Time: Tue Dec 02 08:11:11 1997 To: From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: SLS: The Waco Incident (fwd) Cc: Bcc: sls References: <snip> > >The murders at Waco. The lid comes off. > >It's all here, folks -- the burning, the gassing, the missing >videotape. If there is any justice, the lid is about to come off >this. If not, well, you'll know what kind of baby killers are running >the government. If nothing else, read the moving poem at the end. If >you're not in a rage after reading this, there is something wrong. >Call your Congressional people, call your local media. If they don't >wake up, they will be next. YOU will be next. > > >JH - Jerry Hughes, host >DH - David Hall, KPOC-TV, Ponca City, Oklahoma >XX - Caller >[ ] - Infrequent comments, explanation of references (to other shows >or > guests or office holders] > >=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/=/ >"Washington On Trial" > >Air date - August 2, 1994 > >[Opening music: Drum and fife playing "Yankee Doodle"] > >JH: And good evening Mr. and Mrs. America, to all our ships at sea. >>From the Peoples' Radio Network we welcome you to "Washington On >Trial". Good evening, America. I'm Jerry Hughes. Thank you for >allowing us to share this time with you. Wherever you might be across >our grand old Republic or anywhere in the world this evening, we >welcome you to tonight's program. > From Texas to Idaho, from California to Maine, we thank those >great affilliate stations for making it all possible. > > You'll remember, ladies and gentlemen, about a month ago we talked >with David Hall. Mr. Hall is the General Manager of KPOC television >in Ponca City, Oklahoma, and Mr. Hall and his daughter were guests on >our program. > His daughter Christina [sp?], an investigative reporter doing a >lot of work in the area of Waco, investigating in the aftermath of the >Mt. Carmel or the Waco massacre or tragedy, as it has come to be >called now, for the production of a videotape, a special video, or a >special program I should say that was going to be shown not only on >KPOC, but certainly hopefully on many other television stations across >the nation. We are honored once again to have Mr. David Hall with us >this evening for an update on what has been going on and perhaps we'll >be finding out about the broadcast times or telecast times of that >program. Mr. Hall, good evening. > >DH: How are you, Jerry? > >JH: Real good, sir, and yourself? > >DH: Fine. > >JH: Fantastic. I guess it was about the end of June that we last >talked. What has happened since then? > >DH: Well, of course, we've been busy putting our story together, and >working on a Senate report that we intend to deliver to the Senate >Judiciary Committee next week. Basically we have busy completing that >and have all of our information developed, and our story is expected >to be completed by the end of this week. I heard you mention the >broadcast date -- that's going to be September 19th. It'll be a >two-hour show and I think probably 8:00 Eastern time. It will air. . >.of course, hopefully we will have heard something from the Senate by >that time. We've been in touch, I have, back and forth, almost daily, >with different members of Congress and people in Washington that >basically want to hear the story, and I think that we're going to get >something done. . . I feel confident with the talks that I've had with >people in Washington. > >JH: All right, now the last we talked, I believe the following day, >the next day, Christina was supposed to go to the compound, and I >believe she had a court order, or was hoping to have a court order, >that would allow her in to look at some -- I want to say some barrels >or some containers? > >DH: That's correct. We went to Waco, McClellan County Court. We did >present evidence that we had that possibly criminal acts had been done >in the State of Texas by the Justice Department. We presented that to >Judge McDonald in McClellan County over the objections of the state >attorney there and we did prevail. He certainly gave us entrance to >the complex there. We did gather information that we felt was needed. >We used an arson expert from Oklahoma, and he basically did his >investigation. We also took a criminal investigator in with us and >obtained information. > Also at that time we did, as I recall they recovered remains of >two other bodies, and of course those were turned over to the coroner >there. > >JH: Let me stop you stop you just a minute. You mean there were still >the remains of two bodies at the scene, and this is now into the >beginning of July of this year? > >DH: That is true. There are still bodies, parts of bodies or parts of >remains still there. People that were working there, being as we had >the control of the complex, we still are receiving some of the >remains. > >JH: Let me get this straight. April 19, 1993, was the fire and the >end of the Mt. Carmel church. We were told that all of the bodies and >all of the remains had been removed and autopsies had been performed >on most if not all of them shortly thereafter. Now you're telling me >that you and/or your daughter and/or a news crew, an investigative >crew along with an arson detective, entered that compound with a court >order in July of this year, one year and two months after the fact, >and there were still unrec overed bodies? > >DH: They're not total bodies, Jerry. They're