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 have not been following this story in much detail, do we now know for positive, that no "assault rifle" was used to murder those children? Did he just use handguns?
The better question is why are you lefties so easily duped, and what makes you people so trusting of proven liars, even in the face of inconsistency after another after another?
Well well well, if that don't beat all. Shows what turds the media are for turning this into an agenda driven circus. Makes me sick, and I assume the parents are pretty disgusted for being used like this.
What's that about him getting into an argument, and they are still investigating that? How long until we hear the truth, the whole truth, and nothing more.
We spent plenty of time and research in threat assessment and accident evaluation. In most cases it's the simple explanation or simple mistakes that cause the biggest problems or pose the biggest threat. I don't rule out a good conspiracy from time to time - just this time.
I've seen some analysis of the "family photo" and one thing is that "little" Emily's head is as big as Mom's head. The other is that the photo, which seems a professional effort more than a candid shot, is not symmetrically posed by the photographer and even an amateur would probably have had them posed as more of a unit. That is to say "Emily" is 'outside the box'- likely shopped in.
It then occurred to me to wonder at the age of the 'original' family photo. Could the girl in the red jumper be Emily (or whoever- but the same person as "Emily") and the shopped in "Emily"? That is: black and red dress girl from a recent photo (shopped in) is the same girl as red jumper girl from a photo 1-2 years old or so. Therefore there is only ONE girl and she is not dead. OR the shopped in "Emily" is an age-progressed morph photo of the girl in the red jumper and, again, there is only one girl and she is not dead. OR does this "family" consist of actors/agents posing for a cover-up photo to present an emotional side to the story. In other words, these people may exist separately but not as a real family.
I post the above speculation because people tend to believe photos and videos without question- even though they see an elephant parked by a lady's desk in a TV commercial (how plausible it looks!) and films with every imaginable special effect that can look very real, they beeeleeeve every photo and vid put out by the OWNED MSM. Can it not be seen that the same audio-visual techniques can be used to sell us a bill of goods on the "news" that hits us where our Constitutional rights reside rather than just in the pocketbook as ads do, or to provide fantasy and further mind programming as movies and TV do?
There's no explanation for the gullibility and naivete of so many ... and you'll give yourself a headache trying to make sense of it, because there is no sense to be found.
I find it equally daft, the almost automatic response ... "if there was such a conspiracy, the truth would leak out" nonsense. What can you say to such people? Nothing, nothing you say will make a dent in the concrete.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DifferentDrum
Still, even after we can see how "Emily" may never have existed, the question arises, but- but- but what happened to the girl if she is not dead? Were the kids all kidnapped into slavery? Doubtful as kids are widely available to sickos. No, the probability is that NOTHING happened to her because she is one and the same as her sister and never existed at all except as a "photo", a weak back story, and a very bad actor for a "father". There may only be two girls- not three.
That is the most likely case. Or she could be a photo of one of the hundreds of thousands of missing children, slightly altered, and placed in the photo. The deal is, when you look at all of the interviews of several people claiming to be family of the dead children, not one of them ever sheds an actual tear ... they really put on the show ... the emotional stress and sadness, but nary a single tear. As a side note, the fact that "Emilie" is spelled that way instead of the traditional "Emily" is also just another little inside joke .... Em-i-lie.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DifferentDrum
Further, the first R.I.P. Victoria Soto Facebook memorial page appeared on Dec. 10, 2012 and the "shootings" occurred on Dec. 14, 2012. This has been replaced at facebook, of course, but there are screen shots and youtube vids from several sources about the one from Dec. 10. I provide one reference but there are many to look at:
We spent plenty of time and research in threat assessment and accident evaluation. In most cases it's the simple explanation or simple mistakes that cause the biggest problems or pose the biggest threat. I don't rule out a good conspiracy from time to time - just this time.
Name me one person who readily admits to being "easily duped"? Take some food and water with you, because your search for such a person will no doubt take some time.
The truth is, I discovered a long long time ago that the only way of minimizing the chances of being "duped" is to believe absolutely nothing you hear, and be very skeptical and discerning as to what you see. And even then, there is no guarantee, but your chances are greatly improved. That said, one has to analyze facts, and not feelings, and your remarks about researching and assessing threats and accident evaluations generally forms around a baseline set of assumptions, which do not traditionally include what is universally dismissed as "conspiracy theories". right from the start. In any case, true, legitimate investigation does not exclude ANYTHING, and criminal investigators always look at those close to the crime as potential suspects, and particularly when "stories" conflict, make no sense, or is later revealed to be untruthful. These are huge red flags in any criminal investigation.
So, you rule out a conspiracy in this case, why? And please don't tell me that the degree of difficulty, or the complex nature and the necessary number of accomplices makes such a conspiracy too great to be considered reasonable, because that is an illegitimate reason to make such assumptions, and particularly in the presence of multiple "red flags" indicating that the consensus story is as phony as a three dollar bill.
Aside all of the ancillary points which have already been tabled that should certainly raise an eyebrow or two ... lets start at the proper place ... the beginning.
1) First, the initial reports name the wrong brother as the alleged shooter, injecting the initial confusion, when the normal approach in legitimate investigations is not to declare such identities of perpetrators without confirmation. That is highly irregular in the immediate aftermath of such crime, and very premature given that the investigation was just beginning.
