Government witch hunt to eliminate Monsanto critics

    

"Anybody can fake scientific results. But to be believed, you want a prestigious organization behind you with a billion-dollar budget and access to compliant reporters. You want to manipulate technical language. You want to keep saying how much you care about people. And then you also want to get down and dirty when you have to, and threaten and coerce your in-house scientific dissenters who won't go along with the fakery. Cut their pay, demote them, fire them, ruin their careers and lives. This is all standard procedure in the major leagues of science. I've watched it happen." (, Jon Rappoport)

Wonder how a federal agency as large as the USDA can keep claiming pesticides like Roundup are safe?

Wonder how the truth can be kept from leaking out?

Wonder how this agency, tasked with protecting the public from unsafe food, can turn fake science into "real science" like clockwork?

Wonder how, in Hawaii, Monsanto and Dow can defend their toxic, open-air, pesticide experiments as "approved by the USDA?"

Government scientists who believe in exposing the truth are being targeted.

Ten scientists at the US Dept. of Agriculture are on such a target list, because their research findings would harm big-corporate agriculture. (See Common Dreams, 5/5/15, "Suppressing Science for Monsanto?")

PEER (Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility), a non-profit group, knows who these scientists are, but they aren't talking. Not yet. They're trying to gain protection for the researchers.

Here is a March 26 release from PEER, "USDA Urged to Shield Its Scientists From Harassment":

"Scientists within the U.S. Department of Agriculture are subjected to management pressure and retaliation for research threatening agribusiness interests..."

"PEER has received reports concerning USDA scientists ordered to retract studies, water down findings, remove their name from authorship and endure long indefinite delays in approving publication of papers that may be controversial. Moreover, [USDA] scientists who are targeted by [big-Ag] industry complaints find themselves subjected to disruptive investigations, disapprovals of formerly routine requests, disciplinary actions over petty matters and intimidation from [USDA] supervisors focused on pleasing 'stakeholders'."

The "stakeholders," of course, would include huge biotech companies. Like Monsanto.

In a separate PEER petition to the USDA, we find this statement:

"The USDA Scientific Integrity Policy actively enables [USDA] agency managers to suppress and alter scientific work products for their policy implications, regardless of their technical merit. It also appears clear that agribusiness interests, such as Monsanto Corporation, have access to top [USDA] agency managers and are invited to lodge complaints and concerns about the published work of [USDA] agency scientists. Significantly, the [USDA] Policy lacks any mechanism to effectively challenge this political manipulation of science."

The PEER petition goes on to describe what truth-telling USDA scientists face:

"USDA scientists have been subjected to Directives not to publish data on certain topics of particular sensitivity to [big-Agriculture] industry;

"Orders to rewrite scientific articles already accepted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal to remove sections which could provoke [big-Ag] industry objections;

"Summons to meet with [USDA] Secretary Vilsack in an effort to induce retraction of a paper that drew the ire of [big-Ag] industry representatives;

"Orders to retract a paper after it had been accepted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. The paper could only be published if the USDA scientist removed his authorship thus leaving only the names of authors unassociated with USDA;

"Demotion from supervisory status and a reprimand after the scientist provided testimony before Congress that did not reflect [USDA] agency preferences;

"Disruptive and lengthy internal investigations to search out any irregularity that could be used for management leverage against the targeted scientist;

"Suspensions without pay and other disciplinary actions for petty matters, such as minor irregularities in travel paperwork;

"Inordinate, sometimes indefinite, delays in approving submission for publication of scientific papers that may be controversial;

"Restrictions on topics that USDA scientists may address in conference presentations;

"Threats by USDA managers to damage the careers of [USDA] scientists whose work triggers [big-Ag] industry complaints."

"USDA scientists working on topics with direct relevance to [big-Ag] industry interests are under constant pressure not to do anything to upset these important 'stakeholders.' Rather than shield staff scientists from [big-Ag] industry influence, USDA managers amplify it."

This is a witch hunt.

The notion of believing anything the USDA says or publishes is absurd.

Claims of the inherent safety and value of GMO food? Claims about the safety of pesticides? The assertion that corporations like Monsanto and Dow aren't favored USDA clients?

Smoke blowing in the wind.

Claims that the USDA is serving the public interest?

A fairy tale.

