Society/Culture Shooting attack at Texas church

[BustedWing]

No, it was like shooting every fish in the barrel through the eye ... not something an amateur gunsman with an IQ of 66, shooting from his non preferred hip in rapid fire should be expected to do.

But, I am not trying to convince you that the Port Arthur massacre was a conspiracy.
I am simply stating reasons why I believe what I believe and there is no way that I can document everything that I have seen and read and heard that makes me believe these things.
It will not matter what arguments I make. You Sheeple have already made up your minds and will not even consider any points raised. Your only consideration is how to paint a contrary view as wrong.
Whereas, my main argument is simply stating that you should open your minds and consider the possibilities of alternate news.

Again, when a typical close minded Sheeple poster makes fun of the "good guy with a gun" theory, is then liked by 3 others, and then is shown to have egg on their face, they don't stop and reconsider their position ... they instead move the goal posts and still dismiss the validity of the the good guy with a gun theory. I know I have little to no chance of convincing that type of person to believe what I believe. But I sincerely hope that somewhere deep down they are willing to at least question the mainstream narrative.

Can you answer these questions for me please?

How close was Bryant to his victims when he opened fire?

How big was the cafe?

What were the victims doing when they were fired upon?

How many survived the attack?




On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[PurpleEyes]

Can you answer these questions for me please?

How close was Bryant to his victims when he opened fire?

How big was the cafe?

What were the victims doing when they were fired upon?

How many survived the attack?




On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

As I have previously stated, if I produce 10 pages of arguments showing why I believe what I believe, then the likes of BustedWing will argue semantics and turn that in to 100 pages.

I have no desire to get into an argument of whether Port Arthur was or was not a conspiracy. And I shouldn't have to.
The fact that I have seen enough evidence to convince myself, when I used to believe the mainstream media official story, is a good enough argument to support my claim that others could at least question the mainstream media narrative.

If I was an Atheist, I would know not to try to convince a devout Christian to not believe in their faith. Even if I was confident that I could argue and show evidence to contradict every passage of their bible.
Until you are willing to ask questions yourself, no amount of effort on my behalf is going to change your position.

But I am more than comfortable with my beliefs, even labels of Conspiracy Theorist. After many years of questioning and researching and seeking the truth, I now find I can clearly see past the mainstream media Fake News when it is presented to me. It allows me to understand how Trump was doing far better in the polls than what I was being told to believe, prior to the 2016 Election. It told me that Hillary Clinton was up to no good, the very first time I heard the ABC report of the Bengahzi incident on the radio. It tells me that CNN are faking a supposed live rescue of a man in his pickup truck that drives in to a ravine on live TV. And only yesterday it told me to go look to see if George Soros had his tentacles around Russian presidential campaigner Alexei Navalny given the bias mainstream media coverage that man is getting.

So I will continue to believe that there are some bad people out there, not bad guns. And fortunately, there are also good people with guns to make the place safer.

 

[Father Jack]

Trump wasn't doing 'far better' in the polls than you were being told to believe, he actually lost the popular vote, remember?

 

[PurpleEyes]

Trump wasn't doing 'far better' in the polls than you were being told to believe, he actually lost the popular vote, remember?

Oh the belly laughs you deluded leftist Libtards give me.

The poll data shown on mainstream media was wrong/inacurrate/fake news. Call it what you want, but no amount of crying "he lost the popular vote" can account for the huge difference in what they were reporting and what actually happened.

I knew he was doing better than what was being reported because I was analysing the poll data.
It was being heavily skewed towards Clinton and Democratic voters.

But you keep believing what you want to believe.

 

[Father Jack]

Oh the belly laughs you deluded leftist Libtards give me.

The poll data shown on mainstream media was wrong/inacurrate/fake news. Call it what you want, but no amount of crying "he lost the popular vote" can account for the huge difference in what they were reporting and what actually happened.

I knew he was doing better than what was being reported because I was analysing the poll data.
It was being heavily skewed towards Clinton and Democratic voters.

But you keep believing what you want to believe.

It doesn't take much of a push for you to show your colours.

