Proving the Aurora Theater Shooting's official story false

[Travis]

Part of the agenda seems to be to mess with peoples minds andblur the lines of reality and fiction with their media and social networking fakery. With the millions of fake facebook and twitter accounts, which are created solely to steer public opinion, it's nigh impossible to disprove all the fake witness' and family victims.

Prove that there are any real direct victims or family victims in these psy ops?

You have proof that there are millions of fake facebook accounts?

OK, here we go with the "actually listening to the interview" rebuttal (you're welcome that I transcribed it for you, btw), because I know how you like to do the rhetorical "ha, i made you look bad". Well, it was a ****** job, but anyway:

"We didnt really know what was going on until someone came in from the left and told us not to go out there, because there was a gunman outside"

"I spoke with another man who was in your theater who said that uh, he thought there was some kind of firecrackers or something inside the theater went off and that was the source of the smoke, is that what gels with what you observed?"

"We had plenty of people telling us that someone were throwing uh pepper bombs- I guess it's a firework- it blinds it disorients and it tastes nasty, but uh, yeah, they thought there was pepper bombs, and uh"

"it was some kind of acrid smoke that you smelled?"

"yeah, it was very thick..."

So you are saying that a person shooting continuously over 100 rounds is going to give people the impression that they "don't know what's going on" "3 distinct pops" went off, which was the source of the "lot of" "very thick smoke", caused only shrapnel injuries, had somebody's ear ringing, created a "flash and a boom", had "plenty of people" reporting "firecrackers" and caused Walton's leg to get "really hot"?

Well which one is it? The firecracker effects, also called booms, bangs, flashes, are from the gun in theater 9, (in which case you'd get 100X the report of the sound) or they are from the bullets themselves? Go ahead.

Widdle down your position for me. Are the explosion effects from the bullets or are they from the gun's muzzle? Don't squirm your way into an equivocation either. It's basically one or the other. So which is it?

The point went over your head. All those reports are consistent with what people might report from someone shooting off a gun, detonating incendiary devices with an eventual SWAT team response.

 

[Travis]

As for proving that the victims are real: first you would need evidence that the media has ever invented victims in past mass killings. If you can't do that then you need to provide a really good reason they started with this one and that you have some evidence it was done.

Just assuming a lie happened with no evidence doesn't make you some awesome internet sleuth.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

The point went over your head. All those reports are consistent with what people might report from someone shooting off a gun, detonating incendiary devices with an eventual SWAT team response.

Not only that, but okay, let's say that the perpetrator(s) made use of fire bombs or gas or whatever you claim the "official story" doesn't cover. Then what? How does this "prove the official story false"?

Especially when the "official story" says this:

"AURORA — A gunman slipped into a midnight premiere of the new Batman movie through an emergency exit early Friday, tossed two hissing gas canisters and then methodically, calmly walked up the aisle firing, killing 12 people and wounding 58." ​

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_21124893/12-shot-dead-58-wounded-aurora-movie-theater

​

So, Neveos... what are you trying to accomplish here? Where is your "proof that the official story is false"?

ETA:

You have proof that there are millions of fake facebook accounts?

Pay attention, damnit! They don't need proof, because they are already convinced!

 

[beachnut]

The three have no evidence to support the OP

 

[SezMe]

The notion of truth is barely conceivable in the modern world..... The internet is a big place, luckily, so at least honesty and truthful people are found all over cyber space.

These two sentences are from the same paragraph. How do you explain that?

 

[Safe-Keeper]

The three have no evidence to support the OP

Up to several of them don't even appear to know what the "official story" is in the first place, so no big surprise there.

 

[Neveos]

The point went over your head. All those reports are consistent with what people might report from someone shooting off a gun, detonating incendiary devices

Ahhh, a new ally! Hello! Thanks for agreeing with me!

with an eventual SWAT team response.

Holmes was apprehended within a minute to a minute and a half. Meaning the shooting ended before there was ever a SWAT response. In fact, it is lauded here:
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_21124921/tapes-reveal-chaos-horror-at-theater-shooting

"The quick action was yet another example of the dramatic change in tactics since the Columbine High School massacre.
Before the April 20, 1999, Columbine attack, police departments across the country wouldn't allow patrol officers to enter a building where there was an active shooter until SWAT team members or at least backup officers arrived.
Today, many departments expect patrol officers to go after an active shooter immediately even if they are alone."

What point are you making with that reference to a SWAT response, you little sly bugger? Are you trying to suggest SWAT threw explosives into theater 8?

 

[FrederickEason]

The "incendiary devices" were the smoke/gas grenades used by James Holmes. This is not something "denied" by any "official report", this is a fact of the story corroborated by the Aurora police chief.

What parts of these interviews are inconsistent with the "official report"?

 

[dafydd]

What point are you making with that reference to a SWAT response, you little sly bugger? Are you trying to suggest SWAT threw explosives into theater 8?

Swat teams have never been known to use flash bangs. Not in the CT world, of course.

 

[Wolrab]

Part of the agenda seems to be to mess with peoples minds andblur the lines of reality and fiction with their media and social networking fakery. With the millions of fake facebook and twitter accounts, which are created solely to steer public opinion, it's nigh impossible to disprove all the fake witness' and family victims.