Read More

Psychiatric drugs put 49 million Americans at risk for cancer

© Contributing Source: "Stilnoct2″ by Entheta – Greenmedinfo work. Licensed under Public Domain via Wikimedia Commons

    

You may be unaware of a literature that suggests long-term treatment with all psychiatric medications is more likely to leave you with a quality of life. Here's one more reason to reconsider life partnership with your psychiatric medication - it may contribute to your cancer risk.

What if I told you that this cancer data came from pre-clinical trials conducted for FDA licensure of these medications? That these trials are documented in the package inserts themselves.

Because of the inherent challenge of studying cancer at the population level, using these rodent studies was felt to be important by Amerio et al because they are not subject to publication bias - a major issue in psychiatry - and the methods are consistent across drug class.

Reasonably, even the IARC/WHO back this up, stating:

"although this association cannot establish that all agents and mixtures that cause cancer in experimental animals also cause cancer in humans, nevertheless, in the absence of adequate data on humans, it is biologically plausible and prudent to regard agents and mixtures for which there is sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals as if they presented a carcinogenic risk to humans".

(International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and World Health Organization, 2000).

What does the data show?

A signal of harm. Plain and simple. In their paper, Carcinogenicity of psychotropic drugs, Amerio et al. found:

• 63.6% of antidepressants were associated with carcinogenicity, specifically mirtazapine, sertraline, paroxetine, citalopram and escitalopram, duloxetine and bupropion.
• 90% of antipsychotics agents were associated with carcinogenicity. All agents were associated with carcinogenicity except clozapine.
• 70% of benzodiazepines/hypnotics were associated with carcinogenicity, specifically clonazepam, zolpidem, zaleplon, diazepam, eszopiclone, oxazepam and midazolam.
• 25% amphetamines/stimulants were associated with carcinogenicity, with methylphenidate specifially associated.
• 85.7% of anti-convulsants ("mood stabilizers") were associated with carcinogenicity. The only agent not associated with carcinogenicity was lamotrigine. Specific agents associated with carcinogenicity were valproate, carbamazepine, gabapentin, pregabalin, oxcarbazepine and topiramate.

Cancer? How could psych meds cause cancer?

I've said it before and I'll say it again, and again. There's no free lunch with pharmaceuticals. We must disabuse ourselves of the notion that we can yank only one thread out of the spider web. When you pull it, the whole thing moves.

When you expose your body to pharmaceutical grade chemical influence, it is forced to adjust.

We think of these medications as "fixing" brain problems, but we are just beginning to learn some of the many effects they have on the body as a whole, and the unmapped individual differences in metabolism and toxicant threshold effects, on the body's mechanisms for survival in adversity - aka cancer.

Researchers today, including research in pregnant women, are asking the wrong safety questions. They are asking questions that made sense two decades ago, before we learned about the microbiome, epigenetics, and transgenerational effects of these individual variables. Particularly the differential effects on female vs male physiology.

Look what happened when they bothered to ask about the effects of Zyprexa on gut bacteria:

This study furthers the theory that gender may impact on the nature of, and susceptibility to, certain side effects of antipsychotics. In addition, we demonstrate, what is to our knowledge the first time, an altered microbiota associated with chronic olanzapine treatment.

The challenge is, that the population-level effects can take decades to emerge and the incentive to limit study of adverse effects is very high. In the meantime you may have been entered into an uncontrolled and unconsented experiment. Take this information for what it is, an invitation to take a different, safer path to healing.

Read More

Almost 40 million birds dead as avian flu ravages Midwest

© Nonpareil Photos
Avian flu remains.

    

The devastating avian influenza sweeping the Midwest has forced the mass slaughter of nearly 40 million diseased chicken, turkey and wild birds in order to contain the outbreaks, according to the latest grisly numbers from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).

BREAKING: State officials confirm #Malvern landfill among those receiving avian flu remains. http://t.co/bwJsCNtikQ http://pic.twitter.com/qUGMvDsvtp

— Nonpareil Photos (@NonpareilPhotos) May 20, 2015

According to the USDA, since it was first detected in December 2014, there have been several ongoing highly pathogenic avian influenza cases along the Pacific, Central and Mississippi Flyways (or migratory bird paths). The strains in particular, H5N2 and H5N8, have been found in wild birds, as well as backyard and commercial poultry flocks.

This is the worst epidemic of bird flu in the nation's history. Egg-producers in Iowa, the top egg-producing state, have been hit the hardest, with a shocking 40 percent Iowa's egg-laying hens dead or to be euthanized.

