JTF.ORG Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: The One and Only Mo on January 10, 2013, 06:30:25 PM
-
http://www.turnto23.com/news/local-news/report-at-least-one-person-shot-at-taft-high-school
-
Sounds like a copycat, at least it wasn't a massacre though.
-
Wait a minute, don't they have laws against high capacity magazines there?
And an "assault weapons" ban. Unfortunately this guy used a shotgun so I guess we need to ban those as well.
-
I don't trust this government...I think they can use people to advance their anti-gun agenda.
-
I don't trust this government...I think they can use people to advance their anti-gun agenda.
Yep.
Fake actors in the Sandy Hook.
For what?
I dont know.
-
Fortunately both Jews and Christians know that physical death is temporary, because there is an afterlife and we will stand up when the resurrection of all the dead takes place.
-
Also... there was another guy planning to attack a nearby school..... I just found out about this..... apparently the guy was a muslim.
-
Sounds like a copycat, at least it wasn't a massacre though.
This one is real.
-
This one is real.
Oh, so you are able to determine which school shootings contain "fake actors" and which do not? Very impressive skill, are you a prophetess?
It seems you do not consider how illogical and impossible it would be to fake sandy hook. Do you realize how many people would have to be complicit in inventing fake identities of people who never existed and to convince little children to lie about it and somehow not slip up? It defies common sense.
-
Oh, so you are able to determine which school shootings contain "fake actors" and which do not? Very impressive skill, are you a prophetess?
It seems you do not consider how illogical and impossible it would be to fake sandy hook. Do you realize how many people would have to be complicit in inventing fake identities of people who never existed and to convince little children to lie about it and somehow not slip up? It defies common sense.
I think this is not a very nice way to approach.
I dont you approach this way.
Sandy Hook; Actors.
Look it up yourself. Sorry, NOBODY laughs and jokes after their child is murdered. NOBODY makes a "RIP" page 4 days BEFORE an event takes place.
I will tell you no more.
Nobody here is really interested, anyway.
We shall believe what the dear leader says...
-
I think this is not a very nice way to approach.
I dont you approach this way.
Nice way to approach what? I'm not even sure what you just said here. But my only approach was to suggest that your opinion doesn't make logical sense. If your only response is that I am "not nice" then that probably bolsters my point that you haven't thought this through as you cannot offer anything substantial in response.
Look it up yourself. Sorry, NOBODY laughs and jokes after their child is murdered.
So people who experience a tragedy never smile again for the rest of their lives? And never laugh again? Is that even physically possible?
NOBODY makes a "RIP" page 4 days BEFORE an event takes place.
The facebook page was made a few days before. After the woman was murdered, her relative changed it to a memorial page.
I will tell you no more.
Because there is nothing you are able to tell me.
Nobody here is really interested, anyway.
We shall believe what the dear leader says...
What dear leader would that be? This statement is nothing but a straw-man.
-
I think that the government set up the shooting in order to get gun control. I am not willing to commit to anything beyond that at this point, but I think it's always a good thing to question the media story. It's never a good thing to blindly accept what we are told. The brainwashing that most people are under makes them SHUT DOWN when someone questions anything.
It's much like the brainwashing most of society has when someone questions the righteousness of Martin Luther King or of the civil rights movement as a whole. People will shut down and stop listening if you tell them that MLK or the civil rights movement were evil. In a similar way, people shut down and stop listening if you dare to say the government is evil, has done evil things in the past, and is doing evil things right now.
This should be what scares us.
To belittle someone who is trying to break the brainwashing is wrong.
Even if someone draws the wrong conclusions, isn't that better than someone who blindly accepts what they're told?
-
Yes and no. Yes, think wild and free. Think and think. But don't speak something as fact unless you can back it up. Or else what you do is create an insta straw man argument against thinking. Say this is a possibility, and its nice to see if things add up. First what you have to say what your numbers are. You can't say that because you have y+1, you've found x. How many billions of dollars would have gone in to fabricating such an event? You can't throw around a speculation if you present it as an accusation. Now you're attacking people you don't know with a theory you can't prove because you have facts that don't exist spun from facts that don't matter. You're fighting blind. If you were even right, lucky shot in the dark, you've succeeded on painting a massive bull's eye on yourself while insuring that no one useful will take you seriously or get involved. You've got no credibility, no back-up, no support, nowhere to hide, and do less then you could in the first place which is fact check and theorize. I could keep going, but girls usually get my points faster then guys, I've always got along well with you lovely magical people.
