This is an important post. We need to be willing to question everything about these events. Conversely, we need to call out false leads or theories that don't stand up to scrutiny.
There is plenty of weird shit going on with this shooting, but I think the Puma/Vans swap theory is a dead end.
The fact we can see this at all is more proof than you need.
Look at the absolute shitstorm Sandy Hook is, and we haven't seen one parking lot camera picture, one second of interior footage, and not one screenshot.
You are being fed this not to sort out the fact, but to confuse the fact, to make you doubt a militant tranny shot your children.
Cool story, but how did IT afford 7 guns and the ammo to with them? Was IT given the money by a middle man, or did a Fed Boi supply IT with the money to buy them?
And check with its therapist to see if they are fedbois.
And look at where the logo and the front part of the shoelaces are. They both line up on the Nike but not the puma. Hard to see color on the first photo
Who's shutting anything down, though. This is kinda the opposite. Supplying evidence that supports one side of the discussion and yes, commenting, my opinion only, (which who cares about my opinion and if that's really important, why?) I think that if the evidence does not support a theory it does make us look bad to insist upon it. What if I'm wrong. Oh well. What if I'm right. Oh well. Yes, the vitriol is disturbing.
The only possibility I can think of is it was already pre-filmed before the event, even w/ green screen and all. And in the actual scene, they just placed a scapegoat.
Also, the reason why they love to use kids' identity is because there are less digital footprints, less people who know them and easier to stage.
Since DS gets all the help from Hollywood, ANYTHING is possible.
Or its really someone with a mental disorder went crazy.
I hardly think that the DS has enough compassion for children to not use actual child victims.
When all you have is grainy black-and-white and murky color footage, there is no "obvious." You are looking at a Rorschach blot. "You see what you want to see. You hear what you want to hear." (I think that came from a Harry Nilsson song.)
No, we have a tranny shooting Christians, and them giving you false info so you will say it is a Sandy Hook and don't talk about the reality of the tranny war against Christianity.
In Gematria 1s and 0s can be left out. Remember, even if YOU don't use Gematria because YOU don't understand it, doesn't mean the secret societies that have been using this system to communicate for thousands of years doesn't use and understand it.
And just to make sure the people in the back gets the message, the child victims were all aged 9. 9-9-9 (flip it upside down for Satan's sake!)
And don't forget that modern numerals were far in the future when the Bible was written. Arabic numerals and decimal representation was invented several centuries afterward, so all these mysterious groupings are after the fact coincidences.
Just because someone "understands" Gematria doesn't mean that it makes a lick of sense. Modern art, anyone?
It is also based on a cycle of 60 and does not use Arabic numerals, so the coy 999 = inverted 666 is just a child's game. Thanks for not disputing that point.
Which doesn't change the fact that the numerals 666 were never used in the Bible and therefore inversion to 999 makes no Biblical sense. You don't seem to understand the distinction between "math" and numerical systems. Welcome to computation using Roman numbers.
But once you're done, could you at least TRY to argue my original point, in stead of using the same tired forum sliding techniques? It gets old after a few decades...
I made my point several times and you are not responding to it at all. You cited the flip of 999 to 666. I have pointed out that it is only a numerical coincidence that would have no meaning in the numeric system present in the days of the Bible. You haven't contradicted that at all.
As for Gematria, have fun. I prefer a Ouija board.
You are in a room with only red lights, all other colors will appear red including you and everything in that room. Why am I saying this? Light bounces of shiny or polished surfaces including the floors, walls and ceiling . What would orange or yellow light look like bounced off a white surface from a yellow or orange surface?
I pointed out yesterday even on the bad picture, you can see a dark spot right where the dead space in the yellow part of the flame would be. The flame is just washed out.
Something I noticed about the video see how the city cops came with the letter boys threw the door downstairs but when the letter boys went upstairs it was like they knew where to go then attacked her/him around the cornerbut there is only body cam footage? Whole thing seems off
Jim Stone says that the two videos were taken at different events and shmoosed together, that's why the shoes don't match. It was an entirely created scenario and the shooter was created as well.
She'll be back in no time messing with Christians under a new name.
I've found that Jim stone is very often right.
Now explain how she can be shot that many times without making an enormous mess. Body cam views were inexplicably brief, but enough to tell a story. That looked an awful lot like a police training than reality.
I'm not here to "explain" anything, as if I'm supposed to defend a certain point of view; all I did was present some evidence to the discussion that was previously missing (different camera shot showing better color saturation).
