digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at time.com

The Cults That Went Whacko

time.com — On the 15th anniversary of the Waco conflagration, a catalog of the murderous and suicidal groups that stunned the world

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • cybrspin, on 04/19/2008, -3/+8lol nice pic of manson :)
    • zlatinb, on 04/20/2008, -0/+0bet most ppl dont know he was a musician
  • ogisdan, on 04/19/2008, -3/+82wheres the church of scientology?
    • SmellyFingers, on 04/19/2008, -25/+6Look at the right corner of your screen and search for it. I'm sure Digg will give you about 9,000,000 stories about it.
      ANON FTW LOLOLOLOL
    • ehsteve23, on 04/19/2008, -1/+22"went whacko" implies they were sane at some point.
    • Shananra, on 04/19/2008, -0/+3They haven't committed mass suicide. Yet.
  • muleking, on 04/19/2008, -23/+26The forgot the catholic church, remember the 15th century???
    • Farik, on 04/19/2008, -4/+19Like it was yesterday.
      • ZeRux, on 04/19/2008, -0/+2It is for those who're still living in 15th century, and those are apparently many.
    • ZeRux, on 04/19/2008, -24/+11They forgot atheism, remember the 20th century???
      • TheThirdLevel, on 04/19/2008, -9/+8Pray tell me, how many people were murdered by an atheistic cult in the name of atheism?

        That's right. None.
        • eosp, on 04/19/2008, -7/+10-Stalin.
          -But there wasn't a cult!
          -Then what is the Communist Party?
          • TheThirdLevel, on 04/19/2008, -0/+2He didn't kill in the name of atheism.... That's like saying because Hitler was a Christian, we should blame Christianity for the Holocaust.
          • ZeRux, on 04/19/2008, -1/+2Sure he did. The last time I checked, atheism was one of essential parts of communist ideals (although the opposite doesn't have to be, i.e. you can be an atheist without being communist). Perhaps you should repeat your history lessons.
          • Laughsatyou, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1hitler wasnt a christian, he was into the occult.
        • corfe83, on 04/19/2008, -2/+3"-But there wasn't a cult!
          -Then what is the Communist Party?"

          There was a personality cult and a political organization, but it had nothing to do with Atheism, other than the fact that they happened to be Atheist and promote Atheism.

          The Nazi Government promoted scientific research and had many scientists - do you really think that Naziism caused that, or was caused by it?
        • ZeRux, on 04/19/2008, -1/+4Communism is the greatest atheistic cult which ever existed and dictators like Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Causescau (and many more) were responsible for deaths of millions of people.

          If you don't agree that communism was responsible for some of the greatest crimes in human history, then you're no better than those who say Holocaust never happened and that pictures of prisoners from WW2 concentration camps were staged in Hollywood.
    • blackjack75, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1If you think the Catholic church (and others) have stopped being bad 500 years ago then you have very bad -or very old - history books. My parents were raised in spain during Franco's lovely dictatorship and should I believe them the church wasn't exactly a beacon of freedom in the middle of this system.
  • toxicityj, on 04/19/2008, -2/+74if TIME had the balls, scientology would be #1
    • dondara, on 04/19/2008, -1/+12Which is, of course, why it is missing. Time is to news what People is to news
    • Laughsatyou, on 04/21/2008, -0/+3if Time had any balls they would remember waco for what it was, a massacre of US civilians by government jackboot thugs.
  • monospaced, on 04/19/2008, -2/+31Scientology.
  • AshamedAmerican, on 04/19/2008, -6/+43Buried for seventeen ***** pages.
    • SquigglyP, on 04/19/2008, -0/+3and a nice little pop-up ad to top it all off. buried as well.
  • kru1e, on 04/19/2008, -26/+13Christianity.
  • xptweakerntn, on 04/19/2008, -14/+3Waco? Waco? Not only Waco my dear friends.
    4-19
    Hitlers Birthday
    Columbine Shooting
    Oklahoma City Bombing
    And of course Waco, Texas, where Janet Reno showed everyone she had some guns.

