By Jim Davidson
There is controversy regarding exactly what is shown in a certain segment of the film Waco: The Rules of Engagement. This particular controversy is merely the latest stage in an attempted cover-up that makes the Watergate scandal look like a tempest in a teapot. Now that the truth is known, Congress must act. The House of Representatives must order impeachment proceedings against the Attorney General of the United States. Then, Congress must eliminate both the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), turning those constitutionally authorized duties of each agency (if any) over to other relevant federal agencies.
FLIR Shows Automatic Weapons Firing
The most intense segment of Waco: The Rules of Engagement, a powerful documentary put together by former CNN newsman Dan Gifford, his wife Amy, and Mike McNulty, comes when Edward Allard, Ph.D., one of the world's leading experts on infrared systems, provides technical narration for footage taken by the FBI on 19 April 1993. The footage was captured by a Forward Looking Infra Red (FLIR) camera system carried aloft by a surveillance plane to document the tank assault on the Seventh Day Adventist church known as Mount Carmel Center.
Dr. Allard says that several teams of infantry supporting the tank assault on the Branch Davidian church directed automatic weapons fire into the compound. His statements are repeated many times throughout his analysis of the FLIR footage. Nine days after the tank assault, Attorney General Reno told a House Judiciary Committee that those engaged in the assault "received substantial fire from within the compound...without returning any fire." In so saying, she perjured herself. Lying to Congress is an impeachable offense.
Naturally, the FBI denies this "interpretation" by Dr. Allard, the former supervisor of the Department of Defense's Night Vision Laboratory at Fort Belvoir. Instead, they showed their copy of the same footage to reporters from the Washington Post without providing a FLIR expert. John M. Hogan, Reno's chief of staff, was on hand to claim that these bright blips are nothing more than "glints of noonday sun" possibly reflecting off glass shards.
Destroying the Denial
Hogan's comments can be dismissed as nonsense. He claims, "When the film is this quality, you can see things that are not producing heat." In a very technical sense, this statement is accurate, if deliberately misleading.
Infrared film does show things that are not producing heat. Those things which are very cold are utterly black on the film. The gas used to inject CS gas into the Seventh Day Adventist church cooled the tank muzzle tips to a very low temperature, and they do appear utterly black against the medium gray background in several places on the film. Other cool objects appear in varying shades from black to darker gray. While things that are not producing heat do show up, they don't show up as bright flashes. Rather, they display their characteristic infrared signature. Warm things show up in lighter shades, cold things in darker shades.
What Hogan wants you to believe about the sun glints is entirely for the purpose of misdirection. Journalists and most adults in America have considerable personal experience with black and white film. After all, anyone over 32 can remember when most television was broadcast in black and white. Thousands of major motion pictures have been filmed in black and white. Many artistic films are still shot in that medium to achieve a particular effect.
Yes, when you watch a black and white film, you often see white flashes when the sun glints off a reflective object, such as a shard of glass. And yes, there were shards of glass on the ground around the Mount Carmel Center. After all, several parked cars had been rammed and crushed by tanks in the days leading up to the assault, distributing windshield glass about the area. The smashing of various walls by the tank assault on 19 April 1993 also created considerable broken glass on the ground near Mount Carmel Center as windows were shattered.
Hogan would like to lead you to believe that what you are seeing is sunlight gleaming off of glass, which is not difficult for most people to accept. After all, the average person's experience with black and white photography is consistent with that explanation. Most people aren't familiar with infrared film, and easily substitute the nearest convenient reference they have, which is to think that they are seeing a black and white movie.
Sunlight reflecting off shards of glass doesn't produce an adequate thermal signature to show on infrared film. Dr. Allard explains this aspect of the situation during his narration in Waco: The Rules of Engagement. For a sunlight reflection to create a white area on infrared footage, it must produce a good deal of heat. Supposing, for the moment, that some of the white flashes identified by Dr. Allard as characteristic in shape, duration, and thermal intensity of automatic gunfire directed into the church were in fact caused by sunlight reflecting off of bits of glass, where did that heat go?
