Active Shooter San Bernardino

[IanEye]

divideandconquer wrote:
I feel very much the same way. The link you posted contains very disturbing information.

Yes and so does this one. http://21stcenturywire.com/2015/12/13/t ... he-scenes/

Cover-up?
The media provides adequate cover for security agencies the world over – whether it’s Paris, Chattanooga, San Bernardino or any other seemingly manufactured event.
Here’s YouTube clips depicting CNN’s Anderson Cooper interviewing various ‘victims’ family members’ seemingly affected by the San Bernardino tragedy. Critics of this video believe that these people may be crisis actors – decide for yourself…









There’s so much to question regarding the San Bernardino shooting story, as it echoes many other stage-manged [sic] shooting events in recent history.

- link

Here is a fun exercise:

watch this video from the above article.



Watch this video, and listen to the poster's insightful critique of Mandy Pifer as you watch the video.

Then, watch the video again, but this time join in on the fun!
As you watch, provide your own critique of the poster, "Truth Is Good".

I don't know who "Truth Is Good" is, perhaps they are being paid, perhaps not.
But their ability to provide a narrative, and their overall narration sucks.
Their vocal delivery sucks.
Their sentence structure sucks.
Their video sucks.



Truth Is Good: It's gone.
The Ghost of Frank Zappa: What, your talent for sucking? Never.

*


Jeff Wells: This offends you as a human being?
IanEye: No, it offends me as a member of this discussion board.


.

[MacCruiskeen]

Exactly what point are you trying to make, Ian?

In your own words, please, and without distractions or senseless ambiguity. No videos, no music, no images.

[MacCruiskeen]

While we're waiting for Ian's reply in English, this should really not get lost:

:shock:

http://www.salon.com/2015/12/16/fbi_on_ ... socialflow

The alleged San Bernardino shooters in fact did not post messages in support of jihad on social media, the FBI revealed Wednesday morning.

FBI Director James Comey told the media in a news conference that “We have found no evidence of a posting on social media by either of them,” according to NBC journalist Bradd Jaffy.

Thanks, RocketMan, for my new sig-line.

[MacCruiskeen]

^^That astonishing FBI statement is a very encouraging sign.* Seriously. It proves that they are not all complete bastards, not all CIA plants. There would appear to be an internal power-struggle going on right now.

* As is the important word "Alleged" in the Salon headline. Who woulda thunk it.

[IanEye]

Exactly what point are you trying to make, Ian?

In your own words, please, and without distractions or senseless ambiguity. No videos, no music, no images.

Mac, it would appear as if you care about the quality of information shared on this thread, correct?

Tell us, do you think that the article shared here, not by me, but another board member, is of sufficient quality?

If it is a link of quality, and the link itself is a critique of the behavior of people who knew the victims, are we not required to critique those who critique others?

[MacCruiskeen]

Ian, I didn't follow that link or watch any of the videos posted there and I have only just glanced at it now. My time is not endless. Yes, all crap (if it is in fact crap) from any source should be resisted, but not by posting a string of videos as long as my patience and not by replying to them with another such string. The fact that crap exists on the web is not at issue and also not the point. The point is the sheer feebleness and brutal mendacity of the official (cop + govt. + media) case against the dead couple. Your response also stretched the thread to infinity and buried RocketMan's really astonishing piece of news, about which you say nothing. Let's leave it at that, please.

[IanEye]

Mac, I've had the same sig line for months now.
You know why I am pointing that out?
Because you decided that it is ok to talk about sig lines on this thread.

A thread that isn't yours, on a board that isn't yours.

I've been down this road before with you, Mac.
It is a road that stretches a little over 26 miles.
This is not your board, & this is not your thread.

I will illuminate the prestige:

1: You, Mac, will start acting like a callous, insensitive prick in regards to the victims of violence and the family members of said victims.
2: I, IanEye, start pointing out point by point how you are acting like a callous, insensitive prick in regards to the victims of violence and the family members of said victims.
3: You, Mac, start to freak out over the fact that I am pointing out point by point how you are acting like a callous, insensitive prick in regards to the victims of violence and the family members of said victims.

Hey, presto!
You, Mac, take a nice, long vacation from the Rigorous Intuition Discussion Board.

[MacCruiskeen]

Sent at 21:57 CET:

Dear Wombaticus Rex,

Probably a hopeless request, I know, but you are the Moderator; so please tell me and everyone else here at RI what's good or even defensible about IanEye's post. Please tell us exactly how it helps the board or the thread. If it doesn't do either of those things, then I think we should all be told that too.

Please note also that I have not replied to IanEye'spost abusively or even sarcastically, or indeed at all. I am trying my very best to avoid having to do so.

NB This is not a request for a banning or even for a suspension, just a request for some kind of public word from the Mods.

Yours sincerely,

MacCruiskeen

PS I will copy-and-paste this complaint form to the board, because otherwise it will vanish as soon as I press "send" and people might easily get a false idea about what I have actually written to you.

