From: [f--r--a] at [agcs.com] (Andrew Ford)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Waco Flame thrower tank - Not?
Date: 12 Oct 1993 14:42:36 -0700

[m--l--s] at [ms.uky.edu] (Stephen D. Grant) writes:
> 
> I saw it. Live.
> It looked like risidual flamable luid/gas burning to me.
> As if a hose was spraying a flamable liquid and shut off, only to leave
> a small burning flame at the end of the hose/barrel.
> I don't think the thing shot "shells" but rather stream of liquid/gas.
 
The Sunday, August 22 edition of "The Arizona Republic" newspaper has a
commentary in the "Perspective" page of section C which identifies the tank
as a M67A1, manufactured by Chrysler, equipped with a flame thrower.

The most interesting part is the tank was out of service and had to be taken
from "the graveyard" to be put into service in Waco.

Why would the gov't take a flame-throwing tank out of "the graveyard" to
pump tear gas into a building? 

????????????????



-- 
Most people seem to think that trampling individual rights is OK if it is
"for the good of society as a whole."  However, society is but a large number
of individuals, and how can harming the individual parts better the whole? 
 - Andrew Ford      --     [f--r--a] at [agcs.com]   --   (INFP)