    The worst part of it all, 4+19=23
    • harusp3x, on 04/19/2008, -2/+4You're a day early for some of those events.
    • justinx0r, on 04/19/2008, -1/+7My Dr. Pepper has 23 flavors in it.
    • heliox, on 04/19/2008, -3/+1and a dollar short
    • monospaced, on 04/19/2008, -1/+3oh crap, a numerology cult
    • xptweakerntn, on 04/19/2008, -7/+2Sorry guys, correction.
      Hitler was born 4-20. I was told 4-19.
      Columbine happened 4-20, I was told 4-19.
      Oklahoma City Bombing was 4-19, so at least I got one right.
      I hate it when intelligent people have their facts wrong/lie like this.

      • madfrogurt, on 04/19/2008, -3/+8Don't worry, I don't think anyone thought your comment was an intelligent person getting something wrong.
        • xptweakerntn, on 04/19/2008, -5/+2I wasn't talking about me, I was talking about the person that told me about the 2 wrong dates I had. Very intelligent person, knows a lot about everything, but just had his facts wrong. So why did you insinuate that I was talking about myself?
      • qwerter, on 04/19/2008, -0/+5fact checking is just a google search away.
    • Wakuko, on 04/19/2008, -1/+323???

      Michael Jordan is a killer too?
    • ZeRux, on 04/19/2008, -1/+1Both Columbine shooting and Oklahoma City bombing happened on 4/19 on purpose, to honor Hitler's birthday.
      • Laughsatyou, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1fail, his birthday was 4/20. same day as the stoner holiday. and neither event had anything to do with hitlers birthday.
        • ZeRux, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1Except that people responsible for both events were supporters of Neo-Nazi ideology.
  • Josf, on 04/19/2008, -3/+1http://www.public-action.com/SkyWriter/WacoMuseum/
  • Mikhail101, on 04/19/2008, -2/+4Manson: "I am fear, i am terror, I am... oh look another Christmas special"
    From southpark
  • punx, on 04/19/2008, -4/+301.) The Manson Family
    2.) Jim Jones and the People's Temple
    3.) Branch Davidians
    4.) Order of the Solar Temple
    5.) Aum Shinrikyo
    6.) Heaven's Gate
    7.) Movement for the Restoration of the Ten Commandments
    8.) The True Russian Orthodox Church

    Stupid articles with too many pages.
    • apophenic, on 04/19/2008, -10/+3Forget your Ritalin today?
    • heliox, on 04/19/2008, -2/+9The articles were interesting, but spreading it over several pages sucked.
      • punx, on 04/19/2008, -1/+3Yeah, that came off wrong. Good articles, just wish they would put them on single pages.
    • monospaced, on 04/19/2008, -8/+4Stupid comment with too many lines.
    • neko, on 04/19/2008, -0/+6stupid stupid with too many stupid! =D
    • KlogereEndGrim, on 04/19/2008, -1/+3thx :)
    • zlatinb, on 04/19/2008, -0/+2It wouldn't have passed the senior editorial staff if it were any smarter.
    • SLockhart, on 04/20/2008, -0/+2Thank You.
  • Mike007, on 04/19/2008, -3/+2whacko in waco
  • Gozmeranian, on 04/19/2008, -5/+1moar phear pleeze
  • AsylumAleikum, on 04/19/2008, -24/+12Buried for missing the Obama cult.
  • gbv23, on 04/19/2008, -2/+26Article says the Waco raid was botched --but still claims that is was the cultists who started the fire. Has that ever been firmly established? They certainly tried to demonize Koresh afterward, and they were fairly kooky alright but still......they'd been there since 1935 (adventist splinter group) They prolly shoulda come out peacefully cuz eventually the MAN is gonna have more firepower.
    • dondara, on 04/19/2008, -2/+14I saw some hearings video that showed thermal imaging depicting a fed throwing in a tear gas grenade and flames spread instantly afterward.
      Was D. Kuresch(sp?) crazy? Probably
      Were they doing anything illegal? Who knows now
      Did the pigs "teach them a lesson" for refusing to allow a search? I'd say so.
      • Cl1mh4224rd, on 04/19/2008, -3/+3> "I saw some hearings video that showed thermal imaging depicting a fed throwing in a tear gas grenade and flames spread instantly afterward."

        This sounds like BS to me, but maybe you're just exaggerating the "instantly" part. Thermal imaging devices can't see through walls, just like a regular camera can't see through walls. If the canister started a fire, it would take time for the heat from the fire to warm the walls outside to be detectable.

