The Twin Peaks Massacre Coverup

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.

Blue Dragon, AMEN, this is what I figured is a likely scenario, and one which, I suspect, Fed UC cops took advantage of:

It's more like Cossacks decided they would do as they please, and no longer allow themselves to be intimidated by Bandidos.

Or should we all just allow gangs to intimidate any or all of us -- and if we tell them to take a flying leap -- that's as good as ourselves "declaring war" on them, leaving it to be that any violent reaction that may cause, would be all our own fault as much as the fault of thugs, who think they dictate to others?

It's like law enforcement had totally ABANDONED their posts, then got jealous/offended/embarrassed when private citizens did what the cops should have been doing: defending their rights as citizens against assault on public roads for wearing what they have every right to wear.

I think the cops are AFRAID of violent criminals who are bikers; I think the few violent criminals among the vast majority of peaceful rebel outlaw bikers scare the willies out of cops; they would rather ignore them and look the other way.

I know that it is happening in a few small rural towns up the coast from me, where some truly nasty violent psychotic biker dudes, maybe a dozen, have the local cops so frightened that the cops ignore them and instead go after regular rebel-outlaw bikers, who are peaceful live-and-let-live types and a WASTE of time for the cops to bother with, but a lot SAFER and EASIER for the cops to mess with than a bunch of Mongols -- and Boogieman, you had BETTER UNDERSTAND that those bad-ass dude Mongols all have prior records, every damned one of them, and probably were getting into trouble regularly when they were barely teenagers. GET REAL!

Why weren't POLICEMEN doing their job of stopping the tiny percentage of violent asshats among 1%ers? Yes -- a small percentage OF self-described 1%ers-- I bet hard cold cash that most self-described 1%ers are live-and0-let-live rebel/outlaws.

There is a huge difference between rebel outlaws and violent criminals in the real world -- but to inept,

frightened, lazy, militarized factions of law enforcement, they are one and the same because it makes it SO MUCH EASIER for law enforcement to look good in the mirror.

I feel remorse and sadness for good cops in America these days. Good cops deserve to be cherished, respected, and honored, and the "cops" at Waco crapped all over them and made every cop in Texas look like a cowardly armed buffoon.

The stereotype of violent criminal biker "gangs" is shattered when it is looked at with a modicum of INFORMED common sense ... but it makes melodramatically great copy for journalists, TV reality shows, and law enforcement "gang experts" so inept that two thirds of the people they "expertly" classify as "criminal" have never gotten caught ... oh, excuse me, caught IN TEXAS, maybe they all have prior records in other states where they used to live and/or rob/assault/murder/extort etc.

This is not rocket science -- the Waco MSM/police narrative is as phony as a fairy tale.

Last time I checked, it was okay to have an opinion on here.

Yep.

While I think the prosecution will have to make their case and the defendants deserve due process...

Yep.

... I would personally choose NOT to participate in an activity set up by the Bandido’s.

Who said the Bandidos set this up? This was supposed to be a COC&I meeting. While some clubs will be more heavily represented in an organization like COC&I, that doesn't mean the COC&I "belongs" to any particular club. The purpose of organizations like the COC&I is to deal with legislative issues, coordinate schedules for runs to help prevent scheduling conflicts, and the like.

This is not an occasion for violence, but rather one to set aside differences, should such exist, for the purpose of addressing problems which are common to all members of the motorcycling community, patch holders and independents alike.

If you wish to avoid any place a member of the Bandidos shows up, you may well end up avoiding most bike shops, bars, etc., at least in areas where they are abundant. By all means, avoid Sturgis and Daytona.

The more clubs you deem to be "criminal gangs" as some here characterize them, the more places you will avoid, and at some point you might as well stay home and polish it.

The people of Waco and the courts there set the rules for their own community - not us (unless you are a citizen there)...

We aren't talking about how tall your grass is, or which side of the street has parking, there, but fundamental rights of the accused.

Waco can set its rules, but there is a common framework within which those rules must fall, namely the US Constitution, as amended.

...unless there is a violation of civil rights at which point a good attorney will get a payday for his/her client and the Fed courts become involved.

Provided the client isn't dead, provided the Grand Jury isn't stacked, and provided that things are, indeed, conducted squarely.

All too often, if they have not been, that big "payday" (not to mention the loss of employment for some people) is reason enough to attempt to cover up any misdeeds.

Presidents have tried this with mixed success, culminating in results so disparate as "I am not a crook" to "There is no evidence which exists" and "I did not have sex with that woman".

Compared to that arena, Waco is a small pond, and pumping it out even a little will leave a lot of fish high and dry.

I have never maintained that all the bikers arrested are innocent.