remains that have been >burned up, bones, such as that, and pelvic areas. That basically is >what we found. Even as late as two weeks ago, our company -- some of >the remains were being sent to us -- our criminal investigator has >taken control of those, and we intend to bury them here in Oklahoma. > >JH: Let me ask you to hold just a moment as we take a break. > >[BREAK] > >JH: Ladies and gentlemen, again we thank you for allowing us to be >with you this evening. Conferenced in is David Hall, General Manager >of KPOC television, Ponca City, Oklahoma, the television station that >had been doing a good bit of investigative work in the area of Waco. >On September 19th of this year, they will be airing a two-hour program >on that. Mr. Hall has been in touch with numerous members of Congress >and officials in Washington, DC. If you are just joining us, we found >out just before the break that while the Waco tragedy climaxed on >April 19th of last year, a year and two months later at the beginning >of July of this year, entering that compound with a court order, an >investigative team from KPOC along with other individuals accompanying >them, found at least partial human remains still on scene. Mr. Hall, >could you tell, could any of your experts tell, were the remains of >adults or children? > >DH: We think that part of them were children and possibly two adults >thus far. That's what we know. We've had doctors look at what we >have here and we have the partial remains of a child here, and some >other, possibly adult bones, here also. > >JH: Sir, that's awfully sloppy of the United States government. > >DH: Well, it's terrible. It's horrendous. Of course the whole thing >-- we now have a full picture of what happened at Waco. You know, we >hired experts to, basically chemists. . .we've had a report from Dr. >George Ulich [sp?] who's a professor at Price University in Utah. We >know exactly what happened to the people today. I don't know if we >got into that area before when we talked, about the breakdown of the >CS gas. . . > >JH: To the best of my recollection, in the breakdown of the CS, in the >propellant agent that was used, in the fire, etc., there was the >manufacture in kind of a natural response to all these elements, a >natural manufacture of cyanide gas, is that correct? > >DH: That's correct. These people had much. . .many of them had lethal >doses of cyanide and others had incapacitating doses of cyanide. Ten >parts per million, anything above that is incapacitating. Two hundred >parts per million of cyanide is basically dead. Some of these people >had well within the realm of being dead. What is confusing is how >they have bullet holes in them. That has bothered pathologists here, >and two doctors that we've had look at them. We're not real sure what >happened there, and we can't make any statements because we don't >know. > >JH: You mentioned a moment ago that you took an arson investigator >with you. I know that no doubt you'll be mentioning that on the 19th >on the program and I don't wish to ask you to divulge anything that >you would wish to hold until then, but can you give us an >investigation as to what the arson investigator found out? > >DH: Well, we found that. . .we have video that has been furnished to >us by a station in Texas that we're analyzing, it's the start of it. >We know for a fact that the fire did not start where Paul Gray, the >arson investigator that was hired by the ATF, stated that it was. We >have that plainly on FBI video and also 35 millimeter shots. We know >where the fire started, and we also have, we've determined basically >that probably. . .it would be totally a guess on my part at this time, >but in talking with our investigator, we feel like a polytechnic, I >think, device was used to start that fire. And it was started it >three locations. The fire started before . . .we have some other >video that shows the fire started before the time frame in which they >said it was. > >JH: Can you tell if the fire was started internally or externally? > >DH: We feel. . .well, the fire was certainly started on the inside, >but not by the Davidians. Of course that would be totally against >their religion. The FBI even states that on videotape. Bob Ricks >says that this would bound these people for hell eternal, so they're >not going to do this, and we know that. Another interesting thing was >that we had talked last week to the state fire marshall's office at >Austin, Texas. His people had gone out to investigate that fire and >they turned them away. I guess at that time they brought Paul Gray in >who was a former ATF agent. His wife is presently employed by the >ATF, so that was the "independent" investigation that the government >did. That will also be noted in our report. Our arson investigator >totally disagrees with how the fire started and what he states, so I >think we put his report to rest and started looking for really what >happened there. We do now have some officials that are ready to come >forward that have contacted us in the last two weeks and tell the >story to the Senate, and we intend to march those people before the >Senate. For those reasons we have people that were involved that are >now ready to talk and tell the truth, and we believe that something is >going to happen. I don't think this can be pushed under the rug any >further. Also it might be interesting