Report: Clark Role Limited in Waco Conflagration

FNC ^ | 11/28/2003 | AP - FoxNews reporting at website

[txhurl]

WASHINGTON

[txhurl]

Don't think this is a dupe: I did look.

Thinking who ought to be pinged on this.

[txhurl]

You know of a Waco/Clark ping list?

[gatex]

"Danforth found no improper actions...."

Didn't he also fail to recommend punishment for the FBI agent who lied about using pyrotechnic flares ?

[txhurl]

Y'all nevermind me, just indexing some stuff here...

WACO: "Ex-U.S. Attorney Dead in Apparent Suicide"

Arkancide and followup.

[txhurl]

Mmm-hmm. Archy, this is you. Let's figure out why this article was written and dissembled.

[txhurl]

Clark/Waco ping.

[Old Sarge]

Clark's involvement in support of the Waco operation a decade ago was indirect and fleeting

As a former commissioned Army officer, I can tell you one maxim drilled into each young Lieutenant's head:

THE COMMANDER IS ALWAYS RESPONSIBLE!

This is the same arguement the Socialists are using vs. GWB in the War on Terror. Works for General Ashleigh even moreso.

[gatex]

From post 49 in your link above ---

"After six years of denials, the FBI admitted last month agents fired the potentially incendiary military tear gas rounds at the roof of a concrete bunker near the compound. But it said there was no evidence the rounds helped start the fire. "

Danforth did not recommend punishment---

[txhurl]

Indeed, they like to make it sound like he just signed off on the pizza delivery requisition or something.

[Reactionary]

"Regardless of who supplied the military items, Danforth's investigation concluded that no one from the government fired a gunshot - despite being fired upon - at the Branch Davidian complex on the final day of the siege."

Of course.

All of those guys walking around with machine guns and chemically-treated uniforms to evade FLIR were obviously out for an afternoon stroll.

Danforth is a lying sack of garbage.

[archy]

Mmm-hmm. Archy, this is you. Let's figure out why this article was written and dissembled.

Hmmm. Danforth, from Missouri. Bush's Attorney General Ashcroft, also from Missouri. And the same controls and puppeteer's strings pulling both of them....

-archy-/-

[txhurl]

No, I need more than show-me-state coincidence.

What I MEAN is, do you think this article is to trial-balloon whether any Clark/Reno/Waco collusion can be completely substantiated?

[mark502inf]

THE COMMANDER IS ALWAYS RESPONSIBLE!

Except that Clark was not the commander, not present, had no operational role and was only involved as the commander of a unit at Fort Hood that was tasked by its higher HQ to provide some equipment and training.

Clark is arrogant, self-promoting, and integrity-deficient. But he had nothing to do with Waco.

[txhurl]

Then why is he casting around for support to DENY it?

Me thinks he doth protest too much.

[Mr. Silverback]

Report: Clark Role Limited in Waco Conflagration

Yeah, and my role was limited when I took a crap this morning.

[mark502inf]

Then why is he casting around for support to DENY it?

If you had nothing to do with a debacle like that and then people started coming up with stories that you were, wouldn't you deny it too?

[Yasotay]

You may be correct, but as the 'commander' of the 1st Cav Division, Clark sent his ADC(M)or(S) to Waco, in addition to the equipment with Clark's full support and authority. If Schoomaker was ADC(S) [Support] then there should not be a problem. If Schoomaker was ADC(M)[Manuever], a serious question arises in my mind if several laws were broken. Clearly III Corps tasked 1st Cav to support the FBI. There seems to be a question if LTG Funk or Taylor was in charge .... there is the "chance" that the CG of Hood was gone and Clark "took charge"..... I'm just speculating.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[aristeides]

A facsimile of a critical document was posted on a thread here a couple of months ago. It was signed by an "acting CO" of III Corps and Ft. Hood. The acting CO's name was blacked out. I don't think either Funk or Taylor would have been called "acting CO". So I wondered at the time of the posting and still wonder now whether that acting CO was Clark. I wonder why that name would have been blacked out. I also wonder why this is the first time I have heard of this Gen. Taylor in connection with Waco.

[mark502inf]

Ysaotay, Schoomaker was asked for "by name" from Washington to brief Reno because of Schoomaker's past experience with Delta Force. Clark didn't "send" him.

And remember how these taskings work--it starts from the originating civil agency & works it's way up that side and back down the military side to the closest Army installation--in this case Fort Hood. III Corps received the tasking from its boss at FORSCOM, not from the FBI. And there was no option to just say no. This is much ado about nothing in terms of Clark and Army involvement--he wasn't the commander at Hood, but so what if he was? The Army lawfully provided support in the form of equipment and training to civil authorities as required and in accordance with standing procedures.

Your distinction between ADCM & ADCS is lost on me--while their duties differ, they are both equally bound by the same laws. And there is nothing to indicate the military broke any laws.