I can't prove the government's involvement in any of these shootings but I can reasonably assume they're doing SOMETHING we wouldn't like if we knew about it, because they constantly do horrible things, most of which are later exposed. I'm not denying that people died or adhering to any one specific theory about it right now. I just think there was some kind of involvement there just because it was so politically expedient for Obama. I'm really troubled by a lot of the conspiracy theories that have come out about the Sandy Hook thing to be honest because I think most of them are a smoke screen or not accurate. However I do think there was something pre-planned there.
-
That is a statement i agree with 100%. Now collect every fact, even the seemingly mundane ones, classify and organize them, look for patterns and trends until you find inconsistencies, and once as you see the hole in the story, start chipping away at the supporting facts until the wall of lies is torn down, then untwist whatever you have of the story, and you'll probably end up with a great hypothesis to begin investigating.
Right now I'm interested in looking into any kind of information that is floating around about this, no matter how dubious it might be. Just because I'm interested in it doesn't mean I necessarily accept what I read as true. I think what Paulette is doing is good by questioning the official story though. I think this is the kind of mind set that should be encouraged. Even if someone follows a wrong path or ends up having to backtrack and follow another one, I think it shows more intelligence than average to not just accept what we're told. When I've been studying various NWO things I've run into a lot of junk information that I later had to reject. There are so many smoke screens and false trails out there. Especially when something fishy is going on, the disinformation is going to be thick to distract us from getting to the real heart of the problem. It can be tedious to go through all the lines of information. The good thing is that people are thinking about this and analyzing it and not just blindly accepting what Obama tells us.
-
I think that the government set up the shooting in order to get gun control. I am not willing to commit to anything beyond that at this point, but I think it's always a good thing to question the media story. It's never a good thing to blindly accept what we are told. The brainwashing that most people are under makes them SHUT DOWN when someone questions anything.
It's much like the brainwashing most of society has when someone questions the righteousness of Martin Luther King or of the civil rights movement as a whole. People will shut down and stop listening if you tell them that MLK or the civil rights movement were evil. In a similar way, people shut down and stop listening if you dare to say the government is evil, has done evil things in the past, and is doing evil things right now.
This should be what scares us.
To belittle someone who is trying to break the brainwashing is wrong.
Even if someone draws the wrong conclusions, isn't that better than someone who blindly accepts what they're told?
This is where you're mistaken. You are not questioning the media story. You are questioning the media story, the pollice dept's story, the forensics story, the school administration's story, the teachers' story,the childrens' story, eyewitnesses' stories, parent's story. Something that was witnessed and unfolded in real time. Not some random thing msnbc wrote up.
You are also in some way accusing the victims as not having existed or their family members being complicit in their murders and also being paid off by the govt? That part is just utter lunacy.
And it's silliness to accuse people who accept the events as "blindly believing whatever they are told" for all the reasons outlined above.
My point is not to belittle anyone but to point out that this point of view doesn't make any sense. It has the same likelihood of me winning the lottery (or maybe significantly less!), but forget about how unlikely it is - its impossible to pull off w so many complicit and not one saying hey wait the govt tried to employ me in this massive conspiracy and here is proof of that.
By the wayit is both you and ashe who are belittling the rest of us with your blindness comment and with her various replies about following king obama. Reread what she wrote.
-
Isn't this conspiracy stuff to blame America for what tragedies befall it the Arab thing?
Yes... conspiracies always make me roll my eyes.... partially because they don't make sense... and partially... because this is the same stuff that our enemies use.
-
Seriously people? We need to spend time and effort wondering if
a) this was all a set up that the government orchestrated or
b) that no one really died and it's all a fabrication?
Isn't it sinister enough that the federal government is using a tragedy to usurp the Constitution and grab still more power? We need to also have a government conspiracy to actually be outraged?
-
Seriously people? We need to spend time and effort wondering if
a) this was all a set up that the government orchestrated or
b) that no one really died and it's all a fabrication?
