Skip to comments.On This Day In History, August 22, 1992 - Ruby Ridge: FBI Sniper Kills Vicki Weaver
Posted on 08/22/2007 6:44:18 PM PDT by DogByte6RER
EVIDENCE FROM INVESTIGATION OF 1992 RUBY RIDGE MATTER ONLY SUFFICIENT TO CHARGE ONE OFFICIAL WITH CRIMINAL CONDUCT
Disciplinary Penalties Being Weighed for Others
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- After an exhaustive investigation involving hundreds of interviews and the review of hundreds of thousands of pages of documents, the Justice Department announced today that the available evidence does not support further criminal prosecutions of FBI officials arising from the August 1992 incidents, at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, and their aftermath.
In October 1996, E. Michael Kahoe, Chief of the FBI's Violent Crimes and Major Offenders Section, was charged with, and later pleaded guilty to, obstruction of justice charges relating to his destruction of an FBI "After Action Critique" on the Ruby Ridge matter. He is scheduled for sentencing on September 11.
The Department's Justice Management Division will propose what, if any, disciplinary sanctions should be imposed on any other individuals. Their recommendation will follow a review by the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), which has been furnished with the investigation's findings.
The criminal investigation examined events both during and after the crisis to determine whether there was evidence sufficient to support the criminal prosecution of any federal law enforcement officers.
A recommendation against criminal prosecution was made after an investigation by the United States Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia, led by Michael R. Stiles, the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The recommendation was approved by the Attorney General.
While the prosecutors conducted a thorough, nationwide investigation, the evidence was insufficient to warrant a criminal prosecution.
Scope of the Criminal Investigation
The investigative team used a variety of techniques to collect all available evidence in this matter. They gathered large amounts of documentary material that had never come to light during prior internal inquiries into the events at Ruby Ridge. FBI offices were searched, and more than half a million pages of documents were obtained and analyzed. Previously unreviewed files containing the bulk of FBI Headquarters records relating to the crisis, including files from the FBI's Strategic Information and Operations Center (SIOC) and the Violent Crimes and Major Offenders Section.
Investigators also conducted more than 600 interviews involving 378 witnesses. Many of the witnesses hold key positions, particularly in FBI Headquarters and the SIOC, and had never been questioned in any detail about the matter before. The investigation was also conducted in connection with a federal grand jury.
In addition, toll records relating to 226,960 telephone calls were examined, 143 exhibits were submitted to the FBI Laboratory, and another 97 were sent to the Postal Inspection Service Laboratory for examination. Two hundred eighty-nine computer hard drives and 351 disks from the FBI were also examined for pertinent material.
Investigators also thoroughly reviewed the investigative work product and conclusions of the six prior investigations and inquiries into the 1992 Ruby Ridge matter. That record included more than 500 witness interviews, sworn statements and transcribed testimony.
The Ruby Ridge criminal investigative team consisted of experienced federal prosecutors from Philadelphia and Washington, D.C.; Federal Bureau of Investigation Special Agents, including agents with experience in the FBI's Inspection Division, Independent Counsel investigations and Office of Professional Responsibility matters; and United States Postal Inspectors versed in complex white collar cases.
The Incidents at Ruby Ridge
On August 21, 1992, Deputy United States Marshal William Degan and Samuel Weaver were killed at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, during a confrontation between the Marshals Service and Randall Weaver, Samuel Weaver, and Kevin Harris.
The following day, a member of the FBI Hostage Rescue Team, Lon Horiuchi, fired two shots. The first shot struck and wounded Randall Weaver. The second shot struck both Vicki Weaver and Harris, killing Vicki Weaver instantly and wounding Harris. A stand-off between law enforcement and the occupants of the Weaver family cabin ultimately resulted in the surrender of Randall Weaver and Kevin Harris to the FBI.
Initial Inquiries and Discipline
In July of 1993, a task force was formed by former Deputy Attorney General Phillip Heymann to investigate allegations concerning the conduct of federal law enforcement at Ruby Ridge. The investigation, supervised by Justice Department attorney Barbara Berman and FBI Inspector Robert E. Walsh, was conducted from July 1993 to June 10, 1994. The FBI issued a report on January 19, 1994, and the Justice Department attorneys issued their report on June 10, 1994.
