Orlando Shooting Investigation

Politics and religion.

Moderator: JasonNC

User avatar
AJ Research Dept
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 1:14 am
PostPosted: Wed Jun 15, 2016 1:24 am
Paul Craig Roberts lays down several skeptical observations about the Orlando Event

Roberts has huge credentials in academia, journalism, and public service:
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/pages/a ... g-roberts/



Orlando Shooting, June 13
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/06 ... g-roberts/

Orlando Shooting: Still No Evidence, June 14
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/06 ... -evidence/
Quote

Snarky!
Posts: 13692
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2010 12:01 pm
PostPosted: Wed Jun 15, 2016 7:44 am
Dorm wrote:1. Firearms (and the infamous AR-15 rifle)


This one is a case of "journalists" who don't know anything about guns. It wasn't an AR-15. Here's an article where Mother Jones tries to creep you out about how scary and black and military-looking it is:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... ss-shooter

I'm amused that they point out the "military-spec trigger", as if that's some deadly accessory.

And are you telling me that an actor might have been in a gay bar? IMPOSSIBLE!
Quote
User avatar
Woah! Double lightsaber! Double lightsaber all the way!
Posts: 6286
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 3:42 pm
PostPosted: Wed Jun 15, 2016 9:45 am
The only thing I could think of that a "military-spec trigger" could be useful for is switching between auto and semi-auto, and a civilian weapon is by definition incapable of being fired automatically, without major mods.

There may be other benefits (tactical grip and such), but nothing that actually makes the weapon all that much more dangerous, certainly.

Also, I kinda want one. That thing looks cool.
Image
Quote
User avatar
AJ Research Dept
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 1:14 am
PostPosted: Wed Jun 15, 2016 10:48 am
Heli wrote:
Dorm wrote:1. Firearms (and the infamous AR-15 rifle)


This one is a case of "journalists" who don't know anything about guns. It wasn't an AR-15.

And are you telling me that an actor might have been in a gay bar? IMPOSSIBLE!


It was originally reported as an AR-15. I saw it was corrected later. Whatever the case, it's nearly the same: a semi-auto rifle not too different than a military M-16 that shoots .223s.

The actor played a role in the event. He wasn't just there. He also got lots of media coverage from the get-go.

I'll just keep posting about what I find. Mistakes will be made, but overall a picture might emerge.
Quote
User avatar
AJ Research Dept
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 1:14 am
PostPosted: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:35 pm
It's hard to keep up with all the video footage and the internet commentators. I don't have time to post much now. Here's one for now that is causing a stir.

The victim in the red shoes

The media cameramen had set up shop on the street, behind a black fence, somewhat close to the area of emergency. They were roughly within 100 yards from the Pulse night club. Stationed here, they filmed a parade of alleged victims being carried back toward the Pulse. The bar patrons supposedly were told to bring injured people back this way because a hospital or clinic was not far away. Fair enough. I can accept that.

One male 'victim' in bright red shoes with a supposed leg wound is carried by 2-3 friends past the row of media cameras. Once he is carried far enough past the cameras, his friends let go of him and relax. The wounded man stands okay on his wounded leg. One camera man catches the sudden lack of urgency.

Raw video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaNewsknuBw

On 3rd and 4th viewing, I concentrated on the final seconds of the video. You can briefly see one red shoe planted on the ground. Planted forward. What shoe? Apparently the right one. Which leg was shot? The right one. You also see the red-shoe man's arm reach out to give his benefactor in a black a friendly little push to the shoulder.

It was a emergency situation and the man couldn't stand on his wounded right leg. Then it no longer seemed to be an emergency situation once they got past the row of cameramen, and the man could stand on his wounded right leg. Was this one small bit of exposed drama?

Video with commentary:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-SvbAbAE54

Video with foul language, funny commentary:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OC5tDJTIzPQ

Image
Quote

Snarky!
Posts: 13692
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2010 12:01 pm
PostPosted: Thu Jun 16, 2016 7:40 am
So, in these mass shooting situations, you always present the idea that the whole thing is faked and the supposed victims are all actors. But if we're dealing with an elaborate setup orchestrated by rich elites who think of citizens as gullible sheep, wouldn't it be easier for them to just send in a specially-trained person to actually act as a gunman and actually kill and injure people? Wouldn't that be much easier to control, particularly when the gunman is almost always killed anyway? (Not to mention a better use of resources.)