        > "Did the pigs "teach them a lesson" for refusing to allow a search? I'd say so."

        Are you referring to the tear gas that may have started the fire? You'd have to be *seriously* paranoid to believe starting a fire with a tear gas canister was the *intent*.

        If that is indeed how the fire started (but I could swear there were multiple points of ignition) then it sounds like an unfortunate accident.
    • Joab, on 04/19/2008, -2/+7Glad someone else knows what happened it was stated in a review that it was probably the tear gas that started the fire but people still seem to think they killed themselves.
      • roosterjm2k2, on 04/19/2008, -2/+1Amassing assault rifles and firing on federal agents... yeah, they killed themselves... then refusing to come out of a burning building (they werent trapped in it) ...


      • lepton, on 04/19/2008, -2/+2I never understood all this, I watched it live on CNN and I clearly saw a fire start inside on one side of the building when the cops were working the other side. Sure looked like the folks inside set the fire.
    • IphtashuFitz, on 04/19/2008, -1/+3Unfortunately I don't think the truth will ever come out. The feds & Texas did a good job of obliterating all the evidence after the fire. Less than a month after the fire the state of Texas authorized the bulldozing of the entire site so any potential evidence was lost for good. Conspiracy theories will likely follow this incident forever, just like all the conspiracy theories around 9/11, JFK, etc. There will always be people who refuse to believe all the reports and see coverups and government conspiracies everywhere.

      My personal belief is that the Branch Davidians set the fire themselves. There's too much evidence as far as I'm concerned. I've seen infrared video taken from aircraft over the site and it shows the fires starting and spreading extremely quickly from two completely separate parts of the compound. There have also been independent reports that show many people inside would have had enough time to escape if they had wanted to. Add to that the fact that these people showed a lot of the classic behaviors of a cult like Jim Jones & Jonestown, Hevans Gate, etc. and a mass suicide seems like the most reasonable answer to me. They probably had a persecution complex or just wanted to make this appear like a case of "suicide by cop" on a grand scale.
  • D14BL0, on 04/19/2008, -6/+5I do tech support, and a lot of our customers are in Waco.

    I swear, there's a lot of lingering nutjobs out there that should've drank the Kool-Aid.

    "Thar's a microphone in mah cable box!"
    • geekchick82, on 04/19/2008, -1/+3Way to get your facts wrong. And way to hate on the technologically challenged.
      Fail and fail.
    • iJump, on 04/20/2008, -1/+2Errrmmm... *chews on a carrot* Aren't you a tad off-topic here?
  • gromit1025, on 04/19/2008, -1/+32Taken from the article:

    "The True Russian Orthodox Church
    April 27, 2008: Members finally emerge from their cave"

