It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Two journalists killed in shooting during live newscast at Smith Mountain Lake

page: 47
79
<< 44  45  46    48  49  50 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 12:18 PM
link   
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

I do appreciate that you meant no disrespect Hounddog.
And thanks for allowing me an opinion and a place to express.

SnF
edit on Rpm82715v29201500000032 by randyvs because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: tigertatzen

No, I'm definitely not implying that a video game made this psycho kill those people - I did find it very interesting the manner in which he filmed it though.

You're totally right, it had a huge impact on the viewer - and it was probably especially eery for those people who are used to those types of video games and who saw this atrocity from that angle. Freaky stuff, I hope this wakes people up the the huge issue of mental health and the way we approach it as a society. Obviously there are a number of factors here, but this man was evidently a ticking timeb0mb and someone who could've gone off at any moment. Condolences to the victims and their loved ones, so so sad



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 01:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: CuriousPaddy
a reply to: Hellas

I was thinking the same, he shot her at least 3 times before she even turned 180 degree and she was still able to run, its very strange
You ever been hunting? SOem animals can run short distances with 3-4 shots in them. Crazy guy in the late 70s the Halloween movies killer is based on took over 100 rounds to stop.

Each person is diffrent in the way they handle injury and trauma.



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 01:11 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

I saw a yearling whitetail deer go approximately 300 yards, half of the distance was up a steep bank, after having all of its internal organs south of the diaphragm removed by a low shot from a 7mm Magnum.

Real life is nothing like the movies.



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko




Ok, so when do we decide that something like this is a symptom of mental illness as opposed to a racially motivated hate crime?

I don't recall much time being spent wondering whether or not Dylan Rooff was mentally ill once the details like this manifesto came out. Most everyone agreed he had racial animus.

But this guy is mentally ill, not acting out of animus?

Not sure I get where we draw the line here.



Not only that, but blaming this on "mental illness" is diminishing the real horror of what he did, making it somehow excusable, and is simply going to encourage more of the same. It is already a crutch in this country for people who have no desire to help themselves, who are perfectly happy to play the role of "victim" rather than take responsibility for their actions and take charge of their own destinies. Now, it's going to be a convenient excuse for murdering people in cold blood and then bragging about it afterward? Christ on a corndog, can nothing just ever be exactly what it is?

There is already no justice for the true victims here; now their deaths are being trivialized by chalking it up to this murderer being just another poor, pitiful, misunderstood mentally ill American who has been failed by the "system" and saw violence as the only way to express his pain and suffering. Please...I think I actually prefer the racial animus angle. At least then it's ok to assign him some actual blame, right?



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 01:30 PM
link   
So, now CNN is talking to the victims of Sandy Hook. No one finds this suspicious? Whatever. Back to slavery, I go.



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 01:39 PM
link   
Unfortunately I believe this incident possibly could be another behavioral changing operation / false flag / psyop or whatever you want to call it. Why unfortunately? Because I find the alternative more disturbing than the official story.

Why do I see a possibility of this? Because all of the involved aspects point to current behavioral changing topics which aims to subliminally change our state of mind and belief system. People who read and research matters in a unbiased way without getting clouded by cognitive conservatism know that many if not all of the aspects I’m going to mention below have been pushed to enable behavioral changing attributes among the population.

I also find certain aspects involved in the POV footage peculiar.
____________________________________________________________

First of all, we have the aspect of race-war, this time a black person killing two white people and injuring one.

"In the message, according to ABC, the gunman said the Charleston, South Carolina, church shooting in June is what put him over the edge, but he wrote that his "anger has been building steadily" because of racial discrimination and sexual harassment he claims to have endured”

We also see other current topics which the mainstream media selectively favors to report and angles to further divide the population, and that’s sexual harassment and anti-gay matters. The only aspects ABC chose to adress regarding Vester’s manifesto and putative motive behind his actions. (so far)

edition.cnn.com...
www.dailymail.co.uk...