I have maintained that there are some serious irregularities in the way things have proceeded down there:

That video which justifies police action seldom sits for more than 24 hours before being released to the public. Yet virtually all video from any source of the incident has been sequestered (assuming it has not been wiped or altered), whether it be from cell phones, business cameras, or the ones the police set up to record the proceedings, whether dash cams, body cams, or those mounted on poles in anticipation of the event.

I find it odd that the forces (yes, plural City, county, Texas, and Federal agencies including the BATFE) present even brought their lawyers with them, even though no violence had ocurred.

I find it odd that though dozens of COC&I meetings have been held where there were no problems, this particular one was singled out for intensive LEO treatment, that the police arrived and even put up cameras in advance, including Feds, which take some planning and coordination (or if a criminal event, a conspiracy), something which is not necessary if someone sees a poster and decides to take in the meeting as an excuse to take a ride (and maybe grab a bite to eat served by well-endowed waitresses). Yet the chance rider is more likely to have spent their summer sitting in jail on $1,000,000.00 bond than any of the former, charged with 'conspiracy'.

If the only proof required for conspiracy is the results, and not evidence of malice and forethought, then the US Congress should be so summarily sequestered. The proportion of honest people is likely much higher among those arrested at Waco.

This is America - if you want to wear leather and ride a Harley you should be able to do so without fear no matter where you are.

Everywhere I have ridden (in 40 years, US and Canada), the only things I have feared were idiot drivers and heavy handed police. I am no "outlaw", and am an independent (no club affiliation).

If you ride (whatever marque) I recommend leather.

It is protective clothing, far more than a 'fashion statement'. No other fabric will resist abrasion sliding down pavement as well. Denim has pathetic performance, giving out in 4 feet or less, and only some Kevlar weaves come anywhere close to leather.

Black is the basic color such protective equipment comes in, although you can get any color you want if you want to spend enough. Considering a decent jacket, pair of leather pants or chaps, boots, and gloves and goggles can set you back the better part of $1000.00 in basic black, most people don't bother to double that as a fashion statement (though some do).

But I reiterate, that the only people I have had to fear have been idiot drivers (which abound), and overzealous LEOs pumped up on stories of "evil bikers" dealing with the adrenaline letdown of having pulled over someone who doesn't even drink and hasn't had so much as a speeding ticket in over 20 years. Oddly enough, that convinces some that you 'must be up to something', because you are so well behaved.

Granted, there are some nasty fellows who ride motorcycles, but Ted Bundy drove a car. Maybe that justifies treating car drivers as heinous serial killers.

Which takes us back to Waco, where 177 people were arrested, many with no previous criminal record in Texas, from all sorts of backgrounds, and all charged with identical charges related to an incident which appeared to be spontaneous, even if it happened at a scheduled event which was open to all.

Take high tensions between a couple of groups of people who have had problems in the past, stir in a heavy LEO presence including likely informants and perhaps agents provocateur, and what could possibly go wrong?

Even so, those were not the only groups there, and there were individuals as well. Using the phrase 'associated with' just means they were in the same area and maybe spoke to each other.

Over one hundred days later, there are no ballistics results? How long does it take to weigh and caliper bullets/fragments, determine jacket material, core material, and determine at least in some cases the type of firearm the projectile was expelled from (if not the maker and source of the ammo)?

After all, supposedly all the weapons are available, and all the cartridge cases (unless someone is holding out).

There may be a lot of pieces in the puzzle, but unless someone is tampering with evidence, they should all be in the box.

Autopsy reports are somewhat vague on who hit who with what weapon, and those are just the deceased. (In all fairness, the ME doesn't do ballistics, just documents the results and recovers available evidence).

Why is the Grand Jury headed up by someone who is in a likely conflict of interest?

Recusal cures that, but in the system in use in Waco, by then the cronies will have been picked and seated. Selection of the remaining members of the Grand Jury is not a random process.

There are too many irregularities for me to deal with in one sitting.

While there are those who conveniently gloss those irregularities over with oft repeated posts of what amounts to "They're all evil criminals, so who cares?", I would maintain that all Americans should care whether there is corruption in the judicial process, and particularly whether the presumption of innocence is maintained.

Especially when there have been deaths by unknown hands, and some of those who fired their weapons have every reason to wish to appear justified--a situation which causes conflict of interest when the Grand Jury has a member of the Law Enforcement community selected as the head.

In their wisdom, the Founders sought a legal system which guarded the Rights of the accused, which held those charged with enforcing the law to a higher standard of proof beyond unreasonable doubt, but which also safeguarded the People (whomever they were) from being harassed out of house and home and all they possess with frivolous charges. The idea was to prevent the abuse of power for which opportunity abounds in a legal system.

In this instance, without prejudice, it appears that power may be being abused.

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.