Question, have you done anything more substantial or in depth than a Wiki scan?
I have the advantage of it being within the range of my living memory, along with some of the subsequent response. But reading the Wikipedia articles is some of the most useful information, especially because it provides background on what sort of movement was camped out in that compound.
And yes I doubt what she has written and would hope that you would also, considering she holds no qualifications in the field of psychiatry or criminal investigations and offers articles for sale that she knows would be seen as conjecture in a court so she risks nothing but gains all.
You don't need any such credentials to report on child abuse. And other than it being potentially considered heresay, there's no reason you need those credentials to testify in a court of law (since that seems to be the standard you want to apply) about child abuse either. A court would want the child to testify rather than a third party, but I see no reason to suspect she's lying about what the children have told her.
I have spent many hours watching the tapes that were presented to the Congressional panel and reading statements of those that were brought before the panel...
And what did you find that made you think that the actions of federal agents were worse than driving a truck up to a building full of innocent people and blowing it up while you flee to safety? I mean, it would have to be seriously sinister stuff to be as bad as that.
if Wiki is good enough for you to prosecute someone I feel sorry for you and anyone else that would treat another persons life with so little value or respect,
I never said that it was. I'm challenging the way you make the comparison. If you feel that you have presented enough to justify your accusations against Janet Reno and other federal officials, by all means, leave it at that, but I am not satisfied, and therefore not persuaded. I would point out that you have offered less substance than I have to support your case, and in fact, you have suggested that I spend hours of my time chasing down some evidence of some so-far-unspecified wrongdoing by federal agents. If you really had something impressive, you'd have at least said what it is by now.
To be clear, what I am asking for is what you believe the federal agents did wrong. I'm willing to do some searching myself, but you need to point the way if you want me to find the evidence that you consider relevant.
and no I'm not going to do your homework for you..you wish to present your case for debate it is up to you to present it well enough to be believed. So far you have failed to do so.
Look, we each have our burdens to satisfy in order to persuade others, and on a forum post, we really aren't accountable to anyone but ourselves. In my case, I'm drawing from widely available public sources of information that I've read to draw conclusions about the group involved. I've provided those sources, and you haven't even said where you think they err. I'm open to persuasion that there is more to consider, but you haven't really even given me a reason to think that I'm missing something really important. I don't even know what sort of wrongdoing you're thinking of when you refer to the Congressional panel recordings, and you should recognize that I need some more serious reason to look that deep into it.
In your case, you have said that things which federal officials have done are worse than mass murder. If I were you, I'd want to justify that claim when challenged. But suit yourself.