In a report from Harvest Public Media (via NPR), while some local incinerators are burning dead birds 24 hours a day, other landfills have been turning away the carcasses for fear of contamination and neighbors' complaints.

"I've been in the landfill business probably 26 years, and I've never ever seen this kind of volume," said Randy Oldenkamp, director of the Northwest Iowa Area Solid Waste Agency, in the report. "And I hope I never do again."

Prices for eggs in the Midwest have climbed at a rate of 5 percent a day for the past week as supplies dwindle, according to the Associated Press. A dozen large eggs reportedly starts at $1.88, which is 58 percent higher than the prior month. Chicken and turkey sales have also been affected.

Economic impact of bird flu on two hardest-hit states could reach $1B, economists say http://t.co/lyh9SQcKJ4 http://pic.twitter.com/wNPlHPaG99

— Yahoo News (@YahooNews) May 18, 2015

Agricultural economist said that bird flu could cost nearly $1 billion to Iowa and Minnesota, the two states hit the hardest. Minnesota, the top turkey state, has lost more than 8 million birds.

The USDA told TIME that some of the viruses currently seen in the U.S. outbreaks originated in Asia and spread via migratory fowl.

Research is still being done to see how the virus has spread so rapidly. Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota, told Harvest Public Media that the poultry industry is in uncharted territory. The virus is "doing things we've never seen it do before," so scientists' understanding is very limited, he said.

"Influenza viruses have thought in the past to be transmitted by birds to birds in close contact and that it was only through that kind of transmission that we need to be concerned," Osterholm added. "Now we surely have a very dynamic situation in the Midwest. It's also a situation where we no longer can assume it's just migratory birds."

The USDA also noted that while "the high number of birds slaughtered during this outbreak is hard for farmers involved, but 30 million is still considered a small percentage of the overall U.S. poultry population." According to the agency, in 2014 the U.S. poultry industry produced 8.54 billion broilers, 99.8 billion eggs and 238 million turkeys.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says the risk of human transmission is low. For you to stay safe, the CDC has told the general public to avoid contact with wild birds and chickens or turkeys that appear sick or have died.

Read More

Remote galaxy discovered shining with infrared light equal to more than 300 trillion suns

© NASA/JPL-Caltech
Dusty 'Sunrise' at Core of Galaxy (Artist's Concept).

    

A remote galaxy shining brightly with infrared light equal to more than 300 trillion suns has been discovered using data from NASA's Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer, or WISE. The galaxy, which belongs to a new class of objects recently discovered by WISE -- nicknamed extremely luminous infrared galaxies, or ELIRGs -- is the most luminous galaxy found to date.

"We are looking at a very intense phase of galaxy evolution," said Chao-Wei Tsai of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, lead author of a new report appearing in the 22 May issue of "This dazzling light may be from the main growth spurt in the size of the galaxy's black hole"

Professor Andrew Blain, from the University of Leicester's Department of Physics and Astronomy, has been involved with WISE since its inception in 2001, and has been responsible for examining and validating the data from the WISE telescope. He is a co-author of the new report into this discovery.

The galaxy, known as WISE J224607.57-052635.0, may have a behemoth black hole at its belly, gorging itself on gas.

Supermassive black holes grow by drawing gas and matter into a disk around them. The disk heats up to beyond-sizzling temperatures of millions of degrees, blasting out high-energy, visible, ultraviolet, and X-ray light. The light is blocked by surrounding cocoons of dust. As the dust heats up, it radiates infrared light.

Immense black holes are common at the cores of galaxies, but finding one this big so far back in the cosmos is rare. Because light from the galaxy hosting the black hole has traveled 12.5 billion years to reach us, astronomers are seeing the object as it was in the past.The black hole was already billions of times the mass of our sun when our universe was only a tenth of its present age of 13.8 billion years.

"The massive black holes in ELIRGs could be gorging themselves on more matter for a longer period of time," said Professor Blain. "It's like winning a hot-dog-eating contest lasting hundreds of millions of years."

More research is needed to solve this puzzle of these dazzlingly luminous galaxies. The team has plans to better determine the masses of the central black holes. Knowing these objects' true hefts will help reveal their history, as well as that of other galaxies in this very crucial and frenzied chapter of our cosmos.

WISE has been finding hundreds of other, similar oddball galaxies from infrared images of the entire sky it took in 2010. By viewing the whole sky with more sensitivity than ever before, WISE has been able to catch rare cosmic specimens that might have been missed otherwise.

The new study reports a total of 20 new ELIRGs, including the most luminous galaxy found to date. These galaxies, which are even more luminous than the ultraluminous infrared galaxies (ULIRGs) reported before, were not found earlier because of their distance, and because dust converts their powerful visible light into an incredible outpouring of infrared light.

"We found in a related study with WISE that as many as half of the most luminous galaxies only show up well in infrared light," said Tsai.

NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California, manages, and operates, WISE for NASA's Science Mission Directorate. The spacecraft was put into hibernation mode in 2011 after it scanned the entire sky twice, completing its main objectives. In September 2013, WISE was reactivated, renamed NEOWISE and assigned a new mission to assist NASA's efforts to identify potentially hazardous near-Earth objects.

Read More

How Russia is countering Western aggression in the Black Sea and beyond

    

Battlefield: Black Sea examined the development of US and NATO military deployment in the Black Sea region. This article focuses on the ways in which Russia is moving to counter what it perceives as an aggressive US-NATO strategy.

Russia's Counterstrategy

After the US-backed coup in Ukraine, the people of Crimea voted for reunification with Russia. While this was undoubtedly a politically and economically motivated move to secure their own safety and future amid the entirely predictable collapse of Ukraine, it would not have been possible without a clear military and strategic (and of course political and diplomatic) benefit for Russia. That such a benefit existed was plainly obvious. For Moscow, Crimea is more than a historic territory of Russia; it is a strategically vital region for Russia's navy and military generally.

The security and integrity of the Russian Black Sea fleet, based in Sevastopol on the Crimean peninsula for more than two centuries, was of primary importance to Moscow. As such, since the accession of Crimea to the Russian Federation, and the chaos throughout Ukraine, the Kremlin has moved quickly to modernize and bolster its naval assets in the Black Sea. While this was necessary by any measure, the move was also to preempt any military escalation by US-NATO; Washington and Brussels have moved ahead with their military buildup regardless.

Within months of the Crimea referendum, Russia announced a massive upgrade of the Black Sea fleet, in order to make it, in the words of Russian military officials, "modern" and "self-sufficient." As Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Navy Admiral Viktor Chirkov explained, "The Black Sea Fleet must have a full complement of naval vessels to be capable of performing all assigned missions...This is not a provocative military buildup. This is something the Black Sea Fleet urgently needs as it has not been receiving new vessels for many years." As part of this modernization and upgrade, the fleet will receive 30 new ships by the end of the decade, including a full complement of modern warships, submarines, and auxiliary vessels. Additionally, Moscow intends for the fleet to be self-sufficient, meaning that it will expand bases, house troops year-round, and generally be able to support itself in Crimea without the need for special assistance from Moscow.

But Russia of course recognizes that the growing political conflict with the West, with all the attendant military and strategic implications, requires partners and allies. With that in mind, Moscow has worked diligently to foster military cooperation with China generally, and in the Black Sea specifically.

Chinese Allies, Chinese Partners

Earlier this year, Russian President Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping agreed on a preliminary military deal worth upwards of $3.5 billion. According to Chinese media reports, the agreement would see Russia providing fighter jets, submarines, and other advanced military technology and hardware. This would mark a major turning point in military cooperation between the two countries which has had a rocky recent history. Of course, it is a mutually beneficial cooperation as Russia gains a valuable political and military partner in its conflict with the West, while China gains access to critical military hardware in its escalating conflict with Japan and in the South China Sea.

But it's much more than just military hardware contracts between the two countries. Russia and China, under the auspices of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) have engaged in a growing number of joint military exercises. In 2014, SCO states participated in the largest ever joint operations between the two countries. As Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu stated:

We have vast potential of cooperation in the defense sphere, and the Russian side is ready to develop it is a wide range of areas... amid a highly volatile world situation, it becomes particularly important to strengthen reliable good-neighbourly relations between our countries...This is not only an important factor for security of states but also a contribution to peace and stability on the Eurasian continent and beyond... regular private meetings between the leaders of Russia and China give a powerful impetus to development of bilateral partnership.

It is clear that both Russia and China understand the potential and necessity of close military interactions between the two countries. And right now, with US-NATO expanding its presence in the Black Sea, Moscow and Beijing have decided to flex their muscles.

