Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 sebster wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
That is a major point of contention actually. No one knows who opened fire first, and evidence that would be critical to determining who did conveniently vanished.

That line of argument doesn't work. Sure, the ATF could have shot first, they're busting in to an armed compound with assault rifles, if they see people drawing those guns in a threatening situation they're entitled to shoot to protect their lives. Point being, when cops come in, you don't draw guns against them unless you want a shoot out... which is a flat out crazy thing to ever try.

Now, note I'm not saying the police aren't to blame. They're to blame for thinking an armed raid was needed, and for then fething up the armed raid. But none of that removes a considerable portion of responsibility from the Branch Davidians - when you draw guns on police then there's going to be dead bodies, and most likely your own will be among them. Ignoring that just because your politics wants you to place all blame at the foot of the government is dodgy thinking.

So the cops start shooting after taking up defensive positions, they really haven't made any effort to negotiate, defenders grab guns and start defensive fire, protecting the innocents in the building, while desperately trying to reach THE POLICE to get these tax agents to stop trying to murder them all. Yup, goddamn certainly sounds like a straight up ambush to me, those poor pigs never saw it coming. Remember no other attempt to serve a warrant on the Davidian compound was ever made, no actually intelligence was considered, the ATF LIED to get air assets and other support, and went in guns blazing for no good reason at all. When Koresh knew the raid was coming, knew the ATF was sniffing around, had asked to speak to the lead agent multiple times, OFFERED to have them come down and check their paper work. They did everything they could for a peaceful situation, till armed officers began machine gunning their home.

I also find your inherent trust of law enforcement kinds disturbing Sebs, especially given the rampant examples of police and federal over reach here in the United States.

 sebster wrote:

. While the ATF planned simultaneous points of entry, there was still an agent at the front door, presenting the warrant - who was shot and killed for his efforts

That never happened. On ANY time line of events. 70 odd guys in ski masks with machine guns rolled up in unmarked POVs, surrounded the place and shots rang out. Again what would you do?

 sebster wrote:

Let us reflect upon the fact that a man who covers his face shows reason to be ashamed of what he is doing. A man who takes it upon himself to shed blood while concealing his identity is a revolting perversion of the warrior ethic." - Col Jeff Cooper

Yeah, oh the shame of firemen and astronaughts.

Or maybe, you know, like lots of professions involving dangerous situations, there are lots of reasons for tactical police to cover their faces that have nothing to do with shame. I mean, for feth's sake.

If a cop has to cover his face in the pursuit of his duty, with a ski mask not a rebreather or a helmet like an astronaut or a fire fighter, which has NO PURPOSE BUT CONCEALING YOUR IDENTITY then YES you can absolutely call them out on it. If it's such a tactical benefit to wear a ski mask I'll have to call Marine Corps TECOM and ask why such useful equipment isn't included in our infantry training curriculum.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
So the cops start shooting after taking up defensive positions, they really haven't made any effort to negotiate, defenders grab guns and start defensive fire, protecting the innocents in the building, while desperately trying to reach THE POLICE to get these tax agents to stop trying to murder them all. Yup, goddamn certainly sounds like a straight up ambush to me, those poor pigs never saw it coming.

I never said ambush. It doesn't have to be an ambush to be a really stupid set of decisions made by the Branch Davidians. Don't just throw in words like that, it makes a nonsense of trying to actually discuss this.

Remember no other attempt to serve a warrant on the Davidian compound was ever made, no actually intelligence was considered, the ATF LIED to get air assets and other support, and went in guns blazing for no good reason at all. When Koresh knew the raid was coming, knew the ATF was sniffing around, had asked to speak to the lead agent multiple times, OFFERED to have them come down and check their paper work. They did everything they could for a peaceful situation, till armed officers began machine gunning their home.

And now you've gone from pointing out it is unknown who fired first, to just asserting that officers started machine gunning the complex.

I also find your inherent trust of law enforcement kinds disturbing Sebs, especially given the rampant examples of police and federal over reach here in the United States.

My fething what? Where in the feth does that even come from? Just... fething read what I'm fething saying.

I have said the ATF fethed up. Because they totally, 100% fethed up. The raid was not needed, compromised and poorly executed.

But what I am telling you is that it is still completely, 100% crazypants stupid to resist law enforcement when they come to your cult compound. Whether they look scary or not, the decision to fight the law means you are very likely to die. The decision to co-operate and let them raid your premises means you have a lot of legal avenues to challenge government actions.

That never happened. On ANY time line of events.

True, and my mistake. Not sure if I was thinking of another event, or an early mistaken claim from the story, but I should have checked it before looking it up.