On July 13, 1994, the former Deputy Attorney General referred the Justice Department's report to the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division for a determination of whether a criminal civil rights prosecution was warranted. After reviewing the evidence gathered by the Task Force, the Civil Rights Division declined prosecution, finding insufficient evidence of a willful violation of the Weavers' or Kevin Harris' civil rights.
Following the conclusion of the Task Force investigation, the FBI conducted an administrative review of the findings of the Task Force. The purpose of the review was to determine what administrative action, if any, should be taken as a result of the Task Force's findings. The review, led by FBI Inspector Charles Mathews, III, was conducted between October 1994 and January 1995. A final administrative report was issued on January 27, 1995.
As a result of the Mathews review, the FBI disciplined 12 employees on January 5, 1995. This included letters of censure for then-FBI Deputy Director Potts and Danny Coulson (former Deputy Assistant Director of the FBI's Criminal Investigation Division) and more severe discipline for others--including Eugene Glenn, Special Agent-In-Charge, Salt Lake City, Utah, who was the highest ranking FBI official at the scene.
The Potts and Coulson letters of censure were based on claimed failures in management, but also commented that:
"neither Potts nor Coulson nor any other FBI Headquarters official approved or were aware of the improper ("can and should") Rules of Engagement."
On the other hand, Glenn's letter of disciplinary action stated that:
"As on-scene commander you approved Rules of Engagement ... [that] could reasonably have been interpreted to direct law enforcement officers to act contrary to FBI policy and law."
Those rules of engagement, which were employed at Ruby Ridge, provided that:
a) if any adult male is observed with a weapon prior to the [surrender] announcement, deadly force can and should be employed, if the shot can be taken without endangering any children.
b) If any adult in the compound is observed with a weapon after the surrender announcement is made, and is not attempting to surrender, deadly force can and should be employed to neutralize the individual.
c) If compromised by any animal (dog), that animal should be eliminated.
d) Any subjects other than Randall Weaver, Vicky [sic] Weaver, Kevin Harris, presenting threats of death or grievous bodily harm, the FBI rules of deadly force are in effect. Deadly force can be utilized to prevent the death or grievous bodily injury to one's self [sic] or that of another.
Following the FBI disciplinary action, SAC Glenn wrote a letter to OPR Counsel Michael Shaheen on May 3, 1995. Glenn alleged that the administrative review was designed to cover up the responsibility of higher level FBI officials for the events at Ruby Ridge. Specifically, Glenn wrote that Potts told him during the crisis that he had approved the Rules of Engagement, and Coulson at one point reminded him to act in conformity with the Rules of Engagement. Glenn, therefore, claimed that FBI Headquarters had approved the Rules of Engagement. In May 1995, the Justice Department's OPR began an investigation of Glenn's allegations.
As a result of the Justice Department's OPR investigation, on July 11, 1995, Kahoe was placed on administrative leave with pay by the FBI. On August 11, 1995, Potts, Coulson, Evans and Anthony A. Betz, former FBI Domestic Terrorism Chief, were also placed on administrative leave with pay.
Mandate of the Criminal Investigation
Based on information uncovered in the course of the OPR investigation begun in April 1995, a criminal referral was made to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia, resulting in an investigation by a criminal investigative team assembled just for this matter. Eric Holder, then United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, recused himself from this matter. The Attorney General appointed Michael R. Stiles, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, to supervise the investigation.
As noted previously, the Ruby Ridge criminal investigative team was asked to examine events both during and after the crisis to determine whether there was evidence to support the criminal prosecution of any federal law enforcement officers. This included the issue posed by the referral from OPR, whether Potts and Coulson had falsely denied knowledge or approval of the "can and should" Rules of Engagement used at Ruby Ridge. It also included a determination of whether there was any evidence not uncovered during the Task Force review that would change the prior conclusion of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division declining a civil rights prosecution for the shootings of Vicki and Randall Weaver and Kevin Harris on August 22, 1992.