While US military forces deploy in Romania, Chinese warships have made an unprecedented move, entering the Black Sea to participate in the Joint Sea 2015 naval exercises with their Russian counterparts. Beijing's Defense Ministry noted that, "The purpose of the exercise is to strengthen the friendly exchanges between the two sides ... and to improve the capability of the two navies to deal with maritime threats," adding that "this joint exercise is not targeting any third party and is not related to regional security." While the diplomatic language is meant to soothe relations with Washington, the regional dimension of these exercises is certainly not lost on US military and strategic planners.

The Long View on Russia-China Relations

But while joint military training and exercises may indicate a growing partnership, they alone do not constitute a military alliance. Indeed, Russia and China have yet to formally declare any such overt alliance, though one could be forgiven for presuming a de facto one. However, the transfer of advanced - and militarily sensitive - defense technology is a concrete indicator of an inchoate alliance between the two powers.

In April 2015, it was reported that Beijing would be the first buyer for Russia's advanced missile defense system known as S-400. Anatoly Isaykin, CEO of Russia's state-owned military technologies exporter Rosoboronexport, was quoted as saying "I will not disclose the details of the contract, but yes, China has indeed become the first buyer of this sophisticated Russian air defense system... It underlines once again the strategic level of our relations... China will be the first customer."

This deal is militarily significant because of the transfer of advanced missile defense technologies that can provide Beijing with a measure of security from a host of threats, including those stemming from China's ongoing conflict with Japan over disputed islands, as well as from the US and its aggressive "Asia Pivot" strategy in the South China Sea, and throughout the Asia-Pacific region. However, the agreement between Russia and China is also critical for symbolic reasons. That Moscow decided to provide these advanced systems to China before any other country, and that they would do so at such a critical moment for both countries, indicates that while a formal alliance has yet to be announced, we are witnessing one emerging in all but name. In an unprecedented move unthinkable just a few years ago, Chinese troops marched through Red Square during the ceremonies commemorating the 70th anniversary of the Soviet and allied victory over fascism, further proving the symbolic connection between the two countries.

The international security dimension is also critical to understanding the importance of the recent deals. The S-400, which is considered capable of matching up against any aggressive missile system employed by the US and NATO, symbolizes a growing, though not yet achieved, military parity between the US-NATO and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. Although Washington still postures as if it maintains full spectrum dominance globally, the reality, painful though it may be for many strategic and military planners in the West, is that US-NATO simply does not control Asia or Eastern Europe. Looking at a map, it becomes clear that the total space militarily under the thumb of the US is shrinking, while Russia, China, and their allies are increasingly becoming militarily independent and capable of defense. This sea change in the global chessboard will have implications for decades to come.

It is crystal clear that the burgeoning alliance between Russia and China will have implications throughout the world, from the South China Sea to the Atlantic, changing the strategic calculus throughout all of Eurasia; essentially much of the globe. But while direct alliance is still not yet fully realized, its broad contours can be seen in the Black Sea, today one of the hot spots of the East-West conflict. The US-NATO presence in the Black Sea and the littoral countries is a clear indicator of the importance Washington and Brussels attach to this area along the southern border of Russia. Conversely, Russia has made countermoves to both show strength and to increase its military readiness in the face of the West's provocative moves in Russia's traditional sphere of influence.

While the chances of a military conflict remain low, even the potential raises terrifying possibilities. A nuclear power like Russia that, despite its military might and technical expertise, is still far behind the US with its robust military-industrial complex which never had to go through the dismantling that Russia's did in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union. As such, Russia would be heavily reliant on nuclear deterrence, thereby creating the potential for an apocalyptic confrontation. Such a doomsday scenario, though unlikely, should give everyone pause.

In the interest of peace, the US and its allies, were they interested in stability rather than expanding their own hegemony, would do well to respect Russia's sphere of influence and do everything to defuse the situation. However, for the West, war is good for business. And with the growing tensions with Russia, especially in the Black Sea, business is most certainly booming.

"New Eastern Outlook".

Read More

Pro-Israel bias: BBC admits editorial breach in interview with Israeli defense chief

© Reuters / Amir Cohen
Israeli Defense Minister, Moshe Yaalon.

    

The BBC has reached a "provisional finding" to uphold complaints made by Palestinian activists that the broadcaster breached its editorial guidelines in a "soft" interview with the Israeli defense minister.

Complaints focused on BBC journalist Sarah Montague's alleged failure to challenge controversial claims made by Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon.