    Apparently this hasn't happened yet.
    • zlatinb, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1Stan to Kyle: "Dude, this is F***up right here!"
    • YogiWanKenobi, on 04/19/2008, -0/+3Perhaps they understand nature's 4-way time cube
  • jisrael, on 04/19/2008, -1/+18The last photo in that batch is dated April 27, 2008. soo... They took a picture 8 days from now?
  • apophenic, on 04/19/2008, -2/+15"April 27, 2008: Members finally emerge from their cave"
    Hahaha, what?
  • fotofunguy, on 04/19/2008, -2/+14What about KKK or scientology?
    • IphtashuFitz, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1I think Scientology certainly should belong there. I don't think the KKK really should because they aren't a religion. (religion != racism) If you included the KKK then you'd have to include the Nazi's and all other racist organizations.
  • DrNemo, on 04/19/2008, -5/+9Time is trying to make Waco look like a collective suicide while the fire was clearly not caused by the Davidians.
    • IphtashuFitz, on 04/19/2008, -2/+1I suggest you do a little research into the independent studies done after the fire. Two experts from the University of Maryland's Department of Fire Protection Engineering went to Wako and studied the aftermath. Their conclusions where that the fire broke out simultaneously in three locations, an accelerant (like cans of gasoline) was used, the tank injecting teargas couldn't have started those three fires, and most damning is that there would have been plenty of time for a number of those inside to have escaped if they wanted to. I think that's the most important fact. Why didn't more people escape, or even attempt to, if they had plenty of time? They wanted to commit suicide. Just like other cults like Jonestown, Hevans Gate, etc.
  • DiggerUpper, on 04/19/2008, -18/+1My list of whacko cults: Catholic Church, Mormons, Scientologists, Evolutionary Scientists, Atheists, Satanism, Judiasm, etc.
    Jesus is risen!
    • CitizenSweeps, on 04/19/2008, -3/+10Atheism isn't a religion, much less a cult.
      • kelly, on 04/19/2008, -14/+3Yet it still should be included in the list
        • BeOrange, on 04/19/2008, -2/+9Wanna explain why?
          • camelseye, on 04/20/2008, -2/+2because the atheist who denies the existence of God, makes himself a god, by placing his opinion as his theology. Thus he worships himself as god, negating his own conclusion. Aetheism is the FAITH that there is no god, thus making it a faith, commonly referred to as RELIGION.
          • kingmanic, on 04/21/2008, -1/+3Camelseye: Your idea fails. Because a lack of belief implies nothing except a lack of belief. I do not think Baal is a god. This does not mean I worship myself or Marduk as a god. Atheism is the lack of belief in a god which does not propose that man is god. Atheism is the denial that religion has the right idea. It is anti belief. Most atheists requiring evidence for their acceptance of ideas and God has no direct evidence despite some great minds trying (Pascal, William james etc..). You must take god on faith. Atheism is not taking anything on faith but is the default answer to the question of "is there a god" if you are a positivist, rationalists or empiricist due to the lack of evidence.
          • camelseye, on 04/21/2008, -3/+1Agnosticism is a bit more honest than atheism--"We cannot know..." I think you are confusing the 2. Lack of belief is instigated by a motive...others cannot always tell what the Atheist's motive is, but it always boils down to the atheists word against God's Word, and one of them over-rules. Rejecting God is the "faith" that He does not exist.
          • kingmanic, on 04/21/2008, -1/+2Agnosticism is the idea there may be a god. It's a position you can take however it's no more or less valid.

            Reductio ad absurdum of your argument, there is no evidence of god. But we must hold he may exist (the agnostic view). There is not evidence of invisible undetectable pink unicorns. We must hold the possibility they exist? Atheism is the lack of belief based on the lack of evidence. You do not need any belief to take that position. It is not equivalent to faith.

            How are you certain that anything is god's word? Atheism is not the rejection of Gods word just because it's a rejection of a certain stance in metaphysics. The need for an outside entity in the universe. Which is more basic. They don't' reject the Christian faith but the need for a faith in general and the very question that faith seeks to answer.
          • camelseye, on 04/21/2008, -2/+1But I am saying that it takes faith to say 'FAITH DOES NOT EXIST." Do you understand what I'm saying. I am not de-valuing any opinion. Just insisting that even those who profess not to have faith, actually have faith (that they don't need faith.) Believing any absolute takes faith.
          • kingmanic, on 04/21/2008, -1/+1Camelseye: Unfortunately you don't understand the concept. It does not take faith to take a stance in philosophy, not the sort of faith you are implying. There is no acceptance without proof needed. It's a intellectual stance based on a rationale. It is fine if you don't hold the same rationale but it does not require religious faith to assert there is no God. On some level you may be right, as all ideas require some basic unprovable premises however they are not the same as religious faith. I must take the premise that you exist for example when you may not. I must assume so because within the framework of the premises I accept and the implications that are built on top of them you must exist as a person or some sort of organized automata in order to reply to me. should my premises be incorrect I would have to adjust. If I find enough evidence I am a brain trapped inside a machine I may re-evaluate your existence. Faith as you imply is not needed for atheism. Extremes do not require faith. The "extreme" idea that the sun is around ~5000'c at it's surface does not require me to have faith it is so. It requires only that it conforms within the framework of my premises and that I am able to work out the models of physics and interpret the data set that indicate this is so. If I am unable to I may then have to take it on faith, however that is not how a rationale mind ought to work.
      • robthom, on 04/19/2008, -2/+3Its more of a gang?
        • CitizenSweeps, on 04/20/2008, -2/+2It's not even a gang. It's not organized in any way, which is a pretty important criteria for any of those tags. The only unifying thought is that there is no creator spirit. Other than that, there is no atheist "organization."
        • alkajazz, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1Organizing Atheists is like herding cats.
  • browny1978, on 04/19/2008, -8/+5Athiesm

