All Episodes
Previous Next
July 27, 1998 - Bill Cooper
58:46
BATF Special Agent Littleton #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Light the candle of the hour, lead the hour of the fire.
Light the candle for the purpose of knowing what is so divine.
And I'm gonna prove to you that I am a man of my word. See you tomorrow.
I'm gonna prove to you that I am a man of my word.
I'm William Cooper.
You're listening to the Hour of the Time.
I'm William Cooper.
Ladies and gentlemen, today we have a tape that was made at a Texas Best Seminars in
June of this year.
That's just last month.
It is an incredible tape.
Texas Best Seminars is conducted all over the state of Texas.
It's usually a conservative audience that attends for these gatherings.
And the audiences are large.
They're good, decent people.
At this Texas Best seminar, which took place in Austin, Texas, they invited the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms to send a representative to talk to them and then answer questions that the audience had.
Well, the portion of the BATF agents' talk is omitted from this tape because we want you to hear the questions and the answers.
You're going to hear that these are folks just like you.
You will not hear the end of this tape today, so we will continue it tomorrow and possibly the day after until it's finished.
But pay attention to the questions and pay attention to the answers.
Also notice that the BATF sent someone who is not well educated, did not have a good command of the English language, and You'll find some of his comments and answers to the questions absolutely astounding.
You're also going to hear some of the audience ask some questions that in my estimation are pretty dumb, but I'm sure that the people who asked them thought that they were important.
You're also going to hear some very intelligent, very to-the-point questions.
And I think you're going to find this hour, and tomorrow's episode of the Hour of the Time, extremely interesting at the very least, and informative, educating, and eye-opening at the very best.
So, take notes if you want, but listen carefully.
Hi, my name is Dale Littleton.
I'm the Senior Special Agent for the Bureau of Alcohol Abuse and Violence stationed here in Austin.
And what I'd like to talk about for about 20-25 minutes is about ACF.
A lot of people do not understand what we are about or what we do.
Okay?
I don't know.
I have a question, sir.
Will you answer to this audience yes or no?
I have two questions.
Are you funded by and do you answer to the Communist United Nations?
Number two, why is it every time a bomb does go off in a building, federal or whatever, the ACF is right there on the spot and no access is allowed from anybody else?
And then you all subliminally put out, well, it may have been a militia group or an anti-government group.
Why is that?
Answer to your first question is no.
We're not funded by Communist country.
The answer to your second question about why we were able to respond so quickly to bombings, and everybody else was?
Okay.
I have. I was part of the team that investigated bombings.
And in the last five years I ran the team that would go out and investigate bombings where
we had specialized people where we'd bring in our explosive people, we'd bring in our chemists,
we'd bring our agents in.
I never excluded any local authorities.
They always worked with us.
So I don't worry about it, where I get my equipment from, but the local authorities do work with us, hand in hand, whether they're off to an investigation or a bombing.
Yes, sir.
Would you be able to speak on behalf of the APS?
We hear people who make claims that possession of automatic weapons is a viable argument to protect themselves against a tyrannical government.
Do you think that's a viable argument?
Well, if you've got a bullet, and like I said, there's no question that you can have those weapons as long as you have it.
You can pay the tax and you can have it.
There's nothing that prohibits you from that.
So, I don't know if I can really answer your question other than say, if you're not in
any prohibited categories such as being a convicted felon, an indictment for felonies,
a citizen without any citizenship, a narcotics addict, a person committed to a mental institution
by a court, disarmed or discharged from the armed forces, or an alien, you're legally
in the country as long as you're not in those areas and don't have a misdemeanor charge
for family violence type stuff.
But as long as you're not in any of those categories, you can have those type of weapons
as long as you pay the $200.
And today, paying a $200 tax is no problem for anybody.
I wasn't clear on an answer you just gave to the gentleman here.
He asked you whether or not the ACF was funded by the Communist United Nations.
Your answer was we are not funded by a foreign country.
They're not a country.
As far as I know, we're not funded by the United Nations.
That's what I wanted to hear.
First thing I'd like to do is to congratulate your agency on being the second largest revenue generator in the federal government.
And I will tell you what the outset is, just to be honest, okay?
In my own research, my own study, I have come to a whole very serious judgment at the behavior and attitude of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Fire.
And I tell you that's the outset, that I am not an unbiased party here.
But I'm willing, I am willing, you know, I really, I mean this, folks.
I'm genuinely willing to be wrong about my preconceptions.
I have two questions for you based on something that you said.
You said that Americans are of a type that they do what you tell them they cannot do.
You said that earlier on in your speech.
I'd like to know where you come off, where the ACF comes off telling Americans who are not harming anybody, who are endowed by their unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, what they can and cannot do.
That's my first question.
The first question was I was not referring to ACF as being the person who can tell the people of the United States what they can or cannot do.
What I was telling you was that when people, when laws are passed saying they can't do anything, people decide to do it.
I see.