 

[happy_eagle]

Obama and his administration tried very hard to publicise the Sandy Hook shooting as a strong argument for gun reform ... so no, it is not easily dismissed

Ok
So based on your research, what is your version of events that happened at Sandy Hook ?
If you are to dispute the official story, you should have a replacement story that you believe to be more plausible.

Were there children that died?
Who was responsible?
To what degree does your story change from the official story?

 

[PurpleEyes]

It doesn't take much of a push for you to show your colours.

& you were in your birthday suit the very first time you replied to my post.

 

[Mofra]

Oh the belly laughs you deluded leftist Libtards give me.

Quality posting.
Are you happy with Trump's performance thus far, and do you think "thoughts and prayers" are enough whenever innocent people are killed due to gun violence?

 

[BustedWing]

As I have previously stated, if I produce 10 pages of arguments showing why I believe what I believe, then the likes of BustedWing will argue semantics and turn that in to 100 pages.

I have no desire to get into an argument of whether Port Arthur was or was not a conspiracy. And I shouldn't have to.
The fact that I have seen enough evidence to convince myself, when I used to believe the mainstream media official story, is a good enough argument to support my claim that others could at least question the mainstream media narrative.

If I was an Atheist, I would know not to try to convince a devout Christian to not believe in their faith. Even if I was confident that I could argue and show evidence to contradict every passage of their bible.
Until you are willing to ask questions yourself, no amount of effort on my behalf is going to change your position.

But I am more than comfortable with my beliefs, even labels of Conspiracy Theorist. After many years of questioning and researching and seeking the truth, I now find I can clearly see past the mainstream media Fake News when it is presented to me. It allows me to understand how Trump was doing far better in the polls than what I was being told to believe, prior to the 2016 Election. It told me that Hillary Clinton was up to no good, the very first time I heard the ABC report of the Bengahzi incident on the radio. It tells me that CNN are faking a supposed live rescue of a man in his pickup truck that drives in to a ravine on live TV. And only yesterday it told me to go look to see if George Soros had his tentacles around Russian presidential campaigner Alexei Navalny given the bias mainstream media coverage that man is getting.

So I will continue to believe that there are some bad people out there, not bad guns. And fortunately, there are also good people with guns to make the place safer.

What a shame.

Instead of actually checking to see if your claim of "expert marksmanship needed" is actually true, you prefer to ignore anything contradicting your position.

Yet there you are, lecturing us about "digging deeper" and daring to seek the truth rather than merely believe what you've been told.

You were told Bryant needed expert marksmanship, when that is in fact total garbage. Instead of changing your position to reflect the facts, you instead ignore said facts.

That's hypocrisy.

For what it's worth, I encourage you to read the (pretty horrific) account of what took place. I challenge you to read that, and then tell us that expert marksmanship was needed.
Read from: Broad arrow cafe murders:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australia)

I'll warn you, its grim reading.

This excerpt comes from Carol Altmanns 2006 book: The Massacre, After Port Arthur. It won a walkley non fiction book award.

Question the authenticity of the reference if you want, but that would be a whole other conspiracy!

After all this, SURELY.... you can't still claim Bryant needed expert marksmanship...


SURELY.....



On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[PurpleEyes]

Ok
So based on your research, what is your version of events that happened at Sandy Hook ?
If you are to dispute the official story, you should have a replacement story that you believe to be more plausible.

Were there children that died?
Who was responsible?
To what degree does your story change from the official story?

I believe Sandy Hook was mostly actors. I am probably about 75% confident that there were no fatalities (or very few).
There are just way too many dodgy photos, videos and fake acting involved in this.
I think they went and used old photos of real children and then claimed they were current day younger siblings killed in the massacre (hence the Parker mother having to admit that she photoshopped their family photo containing all their suposed children).
The money (hush money) they poured in to Sandy Hook after the event was insane, from memory over 200million.
To me, there appeared to be no real solid evidence that really makes me believe a dinkum massacre occurred there.

