As you can see from some of the reviews here, misinformation about Waco still abounds.
The warrant WAS to search for automatic weapons. Specifically semi-automatic weapons converted into machine guns. Such conversions are 100% illegal. Not only did the agents on the ground testify to hearing automatic weapons fire, so did the journalists present. This is also all in addition to them recovering automatic weapons after the fire.
Meanwhile another reviewer insists that if the Davidians had grenades that they would have exploded in the fire. I can only imagine this reviewer was simply not paying attention because 1) Footage of the initial shootout captured the sound of very loud explosions which were implied to be the grenades and 2) There WAS a very large explosion at some point during the fire. Even if those explosions and the large one during the fire could not be attributed to grenades, that doesn't mean the Davidians weren't attempting to construct them, which is all that the delivery driver's finding of an empty grenade hull actually ever implied.
The documentary also did very little to explore the issue of who fired first, despite there being an enormous amount of theories and speculation about this--both theories that the ATF did and to the contrary. It instead simply gives the benefit of the doubt to the ATF agents, which is pretty far from unbiased or definitive. Not even to suggest they're lying, they just could have been mistaken.
The one piece of information this documentary DID provide that's usually absent in many Waco documentaries is the audio recording of Davidian members discussing pouring fuel and distributing hay, which implies they were setting the fires. It also includes FLIR footage from helicopters which shows the flames beginning simultaneously at three different locations, which does not support theories suggesting the FBI HRT set the fires either intentionally or unintentionally.
Despite what you believe about what happened that day on Waco, this documentary takes the side of the government's explanation of the event, and I think it's unfortunate that it doesn't provide more substance to support that. It's not that I disagree with it, it's just that it spends much more time interviewing people who clearly have a stake in the matter and whose views can't be seen as impartial by any means, rather than reviewing cold hard facts, which are readily available.
Beyond that, it doesn't really give equal time to all those involved, and it seems to be unfairly weighted to make the HRT operation seem to be at fault for things going so badly. The Davidians were presented as religious fanatics who didn't know any better, the FBI negotiation team was presented as the only voice of reason involved, and the HRT was painted as simply a gungho force of overly aggressive soldiers who unnecessarily escalated things. Given what the documentary did show, it's hard not to agree with it, but considering that only ONE member of the HRT was interviewed, it feels pretty slanted and like there's much more to the story left out--and having watched many other Waco documentaries, I know there is.
Overall, I was pretty disappointed, especially given that this is a Netflix docuseries. With their propensity for turning small subjects into 8 episode installments of mind numbing minutia, it's really surprising that they dropped the ball so hard making only 3 episodes for this when SO many more facets of the event could have been explored. It just feels extremely incomplete and shallow, examining only the very surface of the event.
On the other hand, there is an abundance of never before seen footage, and what's more some footage that's been seen before with this level of video quality. They really knocked it out if the park as far as collecting and presenting stock footage, creating visual representations of what happened, etc. But unfortunately the actual informative quality seemed to suffer because of that.
The best I can say for it is that it's phenomenal supplemental footage to other information that's already available. The worst I can say is that it's very shallow and biased in its dissemination of information about the event. Overall, worth a watch, but by no means comprehensive.