Okay, that leads me to my second question.
Now you do indicate that Congress passes a law and we get stuck with it.
I'm certain that you're familiar with the Nuremberg Trials after World War II in which it was clearly established that I'm only doing my job.
I'm only doing what I have been told is not a justification for a violation of the rights of the people under any circumstances, including a time of war.
My question is this.
If Congress passed a law making murder legal, would you then advocate committing murder?
If Congress told you that owning a cat is illegal, would you consider that to give you leave to harass and otherwise arrest and bother American citizens who are doing nothing wrong except owning a cat?
In other words, is whatever Congress says automatically going to be enforced by the
ATF or do you have people who will think clearly and say, this does not follow the constitutional
protection guaranteeing the rights of the people and we will not obey this for that
reason?
The answer to your question is we have people who realize what the Constitution is and we
will and try to the best of our ability to do what the Constitution tells us to.
If you had an instruction from Congress to violate what you understood was the Constitution, would you accept the instruction?
No.
Thank you.
I will say this.
Let me back up here just one second.
I notice everybody has brought up to attention some of the language that I use.
I was born and raised in the country.
I suppose I come from the country.
And when I say certain things, I think we're getting very specific on what I say.
I am trying to be general in what I'm saying.
So please, for all you very intelligent people out there, you will be able to hang me up on language.
So bear with me and I'll try to explain my way out of it.
Yes, sir.
Go ahead.
Sir, I apologize.
This is going to be many questions in regards to the Oklahoma City bombing.
As far as Carol Howe, the APS informant at Elohim City, who warned you guys at least three weeks in advance that a racist named Henry Mahon and a German national named Andre Strassmayer had already came to Oklahoma Federal Building three times and were planning to blow it up.
The fact that the size and the draft show at least two blocks ten seconds apart The fact that many witnesses saw the local police bomb squad there early in the morning securing the area and checking people to come inside.
The fact that all the ATF agents and some were even quoted by the local newspapers as saying they were tipped on their pagers not to go to work that day.
As far as general part and then general bank a part of the former head of the Air Force weapons development.
And we can prove that there had to have been at least four demolition charges on
the third floor inside to destroy their support columns.
Excuse me for harassment of Poppy Heidelberg, one of the original grand jurors,
who thought she subpoenaed witnesses who saw John Doe number two.
Whose life was indirectly threatened and who was dismissed from the grand jury for
asking unpopular questions and being refused, he was refused to
subpoena witnesses including the seismograph expert at the US.
Geological Survey and at the University of Oklahoma.
Um, that should explain to us, sir, how a 4,800-pound fertilizer bomb can destroy eight support columns.
You are the head of the Bomb Investigation Unit, right?
You said for the past five years that you were at Oklahoma City.
I'm not saying I was not.
I was not at Oklahoma.
Oh, you were not at Oklahoma.
Well, with your expertise in explosives, could you explain how 4800 pounds of fertilizer bombs could destroy a support complex?
General Ben K. Parton, former head of Air Force Weapons Development, says there's not a chance in hell.
I'm not going to argue with him.
What about Carol Howe, the APS informant?
I don't know anything about her.
You've never heard of Andrea Strassmeier, sir?
I know there's a licensed informant in Tulsa, and I've gotten that from just reading a newspaper, and I know no more about that than you do.
So you guys don't talk about your informants among yourselves in APS, sir?
Not between here and Tulsa, no.
Thank you very much, sir.
That's a different division.
I mean, would your office handle anything in Oklahoma City or anyone in your office?
No.
The only people there.
I mean, would your office handle anything in Oklahoma City or anyone in your office?
No.
OK.
No.
I have a lot of people that...
In answer to the one about the question about the...
I'm trying to go back over.
About the component of not coming to the office.
OK.
That occurred after...
I think.
It could have occurred at all.
I'm going to say it occurred afterwards, because we had six people in our office building, or in our offices at that time.
What the televisory said, I'm telling you, we had six people in that building at the time it went off.
One was in an elevator with a secret service agent.
The other lady... Let him answer the technical stuff.
There was another lady in the office.
And three, another agent and two regulatory people were there in the office.
You got to be on the mic, sir.
Afternoon, sir.
I've had the pleasure in the last couple of years to get to know some of these French civilians back here, Catherine Madison and Clyde and Sheila and Grandma Edna.
I think that I have never met Any nicer people in my life.
What did they tell y'all on the initial raid about these people?
Did they tell you these people were wicked devils in here, that you needed to murder these people?
What did they tell you to go in there with the kind of force y'all did with helicopters and guns and everything to blast them?
That's my question to you.
First off, they told us to go in and blast them, period.
The search warrant was for a compound.
The search warrant was for weapons.
And we knew that there were a lot of people in the place.
For the most part, we figured most of the people were innocent people that were at the location.
And our job was to try to serve the search warrant and have no loss of life at the time.
I'd like to ask you this.
Do you believe in the Constitution of the United States?
