Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Jared Loughner the alleged Tucson shooter - So many questions - so few answers .

page: 1
25
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 05:37 PM
link   
This thread is designed as a platform for any questions/suspicions and alternative research to do with the Tuscan shootings of 8th January 2011 Tuscan Arizona USA - .

I will kick off with my questions , please feel free to add any yourselves . Lets see if we can build a better picture of this 22 year old alleged gunman is there a reason for these terrible actions ?








This picture is supposedly from 2008 . The year he tried to enlist in the army .


1 - Why did he get kicked out of the army ? -

If you research this you will find 4 answers . 1 ) The army refuse to disclose the reason- 2)Loughner failed the Drug test - 3) Loughner failed the aptitude test - 4) Loughner admitted when asked that he smoked marijuana - So which is it ? I have seen an article that says he Passed the aptitude test . However I have no clue which reason is the correct reason .


2- Did Loughner have serious mental problems ?
Depends who you ask . Most of his fellow students at Prima college say yes as do his tutors. They say he clenched his fist ,interrupted the class with nonsensical comments and they were all scared that "one day he would bring a gun into school " -
However , there are discrepancies here -
What are Loughners parents comments on this ? Had they ever taken him to a physchiatrist ? Was he on prescribed medication ? These are 2 things we could and should know at some stage .
Also Loughner had no problem buying a glock 17 but when he tried to buy ammo at a different store the purchase was refused .
Did the cop who pulled Loughner up for driving through red lights think he was suffering from serious mental problems ? Doesnt seem so because Loughner was allowed on his way .



3) Who was his target?
The media will tell you it was Congresswoman Giffords but I will now explain why I doubt this .
It is debateable whether Loughner knew Giffords was even attending the meet and greet . It is said that it was only announced 24 hours in advance . According to police Loughner was quite "busy" during this period so we have to assume in between time he saw the announcement .
The reason your led to believe that Giffords was is his target is because he had a "grudge " A grudge he took 4 years to take action on may I add

How do we KNOW he had a grudge? Because 1 guy has told us . Am I going to believe that without proof ? No .

Please note -It is alleged that Giffords subscribed to Loughners youtube . She had only subscribed to 1 other person. Another politician . Why would a female politician subscribe to a 22 year old unemployed male who has videos called How to -Mind controller and How to Your new currency .?

If she was his " assasination" target I find it strange he only fired 1 bullet at her when other non "targets" had in some cases 4 bullet wounds .
The whole premise that she was the target is not based on proof only hearsay and the "confession " in his safe .
He pleads NOT guilty yet has "admiitted" guilt in the "confession" . Very strange .

4) and Conclusion -

Was he even there ? /Did he do it ?
At this moment in time it is impossible to know . We have zero proof of anything .
We don't know if he was at the location without the surveillance video footage (15 minutes of footage Before the first shot was fired ) This footage Must be released - It is not of a sensitive nature so is there is no reason why it shouldnt be ,, UNLESS it doesnt exsist because he was never there .

When and if they release proof that he 100 % did it beyond reasonable doubt , I will believe it .

Right now I see a lot of conflicting information which leads to suspicions -

My prediction is that we wil see no proof. He will be convicted using evidence not available to the public Maybe a video confesson with his face on camera that was retrieved from his hard drive .

I hope I am wrong though about this case and its like they say he acted alone and in insanity .



However, we have to make sure this guy is only convicted using verifiable proof .
Because otherwise next time it could be one of us that they frame or convict on trumped up charges.
.
If he did it he did it . Just show us the proof .






edit on 24-2-2011 by Doomzilla because: (no reason given)
edit on Mon Mar 14 2011 by DontTreadOnMe because: Tucson was misspelled




posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Doomzilla
 


Agreed, there are waaaay too many conflicting stories, things that just do not make sense, Cept in bizzarro world. and too much missing info.
I still have yet to see a pic or video of Giffords, was she really shot? If so is she just brain dead?
Lotta unanswered questions makes me think something is up.
S&F.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 05:47 PM
link   
You can never really know what is going on in someones mind. He could easily have hidden how mentally disturbed he was from everyone. There are plenty of people with serious debilitating mental illness who can turn on the charm and act completely normal when speaking to mental health practitioners, potential employers etc.

