CBH1926 Posted July 14 Share Posted July 14 25 minutes ago, DeNiro said: If you believe all of those actually happened the way they did sure. A shooting of a president is something that actually happened. They don’t take chances with stuff like this anymore just like they don’t take chances after 9/11. Are you not at all suspicious how this was allowed to happen? It’s fine to take comfort in believing this at face value. Much “easier” to live in a world where people simply made mistakes vs a world where governments kill its own leaders. There have been so many breaches of airline security in the U.S after 9.11. I could be suspicious all I want but as of right now there are no credible evidence of any governmental involvement like you are applying. I believe in what is in front of me, right now that is all I see, if I see something else down the road I will change my opinion. What happened to JFK or what you think happened in Israel or on 9.11 has no bearing on this event. After 23 years, there is no credible evidence that WTC towers were brought down by explosives or that missile struck the Pentagon or that there were no passengers inside those planes. Now internet is full of people that have their opinions but lack credible evidence. Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted July 14 Share Posted July 14 Just now, DeNiro said: During a presidential rally it would be something professionals should take note of. Especially when they start walking towards a building… My dad live in AZ for many years and said there were hundreds of rednecks with assault rifles just outside the grounds of every Obama rally in 2007 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted July 14 Share Posted July 14 Just now, Optimist Prime said: There is a certain bias to all of us that once waldo has been found on a page, that spot we found him was the obvious spot all along. Adding hundreds of thousands of dollars to the entire mass of events in North America that happen everyday is not practical nor fiscally solvent. The idea that a drone would have spotted the shooter may be correct, but the thousands of other events that happened that day in North America didn't have a shooter to spot. If you can't put enough agents on a high value target like a former president/presidential front runner, then one or two drones wouldn't be a bad idea in my opinion as long as you can do it in a way that enhances security rather than using it as another primary operation. You don't want drones to breed over confidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-dlc- Posted July 14 Share Posted July 14 https://theprovince.com/news/world/what-we-know-about-the-20-year-old-suspect-in-the-apparent-assassination-attempt-of-donald-trump/wcm/5ef5081f-76e3-40be-86bc-14add9990ed7?taid=6693fd0f3162580001098470&utm_campaign=trueanthem&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter A bit more about Crooks. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Gurn Posted July 14 Popular Post Share Posted July 14 People can easily end up seeing what they expect to see, or get distracted and a meme previous posted by Bob Long- iirc 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted July 14 Share Posted July 14 Just now, stawns said: My dad live in AZ for many years and said there were hundreds of rednecks with assault rifles just outside the grounds of every Obama rally in 2007 I remember seeing those pictures. I was surprised the USSS weren't short circuiting on those days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted July 14 Share Posted July 14 2 minutes ago, DeNiro said: During a presidential rally it would be something professionals should take note of. Especially when they start walking towards a building… Eye witnesses said they saw the guy + 4 minutes before the shooting. Yelling at police and pointing to the guy. Rifle in plain sight. 2:30 minutes prior to shooting active calls to police. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post -dlc- Posted July 14 Popular Post Share Posted July 14 Too soon? 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted July 14 Share Posted July 14 2 minutes ago, Gurn said: People can easily end up seeing what they expect to see, or get distracted and a meme previous posted by Bob Long- iirc I saw the gorilla, but I definitely did not see the dog in the 2nd picture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted July 14 Share Posted July 14 6 minutes ago, Boudrias said: Ultimately whether Trump was killed or not will be incidental for many Americans. It is all about the attempt. It will radicalize many supporters. It fractionalizes American society even more than it already is. The reaction to this attempted assassination could give Biden an avenue out of the POTUS race. Many Dems have turned against him and he could bow out as a form of national reconciliation. If Trump supporters start shooting Democrats then we could head towards civil war. Just what Putin always wanted. ` Trump could also pull out in the name of reconciliation. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted July 14 Share Posted July 14 6 minutes ago, Boudrias said: Ultimately whether Trump was killed or not will be incidental for many Americans. It is all about the attempt. It will radicalize many supporters. It fractionalizes American society even more than it already is. The reaction to this attempted assassination could give Biden an avenue out of the POTUS race. Many Dems have turned against him and he could bow out as a form of national reconciliation. If Trump supporters start shooting Democrats then we could head towards civil war. Just what Putin always wanted. ` Imo, the only ones it's going to sway is the ones who are already radicalized........in that context it could trigger more violence. I think the Dems need to quit referring to this as political violence and an assassination attempt and start calling it a mass shooting event by a lonely, disgruntled single white male.......which is most likely was Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted July 14 Share Posted July 14 4 minutes ago, -dlc- said: Too soon? I'd suggest she has enough ice in her veins to not miss the shot. Very low pulse rate. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted July 14 Share Posted July 14 1 minute ago, Gurn said: I'd suggest she has enough ice in her veins to not miss the shot. Very low pulse rate. She seems more like the long gradual poisoning of his nightly tea kind of gal 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted July 14 Share Posted July 14 4 minutes ago, Sabrefan1 said: I saw the gorilla, but I definitely did not see the dog in the 2nd picture. First time I missed the dog as well. I believe there is another gorilla vid- where the gorilla just walks past while eating a banana, no stopping to wave, much harder to spot it then. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sapper Posted July 14 Share Posted July 14 Post shooting, Republicans fault Biden’s past rhetoric about Trump https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/14/politics/biden-say-trump-shooting-bullseye Have read. Republicans pretend that Jan 6 never happened and that Trump hasn't ever said the same and worse about Biden At every opportunity Trump screams Biden is destroying the USA and electing him Is the only way to save the USA Biden says the same and now it's wrong ? This reads like the too funny clip in bagdad of the general claiming no us soliders in bagdad and they have been destroy ... And behind him rolls the USA armoured corp The shooting of anyone isn't funny. But this right wing self righteous spin is sad 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimist Prime Posted July 14 Share Posted July 14 8 minutes ago, Sabrefan1 said: If you can't put enough agents on a high value target like a former president/presidential front runner, then one or two drones wouldn't be a bad idea in my opinion as long as you can do it in a way that enhances security rather than using it as another primary operation. You don't want drones to breed over confidence. That is the thing though, Trump has had 'enough agents' at every event until this one. Our human biases since there WAS a shooter is to now think it was obvious there was gonna be one, no one in the minutes before the shots were fired thought there would be a shooter there. Confirmation Bias is at play. There is no way to plan to stop every single psychopath wingnut with a gun, it is a fallacy to believe there can ever be "enough security for high value targets". 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted July 14 Share Posted July 14 6 minutes ago, CBH1926 said: There have been so many breaches of airline security in the U.S after 9.11. I could be suspicious all I want but as of right now there are no credible evidence of any governmental involvement like you are applying. I believe in what is in front of me, right now that is all I see, if I see something else down the road I will change my opinion. What happened to JFK or what you think happened in Israel or on 9.11 has no bearing on this event. After 23 years, there is no credible evidence that WTC towers were brought down by explosives or that missile struck the Pentagon or that there were no passengers inside those planes. Now internet is full of people that have their opinions but lack credible evidence. Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one. I mean do you really think there will be actual evidence? A coverup that big would require tying up every last loose end. But I’m not gonna get into that. As long as there’s reasonable doubt then questions should continue to be asked. The US has committed many atrocities throughout their history with actual evidence to prove it now. Just because they’re not leaving evidence lying around doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be suspicious. I believe the US is entering a very dangerous time in the next 4 years with both Russia and China challenging them militarily. I don’t think it’s unrealistic to think that there are certain people (generals/CIA/Homeland Security) that don’t want Trump leading them through that. He’s unpredictable and hard to control which means he’s dangerous to the country. Is it that crazy to think they wouldn’t “remove him” from the situation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted July 14 Share Posted July 14 1 minute ago, Gurn said: I'd suggest she has enough ice in her veins to not miss the shot. Very low pulse rate. You aren't kidding... Apparently she's trying to renegotiate their prenup for the umpteenth time because of his newfound wealth with his social media company. That's what some have said is the biggest reason why she isn't on the campaign trail with him ever. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimist Prime Posted July 14 Share Posted July 14 2 minutes ago, DeNiro said: I mean do you really think there will be actual evidence? A coverup that big would require tying up every last loose end. But I’m not gonna get into that. As long as there’s reasonable doubt then questions should continue to be asked. The US has committed many atrocities throughout their history with actual evidence to prove it now. Just because they’re not leaving evidence lying around doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be suspicious. I believe the US is entering a very dangerous time in the next 4 years with both Russia and China challenging them militarily. I don’t think it’s unrealistic to think that there are certain people (generals/CIA/Homeland Security) that don’t want Trump leading them through that. He’s unpredictable and hard to control which means he’s dangerous to the country. Is it that crazy to think they wouldn’t “remove him” from the situation? Have you heard of Occam's Razor? Where a 20 year old murderous psychopath tries to murder an ex president, it is not necessary for Joe Biden to have been the master mind. A crazy guy with a gun managed to find a place to shoot from. The armchair whodunnit enthusiasts are only serving to fan the flames that divide and create these nutjobs delusions in the first place. Occam’s razor, principle stated by the Scholastic philosopher William of Ockham (1285–1347/49) that pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate, “plurality should not be posited without necessity.” The principle gives precedence to simplicity: of two competing theories, the simpler explanation of an entity is to be preferred. The principle is also expressed as “Entities are not to be multiplied beyond necessity.” 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted July 14 Share Posted July 14 5 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said: That is the thing though, Trump has had 'enough agents' at every event until this one. Our human biases since there WAS a shooter is to now think it was obvious there was gonna be one, no one in the minutes before the shots were fired thought there would be a shooter there. Confirmation Bias is at play. There is no way to plan to stop every single psychopath wingnut with a gun, it is a fallacy to believe there can ever be "enough security for high value targets". I still remember the Reagan shooting. I never once thought that there weren't enough agents there. I still think that was an excellent response even though Reagan very nearly died. I do remember being annoyed at the incompetence of the media reporting though. There were definitely screw-ups with this one. That roof should have been covered in some manner. It was the closest high ground with a direct line of sight. We aren't talking about a library window in a building right off of a round-about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satchmo Posted July 14 Share Posted July 14 2 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said: Occam’s razor, principle stated by the Scholastic philosopher William of Ockham (1285–1347/49) that pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate, “plurality should not be posited without necessity.” The principle gives precedence to simplicity: of two competing theories, the simpler explanation of an entity is to be preferred. The principle is also expressed as “Entities are not to be multiplied beyond necessity.” Yeah but that just takes all the fun away from things. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted July 14 Share Posted July 14 Just now, Optimist Prime said: Have you heard of Occam's Razor? Where a 20 year old murderous psychopath tries to murder an ex president, it is not necessary for Joe Biden to have been the master mind. A crazy guy with a gun managed to find a place to shoot from. The armchair whodunnit enthusiasts are only serving to fan the flames that divide and create these nutjobs delusions in the first place. Occam’s razor, principle stated by the Scholastic philosopher William of Ockham (1285–1347/49) that pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate, “plurality should not be posited without necessity.” The principle gives precedence to simplicity: of two competing theories, the simpler explanation of an entity is to be preferred. The principle is also expressed as “Entities are not to be multiplied beyond necessity.” Where did I say Biden did it? This is exactly what I’m talking about labeling people with questions as wild conspiracy nuts. It’s actually more dangerous to me to have a society that doesn’t question their governments. Especially one with a history of atrocities and deceit towards their own people. “The simpler explanation is to be preferred”. This is because it’s more comforting and easier to digest for most people. Unless answers are completely laid out for some people they don’t even wanna bother asking the questions. Thankfully I think this younger generation is much better at pushing back and questioning authority and narratives that they’re being fed. Crucial to maintain a free and progressive society. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted July 14 Share Posted July 14 32 minutes ago, DeNiro said: I’m not gonna keep throwing out theories because I’ll be labeled a conspiracy nut. Lee Harvey Oswald was a patsie. Who knows what was involved in getting him into that building with a rifle. Bottom line is he missed too. Would they have needed a second shooter if he didn’t? All I can say is if you believe they allowed this to happen, the other details wouldn’t be hard to manufacture. I agree he was a patsie........however, the real shooters didn't miss and, imo, if this were that kind of operation, Trump would be dead right now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the destroyer of worlds Posted July 14 Share Posted July 14 How could someone show up with a rifle?? Pennsylvania has conceal carry and has open carry. Open carry is exactly what you think it is. The shooter would have been underaged for a conceal carry, but is old enough to open carry. https://www.pittsburghcriminalattorney.com/firearms-weapons-charges/concealment-of-weapon/ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted July 14 Share Posted July 14 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Satchmo said: Yeah but that just takes all the fun away from things. If only the world were full of simple answers and solutions. The real world isn’t black and white though. Ockham had a simplistic view of the world. Edited July 14 by DeNiro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.