By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
badgenome said:
-CraZed- said:

Also I have to disagree with the fact that it was just the exposure that made the difference. Occupy Wall Street got TONS of exposure and what came out of that? Zero, zip, zilch, nada. And Waco also got tons of press even without the aid of the internet. It was on TV every day during the whole standoff.

I think the comparable part of Occupy Wall Street was that OWS wasn't evicted from Zuccotti Park, not that they didn't get any of their (mostly incoherent and unrealistic) demands met. And Waco happened at a time when the media essentially consisted of three major networks plus CNN, all of which could be counted on to faithfully regurgitate the government's narrative. David Koresh being a fucking wacko child molester and not a salt-of-the-earth rancher didn't help the Branch Davidians' image.

I think a better comparison is probably Ruby Ridge. Randy Weaver had a lot of guns, too, and all it did was give the feds an excuse to slaughter his family. What he didn't have was a lot of sympathetic people with cameras.

I offered those two examples up as contrasts. OWS was an unarmed but well covered gaggle of citizens and Waco was an armed and covered but largely unsupported outside of the members of the cult. Where as here we have a case whee he had state officials, other citizens and even militia groups coming from outside the state to assist his efforts to thwart over-bearing bureacrats efforts to steal his property and livelihood.