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.

 

San Bernardino, Calif., fire units responding to reports of 20-victim shooting incident -

page: 131
178
<< 128  129  130    132  133  134 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 12:25 AM
link   
if one of the bombs at the office went off, me thinks this wouldve been labeled terrorism by now...like every other event that involved bombs i can recall in the US.




posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 12:25 AM
link   
Press conference, finally!

1. 14 dead, 17 wounded.

2. tip to Redlands house, suspect vehicle leaving, pursuit with shooting. Both suspects deceased - Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik (female, 27 years old, no other info on her).

3. Christmas party/meeting event. Farook was working for the department (environmental health) - 5 years there.

4. 4 minute response time for police. Victims encountered, suspects searched for. 15 minutes for victim clearing and transport.

5. Suspects might have been married or engaged, no one knows. No one knows if thrd party was involved. Other vehicles saw him flee, but police don't know, they claim.

6. Police claiming they are comfortable with "two shooters", not three.

7. Shooting scene, SUV scene, and house scene. House is listed as Farook's, but no statement that he was living there. Multiple addresses listed for them.

8. Farook's office has been secured.

9. No motive stated by police.

10. Terrorism not ruled out.

11. Police stating there were likely explosive devices handled by bomb squad. One in vehicle wasn't explosive.

12. Armed with .223 assault rifles each - DPMF Model 15 and S&W MMP 15 Model, two handguns as well. LAMA & S&W

13. State all three suspected explosive devices were together. Probable pipe bomb design.

14. No info on criminal records yet.

15. Based on evidence, police assume planning was involved.

16. No info on any comments by shooters during the attack.

17. When asked about other suspects, broad statement that all available resources are in play, and they will do all they can - no clear answer.

18. Statement that, at some point, the crime scene will be compressed, but nno idea when - maybe tonight or tomorrow.

19. One officer wounded, expected to survive and injuries not life-threatening.

Alright, that's what I caught from that. That red tie guy has to be FBI - he could be in the dictionary for that! All there look very serious.

No explanation as to why the initial witness reports of three shooters have changed. News isn't convinced, either. I think they have someone else loose, or at least, the other guy was actually involved.



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 12:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Destinyone

Ya, and in the past I would be all over that.
But have seen over and over again how those reports can be unreliable.
I just don't see what authorities gain out of that, IMO ideally they would want some one to put in front of our face to face a trial and get convicted of this attack. Many people think, me being one, when the attackers die they get the easy way out and don't really see it as justice.
In no way am I saying the cops shouldn't have shot at them, as I have no reason to believe they didn't have a reason to.

Oh and good to see ya on the boards Des, maybe I just haven't been on the same threads but haven't seen ya in a while!

edit on rdThu, 03 Dec 2015 00:29:21 -0600America/Chicago1220152180 by Sremmos80 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 12:27 AM
link   
They will be scouring his computer, phone, social media, etc...to look for any evidence of radicalization or contacts with radicalized people.



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 12:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: Destinyone
a reply to: Sremmos80

I'm convinced 3rd shooter is in FBI custody being scrubbed from media and the web. Being held as informant in exchange for protection immunity.

JMOHO

Des



Im inclined to agree with you, at least to a degree. We were told for several hours that officials *confirmed* 3 shooters, no ifs, ands or buts this time. Then now 2, just a husband and wife workplace violence scenario? I dont buy it for one second.



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 12:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: six67seven

originally posted by: Kangaruex4Ewe
They still HAVE NOT ruled out terrorism.

Three explosive devices...good thing terrorism hasnt been ruled out.

Gimme a break


Assault weapons, Tactical gear, explosives at that.

Long time to not be calling it terrorism.



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 12:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: neoholographic
They have not ruled out terrorism.

Translation:

This is an act of terrorism but we're going to try and do everything to try and rule out terrorism. It would be easy to rule out terrorism if he was just a disgruntled employee.

Saying it wasn't spur of the moment tells you this is terrorism. This reminds me of the terrorist attack at Ft. Hood.


Now now that was 'workplace violence'.