Prove that there are any real direct victims or family victims in these psy ops?

I don't know where you live (except that it is most likely under a bridge) but a bus ticket is relatively cheap if you live in the US. You could actually go to Aurora and meet with the families and friends of the victims. You could even talk to a survivor! You would then be an actual investigator. I'd even make you a certificate and a badge! Until then stop disrespecting the victims . Purveyors of vicsims and no-planers should be banned immediately.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

The "incendiary devices" were the smoke/gas grenades used by James Holmes. This is not something "denied" by any "official report", this is a fact of the story corroborated by the Aurora police chief.

What parts of these interviews are inconsistent with the "official report"?

We've already told him this. Repeatedly. It just won't sink in.
It's as if he's here just to troll, rather than to have a serious discussion.

 

[Scott Sommers]

I asked him this precise question earlier, but to everyone's great surprise he seems to have missed that post, so for everyone's , I'll ask again:

OneTime, you say shooting sprees don't happen because "humans don't have a motive for carrying out such acts". Below I've put together a scale of sorts of misdeeds, from the innocouous (spelling?) to the most horrific evils of human history.

Where on this scale do you draw the line?

┌ leaving the toilet seat up
├ trolling message boards
├ stealing roommate's food from refridgerator
├ cheating on an exam
├ lifting candy from a shop every time you go there
├ kicking a cat
├ punching a child
├ cheating on your true love
├ calling in a bomb threat to an elementary school
├ driving drunk
├ bullying a classmate for years
├ savagely beating someone to the point where they require hospitalization
├ subjecting a partner to domestic abuse over a significant time period
├ raping someone
├ shooting and killing an innocent person
├ going on a shooting spree
├ starting a revolution and installing a brutal dictatorship
├ starting a war of imperialism that kills hundreds of thousands
├ taking over a country by force and selling its populace to slavers on different continents
└ attempting genocide (Rwanda, the Holocaust, etc.).

Please tell me where on this scale things start to get too unrealistic for you.
Do bank robberies happen? What about WWII? The European empires? The Holocaust? Mao's Great Leap Forward?

Funny thing is, you seem to have no problem believing in corrupt politicians and businesses and huge conspiracies involving hundreds of thousands to millions of people, but a shooting at a theatre? Nah, too horrible. Only happens in action films.

This is a really interesting idea. You could develop this in to some sort of measure of belief in conspiracy theory. If I do this, I'll give you credit for it.

 

[Travis]

Ahhh, a new ally! Hello! Thanks for agreeing with me!

Which I guess means you agree with the police report. So what is the point of all this?

Holmes was apprehended within a minute to a minute and a half. Meaning the shooting ended before there was ever a SWAT response. In fact, it is lauded here:
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_21124921/tapes-reveal-chaos-horror-at-theater-shooting

"The quick action was yet another example of the dramatic change in tactics since the Columbine High School massacre.
Before the April 20, 1999, Columbine attack, police departments across the country wouldn't allow patrol officers to enter a building where there was an active shooter until SWAT team members or at least backup officers arrived.
Today, many departments expect patrol officers to go after an active shooter immediately even if they are alone."

What point are you making with that reference to a SWAT response, you little sly bugger? Are you trying to suggest SWAT threw explosives into theater 8?

Um, that wasn't the point. There was a police response of some sort and I'm sure it added to the confusion for the witnesses.

 

[Neveos]

The "incendiary devices" were the smoke/gas grenades used by James Holmes. This is not something "denied" by any "official report", this is a fact of the story corroborated by the Aurora police chief.

What parts of these interviews are inconsistent with the "official report"?

Nothing quite says it better than:

"To the right of us, right by the stairwell, all 12 of us, heard hissing, and started seeing smoke, saw a/heard a boom and a flash, we heard what we thought were fire crackers, we thought kids were throwing fire crackers"

ETA:

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHA

Sounds like ... smoke bombs to me.

^^

 

[FrederickEason]

What are you even trying to say? What do those carets mean?

 

[BStrong]

What are you even trying to say? What do those carets mean?

Could it be a secret symbol used by the trollish to admit defeat?

 

[Ladewig]

Purveyors of vicsims and no-planers should be banned immediately.

Banned from JREF message forum ?
Why?

 

[Safe-Keeper]

At least he's having fun.

 

[OneTime]

So far two people have requested that I be banned, and the guy talking bogus ct's claims that i'm a dis informant agent on a smear campaign I must have hit a couple of raw nerves

And it was documented last year that 83 million facebook accounts were fake, and around 20 million fake twitter accounts. You guys can say 'prove it' all day long but it works both ways, you need to prove there are real physical victims. It's so obvious when you try and stifle conversation by using that old chestnut; 'respect the families of victims' yeah yeah show me some real victims that were physically affected. The only victims in all of this masquerading are the unknowing masses who are being psychologically manipulated.

 

[LaurelHS]

And it was documented last year that 83 million facebook accounts were fake, and around 20 million fake twitter accounts.

And how many of those were fake disaster victims, as opposed to trolls and advertising spammers? Numbers and specific examples, please.