Yes.
That gas was illegal to use against Enemy Soldiers, but Clinton used it against his own people.
Clinton wanted to prove that even though he was a Draft Dodging Coward, he was still brave enough to burn a bunch of little kids alive.
Democrats thought that killing a group of religious kooks was Great!
But Democrats don't want to wiretap Terrorists.
Because that would "interfere" with "Terrorist Freedoms".
Cool!!!!!
2007-08-13 10:33:32
·
answer #1
·
answered by wolf 6
·
6⤊
10⤋
I didn't like Bill Clinton and I don't like his wife either. But the last time I looked tear gas is not banned by the Geneva Convention. And those 32 kids that died were not the fault of Bill Clinton, Janet Reno, or any other government employee. All the people who died at the Branch Davidian building were the fault of David Koresh or what ever his name was.. Quit sounding like those wackos who want to blame Bush for every death that has happened since he took office.
2016-05-17 05:18:47
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Not sure about the gas thing. I doubt the Geneva Convention applies to the US attacking it's own citizens but, you might make the parallel with Saddam
The Gonzales flap is a hanging looking for a crime. Reno by comparison was a walking talking crime if you use the same standard. She slipped all the hangmen. WACO is a good example. She ruined Richard Jewell's life by incorrectly leaking information that implicated him in the centennial Olympic Park bombing. She said: Sorry about that.
Eric Rudolph the real bomber stayed on the lose during her rein.
I won't miss Timothy McVeigh but, using today's liberal standard for terrorists, he should have received therapy, Reno killed him.
Pointing an automatic weapon at that little Cuban kid Elián González in Florida was a nice touch.
Could you just imagine what would have gone on if that happened under Bush's watch? He would have been dragged out of the white house in irons by Tim Russert.
2007-08-13 10:55:39
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Yes, the use of CS Gas was outlawed by the 1997 Chemical Weapons Convention, which is decidedly after the Waco seige. However, it is not banned because it is dangerous, but because it could provoke other countries to use more dangerous chemical agents. Also, the convention only applies to warfare, not domestic police activities and it remains legal in most countries.
Also, Clinton had nothing to do with it. He wasn't there, he didn't give orders, and he had nothing to do with it.
2007-08-13 10:42:27
·
answer #4
·
answered by James 7
·
4⤊
2⤋
Know the difference between organized religion and a cult? Religions collect money, cults collect guns. Those people were asking to meet their maker, our government just helped it along. Maybe Clinton was using the same Geneva convention outline this President uses???
2007-08-13 10:55:46
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
this gas is in fact banned under the geneva conventions, but guess what? the united states armed forces uses this gas on it's own troops during chemical weapons training. (all tear gas is banned under the geneva conventions for use against enemy forces)
2007-08-13 10:33:58
·
answer #6
·
answered by PD 6
·
3⤊
2⤋
no,Clinton wasn't there. tear gas and mace are against the geneva convention too,but police use it on citizens
2007-08-13 10:40:59
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
3⤋
You do realize every US soldier is exposed to CS gas during basic training? Of course you do all you cons have served in the......
oh wait nvm.
2007-08-13 10:53:40
·
answer #8
·
answered by Michael C 2
·
0⤊
2⤋
Good thing the Geneva Convention is quaint, eh?
______________________________
Elevating Koresh to a hero martyr, when he was was torturing and sexually preying on those kids in the name of Christ strikes me as a strange strategy for the right wing. But if it suits you, go for it.
Next you'll be telling me MacVeigh was just a misunderstood schlub.
2007-08-13 10:34:23
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
4⤋
This is a stretch. And by the way, it IS 2007... Clinton is irrelevant now. Get over it.
2007-08-13 10:37:23
·
answer #10
·
answered by cattledog 7
·
3⤊
3⤋
Clinton wasn't at WACO at the time but no, he didn't. And, it was David Koresh that started firing on the government. And, he's also the one that killed those kids. Why do you stick up for Jim Jones type of cult leader?
2007-08-13 10:35:34
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
6⤋