Finally, the investigative team was asked to explore the conduct of the Deputy United States Marshals in the firefight that led to the deaths of Deputy Marshal William Degan and Samuel Weaver on August 21, 1992. In sum, the investigation was asked to search for any and all evidence of possible criminality by federal law enforcement, and to follow that evidence wherever it might lead.
Conclusions -- Coverup Allegations
As a result of the investigation, the investigative team submitted detailed reports recommending against prosecution of federal law enforcement personnel, other than E. Michael Kahoe.
Concerning the agents placed on administrative leave with pay prior to this investigation, it was determined that Anthony Betz was not criminally implicated in this matter and thereafter returned to work in June of 1996. Michael Kahoe resigned in December of 1996 following his guilty plea to obstruction of justice and is awaiting sentencing.
The conclusions with respect to other agents on administrative leave are as follows:
* With regard to Larry Potts and Danny Coulson, it was determined that there was insufficient evidence against either to obtain or sustain a conviction on charges that they had falsely denied knowing of or approving the "can and should" rules of engagement, or had otherwise destroyed or falsely created records to cover up such culpability. A successful prosecution of Potts or Coulson would have necessitated proof beyond a reasonable doubt that they knew of or approved the specific word "should" in the Rules of Engagement. Despite intensive efforts, the investigation did not uncover that proof. There was also insufficient evidence to prove other criminal violations by Potts or Coulson relating to either the shooting or its aftermath.
* With regard to FBI Special Agent Gale R. Evans, it was determined and also publicly acknowledged by his supervisor, E. Michael Kahoe, during Kahoe's guilty plea, that, at Kahoe's direction, Evans destroyed copies of the FBI Ruby Ridge After-Action Critique, as well as his computer disk containing the critique. The Investigative Team recommended against prosecution on the basis of Evans' significant cooperation, without any promises, from the outset of this investigation; the nature of his subordinate role in the criminal conduct; and the availability of administrative sanctions.
* With regard to FBI Special Agent George Michael Baird, the investigative team determined that Agent Baird's actions did not amount to a criminal violation.
The cover-up phase of the investigation also explored the conduct of FBI Headquarters officials generally as they responded to the various inquiries and litigation that followed the Ruby Ridge crisis. This included the examination of whether any other FBI Headquarters officials lied in their denials of knowing about or approving the Rules of Engagement issued at Ruby Ridge. No evidence was uncovered which would warrant criminal prosecution of other FBI Headquarters officials.
Although the investigation concluded no further criminal prosecution was warranted, OPR is reviewing what, if any, misconduct occurred that might warrant administrative sanctions, up to and including termination of employment.
Conclusions -- Civil Rights Allegations
As noted above, the investigative team was also instructed to review the question of whether there was sufficient evidence to prosecute any federal law enforcement officer for civil rights offenses occurring at Ruby Ridge. In October of 1994, after a review of the earlier Justice Department's Ruby Ridge Task Force Report, the criminal section of the Civil Rights Division concluded that there was not.
After substantial further investigation, the Ruby Ridge criminal investigative team reached the same conclusion: there is not sufficient evidence to obtain or sustain a conviction for violation of the federal civil rights statutes for the shooting of Vicki Weaver, Randall Weaver, or Kevin Harris on August 22, 1992. In essence, the critical element of willfulness necessary for a civil rights violation cannot be established beyond a reasonable doubt. Such willfulness, or knowing, intentional use of unreasonable force cannot be made out against FBI Agent Lon Horiuchi, who fired the shots which struck Randall Weaver, Vicki Weaver, and Kevin Harris, since those shots were within the guidelines set forth by his superiors in the controversial rules of engagement. There was also no evidence from which it could be concluded beyond a reasonable doubt that Horiuchi actually saw Vicki Weaver at the time he fired the shot that killed her.
Moreover, it was concluded that such willfulness could not be established against the on-site supervisors responsible for drafting and implementing the rules of engagement and other tactics at Ruby Ridge. In summary, the little circumstantial evidence from which it could be argued that there may have been an intent to use more force than was necessary was far outweighed by a significant amount of evidence that law enforcement had no such intention here. Instead, there was substantial evidence that FBI law enforcement efforts were undertaken by on-site supervisors with the actual, although not completely accurate, belief that Randall Weaver and Kevin Harris posed a severe threat to law enforcement officers requiring the use of deadly force.
