Thursday, February 28, 2008

Waco: Fifteen years later



The first time I watched Waco: The Rules of Engagement it was a revelation. Up until that point I had not paid a lot of attention to the matter. I accepted the conventional wisdom that a bunch of dangerous religious nuts killed themselves and their families after a stand-off with law enforcement. Just a bunch of crazies like the Aryan Brotherhood or The Order.

W:TROE called most of that into question. It turned out that the Branch Davidians were multi-racial with many educated adults as members. They had nothing in common with racists like the Aryan Nation. Then there was the 911 call. Wayne Martin called 911 when the raid started. That just seemed like an odd action for someone who was eager to fight the federal government in an apocalyptic battle.

But most of all, I was struck by the videotapes. Planning for the raid might have been haphazard, but the ATF made certain that they had plenty of videotapes so they could record their big bust at Mount Carmel. It made you wonder: was the “dynamic entry” search a law enforcement necessity or was it a PR move by an embattled agency?

The aftermath was weird. I think Mickey Kaus summed it up best in a column he wrote for The New Republic:

Am I alone in thinking there’s something perverse, even a bit obscene, about the current lionization of Attorney General Janet Reno? She made a disastrous decision that resulted in the loss of more than seventy lives. In a bizarre bit of political alchemy, this somehow protected her from suffering any of the consequences that normally attend disastrously handled responsibilities. Far from restoring accountability, Reno seems to have hit on the formula for avoiding it. Make a dreadful mistake? Go immediately on ‘Nightline’. Say the buck stops with you. Recount in moving terms the agony of your decision. And watch you polls rise.
It was classic Washington. CYA. “Mistakes were made.” “We are sorry”. “Let’s move on.”

Kopel and Blackman understood the problem with the Reno passive accountability:

There is perhaps no institution in the United States government with more unchecked power than the Department of Justice. The job of attorney general is therefore one of the most difficult in the entire cabinet. It cannot be performed effectively by an attorney general who looks the other way at misconduct by her own employees. Nor can it performed effectively by an attorney general who, having been deceived into approving a plan which directly led to the unnecessary death of seventy-six persons, fails to discipline a single one of the persons who deceived her.


The MSM was surprisingly complacent about the big questions raised by Waco. By and large, they did not challenge the government. Instead, they served as its mouthpiece. As Kaus notes, it was strange to see reporters fawning over Reno after she presided over a catastrophic failure that left twenty-six children dead.

The MSM was amazingly happy to accept government statements at face value. They continued to do so even after it was clear that some of those statements were wrong, misleading, or outright lies.

Moreover, the press helped to demonize those who raised questions. Critics were lumped together with “far-right militias”, “conspiracy theorists”, and other kooks.

(There is an interesting side note on this point. Kooks who believed conspiracy theories about the Clintons were called “right-wing kooks” by the MSM. Lefties who believed conspiracy theories about the JFK assassination were labeled “buffs”, “critics”, and “researchers”.)

At the time, Waco raised three serious questions that deserved debate. The first was the use of paramilitary tactics in law enforcement. They have become commonplace but Waco showed that they can have tragic consequences. The second issue was one of simple honesty. ATF and the FBI tried to cover-up the truth after the tragedy. Even if their actions were justified, they had no right to spin and lie as they did. The third issue was the use of the press by law enforcement to demonize suspected criminals before they come to trial.

Those issues remain relevant today. Unfortunately, few seem interested in raising them.



2 comments:

Anchorman said...

In "Stalling for Time," the FBI hostage negotiator went into detail about the actions of the leadership.

He was somewhat diplomatic, but made it known that he thought the leadership on site and in Washington pushed for the violent end. He had been making good progress, for the most part.

He also talked about Ruby Ridge (incidentally, some of the same on-site leadership was at both standoffs) and grilled the on-site team, as well. I think, though, he was either late to arrive on site or didn't actually go to Ruby Ridge.

Edward said...

An incompetent State
asserting its sovereignty
by slaughtering innocents;
Its every action intended
to provoke religious nuts
into group suicide.