Report: Clark Role Limited in Waco Conflagration

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

[aristeides]

Who was the "acting CO" of III Corps that the document refers to as appproving this?

[mark502inf]

Don't know. Would be the ranking officer on post on whatever day that particular action occurred. Most likely one of the major generals (2-star): the Deputy Corps Commander, either one of the division commanders, or the COSCOM Commander. But again, so what? What was wrong or unlawful? Providing tasked equipment or supplies is simply not a big-time decision; would have been a very routine action.

[Yasotay]

interesting....thanks

[hoosierham]

If Clark feels the need to deny involvment ,then it follows that at least some Democrats realize the Waco massacre was unneeded, and un-American enough to be a voting issue with a significant number of people.

[Yasotay]

I disagree with you on several points. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 was basic law at West Point, and YES there was a CLEAR requirement to question the tasking and any General Officer should have required his JAG to take a formal position on that subject. I understood that the FEDs stated in court records that they believed drugs were being made at the church and that allowed a newly inserted exception to policy of the Posse Comitatus Act to be used. My brother was an S-3 at Ft Hood during that time and he did tell me that the training funds for border and drugs operations was attractive.

If Schoomaker was ADCM there is a very high chance that he was involved in the planning. Maneuver is planning. That would have been a clear criminal violation of the Posse Comitatis Act. Support is Support depending on what your meaning of is is.....

[Yasotay]

Does that mean there is hope for the Democrats? :)

[Smokin' Joe]

Seems to me there were two military higher-ups who counselled Janet Reno on the use of the CS/Methylene Chloride gas mix, saying it was harmless (even though it was banned for warfare by international convention). Three medical journal articles uncovered by Rep. Sonny Bono's staff in half a day said otherwise, that in enclosed spaces, and especially with young children and elderly, the gas would cause lethal pulmonary edema within 6 hours.

Was Clark one of the advisors? If so, here's the "indirect and fleeting" involvement which led to the deaths of the folks trapped inside.

[Smokin' Joe]

The Army lawfully provided support in the form of equipment and training to civil authorities as required and in accordance with standing procedures.

So it was made to seem. The only way military equipment and support could have been used legally was in the event of drug interdiction.

It came out in the hearings that exactly none of the personnel in the raid team had taken either the OSHA course in the hazardous chemicals involved in drug-lab seizure, nor had ANY of them taken the course offered by the DEA on how to sieze a Meth lab without having it blow up in your face. It has only been in the last few years that Meth production has utilized pseudoepehdrine and ephedrine containing cold remedies in a different process to produce Meth, the older processes were much more chemically involved and the labs had only a couple of places in the procedure where things could be safely stopped. Otherwise, the evidence would destroy itself. The chemicals involved are dangerous/hazardous/toxic, and the types of releases possible in uncontrolled conditions, especially with gunfire, dangerous also.

The lack of training of anyone on the raid team simply indicates that there was not only no 'Meth lab' as early reports stated, but no possibility of finding one. Keep in mind that the ATF had a snitch in the compound right up until an hour or so before the raid (Koresh let him go), and the picture snaps into focus.

There was no justification for the use of military hardware on either the initial raid or during the seige, in fact, it was illegal.

[Smokin' Joe]

If I had nothing to do with it, I would not have called my involvement "indirect and fleeting", but would have said that I had nothing to do with it. So what was the 'indirect and fleeting' involvement?

[Yasotay]

Providing tasked equipment or supplies is simply not a big-time decision; would have been a very routine action.

Not so routine when Federal agents that had been training on your base were killed and pictures of the DEA surrendering were being shown worldwide. Not your normal "tasking" to have a general officer brief the Attorney General. My CEV was normally "tasked" for parades .... not ramming down the walls of churches....

[autoresponder]

WARNING - NOT MEANT FOR KIDS!:





"THE CLINTONS" AUDIO:

[aristeides]

And if it was not routine, I wonder why the "Acting CO" wouldn't wait to have the real CO come back and authorize it.

[Yasotay]

I don't know but Funk's public comments about Clark are very interesting .... when Federal agents start dying tasking are no longer "routine" ... in Berlin ....I remember one tasking I got during Desert Storm, as soon as the airwar started many contract truck drivers quit. I got a tasking for twenty truck drivers .... we filled a C-141 that night and it left. The CG was there late at night to see them off and nothing was routine. It was a very surreal. Things happen and most of the time you just don't ask questions .... but Generals are paid to ask questions .... as a Company Commander ....I also remember questioning my S-3 many times about tasking ....sometimes even my Battalion Commander .... but in most tasking situations mark502inf is correct. I think you may have something with the signature being blacked out. Clark clearly knew how to make the system work and it was his chance to get noticed by the Clintons .... and he took it.