Such a conclusion does not amount to a finding that the rules of engagement or other tactics employed at Ruby Ridge were appropriate or even constitutional. Instead it is based on the determination that there is insufficient evidence to prove that excessive, unlawful force was knowingly and intentionally employed by FBI personnel in their response to the situation they confronted at Ruby Ridge. Thus it mandates against a federal criminal prosecution for civil rights violations by law enforcement personnel at Ruby Ridge.
Finally, it was also determined that there was no basis to support a federal civil rights prosecution or other prosecution of United States Marshals Service personnel for the initial August 21, 1992, confrontation which resulted in the deaths of Samuel Weaver and United States Deputy Marshal William F. Degan. Although it could not be conclusively determined whether the first shot in this confrontation was fired by U.S. Marshals Service personnel at the Weavers' dog or by Kevin Harris at the Marshals, under either scenario there is no basis for a prosecution of United States Marshals for their conduct relating to Ruby Ridge.
This decision means that FBI personnel, including Larry Potts, former Assistant Director of the Criminal Investigation Division and Deputy Director of the FBI; Danny Coulson, former Deputy Assistant Director of the FBI's Criminal Investigation Division; Michael Baird, Supervisory Special Agent; and Gale Evans, former Unit Chief of the Violent Crimes Unit of the Criminal Investigation Division, will not face federal criminal prosecution for any matters arising out of the Ruby Ridge incident.
This decision does not preclude the imposition of disciplinary sanctions against these individuals or other FBI officials. Accordingly, the investigation's findings have been furnished to OPR for its review and additional investigation, if necessary. If appropriate, OPR will recommend to the Justice Department any disciplinary sanctions, up to and including termination of employment. The FBI will not be the decision- maker regarding any disciplinary sanctions.
On March 1, 1992, The Spokesman-Review, a newspaper in nearby Spokane, Washington, reported that Weaver's children were armed and quoted area residents who predicted violence if law enforcement agents attempted to apprehend Weaver. Allan Jeppeson was quoted as saying, "They'll lose their lives if they go up there and threaten Weaver" and "he don't want nobody on his mountain."
On March 4, 1992, Marshals Cluff and Evans decided to drive up the mountain road leading to the Weaver cabin. They were in plainclothes and rode in an unmarked four-wheel drive vehicle. As they proceeded up the mountain road, the marshals found that vehicle noise on the unmaintained road was clearly audible for great distances. Cluff and Evans then saw Randy Weaver, armed with a rifle, and a boy and a girl standing above them on a rock formation. The boy also had a rifle. A yellow dog ran up to the vehicle, barking. When Weaver told them they were trespassing, they responded that they were interested in buying property. Weaver told them to return with a realtor. The marshals left. Evans determined that additional reconnaissance was necessary. He had learned of previously unknown trails to the Weaver property and believed it was necessary to explore them.
On March 27, 1992, Deputy Director Stagg, who oversaw the Special Operations Group recommended against a tactical assault on the Weaver compound and his recommendation that the indictment be dismissed and then refiled later under seal, so Weaver would be unaware of the new indictment. This was in hope that it would cause Weaver to drop his guard. At the meeting, Haynes and Stagg presented a plan for an assault on the Weaver compound, but recommended against taking such action. Hudson agreed that a tactical approach did not appear viable because of their concern for the safety of Vicki Weaver and her children.
The Weaver case was transferred to the Enforcement Division and was given the name "Operation Northern Exposure." The primary responsibility for developing a plan was given to Deputy Marshal Arthur Roderick, Branch Chief of the Enforcement Division. Hidden cameras were installed throughout the Weaver property. Although final approval was needed from Acting Director Hudson, Roderick was given permission by Jim Roach, Deputy Director for Operations, in late May 1992, to begin preparations for an undercover operation to arrest Randy Weaver. The plan consisted of agents posing as a neighboring couple buying property next to the Weavers and befriending them. Roderick chose Deputy Marshal Mark Jurgensen of the Seattle office for the undercover role. Roderick, Jurgensen, and Hunt started assembling documents necessary to carry out the operation.