If you heat a piece of glass enough to make it very hot in comparison to the temperature of the background objects, that heat takes time to dissipate. Glass is an insulator, or a semi-conductor at best. That's why it is used in cookware, to hold heat next to the food. Try an experiment at home: heat up a piece of glass until it is red hot or white hot, as hot as the muzzle flash of an assault rifle. Use a gas or wood fire or preferably a blowtorch, and use tongs or fireproof gloves. Handle this material with care, because as you will observe, it holds heat very well, and cools off very slowly. Time how long it takes to cool white hot glass to where it is cool to the touch, like the ground on a warm Spring day in Texas. You will find that the heat cannot be added and taken away from glass in tenth-of-a-second intervals such as those white flashes on the FLIR footage.
The white flashes that Dr. Allard and other infrared imaging experts identify as gunfire weren't created by sunlight. That is a despicable lie.
Hogan also points out that tanks appear to cross over areas where automatic weapons fire is seen. "If there are men there, they would be run over by the tank," he says in comments published by The Washington Post, "But there's no person there." When the tank moves over that particular spot, there is doubtless no infantryman standing there, although one might well have moved forward along with the tank, providing support and cover as infantry often does. Hogan expands on these statements in a fashion that makes it clear that he either has no military training, or is a liar (or both). "If you are a commander and you have tanks, why expose your people to gunfire?" he asks.
Obviously, you support tanks with infantry, or you get scenes such as seen during the August 1991 tank deployment against crowds in Moscow. Blankets are thrown over the tanks, and flaming Molotov cocktails do their work. While the tank's gunners can shoot many who approach the tank, a man who gets in close can take out a tank singlehandedly. The blanket trick is particularly apt, as it requires the tank crew to expose themselves outside the tank in order to clear it.
Tanks are always supported with infantry when possible. Perhaps the very visible side of the Mount Carmel Center where the media were clustered on 19 April 1993 was not a place where infantry support was appropriate. On the other side of the buildings, where Dr. Allard sees automatic weapons fire, the need to leave tanks unsupported by infantry disappears. Only the FBI surveillance plane's FLIR cameras were in a position to tell the story.
Then the question becomes, where are the shooters? That question seems to be one that Hogan carefully avoided asking, although he did have a technician show the Washington Post reporters footage of federal agents conducting a mopping-up exercise ("searching frantically in a storm shelter for survivors" as the Post describes it) to reveal that people do sometimes show up against cooler backgrounds.
Hogan may not want to be too explicit in claiming that the white hot muzzle flashes must be accompanied by the characteristic infrared signature of a person nearby holding the gun, because he knows too well that 1993 vintage Battle Dress Utilities were impregnated with an anti-infrared chemical. Special laundering instructions come with these clothes to make sure the anti-infrared treatment isn't washed out in the laundry.
Moreover, a man wearing clothing (and a helmet, and gloves, as the agents in question were surely wearing) who has been out in the Sun for an hour or so is very close to background temperature. You generate heat internally at about 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit, but if you lay a thermometer on your skin you'll find that you are much cooler on the outside. Your skin has layers of fat that serve as insulation. So figure your external temperature as about 85 to 90 degrees. Then add layers of clothing, including a Kevlar bulletproof vest, and your body temperature is only a few degrees warmer than the sun-baked ground in Waco on that sunny day.
If you've never worn a Kevlar vest, ask someone who has, such as your neighborhood police officer. They hold heat next to the body very efficiently. They are incredibly hot to the person inside, meaning that very little heat is transferred to the outside environment. Combine all these effects with the sunlight heating the clothing worn by the assault troops, add in the anti-IR treatment on their clothing, and it is small wonder the shooters don't show up next to their muzzle flashes.
Also, remember that the tanks generate fabulous amounts of heat. The tank tracks are clearly visible on the FLIR footage, because the tanks churned up the soil and left their engine heat behind. Troops supporting tank assaults are trained to avoid infrared detectors by walking in the middle of asphalt roadways or following in the tracks of tanks.
It is merely fatuous to suggest that the white flashes couldn't be gunfire because the shooters can't be seen. A somewhat more interesting question concerns where the heat from those muzzle flashes is going. Even with a flash suppression system and a silencing mechanism, gun barrels heat up. When the white flashes on the film occur, they don't leave behind a characteristic heat trace of a hot gun barrel.