I think this is a deep state orchestrated event.
When I say deep state, for me that just means people and elements from within the US government agencies that are required to be involved.
As to who decides and sets the agenda and instructs the deep state to create something like this, I think it probably goes way up to a few very powerful players. The likes of Obama may be involved but I think he would most likely just be a soldier with departmentalised responsibilities (eg. speeches promoting gun reform).

This was one event where very early on in the coverage of it, I felt it was Fake, before I went looking for any Conspiracy Theories relating to it.

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

My argument is that it was successful in Australia.
One mass shooting and gun reform was immediately introduced.
In US, it was never going to be so easy, which is why they need so many of them.
Obama and his administration tried very hard to publicise the Sandy Hook shooting as a strong argument for gun reform ... so no, it is not easily dismissed.

So the deep state keeps committing these mass shootings on the hope the next one will create gun control?

 

[BustedWing]

I believe Sandy Hook was mostly actors. I am probably about 75% confident that there were no fatalities (or very few).
There are just way too many dodgy photos, videos and fake acting involved in this.
I think they went and used old photos of real children and then claimed they were current day younger siblings killed in the massacre (hence the Parker mother having to admit that she photoshopped their family photo containing all their suposed children).
The money (hush money) they poured in to Sandy Hook after the event was insane, from memory over 200million.
To me, there appeared to be no real solid evidence that really makes me believe a dinkum massacre occurred there.

I think this is a deep state orchestrated event.
When I say deep state, for me that just means people and elements from within the US government agencies that are required to be involved.
As to who decides and sets the agenda and instructs the deep state to create something like this, I think it probably goes way up to a few very powerful players. The likes of Obama may be involved but I think he would most likely just be a soldier with departmentalised responsibilities (eg. speeches promoting gun reform).

This was one event where very early on in the coverage of it, I felt it was Fake, before I went looking for any Conspiracy Theories relating to it.

Oh boy....


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

I know you think deep state is edgy as heck, but all it does is show little you know and rely on bullshit terminology you hear in mainstream movies.

 

[PurpleEyes]

What a shame.

Instead of actually checking to see if your claim of "expert marksmanship needed" is actually true, you prefer to ignore anything contradicting your position.

Yet there you are, lecturing us about "digging deeper" and daring to seek the truth rather than merely believe what you've been told.

You were told Bryant needed expert marksmanship, when that is in fact total garbage. Instead of changing your position to reflect the facts, you instead ignore said facts.

That's hypocrisy.

For what it's worth, I encourage you to read the (pretty horrific) account of what took place. I challenge you to read that, and then tell us that expert marksmanship was needed.
Read from: Broad arrow cafe murders:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australia)

I'll warn you, its grim reading.

This excerpt comes from Carol Altmanns 2006 book: The Massacre, After Port Arthur. It won a walkley non fiction book award.

Question the authenticity of the reference if you want, but that would be a whole other conspiracy!

After all this, SURELY.... you can't still claim Bryant needed expert marksmanship...


SURELY.....



On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

To choose to aim and shoot and hit their necks was the point I was making. That is what would be typical of a trained shooter.
I don't have time right now, but I have read official (coroners)reports of the murders in the past.
I will try to look at your references later this evening and respond.
But please, we are just spinning in circles. I have done hundreds of hours of research over the years and I doubt either of us are going to change our beliefs today/this week.
My main point is that I am happy to question the mainstream media, but to do that, I often need to dig deep to get under the filtered censored information. The likes of wiki/snopes/factcheck very often simply tow the line of the mainstream media.
(Cheers for now).

 

[BustedWing]

To choose to aim and shoot and hit their necks was the point I was making. That is what would be typical of a trained shooter.
I don't have time right now, but I have read official (coroners)reports of the murders in the past.
I will try to look at your references later this evening and respond.
But please, we are just spinning in circles. I have done hundreds of hours of research over the years and I doubt either of us are going to change our beliefs today/this week.
My main point is that I am happy to question the mainstream media, but to do that, I often need to dig deep to get under the filtered censored information. The likes of wiki/snopes/factcheck very often simply tow the line of the mainstream media.
(Cheers for now).

Stop ducking an weaving. You started with headshots, now it's "neckshots".