Roderick was instructed not to put the undercover plan into effect while Acting Director Hudson's confirmation was pending before the U.S. Senate. In early August 1992, Hudson was confirmed Director of the Marshals Service and gave verbal approval of the undercover operation shortly thereafter. There had been no surveillance of the Weaver property since May, so Roderick thought it necessary for a team to visit the site and update their information.
 The confrontation On August 21, 1992, several US Marshals were sent to conduct surveillance for the upcoming undercover operation. Since Randy Weaver was a former Green Beret and it was believed the Weaver family were fully prepared to fight, an initial armed reconnaissance team was sent in to survey the location and prepare for the military style assault. They spent most of the night and early morning moving around the family property.
The group had strict orders that they were to avoid all contact with the Weaver family. According to a Department of Justice report on the incident, the Marshals were detected by the Weavers' dogs and began to retreat. Randy Weaver, his 14-year-old son Sammy and his house guest, family friend Kevin Harris, left the house to investigate, all carrying firearms. The Department of Justice report corroborates this with a statement dictated by Randy Weaver to his daughter, in which he says that "Approximately 11:30 Friday morning....the dogs started barking like they always do when strangers walk up the driveway. Randy, Kevin, and Sam ran out to the rock with their weapons." The labrador, Striker, chased the marshals through the woods, and Sammy and Harris followed the dog. Eventually the marshals stopped retreating and took up defensive positions in the woods.
The sequence of events during the ensuing shootout is disputed, with Harris saying that the camouflaged Marshals did not identify themselves and were the first to fire at Sammy's dog, which was approaching their position with Sammy close behind him. Sammy then fired at Marshal Roderick, who had shot the dog. The marshals' version of events is that they were fired upon first and only then returned fire.
According to Randy Weaver, after splitting up from Harris and Sammy Weaver, a man in full camo, leaped out in front of him and shouted: "Freeze Weaver!". Weaver responded to this with the words, "Fuck you!" and then turned around and began to run back to the house. As he ran he called out to Harris and Sammy that it was an ambush and to get back to the house. Randy said he heard Sam reply "I'm coming Dad" and then heard shots being fired.
Sammy and Harris had followed the dog through the woods when they confronted the Marshals. Sammy, according to Harris, then yelled "You shot Striker, you son of a bitch!", and fired twice at Marshal Roderick, the leader of the Special Operations Group. One or more Marshals returned fire, shooting Sam in the arm and spraying him in the back with automatic weapon fire, killing him, as he ran back up the hill. Harris then shot and killed Marshal William Degan, and retreated up the hill himself where he found Sammy. It is also possible that Marshal Degan was killed by friendly fire as his autopsy showed he had been shot in the back with the bullet exiting through his chest.
According to evidence entered at the trial by prosecution witnesses (ballistics experts Martin Fackler and Lucien Haag), Art Roderick fired one shot, which killed the dog; Sammy Weaver fired three shots, to no effect; Marshal Bill Degan fired seven shots, one hitting Sammy Weaver's arm; Kevin Harris fired two shots, one killing Degan; and Larry Cooper fired six shots, one killing Sammy Weaver. Marshals Cooper and Roderick were not aware of Degan firing, and believed those shots came from the Weavers. There were nineteen shots fired in total.
The next day, the FBI was called onto the scene with their Hostage Rescue Team (HRT). After the first day's events, the FBI HRT changed its usual rules of engagement, stating specifically that "deadly force can and should be used against any armed adult male if the shot could be taken without a child being injured." Deadly force could be used even before an announcement that the Weavers were surrounded and requesting their surrender. This was "unprecedented" and later found unconstitutional by a Justice Department task force.