Isn't it sinister enough that the federal government is using a tragedy to usurp the Constitution and grab still more power? We need to also have a government conspiracy to actually be outraged?
Bingo. Using this tragedy for political gain is plenty evil. No need to invent more evil.
-
This is where you're mistaken. You are not questioning the media story. You are questioning the media story, the pollice dept's story, the forensics story, the school administration's story, the teachers' story,the childrens' story, eyewitnesses' stories, parent's story. Something that was witnessed and unfolded in real time. Not some random thing msnbc wrote up.
No I actually think the story happened just about as it was told to us, but that the government had a hand in planning it. As I mentioned in the post above, I find a lot of the theories floating around right now to be disturbing and inaccurate.
You are also in some way accusing the victims as not having existed or their family members being complicit in their murders and also being paid off by the govt? That part is just utter lunacy.
And it's silliness to accuse people who accept the events as "blindly believing whatever they are told" for all the reasons outlined above.
I already said I feel like that's disinformation/a smoke screen. One of the main reasons I'm disturbed by those theories is that people are going to assume (as you did) that I believe in all that stuff just because I am questioning one aspect of it. What I'm questioning is whether the government had a hand in pre-planning this. I never said I think the victims didn't die. That's other people's ideas and I never actually agreed with any of that.
One of the most frustrating things I've found in dealing with people both online and offline is that when I tell people something they often add several things to what I said that I didn't actually say.
For example when I used to work in this one store we would get our new shipments of product in on Wednesday. Customers would ask me when a certain product would be in again. I would tell them exactly this: "We get our trucks in on Wednesday, but we don't know what's coming in on them before it gets here. You could check back after that to see if it came in or not, but there's no guarantee a particular product will be on it." What they heard was: "The product I want is coming in Wednesday". After Wednesday, customers would come back, the precise product they wanted wouldn't be there, and then they'd be angry that I'd "lied" to them, and they'd insist that I said their particular product would be in, when of course I had not.
I feel like a similar thing is happening here. What I'm saying is that I believe but can't prove that the government may have set up this event beforehand in some way, because it was politically expedient. I'm also saying that we should be tolerant of people who are questioning various aspects of it even if I don't personally agree with all the theories that are floating around right now. What you are apparently hearing/reading is that I somehow agree with all these theories that are floating around, which I never actually said. That's very frustrating because I don't want my personal credibility to be tarnished by making it seem that I agree with a bunch of things that I don't.
My point is not to belittle anyone but to point out that this point of view doesn't make any sense. It has the same likelihood of me winning the lottery (or maybe significantly less!), but forget about how unlikely it is - its impossible to pull off w so many complicit and not one saying hey wait the govt tried to employ me in this massive conspiracy and here is proof of that.
By the wayit is both you and ashe who are belittling the rest of us with your blindness comment and with her various replies about following king obama. Reread what she wrote.
She has a different opinion than I do about some aspects of it than I do.
What I'm trying to say which is again being misunderstood, is only to say that it's ok to question things. I don't even know if I'm right or not that this was set up. If everything as reported makes sense to you then it's reasonable to accept it that way. It mostly does to me too. The only aspect I question of it is whether the government had some involvement.
I was trying to say it's ok to question things, not that you necessarily have to all the time.
-
conspiracy mongering will only cause harm to our cause.
-
I think that the government set up the shooting in order to get gun control. I am not willing to commit to anything beyond that at this point, but I think it's always a good thing to question the media story. It's never a good thing to blindly accept what we are told. The brainwashing that most people are under makes them SHUT DOWN when someone questions anything.
It's much like the brainwashing most of society has when someone questions the righteousness of Martin Luther King or of the civil rights movement as a whole. People will shut down and stop listening if you tell them that MLK or the civil rights movement were evil. In a similar way, people shut down and stop listening if you dare to say the government is evil, has done evil things in the past, and is doing evil things right now.
This should be what scares us.
To belittle someone who is trying to break the brainwashing is wrong.
Even if someone draws the wrong conclusions, isn't that better than someone who blindly accepts what they're told?
Excellent post.
-
No I actually think the story happened just about as it was told to us, but that the government had a hand in planning it. As I mentioned in the post above, I find a lot of the theories floating around right now to be disturbing and inaccurate.