to note that beyond our program >we've been in touch with other people that also have programs going >tomorrow night that we have furnished video for and information, and >those programs will air tomorrow evening on A&E Network and ABC, and >they're going to be also critical of the government's handling of >Waco. > >JH: We're going to take a break, but when we come back in just a >minute, you have answered part of the question, but if I might allow >you to think about it for a couple of minutes. . .in the aftermath, >here we are a year and a couple of months later, has anyone come >forward, or did you find anyone who has now admitted after the fact, >"We really messed up. We were too strong in what we did or the wrong >orders were given" . . .anything along that line. > >[Break] > >JH: We're talking with David Hall, General Manager of KPOC television >in Ponca City, Oklahoma, and one of his crews from the television >station has been working on an update on Waco that is going to be >aired on the 19th of September. Before the break, the question, has >in the aftermath -- here we are a little over a year and two months >later -- has anyone come forward and said, "We really messed up. We >were given the wrong orders, we issued the wrong orders, we followed >the wrong orders, the government was really out to get those folks" -- >anything along that line? > >DH: We have two people that have come forward, both officials, and >both have talked with myself and another investigator and one >investigator in Washington. These people have enlightened us very >much on what happened at Waco, why it happened, and are willing to go >before the Senate. At this time I have to keep their names quiet, but >they certainly intend to go before the Senate and the information that >they are armed with -- they were participants -- and will, I think >totally discredit the trial at Waco, Texas, before Judge Walter Smith. >The attorneys there, the U.S. attorneys as well as the ATF and the >FBI, they're very much involved, these people were, at high levels. > >JH: Can you tell us, without divulging their position or their >occupation or anything along that line, can you tell us what area of >conflict there would be between what the government has said and what >these folks might be indicating? > >DH: Well, what they're going to say, I think, basically the >information they're going to give will be totally shoring up what we >have said all along, plus other plans that were laid aside that would >have saved the people and these plans were laid aside with the intent >of gassing these people. The interesting thing about this CS gas, in >our report from Dr. George Ulich, he tells us that 40 cannisters from >a 40 millimeter gun, or whatever it is they shoot them with into the >building, would have produced sufficient amount cyanide under the >conditions to actually incapacitate these people. . .which would have >been about a quart. So we know that they used ten to thirty 55-gallon >drums of this. Now, I don't know if I made the statement before, but >the chemical company that manufactures says that never in the history >of their company has this chemical ever been used or abused in this >manner, and it is totally not to be used inside a building. So they >fortified [testified?] that they knew all these things and they took >that chance and the kids were not of any concern at the time when they >did this. Their intent was to bring this building down and bring this >thing to an end, regardless of the outcome. > >JH: I've just done some quick math here. You're saying that one quart >would have been sufficient. From one 55-gallon drum, of course we >know there would be 220 quarts. So we know that somewhere between >2,200 times and 6,600 times than was necessary was used. > >DH: Exactly. That's the overwhelming thing about the whole thing. >You know, their S.W.A.T. manual -- we have obtained a copy of it -- >and in it, it tells them not to use this CS gas inside a complex. >It's totally for riot control out in the open air. It tells all the >things that we have stated that could happen if it's used inside, and >of course all those things did happen. > >JH: So what we have is a situation where there could only be three >options. One, somebody deliberately chose to go against procedure and >use a deadly gas inside. Two, someone was incompetent to make the >decision. Three, someone really messed up. In either instance >there's negligence, isn't there? > >DH: There's negligence, no question about it, and I think it borders >along the lines of homicide operating under the color of law. We had >a vigilante group out there, in my estimation. > >JH: Mr. Hall, let me ask you to hold right there, and we'll come back >in a couple of minutes. > >[Break] > >JH: If you are just joining us, our guest is David Hall. Mr. Hall is >the general manager of KPOC television in Ponca City, Oklahoma, and we >are talking about the work that KPOC has done in the aftermath of the >Waco tragedy. Further investigation, and what the outcome has been, >and of course they will be telecasting the program on September 19th, >a two-hour program about that. Mr. Hall, to the best of my >recollection, there were quite a few discrepancies that your team had >found between what really happened, or what the evidence is showing >happened, and what the federal government had told us all along, or >the