- The American Conservative - https://www.theamericanconservative.com -

So THAT’S FBI Integrity!

Word is the FBI is merchandising a new cologne for men [1]. And it’s called Integrity.

[2]

This is what FBI integrity smelled like on April 19, 1993 [3]. Sort of like 76 burning men, women and children.

Sorry. I couldn’t help it. How we tend to forget.

Comments Disabled (Open | Close)

Comments Disabled To "So THAT’S FBI Integrity!"

#1 Comment By Jack Tracey On October 21, 2009 @ 9:20 am

It’s been a long time since I watched Waco: Rules of Engagement. If anyone can point to a rebuttal of that film’s facts or conclusions, I would be interested to read it, because I’d hate to believe that this really was just a massacre of innocent weirdos by Federal authorities who ignored level-headed and better-informed local authorities.

#2 Comment By Thomas O. Meehan On October 21, 2009 @ 10:01 am

Perhaps the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms can market an aftershave called BULLY?

#3 Comment By MattSwartz On October 21, 2009 @ 10:05 am

What they did there was criminal. They, along with the ATF, should have been completely liquidated and re-staffed after that, and that’s the gentlest imaginable remedy I could think of.

Had the ATF not had a racism scandal of it’s own at that time, it might have not been so eager to go after these putative “white supremacists” in Waco, none of whom I recall hearing say bad things about anyone of any race, although they might have done so at some point.

#4 Comment By Barney Rebble On October 21, 2009 @ 11:55 am

If I were a “hate America firster”, I would forget to mention that the fire we see was set by the Davidians themselves.

And the “mercy killing” bullet holes through the brains of the children, was because they were afraid the children might be shot by suddenly monstrously evil FBI agents, if they allowed the children to leave.

But if I were not a “hate America firster”, then like Kelley Vlahos, I would find that liars who lack integrity get my dander up.

#5 Comment By D On October 21, 2009 @ 12:42 pm

Barney,

What would have happened if the FBI/ATF had just ended the siege and withdrawn?

#6 Comment By Jack Tracey On October 21, 2009 @ 12:45 pm

Barney,
Have you watched the documentary I referred to? From what I recall, it contradicts all of those assertions. It has some pretty compelling video to back it up.

#7 Comment By MattSwartz On October 22, 2009 @ 12:08 am

Barney,

I know, right?

Click my name to see how the National Review, as well, blames America First.

[4]

And Robert Novak alludes to the government’s culpability as established fact?

[5]

And George Will seems to think the government handled things incorrectly, too?

[6]

If only we had some more “real conservatives” to save us from these “Blame America Firsters”. I guess when “America” lights a houseful of churchgoing adults and their children on fire, some people assume that blame is in order. Thank goodness you’re on the case…

#8 Comment By Barney Rebble On October 22, 2009 @ 2:51 am

Jack, Can we find information that “contradicts” (each other)?

Yes. Such as:

[7]

D, Is a soldier more likely to be shot during battle, or during surrender? I understand you would prefer we surrender worldwide, and then nobody gets shot. I understand that you would wish to blame evil individuals within the US government for all deaths at WACO.

I am more sympathetic to your point of view than you might give me credit for. My biggest problem with people like yourself and Kelley Vlahos is when I feel that you are attempting to deny that there might be more points of view than your own, and that through “snark”, you would wish to silence people who disagree with you.

#9 Comment By Jack Tracey On October 22, 2009 @ 11:16 am

Okay, Barney. Sorry if I sounded snarky, but I was really curious if you ever saw the documentary. For instance, it contains aerial thermal video footage that shows FBI/ATF smoke bombs starting the fires.

The potential danger of government power resides not just in evil individuals, but in individuals with good intentions who wield the power to coerce fellow citizens through violence.

Even a cover up is not necessarily evil in the mind of those perpetrating it. Think about it: you firmly believe in the importance of your agency’s mission, and you will do anything it takes to protect its image, knowing that a tarnished image inhibits your ability to serve the public.

#10 Comment By Barney Rebble On October 23, 2009 @ 10:16 am

Jack, you are one of the half dozen regular bloggers here, that I consider to occasionally be a lib-leaner, that I always enjoy, and usually agree with.

You said, “point to a rebuttal of that film’s facts or conclusions”, and I did that. I am disappointed that your comments seem almost to have ignored that.

My comments about snark were meant to be shared with the other blogger I was addressing.

I have no love lost for Bill CLinton, nor Janet Reno, no Eric Holder, as assistant AG at the time of the Waco Disaster, who helped in the coverup of some of the FBI misbehavior.

But a lot of the people who accused BUSH of taking out the Trade Towers by himself, seem to be on this site, some perhaps making the comments above. Agenda over truth, or even common sense, seems pretty nasty and nonsensical at times.

MattSwartz, I usually agree with you about half the time. I know I get more out of your comments when you are on your meds. You cited 3 opinion pieces, whose opinions seem to match yours, but add little or nothing to the facts we have assembled.

Check out the reference I made. That guy, since retired from the Military, was there, and we weren’t. He is inferring misbehavior by the FBI, but he is also directly contradicting the conspiracy theorists, and the Davidian Survivors who keep losing in court.

[7]

#11 Comment By Angela On October 25, 2009 @ 3:46 pm

The Branch Davidians hadn’t done anything wrong. The FBI had no legitimate reason to pay any attention at all to them.

Anybody who defends the FBI is the real America hater, because real Americans believe in freedom and liberty.