    /sarcasm

  • IphtashuFitz, on 04/19/2008, -0/+4Am I the only one who was shocked to learn this happened 15 whole years ago? It seems like it was more like 8-10 years ago to me. But then again it was the trigger for Timothy McVeigh to blow up the federal building in Oklahoma a couple years later, and he was eventually executed prior to 9/11 so I guess it really was 15 years ago...
    • stormgren, on 04/19/2008, -0/+5Doesn't it seem like time has passed much differently since 2000. I mean, 1998 was ten years ago. I still think of it as recent. 9/11 was nearly 7 years ago, yet it seems like maybe 2.
    • Joab, on 04/19/2008, -1/+3As much as they would like you to believe, they didn't kill themselves. The fire was started by tear gas being fired into the building.
      • IphtashuFitz, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1That's actually still disputed. There are reports that the Wako residents poured flammable materials throughout the building. The FBI claims (yeah, I know conspiracy theorists will always refuse to believe what they say) that the only tear gas that could have started the fires was a specific type of grenade called a Flite-Rite CS gas grenade since it uses an internal combustion method of generating the gas. However those grenades were only used hours before the fire and in an area nowhere near where the fire occurred (trying to clear a pit 40 yards away from the main compound). There is also video footage taken from infrared cameras in an aircraft circling the compound during that fateful day that shows fires starting in two totally different parts of the compound, neither near the tank delivering the gas, and spreading very quickly. The FBI was using FLIR cameras in aircraft to help track the movement of people in and around the compound. It suggests that the Davidians did in fact set the fires themselves and use accelerants to ensure the fire spread quickly.
  • smek2, on 04/19/2008, -3/+7Aren't all cults sort of whacko?
    • newbill123, on 04/19/2008, -0/+3Yeah, the term "cult" is a very malleable word.

      My "Young Life" coach back in high school told me that a cult is any spiritual group which puts man before Christ. It's a definition that sounds like it includes anything with a charismatic leader, but is clearly constructed to exclude early Christianity itself.

      Many popular media say that a cult is a group that falls outside of the mainstream. Well, does mainstream mean some minimum number of self-described adherents which subscribe to your publication or does it mean having beliefs which differ from the common American philosophy: "try to behave but get ready to spend and shout for forgiveness later" which won't offend any corporate advertisers.

      Fundamentally, religion talks about big picture questions like "What is life about?", "How do I measure my worth as a person?", "How can I improve my worth?", and "Is there more?" These are questions which can't be strictly answered in the scope of the universe as we know it. Religions attempt to pose those answers, and to propagate the answers to others. But I don't think there's any way to cleanly define "cult" other than to say it's a group whose beliefs or acts seem foreign to your own.
    • SquigglyP, on 04/19/2008, -1/+1tell that to the christians.
  • notoneofus, on 04/19/2008, -1/+7They missed Rajneeshpuram, perhaps because they didn't kill anyone (though they tried). I was a kid in Oregon when they were active, and it was bizarre to have something like that only 200 miles away.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajneeshpuram
  • Ob1masterjd26, on 04/19/2008, -1/+11Wait, cults that went wacko? Aren't cults wacko by definition? At least a cultural definition?
    • Tracon, on 04/19/2008, -0/+7Next week cults that went sane and passed out free cookies.
    • newbill123, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1The Ahmish, the Shakers, and the Oneida Community are all religions that people would have trouble classifying as "mainstream" but certainly wouldn't want to imply that they were crazy. The emotional falling and speaking of a shaker service wouldn't hold a candle to some of the chaos that can go on in evangelical churches today. The complex marriages of the Oneida community wouldn't be out of line at all with the Mormons beliefs in polygamy. And certainly with all of the Ahmish furniture bought to furnish the McMansions across America, you wouldn't call these anti-consumerists crazy (or you might be implying something negative about the buyers of their furniture). The word cult is a hard word to define without implying answers to bigger questions about which religion has the right answers to the big questions of life, the universe, and everything.
  • tjmpaintball06, on 04/19/2008, -1/+7Holy Sh*t! I read the article on Jim Jones, that's some messed up stuff. Come on kids...drink the kool-aid. That picture was pretty creepy.
  • robthom, on 04/19/2008, -2/+17Buried for backhandedly labeling those Waco kooks as murderous and suicidal when outside of the media propaganda the videos are serve as much as evidence that they where massacred.
    • zlatinb, on 04/19/2008, -1/+0By burying the story you help that very same media propaganda.
  • InSectWar, on 04/19/2008, -11/+69) The Cult of Ron Paul
    • Notasheeple, on 04/19/2008, -2/+8insectwar, are you in the cult of being an ignorant dumb-ass American? Someone who thinks "change" is going to save the world.......what a goof lol......
      • chaosium, on 04/19/2008, -4/+6People who use the word "sheeple" are just about the least likely of all people of all backgrounds to change something, let alone for the better.
        • Notasheeple, on 04/19/2008, -2/+4based on what? Your enlightened state of Obammaness............. your a joke dude, why not just ask about it instead of incredulously assume that Ron Paul supporters know nothing? Maybe if he would have said change a few more times you would have gotten on board.
      • Cl1mh4224rd, on 04/19/2008, -1/+3> "Someone who thinks "change" is going to save the world.......what a goof lol......"

