Putting quotes around "thousands of rounds" doesn't relieve a "journalist" from some due diligence to write the truth. If that was was the case, Dan Rather would still be on TV since all he was doing was quoting false statements in false documents.
You mean they were not -- and that was actually clear to all, a mere three, to four days after the occurrence?
Though I never bought into that portion of the headline claim myself, may I ask you, has there been ongoing repetition of that claim (from that same source which you seem to desire to impugn as irredeemable or something) or has there been in later articles at the same source (CTH) information contrary to the breathlessness of that arguably too hasty headline accusation that it was the police who did all the shooting that led to deaths?
Putting everything else momentarily aside, how many of those who died, would you think the police were the ones who delivered the kill shots to? 4? 5? 6?
And while we're at it, have you wondered about the ones who had 1/4 holes in their heads and elsewhere, which going by what we've seen so far of the autopsy reports, indicate downwards bullet trajectory? It makes me wonder if they were shot while they were laying on the ground, trying to avoid the gunfire (for whatever reasons) and were shot by the police when in that posture, or attitude.
Speaking of attitude, from day one there was portion of a police radio call recording released, that had an officer saying over the radio "they are on the ground shooting at us", with "us" meaning the police.
What if that was mistaken, and no one was deliberately shooting at police? Or if one person had --- but others not, and had no intention to do so, but since most all of them (?) were down on the ground (trying to avoid getting shot!), they still fit a description just given over the radio of people who were allegedly shooting at cops?
What kind of attitude would that put into the minds of police on scene?
Further; how many other of those who were shot and wounded (but were not among those who were killed by whomever) were shot by police? --- the police so far, have not divulged that information.
And what "truth" would that be? Waco PD press releases, which at that time, in the first few days after the shootings, had shifted around to some extent
AND THEN --- and this is significant, while most of the information had been to a significant degree controlled by Waco PD, out comes news of a civil lawsuit having been filed ----by Don Carlos restaurant ownership--- alleging police fired "thousands" of rounds. Wowsa'.
That was bad timing, and as far as I can tell, and most likely highly inaccurate in that one detail. Yet --- the information was coming from the ONE and ONLY source which was in some manner accessible from generalized 'source' some way likely to have had on-scene experience. I suppose the Don Carlos people misled their own lawyers. People do stupid things. That would be one of those? Probably, if I had to guess.
False documents? What false document--- if we were to narrow it down to one.
The civil suit filed in Dallas District Court? That one?
If there is spurious claim there, and the document itself (District Court civil suit filing) cannot be trusted as being an actual lawsuit at all, or if there was a court filing but CTH jiggered with the pdf file concerning it, then how would you know any of that sort of thing?
If instead the filing, even though possibly flawed in some inwards details is yet still a legitimately filed lawsuit, if it were to be compared with what Dan Rather ran with, would be as good as gold in that sort of comparison. You don't want to go there do you?
So the filing itself is not a "phony document" unless you have evidence there is no such filing, or that CTH phonied-up the document itself. Barring that, that would leave CTH having done nothing with the document itself, other than having in some manner or another obtained copy of lawsuit on pdf file from Dallas County of a real & actual lawsuit. The details alleged to be true within the lawsuit itself, is again, yet another story, and there is the flaw of CTH having repeated the claim for thousands of round having been fired by the police, but had skipped over the portion which alleges that the bikers were shooting at each other (at some time before the police fired "thousands of rounds" and it was all the defendant's, Twin Peaks fault.
Yet if do think the entire suit is bogus, or that it was knowingly 'falsified' in some manner comparable to whay whoever it was that cooked documents by running them repeatedly through old mimeograph machines in effort to artificially age them, in order to fool Dan Rather, I would guess that the now former Twin Peaks restaurant operators might also be interested in whatever you may know that could be used to help to defend themselves from the Don Carlos gang.
It became a fact later on FR. The nutriders made it so.