Posted on 09/07/2015 2:37:39 PM PDT by Elderberry
This is the 114th day of the Twin Peaks Massacre coverup. It is worth noting for two lamentable reasons.
First, the degree to which government officials have been uncooperative, obstructive and evasive about the Massacre is prima facie evidence that there is an official coverup. There was no probable cause to believe that most of the 177, or 182, or so, people arrested that day were guilty of “engaging in organized criminal activity.” There is probable cause to believe that police murdered at least six men and may have attempted to murder 20 more.
The second reason to note the ongoing coverup is the apparent disappearance of what just a few years ago was being called “the investigative impulse” in American journalism. The investigative impulse began, according to Jon Marshall of Northwestern University’s Medill School of Journalism, “in the 1600s, when Enlightenment philosophers taught that ‘people have a right to question their leaders.’”
To its inerasable shame, the Waco Tribune-Herald has not noticed the coverup. To its credit, the Houston Chronicle has. “Any time a prosecutor’s office or a politician does not want people talking about something, one should raise a red flag and insist we talk about it,” a law professor named Patrick Metze told the Chronicle this morning. “They may say it is to protect the investigation, but they are protecting themselves from whatever it is that they don’t want us to see or know about.” You can read the entire Chronicle piece here.
Based on information supplied by various sources who believe their lives, careers and pensions are in actual danger and who have spoken with The Aging Rebel under conditions of either “off the record” or “deep background,” this page will continue to report that the Twin Peaks Massacre was the result of a contrived and avoidable confrontation between members of the Cossacks Motorcycle Club and the Bandidos Motorcycle Club. The Aging Rebel believes that the confrontation was engineered by and anticipated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; the Texas Department of Public Safety and a Waco area law enforcement agency that was not the Waco Police Department. The Aging Rebel also believes that these police agencies, and possibly the Waco Police Department, began physically preparing for an armed confrontation to include the use of deadly force in the Twin Peaks restaurant parking lot at or before dawn on May 17. And finally, this page believes the Massacre was captured in its entirety by at least 44 video cameras. Investigating This Mess
The Associated Press defines information gained “off the record” as information that “cannot be used for publication.” The same news agency and most publications define “deep background” as information that “can be used but without attribution. The source does not want to be identified in any way, even on condition of anonymity.” Generally, information gained off the record can only be used after being substantiated by additional independent sources. Off the record information tells reporters where to llok and what to look for.
Off the record information about federal police actions is often substantiated by filing Freedom of Information Act requests with, for example, the Disclosure Division of the ATF. The information requests involving bikers are almost routinely denied on the grounds of either what the FOIA Act calls “Exemption Seven” or one of three “Exclusions.”
The exempt information is defined as, “Certain types of information compiled for law enforcement purposes.” The three exclusions are: One, “Subject of a criminal investigation or proceeding is unaware of the existence of records concerning the pending investigation or proceeding and disclosure of such records would interfere with the investigation or proceeding;” two, “Informant records maintained by a criminal law enforcement agency and the individual’s status as an informant is not known; and three, “Existence of FBI foreign intelligence, counterintelligence or international terrorism records are classified fact.”
Exclusion three is one reason why motorcycle clubs are frequently described as “transnational gangs.”
Taken together, the exemption and exclusions explain why “gang investigations” are always classified as “ongoing” even when the newest information in those investigations is more than a decade old.
After a FOIA request is denied, large news gathering organizations and some private law firms have the means to bring suit in federal court to discover exempt and excluded information. The Aging Rebel does not have the resources to pursue such lawsuits at this time. This page is aware that many of its conclusions about what happened in Waco on May 17 are unsubstantiated sand have been described as “speculative.” As one 23-year-old reporter recently put it, “A blog favorable to motorcycle clubs citing an undisclosed source…is not credible.”
Credible or not, the authorities in Texas have been blatantly manipulating public opinion since the day of the Massacre and the Department of Justice has, as yet, not chosen to intervene. One plausible explanation for that inaction is that the Department of Justice has been involved since sometime before May 1.
The Aging Rebel stands by its coverage of the Waco Twin Peaks Massacre and will continue to pursue the story.
Ya think that's okay too?
“117 members of “criminal biker gangs” with zero criminal histories “
Thank you for your dishonesty.
You have been called on this over a dozen times. About time you quite the falsehood.