Journalist Amena Saleem, who works with the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC), wrote on Electronic Intifada that she received an email last week from the BBC's Editorial Complaints Unit (ECU) indicating grievances lodged by the PSC would be upheld.

However, a BBC spokesperson said the finding was "" and the outcome was yet to be finalized.

According to a PSC transcript of the interview, broadcast on BBC Radio 4's flagship news program "" on March 19, Ya'alon said that Palestinians enjoy political independence.

If the complaint is upheld, it is the second time in recent months the ECU has censured the state-run corporation for its pro-Israel bias.

BBC News Online was found to have breached its editorial guidelines last July when it described the author of an article about Gaza's hidden tunnels as an "."

The author, Dr Eado Hecht, is a lecturer in military doctrine at Bar Ilan University, an institution described by the ECU as being ""

The complaints board also acknowledged the author had "published articles written from a clearly pro-Israeli perspective."

In Montague's interview with Ya'alon, the senior BBC journalist failed to address misleading statements by the Israeli defense minister.

According to a transcript, Ya'alon said Palestinians "enjoy already political independence. They have their own political system, government, parliament, municipalities and so forth. And we are happy with it. We don't want to govern them whatsoever."

The PSC has challenged Ya'alon's statement, claiming Palestinians live under occupation and, in Gaza, under siege.

The UN General Assembly, Security Council and the International Court of Justice all consider Israel to be an "occupying power."

Ya'alon also said that the 1.5 million Arabs living in Israel have the "."

According to Hassan Jabareen, head of the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel (Adalah), Israel has 45 laws that can be considered discriminatory against Arab citizens of Israel.

"," he told the Journal of Turkish Weekly last week.

Saleem claims the ECU sent her an email in which they upheld the complaints against the broadcaster.

She quotes ECU head Fraser Steel: "Mr. Ya'alon was allowed to make several controversial statements ... without any meaningful challenge, and the program-makers have accepted that the interviewer ought to have interrupted him and questioned him on his assertions."

"," he added.

A BBC spokesperson said: ""

The broadcaster has come under scrutiny from Britain's communications regulator Ofcom in recent years.

A BBC Radio 1 Newsbeat program was found to be in breach of broadcasting guidelines when it interviewed a British jihadist in Syria who compared the war to playing the computer game "."

Ofcom ruled the comments had no context and were inappropriate for a younger audience.

Montague was responsible for another slip-up in 2013, when crime writer Lynda La Plante used the word during an interview on the Today program.

Montague changed the subject during the interview in an "," but Ofcom said she should have addressed the point more explicitly.

Read More

'Criminal meeting' of bikers in Waco was actually organized political gathering

Despite the characterization by police that the afternoon gathering at a Twin Peaks restaurant in Waco, Texas that led to Sunday's bloody shooting incident was a gathering of criminal biker gangs with violent intent, the meeting appears to have been a legitimate, organized gathering of motorcycle riders meeting to discuss political issues.

The group that met was the Texas Confederation of Clubs and Independents (CoC&I) and a look at that group's website and history gives a very different impression of the group's purpose and goals than what has been said repeatedly by Waco police Sgt. W. Patrick Swanton.

Swanton has been a central media figure, conducting several press conferences since shootings that left nine dead and dozens injured happened on Sunday. Swanton's statements have been echoed by the media, creating an image of a get together of thugs converging on Twin Peaks in an event obviously fraught with danger that authorities tried desperately to stop until they were foiled by the uncooperative restaurant owner.

An AP report on Tuesday gives what has been the now-standard media narrative:

Five gangs had gathered at the restaurant as part of a meeting to settle differences over turf and recruitment. Prior meetings had been held at the restaurant, and managers there had dismissed police concerns over the gatherings, he said.

"They were not here to drink and eat barbecue," Swanton said. "They came here with violence in mind."

The "gathering of criminal bikers" story was even used to justify the $1 million bail that the 170 arrested bikers were each handed. From the same AP report:

McLennan County Justice of the Peace W.H. Peterson set bond at $1 million for each suspect. He defended the high amount, citing the violence that quickly unfolded in a shopping market busy with a lunchtime crowd.

"We have nine people dead, because these people wanted to come down and what? Drink? Party?" Peterson said. "I thought it was appropriate."

Despite those claims by Texas officials of drinking, partying and violence in mind, the Texas Confederation of Clubs and Independents website and other information give every impression that the group's meeting on that Sunday was legitimate.

