Skip to comments.Ruby Ridge...documentary films?
Posted on 03/20/2007 5:48:06 PM PDT by Chasaway
Good evening, Freepers.
I just watched a documentary on the Ruby Ridge/Randy Weaver fiasco with my family. I'd like to get some recommendations from you folks on some other good documentary films about it.
My kids are too young to remember any of this (or actually even be AROUND for it) and I want to put some of this kind of stuff in perspective for them.
A year or so ago, we did the whole Waco/Rules of Engagement route to try to get our arms around that whole thing. And then when we watched this little hour-long thing about Ruby Ridge tonight, it made my son get out his guns and start cleaning them. (Had kind of a crazy look in his eye, too. And he's generally a pretty calm kid.)
It may sound a bit like I'm trying to indoctrinate, but I'm really not. I just want my kids to know what the government can do and what it can be like. They've already seen the "nanny-state" side of the government. I want them to understand the flip side, too.
So...all that being said, I'm looking for documentaries or films that tell the story pretty well. We'll probably watch the movie with Randy Quaid as Weaver (although I really didn't like that one when I saw it the first time), but I'd like some really good documentaries that you've seen and appreciate/respect.
Any help or ideas would be really appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
I think I "oopsed" on this. It's supposed to just be a vanity post. If it needs to be moved, would you do so?
Waco: The Big Lie is fantastic.
Death and Taxes, which is about Gordon Kahl, has good info but is rambling and incoherent.
pinging myself to check back on this thread later.
Actually, yes. I was following that thread for most of its existence.
Admittedly, I was puzzled by many of the comments that seemed to take Weaver's oddities - whether religious or social - and make them license for an almost unbelievable (literally!) overreaction by law enforcement. I understand that he acted and talked WAY out the mainstream (as did the folks at Waco), and that he was so "rural" that folks in the big city might see him as dangerous, and that he was so far removed geographically that they might see "good riddance" as a real, "okay" response to what happened.
However, I don't agree. I don't share his beliefs and he could have made some different decisions. But he didn't shoot his son, his wife and his friend. To lay the blame on him solely, or even largely, is mistaken, IMHO.
Long answer to your short question, huh? Yes, I was following the thread the other day, and then I saw the show was on tonite. After watching it with my kids, I realized they might need a little more on the subject.
Randy Weaver said the government was out to get him so he moved his family into the woods, lowered his profile and they still found him. Guess he was right.
Weaver wrote a book on teh subject that you should be able to track down.
Also, Unintended Consequences has an extensive factual account of the event, with a firearms perspective. (The whole book is excellent, but contains some lurid sections that are inappropriate for children.)
You may also want to look into the past of the current Governor of Massachusetts, if you have not already.
Should point out that he was paid by the FBI to cut that 1/4 inch off.
It all could have been avoided. Don't blame anything on the Government. Weirdos in the woods need to be polite to Authorities, too.
Return to Ruby Ridge-- SNAFU? Or Summary Execution?
Published: 08-03-01 Author: backhoe
He's being sarcastic.
So we gun people down after the FBI pays them to break the law. You are a complete idiot. There is nothing in the constitution that requires anyone to be polite to anyone, actually it calls for the opposite. Point me to the so called authorities you are talking of.
You're the F'in idiot Adolph.
All of this started because of one quarter inch. Randy is alleged to have sold a sawed off shotgun to an undercover fed that had a barrel that was one fourth inch too short. For that one quarter inch they shot his teenage son in the back and his wife in the head.
Thanks for the link to that story. That guy would be much less likely to receive public sympathy since he was big into pot and hippies. However unsavory I find him to be, he didn't deserve what the government dished out to him. I probably would've done the same desperate thing he did in that situation.
I'm not a fan of Koresh or Weaver myself, nor of Philadelphia's Black-separatist MOVE, who were literally bombed out of their urban settlement by the city police. But government-sanctioned murders of citizens is always wrong, even if said citizens' sensibilities don't mesh with ours.
If you, or other Freepers, are interested in the Crosslin/Rohm case, check out Dean Kuipers' BURNING RAINBOW FARM. One of the interesting things about that story, to me, is how Rainbow Farm cross-pollinated the hippie Left, the libertarian Right, stoners, good ol' boys, Christians, gays, and all sorts of other seemingly disparate elements.
It is an interesting case. I read the wikipedia link about the MOVE group and how the city police took care of them. I think the subject of government heavy-handed tactics is fascinating and a bit scary.
I'll be bookmarking this one.
"Your a troll idiot"...Your the f'n idiot adolph".
You know... you lose any argument when you start doing that, at least with those of average intelligence and above.
Good observation -- and that makes the events of Ruby Ridge relevant to today. As long as there are Americans who exercise their inalienable rights to be different offending only the "sensibilities" of the meddlesome Ruby Ridge will likely recur.
He then agreed to saw off shotguns for money from whom he thought was an Aryan Nation biker, who was going to sell them to black gangs in the city.
If he had have joined AlQuieda and had have done the same thing you wouldnt be peacocking him as being such an angel.
However that's not exactly what I remember. I will look for the Congressional hearings' conclusions.
For the past few years anyway I've wanted to learn if I remember correctly that one of the federal agents stated at one of the televised hearings that they have the authority to kill citizens based soley upon the belief that the citizen would present a danger at sometime in the future; i.e., a threat did not have to be imminent.
I have always believed that truth is more important than my ego.