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 12:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Wookiep

originally posted by: Destinyone
a reply to: Sremmos80

I'm convinced 3rd shooter is in FBI custody being scrubbed from media and the web. Being held as informant in exchange for protection immunity.

JMOHO

Des



Im inclined to agree with you, at least to a degree. We were told for several hours that officials *confirmed* 3 shooters, no ifs, ands or buts this time. Then now 2, just a husband and wife workplace violence scenario? I dont buy it for one second.


He did give a brief explanation of where the 3rd person came from



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 12:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

So saying it would still be to early to even mention if they are involved?



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 12:28 AM
link   
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Impressive.
Are you a court reporter or something?



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 12:30 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Does an attack by some one who is muslim have to be a terrorist?

Why can't he just be a nut job?

Bring up Dear all you want, but he is getting called a nut job so just asking why the same can't be said here.

Nut jobs can plan stuff too.



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 12:31 AM
link   
I need to go to bed...lots of work to do tomorrow. And by the time I get up in a few hours, I'm sure there will be 50 more pages of comments and the entire scenario on this whole thing will have changed in just about every aspect...lol.

Bets anyone?



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 12:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: neo96

Does an attack by some one who is muslim have to be a terrorist?

Why can't he just be a nut job?

Bring up Dear all you want, but he is getting called a nut job so just asking why the same can't be said here.

Nut jobs can plan stuff too.


Hey don't blame me.

Just using the same standards earlier this week as the PP shooter.

That Christian terrorist.

That didn't have tactical gear, and assault weapons, and explosives.
edit on 3-12-2015 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 12:32 AM
link   
a reply to: CIAGypsy

Still doesn't add up even if the third possibly not involved person as the driver. They stated multiple times that another person not shot on site had fled and was at large. They even said at one point there could be 4 involved if we count the driver. We went several hours being told officials confirmed at least 3 gunmen, so im not buying this new story.


edit on 3-12-2015 by Wookiep because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 12:33 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Yes the ones you have said are wrong...

So what do you think?



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 12:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Xcathdra

So saying it would still be to early to even mention if they are involved?


Yes if im understanding your question. Terrorism is one of those words that can incite problems where none exist. Just because they were muslim and did this doesnt mean religion or hate for the us was a factor. Speculation in that area has a tendency to bring out the rambos who think their justice is justified. Like targeting mosques / muslims when in reality there may be absolutely no link.

Why speculate.. wait for confirmable info then go from there.

Hence they won't rule it out but they cant confirm thats what it is.
edit on 3-12-2015 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 12:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: CIAGypsy
I need to go to bed...lots of work to do tomorrow. And by the time I get up in a few hours, I'm sure there will be 50 more pages of comments and the entire scenario on this whole thing will have changed in just about every aspect...lol.

Bets anyone?

Nighty-night.
People will need all night just to read through the last 130 pages.



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 12:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Impressive.
Are you a court reporter or something?



Thanks, and no. Just wanted the details out there. Know some cant watch, and want what they are saying recorded as it comes out. Stuff changes too fast not to document it here!

The number of shooters bus me a LOT.

Reported the one guy left, and came back with TWO others. Now they are claiming it was only three because one might have fled the SUV, and some vehicles reported he did, but supposedy not the cops. How could they have missed that? How does that affect to more coming back with the guy? Seems they want us to forget when three were reported.



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 12:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra



Why speculate.. wait for confirmable info then go from there.


Agreed, thanks for the insight.



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 12:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Impressive.
Are you a court reporter or something?



Thanks, and no. Just wanted the details out there. Know some cant watch, and want what they are saying recorded as it comes out. Stuff changes too fast not to document it here!

The number of shooters bus me a LOT.

Reported the one guy left, and came back with TWO others. Now they are claiming it was only three because one might have fled the SUV, and some vehicles reported he did, but supposedy not the cops. How could they have missed that? How does that affect to more coming back with the guy? Seems they want us to forget when three were reported.

Wonder if the mysteriously vanishing 3rd. suspect had diplomatic immunity.



new topics

top topics



 
178
<< 128  129  130    132  133  134 >>

log in

join