Also, the face was pixilated beyond comprehension. If we could see the face, that would add a LOT of information we are not privy to. How many videos of people dead from bullet wounds have you studied? How much blood should we expect to see and where might it appear? I personally have seen just a few (mostly posted here), and surprisingly almost zero "mess" at least right away. Probably some blood pooling after a couple of minutes transpire, but a freshly killed body even with multiple bullet holes is mostly covered by the clothes and typically doesn't exhibit much obvious damage until the blood pooling underneath has taken place.
That was directed out into the ether more than it was directed at you. I had seen the perfect video recently to show how bloody things like that are. Now I can't find it, but duckduckgo thinks I'm a psychopath for the search words I had to use. The missing splatter on the walls is really what I find of note. People being shot is a messy business. I am not suggesting that I am convinced this was not real, but I certainly have my suspicions, as I think we all do. It's getting harder and harder to determine what is real when we know so many things are not.
I appreciate your post. I had come to the same conclusion, but not with the certainty that your post provided.
This is an important post. We need to be willing to question everything about these events. Conversely, we need to call out false leads or theories that don't stand up to scrutiny.
There is plenty of weird shit going on with this shooting, but I think the Puma/Vans swap theory is a dead end.
The fact we can see this at all is more proof than you need.
Look at the absolute shitstorm Sandy Hook is, and we haven't seen one parking lot camera picture, one second of interior footage, and not one screenshot.
You are being fed this not to sort out the fact, but to confuse the fact, to make you doubt a militant tranny shot your children.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11915513/Controversial-group-Trans-Day-Vengeance-raised-money-firearms-training.html there is a video down in the article that shows the moment shots are fired (in loop mode). Does it look like " the suspect " is sitting ?
Looks like she was shit from outside the window
100%. This post closed the loop for me.
So we are now going to tr to prove it wasn't a TRANS that killed Children????
Is that where you are trying to go????
It was a Trans, and they all deserve to be treated as the Groomers and Murderers that they are....
What are you talking about? No one is trying to prove that the shooter was not a trans weirdo.
Cool story, but how did IT afford 7 guns and the ammo to with them? Was IT given the money by a middle man, or did a Fed Boi supply IT with the money to buy them?
Call 'it' what it is - a SHE.
Unless you're being derogatory. In which case proceed...
It's derogatory towards all trannys. They don't deserve to be addressed by what gender they're pretending to be.
theres two levels of crazy going on
they don’t “identify as” what they are.
the do “identify as” what they are not.
Example:
so, i just don’t identify as a stereotypical man i see on TV
But i do identify as a stereotypical woman i see on TV
This
And check with its therapist to see if they are fedbois.
And look at where the logo and the front part of the shoelaces are. They both line up on the Nike but not the puma. Hard to see color on the first photo
I’m convinced that the shoes are the same.
However, I’m very disappointed at all the vitriol around people discussing this and theorizing this.
This was a perfectly valid thing to question and investigate. That’s what researchers do.
Shutting down investigations because “it makes us look bad” is for commie glowies.
Who's shutting anything down, though. This is kinda the opposite. Supplying evidence that supports one side of the discussion and yes, commenting, my opinion only, (which who cares about my opinion and if that's really important, why?) I think that if the evidence does not support a theory it does make us look bad to insist upon it. What if I'm wrong. Oh well. What if I'm right. Oh well. Yes, the vitriol is disturbing.
Yeah, people were getting real mad & insulting for even bringing this up. But they do look different, so i dunno
How on earth are those the same?
There not..............
The only possibility I can think of is it was already pre-filmed before the event, even w/ green screen and all. And in the actual scene, they just placed a scapegoat.
Also, the reason why they love to use kids' identity is because there are less digital footprints, less people who know them and easier to stage.
Since DS gets all the help from Hollywood, ANYTHING is possible.
Or its really someone with a mental disorder went crazy. I hardly think that the DS has enough compassion for children to not use actual child victims.
yup, toe at laces gives it away too.. same
It’s the same shoe, the view of her going through the door farther back at the end of the hallway shows the wavy white line much better.
The IR from the cameras is washing out the shoe. It's the same shoe for sure.
So we have another Sandy Hook hoax or a Valentines Day Massacre? Am I getting this right?
Recall all the anomalies surrounding the Sandy Hook & Florida Valentines Day school shootings!!!
Yes its obviously fake. Crisis actors and everything.
But sometimes they try to discredit the skeptics by putting out false leads,
Then they only focus on those false leads, and ignore the rest.
When all you have is grainy black-and-white and murky color footage, there is no "obvious." You are looking at a Rorschach blot. "You see what you want to see. You hear what you want to hear." (I think that came from a Harry Nilsson song.)
