRA programmes, and you have more than enough grounds to petition for an independent, open investigation. No doubt there were citizens of ancient Pompeii who argued that Vesuvius could not possibly erupt in their lifetimes. Faced with all the evidence, no honest government can afford to take the risk that electronic mind control activity may be happening, controlled from their own "back rooms". Eleanor White Up to Contents =========================================================================== XI. APPENDICES Up to Contents --------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPENDIX PM1 ... THE LIDA MACHINE Associated Press (Exact date not shown on copy but tests took place 1982/83) Loma Linda (Veterans Hospital research unit) San Bernardino County A Soviet device that bombards brains with low-frequency [Eleanor White's note: More likely radio frequency carrier which is modulated or pulsed at brain-entrainment rates] radio waves may be a replacement for tranquilizers and their unwanted side effects, says a researcher, but it's use on humans poses ethical and political questions. The machine, known as the LIDA, is on loan to the Jerry L. Pettis Memorial Veterans Hospital through a medical exchange program between the Soviet Union and the United States. Hospital researchers have found in changes behaviour in animals. "It looks as though instead of taking a valium when you want to relax yourself it would be possible to achieve a similar result, probably in a safer way, by the use of a radio field that will relax you" said Dr. Ross Adey, chief of research at the hospital. [Missing one line on the photocopy] ... manual shows it being used on a human in a clinical setting, Adey said. The manual says it is a "distant pulse treating apparatus" for psychological problems, including sleeplessness, hyper- tension and neurotic disturbances. The device has not been approved for use with humans in this country, although the Russians have done so since at least 1960, Adey Said. Low frequency radio waves simulate the brain's own electromagnetic current and produce a trance-like state. Adey said he put a cat in a box and turned on the LIDA. "Within a matter of two or three minutes it is sitting there very quietly ... it stays almost as though it were transfixed" he said. Tho hospital's experiment with the machine has be