I feel there was blame on both sides,I did not like how the situation was handled, it was a bit gung-ho for me.
2007-02-02 08:16:24
·
answer #1
·
answered by Sentinel 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I have not had an opportunity recently to refresh my memories about the Waco incident, but then 'its the same old story!' Although your question seems to center on who to blame, I guess your concern is more about the lessons in the incident. For, ultimately, it is not the incident that counts but the lessons therein.
Waco was about controlling people. Many religious organizations come out with their doctrines about God when in fact all they care about is how to take control of as many people as they can get (a pattern they inherited from some orthodox churches unfortunately). They keep their members on a leash. Sometimes the leash is a subtle threat, other times it involves outright violence. The members of such organizations soon find that it is far more difficult to opt out than to stay in as dutiful members. This is why it would not be entirely correct to blame such members for not opting out.
Meanwhile, God never asked any man to kill on His behalf because no man (or any creature for that matter) is holier than another. It is a simple misunderstanding of God's ways when anyone assumes that God needs an army or anyone to defend Him. It is ovbvious therefore how these 'religious leaders' got it all wrong, or are outrightly mischievous. Unfortunately, they never lack followers.
I am sure the Police and FBI have learned valuable lessons, such lessons that will make them perform better when the next Waco comes along. Hopefully not soon.
2007-02-02 17:54:27
·
answer #2
·
answered by RAFIU 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I watched it a while back and it's a very sad story, surprised to see that happening in the western world. Obviously the first blame goes to him followed by his adult followers. One can say they were brain washed but come on how come all of this people fail to raise the alarm. Brain washing doesn't happen over night so surely this people must have heard or seen something which wasn't quite right so why get colluded with the rest?
The society as a hole shouldn’t escape either because people must have known families, friends, etc……. but no one bothered to report ones missing or any concern they might have. The last one goes to the police, surely that could not have happened now in the days of terrorism. Possibly then police felt they had better things to deal with than a group of people getting together well that’s until it was way too late.
Let me stop mumbling and hit my bed.
2007-02-02 17:27:00
·
answer #3
·
answered by SMB 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is my opnion that the Government acted in a muderous way and they will have to answer to the act someday. David Coresh had a dentist appointment the next week and they could have just been smart and waited. Like all political decisions, it was stupid. I don't really see much difference in the goverment killing those people and others hitting the Twin Towers. Both were wrong and the wrong people paid the price, so far. I would not want to be either party that issued the orders for either event. Unless they are saved between now and judgment, it makes me shudder to think about it.
2007-02-02 16:22:52
·
answer #4
·
answered by happylife22842 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
I watched that documentary as well last night. David Koresh can be blamed for brainwashing some of the followers and the FBI can be blamed for doing the wrong thing. But the FBI thought they were doing the right thing. The fact that David Koresh had a bullet wound to the head at the end of the siege delivered by himself or his right hand man (who incidentally killed himself) shows that they knew exactly what they were doing.
So to answer your question I think David Koresh was to blame.
2007-02-02 16:23:04
·
answer #5
·
answered by Tatty Ted 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
These were not the people of God. This was a cult. The leader was a lunatic who was psychologically imbalanced. He was skilled at persuasion, and he convinced many others that his crazy ideas were correct. People hunger and thirst for God. He created us with the innate need for Him. When we refuse to seek Him directly, we look for substitutes. Some of us choose to not believe in Him at all. Many who are searching, will often feel so needy that they will believe anything at all, even when it goes contrary to basic common sense (i.e., setting aside one's marriage). These people were duped into believing the lies of a madman. They were misled. They were not a people of God. They were a people in search of God. They exercised poor judgment. The police and FBI did what they had to do. They did not set the wheels in motion. They were only responding and taking action as a direct result of the poor choices made by the cult.
2007-02-02 16:26:01
·
answer #6
·
answered by Chimichanga to go please!! 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Obviously Koresh wasn't playing with a full deck, but that doesn't excuse the FBI, the government and Janet Reno from underestimating the situation. All four share the blame equally.
2007-02-02 16:20:10
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
David was made of pure selfish evil power,he abused the free human will what god gave us for being giving and caring , he saw kindness as a weakness, and weakness as a power up for himself in his phycosis state of mind, or he could of been a very deep thinker from the LSD and dope days and found out to himself that the government were evil ,placing everybody in synce,micro chips ,and i don't listen to gossip or chit chat, i need the truth to discover the truth.
2007-02-02 16:42:13
·
answer #8
·
answered by clare p 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
It was very sad what happened, and the authorities did make stupid mistakes and bad judgement calls, but ultimately the blame has to be laid at the feet of the cult leader. The actions of the authorities just played into his hands.
2007-02-03 08:11:45
·
answer #9
·
answered by Nikita21 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Had Koresh simply answered to the charges against him, there would have been no bloodshed, that blood is on HIS hands. The The FBI, etc.. were within their legal and moral right to pursue a criminal (innocent until proven guilty) who was unwilling to cooperate with authorities.
2007-02-02 16:17:44
·
answer #10
·
answered by ©2009 7
·
0⤊
1⤋