Will it really help when we have the answers to these questions? I believe they will filter out eventually, there will be books documentaries and films made about it, all filled with speculation.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Doomzilla
 


We don't know if he was at the location without the surveillance video footage (15 minutes of footage Before the first shot was fired ) This footage Must be released - It is not of a sensitive nature so is there is no reason why it shouldnt be

I may be ignorant to the circumstances here but it seems very odd that the police would not have issued a statement immediately following the shooting, informing the public they were reviewing security footage of the attack.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 05:54 PM
link   
We must be on similar wavelengths because I was just about to start a thread on a general conversation of the Tucson shooting. Since I don't think you mentioned it, you should research district judge John McCarthy Roll, who was also killed during the shooting. Judge Roll received some death threats for ruling in favor of illegal immigrants suing an Arizona rancher, but in the ruling he ruled that illegal immigrants do not have a right to travel in America, so he gained enemies from both sides of the spectrum, from the "tea party" as well as the establishment for taking a hard line when it comes to not giving illegal immigrants free reign on other people's property. Plus there was a story that Roll blocked a confiscation by the federal government, but a lot of people started shouting "Sorcha Faal" so that ended up in the hoax bin real quick, and IMO it may be a hoax but I think it is perhaps meant to be a poisoning of the pot, a half truth that is hiding the real reason of why Roll was killed and maybe he was the target to begin with. If so, this Tucson shooting has the markings of an MKULTRA. The media made a "reenactment" of the surveillance video the FBI won't show us, where Judge Roll over-dramatically jumps in front of another man and takes a bullet to save another man's life. It just seems to stress the media's notion that Giffords and no one else was the real target.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 05:55 PM
link   
Does anyone want to set odds as to whether or not he will be executed - a la timothy mcveigh - "quick and slick"?

at least quick enough to keep him from issuing a diary/memoirs or talking to the press.




posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 06:01 PM
link   
reply to post by g146541
 


Your right my friend , we have seen only pictures of her hand and pictures of everyone but her since the shooting .
Is she even injured ? only god knows but right now we know nothing .


HOW we do know these are photos of her exactly ? lol











posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by MMPI2
Does anyone want to set odds as to whether or not he will be executed - a la timothy mcveigh - "quick and slick"?

at least quick enough to keep him from issuing a diary/memoirs or talking to the press.



if they try to go the mental insanity route they will have a hard time executing him, but they can always Jack Ruby him (Ruby shot Oswald in a police station while Oswald was under police custody).



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Big Raging Loner
reply to post by Doomzilla
 


We don't know if he was at the location without the surveillance video footage (15 minutes of footage Before the first shot was fired ) This footage Must be released - It is not of a sensitive nature so is there is no reason why it shouldnt be

I may be ignorant to the circumstances here but it seems very odd that the police would not have issued a statement immediately following the shooting, informing the public they were reviewing security footage of the attack.




They did and they apparently have footage of Lougner shooting Giffords BUT they are hoping to not have to use it as it would be disturbing for the victims /families .
But as I said they can show the 15 minutes of footage Before the shooting , so we can establish he was actually even present at the scene . AS well as witness testimony to convict him .



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 06:16 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


This is what I think -
If the Judge was the target - Loughner was mk ultra or not even at the shooting and was framed .
They dont mention the judge because the fake internet persona implies ties to Giffords , they cant tie Loughner to the judge .
I think this case is like a bad movie . Jared is the perfect scapegoat , pothead , skinhead, anti government ,conspiracy theorist etc .

I think he has been framed and that his internet activity is fake , planted to back up the official story plus demented mugshot = clear cut case, execute him !



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 06:20 PM
link   
I've always felt that Loughner was a mind control agent used to discredit the Patriot move,ment.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 06:28 PM
link   
If Loughner really planned this, he wouldn't be pleading not guilty and he would be trying to tell his story to the media and courts. If he planned the Giffords attack, he has to have some type of motive. And if he fired indiscriminately into the crowd, he must have been ready to give his life up, meaning he has to have a cause. Why then does he plead not guilty? Why does he not try to speak out and say something? He could at least blurt something out in the court room, even if it goes against the procedure at the time, just so a news outlet will print the story. We have no real comments coming from Loughner except a dubious confession note the FBI found that said "I planned ahead" "My assassination" and his name signed at the bottom. Why would you sign a confession statement and then plead not guilty?



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by recondoman
I've always felt that Loughner was a mind control agent used to discredit the Patriot move,ment.


You could be correct . Maybe he was officially kicked out but assigned to a different unit off the records ?
In the same year he ran away from home and stayed in a hotel for a week , could he have been in contact with his handler ? Is it feasible he had money for this stay ? Or did "someone" foot the bill .

