alt.conspiracy.pynchon.waco

[Coffey, Mitchell R]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: David Morris [mailto:fqmorris at hotmail.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 12:24 PM
>To: mitchell.coffey at baesystems.com; pynchon-l at waste.org
>Subject: RE: alt.conspiracy.pynchon.waco
>
>
>
>>From: "Coffey, Mitchell R" <mitchell.coffey at baesystems.com>
>>
>> >From: David Morris >
>> >Your facts are but one version, of which you seem so certain
>that I wonder how you came by them.  However, 
>arguing/investigating those 
>facts is beyond this forum, I believe.  Different sets of 
>facts will produce 
>different moral-logical judgements, I therefore reject your 
>last conclusion 
>above.
>> >
>> >But here's a hypothetical alternative which would have removed all 
>>uncertainty:  Had Reno and the Feds not bashed-in the walls of the 
>>compound, we wouldn't have to wonder whether it was suicide or an
>(accidental?) Fed bar-b-que.  Waiting the situation out would 
>have removed 
>all uncertainty.
>> >
>> >DM
>>
>>Oh oh, Solipsism alert!
>>
>>Did or did not Koresh [... more questions about facts that could fill 
>>months of investigative hearings, which I'm not going to attempt to 
>>debate.]
>>Obviously, I got _my_ facts from my CIA/New World Order 
>contacts who, of 
>>course, must remain obvious.
>
>or might you mean obfuscatious?


OK, pretty good play on my play on words.


>>Other versions of the facts - well, I consider the sources, the local 
>>militia unit, perhaps.  More importantly, I consider their 
>lack of internal 
>>logic, which may be within the keen of this forum. Recall 
>that the topic of 
>>paranoia rise a time or two within Pinchon's works.
>
>Just because you're not paranoid doesn't mean...
>
>>As I said, Reno & the FBI erred grossly.  What you are 
>allowing as at least 
>>equally probable to the CIA/NWO set of facts is that Reno & 
>the FBI should 
>>_want_ to barbecue small children.  For this to have any probability, 
>>however, some story would have to be proposed as to _why_ they should 
>>_wish_ the mass murder of the innocent
>
>What I am allowing EXACTLY is the possibility (probability) that those 
>children were an inconvenience to the FBI/ATF in their pursuit 
>of  revenge 
>and dominance for Koresh's drawing first blood.  An inconvenience that 
>didn't stop their plans.
>
>>though you might first propound why they should want to 
>persecute poor Rev. 
>>Koresh in the first place.
>
>That part's simple.  It was their job, and their dicks were hard.
>
>>What you are doing is a standard method of the paranoid 
>style: asserting on 
>>the face of it that bad results were intended.
>
>Wrong.  Read "what I'm allowing" above.
>
>DM


Put this way, we don't particularly disagree.  It was your - to me - 
apparent reference to some occult set of facts, contradicting mine,
re: your comment above "Your facts are but one version, of which you 
seem so certain that I wonder how you came by them."  In fact, in the
analysis you have just given, you do not refer to any set of fact that
might not have been reported by your local station's Action News Team.  
You had me thinking you were either under the influence of your local
Free Militia Unit (AKA, "Guys In Camo Pants") or directly wired through
Noam Chomsky, ala "Being John Malkovitch".  I apologize that I am wrong, 
but, reading back, it doesn't seem like I interpreted your comments 
unreasonably.

Mitchell Coffey