Yes, sir.
First off, what gives Congress the authority to go against that Constitution without going through the American people to give y'all authority to do anything?
Because under the Constitution, we are allowed to bear arms without any hassle at all.
But yet, they got a house full of idiots up there that takes it up on themselves to make laws without going through the American people, which should be done, because it's supposed to be for the American people, right?
To protect them.
Well, I don't know my own self, but I ain't got no authority to do a damn thing up there.
So, what makes them have the legal right to speak for us without asking us?
Uh, the only reason I can see they have the legal right to speak with us is these people are voted in by the American people.
The Senate, uh... Not if voted in by the system.
I mean, the Pledge doesn't do it anyway.
Now, you say to yourself that you, that you enforce law, right?
That's right.
Okay, let me ask you this.
If you enforce laws, do you enforce, say, somebody that betrays America and America's people, also, and that has arms?
So do what now?
Do y'all enforce laws, say, a traitor is betraying everything that America stands for?
Betraying the government is what I'm saying.
Do y'all enforce laws like that also?
Those that have been on the sedition laws have also been enforced by the FBI.
We don't have blanket authority like they do.
Ours are specifically to certain things.
But still yet, do y'all have the authority to come in on American people and tell them they can't do this, they can't do that?
They can't buy this, and they can't buy that because they were in jail, or they made a mistake, spent some time.
That's old crap, man.
You can't do that.
Again, we're back to the Malham Prohibitors Law.
There's just as many people that have the opposite view of what you have right there, that everybody thinks should be done to protect them, and what we're doing is what we're supposed to be doing.
I'm going by the Constitution, but that was said by everybody.
If you go against that, you're breaking your own law, man.
I think that's fair.
Sir, how do you do?
Name again?
Dale Littleton.
Mr. Littleton, I want to thank you for coming out.
I think it took a lot of courage for you to show up here.
You know, Clinton and Reno, I never heard any kind of apology out of them over Waco, regardless of who shot first.
Don't you feel some grief or some sort of an apology for what happened to those people?
From Ms.
Reno, the president?
No, you.
As the representative of the ATF, can you give us at this time some kind of an apology?
Maybe not an admission of guilt as to who was right and who was wrong, but can you at least say that you're sorry for what happened to those people?
I can be silent.
I'm sorry for it, but they caused it themselves.
Have you seen Right to Rules of Engagement?
No, I have not.
You need to see it.
Go ahead and give it a look.
Okay.
But still... This is the one that won the Emmy Award or something.
Yeah, you've been nominated for it.
Well, let me ask you this.
Again, thanks for coming out.
I know how organizations work.
You can't say I apologize because that's taking a step back.
And when you take a step back, that assumes liability.
But one thing that gets me about that is, I understand that y'all ran out of ammo, and the brass division ceased fire and let you walk away with your wounded, and then they ended up getting burned out.
That did not happen.
We still had ammo.
Still had ammo.
Well, I had ammo, and everybody had wounded people, and as far as I didn't know, I didn't participate in the peacemaking part of it, but I do know it happened twice.
There was a ceasefire one time, And then somebody on Earth's side did not get to wear it, and it started up again for about 15 minutes, and it finally got around everybody, and it stopped.
And at that point, we were able to remove our wounded.
And they could have done the same thing.
Well, maybe it wouldn't hurt for y'all to have a film to come out to counteract some of this, because I don't want to believe that any government agent, ATF, or whoever, is as evil as y'all were portrayed in that film.
Now, I'm not blaming your organization, but That was the worst day in American history when that building went up.
And Mr. Turner, Mr. Turner, somebody just said we're at least sorry for what happened.
I mean, if you don't want to say the bullets came from in or out of the door, whatever, but... Okay, now another subject before I got to you.
You said you want to investigate arsons?
Yes, sir.
Have you heard of a scheme where they launder money off of arsons via liability claims?
Not exactly.
I don't know exactly what's happening.
It's called loss streaming.
Instead of income streaming through a traditional building or business, they'll load up a site with liability coverage, and they'll generate the arson or the murders, and they launder the claim.
Now, would you be willing to take a look at this to see if you think that it might be happening, and if that's still worth stopping?
If it's arson, yes, it's a violation.
There's all kinds of schemes out there that we probably haven't heard of.
Well, this is one of the worst.
It's called LawStream, and I'd like to get some information to you to see if you can help stop it.
Okay.
For sure.
Thanks.
There's two things.
You had mentioned something about putting out a video tape of your own.
This might be a good time to mention the report you had talked to me about, and also, Sue, could you differentiate, because my very limited understanding of what happened at Waco was that there was an initial raid that involved ATF, and then the secondary deal was FBI, and could you maybe discuss the differences you've seen?
The book he's talking about is the investigation.
It's through the U.S.
Attorney's Office.
And it's called The Investigation of, I may not be exactly correct on it, The Investigation of Vernon Howe, a.k.a.
David Koresh in Waco, Texas.