A FBI sniper, Lon Horiuchi, shot and wounded Weaver in the right arm, while he was lifting the latch on a shed to visit the dead body of Sammy Weaver with others. Then as Randy, his 16-year-old daughter Sara and Harris ran back to the house, Horiuchi fired again at Harris, but instead struck Vicki Weaver. Vicki Weaver was standing behind a door, unarmed and holding her 10-month-old baby Elishiba in her arms, when the bullet struck her in the face, killing her. The round then carried on, striking Harris in the left arm/chest. A Justice Department review later found the second shot was unconstitutional and the lack of a request to surrender was "inexcusable", since Harris and the two Weavers were running for cover and could not pose an imminent threat. The task force also specifically blamed Horiuchi for firing at the door, not knowing whether someone was on the other side of it, along with those who had decided on the special rules of engagement allowing shots to be fired with no request for surrender.
The sniper's two shots were fired at 6:00pm 22 Aug1992; the Weavers did not return fire but retreated to the cabin. At 6:30pm, an armored personnel carrier came to the cabin and announced the presence of law enforcement. According to the Weavers, this was the first formal announcement of the presence of law enforcement.
A stand-off ensued for 10 days as several hundred federal agents surrounded the house, in which Weaver and his three surviving children remained with Harris and the dead body of Vicki Weaver, under a blood-soaked blanket in the kitchen. The area was surrounded by protesters angered by what they perceived as the heavy-handed nature of the authorities' actions. James "Bo" Gritz, then a third-party presidential candidate who had formerly been Weaver's commanding officer during his time in the Army served as a mediator between Weaver and the government. Eventually, Weaver elected to abandon the stand-off and trust his case to the judicial system.
Also, on August 22, 2006 Iran thought they were gonna bomb us and that the world was going to end, I believe
I would like to see some FReepers comment and dissect this event that had many lasting repercussions...
Have the bastards reponsible for this ever been brought to justice?
The quick answer is...NO.
The feds declined to prosecute.
A state case against Horiuchi was tossed out of court. The Ninth Circuit (as I remember) cited the “supremacy clause” of the federal government over state jurisdiction.
Top FBI official Larry Potts took an early retirement.
There are rumors that the sniper (Horiuchi) was also present at Waco during the Branch Daviudian standoff.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Horiuchi is retired by now.
I have always found this incident troubling not because of any sympathies for the Weavers, but because if this was a local or state agency like the LAPD, NYPD or any state police agency that engaged in the exact same acts in the same situation, they would have been investigated and prosecuted by the feds.
I love law enforcement. I just don’t like double standards.
They will be; if not in this life, then in the next.
Not only no, hell no. Horiuchi was promoted from his position to sniper team lead, a position which he served with distinction in Waco, TX on 19 Apr 1993, during which he can be credited with still more murders of US citizens on US soil.
Who was AG at the time? Reno? And what of the Branch Davidians? 90 something murdered by our wonderful FBI .... I guess we’re really safer now, right?????
The bastards responsible are the justice (Department of)
Actually, Ruby Ridge occured under President George H. W. Bush and his Attorney General in 1992.
Janet Reno did not take over DOJ until 1993.
“I would like to see some FReepers comment and dissect this event that had many lasting repercussions...”
Knock yourself out:
“Who was AG at the time?”
William Barr, An H.W. Bush install who left in 93. Most have never heard of him because (IMHO) he was liberal enough for Congress/Senate/MSM to leave him alone.
Jackboot Reno was asked about Ruby Ridge and she very quickly denied being in office then during a congressional dog & pony or senate about Branch Davidians.
Teflon Clinton had nothing to do with it of course, just as he had nothing to do with the Elian Gonzalez abduction.
FWIW, BATFE has been known to edit Wikipedia articles (not sure who, but their IP addresses seem to be in the 149.101.1.xxx range and if it is a single individual they have DHCP and a LOT of free time at work).
Edits include, among many others, the NRA and Ann Coulter pages. But just in case you think there might be a closet conservative at the ATF, his comments in the talk section on the 2000 election (from IP address 188.8.131.52) include:
My version: The Court stopped the recount. It did not let it go on until everyone was satisfied. My side believes, therefore, that the five conservatives on the court ruled in favor of stopping the recount at a point when Bush was ahead, and that an enormous amount of evidence shows that had the recount been allowed to continue, Gore would have prevailed. Can I prove my opinion? No. Can you prove yours? Probably not. Anything wesite will be deemed unsatisfactory by the other due to bias, thus the original conflict. Therefore, why do we have a section on this topic that is far less than satisfactory to those who share my viewpoint? Because wikipedia is largely ridiculous when it comes to controversial topics
For somebody who believes Wikipedia is "largely ridiculous", he sure does seem to spend a lot of taxpayer time editing it (sorry, didn't mean to derail the subject but it seemed like an important point to make).