70 odd guys in ski masks with machine guns rolled up in unmarked POVs, surrounded the place and shots rang out. Again what would you do?

Your assertion that it is impossible to distinguish guys in ski masks as either tactical police or crazy evil attackers is really weak. I mean, look at that guy you posted earlier. He sure is scary looking, but he's also really fething obviously a cop.

And it also makes no fething sense when we know the Branch Davidians knew of the raid ahead of time. OMG the law is coming, get your guns just in case. And now OMG there's masked gunman entering the compound, but who knows if they're those cops... better just shoot them just in case!

Come on.

If a cop has to cover his face in the pursuit of his duty, with a ski mask not a rebreather or a helmet like an astronaut or a fire fighter, which has NO PURPOSE BUT CONCEALING YOUR IDENTITY then YES you can absolutely call them out on it. If it's such a tactical benefit to wear a ski mask I'll have to call Marine Corps TECOM and ask why such useful equipment isn't included in our infantry training curriculum.

Are you seriously claiming balaclavas have no purpose but to cover your identity? No concept of protection from the kinds of explosions and the like that you see in combat? fething seriously?

And they're not used by military units because like much kit they've got plusses and minuses. For troops who might expect to be on patrol for many hours while unlikely to engage the enemy, they're far from ideal. For police who expect to engage in a raid in the next few minutes, and expect that raid to last maybe less than a minute, they make a lot more sense.

No, far more sensible to speculate that these troops wore them purely out of shame. Never fething mind that agents who died at Waco are publically listed, and many of them have come out since and written of their experiences. So by your claim they're shameful enough to cover their faces in the attack, but not so shamed that they wouldn't talk to the media about it afterwards. I mean, fething seriously, just think about what you're trying to claim here.

Balacavas serve no protective function PERIOD. Unless you're trying to keep warm, but since this is the middle of Texas in spring, I doubt they were worried about snow.

And I admit I misspoke above when I said the agents opened fire.

Thought for the day: Why the hell do tax agents have guns any way?

You'd dare take away their 2nd amendment rights?

I can't carry when I go to work, if there's a criminal case that has a force risk real cops (i.e. the FBI) can handle it.

How do you live with that blatant abuse of the 2nd amendment I'll never know. (you know I'm not being serious)

Frankly on googling your question I found loads of whackjobs circlejerking each other on how your country is now owned by the ilerminitus and how only they know. Or something.

Real crazy stuff.

There's this statement apparently from the IRS

“As law enforcement officials, IRS Criminal Investigation Special Agents are equipped similarly to other federal, state and local law enforcement organizations. Special Agents receive training on the appropriate and safe use of assigned weapons. IRS Criminal Investigation has internal controls and oversight in place to ensure all law enforcement tools, including weapons are used appropriately,”

Yeah that's a bad idea, we need to reduce numbers of Federal LEOs, if a criminal investigation needs to be done call the FBI. Everyone else can just hand them the saw.

KalashnikovMarine wrote:Balacavas serve no protective function PERIOD. Unless you're trying to keep warm, but since this is the middle of Texas in spring, I doubt they were worried about snow.

I was always under the impression balaclavas were there to conceal the officer's identities so that their families need not fear reprisals when dealing with criminal organizations (a commonplace tactic of Pablo Escobar)

Maybe south of the border, I've never heard of it here. The negative association of masked LEOs here in the states makes it pretty rare to my knowledge. At least with the guys I know any way. I'll ask one of the guys I know on a Gang Task Force if they use balaclavas for anything.

 sebster wrote:

Let us reflect upon the fact that a man who covers his face shows reason to be ashamed of what he is doing. A man who takes it upon himself to shed blood while concealing his identity is a revolting perversion of the warrior ethic." - Col Jeff Cooper

Yeah, oh the shame of firemen and astronaughts.

Or maybe, you know, like lots of professions involving dangerous situations, there are lots of reasons for tactical police to cover their faces that have nothing to do with shame. I mean, for feth's sake.

Fireman and astronauts are now warriors who "shed blood"?

This whole thread has descended into a theatre of the absurd. The only rational responce to it is....



edit: To try to get the thread back on track, the NSA claims 50 terror attacks were thwarted by their programs.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/nsa-director-50-potential-terrorist-attacks-thwarted-controversial/story?id=19428148

Easy E wrote:This whole thread has descended into a theatre of the absurd. The only rational responce to it is....



edit: To try to get the thread back on track, the NSA claims 50 terror attacks were thwarted by their programs.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/nsa-director-50-potential-terrorist-attacks-thwarted-controversial/story?id=19428148

Doesn't matter. It still doesn't outweigh the loss of freedom from the entire population.