How many were shot in the neck? Why is that (a) more or less difficult than a headshot, and (b) how is that in any way indicative of "expert marksmanship"?

Read the account.

It's really really clear that the overwhelming majority of shots were point blank at defenceless, unprepared people, who were either completely unaware of what what happening, or defenceless and cowering in fear.

Your position that "something is fishy" because "Bryant would have needed expert marksmanship" is fantasy. Nothing more.

You've been hoodwinked.






On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[BustedWing]

A diagram of where the shell casings were found, indicative of where he shot people:

He got them at close range one after the other in a tight confined space.

There is even a horrific video of the aftermath (I won't post it here).




On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Thats Wright]

Stop ducking an weaving. You started with headshots, now it's "neckshots".

How many were shot in the neck? Why is that (a) more or less difficult than a headshot, and (b) how is that in any way indicative of "expert marksmanship"?

Read the account.

It's really really clear that the overwhelming majority of shots were point blank at defenceless, unprepared people, who were either completely unaware of what what happening, or defenceless and cowering in fear.

Your position that "something is fishy" because "Bryant would have needed expert marksmanship" is fantasy. Nothing more.

You've been hoodwinked.






On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

It was a bit sus that someone in the cafe apparently jumped up and said 'no, not here'.
The credible witness saying he saw his face and it wasn't Bryant, the local police being sent on a goose chase prior to the event.. some of it was odd.

 

[BustedWing]

It was a bit sus that someone in the cafe apparently jumped up and said 'no, not here'.
The credible witness saying he saw his face and it wasn't Bryant, the local police being sent on a goose chase prior to the event.. some of it was odd.

Stressful situation. People do weird things and say/remember weird things under stress.

Truth be told I don't think it's all that odd.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Thats Wright]

Stressful situation. People do weird things and say/remember weird things under stress.




On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Fair enough, but adding horrendous acne scars to faces seems an odd account.

 

[Father Jack]

It's incredible how frequently Bigfooty throws up these special posters that we all love and enjoy to read their work, and that keep us coming back for more. It's like it's some sort of conspiracy

 

[happy_eagle]

I believe Sandy Hook was mostly actors. I am probably about 75% confident that there were no fatalities (or very few).
There are just way too many dodgy photos, videos and fake acting involved in this.
I think they went and used old photos of real children and then claimed they were current day younger siblings killed in the massacre (hence the Parker mother having to admit that she photoshopped their family photo containing all their suposed children).
The money (hush money) they poured in to Sandy Hook after the event was insane, from memory over 200million.
To me, there appeared to be no real solid evidence that really makes me believe a dinkum massacre occurred there.

I think this is a deep state orchestrated event.
When I say deep state, for me that just means people and elements from within the US government agencies that are required to be involved.
As to who decides and sets the agenda and instructs the deep state to create something like this, I think it probably goes way up to a few very powerful players. The likes of Obama may be involved but I think he would most likely just be a soldier with departmentalised responsibilities (eg. speeches promoting gun reform).

This was one event where very early on in the coverage of it, I felt it was Fake, before I went looking for any Conspiracy Theories relating to it.

And you think that co-ordinating something on that level, and ensuring everybody keeps quiet about it (conveniently except for when conspiracy sites get exclusives) is more plausible than
1. Mentally ill guy gets a gun
2. Mentally ill guy goes to a school
3. Mentally ill guy shoots children in school