I think it's available for $30 or $35.
That booklet is a cumulation of All the information obtained from the people who were at the scene.
They interviewed all the agents that were on scene.
They interviewed supervisors.
They took the plan.
They took everything that was in the book.
They also go to five or six different experts in different fields.
Whether it be SWAT training, explosives, intelligence, anything of this nature, they go over and they make their, they write out what they think of what we did.
In this report, they're very critical of certain areas where we had failings.
They praise in certain areas where we did good.
The report, the interesting thing about the report was, the report was not generated from Outside influences.
The report and the investigation was generated by the people, the agents, that were at the scene requesting that an investigation be done.
First time that I know of that this has happened.
And it was done, and if you want to read it, read that book, and if you've seen the movie, you can make your determination.
I have not seen the movie, I know, I read through the book, I know the book, so that's, and when I was there, so that's it.
Would you agree that the Waco siege was probably, and this is not really a question, this is really a statement, was one of the most tragic incidents in American history, and that as a result of that, that the people in the United States are doing more than just an administrative explanation as to what is going on.
Now, I'm coming from, the position I'm coming from, is a friend of mine, Byron Sage.
I'm sure you know Byron.
Byron Sage was there, and in one-on-one conversation with Byron, he was able to convince me that he had done everything humanly possible to end it without a fire.
Now, it's my belief that The only way the truth can ever be known is if there is a hearing, some type of court hearing that's open to the public, that people can attend, that they can see, and that charges are placed against agents that participated in the event by people that feel like they have been harmed.
Now, it's my understanding that the way the law is written now, It conflicts with what our founding fathers wanted.
Our founding fathers wanted no man to be above the law, not a judge, not an agent.
No one was to be above the law.
Would you agree that some type of hearing should be allowed that agents as well as the people that occupy the building should possibly be charged And the people in the United States are entitled to the full truth about what happened at Waco.
That's my question.
Okay.
Contrary to popular belief, the truth is out there.
It has come out.
People just don't want to believe it.
Well, the question I asked was about what our nation was set on with law.
Uh, set up under a nation of laws.
And what we've got now is we've got people in the ATF, in the FBI, and in the legislatures that are claiming to be immune.
That's, that's why we have these.
Okay.
Uh, I don't think I'm qualified to answer about the legislative people and all this stuff, so.
No.
Okay.
But, as far as the book goes, get the book and then, uh, The founding fathers didn't put in there that they would be appropriate to explain what the government does.
I would like to see the constitution upheld.
You say that you follow the constitution, and I think that in your heart you believe you do, and what I would like to see is some Movement in the direction of doing what the Constitution says, and I understand that it's not your decision.
I understand that.
A lot higher than I think we're in the federal government.
Yes.
Sorry to ask another one here.
I'll make this one short.
First thing, I think the reason that people keep recommending that you see the Rules of Engagement is because included is the unedited infrared footage from the FBI plane that was flying overhead on the 19th as the fire was started.
Where you can plainly see little air-conditioned black dots get out of the back of the tanks and fire photo-automatic weapons into the back of the house.
That's why people want to see real-world engagement.
The rest of it is irrelevant as far as I'm concerned.
The FBI is on infrared footage.
But actually, my question to you is, your speculation, what would have happened if Jim Cavanaugh and Jack Harlow, the local sheriff, had gone politely with their guns in their holsters and knocked on the front door and said, Please step outside, we have a stationer for the pens.
I have no idea.
I have no idea.
The way, uh, I have no idea.
And if I can answer that question, I'm asking pure speculation, I have no idea.
Were any ACF agents in contact with the local authorities before this went down?
Oh, yes.
Yeah.
Now, the Sheriff's Department had actually called us about this stuff.
They knew, they said they wanted some assistance, and so we ended up working.
Yes, ma'am.
I'd like to know if you have thought about or considered the hazards, the present hazards
and future hazards of the private prison, private prison on glowing, the corporation,
the private, yeah.
Private prison.
Yes. And how these are now, these private prison corporations are now on the stock exchange
and this means more money to build more prisons, which means more money
to lobby congressmen to pass more strict laws that release prisons for corporations
to have more people to work the 23 cents an hour to, just like slave labor in China.
Have you thought about this?
No, I haven't.
I have nothing to do with prisons, period, other than... Yeah, but you are part of this.
In a way, you are a part.
You are part of it in a way, if you are helping to put people in these prisons.
Most of the private-advised prisons are from the state.
The state cuts, they're not federal.
No, these are private prisons and corporations.
I know, but I'm telling you, we have nothing to do with them.
That and most of the prisoners in there.
You said we have stuff putting people in jail there?
These people are usually there on state charges, not federal charges.
But aside from that, I have nothing to do with prisons.
Whether it be the state prisons or federal prisons, we don't have anything to do with those.
Okay.
And I can't answer that.
In other words, I can't answer that question and tell you.
Okay, I just would like, if you would think about, if you could think of future hazards in all these prisons that are being built.
