Waco Unraveling No. 5
There are many misleading claims amongst the current exposure of new informationGary Hunt,
Outpost of Freedom
September 29, 1999
Six years ago, a number of people made outlandish claims about certain events in Waco. One of the earliest was the claim that the milk, which had been sent in to the Davidians, during the siege, contained poison. The perpetrator of this misinformation admitted that he was trying to increase the public awareness of what was happening in Waco. I have wondered, since that time, whether such claims can help, or can only hurt the cause of bringing justice to the situation.
Deceit, fraud and guile have long been the tool of those who have taken control of our government. History is filled with the use of such means to achieve a desired end. Of course, only by blindness can one rationalize the necessity of these means. The methods are only evil in their nature.
This is not to say that the incentive to "sensationalize" certain circumstances cannot be accomplished without good motives. The motives above mentioned, as well as many of those who have, these past few days, attempted to bring light to certain evils, are, without a doubt, well intended.
Also, without doubt, is the reality that only the government is served by such claims. For, if the claim is false, it, surely, will eventually be exposed. That exposure leaves those who espouse these theories, those who believe them, and, those who associate with them in a position of ridicule -- causing some who might have joined the cause to distance themselves, not wishing to be associated with these "false accusers".
There is little merit to the argument that by presenting the theory, perhaps some light will be shed that will prove it out. It is more likely that it will reflect on the source"s inability to thoroughly research the matter.
A friend, and patriot, who has helped me in some of my investigations, once compared the Patriot Community to those who remained at the base of the mountain when Moses received the Ten Commandments. In Moses" absence, they chose to hear the "words that fell softly on their ears," he said.
There are, however, many who have in the past, and will in the future, look into such claims and see merit to them. Some will, in time, realize the error in the evidence, others might only relinquish their assertions after overwhelming proof to the contrary becomes evident. When such proof comes into existence, those who are willing to admit their error are more worthy of praise than those who meekly walk away, ignoring the contradiction to the claims, as well as the claims, themselves. The former is now learned in the ways of deceit. The latter, well, he will probably follow the same course at some future date.
Ian Goddard has proven himself to be one of the former. When confronted with evidence, he chose not to resist, rather to investigate further. His article on the bomb theory is, now, deserving as much merit as his articles on the TWA 800 downing.
It is with this in mind that OPF has chosen to discuss some of these theories, as they begin to surface.
