Date: 10/18/95 1:05 AM
From: Shirley Ragsdale
Very clear and balanced presentation. I have been a fan
of Frontline and POV for years. I appreciate the way your
program addresses prickley issues with great finesse. I
have seen the testosterone level of law enforcement make
bad policy and decisions. It appears, as I suspected, that
this is what happened in Waco, much to this nation's shame.
I hope lessons about negotiation and patience in future
such standoffs with manipulative people have been learned.
If so, then something constructive will come from the ashes
of "Mount Carmel." It is such a sad chapter, a horror few
of us will forget.
Thank you for giving us rational insight into the event.
Date: 10/18/95 1:05 AM
From: Kurt Dillard
To the creators of WACO--THE INSIDE STORY,
I found the episode extremely interesting and informative. . . and quite
disturbing. Thanks for maintaining your objectivity and detatchment while
doing such an emotionally explosive piece. I feel that your coverage was
very even-handed and fair.
I've always enjoyed Frontline, and will be a regular viewer in the years
to come.
Regards,
Kurt Dillard
Austin, Texas
Date: 10/18/95 1:07 AM
From: Robert Bertrand
Your story tonight was balanced and thought provoking. But,
there is a part of this story that still needs to be reported,
what changes have been or yet to be made in the manner of how
the government deals with such situations? Does the government
still feel that use of gas is ok? Who will be in charge in
future standoffs, the Ninja's; the Negotiators; or the Local
Agent in charge? Do we still feel we need to flush the people
out as soon as possible, or are we more able to sit and wait
out such people? Do we still need a separate ATF or can it
merge with the FBI? Can and should local authorities play
more of a role in such standoffs? Would there be any benefit
in a public admission of error by the government to build
bridges with some of these militia organizations and other
radicals such that feelings are not running so high. Such
admissions could deal with the fact that some bad decisions
were made and carried out, however, David Koresh and the
other adults of the compound share a burden as well in not
surrendering and starting fires in the compound. We know now
much of what was said and done on both sides, now what will we
do about it?
Date: 10/18/95 3:10 AM
From: Michael Lawler
Your informative documentary ended with the thought that
the FBI's greatest mistake was allowing David Koresh to
write the final chapter. The real mistake was the FBI's
being there in the first place. Nowhere did you ask the
obvious question: WHO allowed all that firepower there in
the first place? WHY is a man accused of a relatively minor
crime attacked with all the resources of the federal govern-
ment? Why did your reporter not challenge the FBI agent who
told Koresh there were only two documents for which he
would die -- the Bible and the Constitution. He was busy
making a mockery of it.
Date: 10/18/95 1:05 AM
From: Paul Bossi
"The Inside Story?" "The Real Story?" Give me a break.
Your Waco program was one of the most tepid reports yet
on the Waco standoff.
The supposedly new
snippets from the wiretaps and
tapes were played for at longest five seconds at a time
and were used solely
to reinforce points being made by FBI agents.
The true underlying script for the program was obviously
the whitewashed Department of Justice document on the
standoff. There was not one
sign of new investigation on the part of FRONTLINE;
rather, the program appeared to be entirely a product
of journalistic laziness.
I used to consider FRONTLINE the best investigative
journalism on TV. The Waco program shows that at least in
one case FRONTLINE has descended to the role
of naive patsy for the most obvious kind of government
propaganda. A big step down.
Date: 10/18/95 3:09 AM
From: Robert Bulechek
I thought the Frontline program on Waco was good, but it
could have been better. For a program that I enjoy because
of its hard hitting willingnes to examine the facts
wherever they may lead, I thought this program was pretty
soft.
I would have liked to have seen a more detailed
examination given to conflicting statements made by various
participants. Did members of the FBI lie to superiors to get
their policies approved? If so, why wheren't they fired? Did
Clinton approve of the attack? If so, did he lie about it
later? Were any of the feds injured by friendly fire?
I thought the program glossed over the question: did the
damage done to the buildings prevent escape from the fire?
Is there more evidence about whether the Dividians or the
CS gas caused the fire? Where people incapacitated by the CS
gas so that they were unable to escape? And a lot more.
Even if agents of the BATF and FBI are not guilty of
manslaughter, why wheren't many more fired for incompetance?
I hope Frontline will do a follow-up that can examine
whether injustice has occured, who is responsible, and what
can be done to correct it. For example, I am appaled that
after the deaths of their family and friends and the tragety
that occured, the government went after the survivors and
put them in jail. It seems to me that they have suffered
enough.
Robert Bulechek
Tucson, AZ
Date: 10/18/95 9:16 AM
From: Kurt Cianelli
It's good to see that my tax dollars are being put to use spouting the
liberial line. PBS presents another series of shows reguardless of the
facts. I wish you would not advertise your semi-factual docu-crap shows
(ie The Civil War and Baseball) as a quality fact base news show.
Date: 10/18/95 3:09 AM
From: Peter Shriner
The 10/17/95 Frontline story about Waco should have been titled "WACO --
The One-Sided Story". The whole hour was merely a lopsided defense of the
government's actions. Frontline presented _nothing_ that opposed the
ATF/FBI actions and motives; offered no discussion of the validity of the
original ATF assault on the Davidian compound; and didn't reveal how
Frontline just happened upon a lode of files and tapes that finally
revealed the "truth".
I thought the establishment of truth includes the other side of the story.
Why did Frontline not present anything that might defend how the Davidians
felt about (and reacted to) an armored, heavily armed assault upon their
home and families? Was there no representative of the Davidians willing to
talk to Frontline? Was there no physical evidence, no audio tape, no
videotape that might speak for the Davidians?
Weren't they American citizens, living in their own home? What possibly
justifies the actions taken against them? Dozens of combat-trained men with
automatic weapons surrounded their property. Helicopters buzzed their
buildings day and night. Their electricity was shut off. They were
subjected to psychological warfare -- remember American troops serenading
Manuel Noriega in Panama? Tanks drove over their cars parked in their front
yard, and crashed through the walls of their home to inject toxic gas. And
yet the FBI negotiators tell them "This is not an assault..." ?
Perhaps the greatest tragedy (and my greatest foreboding) about Waco is how
the law enforcement people were just trying to do their job, supposedly to
uphold the law. Have the rules of America become more important than the
lives of its own men, women, and children?
Back
|