Maintaining the secrecy of a staged event involving hundreds of people, including fake victims who are now reported dead and presumably have to be relocated, seems like it would be a gigantic risk, as well as a huge waste of resources, if you're coming from the perspective of aloof control.
Quote
User avatar
AJ Research Dept
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 1:14 am
PostPosted: Thu Jun 16, 2016 10:49 am
Heli wrote:So, in these mass shooting situations, you always present the idea that the whole thing is faked and the supposed victims are all actors. But if we're dealing with an elaborate setup orchestrated by rich elites who think of citizens as gullible sheep, wouldn't it be easier for them to just send in a specially-trained person to actually act as a gunman and actually kill and injure people? Wouldn't that be much easier to control, particularly when the gunman is almost always killed anyway? (Not to mention a better use of resources.)

Maintaining the secrecy of a staged event involving hundreds of people, including fake victims who are now reported dead and presumably have to be relocated, seems like it would be a gigantic risk, as well as a huge waste of resources, if you're coming from the perspective of aloof control.


Years ago, I originally had a 'philosophical' approach like you're suggesting. Then I started looking at each event in detail and I followed an 'evidence-based' approach more closely. Since the other investigation threads in this forum reveal some or a lot of fakery, I believe that the theme very well could be continued in this case.

We know now that the security state is obsessed with staging events. An entire industry of companies and sections of security bureaucracies with mega millions are involved. After all the research that's come forward about that, I didn't think that was in question any more.

Anyway, recent events such as those in San Bernardino, Belgium, and so forth seem to speak for themselves. As for Orlando, it remains to be seen.
Quote
User avatar
AJ Research Dept
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 1:14 am
PostPosted: Thu Jun 16, 2016 9:16 pm
Heli, to get to the specifics of the philosophical debate, I'll add this.

There have been covert operations in the past when a government-directed/influenced lone killer or small group of killers has gone in, caused havoc, and eventually -- due to excellent investigations done by authorities not involved in the plot -- their true purposes and relations were expertly exposed. This has caused enormous damage and strain in the societies involved, and the chickens have come home to roost, so to speak (example: Operation Gladio). The amount of damage control and cover up to contain these problems is massive. Careers and lives have been badly affected or just ended.

I'll also add that 'lone killers' doing their crimes alone frequently aren't working so independently; there's handlers, look-outs, and so forth, and people indirectly involved to assist/coverup, being bribed and coerced, etc.

In short, messy covert ops in highly public areas can go south very fast. So much can go wrong. There's so many random possibilities involved. Anything from random witnesses and photographs, to random vigilantes fighting back, to cops and undercover cops, to equipment failures, etc.. It could be a nightmare for the nutty operatives if they are going into uncontrolled territory.

Whereas, it is now law under recent 2012-2013 NDAA legislation that the USgov can legally produce propaganda (which can be totally false) which forwards the agenda of said gov, and it can harness the media to distribute it. More on that later.

It's also clearer every year that there is an emerging culture of security preparedness and mass-casualty simulation that is growing big nation-wide in every city of any size. It's well organized, well funded, and viewed as zealously serious by those involved.

As for faking events, there are many advantages. The first is control and containment. If virtually every noteworthy or important person involved in a simulation is "in on it," left undisturbed in a designated zone, and what you're doing is legal and protected by authorities, then the random elements are almost wiped out. It's a show, a theater piece. A director is given excellent control over his movie. Next there is excellent control over what you want to show, and especially what you don't want to show. Suggested action that didn't even happen does not have to be shown at all. There's also the luxury of shooting footage in private, again and again, possibly before the event (to be used on the day of), as well as potential months and months of preparation to get things just right.

As for real people involved in an illusory event: My interest isn't speculation, but I know people focus on that themost. First of all, I am rarely surprised anymore what people will do for money in this age of unemployment, high debt, drug addiction, and legal criminal trouble. Anyway it's known from different real mass-casualty exercises that there are avg volunteers, theater and FX Effects experts, paid crisis actors from bonded corporations, as well as real police. In mysterious 'shooting events', such as Sandy Hook, police are given huge monetary rewards; the municipal and state govs are given lots of extra funds; and 'victims' and their families are able to raise mega millions of dollars in charity donations. All this is a matter of public record.

As for a "waste of government resources", we're talking the federal government here, the force that usually comes in to take complete control and distribute bails of cash. The Pentagon alone spends at least $4-5 billion every year solely on propaganda projects, which very much includes false news that is distributed far and wide.

Would people make a deal with the devil and lie briefly to make lots of money? Would they relocate to do this? Would they say they are someone else? Would a selected fed employee lie if asked to? Would someone in big trouble play-act to get their legal troubles negated? Debts paid off? Would they lie to pursue a hotly-believed ideological agenda that keeps them up at night? Would a narcissist or sociopath or egomaniac welcome this opportunity to seize some brief fame and money? Would operators in government spend $10-20 million dollars to create a psy-op "movie" that greatly assists their long-term tier1 agenda? Are there scary connections between media and government? Local cops and the fed gov?