Again, the explanation is very simple. After firing their weapons, the federal troops point the barrel toward the ground, knowing that the FLIR cameras are overhead. That hot barrel shines in the infrared, but not toward the surveillance plane. Only the gunstock can be seen from above when the barrel is pointed down, and that gunstock will be close to ambient temperature.
What cannot be explained away, no matter how hard the FBI tries, is the eyewitness corroboration by at least two Branch Davidian survivors that federal agents fired automatic weapons during the tank assault. One of these eyewitnesses has made statements to the effect that occupants of Mount Carmel were shot down as they tried to exit out the back of the building (away from the cameras).
Try as they may, the FBI denial that their troops, fresh from seven months rest after their engagement at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, fired no shots during the tank assault is simply beyond credibility. The FBI "Hostage Rescue Team" which might better be termed "Hostage Recycling Team" that deployed at Ruby Ridge to kill Vicki Weaver and her son Sammy came to Waco with bloodlust. They fired at Branch Davidians who were trying to protect themselves from the vicious tank assault, and they killed many of those people.
Bullets in Their Backs
Due process of law in Texas requires that the county coroner investigate any violent death. The deaths of the Seventh Day Adventists in their church at Mount Carmel were certainly violent. So the medical examiner's report is particularly interesting. It reveals that some 18 bodies found on the scene had identifiable bullet holes. Two of these were shot in the back, a rather unusual place for a suicide bullet, or for a mercy killing. Pathologist Cyril Wecht ruled out suicide in Steve Schneider's case, pointing out that the wound was in the back of the head, indicating, "he did not shoot himself." Wecht also found David Koresh's wound to be consistent with sniper fire.
At least one of the bullets recovered from a body was consistent with 9 millimeter government issue weapons carried by federal agents that day. None of the Seventh Day Adventists who were in Mount Carmel Center saw any of their own people shooting at each other, and they have testified to that effect.
What about the weapons checks? When police or military personnel take weapons with live ammunition into the field, it is standard procedure to check those weapons and count the ammunition to independently verify if any weapons were fired. Where are these weapons after-action reports? Are we to believe the federal agent who claimed to use his "ferret" round grenade launcher in a 40-second exchange of fire with one of the Davidians (rather than his M16) in the absence of detailed after action weapons checks?
Autopsies of one year old Chanel Andrade, eight year old Cyrus Howell, six year old Star Howell, two year old Bobbie Lane Koresh, three year old Dayland Gent, one year old Page Gent, three year old Crystal Martinez, four year old Isaiah Martinez, eight year old Joseph Martinez, six year old Melissa Morrison, two year old Mayanah Schneider, one year old Startle Summers, one year old Hollywood Sylvia, four year old Serenity Jones, two year old Chica Jones, and two year old Little One Jones proved very interesting. These infants and youngsters apparently died of "smoke" and had high levels of carbon monoxide in their bodies. Some are listed as dead from suffocation.
None of these children's heads were of the size appropriate for any gas mask available in Mount Carmel Center. Janet Reno knew these infants were inside when she ordered those tanks to deploy poison gas into that church. The FBI knew that none of these children could have gas masks.
Yet Reno had the temerity to claim on televised interviews and before Congress that she was concerned about these children. Her agents knew that when CS gas burns it creates cyanide gas. Reno knowingly and willfully poisoned those children, their older siblings, and their parents. She did so in violation of their Constitutional rights, without providing due process, and in contravention of her oath to uphold the Constitution. Having taken personal responsibility for the tank assault, she should be impeached, stripped of office, and charged with 74 counts of murder in the first degree.
Burned to the Ground
Naturally, the fire is an interesting event in and of itself. Did the Seventh Day Adventists set that fire? Their surviving members deny it. Was the fire caused accidentally? Certainly not.
When you inject flammable gas using a flammable solvent (methylene chloride) into a wooden building, and then create large holes aligned with the brisk wind blowing that day, you have to expect fire. Even if the characteristic flash of an incendiary grenade lighting up a window as seen on the FLIR footage (and described by Dr. Allard as a grenade-type explosion) is not the only causative agency for the fire, the FBI tank assault was clearly designed to promote that fire. It is not surprising that the fire appears to start at the most upwind corner of the building moments after a tank crashes into this part of the building. Nor is it surprising that known fire accelerants such as methylene chloride accumulated over 6 hours of the gas attack would catch fire when federal agents fired pyrotechnic "ferret" rounds into the church. Repeatedly.
The FBI cut off water and power to Mount Carmel Center during their alleged "negotiations" process. They were well aware that kerosene lanterns, candles, and other open flames were used for illumination in that building. They were equally aware that there was no water inside except that collected in rain barrels positioned around the building.
If the FBI had not intended to cause a fire, they certainly picked an unusual way to ventilate the building. They knocked down the staircases to make exiting the building much harder. They injected flammable materials into a wooden building. They knocked large holes aligned with the wind, and some photos reveal characteristic rocket-powered grenade or mortar holes just beneath the roof line. A fire chief evaluated the Mount Carmel footage and likened the effect created by the FBI tanks to that found in a pot bellied stove. Deliberate ventilation bringing oxygen to flammable materials is the characteristic effect found in both a pot bellied stove, and in the work of the tanks on 19 April 1993.
FBI agents contacted the Burn Unit of Parkland Memorial Hospital in Dallas at 6 a.m. on 19 April 1993. Sufficient federal agents from the Dallas BATF office were on hand and assigned to guard the emergency helicopters from Parkland around the clock that same day.
There would have been no fire if the tanks had not assaulted that church. The fire might have been put out, but the FBI prevented the fire trucks from reaching the building.
The FBI moved quickly to cover up its misdeeds. Tanks equipped with bulldozer blades pushed the standing walls of the church buildings into the fire to ensure their total consumption. According to a Captain of Texas Rangers on the scene that day as a deputized federal marshal, the "crime scene" was eviscerated almost immediately. Vehicles were towed away, the remainder of the building was leveled, and the reinforced concrete room where the women and children had been hiding was demolished. Items determined to be trash were hauled away before defense attorneys for the survivors could inspect them.
The FBI would have you believe that dozens of Americans perished in a fire deliberately set by the Branch Davidians in a building where no arson investigation was allowed to take place. Why? Why not have the local fire department go through the remains of that building to identify ignition sources? Why destroy the building before that could be accomplished?
The FBI doesn't want you to know who set the fires that burned so many of those bodies so badly, so they destroyed the building before the arson investigation could take place. The FBI doesn't want you to know about the camouflaged men who shot and killed Americans that fateful day, so they are lying about the white flashes seen in the FLIR footage. The FBI doesn't want you to see the mangled remains of tank-ravaged bodies, or the infant whose spine is twisted back on itself in characteristic indication of cyanide gas poisoning, so they are deliberately lying about Waco: The Rules of Engagement.
The FBI has even gone to the trouble of releasing a copy of the FLIR footage to a Maryland lab (which incidentally has a very lucrative government contract) which has recently reported that the images on the FLIR footage are not gunfire. Unfortunately, the FBI deliberately misinformed the Maryland lab about what generation and model of FLIR equipment had been used at Waco. And, of course, they chose a lab with a vested interest in getting further government contracts.
What Should Be Done?
In a recent issue of indieWIRE (June 16, 1997) John Bernstein reports, "After an earlier screening, an irate audience member leapt to his feet and shouted, 'Now you've seen it, what are you gonna do about it?'" The answer should be obvious. Write your Representative in Congress asking for the impeachment of Janet Reno. Once the House moves to impeach, the Senate will try the impeachment. That is the only proper venue for the evaluation of Reno's conduct during and after the BATF raid and in regard to the FBI tank assault, as well as her egregious perjury before Congressional hearings on the subject.
Based solely on the information shown in the Federal Bureau of Investigation's own Forward Looking Infra-Red (FLIR) imagery taken on 19 April 1993 during the tank assault on the Seventh Day Adventist church near Waco, Texas, there is adequate cause for the United States House of Representatives to bring forth a motion for impeachment of the Attorney General, Janet Reno. In her testimony before Congress on the events associated with the attack on the Mount Carmel Center, Reno perjured herself repeatedly. In addition, she caused or permitted her agents within the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to perjure themselves repeatedly.