"Here's 50 wins for us, no you can't see our sources or any form of evidence"

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Balacavas serve no protective function PERIOD.

It isn't supposed to be protective, it is supposed to be delicious.

Balacavas serve no protective function PERIOD.

I call BS.......cannot give exact figures on the reduction of Cold Weather Injuries when it became a standard issue item.....

Allow me to amend myself, it's not useful for anything BUT cold weather gear.

Oh no KM...I'm not letting you off the hook.....Balacavas fall under Frazz (I agree with him) version with "Tacticool Gear"....its the intimidation factor or to some the laughter factor...mainly the laughter factor.....the guy looks all cool but huffing and puffing due to the noticeable spare tire around his waist

Nope I said it was good cold weather, otherwise it's stupid.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Balacavas serve no protective function PERIOD. Unless you're trying to keep warm, but since this is the middle of Texas in spring, I doubt they were worried about snow.

It protects from flames and hot gas. Which police forces have found, perhaps unsurprisingly, very common in close quarters fighting, especially when there's flash bangs getting thrown around.

Thought for the day: Why the hell do tax agents have guns any way?

Why was Treasury the guys who managed to put Capone and Mickey Cohen behind bars? Because your Federal Government is a confused warren of departments and bureaus competing in an endless turf war. And no, that isn't good, but if you're genuinely concerned about placing too much trust in your government, well that system must be preferable to a powerful, unified government with strong control over all its agencies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Yeah that's a bad idea, we need to reduce numbers of Federal LEOs, if a criminal investigation needs to be done call the FBI. Everyone else can just hand them the saw.

That's kind of funny, because comments like yours above were said during the Gangster Wars, when the FBI began arming itself and people complained that if armed men were needed local police should be called on.

Its perception KM...we rolled out the "Wire" wearing "Skull" bandana's under our Oakly Ballistic eyewear...we look tacticool along with tacticaly able to "opt out" a insurgent wearing man-jammies and a scarf wrapped around the top of their head. Besides a bakacava interfere's with how the ACH seats on ones head

Here in the States though.....if your on a "elite" federal response team.....and know your overweight.....no one will recognize you due to the bakacavas...

There in the former Soviet Union a bakaclava equates to a Chechen fighter...or Bos....or Kosovo fighter...if you were in the US military dealing with those chuckleheads...

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Fireman and astronauts are now warriors who "shed blood"?

No, and that's a fine, fine piece of nitpicking. Well done.

Meanwhile, I'm just going to continue shaking my head at the sheer, balls to the wall stupidity of someone claiming that officers acting openly as recognised members of government agency must be ashamed of it because they wear gear designed to proect their faces on tactical ops.

I never wore my Bakaclava on tactical ops because it doesn't protect shiat and in case of a flash fire from explosion I rather not have a flammable item on my face or my troops face...I'm with KM on that on the serious side. Besides the fact its a cold weather gear its also very effective of masking your identity.

edit

To ensure I have this aim right

Meanwhile, I'm just going to continue shaking my head at the sheer, balls to the wall stupidity of someone claiming that officers acting openly as recognised members of government agency must be ashamed of it because they wear gear designed to proect their faces on tactical ops.

You seriously lack combat experience and you seriously lack a sense of humor.

sebster wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Fireman and astronauts are now warriors who "shed blood"?

No, and that's a fine, fine piece of nitpicking. Well done.

Meanwhile, I'm just going to continue shaking my head at the sheer, balls to the wall stupidity of someone claiming that officers acting openly as recognised members of government agency must be ashamed of it because they wear gear designed to proect their faces on tactical ops.

I think KalashnikovMarine simply just prefers stripper cops.

I don't think he likes stick figures.....

 sebster wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Balacavas serve no protective function PERIOD. Unless you're trying to keep warm, but since this is the middle of Texas in spring, I doubt they were worried about snow.

It protects from flames and hot gas. Which police forces have found, perhaps unsurprisingly, very common in close quarters fighting, especially when there's flash bangs getting thrown around.
.

Have you ever seen cotton burn? I trained in CQC, have personally thrown all sorts of grenades, and I've never EVER had a situation where "Gee cloth on my face that obscures part of my vision and has the potential to light on fire would TOTALLY make this better"


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jihadin wrote:
I never wore my Bakaclava on tactical ops because it doesn't protect shiat and in case of a flash fire from explosion I rather not have a flammable item on my face or my troops face...I'm with KM on that on the serious side. Besides the fact its a cold weather gear its also very effective of masking your identity.

edit

To ensure I have this aim right

Meanwhile, I'm just going to continue shaking my head at the sheer, balls to the wall stupidity of someone claiming that officers acting openly as recognised members of government agency must be ashamed of it because they wear gear designed to proect their faces on tactical ops.