government spokesman, Mr. Ricks or whomever it might have been. >Would that be accurate? > >DH: That's exactly right. All throught that siege, what we were being >told I would have to say they were dishonest at the very best, and of >course going back over it now we find the things that actually did >happen, and they made every effort in the world to cover that up. >There also, we feel like, Texas state officials that should certainly >be indicted over the deaths of these children. There's no person that >can tell me these children were guilty of anything. Did they deserve >to be shot at, cyanided and burned? No, I don't think so. These kids >were ten years old and under -- seventeen of them out there -- at the >hands of the government . . .men that knew well, and you asked about >the three options that they had. . .they had many, many options that >they could have taken to avert the situation. The act there was >deliberate to put this cyanide in there or put this CS gas which >turned to cyanide and the potency of that would be -- people back east >and probably some of the areas in the Appalachians would know -- the >potency of that was like coal dust. It's compared in Dr. George >Ulich's report to us as being the potency of coal dust, what it will >do. The structure, the way it was ventilated, was an actual act to >give a backdraft so that you would create a flash fire. Again, this >with chemistry was done many, many times in tests of these kinds of >things to create flash fires, explosions, things like that, and that's >in the field of kinetics. > >JH: All right, the government would treat us as though maybe we just >fell off a turnip truck on the way into town. They told us that they >had nothing to do with the fire. They told us that the fire was >started by Branch Davidians on the inside, and yet if we use just a >little bit of common sense -- just a little bit -- > >DH: That's all it takes. > >JH: -- they denied access for about 30 minutes or so, or there was a >period of about 30 minutes once the fire broke out before the fire >companies were called, and they did not have any on-scene, in fact had >cancelled them. It's my understanding that they had called area >hospitals, either the morning of or the previous day and had asked >specifically, "How are you equipped to handle burn victims and how >many can you handle?". Now this was before the fire. If we use a >little bit of common sense, first question, is that correct. >Secondly, if we use a little bit of common sense, do they really think >we're foolish enough to believe that this was started by the Davidians >or that it was an accident when they did not allow fire trucks, when >they did not allow someone to be on hand to protect against fire and >when they called about treatment of fire victims? > >DH: The answers to the statement you made are absolutely correct. >They did call Parkland Memorial Hospital. We have an interview with >the supervisor in the burn unit who they talked with that morning and >she plainly states in our interview with her, which is on videotape, >that they called her at 5:55 wanting to know about beds available in >the burn unit and helicopters . . .what size helicopters could land on >the pad, which is on top of the building. This was well four or five >hours before the fire ever started. Getting to the point where the >fire trucks come out -- the fire trucks come out thirty minutes into >the fire like you stated. They then held the fire trucks thirty >minutes. . . > >JH: And by that time it was too late. > >DH: Well, the building had already burned. But there was a reason for >that. The reason being George Ulich, again, our chemistry professor, >in his report to the Senate, said it was a good idea on the >government's part. Had they have shot water on that flaming inferno, >it would have caused a hydrogen cyanide cloud, a steam cloud, which >could have drifted over many miles around, and you take three or four >breaths of it and you're down. So they knew what they were doing. >There's no question but they knew what'd happen. I don't think >there's any rebuttal to that. All of the acts that they did on that >day goes. . .it falls right in line with their own manuals. So they >made the thing happen, and made it at best look like an accident, >which we know today it was not an accident. > >JH: All right, I'm going to assume that probably in the course of >getting the information together for your project, for your >documentary or your special, that you probably interviewed some Texas >officials, and maybe U.S. government officials who had a direct role >in that -- very probably you have confronted them with a good bit of >the information which you have subsequently found out. . .did they >come clean or did they still say, "Oh no, we did the right thing, we >did what had to be done, and we're proud of what we did."