Moreover, Reno has taken responsibility for the events related to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF) raid on the Seventh Day Adventist church 28 February 1993, and she was personally responsible for the FBI-led tank assault. The BATF raid was conducted with a warrant obtained with perjured statements. The BATF raid was also conducted in unconstitutional fashion with military assistance, obtained by agents knowingly making false statements regarding an alleged drug laboratory on the premises. The FBI used chemical weapons, in particular toxic CS gas against American citizens, many of them infants. Since the time of the assault, FBI agents have lied to Congress and to the American people, denying, among other things, that federal agents fired on the Seventh Day Adventist church during their assault.
In addition, those seeking to determine what we should do about it should contact both their Representative and their Senators with regard to the elimination of both the BATF and the FBI. Nothing being done by BATF is appropriate under the terms of the Constitution for the United States. Nothing being done by the FBI is appropriate under the terms of the Constitution for the United States. Those FBI functions relating to espionage activities on US soil should be handled by the Defense Intelligence Agency or related Defense Department functionaries. Drug interdiction efforts, to the extent that they are appropriate, should be handled by the Drug Enforcement Agency. Anti-terrorism efforts should be handled by local police or other federal agencies.
The American people cannot trust an agency which deploys armed men in helicopters to fire on a church. The FBI's own negotiator is heard on FBI negotiation tapes agreeing that armed men in the helicopters sent to Mount Carmel Center on 28 February 1993 fired on the buildings. Video of the event shows at least one Seventh Day Adventist falling injured or dead from gunfire from a helicopter.
Military helicopters were only provided to the BATF on 28 February 1993 because the BATF lied about a drug lab being inside. The BATF is not charged with drug enforcement activities. The BATF lied about automatic weapons being inside. The BATF opened fire on the church without provocation. The BATF has repeatedly shown itself to be a rogue agency.
Regulation of firearms manufacturing, acquisition, and distribution is beyond the authority of any federal agency, as clearly set forth in the Second Article of the Bill of Rights. More crimes are prevented by armed Americans than are caused by them, by a ratio of over 60 to one. More children under the age of fifteen die in bicycle accidents each year than die from gun accidents. Most ominously, over 50 million people have been murdered by their governments in the 20th Century, governments which in every instance passed restrictive gun control laws prior to their respective genocides.
We need no agency to regulate firearms in America. Nor do we need a federal agency regulating alcohol, given that the Federal Alcohol Act and Prohibition have both been repealed. States collect alcohol taxes, and states can enforce these taxes. We also need no federal agency regulating tobacco. Again, states collect cigarette taxes and can enforce them. Federal gasoline taxes are collected by the states without difficulty. We need no Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms.
Nor do we need a Federal Bureau of Investigation. Hundreds of FBI files on prominent Republicans were discovered in recent years at the Clinton White House. Why are such dossiers compiled on Americans by their own government? What criminal acts were committed by those whose records were so carelessly distributed?
It is widely accepted that FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover had dossiers on most prominent politicians both Democrat and Republican. It is said that his very lengthy tenure as Director, 1924 to 1972, was due in no small part to his willingness to extort American political leaders, including several presidents of the United States. No less a source than the Columbia Encyclopedia describes this view of his life. Prior to assuming the post of Director, Hoover led the infamous Palmer Raids against immigrant Americans with allegedly radical politics. The Palmer Raids, one of the darker episodes associated with the Office of Attorney General, were intent on capturing arsenals of guns held by anarchists, and managed to uncover exactly one legally owned pistol.
Did the death of FBI Director Hoover in 1972 cause the assorted files on prominent American politicians to disappear, never to be used again? Evidently not. Hundreds of such files were misappropriated by the Clinton White House, as revealed in the recent File-Gate controversy. Does the Federal Bureau of Investigation continue to extort budgetary and other authority from hapless politicians who fear that their liaisons and financial dealings will be revealed? Obviously.
The FBI recently obtained authority from Congress to tap 3 million phones simultaneously. Surely the enemies of the State are not so numerous as that! Yet, in the guise of protecting us from terrorism, sophisticated voice recognition and keyword recognition software programs are monitoring millions of conversations a day, hoping to catch wind of "assassination," "bombing," and other terrorist terminology. You should be aware that email transmitted across the Internet can be similarly perused, unless it is encrypted with one of many popular software programs.
In the Randy Weaver case, the government paid a multi-million dollar settlement to Weaver for the loss of his son, his wife, injuries to himself, and punitive damages. The FBI admits that their sniper shot Vicki Weaver, they admit that their people shot her son, and killed the family dog. Do we need such an agency in America?