[mark502inf]

The two military officers who met with Reno were Schoomaker and Boykin. Don't know if they discussed CS, but from the "can't grade your paper" account, it appears they did not go into much detail.

[mark502inf]

I wonder why the "Acting CO" wouldn't wait to have the real CO come back and authorize it.

Fellas, it was a tasking from a higher military HQ that had already been staffed, vetted & authorized. The role of the military at Hood was simply to fill the requirement as specified. Now, if anyone at Hood thought it was flaky, they could have challenged it at anytime. Nobody did for the good reason that there was nothing illegal or out of order.

[mark502inf]

Guys, please check out this link. A real good source on Posse Comitatus and other laws bearing specifically on military involvement at Waco.

http://www.rickross.com/reference/waco/waco_report_05.html

[Yasotay]

Fellas, it was a tasking from a higher military HQ that had already been staffed, vetted & authorized. Now, if anyone at Hood thought it was flaky, they could have challenged it at anytime. Nobody did for the good reason that there was nothing illegal or out of order.

OK the 'staffing' that I saw in the 502nd (Berlin Bde) was usually a yellow memo pad with each staff officer initialing off .... sometimes that would take a week to complete. When something was urgent you wouldn't staff or vetted it, the mission required that you do it ASAP. I think you are probably correct, but from everything that I was taught, the authorizing general sure should have known better .... if a Hudson High Grad (and student of Clark) knows about Posse Comitatus, I sure would have hoped the CGs JAG would have given him the correct answer. Also the ADC had better have only been supporting not planning operations. I hope they did not "grade" any papers .... but I still remember Clark, as my instructor, paying very close attention to details and grading my 'papers' ruthlessly. I did not know Boykin or Schoomaker, but it is very difficult to believe two Special Operations officers not becoming active in planning.

[Yasotay]

OK

[Yasotay]

On February 2, 1993, Operation Alliance made a request to the Commanding General of JTF-6 for the use of Special Forces personnel assigned to his organization.\221\ Lt. Col. Philip W. Lindley,\222\ the U.S. Army Special Forces Command Staff Judge Advocate, was notified of this request and advised JTF-6, --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \221\ Memorandum from Colleen Callahan and Robert Tevens to Geoff Moulton and Lew Merletti, ``Chronology and Witnesses Re: Military Support of ATF'' (July 14, 1993). Treasury Documents T004589, T004590. \222\ At the time of the Waco incident Philip Lindley served as a Major in the U.S. Army. However, since that time, he has been promoted and testified before the subcommittees with the rank of the Lieutenant Colonel. He will be referred to as Lt. Col. Lindley throughout the Report. . . . that Rapid Support Unit (RSU) \223\ assistance in actual planning and rehearsal of proposed ``takedown'' could violate posse comitatus law, expose RSU to liability. [A q]uestion also arises as to appropriateness of RSU giving non-METL, \224\ i.e., SOT/CQB training to ATF.\225\

It is pretty clear from just getting to this point alone that a JAG officer did object! The authorizing general should be burned .... thanks for the link ...I'll keep reading.

[Yasotay]

e. findings concerning military involvement in the government operations at waco

1. The Posse Comitatus Act was not violated.

a. No violations of the Posse Comitatus Act occurred up to February 28, 1993. The subcommittees conclude that no actual violation of the Posse Comitatus Act occurred as a result of the military support provided to the ATF through February 29, 1993. The subcommittees review of this question was divided into two parts: the support provided by active duty military personnel prior to February 28 and the support provided by Texas National Guard troops up to and on February 28, 1993. The subcommittees find no violation of the Posse Comitatus Act as a result of the support provided by the active duty military personnel who facilitated the training of ATF agents at Fort Hood, TX in late February 1993. The ATF's initial request to Operation Alliance included a request that military medical personnel actually participate in the raid on the Branch Davidian residence. The ATF also requested that military personnel participate in the formulation of the ATF's overall raid plan against the Davidians' residence. These requests raised the concern of military lawyers due to their Posse Comitatus implications. The subcommittees conclude that these officers were correct to raise these concerns and that their actions helped prevent a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act.

Thanks, very good reading .... they sure went right to the edge. I will always still think the authorizing general should be burned.