        You're absolutely right. Continuing to do exactly the same thing we've been doing will certainly save the world...
        • Notasheeple, on 04/19/2008, -1/+4That was based on Obamma's campaign slogan. "change" is all he ever talks about but rarely talks about how how will accomplish that change. Ron Paul talked a lot about change if you would have had your ears open to hear it. things like:

          The need to change Federal Reserves rampant inflation and it's effect on middle America.
          Our need to change from being the policemen of the world.
          Our need to cut foreign policy spending.
          Our need to change the borders security practices.
          Our need to change the fiat currency to sound money.
          Or how about the need for change back to the rule of the Constitution.
          Or our need to subsidize the biggest industries so they can make even more profits.
          Or our need to quash NAFTA, and support home grown businesses and their employees.
          Our need to keep up with our infrastructure demands at home, before we bomb then rebuild that of foreign inf. interests.

          If you need more just let me know. But I know for a fact that RP has already forgotten more about change than Obamma will ever even know. Ask yourself this: How long has Obamma been a senator? How much work has he put in on this so-called "change" through legislation? See, he could have been working on this "change for a long time now........and his results are????????? Now I challenge you to look at what RP HAS DONE TO CHANGE the direction of this country. Because the truth is you would not even know where to start!
        • Cl1mh4224rd, on 04/19/2008, -2/+3@Notasheeple: I've read enough about Ron Paul to know that he's a racist and his ideas about the economy are pretty nutty. Most of the people who support RP do so because he says what those people want to hear, but they honestly have no clue "who he is". He's no different from any other politician, except that when *he* drops out of the race, he will likely still have not incurred any serious campaign costs and will be millions richer... thanks to you.

          http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/5/15/124912/740

          "[...] our country is being destroyed by a group of actual and potential terrorists -- and they can be identified by the color of their skin."

          "[...] only about 5% of blacks have sensible political opinions [...]"

          "I think we can safely assume that 95% of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal."

          "We are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, but it is hardly irrational."

          Is this someone you want in the White House? Really?

          Don't talk to me about Ron Paul. *spits*
          • Notasheeple, on 04/20/2008, -2/+3That's so typical of a drone digger..........you think because you read someones blog you have all the answers...........Didn't even try to refute one point......I mean sheesh...................

            "Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans strictly as members of groups rather than as individuals. Racists believe that all individuals who share superficial physical characteristics are alike: as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called "diversity" actually perpetuate racism."

            "The true antidote to racism is liberty. Liberty means having a limited, constitutional government devoted to the protection of individual rights rather than group claims. Liberty means free-market capitalism, which rewards individual achievement and competence - not skin color, gender, or ethnicity."-RP

            What else do you have besides that because I mean I got that from his sight in like 5 min. No seriously, that was such a weak and pathetic attempt at smearing..........You think because the Idiot box says so it must be true..........