Perhaps Weaver was a white supremacist, or perhaps he was just a Fundamentalist Christian with unusual political beliefs. Did his wife deserve to die because she shared his beliefs? Certainly not if the First Amendment protection of freedom of religion and freedom of speech is being enforced.
Weaver's crime was not paying a tax on some gun he sold. Had he filed the necessary paperwork and paid the necessary fee, about $200, he could have sold that particular gun without hindrance. Did his wife and child have to be murdered because he failed to pay that fee? That would seem to be an "unusual punishment" which the Eighth Amendment says are not to be imposed. It would also seem to be the death penalty for associating with an alleged criminal, executed without due process. Murder is an appropriate term for it.
The Branch Davidians are certainly an unusual Christian sect. Their beliefs, and those of other Seventh Day Adventists, are not widely accepted. Should they then be murdered wholesale and their bodies burned? Certainly not.
Texas Child Protective Services and the local sheriff's office investigated various allegations of child abuse, and found no evidence of any crime. Moreover, when wanted for questioning in an earlier case involving murder, David Koresh surrendered himself to authorities without incident. (He was exonerated of any wrongdoing in the murder case.) So why, when he and others were accused of having some guns that hadn't been purchased with the proper paperwork, did the BATF need to assault his home and church? Why did the FBI have to kill 74 people to bring this man to justice, when he repeatedly offered to come out peacefully?
Why, in the name of all that is Holy, was 51 days too long? Sure, the evidence of BATF helicopters firing on the compound, and the eyewitness testimony of all those Davidians regarding who fired first on 28 February 1993 was potentially damaging. Sure, the FBI Hostage Recycling Team was unhappy negotiating with armed Americans, presumably preferring to deal with the helpless sort instead.
But Koresh had agreed to come out, and had produced the first of seven written documents (his interpretations of the Seven Seals in the Book of Revelations) as an indication of his good faith to make progress in this matter. One of the Davidian survivors of the 19 April 1993 tank assault carried a finished copy out of the fire that day.
So, why do we need an agency that sends tanks, poison gas, and men armed with automatic weapons to destroy a church? We don't.
We don't need Janet Reno. She should be impeached and tried for murder. We don't need the BATF. It should be dissolved, and no federal agency should do anything in its areas of authority. We don't need the FBI. It should be eliminated, and other federal agencies should handle those few Constitutionally-authorized powers which it handles (in cooperation with other agencies in any event).
Your Responsibility, Your Opportunity
Write your Representative. Write your Senators. Tell them what they should do. If they won't, for whatever excuse they offer, fire them. When called upon to vote for their reelection, don't. Find politicians who aren't in the FBI archives, who have sufficient personal integrity not to have engaged in wrongdoing, or the guts to admit they made mistakes. It will be necessary to look to the Libertarian Party for such candidates, although some can be found among the Democrats and Republicans.
Once you have seen Waco: The Rules of Engagement you will realize that there were no rules. There was a determined effort to destroy evidence and kill witnesses. It was a tragedy, a travesty of justice, grossly unconstitutional, and willfully planned and executed. Those responsible must be removed from office, and those agencies involved must be eliminated by Congress.
Your obligation as an American is to make sure that the Constitution is enforced. Elect people who will take their oath to defend the Constitution seriously. Make sure they appoint and confirm people who will do so, and make them impeach people who don't.
If you don't uphold your obligation, there is no telling what may happen. Misguided people apparently blew up the Federal Building in Oklahoma City because you weren't responsible about what happened at Waco. You were told that the Davidians set those fires and shot each other. You were lied to by the FBI, by Janet Reno, and the postmodern Bob Woodwards didn't uncover the story soon enough. So, perhaps, you couldn't be responsible for what happened at Waco until the FLIR footage was available, until Waco: The Rules of Engagement was released.
So be responsible now. Write your local newspaper. Write your Congressional leaders. Demand that Reno be impeached. Demand that the BATF and FBI be eliminated by Congress. If the politicians who claim to represent you won't do these things, find better politicians.
It is your country. Do something about it. You can live in a free country. If you don't, it is your fault. If you want to live in freedom, you have the opportunity. Tell your political leaders to stand up for freedom. Always.
Free Yourself.