No, we have a tranny shooting Christians, and them giving you false info so you will say it is a Sandy Hook and don't talk about the reality of the tranny war against Christianity.
Adult victims age: 6(1), 6(0), 6(1)
In Gematria 1s and 0s can be left out. Remember, even if YOU don't use Gematria because YOU don't understand it, doesn't mean the secret societies that have been using this system to communicate for thousands of years doesn't use and understand it.
And just to make sure the people in the back gets the message, the child victims were all aged 9. 9-9-9 (flip it upside down for Satan's sake!)
And don't forget that modern numerals were far in the future when the Bible was written. Arabic numerals and decimal representation was invented several centuries afterward, so all these mysterious groupings are after the fact coincidences.
Just because someone "understands" Gematria doesn't mean that it makes a lick of sense. Modern art, anyone?
https://fg.ed.pacificu.edu/charlesm/courses/mathsci/numsys/numsys.html
The Babylonian numerical system is 5000 years old, but please continue...
It is also based on a cycle of 60 and does not use Arabic numerals, so the coy 999 = inverted 666 is just a child's game. Thanks for not disputing that point.
Yes, the jews learned their talmudic kabbalah from the Babylonians who invented math 5500 years before Arabs figured it out.
Doesn't change the fact that freemasons study Gematria based on jewish kabbalah and use it in their public mass rituals.
Which doesn't change the fact that the numerals 666 were never used in the Bible and therefore inversion to 999 makes no Biblical sense. You don't seem to understand the distinction between "math" and numerical systems. Welcome to computation using Roman numbers.
Why don't you check it out for yourself in the original Greek?
https://www.abarim-publications.com/Interlinear-New-Testament/Revelation/Revelation-13-parsed.html
But once you're done, could you at least TRY to argue my original point, in stead of using the same tired forum sliding techniques? It gets old after a few decades...
I made my point several times and you are not responding to it at all. You cited the flip of 999 to 666. I have pointed out that it is only a numerical coincidence that would have no meaning in the numeric system present in the days of the Bible. You haven't contradicted that at all.
As for Gematria, have fun. I prefer a Ouija board.
You are in a room with only red lights, all other colors will appear red including you and everything in that room. Why am I saying this? Light bounces of shiny or polished surfaces including the floors, walls and ceiling . What would orange or yellow light look like bounced off a white surface from a yellow or orange surface?
The lights in a Christian school hallway are not disco lights. They are likely fluorescent white tubes.
I pointed out yesterday even on the bad picture, you can see a dark spot right where the dead space in the yellow part of the flame would be. The flame is just washed out.
Vans the entire time. You can see the rubber vans patch on the back of the sole.
Didn't she post on her twitter account that she "wouldn't be caught dead wearing Pumas"?
We need laugh reactions here. That was good.
Something I noticed about the video see how the city cops came with the letter boys threw the door downstairs but when the letter boys went upstairs it was like they knew where to go then attacked her/him around the cornerbut there is only body cam footage? Whole thing seems off
Jim Stone says that the two videos were taken at different events and shmoosed together, that's why the shoes don't match. It was an entirely created scenario and the shooter was created as well. She'll be back in no time messing with Christians under a new name. I've found that Jim stone is very often right.
Now explain how she can be shot that many times without making an enormous mess. Body cam views were inexplicably brief, but enough to tell a story. That looked an awful lot like a police training than reality.
I'm not here to "explain" anything, as if I'm supposed to defend a certain point of view; all I did was present some evidence to the discussion that was previously missing (different camera shot showing better color saturation).
Also, the face was pixilated beyond comprehension. If we could see the face, that would add a LOT of information we are not privy to. How many videos of people dead from bullet wounds have you studied? How much blood should we expect to see and where might it appear? I personally have seen just a few (mostly posted here), and surprisingly almost zero "mess" at least right away. Probably some blood pooling after a couple of minutes transpire, but a freshly killed body even with multiple bullet holes is mostly covered by the clothes and typically doesn't exhibit much obvious damage until the blood pooling underneath has taken place.
That was directed out into the ether more than it was directed at you. I had seen the perfect video recently to show how bloody things like that are. Now I can't find it, but duckduckgo thinks I'm a psychopath for the search words I had to use. The missing splatter on the walls is really what I find of note. People being shot is a messy business. I am not suggesting that I am convinced this was not real, but I certainly have my suspicions, as I think we all do. It's getting harder and harder to determine what is real when we know so many things are not.
I appreciate your post. I had come to the same conclusion, but not with the certainty that your post provided.