Thanks .... still scary how our government protects us ... who should we be more afraid of, terrorists or the FBI???
Hmm ... thought Reno was involved in that one ... either way it’s scary how our government protects us ....
I know that you sometimes have to take Wikipedia with a grain of salt. I didn’t know about government editing topics about themselves though.
Thanks for the info...
Sad thing is that after 2 dead and 2 wounded Americans, murdered on their own property, no one from the fbi or any other government agency has come forward and blown the whistle. Now that is scary.
I heard the same thing. He was supposed to either have driven or been in one of the two tanks they used to break in the walls at Mt Carmel
William Barr was a member of the Federalist Society.
So who has Lon Horiuchi been murdering from afar these days? Or are he and “Jimmy the Tulip” still doing shots in Moab, Utah?
Two sides of the same coin.
Should read “murders Vicki Weaver”.
Right........I look through the scope on my rifle all the time deer hunting and never see anything when I pull the trigger.
Basically, the jackboots involved should all have been hanged, but they were promoted. Nothing has changed. The Bush/Clinton/Bush administration continues unabated.
Magaw, from the Waco massacre, is now Bush’s man in Homeland insecurity.
Ruby Ridge was Bush’s game.
Ok, Bush senior .... got it .....
As a sniper, Horiuchi probably wouldn’t have gotten close to the building, even in an armored vehicle.
I believe, but don’t know, that he was in a position not far off.
from what I remember, these months of planning and execution [pun intended] resulted from BATFags entrappment over 2 shotguns cut down to 17 & 1/2 inches.
My take is that Mr. Weaver must have REALLY p!zzed somebody off to draw that kind of concentrated effort from a whole army of alphabet soup... my .02
I vaguely remember that they were trying to nail him so they could force him to roll over on someone else.
I think it might have been related to PROMIS and INSLAW.
Transportation Security Administration, which is part of Homeland Security. They even named a "values award" for him. I think he's an "emeritus" now, but still sits on the Homeland Security Advisory council. Also former head of BATF from 1994 - 1999. He was also previously head of the Secret Service.
We have him to thank for heel dragging and bureaucratic obstacles put in front of airline pilots wishing to be armed to protect their aircraft. He was also a major player in getting them to be reserve deputy US Marshall, rather than lawfully armed citizens.
Those who claim W brought a change to the Whitehouse are nuts. Same oligarchy, a few different characters.
Well, put it this way... You’re still allowed to defend yourself against terrorists.
Tell that to the 767 pilots who died on 9/11.
And where is Ol' Lon today? Happily retired on a gubmint pension for "dong his job"...and probably with a commendation for "good work?"
No, tell that to the FAA who don’t allow aircrew to carry guns ... and those idiot security people at Boston who allowed the terrorists to bring box cutters on board ... and to top it off, you can disable a passenger jet with dental floss .... passenger/crew safety is a joke ......
I know what the FAA is and what their policies are. Read my bio.
Hopefully you can improve it from the inside. Rearming the pilots is a worthy first goal. Part of the problem is that the corporations running our airline industry wish to indemnify themselves from all second amendment liability. This should not be their decision to make. Contrary to current popular opinion, the airline industry does not rule the American skies. The American people and its constitution do.
Anyone who says anything else is a stone liar.
I keep getting conflicting stories .... some say Reno was involved others say the AG under Bush senior ..... but I agree, they could have picked up those people at the local K-Mart plus they were set up by the fed’s ..... same with the Branch Davidians ....set up ....
Thanks ... I’m looking for cargo flights ... somehow to me it’s all a three-ring circus ... TSA-FAA-NTSB all circling around each other ... but then too, it’s the fed’s who control the sky Americans own ....
Hollywood and the media are telling Americans to sell their liberty birthrights for a little security. They’re capitulating most willingly. Like sheep to the slaughter.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.