or

1. Government decide to stage terror attack (pick location, pick date)
2. Government cast the actors for the roles (assumably from Craigslist). There were 20 children that died that day, each with families. So that at minimum is at least 60 willing participants (who obviously aren't able to tell anybody what this project is all about).
3. Government organise for the schools usual participants to all be absent during that day, and to be the dead participants. These students and their parents agree to have their children declared dead in the shooting, in order to help out the government. These fake dead students will not be able to be seen in public ever again, but have been paid money by the Government, so agree to go along with it all.
4. Government cast the shooter, who willingly accepts the role as "Adam Lanza". His family are also cast and given appropriate back stories.
5. Government also involve local law enforcement who are likely to respond to the scene of a reported shooting, and assumably have the capability of determining a dead body from a live one. Local police officers are told to ignore the lack of dead bodies, and distribute photographs of the fake dead students to the media.
6. Finally game day. The Government conduct the mass shooting, with special effects and top acting from all the child actors and everyone involved. The assumably quite small community of Sandy Hook (most of whom are probably in on the act, or know someone that is) give believable responses. The only hitch is some of the media interviews given by the fake parents do not seem believable to the trained eye.
7. All of the actors, the students, parents, police officers and local media (in total probably over 100-200 people) are paid money by the Government, and therefore do not speak a word of this to anybody (except for one or two, whose stories appear on conspiracy websites). To this day, each of the 20 dead students have not been seen in public, thus confirming this conspiracy.
8. At the end of this grand scheme, the same shadow government that organised and kept quiet an operation on that scale, try and pass gun legislation in congress. It does not work.


I mean I know which story sounds cooler (The cool sounding story is a major influencer of conspiracy theory I believe), but this isn't about which story is cooler. its about which story is more plausible and which story has less holes in it.

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

It's incredible how frequently Bigfooty throws up these special posters that we all love and enjoy to read their work, and that keep us coming back for more. It's like it's some sort of conspiracy

I’m certain chief creates accounts to get eyeballs. Geelong crazy 26 farts and 35 of us are in there telling him why he’s a dickhead.

 

[Thats Wright]

It's incredible how frequently Bigfooty throws up these special posters that we all love and enjoy to read their work, and that keep us coming back for more. It's like it's some sort of conspiracy

Then you get posters that don't add much.

Would rather hear this blokes honest account of something than agenda driven crap/whining.

 

[kane249]

And you think that co-ordinating something on that level, and ensuring everybody keeps quiet about it (conveniently except for when conspiracy sites get exclusives) is more plausible than
1. Mentally ill guy gets a gun
2. Mentally ill guy goes to a school
3. Mentally ill guy shoots children in school

or

1. Government decide to stage terror attack (pick location, pick date)
2. Government cast the actors for the roles (assumably from Craigslist). There were 20 children that died that day, each with families. So that at minimum is at least 60 willing participants (who obviously aren't able to tell anybody what this project is all about).
3. Government organise for the schools usual participants to all be absent during that day, and to be the dead participants. These students and their parents agree to have their children declared dead in the shooting, in order to help out the government. These fake dead students will not be able to be seen in public ever again, but have been paid money by the Government, so agree to go along with it all.
4. Government cast the shooter, who willingly accepts the role as "Adam Lanza". His family are also cast and given appropriate back stories.
5. Government also involve local law enforcement who are likely to respond to the scene of a reported shooting, and assumably have the capability of determining a dead body from a live one. Local police officers are told to ignore the lack of dead bodies, and distribute photographs of the fake dead students to the media.
6. Finally game day. The Government conduct the mass shooting, with special effects and top acting from all the child actors and everyone involved. The assumably quite small community of Sandy Hook (most of whom are probably in on the act, or know someone that is) give believable responses. The only hitch is some of the media interviews given by the fake parents do not seem believable to the trained eye.
7. All of the actors, the students, parents, police officers and local media (in total probably over 100-200 people) are paid money by the Government, and therefore do not speak a word of this to anybody (except for one or two, whose stories appear on conspiracy websites). To this day, each of the 20 dead students have not been seen in public, thus confirming this conspiracy.
8. At the end of this grand scheme, the same shadow government that organised and kept quiet an operation on that scale, try and pass gun legislation in congress. It does not work.


I mean I know which story sounds cooler (The cool sounding story is a major influencer of conspiracy theory I believe), but this isn't about which story is cooler. its about which story is more plausible and which story has less holes in it.

Refer to point 6 on this, sums it up well
http://www.cracked.com/article_24943_6-fatal-flaws-behind-famous-conspiracy-theories_p2.html

 

[Thats Wright]

I know you think deep state is edgy as ****, but all it does is show little you know and rely on bullshit terminology you hear in mainstream movies.

Like nazi?

Give it a spell, at least he doesn't transfer his conspiracy into bloodlust and see nazis in his soup.