According to NBC news "He also expressed admiration for the gunmen who carried out mass shootings at Virginia Tech in 2007 and Columbine High School in 1999.” More hyping of this widely discussed ”phenomena” with past incidents we all know involves many controversies.

www.nbcnews.com...

We have the aspect of gun control, and the aftermath of this incident as we all knew would happen have given more fuel regarding this debate, look no further than this thread.

Slaying of journalists renews gun-control debate
www.politico.com...

We must act to stop gun violence, and we cannot wait any longer - Clinton
uk.businessinsider.com...

And last but not least we have the aspect of net neutrality and the enormous harm it can do according to the state and establishment. People now say that being able to post material (video or text) will make other people do and post the same thing in connection to the original posters behavior. In other words, net neutrality could according to the establishment be the reason behind similar incidents in the future. Or at least, that's what they want us to believe.

Virginia shooting: Is it right to show graphic footage?
www.bbc.com...

“He wasn’t just bent on revenge; he was bent on doing it in a visible, videographic way,” said psychiatrist Jeffrey Lieberman, a professor and chairman of psychiatry at the Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons in New York.

"It’s applying social media to committing a homicide,” Lieberman said. "This bears all the earmarks of our culture — ready availability of guns and social media-facilitated ability to disseminate this instantly.”


www.usatoday.com...

So to sum it all up.. The following aspects are involved in the incident: Race war, Sexual harassment, Gay-rights, Gun control, Mass-shootings, and the harm of Net neutrality. Very juicy mix for the mainstream media to say at least..

____________________________________________________________

Sure, the involved aspects could all be peculiar coincidences.. I mean why couldn't all the current and preferred topics be involved in one single incident without a external/clandestine motive. Just like all other peculiar coincidences involved in other behavioral changing operations according to the official story and their non official covers. But then we have the peculiar behavior in the footage which some of you already have brought to light..

We can clearly see in the POV video that Alison Parker looks at Vester when he pulls out the gun, but instead of reacting to the fact that a fired employee of the same network takes out a gun and situates himself in the immediate vicinity of a live broadcast, this woman simple looks back at the person she is interviewing like it’s something normal and expected.

How is that so?

Another thing is that when Vester is pointing the gun at Alison she as well as the person she is interviewing would undoubtedly see the pistol in their mid-peripheral and/or far-peripheral vision. But this doesn’t seem to bother non of them. It would be one thing if Vester held the gun against his body, but the extended position of the arm (aiming) in combination with the color (black) and the shape of the object would trigger a reaction in a unknowing individual. But this didn't happen.

How is that so?

And yes, according to me and others the shots may look and sound blank and the taping of both cameras abruptly ends in a very convenient time which results in zero visual of the bodies and blood. These last things wouldn’t bother me, if it wasn’t for the fact that in all incidents that makes me go ”this looks peculiar, could there be more to this than the official story” there always seems to be some missing piece, some missing footage, and/or some peculiar or unexplained behavior.

It's going to be interesting to hear what the surviving victim has to say about the incident and how she could miss the visual gun, also hoping to get some more information about her. It would also be interesting to the read the 23 page manifesto, and see what kind of words that is being used. Up until then I*m staying a bit sceptic.
____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________

Some preventive words for members who sees themselves as good hearted individuals for not contemplating alternative theories in regard to incidents like these out of respect for the victims/families:

Yes I do care about the victims and families in incidents like these. But that doesn’t stop my critical thinking and automatically give in to self-censorship. And to be honest, deaths like these are not worth more grief than the other 42 people who according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s statistics got murdered the same day in the US. And that’s that!
edit on 27-8-2015 by Crowdpsychology because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 01:42 PM
link   
a reply to: CuriousPaddy




Peripheral vision from both the reporter and interviewee when he pulled out the gun and said bitch, should have raised alarms, even if they didnt know what it was, something in my peripheral like that would at least make me glance in that direction



Peripheral range is not a set standard. Some have a wider field than others. And you're talking about people who were doing a live interview...they're trained to ignore distractions and adopt "tunnel vision" while on camera. There aren't outtakes in live television, so they have to learn not to pay attention to people and things outside their immediate focus.