? > >DH: No, I don't have them telling me that today. Early on when we >started, Christina had that, but she knew something was afoul. At >that time they were basically going with the same thing, that the >Davidians had started the fire. But again, even common sense here, >they knew what was going on. They had listening devices, they had >small cameras inserted into the walls, they knew everything that was >going on inside the compound. Many, many times they stated that they >were using coal oil lanterns in there. So with those tanks running >back and forth as battering rams, even if we give them this and say it >was an accident, they knew exactly what they were doing. It was >negligence on their part to go ahead and shoot the CS in, knowing how >flammable it was, knowing it would create cyanide, knowing they had >flame in there. We don't believe that the coal oil lamps started the >fire. We think that we have videotape that shows totally different >than that. Again, that has been supplied to us by a Texas station. > >JH: I read a report, and maybe you can confirm this, we knew that they >had brought in, the BATF and marshall, the FBI, the federal >authorities, we know they had brought in the surveillance aircraft >from England. I read a report on that particular aircraft that was >recently declassified, and according to the information I have, not >only could they pinpoint the whereabouts of the individuals inside >through infrared, etc., that this aircraft, flying high overhead, had >a rather unique capability to actually hear what was going on inside. >Now we also know of course they had implanted into the walls and >structure some microphones, too, and some cameras, but they used some >rather sophisticated equipment that heretofore no one has heard >anything about. There was some concern that a lot of the things that >were used were of military make, military manufacture, or of military >preference, let's say -- in violation of the Posse Comitatus law. We >know that Ann Richards ["Ma" Richards, Governor of Texas] provided >some National Guard helicopters. Originally it's our understanding >that she was told that there was a drug lab in the church or in the >complex. Later of course we found that obviously to be false, and yet >she never withdrew the hardware. Have you been able to find out >anything about the use of military and military equipment? We heard >the story that possibly Delta Force people were there. We've heard >that possibly individuals from either SEAL teams or Ranger teams were >there. A lot of it is rumor perhaps, but let's get into that when we >come back. > >[Break] > >JH: David Hall is with us this evening, ladies and gentlemen. Mr. >Hall, any information on why members of the military -- we do >understand, as a matter of fact, please confirm or if you have found >otherwise, shoot it down -- that there certainly was contact with >Delta Force members or planning people or possibly even Delta Force >people on the scene. > >DH: I'm going to tell you -- you had two questions, first the >airplane. That airplane I'm not real sure about the capabilities of >the plane. I do know that they used that to take infrared pictures, >which were vital at the trial. We now have witnesses and people that >actually witnessed this tape being edited by the U.S. government >before it was presented to the trial, as well as the audio tapes that >were used for surveillanced which would be worth noting. > >JH: So they did edit the tapes before they presented them. Now did >they edit them for brevity, or did they edit them for content? > >DH: They edited them for content. The funny thing was that right >after the trial, it was discovered that four minutes 40 seconds was >missing out of that infrared tape. > >JH: That's the period of time that the fire started? > >DH: Exactly. And now we can prove that they did this. We also have a >signature on a document from Ray Young [sp?] admitting that they had >lost four minutes 40 seconds of that tape. > >JH: Lost, quote unquote or lost deliberately or. . . > >DH: Lost quote unquote. > >JH: Okay. > >DH: How do you lose, you know, four minutes 40 seconds? It's cut, >just cut out. And so that much we know about the plane, and that was >a British airplane. Navy SEALS certainly were there, we have firemen >at TSDC [?] that tell us they were there. Of course they were there >all the time. The intelligence network of several countries was >there. I had no understanding why they would be there. Even our own >Army intelligence was there. Of course, the Navy SEALS, there was >Delta Force people were there. > >JH: Isn't that against the law, sir? > >DH: It's against the law to use the military in a police action. We >know that fifteen military Ft. Hood people were used there. We know >that the Abrams tank came from the U.S. military. That by Major >O'Rourke [sp?] of Ft. Hood, Texas said that on our tape. > >JH: Now the FBI, and the government said their people handled the >equipment. Their people were just there as advisors, thereby skirting >the Posse Comitatus. Is that true? Were they there as advisors? > >DH: They were there as workers. > >JH: They were hands on? > >DH: They were hands on. We have one helicopter pilot we've talked >with who was active reserve that was reactivated back and assigned to >Ft. Hood and assigned to that particular job. So they were involved >more than the FBI would lead you to believe. So we have the U.S. >military in a police action against the citizens of the United States, >which, to me, violates the Constitution of the United States. They >can argue all they want, but I take the Constitution to mean exactly >what it says, and we don't deviate from that, and I get scared when >that happens. > >JH: Oh, absolutely. > >DH: And I think that many, many people around the United States should >be scared. When you get the military involved, well, what happens is >Waco, and if we allow those