            And I donated a total of $100.00 towards something I believe in instead of Copenhagen. *spits*
            Don't talk to me about "change."
          • Notasheeple, on 04/20/2008, -1/+1-r- (site)
          • Cl1mh4224rd, on 04/20/2008, -2/+2I suppose I have no reason to care, honestly. It's not like it's even remotely possible that he'll be elected.
          • Notasheeple, on 04/20/2008, -1/+1Oh but you'll bash someone who you have no clue about. You obviously don't know ***** about RP. You just spew out whatever nonsense comes to mind because the tv said it. This is exactly what makes me sick. People talking like they know, when in reality they only know what someone else has told them. You don't take the time to research anything. You just fall in line and do what you are told. What a joke................. Do us all a favor and don't vote. You still have not tried to argue one point. So typical of the common sheeple!
    • Diderotten, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Any idea you disagree with that is supported by a notable percentage of people a cult?
  • JohnFromChicago, on 04/19/2008, -6/+24Time is trying to gloss over one of the worst abuses of authority in American history. The Branch Davidians didn't commit suicide, they were killed by Federal agents. Their compound was raided because they were an odd religion with lots of guns and made the ATF's radar. What part of freedom of religion and the right to bear arms gave the government the right to go in there in the first place? In retrospect, no one in Waco was ever convicted of any crime. By calling the Branch Davidians a suicide cult is inaccurate at best, and a willful attempt to gloss over a horrendous human rights tragedy committed against American citizens on American soil.
    • Notasheeple, on 04/19/2008, -2/+8Very true. People spout off about them, knowing nothing except what the idiot box told them to beleive. American ignorance at it's finest.
      • IphtashuFitz, on 04/19/2008, -1/+1Then why don't you enlighten us since you infer that you know so much about what really happened there. Or are you just another conspiracy theorist who refuses to believe all the evidence? Two independent experts from the University of Maryland's Department of Fire Protection Engineering went to Wako after the fire and did a full study before the site was bulldozed. These independent experts concluded the following:

        1. The fires in each of the three points of origin grew very quickly, each resulting in full room involvement within two minutes of initiation.
        2. The rapid growth rates of the fires resulted from an ignition source, probably liquid fuel, deliberately placed in each of the three points of origin.
        3. The rapid growth rates of the fires could not have been caused by a CEV accidentally tipping a lantern, nor by the chemical (methylene chloride) used as the dispersal agent for the CS tear gas.
        4. The strong winds did not significantly affect the fire growth rates inside the compound. The wind affected the external spread of flames, but not the initial rapid growth of the three fires to full room involvement.
        5. The tank-made openings on the first floor of the compound could have had some effect on the fire growth, but more likely provided fresh air to areas of refuge for some of the occupants.
        6. The compound residents had sufficient time to escape the fire, if they had so desired.
        • JohnFromChicago, on 04/20/2008, -0/+3Some of this is true and some of it is conjecture. There is no hard proof the Davidians had anything to do with intentionally accelerating the fire. But you failed to address my central point that the Feds had no business being there in the first place. Those people had the right to practice whatever religion they chose ... and they had the right to stock pile firearms if they chose. Posse comitatus (sp?) specifically bans the use of a tank or the military on American citizens on US soil. The vast majority of the people killed in Waco were women and children who were cowering in the corners hoping and praying that it would be over soon. Sadly, Janet Reno, the DoJ, and the directives of President Bill Clinton answered their prayers ... just not in the way they expected.

          If you're going to accept the government using military hardware on civilians ... and under questionable circumstances to boot, I really can't call you an American or a countryman. We do not require the services or wisdom of bootlickers, cowards and fools.
    • lajaw, on 04/19/2008, -0/+8And Janet Reno and Bill Clinton still roam free.
  • superPipo, on 04/19/2008, -0/+3uhm.. all of 'em?
  • BeOrange, on 04/19/2008, -0/+2Cliche Scientology cult remark here.
  • jordwest, on 04/19/2008, -1/+2"In the Penza region of Russia, Father Pyotr, as his followers call him, claimed that apocalypse would come in May 2008 and that God would show him and his followers how to survive. "
    LHC anyone?
  • sentime, on 04/19/2008, -5/+7Yea sure Time. The people at Waco were MURDERED.

    Nice doing cowards.
  • TheShadowKnows, on 04/19/2008, -8/+7The Cult of Bush - killed millions, destroyed America.

    http://www.makethemaccountable.com/podvin/images/B ...
    http://www.remote-dba.net/images/bush_flipping_bir ...
  • JointVenture, on 04/19/2008, -4/+4Just wait till next november if Obama loses you will see a cult go ***** whackObama.