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 02:23 PM
link   
a reply to: tigertatzen

You get outta here with that "people on TV worry about being on TV" crap.

These people should've had a 360 degree bubble of awareness at all times because all people on the planet have that at all times.

Again, this is why sucker punches and surprise attacks NEVER EVER work.

Jeeze.



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 02:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: tigertatzen
a reply to: CuriousPaddy




Peripheral vision from both the reporter and interviewee when he pulled out the gun and said bitch, should have raised alarms, even if they didnt know what it was, something in my peripheral like that would at least make me glance in that direction



Peripheral range is not a set standard. Some have a wider field than others. And you're talking about people who were doing a live interview...they're trained to ignore distractions and adopt "tunnel vision" while on camera. There aren't outtakes in live television, so they have to learn not to pay attention to people and things outside their immediate focus.



Parker did look in his direction...



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 02:30 PM
link   
CNN headline: News Team Honors Slain Colleagues


Spends 90% of the time justifying their reasons for firing the killer.


This is too odd.



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 02:37 PM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs




Name me one sane person to ever kill themselves...
I'll wait!



My cousin. He preferred to die on his own terms rather than wait for the inoperable tumor in his brain to do it the long, painful way. He was not crazy, depressed or unbalanced. And he was determined not to end up that way either. So he put a gun in his mouth and pulled the trigger.

The truth is, sane people kill themselves all the time. Other people too. Another truth is, people who actually are mentally ill don't walk around with a sign on their forehead proclaiming that. So how would you know the difference? You wouldn't, unless you are a licensed professional trained to evaluate people for such a thing. Which cannot be accomplished in the abstract, from behind a computer screen, based on nothing more than a Twitter account and some video footage. The very best you can do is call that a wild guess.

Sometimes I really wonder if people even think at all before they ask ridiculous questions like that. Did you?



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Crowdpsychology




Some preventive words for members who sees themselves as good hearted individuals for not contemplating alternative theories in regard to incidents like these out of respect for the victims/families:


Opportunistic defensive posturing, nothing more.
It is never applied where the justice seeking families of nine eleven
are concerned. So flush that crap these people are merely concerned
with their own little worlds not being upset. Star for your post.



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 02:52 PM
link   
a reply to: tigertatzen

I'm sorry for the loss of your cousin, but I must disagree. I don't have a problem with terminally ill patients deciding to go out on their own terms, rather than suffering a slow, painful death, but no sane, rational person who's thought it through and made that decision would do it by blowing their brains out and allowing their friends/family to discover such a grisly scene.

That's something that someone overcome with emotion and not thinking clearly does.



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 03:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: FelisOrion
CNN headline: News Team Honors Slain Colleagues


Spends 90% of the time justifying their reasons for firing the killer.


This is too odd.


Is 90% a number you have made up or do you have something to back your claim up with?

Can you explain what your finding strange and why?

(not having a dig at you just want to understand your post)



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 03:07 PM
link   
a reply to: weirdeel




Parker did look in his direction...



Ok. I am not being a smartass when I ask this, but have you ever been on live television? Or a live stage production? If not, the best way I can describe it is...you literally lose the sense of anything other than your immediate focus; in this case, an interview. You have one chance to get it right, no outtakes. They make it look easy but it's not. You may very well glance away in different directions without seeing anything, because you're not supposed to glance away, and the second you do, the little voice in your head chastises you for doing it. You're not actually processing any visual information.

Had he been waving the weapon around and calling undeniable attention to himself, there might have been a reaction, but it would still have been very delayed just from the shock alone. Even if he had, and she clearly saw him, her brain would have had trouble processing what she was seeing. It would have been surreal...mutable, dreamlike. As it was, you can clearly see the shock on her face when he starts shooting. That is not feigned.