things to go unheeded, unattended, so to >speak, without outcry, it's going to happen more and more and more. >The government has accellerated its attacks against any Christian, >religious group, whatever it might be. We've seen that happen over >the years, back when they started taking prayer out of schools, and >it's just got worse. We're to this point now, so it's waking up -- I >know I've woke up a lot in the last year. I thought we had a good >government. I still say we have a good government, but we've got some >bad people we have to eradicate and that's my thinking on that. Also >there was the CIA, and what their involvement was we don't know. I >think that the Congress or Senate -- it's going to take somebody with >the power of the law behind them. Honest men to sort this thing out >and find out why all these people were involved. > >JH: Bottom line question for this segment. From what you have found, >from the people you have talked with, from the evidence you have >gathered, from the tapes -- the video tapes and audio tapes you have >seen and heard -- from no doubt the data you have read and such, can >you tell me, was it a federal official/field commander, a commander of >the U.S. military who was on-scene, or the Attorney General of the >United States who decided to go ahead and call the shot which >basically ended up killing the kids? > >DH: We're still bouncing that around amongst ourselves and among three >Congressmen as to what knowledge she [Attorney General Janet Reno] had >of the CS gas. We know the field commanders belong in jail. We know >that. They knew that -- Saraman [sp?], Royster [sp?], Bob Ricks, >those people I intend to, if it's within my power, to see those people >in jail -- Higgins -- we've found now that some of these people that >they've put off with retirement or with pay have now went back to work >and are drawing full pay and just sitting around twiddling their >thumbs. These people certainly that were put off with pay certainly >belong in jail, and I believe that Bob Ricks belongs in jail. I'll >state that out plainly and some of the ATF there's no question that >they -- the field commanders -- I don't believe that the man out there >in the field really realized what he was doing. I think that they >went out on a job and probably the ATF in this case at the very first >was wrong, but it was even worse on day 51 -- that was, to me, they >have given law enforcement the blackest eye in the history of this >country, this group of men down there. > >JH: Let me ask you to hold it there, sir, as we take a break. > >[Break] > >JH: Next hour we'll be taking your calls. Mr. Hall has graciously >agreed to be with us next hour to answer questions you might have. >Sir, you mentioned a moment ago that you probably had had a little bit >of a change of mind about our government. Let me explore that just a >little bit more. We know that every year the United States State >Department comes out with a list of nations that violate human rights, >and those are nations that we are not supposed to be full trading >partners with, or at least we're supposed to do what we can to try to >correct that. One of the nations on the list was Mexico, and one of >the reasons Mexico was on there was because the government sometimes >is rather severe on its citizens. Sometimes they will incarcerate >them without provocation, sometimes they will torture them, and >sometimes they will kill them. Were the human rights violations of >Mexico any different, or the human rights violations of China -- the >people who were killed in Tienanmen Square, or in the aftermath of >that, who were executed -- are those human rights violations any >different than what our government did in Waco in your estimation, >now, after looking at the evidence? > >DH: You know, I'm going to have to say probably not at all. No >different at all. Worse. We've been brought up different as >Americans, you know, to stand up for human rights, and these men down >there were brought up just like you and I were, in God and country, >and to do those atrocities and . . .you know, while this was going on >on the 19th, I had to think about this, our president was dedicating a >monument in Washington, DC to the Holocaust victims at the same time >he was burning up these people in Waco, Texas, on that very day. I >don't know if people were aware of that or not. But to me, it was >almost genocide here, and I would call it genocide. I'm sick to death >of this type of action by our government. I wasn't privy to >information a year ago that I am today, and so I'm taking totally a >different look at government. I'm investigating government anywhere I >see wrongdoing, and I'll bring it out, be it local or state or >federal. I feel like we're under a threat from the government. It's >got too big, and when they turn on the people that way, it's time for >the people to act. I think we have to do that with due process, but I >think that they've excited enough people where, the circles that I've >been in in the last six months tells me that there's an army of people >out there, probably a bigger army of people that are fed up with >government and these people are armed, and that scares me also. I >don't own a gun, but I certainly believe that every citizen has a >right to own a gun and this almost puts me in a position of believing >that a person ought to buy one if they