In the end, this is all abstract, but worth mulling over. I like evidence instead. You can accomplish real research by looking at evidence. If I don't find any more fishy stuff, I'll let that lack of evidence speak for itself.
Last edited by Dorm on Thu Jun 16, 2016 9:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
User avatar
AJ Research Dept
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 1:14 am
PostPosted: Thu Jun 16, 2016 9:39 pm
How the NDAA Allows US Gov to Use Propaganda Against Americans

https://occupycorporatism.com/how-the-n ... americans/


You won't find the Corporate Media talking about this, because it actually casts suspicion on the media as being willful partners with government in a legal yet deceptive practice going against everything media is supposed to be about: Informing Americans with true stories.


U.S. Repeals Propaganda Ban, Spreads Government-Made News to Americans
http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/07/14/u-s ... americans/

The NDAA Legalizes The Use Of Propaganda On The US Public
http://www.businessinsider.com/ndaa-leg ... nda-2012-5

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_ ... _Year_2013
Several news outlets reported that the 2013 NDAA overturned a 64-year ban on the domestic dissemination of propaganda (described as "public diplomacy information") produced for foreign audiences, effectively eliminating the distinction between foreign and domestic audiences. The social news media site BuzzFeed for example quoted an unnamed source saying the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 would allow “U.S. propaganda intended to influence foreign audiences to be used on the domestic population.”




Journalist Naomi Wolf Exposes Fake News / False Flags
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuB6wavzcww

I was never a big fan of Naomi Wolf until she got into this subject and related stuff. Her short lecture here is pretty good in explaining the changes. She explains how the law was passed so that it now has become legal to present gov-controlled stories to the American public which are potentially false and they may be propaganda (which means, material which is designed to bring about political changes).

She starts getting into it at the 2 minute mark:

Naomi: We've entered an era in which it is not crazy to assess news events to see if they are real or not real.


She gets into the theme of legally slanting the news and creating news, all the way to creating violent simulations ("spectacles") that dominate the news. All aimed at the domestic public to influence their thinking.
Quote
User avatar
AJ Research Dept
Posts: 2881
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 1:14 am
PostPosted: Thu Jun 16, 2016 10:55 pm
Shooting victim Norman Casiano

http://heavy.com/news/2016/06/norman-ca ... y-stories/

Casiano was ultimately shot twice in the back, but luckily for him both bullets passed through his body and did not cause any major damage.


We can safely assume he was taken to hospital sometime on the morning of Sunday, June 12. The 'event' ended after 5 AM.

Casiano was discharged from the hospital on Monday.


Casiano says he isn’t sure how he mustered up the strength to crawl out of the bathroom to safety, as he was very seriously injured by the time the gunman left.


After being released from hospital on June 13, with at least one small bandage visible on his side, Casiano felt it was a priority to get interviewed by CNN's Anderson Cooper, a common face in the aftermath of all mass shootings in the last years.

More from Tampa Bay News 10, June 16:
http://www.wtsp.com/news/nation-now/orl ... /246101047

“First time he shot, he shot me right in the back. That is still the worst wound I’m dealing with,” says Norman Casiano.

The bandages will soon be removed.


Casiano got the bonus of meeting Obama and Biden.


Here is the CNN interview, taken some time within 36 hours of him being hospitalized.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEgLw6MNhMg

I noticed how relaxed and well spoken he is. He looks very healthy and aware, not a man who had 'slept for 2 days' and recently woke up for his interview (2 days is his exag or error). No groggy signs of medication or exhaustion. As the interview progresses, he becomes more animated with his arms and his torso. He shifts and pivots. For having 2 bullet wounds, one minor one to the side and the other 'right in the back', he is doing dynamite. Kids can really recover these days from gunshots.

Me personally? I'd be pretty sore, tired, anxious, depressed, and even if I wanted to, I wouldn't be able to bust such a cohesive, clear, well-paced narrative after going through a massacre where I got plugged twice. As I shifted on the seat, I'd probably bite down on a frown as the pain reminded me of lead puncturing my tissues at 3000 ft per second. Lead right through my back.

Playing paintball two decades ago, I remember getting hit, near point blank range by a camo ambusher, in my exposed side. Just a t-Shirt for protection there. It was right around where Casiano allegedly got shot on his side. Tender flesh there. It stung bad, big welt, and made me hiss for two days every time I turned or shifted nearby muscles.

This guys catches 2 bullets, in and out, and he's a champ.

Image
Last edited by Dorm on Thu Jun 16, 2016 11:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
PreviousNext

Return to It matters!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron