Go home with love & in peace. Let the games begin!
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (179)
sorted by:
I just don't see the reasoning. What is the advantage of orchestrating an execution when they could just commit a real one? There were thousands of potential victims within reach, all of them unarmed.
So what possible reason could they have to fake it?
I suggest looking at the multitude of video evidence showing the how, then coming up with your own hypothesis as to the why. For example the gun was pointed at her torso but she supposedly got shot in the neck, and the blood squib didn't operate properly; the whole thing was not well done.
I have seen all the analyses you're referring to, andI don't think its convincing at all. For the aimpoint "inconsistency" for example, if you go frame by frame you can see the gun jerk upwards a bit just before the shot is fired. That's common with shooters that are not very experienced and/or under heavy stress, such as a cop during a chaotic situation. We could go on and on, but I'm not going to do that since many more eloquent and knowledgeable people than me have made videos debunking the staged shooting hypothesis.
My thing is that you don't even have to do that, since we're missing a much more fundamental part of the puzzle: There is no motivation whatsoever to stage a shooting in this case. Like I said, they could (and did) just execute anyone in that room and then claim they were ignoring orders. So I ask again, what is the motivation? The DS doesn't do things like that if it doesn't advance their goals. It makes no sense.
If they actually just killed someone that would give whitehat's ammunition.
How is that any different than pretending to have killed someone? The murder was committed, as far as the people are concerned. So if it was faked, it would still give the whitehats the same ammunition.
Yeah, but my point is that they could just shoot a woman and achieve the same result (which I believe they did). And that way there wouldn't be the danger of leaks or unconvincing actors
Like I said in another comment, I have watched the vids you're referring to and I disagree with their conclusions. I have gone frame by frame and concluded that the events are consistent with a woman being shot and bleeding out from a neck wound.
The shot is not misplaced like some claim, the shooter jerks up the gun before the shot which led to the bullet hittinbthe neck. Many people have reached the same conclusions in fact. The actions ofvarious people in the crowd who mightseem suspicious or actor-like could be equally explained by their inexperience, shock and the chaotic climate in the room.
Such a daft take, excuse me for being blunt. You fake it because then it definitely happens. Doing a real one has all sorts of unpredictability, not least you have to find a killer with a steady aim that has a reason to be there, whereas with a fake one you only need someone who has a reason to be there and be willing to act as if for money. There are more money hungry people than stone cold killers in the cohort of people that have a reason to be there. Much easier to fake than do for real.
All they had to do is tell the cops that there's a security risk, that there might be armed gunmen in the crowd etc. Let them know that lethal force is justified, and the rest will happen organically. No conspiracy necessary. If there's one thing our cops are good at, is paranoia and a hair trigger.