$25,000 reward for information leading to exposure of false flag at orlando

Good response. Insinuated the conspiracy theorists are all a bunch of idiots. I watched the coverage of the Orlando shooting, and I found the whole thing to be a tad bit fishy. I guess I am an idiot for watching victims retell the horror in the most calm manner, and without a single tear. Damn two-bit actors anyway.

 

I'm still not sure if he was set up, although I know that he claimed to be as his final defense at trial. As to driving a car that had no license plate, apparently it was because they had gone down to "Plan C" as the following passage in the article points out...

**It’s not just conspiracy theorists who doubt McVeigh dreamed up the plot by himself and carried it out with just Terry Nichols for help.

Larry Mackey, the No 2 prosecutor against McVeigh and the lead prosecutor against Nichols, has acknowledged his team did not entirely believe it, either. “If you had said to us: ‘Anybody in the room 100% confident that McVeigh was alone, raise your hand,’ we would have all kept our hands in our laps,” Mackey told me in 2010.

But if the official narrative of the bombing is incomplete or wrong, what really happened?

One thing the prosecutors stripped away at trial was the vital context of the radical anti-government movement, which in the early 1990s was in ferment over what it saw as crypto-fascist government tactics at Waco and at a mountainside siege at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, in which a government sharpshooter killed the wife of a survivalist holding her 14-month-old baby in her arms.

In 1992, a propagandist named Louis Beam – described by a senior ATF investigator as “the most dangerous man in America” – gave a speech to fellow radicals calling for “a thousand points of resistance”. It was time, he said, “to fertilise the tree of liberty with the blood of both patriot and tyrant” (a line almost identical to the slogan McVeigh had on his t-shirt when he was arrested). Beam advocated the formation of small, secretive cells that would carry out attacks at the direction, but without the specific knowledge, of the movement leadership.

In 1994, Beam told a career criminal named Roy Byrd – who later told the FBI – that “something big” would happen in Oklahoma City, Denver or Dallas on 19 April 1995, the second anniversary of the fire that ended the Waco siege. “They’ve got some kid who’s going to do something,” Beam reportedly said. (The government never interviewed Beam to find out more.)

The original plan, according to several sources, including an FBI informant, had been to blow up not the Murrah building but the federal courthouse next door. The two buildings shared an underground garage and McVeigh’s crew was supposed to plant the bomb there, much as Ramzi Yousef had planted a fertiliser bomb beneath the World Trade Center in New York two years earlier – an attack McVeigh had studied and vowed to improve upon.

The Ryder truck was first seen downtown around 8am, 50 minutes before McVeigh later claimed to have arrived, but could not get into the garage because the truck was too tall – a clamorous miscalculation confirmed to the Guardian by both senior government sources and members of the radical far right. There followed a nerve-wracking hour in which people and vehicles associated with the Ryder truck were spotted several times around downtown and adjoining neighborhoods.

Plan B was, apparently, to park the truck in an alley between the federal courthouse and the Old Post Office building, site of Oklahoma’s main bankruptcy court. But the truck had to back out of the alley, said multiple sources, because a US Marshals Service truck was already there dropping off a prisoner.

Parking the bomb in the handicapped spot directly below the daycare centre was Plan C and – as far as anyone can tell – McVeigh’s idea alone. If, as seems likely, McVeigh was left suddenly alone at this point, the 18-year-old Mercury Marquis may have been the only car available to him. Everything about it, including the missing license plates and the propaganda materials left on the front passenger seat, suggest it was meant to be kept close to the bomb site and provide a “signature” for the attack. It became a getaway car only as a desperation measure.**

 

Just came across this article. It reminds of of the FBI informant who claimed that they actually told him to give real explosives to the bombers of the World Trade Center back in 1993...

FBI Tried to Lure Orlando Shooter into a Terror Plot in 2013 | Telesur

 

Yeah, because your "feeling" that things aren't quite right somehow explains how we had 200 people at the club, as per usual. Including many regulars and staff, as per usual. And a person came in and killed 49 of them and wounded a bunch of others. And somehow the only people who were interviewed on television were paid actors. And all the people who said they were friends, family or acquaintances of the people who died -- they were all actors, too. And the ACTUAL friends, family and acquaintances of the people who died never called them out. And the police never noticed anything amiss.

And nobody in this entire enterprise -- like, say, the paid actors -- spills the beans.

I call conspiracy theorists idiots because, by and large, they ARE idiots. Please stop proving me right.