    *when is digg going to fix the spell check so that Obama doesnt come up every time. You would think with all the spam they would have done it by now.
  • Nekura20x6, on 04/19/2008, -0/+4***** awful interface. I get why they do it (more pages = more ad hits), but I usually close pages put together this way which means they get less hits overall.
  • YHWH, on 04/19/2008, -4/+1The Manson "Family" wasn't a ***** cult.
    • IphtashuFitz, on 04/19/2008, -0/+2Then what was it? It had all the "classic" elements of a cult. A cult doesn't necessarily imply religion. A cult in the simplest terms is a cohesive group of people with similar beliefs, and often with a well established leader or authority figure. Well Manson was certainly an authority figure to the rest of his "family", and they certainly had similar beliefs given that they believed in, and thought they were instigating "Helter Skelter".
  • gquaglia, on 04/19/2008, -0/+5Jones Town should have been #1. 900 people dead beats anything Manson ever did. Plus it gave us the famous "drank the koolaid" phrase.
    • Diderotten, on 04/20/2008, -1/+1It was Flavor-aide!
      • gquaglia, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Maybe so, but the koolaid phrase came from that incident.
  • gypsi, on 04/19/2008, -2/+1republicans
  • dtfinch, on 04/19/2008, -0/+3Buried for being 17 slow loading pages with popup ads, one image and short paragraph each
  • ThatsNotPudding, on 04/19/2008, -0/+2I would ask the headline: there are non-Wacko Cults?
  • JulyZerg, on 04/19/2008, -1/+4Am I the ONLY one who noticed that April 28th, 2008 has NOT come yet? Go check the last two pages of this RIDICULOUSLY too-many-paged article!
    So this "news article" is reporting things that have not happened yet?
  • SquigglyP, on 04/19/2008, -1/+3The Waco fiasco wasn't a suicide cult. There's plenty of evidence to support the fact that they were killed by the FBI during the raid. Check out some of the documentaries. Those people were murdered, and the people in charge of the investigation were either morons or trying to cover it up. There's video evidence of a helicopter shooting an unarmed man on a silo. There's video evidence of gunfire behind the compound. There's video evidence of explosives going off inside the compound near windows just prior to the fires. The people in charge of the raid testified that they didn't shoot and that they didn't use any sort of explosives.

    There's a ton of other evidence and testimony that were ignored or suppressed during the investigation.

    /not a conspiracy nut.
  • SLockhart, on 04/20/2008, -2/+4They left out Atheism.
    • Diderotten, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Dissent and skepticism is at the heart of atheism for many people. Atheists disagree wth each other all the time. Cults are usually fundamentalist. There's no leader of the so-called cult. You can say Richard Dawkins, but many atheists hate him. He's human. You can say science is a dogma, and I can't disagree with you there.
    • compl3x, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Many atheists hate R.D.? Doesn't seem too likely to me.
      • Diderotten, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Pople say he's a douche-bag, and that he's actually given atheism a bad name.
        • Diderotten, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1*People
        • SLockhart, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1I'm glad people are starting to see that. I can appreciate why some people don't believe but Dawkins obviously has a chip on his shoulder.
        • Silencer7, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1sounds like those people never bothered to read a single one of his books.
  • pettdog78, on 04/20/2008, -0/+0The Waco people certainly were abit off their keester but I'd hardly say they commited suicide. They got pushed against a wall when the ATF just started firing on them and locked themselves in their complex. Besides that there are documented recordings of a ATF Tank that rammed the building shortly before the fire started and much of the evidence of the fire suggests it was started by the tank.
  • LoJack, on 04/20/2008, -1/+19) Fu Lung Gong
    10) DieLie Limur & his 'monks'
  • caponumen, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Largely inaccurate, deamonizing revisionist history, sorry, buried........
  • compl3x, on 04/20/2008, -1/+1Aren't all religions really cults? Or at very least started out as cults. The only difference between a minor cult and a major religion is the major religion has had the passage of time to allow it to become more widely accepted and more time to get more followers.

    All religions from my point of view are false, misguided or extreme in one way or another and that's basically the definition of a cult...
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 52 of 52 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.