The Waco Tragedy: to what extent a better approach of FBI could have changed the catastrophic ending?

Résumé du document

It is very difficult to give an opinion about the Waco tragedy: all news reports are subject to a dual interpretation, and each party defends its version with strong arguments. As an outsider, it's impossible to verify which report is false and which one is true. That's the reason why my personal commentary on the Waco tragedy can't be neutral: I tend to be more confident in the information given by State authorities than by members of the branch Davidians. Thus, I will defend the point of view that the way the FBI negotiated with David Koresh could surely have been better, but that the leader of the Mount Carmel did not really encourage other approaches because of his behavior...

Extraits

[...] The child seems to be extremely stressed and frightened, and asks if “someone will come in and kill As the FBI never threatened to slaughter the occupants of the Ranch, we can reasonably presume that some adults inside had told the child that the federal agents were the community's enemies and that they were here to kill every member of the Ranch. The situation is very different for the FBI if it is confronting an entrenched madman who refuses to surrender, or if it faces an armed and hostile group, which is persuaded the Armageddon is taking place, as Koresh predicted it. The use of tear-gas had tragic consequences, but the original idea was simply to reach the goal of arresting David Koresh and to avoid the blood bath that a “final battle” between the Davidians and FBI would have caused. [...]

[...] The Waco Tragedy: to what extent a better approach of FBI could have changed the catastrophic ending? It is very difficult to give an opinion about the Waco tragedy: all news reports are subject to a dual interpretation, and each party defends its version with strong arguments. As an outsider, it's impossible to verify which report is false and which one is true. That's the reason why my personal commentary on the Waco tragedy can't be neutral: I tend to be more confident in the information given by State authorities than by members of the branch Davidians. [...]

[...] Their goal was to make him leave the Ranch. The first negotiations showed that the Mount Carmel leader was absolutely not willing to give himself up: at the beginning, he pretended that he was ready to self-surrender in exchange for a 58-minute- long speech on Christian radios, then for a participation in a religious talk show on CBN (Christian Broadcasting Network). Afterwards, he asked to finish his work about the Seven Seals in the Apocalypse. This lasted 51 days without Koresh proving at anytime a readiness to submit to the orders of the federal agents, who simply tried to enforce the law: they just required to make sure that no dangerous weapons were in possession of David Koresh. [...]

[...] After one hour, the fusillade had killed 4 ATF agents and had wounded 16 others. What reaction should have the FBI confronted with an heavily armed man (this was not a suspicion anymore but a certitude after the rifle fire), ready to slaughter federal agents and refusing to give himself up? Putting aside the religious aspect and of the vague accusation of child abuse, the main fact is that David Koresh could be considered from then as an entrenched madman. [...]

[...] It appears clearly that the accusations of child abuse and of violence against children were founded: sins as small as spilling milk, the children said, they were struck with a wooden paddle known as helper' ( The testimonies received by the team make also clear that the inhabitant of the Ranch were trained for Armageddon: train for the final battle, they were instructed to fight each other, and if they did not fight hard enough, they were paddled for that, too.” The conclusions of Dr. Perry were very pessimistic. He considered the ending could be nothing but “explosive”. In sum, all these elements justify the approach of the FBI, who never considered David Koresh as an innocent religious leader, but as a dangerous madman unwilling to surrender. [...]