I'll give you this...something is definitely odd about the entire thing, and his video footage seems erratic...as if there is hesitation or a sense of waiting for some cue before the "action sequence". Like a movie scene being filmed...following a script. That bothers me a lot, as does the fact that the gun comes out, fully visible, and then retreats.

However, after watching it a number of times it occurred to me that perhaps--in his mind--he was waiting for the right timing...after all, he was filming his very own movie scene. Perhaps he pulled his weapon out and got it squarely in the camera to make it clear in his "movie" that he was indeed holding a gun. For posterity, to make sure there was no mistaking that fact. Because he didn't plan on being around after it was over.

I don't like it either, I really don't. In my experience, if something doesn't feel right, it usually isn't right. I will not say on this thread some of the other possibilities that I think may be true, because it's not the right place for that. But I can tell you, I believe he really shot them, and I believe that both the reporter and the camera guy had no idea it was coming. Am I making sense? Right now I'm going to leave it at that.



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 03:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
a reply to: tigertatzen

I'm sorry for the loss of your cousin, but I must disagree. I don't have a problem with terminally ill patients deciding to go out on their own terms, rather than suffering a slow, painful death, but no sane, rational person who's thought it through and made that decision would do it by blowing their brains out and allowing their friends/family to discover such a grisly scene.

That's something that someone overcome with emotion and not thinking clearly does.


Bingo.



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 03:36 PM
link   
So this is getting crazy now:

6'3 250 pound Gay, Racist Black male with combative and anger issues, who owned gay porn sites (domain names only). Who frequented basketball forum sites looking for muscular men to pose for gay webcams. They found a wig, a shaul, an umbrella, and a black hat in his car.

I can't take this any more. This is willie wonka level of reality.


edit on 27-8-2015 by FelisOrion because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-8-2015 by FelisOrion because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 03:47 PM
link   
a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

Disagree all you like. It's simply the way the men in my family are. My father was like that too...he'd rather be dead than a burden. But my cousin didn't leave a mess for the family to discover. It was taken care of. It wasn't an impulsive decision, nor was he overcome with emotion. And he did think it through, which was why he made the decision. He died with dignity and honor. Back then, there weren't a whole lot of choices for people with a terminal condition like there are now. Things were a lot different.

My point was, people do in fact kill themselves and other people, and yet are perfectly sane. Even our court system recognizes that. In fact, premeditation typically points to sanity rather than insanity, and what this guy did was most definitely premeditated. In my opinion, dismissing it as the work of a mentally ill person only serves to detract from the seriousness of what he did, and even glamorizes it to a large degree. What he did came from a place of hatred, jealousy, and a false sense of entitlement. He killed himself rather than suffer the consequences of his actions, which is nothing more than the mark of a coward, not someone who is suffering a mental illness. And it's a running theme among murderers, really. Insanity is not.



posted on Aug, 27 2015 @ 04:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: tigertatzen
a reply to: CuriousPaddy




Peripheral vision from both the reporter and interviewee when he pulled out the gun and said bitch, should have raised alarms, even if they didnt know what it was, something in my peripheral like that would at least make me glance in that direction



Peripheral range is not a set standard. Some have a wider field than others. And you're talking about people who were doing a live interview...they're trained to ignore distractions and adopt "tunnel vision" while on camera. There aren't outtakes in live television, so they have to learn not to pay attention to people and things outside their immediate focus.



I would have to agree with you. I majored in radio/tv/film in college, and we had to do mock news reports for class. We had an earpiece to listen to the producer, so we were concentrating very hard on that and on the person we were interviewing. You aren't supposed to be looking around while you are interviewing someone - it looks unprofessional. So, even if you saw something in your peripheral vision, you ignored it while on air.



new topics




 
79
<< 44  45  46    48  49  50 >>

log in

join