I’ve said previously I am of the opinion that Peltier was given up to deflect heat away from other issues involving AIM, but I suspect there is more to it than just that.
I’ve also said I believe in the AIM hierarchy there exists one or more “insiders”-by that I mean the entirety of those words they play so free and loosewith-words like rat, and fed, and snitch.
Ultimately I think those at the top have all “ratted” at some point, either in unison or singularly, depending on the issue. No other logical explanation can be given for what
they have been able to get away.
We constantly hear of cold cases being resurrected and individuals charged-even as far back as Nazi war criminals-makes it difficult with the array of technology and manpower available to believe any of these AIM gangsters is smart enough or capable of defeating justice. Yet that is apparently an assumption we are supposed to make.
As I say I don’t believe it is a lone individual-I think they all have either been on their knees or bent over for decades now and this persona of fiercely independent warriors is a prescribed affectation, part of the cover story-more to the point, allowed.
I mean think about it for a minute, it’s as though it’s all rehearsed and pre approved-what does taking a single fish over the limit amount to on the crime scale, or a lot of talk about a non existent republic?
Are the fist waving commentaries any more of a “threat” than the millions of others? A misdemeanor arrest or citation for protesting? Especially if those waving the fist or leading the walking are already in the pocket?
Adds to the resume if my suspicions are correct and assists in embedding the cover story. I’m all for standing up for rights, for taking that extra fish, for speaking loudly and plainly-but the value of it lies in who is doing so and the reason for it
AIM has been referred to as the American Indian Mafia-what has been the history of law enforcement and the Mafia? They turn people within the organization, some in high places, some known murderers, allow them to continue operating, and in turn are fed information, it is an established formula with a long history of success.
What they don’t do is kill the goose laying the golden eggs-that alone blows the Annie was a snitch for the feds bs so they killed her. Could be Annie knew who the snitches were and that along with what else she could have known in being close to them could have multiplied the threat to them
So they kill her off, and rely on the past and current fawning pie patrol members and the “security apparatus” to float the tales of the feds setting her up. Speculation, but one possible scenario.
Are we to think a different approach would be taken with a crime syndicate that exists among our own? That would really be naive wouldn’t it? And speaking of syndicates look up the RICO statutes and ask yourself why this has never been employed in the midst of all the COINTELPRO talk? It’s a tailor made fit.
This is an opinion I express, if you agree or have an issue with it tell me about it. But I am not alone in holding this opinion-more and more we see talk of this, and if it is something more than opinion then somewhere, sometime, it will become known-too much hacking, too many leaks, and too much vulnerability in the areas of information and secrets going on for it not to. Hopefully too many people beginning to stand up too.
I just hope it all comes to light before these fools pass on.