FBI won't release Jared Lee Loughner video. Therefore, coverup

Originally posted by phishybongwaters

Sigh.....

You can't release potential evidence before a trial. Now, come post back in 5 years after the trial when they still refuse to release the footage, or parts of it. THEN you can cry conspiracy. video evidence trumps eye witness testimony, as eye witnesses have been proven to be horrible. they release the video now it's on the net instantly, good luck getting any "fair" trial after that. the only people that need to see this video are the prosecution and defense, simple as that. Anyone else demanding it is doing so out of their own morbid curiosity. there are plenty of videos online of people being killed, must you watch him shoot a 9 year old?

Not everything is a conspiracy. Guess i must be a government plant for having this opinion righT?

edit on 1/19/2011 by 12m8keall2c because: errant mouse click

True!
It is not customary to show evidance before a trail.
That wouldn't be very smart now would it?

But there are a few things that seem off in this situation.
But let's wait until we actually find some hard evidence before crying conspiracy.

Originally posted by filosophia

Originally posted by notsoperfect
reply to post by filosophia

 

Not just a cover up. It means it was a 911 style conspiracy, planned and executed like Ronal Reagan assassination attempt, John Lennon murder etc, using the patsy Manchurian candidate. Most likely there was more than one gun man also. Loughner was recruited by the US army and trained for gun shootting(who knows what else they did to his mind), Chapman and Hinckley both were members of the World Vision order, a dubious Catholic charity organization.

At first the sheriff said he was convinced there was a second shooter, now of course that is under wraps. I know that it was probably an inside job but I was just focusing on the fact that the FBI has the video tapes so that is an indication of a cover up at the very least.

Some say it was one of the security peps who fired the second shot while he was "running to JFK's aid".

At first the sheriff said he was convinced there was a second shooter, now of course that is under wraps. I know that it was probably an inside job but I was just focusing on the fact that the FBI has the video tapes so that is an indication of a cover up at the very least.

reply to post by filosophia


I remember hearing the news on the second (or more) shooter(s) and I don't hear it anymore. Definitely a huge inside job. Now it looks like the federal judge who refused to buckle may have been the main target. Now they are trying to blame it on tea party leader Palin who is also a sore thumb in their eyes. Two birds with one stone idea doesn't seem to work very well as they planned this time. There is a pattern for this type of crime.

There is a "great" leader or a rogue country they need to put them under their control or get rid of.

There is a "crazy" executer of the crime. It could be Islamic terrorist or a mentally deranged individual.

There is a target to be blamed. Osama bin Laden. The fundamental Islamic leader hiding in Afghanistan. And then there is a Tea party leader who is supposed to take the whole blame.

The "crazy" executer always has some kind of secret helper(s) who will complete the crime. Oswald was a patsy and there were many shooters who actually triggered their weapons. Then there are collateral damages they would like to get rid of at the time of the event if they can. The gun control issue has arised on the horizon again.

Vitruvian and Subjective1 are here to distract, not to focus on the issue. Be careful of those who are here to get you distracted.

i dont know if the judge was actually the target or not, but after reading this i guess its always a possabilty, its unfortunate we will probably never know the real truth, and only have the media to rely on.

www.eutimes.net...

Wow! I thought I was the only one who realized that too many things were not adding up with this whole incident. Those of you who are crying ignorance to suggesting that something is not right with how this all went down are using the information that you have received from the media to back up such comments. Now cmon basic conspiracy class 101, everything the media says is not true. None of the questions that have been asked in the beginning of this thread regarding this case have been answered and we have no video evidence at all to back up the medias claims of the description of what happened. I for one don't buy into most conspiracies but something just isn't right with this one.

Man you guys on here are getting paranoid.Ya, ok, I see your points and the gov't never seems to fail for the reasoning but in this case it was just a mad man gone MAD. Now if Jarod Loughner ends mysteriously killing himself then we have a debate.

reply to post by pacofunk64


No offense but, If you make a claim back it up with some sort of proof. It's easy to say "cmon guys it's so obvious" but it's another to give actual evidence outside of the manipulation of the media.

Originally posted by pondereternity77
Wow! I thought I was the only one who realized that too many things were not adding up with this whole incident.

thank you, you have renewed my faith in humanity. I'm glad at least someone is thinking outside of the box. As you can see there is about 5 pages of this thread with nothing but conspiracy denial, which is fine if this was the Wall Street journal or the Washington Post but with so much conspiracy denial on a conspiracy website it is a bit ridiculous.

does anyone know if the other congress on the corner events were covered by the local media? I have not heard anyone ask that question?