And the factories that are being built inside these prisons, I encourage you to think about this, what it may be like ten years from now.
I'll think about it.
Well, don't worry.
I don't mean this the wrong way.
I think many of these are really, really super valid questions.
I just want people to remember here, this is a very special guest and a very rare opportunity, okay?
Now, I have told him and I've told everybody, I don't want them necessarily to think of of all his questions to be on Waco.
But I would like to.
I don't think that.
But I would.
I think it's important that when you have a rare opportunity like this to stick with
questions that either have to do with Waco or areas that he directly deals with.
And sure, he has personal opinions on what happens with, say, prisons.
Sure he does.
But I'm just saying, do, you use this time however you want.
But I personally would rather use it to ask him on areas that he's especially privy to.
And that has to do with Waco.
It has to do with firearms laws, explosive laws, alcohol laws, tobacco laws, that sort
But you use it however you see fit.
Mr. Littleton, would you tell me again what is your position and your responsibility with the APS so that I can properly explain my questions?
Senior Special Agent.
Senior Special Agent.
Yeah, Senior Special Agent means you have Are there Asians underneath you?
No.
That just means I've been around a long time.
Oh sure.
That's fine.
I just wanted to get that.
That's fine.
I just wanted to understand that.
In the first place, I do want to say that.
That just means I've been around a long time.
Oh sure.
That's fine.
I just wanted to understand that.
That's fine.
I just wanted to understand that.
That's fine.
I just wanted to understand that.
That's fine.
Okay.
That's fine.
I just want to understand that.
In the first place, I do want to say that I have found that it astonishes me that back when George Washington gave his farewell address, he acknowledged that he may have made some mistakes and he was sorry for that.
But today we have, within the United States government and its agencies, including the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, Exemplary behavior from everybody.
Nobody ever admits to doing anything wrong, and I think we're very fortunate to have such good people.
But, on a more serious point, I want to say it again at the outset, okay?
I do not recognize the authority of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms on my person.
I am a sovereign citizen.
I live in this country by grace of God.
My law is embodied in the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, And my rights are guaranteed and protected by the Organic Constitution for the United States.
Now, having said that, and I want you to understand, if an ATF agent came on my property without due process, he would take his life in his hands because he would become a criminal trespasser without due process, and the U.S.
Supreme Court has said that I may repel a criminal trespasser Any kind of happens with necessary force.
Now my question to you, my comment to you is this.
You have indicated today, here, that you do believe in and support the Constitution of the United States.
Is that correct?
Yes.
Thank you.
Okay.
I would like you to comment on the facts.
Being a senior agent who has been around for a while.
That, and I'll just name a few names.
Donald... Patola, Ohio.
Monique, Montgomery.
We can go on and on.
These are all people who have their homes burst into by ATF agents with absolutely no due process, no search warrant of any kind.
Most of them were shot.
Some of them were killed.
All of them found themselves the victims of what could only be described to the uneducated observer as Nazi Storm Trooper tactics.
You speak about Waco, and I'm sorry to bring it back in here, but it needs to be said.
The original two warrants were for $400 for two handguns suspected of not having had the excise tax paid on them.
This justified, in the minds of the ATF, laying fees to a private resident for two months at a cost of a million dollars a day to taxpayers with no benefit of trial, no benefit of charges, the incarceration against their will of men, women, and children in the ultimate The ultimate death of 86 people and four ATF troopers.
I would like to know how you can possibly say that you believe in and support the Constitution for the United States, which prohibits illegal search and seizure, which invalidates House Resolution 666, the Exclusionary Room Reform Act of 1995, Which very simply says that you may not burst into private homes without a search warrant signed by a judge with a complaint and affidavit attached.
How can you reconcile the numerous, confirmed, knowledgeable sources of ATF raids without due process to your claim And I'm willing to believe you, but I want to hear the reconciliation.
Your claim that you believe in and support the Constitution and your work for the ATM.
As far as the search warrant in Waco, the search warrant was for machine guns and suspected machine guns and for explosive devices.
Where the $400 exhaust tax that you're talking about came from, I have no idea.
That Mr. Perez was living in a private residence, minding his own business.
He was in a private residence, minding his own business.
He did not harm anybody.
We had a search warrant for the location.
And who signed the affidavit of complaint to pass to the church?
The U.S.
Magistrate.
Who were the damaged parties?
Excuse me, if you would check your Constitutional Law, you will find a citizen damaged party must sign the complaint, not the U.S.
Magistrate.
The U.S.
Magistrate?
No, the U.S.
Magistrate signs the warrant, not the complaint.
The U.S.
Magistrate signed the warrant.
But not the complaint.
Who signed the complaint?
The warrant was executed.
Okay, you're not responsive.
The question about Donald Carlson, Donald Scott, and the other half-dozen individuals who the ACF raided without search warrants.
No.
That would not have happened.
It has happened.
We know for a fact that it's happened.