You seriously lack combat experience and you seriously lack a sense of humor.

Quit reading my mind Jihadin

Getting an idea someone thinks a flashbang is thrown to detonate at shoulder height instead of on the floor.

How not to use a flashbang but notice it was toss on the floor by arm movement



Proper use of a flashbang is its thrown on floor like your trying to skip it. Its a distraction, draws attention to the bouncing baby boomer and goes off. Now your ears are ringing, your "spot" seeing and a bit confused from a mild concussion you just received. The flashbang is capable of setting off volatile fumes since one never knows whats on the floor in a room its best to play it safe. Before you jump...everyone goes in on a flashbang detonation

A basaclava is more a hinderance. Everyone entering a room much prefer 100% visual. No one wants to shoot a buddy or a innocent bystander for a thread from the bakaclava that's at the corner of your eye that gives an effect someone carrying. Most man-jammies are whitish and something small and black stands out. The possibility of shooting a bystander has increased.

 Jihadin wrote:
I never wore my Bakaclava on tactical ops because it doesn't protect shiat and in case of a flash fire from explosion I rather not have a flammable item on my face or my troops face...I'm with KM on that on the serious side.

If you're with KM, then you think that the ATF was ashamed enough to hide their faces on the raid they were about to undertake, but also leaked the raid to the media...

Besides the fact its a cold weather gear its also very effective of masking your identity.

Oh come on. The ATF fething leaked the raid to the media. There's plenty of criticism due to the ATF for the raid, that should have been a drastic last step taken extremely seriously, as a PR op.

Instead we've crazy nonsense about how the soldiers involved were ashamed of the operation, because they wore balaclavas. fething seriously, this is straight up crazy fething bs nonsense.

You seriously lack combat experience and you seriously lack a sense of humor.

My sense of humour ends when people post insane bs, and other posters wander in largely agreeing with it.

And I need exactly zero seconds of tactical combat to know that the soldiers undertaking it aren't wearing masks out of shame. All that requires is a functioning brain. Now, whether an officer might wear it because he thinks it will protect minor threats, or just because it looks cool, I don't much care. But crazy ass nonsense should be called out, everytime.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Have you ever seen cotton burn? I trained in CQC, have personally thrown all sorts of grenades, and I've never EVER had a situation where "Gee cloth on my face that obscures part of my vision and has the potential to light on fire would TOTALLY make this better"

Well then, obviously the only conclusion is deep shame on the part of the tactical officer. Uh huh. Yep. Perfectly fething sensible conclusion to draw, over a raid in which the fething ATF leaked the damn thing to the media beforehand.

That was a quote from Col. Jeff Cooper about masked men in general. Not sure why you're elbows deep in your donkey cave over this.

Personal statement though? If they aren't ashamed they damn well should be. Which would explain the multiple cover ups by multiple agencies including the FBI, agents changing their testimony from what they told reporters compared to what they said on the stand, you know stuff like that. A deep sense of personal regret for their absolute failure as a laughable excuse for a law enforcement officer would be excellent, but no one got fired or investigated and they're probably drinking beer with Lon Horiuchi instead. Interestingly the latter was also at Waco.

What? Can't tell the officer that KM posted a bit wee heavy? That's not body armor he is wearing....its a Mollee Vest. If he was wearing body armor then it should have been on top of his jacket. That looks like a nylon material jacket under the Mollee Vest. That's a no go. I do believe the fed has a similar standard of Height and Weight. If the officer knows news crew are going to be around filming live and he knows he's "questionable" on being close to popping tape. He throw on the Bakacava to mask his identity from his Chain of Command to avoid to be called in to make height and weight standards as long as possible to buy himself time to lose the excess weight. I do the same damn thing to till operation execution. Hey if your thinking I'm all out bashing the Feds rapid response teams its all good. Nothing but rivalry. So call it BS or whatever you like but it still stands. You Lack Combat Experience, You Lack a good sense of humor. You lack the understanding of friendly rivalry. You also do not know as most here don't that these teams train with 160th right? In fact quite a few of these team members on the fed side are former SPECOPS and/or high speed grunts. NSDQ and brush up a bit more on the US Military

Hahaha. That guy should be ashamed for his merciless repeated assaults on the local doughnut place that is true. Jihadin the guy pictured is a regular ATF fed, not one of the high speed/low drag types from HRT or the other Federal Tac teams.