don't own one. Back in 1938, >Hitler started disarming the people and what we had was was genocide >and the Holocaust, and we're just seeing history repeat itself, and >we're just sitting here watching it happen. We're going down to buy >our new cars, we're going to the movies, we're going there, going >here, just letting all these things happen. > >[The original assault on the compound was 50 years to the day after >the Nazis stormed the Jews in the ghettos in the same fashion -- both >were wearing the black helmets, too. Some of the Jews had guns and >took out a few Nazis, which is why the Nazis used the gas and flooded >the sewers. The Jews formed a "militia"!] > >JH: Not only sir, not only did the president on that same day dedicate >the Holocaust museum, but almost to the hour 218 years, on the day 51 >of Waco, on that April 19th morning of 1775, some farmers met some >Redcoats at a bridge near Lexington and Concord, and the action to >make sure that we would live free, the action to make sure that we >would in fact be a free and independent Nation with liberty for all of >us began. Well. 218 years later, we know what happened. Stay with us >ladies and gentlemen. We'll be back next hour with your calls. > >[Break] > >JH: Again, ladies and gentlemen, we welcome you to "Washington On >Trial" from the Peoples' Radio Network. Hello, America. I'm Jerry >Hughes, and thank you for joining us this evening. Our guest this >evening ladies and gentlemen is Mr. David Hall. Mr. Hall is the >General Manager of KPOC television in Ponca City, Oklahoma, a >television station that has done a tremendous amount of investigative >work and has produced a two-hour program on Waco, what really >happened. A two-hour program that will be airing on the 19th of >September. Our lines are open this evening, toll-free across the >United States of America at 1-800-TALK-YES, 1-800-825-5937. When you >dial that number, you're going to reach our satellite uplink facility >which is inside the turn-of-the-century Telford Hotel, on the banks of >the Suwannee River in White Springs, Florida. Jay Corley, our >producer, who, as always is doing an excellent job will take your call >this evening, and he'll make the necessary connection so that we can >get on the air tonight. Mr. Hall, are you ready to take some calls >from folks across the country? > >DH: Sure. > >JH: Let's go to Orangeburg, South Carolina. Randy, good evening. > >XX: How are you doing, Jerry? > >JH: All right, sir, and yourself? > >XX: Fine. I enjoy your show. > >JH: Thank you. > >XX: Mr. Hall, I want to know what you all heard about Linda Thompson >lately. > >[Linda is planning a "march" on Washington during the second week of >September. It is supposed to consist of armed members of the Militia. >The object is to convince members of Congress that they must uphold >the Oath they took to protect and defend the Constitution of the >United States, and to arrest them if they don't. The group will also >demand, among other things, repeal of NAFTA, the Brady Law (already >challenged in several court cases and on its way out), and an >investigation into Waco. Although agreeing in principle, most >populist groups distance themselves from her methods. They feel an >armed group will create a bloodbath and increased (and immediate) >disarming of the populace. > >She is also the main force behind the most popular videotapes on Waco. >Although there are some small errors (the "flamethrowing tank" for >instance), 99.99% of the facts on the tape are accurate.] > >[The "march" was called off, and Linda is pretty much discredited by >just about everybody.] > >DH: I haven't heard anything about Linda Thompson. I don't really >know. . . I talked with Linda once or twice. I don't know Linda very >well. > >XX: I was calling to try to learn. . .I know the network used to say >the video she had out was pretty good, and it may be. But I'm afraid >that this armed march she's calling for on Washington is something >that's going to get a lot of people in trouble. I don't think it's >the right move for the time yet. > >JH: Randy, I certainly agree with you. I'm sure Mr. Hall would agree. >In fact, I think any sensible American -- and I mean not to slight >anyone by that, it's my opinion -- but you're absolutely right. It is >not the thing to do. There are a lot of things we could still do, >hoping and praying that that day will never come. > >XX: That's right. > >JH: As we mentioned a moment ago, it was 218 years when the Mt. Carmel >fire began, 218 years previous to that, at about the same time of the >day, the men at Lexington and Concord, the farmers of America, met the >British. The British said, "Give us your guns." Until that time, no >one in America had pretty well bothered anybody in the sense of a >violent fashion. We have not reached anything near that, and again I >hope that certainly all good common-sense folks will work within the >system to change the system, because I still believe that it can be >done. Sir, I appreciate your taking the time to call. > >XX: I've heard you say that before, and I agree with you, and I just >wanted people out there that will listen, not to make this move. It >is not the time to make this move yet. The day might come, but I >don't think as yet. > >JH: I agree with you, sir. Hopefully it will never come, but if it >
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail