7/7 Dallas Shooting

[SonicG]

I am surprised there have not been more white cop killing.
I just watched the 30-30 OJ documentary and, putting aside the mainstream slant and numerous conspiracy theories about it, it is relevant to consider how that was 20 years ago and the support of the black community for perhaps the most Oreo of all Oreos was due to a horrendously racist police department in LA that was able to attack, beat and kill Blacks with impunity.
20 years and nothing has seemed to change...I'd be fairly pissed too.

"RB" for robot bomb might be a good theory. He didn't want the story to be covered-up maybe??

[Novem5er]

. . snip . . .

And Novemb3r, these guys are never the "super agent" types, not evil Jason Bournes, they are fucked up MK-ULTRA type guys who can be released with hypnotic instructions to do what they're programmed to do. (Uh, actually sort of like Jason Bourne before he had his awakening I suppose)

This reminds me very much of the DC Sniper. Remember Charles Moose and "duck in a noose" and all if that high weirdness?

They seem to have these guys in reserve, secret weapons so to speak. One phone call with the right triggers and these guys go off, doing what they are programmed to do.

OR it could have been a disgruntled black dude with a 65 year old rifle and supernatural abilities to be in 2 places at once.

I appreciate this idea. Honestly, with mental illness and excessive media exposure, I think there are probably many thousand MK Ultra potentials out there, without any formal indoctrination necessary. I think that's my point, is that this shit can happen organically. It's not like this is a totally peaceful world with everyone getting along if only for those secret government brainwashing projects! But if there was a conspiracy of some kind happening out there, I agree that it'd me more likely that several ordinary citizens have been harassed and indoctrinated for years and a little pushing by a handler could send them over the edge. I think that's very possible, and wouldn't even require a large conspiracy to pull off. Which leads me to my next quote . . .

One path of speculation I haven't seen yet: If this was an orchestrated plot and not a lone gunman, why does it have to be orchestrated by the feds/OGA? Couldn't it just as well be the Russians or the Chinese trying to destabilize the US even further? Having the US in political and social turmoil would be perfect for them.

I'll go a step further; it wouldn't even have to be another government at work. There are plenty of private groups that feed off of instability and violence. It could be anything from neo-fascist movements to arms manufacturers. Who benefits the MOST from this toxic social environment? Gun manufacturers. The cops have the guns. The citizens have the guns. The criminals have the guns. Literally its a business with only an up market.

So why isn't Smith & Wesson a prime suspect? Heckler & Kosh?

Alright, my last point on this subject before I head off to bed, and it's a point that will probably make me unpopular.

I think people are reading too much into the earlier reports of multiple gunmen and snipers in elevated position.

Everybody is parsing Brown's words, looking at photos of police looking upwards, watching hasty videos of panicked onlookers, and wondering how in the hell one guy could have done so much damage from the street. I think a lot of people here want to believe so badly that there is more to this story, honestly more to EVERY story, than meets the eye. If you go back to basically every disaster in modern history, the minutes and hours after the events are ALWAYS filled with shitty information from multiple sources that turn out to be incorrect. I'm talking natural disasters, terrorist attacks, and plain old accidents.

Don't underestimate panic and confusion, and the media's incessant need to report anything as fast as possible to get the scoop, and the equally incessant need of authorities to make early statements to give the illusion that they are informed and in control.

Let's look at the Dallas Police reporting early that there were multiple shooters in elevated positions. This was a statement released by the department at 11:53 pm on their Facebook page and other outlets. It states:

Dallas Police Department
July 7 at 11:53pm ·
Tonight it appears that two snipers shot ten police officers from elevated positions during the protest/rally. Three officers are deceased, two are in surgery and three are in critical condition An intensive search for suspects is currently underway. No suspects are in custody at this time. We ask that any citizen with information regarding the shootings tonight call 214-671-3485.
We will provide more information once it is available. Please keep us in your thoughts and prayers tonight.

https://www.facebook.com/DallasPD/posts/10154253588372412

The situation was literally still unfolding. Chaos. High emotions. The public knows something is up and the department puts out some information, not always to disinform, but to appear that they, themselves, are informed and in control. They amend the information as facts are nailed down. Obviously there can sometimes be tampering with truth - but not always - and simple change in information is not itself evidence of guilt.

Some here have claimed that the Dallas Police could be "in" on it, part of some larger conspiracy. I'm not sure how this misinformation would play into that . . . what the plan changed? They were told it was going to be multiple shooters, so they released that to the public, but then someone higher up decided to let some of the shooters go, so the police changed their story to match? No, that's the kind of uncoordinated stuff that actually unravels conspiracies rather than acting as evidence of a conspiracy.

In conclusion, I'm not saying that there isn't something more than meets the eye, but I am saying that we should use more scrutiny than just looking at early discrepancies as the foundation for alternative explanations.

[stickdog99]

Some shadow government higher up makes an executive decision to take the wind out of the ever mounting, totally righteous BLM protests. So he calls up a team of pros and has them gun down a few cops. They set up a convenient patsy to take the fall. They "do not cooperate with the police" and are summarily released because of a dictate from the same shadow government higher up.

I just don't get why that is not the default assumption here. Why is the default assumption a lone nutcase intent on completely fucking up BLM's message for some unknown reason? Yes, anything is possible. But given the circumstances, I don't understand any predisposition toward the black lone nut serial cop killer explanation. Less means, more inscrutable motive, and more tenuous opportunity.

[Freitag]

Alright, my last point on this subject before I head off to bed, and it's a point that will probably make me unpopular.

I think people are reading too much into the earlier reports of multiple gunmen and snipers in elevated position.

Oh don't spoil the fun, I enjoy all the crazy.

[The Consul]

Politicians, police & media lie constantly on a daily basis. If there is such a thing here as "duty" it is to question every lone nut gunman theory that usually coalesces 20 hours after event in which several gunmen are reported. Based on all the lies we know we have been told - big lies costing millions of lives - we should be skeptical of everything they say. Every fucking lilting expert bullshit word that comes out of their robot bomb mouths.

[82_28]

Politicians, police & media lie constantly on a daily basis. If there is such a thing here as "duty" it is to question every lone nut gunman theory that usually coalesces 20 hours after event in which several gunmen are reported. Based on all the lies we know we have been told - big lies costing millions of lives - we should be skeptical of everything they say. Every fucking lilting expert bullshit word that comes out of their robot bomb mouths.

That is why I like to watch the initial live reports on the TV news. Wasn't it that the dude was first reported as having suicided himself and then it became a robot bomb?

We will never know.

[Novem5er]

Alright, my last point on this subject before I head off to bed, and it's a point that will probably make me unpopular.

I think people are reading too much into the earlier reports of multiple gunmen and snipers in elevated position.

Oh don't spoil the fun, I enjoy all the crazy.

Some shadow government higher up makes an executive decision to take the wind out of the ever mounting, totally righteous BLM protests. So he calls up a team of pros and has them gun down a few cops. They set up a convenient patsy to take the fall. They "do not cooperate with the police" and are summarily released because of a dictate from the same shadow government higher up.

I just don't get why that is not the default assumption here. Why is the default assumption a lone nutcase intent on completely fucking up BLM's message for some unknown reason? Yes, anything is possible. But given the circumstances, I don't understand any predisposition toward the black lone nut serial cop killer explanation. Less means, more inscrutable motive, and more tenuous opportunity.

How can we have a default assumption based on absolutely zero evidence? We have absolutely no evidence that there is a secret cabal of government operators behind this attack. All we have are news reports with some early conflicting information.

Now, for my own credibility, I'm not saying there has never been a false flag operation. I'm just saying that it doesn't mean every act of violence must be a false flag, simply because it fits the narrative of this message board. Realize most of the cases of false flags or the intention to commit one, were only discovered years after the fact with the release or leaks of classified documents and supposed participants. What amazing internet sleuths we would all be if we could crack the case, every case, in a matter of hours in what used to take researchers years to do.

Politicians, police & media lie constantly on a daily basis. If there is such a thing here as "duty" it is to question every lone nut gunman theory that usually coalesces 20 hours after event in which several gunmen are reported. Based on all the lies we know we have been told - big lies costing millions of lives - we should be skeptical of everything they say. Every fucking lilting expert bullshit word that comes out of their robot bomb mouths.

You make a fair point. We should absolutely be skeptical. However, in the interest of avoiding this entire forum becoming nothing more than an echo chamber, I think we should also be skeptical of our skepticism.

Most of the skepticism in this current case stems from initial reports from the police. Where there eye witness videos that said multiple shooters? I'm not sure. What we have to realize is a fact that courts and police departments have known for decades: eye witness testimony is often very unreliable. It is why we use forensics now in court. Study after study has shown that eye witnesses, in dangerous situation, will get details wrong over and over again. Some are correct, others are wildly inaccurate. We know this.

Yet, a lot of people on this forum grasp at any witness that says anything out of the norm and they hold on to that as proof that a conspiracy is underfoot. Oh, we should be skeptical, which usually means viewing those early witnesses with as much skepticism as we do everything else.

[stickdog99]

What are the names of all of the previous black gunman serial white cop sniper murderers in the history of the universe?

Weird how quickly and easily we can believe certain historically unprecedented things while finding it quite difficult to believe historically repetitive things.

[0_0]

Novem5er, fair enough but are you skeptical enough of your own skepticism? I hope being skeptic means being skeptic about any narrative, whether it carries an official seal of approval or not! Or let me ask you in another way: assuming the unreliability of eyewitness accounts to be true, what else do we have that's more reliable? All the initial reports for the first day or two mentioned multiple snipers.The police chief said in a press conference with the shootings well under way that there were at least two snipers working together from elevated positions. What has changed since then? What information has come to light to now make the case for one lone wolf so much more convincing?

On edit: let me answer my own question, you're prolly gonna say forensics. I don't know how fast they get those tbh. Could they already have matched all the bullets to the weapon?

[Spiro C. Thiery]

...it is relevant to consider how that was 20 years ago and the support of the black community for perhaps the most Oreo of all Oreos was due to a horrendously racist police department in LA that was able to attack, beat and kill Blacks with impunity.

This nice little puff piece about one of the officers down for the count (family man, big-cuddly teddy bear ex-football player who loved being a cop etc.) features this tidbit...

Before moving to Texas, Ahrens worked as a law enforcement technician for the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department for 11 years, according to ABC 7."

...and -- irony of all iron crosses -- is headed by this photo, which makes no mention of the detail RIers are not likely to miss among its "5 facts you need to know":

Now, my first thought, of course, being, I like to think, a fair-minded soul, is that maybe he's a Prussian history buff, for, you know, the aesthetics.

However, based on what I've been able to scour, I think this site here captured legit info on the matter:

http://melanoidnation.org/was-one-of-the-slain-dallas-police-officers-a-white-nationalist/

Now keep in mind that this is just one guy... (pause) ...who just happens to have loads of "colleagues" among those who probably know him better than most, who've gone beyond the call of duty to pay tribute to him, in public.

The whole, lame, "nuanced" and oh-so middle-of-the-road reasonable discussion about being both "pro Black" and "pro cop" honesty needs a serious rock-overturning assessment of just what the fuck it means to be pro cop, when the institution (not just the labour union) will fight tooth and nail to defend guys like this when they do the slaying, no matter the circumstances.

Now before anyone hastens along to pose the question, "So? Does this mean he deserved to die?" I'll pre-emptively answer by saying that I do not condone murder of any kind and have never and never will own an instrument for such. But to answer the question directly...

[SonicG]

Very interesting Spiro! I lived in LA from 84-91 or so and vividly remember all the Gates terrorism...I don't condone murder either, but g-damnit, if only OJ had killed Mark Fuhrman when he had the chance!!

[Nordic]

Novemb5r, where's your evidence that the official story is at all true?

Why is the cops story, for you, the most likeliest to be true?

Where have they shown us any evidence that this fucked up vet (fucked up by his own country) was the lone shooter?

Where's the evidence that they blew him up with a bomb. Why didn't the journalists crowded at the scene not that far away, in a downtown area where sound reverberates like crazy, not notice A POUND of C-4 being detonated. A pound! Why didn't anyone report about a massive explosion going off in the area where the perp was cornered? A guy who supposedly claimed to have bombs? That would have scared the shit out of everyone in a several block radius maybe further.

Why did they say suicide, then change the story to a silent robo-bomb?

Tell me do you believe the magic bullet theory re the JFK murder?

What the government tells us should immediately be suspected as a lie. Because it usually is. Where's the evidence, any evidence, that their story is truthful?

[Nordic]

Also where is a timeline explaining how a guy can suddenly now down 10 cops from an elevated position while simultaneously sneaking around and murdering another on the street level? Is he Spider-Man? How was he so accurate and deadly with a 65 year old Russian rifle?

[Spiro C. Thiery]

Alright, my last point on this subject before I head off to bed, and it's a point that will probably make me unpopular.
I think people are reading too much into the earlier reports of multiple gunmen and snipers in elevated position.

I'm gonna be bold & say that this was already obvious to everyone on the thread.

As to your subsequent assertion that contributors here are coming to conclusions, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man. All I see is objects of inquiry. You can argue that they're making too much of Brown's original statements and pictures of people looking upward, etc. but this is part of the evidence. As a matter of fact, it is the only evidence. The official story, to the extent there really is one, has been shaped in the same fashion as everything like this has been come to shape before, with the added bonus that the Spiro Tard version was handed over on a silver platter by a police chief with extensive urban weapons training. Add to that a lone suspect being not only killed instead of captured, but also blown to bits, I'd say you have the makings of "it ain't what they're telling us".

I like the Smith & Wesson angle, btw. I'd go even one step further into the territory whose signpost reads: "The owls are not what they seem." No, I'm not saying Bob did it (interesting blood smeared RB notwithstanding), but that at the end of the day, it's simply not this one guy, end of story. I'd stake my rep as a Spiro Tard on it.

[minime]

Novemb5r, where's your evidence that the official story is at all true?

Why is the cops story, for you, the most likeliest to be true?

Where have they shown us any evidence that this fucked up vet (fucked up by his own country) was the lone shooter?

Where's the evidence that they blew him up with a bomb. Why didn't the journalists crowded at the scene not that far away, in a downtown area where sound reverberates like crazy, not notice A POUND of C-4 being detonated. A pound! Why didn't anyone report about a massive explosion going off in the area where the perp was cornered? A guy who supposedly claimed to have bombs? That would have scared the shit out of everyone in a several block radius maybe further.

Why did they say suicide, then change the story to a silent robo-bomb?

Tell me do you believe the magic bullet theory re the JFK murder?

What the government tells us should immediately be suspected as a lie. Because it usually is. Where's the evidence, any evidence, that their story is truthful?

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Nordic... You're better than this. And you're not.

One observation: RI, you seem to be so... happy!

Mac, in particular, is positively giddy.