This does not mean that groups or individuals who participated in CoC&I meeting don't have criminal connections. Some see the CoC&I as a way for clubs like the Bandidos to gain legitimacy, an assessment shared by the Texas Department of Public Safety's Gang Threat Assessment from 2014:

Formed in the 1960s, the Bandidos Outlaw Motorcycle Gang (Bandidos OMG) conducts its illegal activities as covertly as possible and avoids high-profile activities such as drive-by shootings that many street gangs tend to commit. However, members are not covert about making their presence known by wearing the gang colors, insignia, and riding in large groups. They seek to turn public sentiment in their favor by organizing frequent charity runs. Bandidos are likely to focus on recruiting new members with no criminal history.

However, it's not clear that everyone who attended the CoC&I meeting had criminal connections. As the Gang Threat Assessment report pointed out, even the Bandidos have recruited members with no criminal history in an attempt to clean up there reputation. As a comment on the biker site Aging Rebel suggests:

If thirty guys were fighting who were the other 140 that were arrested? The Christian Ministries, the Veterans Clubs, and everyone else who attended a COC meeting aimed at keeping bikers safe, biker legislation, and scheduling biker events? So now your local motorcycle minister is locked up on a 1 million dollar bond.

A look at the Texas Confederation of Clubs and Independents website and events calendar does show a group that's focused on legislative issues and elections.

The CoC&I site has an entire page dedicated to National, State and Local Happenings with links to various political calls to action and events.

That page features a photo of a U.S. Marine standing at attention with a group of bikers and a photo an eagle over an American flag with the motto "Don't tread on me. I refuse to allow my civil servant to run my life."

A look at the group's events calendar shows that the Twin Peaks meeting was listed on the Calendar as a "Region 1 Texas COC&I Meeting"; one of a number of meeting that happen in every part of Texas on a regular basis.

Other events on the Calendar show an actual legislative purpose. For example, on April 22nd at 7am the Calendar lists a public hearing on legislation:

The Motorcycle Safety Fund Bill (SB754) will be brought to the floor for public hearing in the Transportation Committee.

Paul and Jude will be testifying in support of the bill and we need as many people as possible to attend the hearing to support our community spokesmen, Senator Watson and show we are unified in seeing SB754 passed.

Later in April was a two day "Texas COC&I Christian Unity Event", described as:

This event is open to everyone. We want to include Christians from all traditional MC's and not just the Christian MC's and MM's.

You are welcome even if you are not a Christian, but the event will be Christian by nature.

Looking beyond the group's website, eyewitness reports are beginning to paint a very different picture than that the official version from the Waco police.

Halfway through this WacoTrib.com story comes an account from someone who was at event that claims the biker's political event was interrupted by uninvited bikers from the Cossacks gang.:

Steve Cochran, a national bikers' rights advocate from Waco who witnessed the melee, blamed the incident entirely on the Cossacks. Cochran, who is a founder of the Waco chapter of the Sons of the South, is an official with the U.S. Defenders Task Force, a legislative group affiliated with the Texas Confederacy of Clubs and Independents.

He arrived at Twin Peaks on Sunday to set up a sound system for the COC&I meeting, only to find that the violence already had started.

Bandidos members were to be part of the meeting, which was to focus on legislative issues common to all bikers, Cochran said. He said police gave no indication to him or other COC&I members that their lives might be in danger.

"These meetings have gone on for 20 years, and we've gone all these years without a single incident until Sunday," he said.

Other reports say that about 60 Cossacks arrived at the meeting and a list of those killed indicates that only one of the victims was from Waco. Tuesday, Breitbart Texas reported exclusively on indications on social media of aggressive moves by the Cossacks, including "transfers" of bikers into Texas.

The emerging picture of what really happened on Sunday in Waco raises some doubts about the initial police explanation of the incident as well as their suggested remedy. For example, Waco spokesman Swanton has repeated blamed the restaurant for not refusing to host the event.

However, the very political nature of the Texas Confederation of Clubs and Independents and its website raise troubling First Amendment questions about the police trying to pressure a business to shut down a lawful political meeting that had never led to problems previously, regardless of the people at that meeting.

Texas Law Enforcement has had a difficult job dealing with biker gangs. One frustration is that some groups like the Bandidos combine legitimate elements (with charity rides) with criminal (like meth dealing.)

Read More