Posted on 01/16/2013 5:55:19 AM PST by Uncle Chip
And I am the one who is a Conspiracy theorist?
Oh, BTW. What happened to the handguns? You said they found two guns. Rifle and shotgun right? So then when did the handguns get in the mix? I’m not making this crap up. I wanna know.
“What? you don’t believe that fast and furious was a conspiracy?”
No, I just don’t think that F&F being a conspiracy has anything to do with whether Sandy Hook is a conspiracy. Like I said, I don’t believe that all conspiracy theories are automatically false, but I judge them all individually and critically. Just because one conspiracy is true doesn’t mean all conspiracies are true.
Fair enough. I didn’t mean to say that F&F had anything to do with Newtown.
Thanks for remembering the DSL!
You’re very welcome. You did outstanding work.
OK. So your post is a bunch of stuff that you think you SHOULD see, but you don’t see.
That doesn’t show it didn’t happen, because you weren’t there. You are working off of news feed stories.
So you think you should see lots of pictures. But you don’t KNOW that pictures were taken.
But that’s where your story ends. It’s like there is a puddle on the floor. And you think, hey a puddle, there should be a glass on it’s side, or drips from the ceiling. But there aren’t.
But does that mean there isn’t a puddle on the floor, or just that you didn’t think of another explanation for the puddle on the floor?
So, do you think there weren’t 400 kids? That’s the argument you are making — “if there were 400 kids, we’d see A, we don’t see A, .... but you don’t reach the conclusion. You just let it hanging there.
Because the conclusion contradicts the facts that are known. You are trying to use secondary, indirect measurements when you have primary facts. With primary facts, you can ignore the lack of indirect secondary measurements. It doesn’t matter — a LACK of some expected thing doesn’t negate a known fact, it just means you understand how things happened.
Who cares that you don’t see kids in the chopper shot? There are very few chopper shots. The chopper doesn’t seem to have been there long.
We know the kids were moved. We see them being moved. I showed you pictures of two sets of kids being moved. And you can see they aren’t panicking. On the other hand, 4 kids panicked and ran away, and ended up at some guy’s house.
So instead of asking “why can’t we see the kids”, why not recognize the reality that the kids were moved, and ask “what is it about the chopper that kept it from taking pictures of the kids”.
Like it wasn’t there when the kids moved, or at that moment it was spending several minutes watching the guy in the woods.
BTW, if someone walks up to you and slaps you, you don’t have to “assume the event took place” — you know it. We know this event took place, because eyewitnesses who are trained have reported about the event.
Of course, you can choose not to believe them. They could be lying. But if you assume that everybody would lie to you, then I guess you never believe anything unless you see it with your own eyes.
I’m not faulting you for that. I never “fully believe” things I don’t see myself. I accept them , if they are rational, but always leave open the possibility that I’ve been lied to. But if you don’t accept that you have to just take a lot of things on faith, meaning that you have to hold a certain degree of trust in those people who we have entrusted to law enforcement and other critical functions.
Thank you!
I'm sure the officer would have been more specific if they knew you were going to be so nitpicky but they were busy with other matters I trust you understand.
Also, he had training, and the “targets” weren’t moving, and were extremely close. And he shot each one several times, according to sources. so he didn’t need to be very accurate either.
The raid on Waco was as much part of an agenda as Fast and Furious.Each involved murder and coverup: just such a concoction appears in the series of mass shootings leading to a 23-point fiat concurrent with a UN agenda and an ammo buy for Federal agencies in the tens of millions of rounds.
As Benghazi presents with the arming of the former enemy, and the DCI is removed with help from a compliant FBI.
Clinton was re-elected with the eleven-point boost of OKCBomb.
In the year the DCI who revealed the Agency's family jewels was likely murdered in a clumsily-contrived "canoe accident":
WHO MURDERED THE CIA CHIEF? William E. Colby: A Highly Suspicious Death
I knew one of you would post those two pictures claiming it was different kids. You might want to adjust your glasses. See the blonde boy in the middle of the group in the top picture? He's wearing jeans, gray sports shoes, a long sleeved black shirt with an image on it and he's carrying a piece of paper. Now, look at the kid in the lead in the second picture. Same kid, same clothes, carrying a piece of white paper. Back to the top picture, see the kid behind the kid I pointed out above? This boy is short, darker blond hair with straight cut bangs, darker shade of baggy blue jeans and a long sleeved gray shirt. Now, look at the kid in the back of the line in the second picture. Same kid. Ok, I'll play along that they might be twins dressed alike and that both sets of twins were split into the same two classes, but it's stretching it too much with one set carrying the white paper.
So two pictures of the same group of kids a few seconds apart — and that proves what??? that only one classroom was evacuated???
These are only two pictures out of the dozens of photos and videos showing kids walking down the hill to the fire station, the parents waiting for them and the multitudes of the parent’s vehicles parked along the road, and witnesses to the evacuations.
I never said it was one classroom. Either it's the same class or it's a different class. Whichever it is, there are problems. Look at the tar repairs in the parking lot pavement, specifically the repair that forms a square shape in the middle of each picture. Now, tell me why your "same group" is walking past those same repairs but over a few feet in each picture and with a different group composition? Did they stop, go back, get new kids, keep two boys and then walk past the square repair a second time?
Not the same kids. I don't see paper in the one kid's hands and the images on the shirts are not the same.
I see the similarities in the two; they could be the same, although how they completely re-arranged the class in the short distance travelled (the car is the same in both pictures, so they are pretty close to the same location) is problematic.
And the fact that none of the other kids match is also an issue. Several people have papers in their hands as well, so that isn’t definitive.
It seems odd that they would take the kid from the front and the kid from the back, and then move them to the middle, when all the kids are linked together.
That is why I suggest that it is two different classes. Although if all I saw was the one boy you mentioned in the two pictures, I would totally agree with you.
There would have been dozens of these groups, to get all the kids from the school to the firehouse.
Another thing that would suggest the same group rather than two — if the reporter just got out the camera for a few quick shots, it would make sense to have two pictures of the same group.
Other “wag the dog” incidents under Clinton involved the bombing of Iraq and then the bombing of Kosovo.
They are not the same boys IMHO.
Look carefully at the images on the shirts. One image stops at the chest level and the other goes down almost to the waist.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.