Many dead in coordinated Paris shootings and explosions

[Pickman's model]

And. They. Have. Fuck. All. To. Do. With. The. Paris. Attacks.

It's wicked to mock the afflicted

 

[Pickman's model]

squirrelp can you tell us about a few non-false flag terrorist attacks that have happened recently? Is there a list we can refer to?

None of them

Next

 

[squirrelp]

Does anyone remember immediately after the shooting of Jean Charles De Menezes; either on BBC or Sky News? They interviewed "witnesses" who (iirc) desribed Jean Charles as "acting suspiciously" and that he'd jumped the barriers etc.

Later proved to be nonsense, of course.

BBC NEWS | UK | The problem with eyewitnesses

(also editor and bimble)

This is very true.

There can be all kinds of problems with eyewitness evidence. However I think it worth saying that the direction they gravitate to is matching the opinions of others. That is why the staff who are victims of a bank robbery say, are told not to compare notes before giving their statements.

And in particular we will match our recollection to a statement from authority. So, in the De Menezes shooting, the guy said he saw a muslim terrorist jump a barrier. Of course he saw no such thing. He saw police jumping the barriers perhaps, and because the story at the time was that a muslim terrorist was attempting to evade capture, that is what he decided he had seen.

But the notable thing about the Orlando shootings is that many of the witnesses independently said they thought there were multiple shooters in spite of the official story containing only one. They are not adapting their recollection to conform: rather they are going against it, although they must be aware it is incongruous.

And at least two of those eyewitnesses relate hearing Omar Mateen describing on the telephone how he was part of team of several. These recollections are detailed and coherent and it is hard to see how they can be a mistake, or muddling.

And killing 50+ people really looks like the work of a military team. Not a single guy with no military training. So it matches the evidence to have multiple shooters.

And how the fuck do you even get into a nightclub armed with assault weapons? it's not exactly going to get past the pat down is it?

Now something has to give. If the eyewitnesses are right, and I absolutely think it is worth considering that they are, we are going to a pretty dark place.

The question is of course, if there were multiple shooters, what happened to them? Why weren't they caught like Mateen? How did they get out?

And I looked at the story and suddenly everything was crystal clear.

 

[existentialist]

(also editor and bimble)

This is very true.

There can be all kinds of problems with eyewitness evidence. However I think it worth saying that the direction they gravitate to is matching the opinions of others. That is why the staff who are victims of a bank robbery say, are told not to compare notes before giving their statements.

And in particular we will match our recollection to a statement from authority. So, in the De Menezes shooting, the guy said he saw a muslim terrorist jump a barrier. Of course he saw no such thing. He saw police jumping the barriers perhaps, and because the story at the time was that a muslim terrorist was attempting to evade capture, that is what he decided he had seen.

But the notable thing about the Orlando shootings is that many of the witnesses independently said they thought there were multiple shooters in spite of the official story containing only one. They are not adapting their recollection to conform: rather they are going against it, although they must be aware it is incongruous.

And at least two of those eyewitnesses relate hearing Omar Mateen describing on the telephone how he was part of team of several. These recollections are detailed and coherent and it is hard to see how they can be a mistake, or muddling.

And killing 50+ people really looks like the work of a military team. Not a single guy with no military training. So it matches the evidence to have multiple shooters.

And how the fuck do you even get into a nightclub armed with assault weapons? it's not exactly going to get past the pat down is it?

Now something has to give. If the eyewitnesses are right, and I absolutely think it is worth considering that they are, we are going to a pretty dark place.

The question is of course, if there were multiple shooters, what happened to them? Why weren't they caught like Mateen? How did they get out?

And I looked at the story and suddenly everything was crystal clear.

No. Just no.

I thought you were going out to spare us more of this nonsense?

 

[Pickman's model]

(also editor and bimble)

This is very true.

There can be all kinds of problems with eyewitness evidence. However I think it worth saying that the direction they gravitate to is matching the opinions of others. That is why the staff who are victims of a bank robbery say, are told not to compare notes before giving their statements.

And in particular we will match our recollection to a statement from authority. So, in the De Menezes shooting, the guy said he saw a muslim terrorist jump a barrier. Of course he saw no such thing. He saw police jumping the barriers perhaps, and because the story at the time was that a muslim terrorist was attempting to evade capture, that is what he decided he had seen.