ON EDIT: I'm adding IanEye's post for the record, and so that there's absolutely no confusion about which post I mean:

Mac, I've had the same sig line for months now.
You know why I am pointing that out?
Because you decided that it is ok to talk about sig lines on this thread.

A thread that isn't yours, on a board that isn't yours.

I've been down this road before with you, Mac.
It is a road that stretches a little over 26 miles.
This is not your board, & this is not your thread.

I will illuminate the prestige:

1: You, Mac, will start acting like a callous, insensitive prick in regards to the victims of violence and the family members of said victims.
2: I, IanEye, start pointing out point by point how you are acting like a callous, insensitive prick in regards to the victims of violence and the family members of said victims.
3: You, Mac, start to freak out over the fact that I am pointing out point by point how you are acting like a callous, insensitive prick in regards to the victims of violence and the family members of said victims.

Hey, presto!
You, Mac, take a nice, long vacation from the Rigorous Intuition Discussion Board.

[MacCruiskeen]

- Back on topic, if humanly possible.

I am wondering how the hacks and their editors will cope with this latest FBI statement. They must be positively shitting themselves with confusion. I look forward to seeing tomorrow's headlines.

Note that if any of those hacks had dared, yesterday, to even suggest what the Feds today tell us is true, they would have been placing themselves at the outer fringe of conspiracy nuttery and thus rendering themselves unemployable. Rita Katz and SITE had told them the jihad/Facebook yarn was true, so they took that as gospel and passed it on to the world as incontrovertible truth. How will they explain this tomorrow?

[OccultariSafari]

There would appear to be an internal power-struggle going on right now.

* As is the important word "Alleged" in the Salon headline. Who woulda thunk it.

I think you are onto something here Mac.

I have had the sneaking suspicion (since 9/11 really) that deep rogue elements of all the major intelligence agencies have been in a covert war for a very, very long time. All of these drills, the funding received for all of this ridiculous police equipment, trials by hundreds of bullets with no questions asked.

I was in Massachusetts for the marathon bombing. We happened to be taking a drive from western MA to Boston and on a whim drove the entire length of the Marathon route the day before. I'll never forget it. The shear amount of surveillance equipment alone was astounding, 5 million dollar NSA vans the entire ride up. Military like police swat units everywhere. It was INSANE, the vibe was foreboding! I turned to my wife and said "Are they gearing up for something? What is going on?" She agreed. Then the next day happened.

With this current shooting I can't help but have that same feeling. This "chase" seems to me like someone on the payroll drove a dead couple down the street for the TV show, threw them out and bailed. Hell, who knows. Maybe Farook was alive and they shot him in the street for maximum effect.

[AlicetheKurious]

^^That astonishing FBI statement is a very encouraging sign.* Seriously. It proves that they are not all complete bastards, not all CIA plants. There would appear to be an internal power-struggle going on right now.

* As is the important word "Alleged" in the Salon headline. Who woulda thunk it.

Of course they're not all complete bastards, some of them are even human. And over the past 14 years, many of them must feel that their capacity to keep silent and go along to get along may just be getting strained to a breaking point. Susan Lindauer, the CIA whistle-blower was saying exactly that about her former CIA colleagues, in a recent interview she did with Russia Today. But even if this is true (and I believe it must be), it would have to be a relatively widespread mutiny, and have the support of at least some higher-ups, to accomplish anything positive.

As for the videos IanEye posted, I found the acting, especially in the first two, to be very fake and unconvincing. I've seen countless interviews with the spouses and children who have lost a loved one to violence. Many of them have moved me to tears. These left me cold as ice. After people go through a traumatic event or loss, they lose sleep, and they're bewildered or wound tight, as they struggle to adjust to a new and horrible reality. Their eyes show the strain. There's a bleakness in them. Their automatic facial movements express sorrow or anger; the default expression is not a smile -- let alone a toothy, not-a-care-in-the-world smile. The dialogue was trite and phony, their words generic. I was reminded of a priest having to eulogize someone they never met. Even a professional actor could have done a better job.

[Wombaticus Rex]

Mac -- since it's a "tell me and everyone else" thing...

Basically: "Asking people questions, then getting angry when they answer you ... doesn't seem, to me, like there a problem anywhere but on your end."

If you don't want people responding to personal discursions, maybe don't ask them those questions in the middle of the thread you don't want to take off track with personal discursions.

To re-iterate, though: The motherfucking FBI came out like "Oh, Whoops, Our Bad" on a Wednesday. This has to be one of the weirder news events in America this year.

FBI Director James B. Comey today told the media that the suspected assailants in the San Bernardino, Calif., massacre — Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik — wrote private messages to each other stating support for jihad. However: “So far, in this investigation we have found no evidence of posting on social media by either of them at that period in time and thereafter reflecting their commitment to jihad or to martyrdom. I’ve seen some reporting on that, and that’s a garble,” Comey said at a media availability during an event in New York City.