That is to say — I recommend SKIPPING the mass postings of the half-dozen or so jackboot lickers here. Doing so makes reading these threads MUCH more enjoyable and you get the SAME amount of info.
” I abhor criminals who assault, abuse, rob, murder, kidnap, and/or extort innocents. “
258 Bandidos arrested in Operation Hog Trap
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/article/Bandidos-caught-in-Hog-Trap-4926531.php
Bandidos execute eight of their own
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shedden_massacre
I won’t bother at this time to detail the other murders and beating by the gangs in Texas that have been document numerous times on these threads.
“What about liars. TG?”
I don’t use that term. It speaks badly for the person using it and is a personal attack which I thought was frowned upon.
I only speak to the words of the posts, whether it is true or a falsehood.
Falsehoods should not be posted.
I've read the code several times over the past few months, and the "argument" was made by the Texas Tenth Court of Appeals.
You used the word "participate." I don't know what that means, to you, in this context, so I used other words - the words from the statute.
According to the Texas Tenth Court of Appeals, the affidavit plainly does NOT allege that Pilkington or Weathers committed one of the underlying offenses, ergo, no probable cause (in the affidavit) that Pilkington or Weathers committed one of the underlying offenses. That conclusion applies to all 177 arrested on the same affidavit, because the affidavit is identical for all 177, other than the name of the accused.
In ordinary English usage, the participants in the brawl (not necessarily counting the victims) would have committed or attempted to commit assault. The affidavit does not allege the commission of any form of assault, according to the Texas Tenth Court of Appeals. Therefore, there was no probable cause for commission, attached to any particular individual.
Thank you. I pinged finny so he can see from your post the error in his post.
“Sec. 71.03. DEFENSES EXCLUDED. It is no defense to prosecution under Section 71.02 that:
(1) one or more members of the combination are not criminally responsible for the object offense;”
Derp, your argument’s invalid. That’s why the judges who actually know the law don’t agree with you that there is “no probable cause”.
Interesting.
AP does a quick database dump which has been later determined to:
1. Not be complete.
2. Not evaluated for aliases.
Additionally, five of the nine dead DID have convictions.
“In other words, you made a snotty sarcastic and grandiose comment and feel good about it.”
No. I was very sincere. As I am sincere to you.
Was my previous discussion with you?
I knew a guy like you in Prescott, AZ. He wanted to be a cop but couldn’t pass the tests needed so he went to school to work in IT. Kinda sucks settling for second best, eh.
Of course you don’t want people to read the comments that destroy your precious conspiracy theories.
On the other hand, I have no problem with people reading your inane posts. I have faith that most FReepers are wise enough to judge them for what they are.
A couple points. First, what is the distinction between "attended" and "participated?"
Second, the fact that a person is not arrested does not make them a non-criminal. Law enforcement routinely allows people freedom while it investigates, and once law enforcement has probable cause that a crime has taken place it may (but is not obliged to) make an arrest. Just saying, the 70 who were not arrested that day may be criminal bikers.
Never wanted to be a cop ever. I bristle at taking orders from anyone, so that line of work has never interested me at all.
You’re really far off base, although I do have family in Prescott, AZ. On a side note, there was a police biker club in Prescott a couple years ago that got themselves busted off the force for their antics:
“A couple points. First, what is the distinction between “attended” and “participated?””
Attended = showed up at the restaurant that day
Participated = took part in the violent gang fight that day
“Second, the fact that a person is not arrested does not make them a non-criminal.”
True, but I say they were “non-criminal bikers” because they were not members of criminal biker gangs, not because they were not arrested. It’s the other way around. The police did not arrest those who were not members of criminal biker gangs, or their support groups. The police have specifically stated that, so I don’t think there is any need to speculate as to why they weren’t arrested.
boogieman:”You cannot shoot a person because they shot a dog, if you do, it’s homicide.”
Every killing of a human is a homicide. So you are correct about that. In many states you can lawfully shoot trespassers that are harming your property. There are several cases recently where a homeowner shot a cop to death that was conducting a raid in the middle of the night and the homeowner believed it was a home invasion. The various homeowners were not charged with “murder” so you are wrong about that.
Boogieman:”The first person at Waco that day killed was law enforcement, the first person fired upon was law enforcement, there is no dispute about that.”
Nice try but that is not what you said. You said the Dividians open fired first. Which are “facts” not in evidence. Please try and stay on point.
Do you see the error in yours?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.