2) Then we have the shooter's mother ... first claimed to be shot and lying dead inside the school, and shot by the misidentified son. She was identified as a school teacher there at the school. Then the story is changed, and she was not at the school, but shot in her home by the other son who then proceeded to the school with her guns, and killed 20 small children and several adults, and then himself. And this too is highly suspect, because there is no way for the authorities to conclude that the mother was killed by her son at that point, absent a witness to that act. And then the story changes even more ... she was a substitute teacher which explained why she wasn't at the school that day ... then she was not a teacher, but maybe a teacher's aid .. a volunteer. Then she was not affiliated in any way whatsoever with the school. This shifting story makes no sense whatsoever ... if she had no affiliation with the school at all, then who identified her are a teacher there in the first place? And how did they link an apparent dead person at the school as her? This is just a major debacle at this point, that has no rational explanation.
3) Now we have the reports of the two suspected accomplices outside the school, and one dead perp inside. We have audio and video of police apprehending at least one suspect in the woods adjacent to the school ... ON VIDEO AND AUDIO TAPE ... apprehended, and handcuffed and described as wearing camo pants and a black jacket. We also have eye witnesses testifying that a man in camo pants and black jacket was led away from the scene in handcuffs, who even said to these bystanders, "I didn't do it". He didn't do what? What could he have known about what transpired inside the school if he wasn't inside and involved in some way? Do you think the police would give him a narrative of what they knew at that point, while arresting him? Please!!
4) Now the story is massaged further, and all talk of accomplices magically ceases .. and we hear no more about this man apprehended and arrested outside, and the story takes on the age old and familiar "Lone Gunman" theme which seems to be so popular. No more talk do we hear about accomplices .. and the initial reports of such begin to disappear mysteriously. Totally inexplicable, and prima fascia evidence of a coverup in the works ... absolutely a dead giveaway that the authorities are determined to promote the "lone wolf" scenario in spite of the evidence to the contrary. (it seems that the authorities don't like conspiracies any more than you do )
5) Now we have the mechanical details ... the two pistols and the Bushmaster AR15 "assault rifle" .. reportedly found inside ..... a Glock, a Sig Sauer, and the Bushmaster AR15 ... all openly named in such specific detail to include type and manufacturer in the initial hours before a proper investigation has even been partially completed? This does not happen in a legitimate investigation. Such details are purposely withheld pending interviews with witnesses and not revealed to the public until the investigators are convinced that revealing of such details will not compromise the ongoing investigation. RED FLAG.
6) The very odd and very quirky Medical Examiner - he claims that all of the victims he had already examined (he hadn't yet examined the shooter, and was planning to do that tomorrow: another red flag that I will expound on in a moment) had been killed by the "long gun" .. not the pistols. He wouldn't name the caliber of the bullets that allegedly killed these victims, but he could definitely name the rifle as the murder weapon. PROBLEM ... video shows that the AR15 was recovered by police from the trunk of the suspects car, and was not inside where the shooting took place. So how could that have been the murder weapon, when only pistols (2) were found inside? That number later changed to 3 pistols, and then 4 pistols found inside. Four? Really? So this strange kid carries 4 pistols inside, I suppose he has two pistols in his hands and two in his pockets? That would be the natural assumption when one finds 4 weapons at a mass murder scene, that all four belonged to the one lone gunman? Give me a freaking break. The natural inclination is to consider the presence of multiple weapons as indicating the possibility of multiple perpetrators ... and not the opposite conclusion. The reality is, there is not one element so far that isn't drowning in a sea of contradiction and deception. This story is gasping for air, and is all but dead at this point. Total, unmitigated nonsense.
7) Medical Examiner examining the perpetrator last? This, from an a law enforcement investigative standpoint, the shooter should have been examined FIRST ... to determine the details of his death, and whether it was actually self inflicted, or if evidence exists that he was murdered by someone else, indicating accomplices still at large, or perhaps details needed for the proper interrogation of the suspect that was already arrested and in police custody. This is another extremely irregular aspect of non-traditional conduct in the investigation of such a massive crime. The fact is, this investigation, from start to finish was conducted as if the entire narrative of what transpired was already known ... or shall I dare say, the narrative of what will be the official story was fait accompli from the very beginning.
There are many more questions and questionable details that cast a cloud over this nonsensical truckload of inconsistencies and contradictions, but the ones here suggest a fabricated story is being promoted at the very least, and that brings the entire event into question.
If you are familiar with conducting investigations, as you have insinuated ... and you aren't the least bit alerted to massive issues related to this event, then you are not qualified to undertake the investigation of the big cookie heist from the cookie jar in your own kitchen.
Breaking News: None Of The Kids At Newtown School Were Killed By AR-15 Bushmaster......I Repeat, None. It Was In The Car
Just heard it on Rush. So why has the main focal point on the massacre been the AR-15 Bushmaster .223 caliber? It was never used. When the news reports first came out, they (Cops in interviews, Police dispatch reports) reported that the killer used pistols and that a Bushmaster was in the backseat of his car. But never the less, the narrative the media used was that the Bushmaster was the weapon used. Why the focus on the Bushmaster instead of the pistols?
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.
)
Breaking News: None Of The Kids At Newtown School Were Killed By AR-15 Bushmaster......I Repeat, None. It Was In The Car