I already said I feel like that's disinformation/a smoke screen. One of the main reasons I'm disturbed by those theories is that people are going to assume (as you did) that I believe in all that stuff just because I am questioning one aspect of it. What I'm questioning is whether the government had a hand in pre-planning this. I never said I think the victims didn't die. That's other people's ideas and I never actually agreed with any of that.
One of the most frustrating things I've found in dealing with people both online and offline is that when I tell people something they often add several things to what I said that I didn't actually say.
For example when I used to work in this one store we would get our new shipments of product in on Wednesday. Customers would ask me when a certain product would be in again. I would tell them exactly this: "We get our trucks in on Wednesday, but we don't know what's coming in on them before it gets here. You could check back after that to see if it came in or not, but there's no guarantee a particular product will be on it." What they heard was: "The product I want is coming in Wednesday". After Wednesday, customers would come back, the precise product they wanted wouldn't be there, and then they'd be angry that I'd "lied" to them, and they'd insist that I said their particular product would be in, when of course I had not.
I feel like a similar thing is happening here. What I'm saying is that I believe but can't prove that the government may have set up this event beforehand in some way, because it was politically expedient. I'm also saying that we should be tolerant of people who are questioning various aspects of it even if I don't personally agree with all the theories that are floating around right now. What you are apparently hearing/reading is that I somehow agree with all these theories that are floating around, which I never actually said. That's very frustrating because I don't want my personal credibility to be tarnished by making it seem that I agree with a bunch of things that I don't.
She has a different opinion than I do about some aspects of it than I do.
What I'm trying to say which is again being misunderstood, is only to say that it's ok to question things. I don't even know if I'm right or not that this was set up. If everything as reported makes sense to you then it's reasonable to accept it that way. It mostly does to me too. The only aspect I question of it is whether the government had some involvement.
I was trying to say it's ok to question things, not that you necessarily have to all the time.
I just don't see any reason to suspect the govt was involved. I mean what piece of evidence lends that suspicion? What fact about that day says this couldn't have been a messed up evil guy who did this on his own? Don't see anything not believable about it.
Further: what incentive could the govt possibly offer a lunatic like this to do what he did? Its not like this was islamic jihad. He goes into it knowing he will die from it so who is going to convince him to do that except his deranged self? This guy killed his own mother!
-
How do we know that agents did not seek this kid out, brainwash him, and convince him to do this deed similar to what was done to Yigal Amir?
-
How do we know that agents did not seek this kid out, brainwash him, and convince him to do this deed similar to what was done to Yigal Amir?
convince him to kill his mother and kill himself? And lots of children? For what? There's nothing in it for the nutball. And it really doesn't make sense for them either.
Btw great screenname! I love that.
-
Good point!
It's not a good point because Amir believed he was killing Rabin as a loyal patriot defending the Jewish people from harm and national suicide. That he was encouraged to do the act doesn't have anything to do with sandy hook. First, he wanted to do it anyway and he had motive to do it. Second, it was found out in the investigation that Amir was encouraged to do it! The police would uncover this if it happened, and not only that, in the case of the israeli govt, it was rabin himself behind it, so he obviously did not want himself to actually get killed. You are proposing that the govt wanted tens of children murdered. For what? The same thing could be achieved by having the guy break in only to get stopped with all the deadly "automatic" (and so on) weapons. If they really NEEDED something like this to happen and they set something up, not one kid has to get hurt since they would be in control of the situation and could pwn the assailant.
Amir was a setup. This was not. The guy was on a rampage inside a school with no one able to do anything about it. Amir was immediately tackled after the first "blanks" were fired. This is comparing apples with oranges.
-
Why would it be that hard for the authorities to be able to figure out who might be a suggestible enough nutcase to actually listen to someone feeding him a bunch of bull? How hard would it be to talk a loser with no future whatsoever, and who knew it, into "going out with a bang"? He may even have converted to Sh*tlam for all we know.
-
Just a thought ... The government knows his mother is a right wing tea bag, and he has mental issues. How hard would it be to convince him to do something evil?
Theoretically, monkeys could type enough letters on keyboards and eventually you will produce a word or phrase or two from shakespeare. How are all these mental gymnastics pointing out the hardly believable realm of "possibility" relevant to anything? Many things are theoretically possible, but that doesn't mean they happened or had any logical reason to have happened.
