Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I did. Here's just one part from your linked site I still find confusing:
What about the man in the woods? Central to proving any conspiracy theory is finding co-conspirators, which in this case means multiple shooters. Theorists have seized on helicopter footage of a man getting chased by police through the woods behind the school as evidence there was more than one shooter. Who is this man?
Answer: It was Chris Manfredonia, the father of a 6-year-old who attends the school. He was on his way to the school to make gingerbread houses with first-graders when he heard gunfire and smelled sulfur, so he ran.
OK, so I guess a dad could put on camo's to go volunteer at the school. Seems weird, but certainly possible. But why was he running away from the school? Why did the police handcuff him and put him in the front seat of the squad car?
How do you now he was running away from the school?
"Chris Manfredonia, whose 6-year-old daughter attends the school, was heading there Friday morning to help make gingerbread houses with first-graders when he heard popping sounds and smelled sulfur.
He ran around the school trying to reach his daughter and was briefly handcuffed by police. He later found his child, who had been locked in a small room with a teacher."
That's from the L.A. times. The word "around" is kind of vague, but it sounds like he ultimately made his way back to the school.
Actually, I'm not that interested in what you have to say if you are not that interested in defending your positions. Is it laziness which is preventing you from restating your position?
I still believe that my speculation as to why there aren't more pics of the evacuation as I posted in No. 445 is probably pretty valid, yet I find it odd that not one person seems to have considered it as a possibility. At least, no one addressed it.
Notice how many of my FIRSTHAND accounts are being ignored? Not one of my posts were responded to by these trolls. Not one.
Actually that is likely to happen in real life all the time.
People's memories are highly fallible. There is a ton of research proving this. Eyewitness testimony is also notoriously unreliable.
It is highly likely that a person relating a incident will at different times omit certain facts, or remember things they didn't remember before, even actually change their mind about details of what they really saw and experienced. That is the nature of memory. Memory is constructed at a point in time. It is not like a accurate videotape that we can just play back at will.
If details change it doesn't mean the person is a liar. And it doesn't mean a hoax is being perpetrated.
And you accuse other people of being conspiracy theorist ...
I'm the mother of five and the grandmother of seven adorable kids between the ages of 2-10, whom I spend time with and enjoy loving and nurturing as much as humanly possible. I'm not some crazy gun freak - just a middle aged American grandmother who wants to know what really happened that terrible day.
What does being a grandmother, etc., etc., have to do with making smoke screen threads or posts? I guess you're going to have to wait, just like all the other "middle aged American grandmothers" out there for the investigative report to come out to "know what really happened."
Actually, I'm not that interested in what you have to say if you are not that interested in defending your positions. Is it laziness which is preventing you from restating your position?
You asked me to look up something for you repeatedly. If you weren't really interested, why did you ask? I don't need to retype what I already wrote just because you wanted to see it but were too lazy to look it up yourself.
That kind of reporting of ongoing events in a situation like that is very common. It happens all the time. Obviously, the first responders and people in charge there that day did not want to report more inaccurate information, and MAYBE they were concerned about the parents who were rushing to the school after the first reports of gunfire. Maybe they didn't want to report the number of children killed until all or most of the parents had arrived and there were people at the school who could help and support those parents.
So exactly what do you think the reason was for the reporting of fewer killed initially and THEN, within a few hours, reporting the actual number? I don't get why you think that is suspicious.
Sigh. I never said it was suspicious. I stated that to refute the assertion by a poster that it was such a horrific event as it was unfolding that no one, no bystanders, no media personnel, no one had the presence of mind to take photos.
The kids - hundreds of kids - were ushered out of the school. We have one photo. There were HUNDREDS of parents gathered there. We have zero shots of hundreds - and just a few shots of small groups of people - the vast majority of which show no crowds, or have a very blurry background with only a few people in focus.
Considering that there was some time in which the shocking number of 26 casualties was not known, or even SUSPECTED by the media who were on the scene reporting, I just find this odd. I still find it odd. I don't know why it is the way it is, I don't know why there aren't more photos, I don't know how or why there are inconsistencies and oddities to the stories - I just think that cumulatively speaking, there are still many unanswered questions - and more keep cropping up.
I am looking forward to the full report which I guess will be made public in the future. Hopefully that report will lay to rest most of the questions.
Notice how many of my FIRSTHAND accounts are being ignored? Not one of my posts were responded to by these trolls. Not one.
And they're not going to acknowledge it. The purpose for posting about this topic seems to be to confuse people, to create a smoke screen in order to bash "the government" and "the media" in order to make people think that the "government" is so evil that they would somehow (nothing really specific) be involved in this horrific event in order to take their guns away. I think "trolls" is a very good word.
What does being a grandmother, etc., etc., have to do with making smoke screen threads or posts? I guess you're going to have to wait, just like all the other "middle aged American grandmothers" out there for the investigative report to come out to "know what really happened."
Being a loving mother and very actively involved grandmother is indicative of the fact that I am not a calloused, hard hearted person. I think you know that I meant that.
I have, however, been "accused" all my life of being a very logical, objective person with a very active curiosity and a gift for research and gathering facts. Those traits have served me well in both my personal and professional life.
Notice how many of my FIRSTHAND accounts are being ignored? Not one of my posts were responded to by these trolls. Not one.
I for one read them, and appreciated that they were first-hand reports.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