The Los Angeles District Attorney conducted an investigation on Donald Carlson and came to the absolute conclusion that, yes indeed, it did happen.
We know for a fact it has happened.
My question to you is how you reconcile that behavior with your support for the Constitution.
I've never known that to happen.
You're saying it's going to happen.
I've had... If you knew it was true, if you knew it was true, would you do anything differently?
If I knew... If you knew that this type of stuff was going on... It's not going to happen because you're going to have to have a legal search warrant.
I understand.
What I'm saying is if you knew for a fact, if someone showed you evidence to prove that what I've just spoken has and does occur, What would you be prepared to do?
In your capacity as a senior agent, what influence or what statements or actions would you be prepared to do if this were to be brought to your attention as fact?
Again, you're talking to yourself.
You're saying, California, Ohio, I'm in Texas.
I cannot go to all of these places unless I'm sent.
Let's be clear, sir, I brought this up earlier.
I mean, this is something...and keep in mind, I have my own opinions about what happened at Waco, but, I mean, I don't understand how you can really, truly...I mean, yes, you can ask him his personal opinion.
That makes sense.
But do you really expect an ATF agent to know the effectiveness of all the goings-on of an ATF officer?
Not at all.
What I do expect is that he does have a personal opinion, and I'm asking him whether or not he is willing to state for the record what he thinks.
I gave you the answer that that would not happen, and I said if somebody did do something, they are doing something illegally.
And those people need to go to jail.
That's what I told you, and you can't go on and on and on.
That's what I told you, and you can't go on and on and on.
That's what I told you, and you can't go on and on and on and on.
That's what I told you, I've heard some people say this, and I would be interested to say, what would be your opinion on what would have happened if somebody within the ACR, not even yourself, just anybody, if they just said, excuse me, I think maybe what we're doing is unconstitutional here, and I don't want to have any personal involvement.
If somebody said that, could you maybe speculate on what might have happened?
As far as the reason I wanted to come here, the reason everybody, if you go, I'd like to set the record straight.
I'd like to tell you what the truth is.
I've told you what the truth is, as I know it.
If you do not like that, I'm sorry.
If you do not like my answers, I'm sorry.
What I am telling you is the truth, as far as I know it, and some things I'm absolutely positive about.
I'm not going to lie to you with the type of questioning and requesting I've gotten.
I don't think some of you believe that, which I'm very sorry, but that's the reason I'm here, is to try to tell you the truth.
Now, if you don't want to believe it, if you don't want to look at it, I cannot do anything about that.
All I can do is tell you what I'm trying to do.
And that's the truth.
What was the question?
Alright, that's a constitutional answer.
Alright.
I have been involved in law enforcement for 28 years.
Sex laws, you have to have probable cause.
If you do not have probable cause, That search warrant does not get signed.
It does not get signed by the magistrate.
It does not get signed by the judge.
It doesn't get signed by a state judge.
It does not get signed by a municipal judge.
You have to understand that the magistrates in the federal system are lawyers.
They are very cognizant of the law and we have to go a step further with them to make sure that, because they're putting their signature on the thing.
We have to be truthful.
If we lie to them, we're liable.
So we have to be truthful.
Yes, sir.
What would happen if somebody had said within the ATF, hey, I think maybe what's occurring here might be unconstitutional?
The claim was not unconstitutional.
No, but I'm just saying, can you speculate maybe on what the ramifications would be?
I have no idea what would happen.
Have you ever heard of an ATF doing that?
No.
No.
I just wonder.
Because we make an opinion and our opinion not to violate that.
Now, again, other people...
In their opinion, according to the law that we operate under, we are not violating the Constitution.
Who did the cleanup at Waco?
I have no idea.
thing at the wake of the program was responsible for the thing at the wake of I
have no idea it wasn't you it wasn't me I have no idea.
That's done it my.
Do you have no idea what happened to the evidence that would never sound like the front door?
And, you know, I know they put 24 inches in the car.
The Texas Rangers, the people who actually did the crime scene, or the Texas Rangers, who were responsible for the cleanup after that because by, to try to make this look, to do it fair to everyone, They do not want us to... See, there you go again.
I'll tell you one thing.
I'll tell you one thing.
I'll tell you one thing and you take it the wrong way.
I'm sorry, I told you that.
So, please, get off my back on that one, okay?
If I don't speak up, that's when I end up.
That was one reason.
Prior to any of this stuff, the Texas Raiders were going to be assigned the process of processing the scene and working the crime scene.
We were not allowed on the crime scene.
Uh, at all, until it was, the final scene was what?
The FBI, FBI, uh, climbed on our people, and the Texas Department of Public Safety climbed on our people, and we worked the scene.
The Texas Rangers worked the scene.
The whole time, we were not allowed on the scene.
The closest an ACF agent could get to the scene is just inside the gate.
We had a, uh, portable loudspeaker set up.
So you have no idea, you stripped up that 24 inches of top floor everywhere and started it off from there?