-
I just don't see any reason to suspect the govt was involved. I mean what piece of evidence lends that suspicion? What fact about that day says this couldn't have been a messed up evil guy who did this on his own? Don't see anything not believable about it.
Further: what incentive could the govt possibly offer a lunatic like this to do what he did? Its not like this was islamic jihad. He goes into it knowing he will die from it so who is going to convince him to do that except his deranged self? This guy killed his own mother!
I just have an inherent distrust of the government. I can't prove it. All I'm saying is that I suspect that there was something fishy going on here and in some of the other shootings. It could have just been this guy going nuts on his own and doing this on his own though. That's what Occam's razor would indicate if it was applied. Of course the simplest explanation isn't always the true one either.
-
Theoretically, monkeys could type enough letters on keyboards and eventually you will produce a word or phrase or two from shakespeare. How are all these mental gymnastics pointing out the hardly believable realm of "possibility" relevant to anything? Many things are theoretically possible, but that doesn't mean they happened or had any logical reason to have happened.
You don't at all think that the timing and execution of this was just utterly perfect for what Obama wanted to do?
-
You don't at all think that the timing and execution of this was just utterly perfect for what Obama wanted to do?
You're approaching this from a false assumption that Obama was itching to enact anti-gun legislation and had to do something that would enable him to succeed. If you learn nothing else from progressives, learn that they are masters at eroding small amounts of your liberties over long periods of time until they accomplish their objective. It has taken us over 100 years to get to the point that we are today. Progressives do not need to create tragedy and crisis in order to implement their agenda. They simply need to take advantage of the tragedy or crisis when it occurs. As I said, this is more about looking at the shooting and saying, "this gives us an excellent opportunity to enact gun control legislation" than it is about them sitting around and coming up with an intricate plan to find an unstable individual, talk him into killing his mother, a large number of schoolchildren and himself so that they can implement their legislation.
-
I just have an inherent distrust of the government. I can't prove it. All I'm saying is that I suspect that there was something fishy going on here and in some of the other shootings. It could have just been this guy going nuts on his own and doing this on his own though. That's what Occam's razor would indicate if it was applied. Of course the simplest explanation isn't always the true one either.
I also distrust the govt but to say they would purposely butcher American children is a big leap IMO. And especially when whatever legislative goals they had that would make them butcher kids could have just as easily been achieved based on aurora or past crimes without this ever having happened.
-
You don't at all think that the timing and execution of this was just utterly perfect for what Obama wanted to do?
The "timing" was right because like any scheming politician worth his salt, Obama USED what took place to his political advantage. If it happened next year he would react the same.
-
You're approaching this from a false assumption that Obama was itching to enact anti-gun legislation and had to do something that would enable him to succeed. If you learn nothing else from progressives, learn that they are masters at eroding small amounts of your liberties over long periods of time until they accomplish their objective. It has taken us over 100 years to get to the point that we are today. Progressives do not need to create tragedy and crisis in order to implement their agenda. They simply need to take advantage of the tragedy or crisis when it occurs. As I said, this is more about looking at the shooting and saying, "this gives us an excellent opportunity to enact gun control legislation" than it is about them sitting around and coming up with an intricate plan to find an unstable individual, talk him into killing his mother, a large number of schoolchildren and himself so that they can implement their legislation.
This is just what is happening... I personally don't understand why more people don't see it... In fact the progressives don't even try to hide it much... Feb 26, 2009 ... The White House chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, let the cat out of the bag when he said, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste"... The government knows things like this are going to happen from time to time they just need to be ready to move on it when it does.
-
The "timing" was right because like any scheming politician worth his salt, Obama USED what took place to his political advantage. If it happened next year he would react the same.
That could be all that it is actually.
I still suspect the federal government had a hand in this to some degree but I'm so disgusted with the way this whole topic has turned that I feel like I want to drop it to avoid association with the really unsubstantiated stuff that's flying around right now.
The fact that people would be actually harassing Gene Rosen and openly mocking the parents makes my stomach turn especially since all those other suspicions (that I don't agree with) are based on extremely thin to non-existent evidence.