CDR: Re: Why?

[Phaedrus]

On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, Jim Choate wrote:

> So your claim is that when the FBI, BATF, etc. moved into that building
> not a single one of them actualy executed on the required threat plan? And
> during the execution of that plan nobody noticed the child care center or
> considered the impact of an attack on them?

I didn't say that the FBI, BATF or anyone else has (during the OK city
bombing or at any time) actually used such a facility as a human sheild. I
was pointing out that it was possible, that parents could easily be
shepherded into using such a facility for child care and that the
cold-bloodedness possible certainly does exist, just not in the parents of
the children (who are/were/would be ignorant of such uses of the very
convenient on site child care)

> I don't believe anyone was forced to house their child in that center.

It doesn't require force

X (official/officer/etc in position of power) decides that a childcare
facility would make an excellent 'human sheild' in place Y.  X then makes
arrangements for decent child care facility, tells parents who work at Y
'Look. Your children can be near you, you can visit them at lunch time,
you can drop them off and pick them up on your way in and out of the
office respectively, and if something happens [in the normal sense -- kid
falls off monkey bars and breaks arm sort of things] you'll be right
there'

No force necessary. Parents think they have a good deal. X thinks he has a
good deal. Kids are up shit creek if anything actually goes down.

And no, I'm not arguing this did, has or is happening. I'm not in a
position to have data on that. I'm arguing that, contrary to what you
said, it *is* a viable possibility.


Ph.