But the notable thing about the Orlando shootings is that many of the witnesses independently said they thought there were multiple shooters in spite of the official story containing only one. They are not adapting their recollection to conform: rather they are going against it, although they must be aware it is incongruous.

And at least two of those eyewitnesses relate hearing Omar Mateen describing on the telephone how he was part of team of several. These recollections are detailed and coherent and it is hard to see how they can be a mistake, or muddling.

And killing 50+ people really looks like the work of a military team. Not a single guy with no military training. So it matches the evidence to have multiple shooters.

And how the fuck do you even get into a nightclub armed with assault weapons? it's not exactly going to get past the pat down is it?

Now something has to give. If the eyewitnesses are right, and I absolutely think it is worth considering that they are, we are going to a pretty dark place.

The question is of course, if there were multiple shooters, what happened to them? Why weren't they caught like Mateen? How did they get out?

And I looked at the story and suddenly everything was crystal clear.

Yeh. So Breivik was false flag too by your logic, 'loony toons

 

[bimble]

Come on squirrelp I'm getting bored and you seem to be back from your night out already. So, Whodunnit really ? Paris I mean. What was the real flag behind the false one. Just do it, one sentence should suffice.

 

[krtek a houby]

(also editor and bimble)

This is very true.

There can be all kinds of problems with eyewitness evidence. However I think it worth saying that the direction they gravitate to is matching the opinions of others. That is why the staff who are victims of a bank robbery say, are told not to compare notes before giving their statements.

And in particular we will match our recollection to a statement from authority. So, in the De Menezes shooting, the guy said he saw a muslim terrorist jump a barrier. Of course he saw no such thing. He saw police jumping the barriers perhaps, and because the story at the time was that a muslim terrorist was attempting to evade capture, that is what he decided he had seen.

But the notable thing about the Orlando shootings is that many of the witnesses independently said they thought there were multiple shooters in spite of the official story containing only one. They are not adapting their recollection to conform: rather they are going against it, although they must be aware it is incongruous.

And at least two of those eyewitnesses relate hearing Omar Mateen describing on the telephone how he was part of team of several. These recollections are detailed and coherent and it is hard to see how they can be a mistake, or muddling.

And killing 50+ people really looks like the work of a military team. Not a single guy with no military training. So it matches the evidence to have multiple shooters.

And how the fuck do you even get into a nightclub armed with assault weapons? it's not exactly going to get past the pat down is it?

Now something has to give. If the eyewitnesses are right, and I absolutely think it is worth considering that they are, we are going to a pretty dark place.

The question is of course, if there were multiple shooters, what happened to them? Why weren't they caught like Mateen? How did they get out?

And I looked at the story and suddenly everything was crystal clear.

So many breaking news shootings/massacres initially report multiple shooters. In most (not all) of these reports, that's the panic and unreliability of immediate traumatised people kicking in and after several hours; you usually (not all the time) find there's only one prick involved.

 

[Spymaster]

How long are we keeping this one then?

 

[squirrelp]

Yeh. So Breivik was false flag too by your logic, 'loony toons

Yeah, in the Norway shootings there was a police drill which exactly mirrored the eventual attacks. I don't personally believe in these coincidences.

Trente på Utøya-scenario 22. juli

If you hear of a terrorist drill going on near you, statistics would suggest that is a good time to make a journey.

 

[Pickman's model]

How long are we keeping this one then?

Not so long

 

[existentialist]

Yeah, in the Norway shootings there was a police drill which exactly mirrored the eventual attacks. I don't personally believe in these coincidences.

Trente på Utøya-scenario 22. juli

If you hear of a terrorist drill going on near you, statistics would suggest that is a good time to make a journey.

You realise that you are going to get binned very soon indeed if you keep this up, don't you?

 

[krtek a houby]

Yeah, in the Norway shootings there was a police drill which exactly mirrored the eventual attacks. I don't personally believe in these coincidences.

Trente på Utøya-scenario 22. juli

If you hear of a terrorist drill going on near you, statistics would suggest that is a good time to make a journey.

Um, terrorist drills are just that. Drills.

 

[krtek a houby]

You realise that you are going to get binned very soon indeed if you keep this up, don't you?

He does but it's clearly from high up orders from the lizard illumanti overlords... they have to be stopped

 

[FridgeMagnet]

No, look, we're not having this. We have rules about this stuff which have not had to be used for a while, political shifts have taken place which have made them less common in an Urban context, but the rules are still there. I'm closing the thread.