Just saying even atomic clocks (or whatever their called) can be off, my computer and cell phone are set by the Internet and they've been off from each other. Not making an assumption I'm just not putting my tin foil hat on for this one.
Shooting Caught Live On Air
- Thread starter orbitup
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
- Status
Just saying even atomic clocks (or whatever their called) can be off, my computer and cell phone are set by the Internet and they've been off from each other. Not making an assumption I'm just not putting my tin foil hat on for this one.
- Jul 1, 2011
- 27,739
- 21
Edited video proves squat. Do you use nails or screws to keep the foil in place?
My posts were not crass in the least. I'm not buying the whole illuminati, false flag crap and he deleted my posts. I did not insult anyone, I did not name call, I did not violate any rules. If you want to start a conspiracy theory thread feel free to do so.
It's not just the edited video. The original video directly off youtube, under the shooters name. Simply did not have any view what so ever of the killers face or full body shot. If you can see it.....by all means shut me down.
There's zero people coming forward to give any logical form of explanation. It's intriguing with nothing to do with tin foil.
I think this gets at your problem. I don't think anyone has said any of these things yet, but you have this weird predisposition to put people in this category when they ask certain questions. It doesn't help when the police and government are overly secretive about the information regarding the crimes, such as in Sandy Hook or the Boston bombing. BBC reporters covering the chase of Flanagan are even claiming they were threatened by the Virginia State police and told to delete their footage. What gives with that?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...g-threatened-by-virginia-police-10474038.html
The video clearly suggested that. And that video was posted in this thread. I didn't indicate that the video suggested that. It clearly says that over and over IN THE VIDEO.
We're on the same team. This is getting answers for a major news event shown to you, me, my neighbor. Stop thinking it's insult to what you think. This is some jiggy crap possibly being used to separate you from the device you protect yourself with.
If you enjoy what you have, start questioning things. I'm am. Cuz I enjoy what I have.
They're going to have to release the whole tape. The screenshot is when he came back and shot the cameraman after the initial volley towards the reporter. It wasn't in the live broadcast before they cut away - it was in the footage afterwards, recovered by the station and police.
Watch the synced videos. The screen grab is from after the 30-second mark - when he comes back. On the news broadcast, they've cut away, but the camera is still rolling. I don't see that footage has been released yet.
http://cache-2.sendvid.com/uvy1cqu3.mp4
http://cache-2.sendvid.com/uvy1cqu3.mp4
Hot dang. Never mind I confused my response.
Respect MReed, this situation is jiggy. It reeks of discrepancies left and right. The screen shot is not the only thing. Video slowed down shows the reporter glace his way. She saw him. Her eyes are seen looking at a big black guy, wearing black, waving a freaking Glock.
The idea her being so entranced enough in an interview, even after seeing some strange guy holding a Damn handgun... The shooter was right next to the cameraman. Some big huge guy standing on a creaky bunch of boards, feet from you. And the person in the video not feeling the area under his feet change in any way?
I see no kinetic slap waves in any of her clothing or body. If he missed. Shooting her in back as she flees down that hallway is the follow through. If he turned to shoot the cameraman, the reporter would already have covered more ground down the hallway.
Tough shot.
Why has the cameraman not jumped off the railing by now? How many shots was he standing there for?
Spider sense is humming.
Respect MReed, this situation is jiggy. It reeks of discrepancies left and right. The screen shot is not the only thing. Video slowed down shows the reporter glace his way. She saw him. Her eyes are seen looking at a big black guy, wearing black, waving a freaking Glock.
The idea her being so entranced enough in an interview, even after seeing some strange guy holding a Damn handgun... The shooter was right next to the cameraman. Some big huge guy standing on a creaky bunch of boards, feet from you. And the person in the video not feeling the area under his feet change in any way?
I see no kinetic slap waves in any of her clothing or body. If he missed. Shooting her in back as she flees down that hallway is the follow through. If he turned to shoot the cameraman, the reporter would already have covered more ground down the hallway.
Tough shot.
