The basic referrence for this is Waco:A New Revelation (2 of 2)

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2962656895645965329

At about 3:14 on this video, we are introduced to a Dr. Edward Allard, whose resume seems to include some patents on FLIR analysis. He starts off with an utterly debunkable lie about shots being fired from a Huey helicopter at someone trying to leave the Mt. Carmel compound. He zooms in on the police helicopter and shows us flashes of light which he claims are gunshots. The sliding side door of the helicopter is closed and the light is obviously located right in front of the edge of that door. This is the location of the side cockpit window. You can't fire a weapon out that window. He goes on to state that the reflection should be steady unless the helicopter was rocking violently. Well, he's full of crap. At that distance, the slightest change in the angle of the glass would reflect the sunlight off at angle fron the camera.

It remains rectangular throughout the time it is visible. I have never, in all my years around weapons, ever seen a weapon emit a square muzzle blast. This is as stupid as Richard Gage's square WTC 7 squibs.

At 4:45, the autopsy reports on one of the victims, supposedly shot from the helicopter, shows a head wound. They made a head shot from a helicopter. Yeah, right. Want to buy a toll bridge?

At about 28:18, they go again to the now suspect testimony of Allard on the FLIR tapes which supposedly show soldiers dismounting from a tank and firing into the compound as the tank knocks down walls.

Problem is that I don't see the soldiers. They would be brighter than the ground, thus would show up as a lighter color. There are dark spots where Allard says they fired from. Doesn't this idiot know how to read the images from his own invention?

Further, from a tactical standpoint, the locations from which the "soldiers" were supposedly firing were the worst possible places from which to do so. You have a tank right there in front of you. You have windows above you from which people can fire down at you. So you lie down on the ground and start firing into the hole the tank just made.

(Will you take the bridge if I throw in a perpetual motion machine?)

Allard is a liar. If he has the IQ to design FLIR equipment, he is not going to get away with pleading stupidity, and being right is obviously not a likely scenario, given that he thinks soldiers will deliberately fire from the position in which they know they are most likely to get shot.

Then there is the old Dominionist piece of crap Benton Partin trying to claim that a breaching charge was used on the concrete bunker inside the compound. At about 32:17, the propane tank cooks off, producing a huge fire ball. That it is propane is indisputable, even to the whackiest of whackjobs. But the film maker shows an initial spurt of flame and calls it a demolition charge going off. But that charge causes no visible perterbation of the smoke around it. There is, therefore, no possible way that this could have been a charge capable of breaching the bunker. How the hell would you even get that charge in there with the building burning down around you? Partin once again offers you a bucket of turds and calls it truffles.