This is speculation obviously but who knows it may be close to the truth ?



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 06:34 PM
link   
Does anyone know why the fact that Giffords and Loughner are both Jewish has been suppressed by the MSM?

this is NOT an anti-Semitic purge, just a question that MIGHT have significance.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


Yes I heard this too my friend . Apparently his mother and Giffords attend the same small synagogue ?
I dont know if its true but if it were , id say it looks suspicious very much so .



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 06:53 PM
link   
I feel that is reasonable to have questions and scrutinize this whole incident however I think the suppression of information on the alleged shooter is a normal and understandable part of the legal process. So many cases have been won or lost in the court of public opinion before the trial ever begins (I could cite numerous examples) and I firmly believe the prosecution is just following all the rules in order to present an air tight case. Unlike CSI, Perry Mason. Law and Order and other fictionalized TV shows, forensics and law can be quite dull and non-glamorous

Sure it makes for compelling conspiracy discussion and I often question "the official story" on many topics but in this case it could either be another Oswald (then I'd be skeptical) or another Timothy McVeigh. There is purportedly clear surveillance video that shows Loughner commiting the crime and unless it is suppressed (like the Pentagon footage) I tend to believe that is compelling evidence.

Regarding the nature of injuries of Congresswoman Giffords there have been numerous credible visitors to see her who can attest to the severity of her injuries. (OK serious opinion aside now)

Besides, Obama healed her:

Did Obama's visit heal Gabrielle Giffords?



UNINTENTIONALLY HILARIOUS WAPO OP ED




edit on 24-2-2011 by kinda kurious because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by kinda kurious
 


Oswald (then I'd be skeptical) or another Timothy McVeigh.

Yes but they were both either patsys or part of a team Not lone wolves like we are told .
The Oklahoma bombing damage was Not caused by what they claimed at the time .

You have to question the OS because as Kissinger said they control and are behind every major event .

Your probably right about not trying to influence the trial but the 1st mugshot did just that bro ! and thats probably why they released the less crazy mugshot 2 days ago .



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by kinda kurious
I feel that is reasonable to have questions and scrutinize this whole incident however I think the suppression of information on the alleged shooter is a normal and understandable part of the legal process. So many cases have been won or lost in the court of public opinion before the trial ever begins (I could cite numerous examples) and I firmly believe the prosecution is just following all the rules in order to present an air tight case. Unlike CSI, Perry Mason. Law and Order and other fictionalized TV shows, forensics and law can be quite dull and non-glamorous

Sure it makes for compelling conspiracy discussion and I often question "the official story" on many topics but in this case it could either be another Oswald (then I'd be skeptical) or another Timothy McVeigh. There is purportedly clear surveillance video that shows Loughner commiting the crime and unless it is suppressed (like the Pentagon footage) I tend to believe that is compelling evidence.

Regarding the nature of injuries of Congresswoman Giffords there have been numerous credible visitors to see her who can attest to the severity of her injuries. (OK serious opinion aside now)

Besides, Obama healed her:

Did Obama's visit heal Gabrielle Giffords?



UNINTENTIONALLY HILARIOUS WAPO OP ED



in the washington post article, we see a clear Christian/Catholic agenda!

there is no mention of Giffords' Jewish faith!!!!

and also fails to mention Nancy Pelosi's religion!!!!

Hmmmmmmm..........??



Thus, if Obama, a man with a strong personality and a deep faith, touched the spirit of Rep. Giffords with his prayer that does not make him into a saint. [I could just as easily have posed this question about daily communicant Nancy Pelosi, the Catholic Kirsten Gillibrand and the Jewish Debbie Wasserman Shultz who were actually in the room when Gabby opened her eyes. Moreover, her husband has also been present in the hospital room. Still, the point is the same, no matter the person present.]



what's the problem?



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 07:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Doomzilla
 


By in large I share you skepticism in many facets of the case. By the way, I neglected to applaud you for this thread. Nice job! It takes jewels to make a case and defend your premise. Thanks for at least striving to find some common ground wth others who may not wholeheartedly agree.
edit on 24-2-2011 by kinda kurious because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 07:37 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


To be clear, I offered that article in jest. It is a crock. But rather than tiptoe around making inferences, why not state your case/angle. How did religious beliefs and lack of reporting on it play a part in this cases as you see it?





new topics

top topics



 
25
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join