Additional comments by Jon Roland on the review of the film in the San

Francisco Chronicle, incorporating information provided by Mike McNulty

(cops555@aol.com) in brackets [], a radio talk show host in Colorado who

was involved in the production of the film:



(1) The film does not indicate that "the FBI accidentally started the

fire". It strongly indicates that they started it intentionally. [Future

cuts of the film will show this more clearly.] It shows that two

unexploded 40mm incendiary grenades of the kind only used by the

government were found. [One was found outside, and one inside the dining

area. The one found outside was better preserved, and had a fuse

failure. It was lying in a pool of melted metal. Both were of the same

design, with no identifying markings, but identified by weapons experts

as "contract" devices of the kind used by U.S. government black ops

teams when they don't want there to be evidence that can be traced back

to them. These devices were too sophisticated to have been made by the

Davidians.] It did not mention the fact that CS mist [or dust] could

have been ignited by any spark, including those caused by bullets

striking hard targets, or by a tracer or incendiary round. The infrared

surveillance video clearly showed two persons firing automatic weapons

into the building, from a position behind the tanks inserting the CS

mist, [about 6-8 minutes] before the first bursts of flame inside at the

points of insertion.



(2) Contrary to the statement "The film leaves that question (which side

started firing first) open", it indicates that the first shots were

fired by ATF agents.



    [There are 5 possibilities:



    1 -- ATF agents shot the dogs.



    2 -- ATF agents fired through the door at Koresh.



    3 -- Agents (not necessarily ATF) fired from the helicopters.



    4 -- An ATF agent accidentally discharged a weapon as he was getting

    out of the trailer.



    5 -- The Davidians fired first.]



But the possibility that the Davidians fired first seems unlikely based

on the testimony of attorney Dick DeGuerin, who visited the site during

the standoff, and stated that the bulletholes through the missing front

door were all inward.



(3) The film has a statement by the attorney for Koresh's grandmother

that, as he was leaving the area, he heard a government agent say that

the grandmother should "say good-bye" to her grandson, clearly indicating

a consensus intention on the part of the agents that all the Davidians

would be killed.



(4) The photos of some of the Davidians' remains clearly showed that

they were run over by tanks before they burned. The photo of the twisted

body of the burned child clearly indicated death from the cyanide gas

produced by the burning of the CS mist or dust.



(5) The film leaves open the question of how decisions were made by

government agents during the standoff, indicating that the outcome may

not have been the result of a high-level decision so much as the result

of a kind of a callous and vindictive mob psychology on the part of the

agents. Their behavior showed clear signs of people who were not part of

a disciplined force, but largely out of control, at all levels of the

chain of command. However, FBI agent-in-charge Jeff Jamar could not have

been unaware of how his agents were starting the fires, and his

statement on tape how he decided not to allow fire trucks in to fight

the fires and rescue the people inside indicates that the decision to

burn the Davidians out was made on at least his level of command, if not

higher.



[It is not certain that the personnel doing most of the firing were FBI

agents. An article by Jim Pate in the July, 1996, issue of Soldier of

Fortune magazine argued that they may have been a black ops team,

perhaps contract. The FBI would be legally responsible, but Jamar and

Rogers (the agent below him in the chain of command at the scene) may

not have been in control of that black ops team.]



(6) The film provided convincing evidence that there was indeed

automatic weapons fire directed at the compound from helicopters, and,

at one point in the audio tape, an FBI negotiator admitted it. [A future

cut of the film footage will show this even more convincingly.]



(7) Although people might like to deny the possibility that agents of

their own government could be guilty of mass murder, if one takes away

the fact of who pays them and looks on them as unaffiliated, the

evidence of the film makes a case for mass murder that would convict

them in almost any honest court.



[The best way to get public exposure for this film is to contact your

local theater managers and ask them to contact Somford to arrange to

show the film.]



=======================================================================

For information on the film, "Waco: The Rules of Engagement", contact

Somford Entertainment, 8721 Sunset Blvd. #105, Los Angeles, CA 90069,

310/289-3900, 289-3909 Fax, Dan Gifford, President. http://www.waco93.com

=======================================================================