Why has the cameraman not jumped off the railing by now? How many shots was he standing there for?
Spider sense is humming.
Last edited:
That image of his facing the camera was the FIRST image I ever saw, well before the police would had the time to have released the video that was on his tape to the media.
What stinks to me is just how quick all of this imagery, video, "facts", and timeline were fed to the media. It was BLAZINGLY fast, but anytime my local news investigates a crime, it takes time for the PD to release anything. Why do stories that capture the MSM attention seem to all have the same M.O.? Why do they all seem to get so much information on active investigations so quickly, while any other investigation in tight-lipped until it's completed and all the facts are in?
MSM stories just have SO much "fact" right up front, it's wierd how at odds they are with standard reporting of crime.
What stinks to me is just how quick all of this imagery, video, "facts", and timeline were fed to the media. It was BLAZINGLY fast, but anytime my local news investigates a crime, it takes time for the PD to release anything. Why do stories that capture the MSM attention seem to all have the same M.O.? Why do they all seem to get so much information on active investigations so quickly, while any other investigation in tight-lipped until it's completed and all the facts are in?
MSM stories just have SO much "fact" right up front, it's wierd how at odds they are with standard reporting of crime.
All of the supposedly weird stuff can be pretty easily accounted for, especially when media outlets are throwing out any bits and pieces they can get.
Discrepancies in stories (stolen car/rental car) are completely common as news outlets put being first ahead of being accurate.
The family are probably hard core libs, likely coached before going on TV how to behave so that they can make a difference and save the children and whatnot. As for lack of emotion, I'd imagine at this point they are emotionally exhausted. Ya know, when something fucks you up so much that you just run out of energy to show you are fucked up.
At this point I have no doubt there are inaccuracies in the coverage, that's how "journalism" works these days. Speed>accuracy. Will the libs use it, of course. They will use anything and everything they can to further their agenda. Even if that includes lying.
Do I think there is any kind of conspiracy at work? If so, it was only in the mind of the sick bastard that was holding the gun.
Discrepancies in stories (stolen car/rental car) are completely common as news outlets put being first ahead of being accurate.
The family are probably hard core libs, likely coached before going on TV how to behave so that they can make a difference and save the children and whatnot. As for lack of emotion, I'd imagine at this point they are emotionally exhausted. Ya know, when something fucks you up so much that you just run out of energy to show you are fucked up.
At this point I have no doubt there are inaccuracies in the coverage, that's how "journalism" works these days. Speed>accuracy. Will the libs use it, of course. They will use anything and everything they can to further their agenda. Even if that includes lying.
Do I think there is any kind of conspiracy at work? If so, it was only in the mind of the sick bastard that was holding the gun.
The media already had it. It was a LIVE feed being streamed (and recorded) back to the studio. When they cut back to the anchorwoman that didn't stop the feed. The control room was still watching the live feed... and able to go back, pull the info and deliver it.
It was uploaded to YouTube. Regardless of the name on the account. Why was it edited? Someone took it off facebook/twitter.....and edited for length...then uploaded? Length footage that's supposedly only in the hands of law enforcement?
My spider sense is pegged.
- Status
Members online
- D0ntTr3@d0nM3
- HKaltwasser
- wakosama
- jgillaspy
- gasgas
- CentexGunner82
- msharley
- kbaxter60
- gdr_11
- Gordo
- Fishin4guns
- brashears9567
- PUCKER
- smittyb
- Wmb556
- thescoutranch
- DocBeech
- Rarias1135
- Mongo
- Miami_JBT
- roadkill
- allusmorgans
- cbp210
- kmcn762
- Jrgar85
- Ausländer
- ZX9RCAM
- Txdweeb
- 1911'S 4 Me
- Younggun
- Texasgordo
- johnbeaver
- tinplas
- paknheat
- zackmars
- Amated
- mdf9183
- CJGarza
- toddnjoyce
- AlteisenMkII
- Armybrat
- S13
- Renegade
- BillC
- Booger
- gamboolman
- Coonan357
- Radarscratch
- justmax
- jlw