From this WaPo Analyis

[MacCruiskeen]

^^That astonishing FBI statement is a very encouraging sign.* Seriously. It proves that they are not all complete bastards, not all CIA plants. There would appear to be an internal power-struggle going on right now.

* As is the important word "Alleged" in the Salon headline. Who woulda thunk it.

Of course they're not all complete bastards, some of them are even human.

I know this, Alice. I could have mentioned, just for example, Colleen Rowley and Robert Bowman (9/11).

As for the videos IanEye posted, I found the acting, especially in the first two, to be very fake and unconvincing.

Maybe, Alice, maybe not. I haven't looked, because it's a complete waste of time. And it would be really good if no one gave anyone any further excuse to derail this thread. It is a separate issue and there are already two separate threads devoted to the topic of Cr*s*s Act*rs, one here and one in the Lounge.

[IanEye]

Sent at 21:57 CET:

Dear Wombaticus Rex,

Probably a hopeless request, I know, but you are the Moderator; so please tell me and everyone else here at RI what's good or even defensible about IanEye's post.
Yours sincerely,

MacCruiskeen

This is yet another perfect example of muddying the waters. Absolutely nothing you say follows logically or even rationally from your first line. No one in this thread is discussing "crisis actors" or Sandy Hook or " a massive faked tragic event " or anything of the kind, so I don't know why you introduce this nonsense here unless it's to create confusion & irritation and put posters off commenting rationally here.

Thanks Mac, I guess we are reading different threads. In a 29 page thread, I think everyone will see what is most relevant to them. I'm not here to argue though so, I'll stay out of it.

NaturalMystik, no worries, and thanks for your very civilized response. Sorry, I may have adopted an unnecessarily harsh tone there. I'm not attacking you or any other poster personally here, or at least not for the hell of it. I hope that's clear to everyone else too.
Edit again: I also stated something factually wrong: "No one in this thread is discussing "crisis actors" or Sandy Hook or "a massive faked tragic event" or anything of the kind." Not true, and NaturalMystik didn't start it. (Sorry again, NM.) If we haven't yet succeeded in nipping that in the bud, let's cut it it off now before it blossoms into full stinkiness.

The Islamist Bonnie & Clyde

WATCH: Police and San Bernardino Shooting Suspects Exchange Gunfire_Fox News Insider

WATCH! - no, don't bother[/i]

The Islamist Bonnie & Clyde

Damn. I had planned to retire to Death Valley.

Kali Yuga, here we come!

(By the way: Re: "WARNING(s)" - I think we are being too hyperaware of the possible feelings of the hypersensitive. The subject of the thread is two separate acts of extreme violence. Anyone following it will know that. And no image has yet been posted or even linked to by anyone that shows anything truly gruesome. I think the warnings are counterproductive, because they make people fear the worst when all that's waiting for them is a blurred aerial photo of wholly unidentifiable (but un-mangled) figures.)

when the World Wide Web finally goes down*, either because of TTIP or thanks to the global nuclear war, I imagine the last post at Rigorous Intuition will be discussing whether Season Twelve of True Detective was better or worse than Season Eleven. "The cinematography's as mindblowing as ever, sure, but isn't MacConaughey getting just a little too self-indul-". (No et cetera. Just a suddenly blank screen and an inaudible chorus of "WTF?")

*Online shopping will of course still be possible, and indeed compulsory.

[MacCruiskeen]

Mac -- since it's a "tell me and everyone else" thing...

Basically: "Asking people questions, then getting angry when they answer you ... doesn't seem, to me, like there a problem anywhere but on your end."

If you don't want people responding to personal discursions, maybe don't ask them those questions in the middle of the thread you don't want to take off track with personal discursions.

WR, I didn't ask anyone a personal question. I asked IanEye, politely, what he was getting at. He has since made it clear (and how). And I was asking you how this:

I will illuminate the prestige:

1: You, Mac, will start acting like a callous, insensitive prick in regards to the victims of violence and the family members of said victims.
2: I, IanEye, start pointing out point by point how you are acting like a callous, insensitive prick in regards to the victims of violence and the family members of said victims.
3: You, Mac, start to freak out over the fact that I am pointing out point by point how you are acting like a callous, insensitive prick in regards to the victims of violence and the family members of said victims.

Hey, presto!
You, Mac, take a nice, long vacation from the Rigorous Intuition Discussion Board.

...is good or even defensible as any kind of any contribution to any thread at RI, least of all this one?

I really want it on the record here, WR. I want to know exactly how the board rules have changed. 1) Is it fine if I call IanEye or anyone else a prick (one, two, three or more times in the same post)? 2) Is it OK if I spam, quite unnecessarily, any thread I feel like spamming, with countless videos of only marginal relevance at best?

Let's hear it for the board, once and for all. I want a public word from you as the Moderator, WR. Because it's you (as you well know) whom IanEye is quoting (or parodying) at the end there.

And I would sincerely like to continue trying to get back on-topic while also remaining polite.