No, ma'am.
No, ma'am.
If somebody did, I'm going to say it was going to be somebody like EPA or some... EPA's good.
EPA's good.
Huh?
Yeah, somebody else is in charge with that type of stuff.
I am?
He doesn't know what happens in the front door, Mike.
The second thing is, I assume that you're regulated by the United States Code.
Is that correct?
Yes, ma'am.
Title 27? 26.
Twenty-six.
Twenty-six is IRS.
Twenty-seven is... Twenty-six is where the fine clause come into a deal with machine guns and sawed-off shotguns is in Title 26 and Title 18.
And Title 27, which is?
I don't know what Title 27 is.
Gee.
What is Title 27?
APF?
No.
So I'm going to name you a regulation part.
You could be talking about the regulations, but the laws that we enforce on the Title 18, Okay, so it's my understanding that in the table of parallel values, any federal code of regulations has to correspond to a title.
Is that correct?
So if it was in Title 26, the corresponding regulation, enforcement regulation would be in CFR 26?
No, in this case, CFR 27 is what you're referring to.
The regulations in CFR 27 are follows.
Okay, my question is, in Title 26, you have a section 6331, which is under, that's what they say.
What section?
In Title 26, they send out a notice, 6331, it's called a Notice of Levy.
The corresponding regulation for that is in Title 27, which for my study of the codes, I find that incompatible.
Could you tell me why the corresponding enforcement regulation is in CFR 27?
And how it can be enforced when the statute says it can't be?
Does that also mean that ATF would go attack someone under that notice?
No.
And we don't attack anybody, but we'll start a search warrant.
And for?
We'll start a search warrant.
Okay, thank you.
I have to admit, our special agent is infectious.
Now I understand that you've been in the...
Ladies and gentlemen, I have to interrupt right here because what you just heard is absolutely astounding.
It's an admission of what we have been trying to tell you for an awful long time.
Title 26 United States Code and 26 Code of Federal Regulations are Internal Revenue Service.
Title 27 United States Code and 27 Code of Federal Regulations are Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and firearms.
In our research we have discovered that both of these organizations interchange hats, but that the Internal Revenue Service has no powers whatsoever to levy, seize, enforce, audit, inspect your records, books, or anything.
All of those codes in Title 26 belong to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms And have only to do with alcohol, tobacco, and firearms violations.
And you just heard the admission here, and I have never heard that admission before from any government official in my whole life.
And one of the things we've been trying to do is get the government to admit the truth about these things.
Well, this agent just did.
He doesn't know what he did, I can assure you, or he would not have done it.
But anyway, we continue.
And if you've been conditioned and framed by the government to do your job, you can follow the orders that are going down to you, even though they are constitutions.
Constitutions that you might not be aware of.
That's right?
Now, is that what you think?
Yes, that's what you think.
Okay, all right.
I'll get along with it.
And we do not deny that you believe in the Constitution, and every man or person has started trying to have the right to propagate it.
That's right.
Or, Charlie, they'd have a black copper jury too, right?
Yes.
But the bank civilians didn't have that option, did they?
Uh, the ones that survived did, yes.
The ones that were killed inside the building didn't?
The ones that were killed inside the building stayed inside the building.
The reason I know that, I was at the back of the property.
I watched it burn.
When I say back of the property, I was 1,100 yards away.
And I watched him stay in the thing and not come out.
So you've now derived the child that's here.
I didn't have, I didn't, we, there was nothing I could do about it.
I was standing back there watching all of it going on.
You're all, all, you can't, hey wait a minute, we're messing up, we can't stop this.
After I was running the deal, I was there as a... It's an ATF deal to start with, baby.
It was ours to start with.
But as soon as the, the, the next day or that afternoon, that's when FBI was ordered to take over.
That Sunday afternoon.
And after that, ATF had no further investigative aspect as far as what was going on at the compound after day one.
So, if I've got this correct, y'all started at day three?
Yes, sir.
Okay.
I'm asking you, if it were pointed out to you and we convinced you that the cops are taking you and you're violating as an officer of the federal government, would you stop doing it?
Yep.
Okay.
Nathan.
Hi there.
Nathan's living.
I'd like to know, uh, how many years ago you took your oath of office to go up to me at the top of the office, back on the firearms administration agency?
Who have you taken oath to?
Uh, to the Constitution of the United States.
When did you do it, President?
Uh... Co-worker?
I don't have one.
I can't remember.
I've been quite excited this time.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is another incredible admission.
He admits that he doesn't even know what the oath that he took is.
He just said he doesn't know.
He can't remember what it was at the time.
He doesn't know where his loyalties lie.
And when he originally said to the Constitution, that just came off the top of his head.
He doesn't know that.
And I'm going to play that back for you.
I want you to listen to that.
Listen carefully.
I'd like to know, twenty-eight years ago, you took your oath of office to work in the Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Administration.
Who did you take an oath to?