 

I call people with blind trust in their government naïve, and naïve people are usually stupid.

 

It's called shock.

 

My faith is in math, not the government.

 

I don't think insulting those who believe government narratives and those who are skeptical of them is going to help the discussion. Thinking we should focus on the evidence. There are some articles I've posted in previous messages, may want to start with those...

 

Shock was what I was in after a roll-over accident with my nine month old. When they finally got me out of the car, the first thing I did was call the two that rolled us over (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s. Even in shock, I didn't stand around pretending to cry. I was mad as hell and wanted to kill someone. I was in a lot pain as I was practically scalped, but I didn't feel anything. That is called shock.

Shock does not explain why all the witnesses seemed more calm than anything else. Screeching and wailing, and crying real tears is a more appropriate reaction. What would you have done? Hours later give interviews, or GRIEVE.
.

 

I think you may well have a point there. Sandy Hook had some confirmed actors involved. I just googled to find an article on this- while the article may be a little overconfident with its "absolute proof", I think there's definitely some interesting information in it... http://nodisinfo.com/sandy-hook-hoax-six-actors-now-confirmed/

 

You would know, you were there, right?

 

You believe they were genuinely shocked, Pipette doesn't believe that's the case. I'm willing to bet neither of you were there. How about we simply allow for the possibility that this may be an event that was staged?

 

Yeah, and (*)(*)(*)(*) on the survivors. Nice.

 

Yep, the way it's going Sam will be calling the next attack a hoax before it even happens.

 

How about we require some evidence that it was staged?

 

Pipette has already stated that she believes that some of the alleged victims weren't acting shocked. I haven't seen much video, so I won't comment on that aspect of things. I just found an article that I found to be interesting though. For whatever reason, a lot of articles like to say they have "proof" of what they are claiming. I'm a bit more cautious, but nevertheless, I do find the article very interesting...

Breaking News! Omar Mateen Did Not Act Alone!

 

Not -everyone- believes what you do, you know? Take Pipette. Neither of you were there. So why not just accept the fact that, just like Pipette doubting their authenticity, you may also be wrong in terms of atleast some of these people being actual survivors instead of actors.

 

'
You're response to what might have been a staged event for purposes of furthering the agenda of gun confiscation, and for other purposes, is interesting. Maybe it is the poster you do not like rather than the ideas of the posters. For someone who constantly rails about our government, and the MSM and how they are pushing gun control, which this 'terrorist attack' put the nail in the coffin of, you sure seem to be towing the MSM line.

 

That is not evidence, any more than saying "I think the moon is made of cheese" is evidence.

That is not evdence of anything either. That is classic bull(*)(*)(*)(*) conspiracy mongering. Take somethng completely normal, act like it is unusual, and speculate wildly about what it means.

What is being speculated about on that link -- that there might have been a second gunman -- is more reasonable than the "all the interviewees were paid actors" bull(*)(*)(*)(*) the other poster is trying to float. But it is still pure speculation. There is no actual evidence of such. There is no reason at this point to think there was.

And the idea that "the media" is covering up any mention of a second gunman -- and that this would be an effective way to hide it -- is complete bull(*)(*)(*)(*) on par with the "paid actors" claim.

If you're going to float a conspiracy theory, try to come up with one that isnt stupid and unworkable on its face.

 

It's her belief, just as it is your belief that they were genuinely shocked. There is frequently a difference between what we believe and what is the truth. At this point, all we know is that you and Pipette can't both be right.

 

I disagree.

If you want to kill the conversation, that's how to do it. I ask that you have some respect for beliefs of people other than yourself.

-You- may believe that the circumstances were normal. Not everyone thinks like you do.

It's not "pure speculation". Did you really read the article? I'll quote the part it seems you missed:
**The interviewee is suddenly cut off and dropped from the broadcast. What was he saying that would cause him to be cut off? As you heard, he was saying that there was “someone” holding the Doors, stopping people from getting out of the nightclub. This means that Mateen did not act alone. By definition, this is the very definition of conspiracy. It can clearly be said now that the Orlando event is a conspiracy involving more than one person.**

Don't believe that this interviewee said those words? Listen for yourself:

[video=youtube;w8NEv1rvDFM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8NEv1rvDFM&feature=youtu.be[/video]

 

Interviewees get cut off and edited all fhe time on TV, for time and clarity reasons.

I have no respect for baseless speculation. Google "Occam's razor." If you want to make wild claims of conspiracy, provide credible evidence or go away.