To the Constitution of the United States.
When did you do it?
President?
Co-worker?
I have no idea.
I can't remember what it said at the time.
There was a part of something, but the Constitution was part of it.
I used to wear a badge.
I didn't take an oath to a sheriff.
Politician, President, State Senator, or anybody else in that regard.
I sent that oath to the Constitution.
That meant that if I had to turn to a co-worker that is using death in force illegally, I'm prepared to put a round in his head.
I'd like to know if that's the same kind of dedication to your oath that you might have.
If someone is authorized to put a round in their head, I'd like to know that there were a lot of reports that came out since that incident in Waco that said that David Koresh was seen in the Waco area and that he could have been bagged, sucked up two days, perhaps a few more days before.
And the whole incident there avoided, at the home.
Now, I'd like to know if you agree with that.
Nope.
Okay.
I'd like to know if you agree with the fact that if you looked out your window... What was he going to be arrested for?
He was picked up for the firearms charges that were going on.
Supposed to be.
I didn't have... The probable cause was later... He cannot be... The probable cause does not get you arrested unless you're on the search warrant.
I mean, the arrest warrant...
We're going to have to have some evidence before we're going to get a show point.
I mean, an arrest warrant for arresting you.
Okay, let's just move on here.
I'd like to know if you... We could not have been arrested before we ran the warrant because there was no evidence for a warrant to be issued.
Wait a minute.
You must have had intelligence reports.
We have... I'm sorry.
You didn't have intelligence reports 48 hours or less before the incident started to get
the warrant.
You had intelligence reports that went back probably months on these people.
Yes.
Yeah.
So that was your probable cause right there.
Your probable cause, Evans.
You had them before Mr. Koresh and they were approached at his home in Waco.
I had a I dream the other night that I didn't understand.
A figure walked in through the mist with a flintlock in his hands.
His clothes were torn and dirty as he stood there by my bed.
He took off his three-cornered hat and, speaking low to me, he said, We fought a revolution to secure our liberty.
We wrote the Constitution as a shield from tyranny.
For future generations, this legacy we gave In this, the land of the free, and home of the brave.
The freedoms we secured for you, we hoped you'd always keep.
But tyrants labored endlessly while your parents were asleep.
Your freedom's gone, your courage lost, you're no more than a slave.
In this, the land of the free, and home of the brave.
You buy permits to travel, and permits to own a gun.
Permits to start a business, or to build a place for one.
On land that you believe you own, you pay a yearly rent, although you have no voice in saying how the money's spent.
Your children must attend a school that doesn't educate, and your Christian values can't be taught, according to the state.
You read about the current news in a regulated press, and you pay a tax you do not owe to please the IRS.
Your money is no longer made of silver nor of gold, You trade your wealth for paper so your life can be controlled.
You pay for crimes that make our nation turn from God and shame.
You take Satan's number and you trade it in your name.
You've given government control to those who do you harm.
So they could burn down churches and seize the family farm.
And keep our country deep in debt.
Put men of God in jail.
Harass your fellow countrymen while corrupted courts prevail.
Your public servants don't uphold the solemn oaths they've sworn.
And your daughters visit doctors so their children won't be born.
Your leaders send artillery.
And guns to foreign shores.
And send your sons to slaughter fighting other people's wars!
Can you regain the freedoms for which we fought and died?
Or don't you have the courage or the faith to stand with pride?
And are there no more values for which you will fight to save?
Or do you wish your children to live in fear and be a slave?
Oh, sons of the Republic, arise!
Take a stand!
Defend the Constitution, the Supreme Law of the land!
Preserve our great Republic and each God-given right!
And pray to God to keep the torch of freedom burning bright!
As I awoke, he vanished in the mist, but once he came, his words were true.
We are not free, but we have ourselves to blame.
For even now his parents trample each god-given right.
We only watch him tremble, too afraid to stand and fight.
If he stood by your bedside to dream while you were asleep and wondered what remains
of the freedoms he fought to keep, what would be your answer if he called out from the grave,
is this still the land of the free and home of the brave?
God bless you and God bless this republic.
Yes, Dave, up here on top of this hill, it's still the land of the free and the home of the brave.
Thank you.
Ladies and gentlemen, this broadcast will be rebroadcast, or rerun, in the Round Valley of Arizona at 8 p.m.
this evening.
So if you have someone that you believe needs to hear it, make sure to tell them to tune in to 101.1 FM at 8 PM tonight.
Good night, folks.
God bless each and every single one of you.
God bless you.
And by the way, folks, when I said that up on top of this hill, it's still the land of
the free and the home of the brave, I meant it.
But something else goes along with that.
Right now, at this moment, in this country, we are the only truly free people that exist.
the rest of you are enslaved in your own ignorance and your own cowardice.
I'm not going to be a fool for you.
I'm going to be a fool for you.
It's a little bit funny, this feeling inside.
I've got my love to get, he's up there high.
▲
Export Selection