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.

 

James Holmes' (Batman Shooter's) Father and why you should know who he is..

page: 10
102
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by longlostbrother
 


Of course if I said the sky is blue and you said it's green, I could'nt prove to you it's blue unless you opened your eyes and bothered to look out the window!

It does'nt take a monkey to figure out Holmes did'nt booby trap his crib unless he was a brillant expert with specialized military experience. Has Holmes done Military service? Not to my knowledge. Can you prove otherwise?
edit on 28-7-2012 by bluemirage5 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 11:13 AM
link   
Why why why is this stuff always so much more complicated than it first appears??? At first you think it makes sense that this kid - early 20's - was probably schizophrenic and had access to some resources. THEN stuff starts coming up: just for starters: 1.) No one actually saw him clearly in the theatre, he was covered up 2.) They find him outside and he meekly "surrenders" and goes on to tell them about his ultra-professionally booby-trapped apartment 3.) He is living on unemployment and manages to buy all of this top of the line equipment with top of the line knowledge about how to use it all, like he had had some serious mega training since he dropped out of school barely a few weeks before 4.) The kid now claims to remember nothing and acts seriously drugged up - although his handlers deny it 5.) His dad IS the guy who came up with the formula that revealed all of the massive bank fraud that has been going on ...geesh, if that is true it is like the icing in the cake. Talk about giving credibility to guys like David Wilcock - this is exactly the kind of stuff he, for one, has been exhaustively researching and forecasting. It soooo fits into his ongoing narrative about what is really happening in the 'matrix' (my analogy) that it is just mind blowing.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by NAMTERCES
I wonder. Is this a warning to father Robert Holmes not to testify about what he knows at the LIBOR scandal?

But, wouldn't it anger the father and make him even more likely to speak?


Not if he has been told that his son was only one of many possible targets close to him. Why create a nightmare scenario with his son only to act it out and not have any further power over the father?

I think the shooter is a patsy and a victim of a false flag op. No wonder he looked like that in court, it's probably still sinking in and he's still trying to sift through the confusion of what he did or didn't do.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 11:23 AM
link   
reply to post by MaxBlack
 



In the real world of deception, whenever the govt needs a hoax that can be used for deception, it will be a govt source that creates the initial conspiracy so that the conspiracy can be easily discredited. Once discredited, the story is branded a hoax and many assume this claim to be truth, when what has happened is the govt blacks ops type have created the conspiracy, spread the conspiracy, fed the conspiracy and then manage the way the conspiracy develops to keep a focus away from the public and to distract from whatever the govt blacks ops type are trying to hide in the first place.

I mention this only because that is what I think is going on with the James Holmes incident and because of it, many will stop thinking about what is going on in secret and why it is going on in the first place. Declaring something with elements of the truth a hoax, only serves to keep us from thinking about certain matters.


Your whole post makes a great deal of sense, but the above quote is particularly cogent. We could call it pre-emptive debunking by the use of a non credible source.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 12:12 PM
link   
Just for fun, lets take it a step further - James Homes was into studying temporal illusions - this can involve "changing the past." JGL, who is in the batman movie, (and appears to be taking up the cape crusader mantle in some form for the future) is also starring in a soon to be released film regarding agents who go into the past to kill people in order to change the future. One could go on and on here. eg: who was in the theatre that needed to be eliminated?
Seems like the whole point of this 2012 hype has been about all of the elaborate false realities that have been created just falling in on themselves over and over. Threshold moment for the collective consciousness?
May you live in interesting times.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by longlostbrother
 


Of course if I said the sky is blue and you said it's green, I could'nt prove to you it's blue unless you opened your eyes and bothered to look out the window!

It does'nt take a monkey to figure out Holmes did'nt booby trap his crib unless he was a brillant expert with specialized military experience. Has Holmes done Military service? Not to my knowledge. Can you prove otherwise?
edit on 28-7-2012 by bluemirage5 because: (no reason given)


So you've seen the boobytraps?

And you think that they took an expert to construct, based on your... expertise?

Shoddy logic.

If YOU are gonna claim you have facts about something, and then your facts are just your, "common sense" then you don't ACTUALLY have facts. Just a theory.

That's not a controversial statement btw.

Galileo didn't go around saying, "The earth revolves around the sun - my proof is that it's just so obvious you nimrods". Einstein didn't say, "E=MC2 - don't believe it, then prove me wrong".

Only people on ATS (and similar sites) think that saying something is "obvious" makes it a fact and it can therefore be used as evidence.
edit on 28-7-2012 by longlostbrother because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by frazzle
reply to post by MaxBlack
 



In the real world of deception, whenever the govt needs a hoax that can be used for deception, it will be a govt source that creates the initial conspiracy so that the conspiracy can be easily discredited. Once discredited, the story is branded a hoax and many assume this claim to be truth, when what has happened is the govt blacks ops type have created the conspiracy, spread the conspiracy, fed the conspiracy and then manage the way the conspiracy develops to keep a focus away from the public and to distract from whatever the govt blacks ops type are trying to hide in the first place.

I mention this only because that is what I think is going on with the James Holmes incident and because of it, many will stop thinking about what is going on in secret and why it is going on in the first place. Declaring something with elements of the truth a hoax, only serves to keep us from thinking about certain matters.


Your whole post makes a great deal of sense, but the above quote is particularly cogent. We could call it pre-emptive debunking by the use of a non credible source.



It's all just speculation.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by longlostbrother
 


Ummm, it was all over the "credible" MSM (I know, right...LOLOLOLOL!!) that the booby traps were top notch stuff! Just parroting back the party line there...I would think that you should be proud.

False narratives just falling in on themselves...



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by anywho
reply to post by longlostbrother
 


Ummm, it was all over the "credible" MSM (I know, right...LOLOLOLOL!!) that the booby traps were top notch stuff! Just parroting back the party line there...I would think that you should be proud.

False narratives just falling in on themselves...



Yeah, but if he's the super genius many want to make him out to be, and considering all the info about bombs and tripwires, and triggers - all over the internet - I find it hard to state that, without seeing the boobytraps, and without being an expert in bomb making, James Holmes could NOT have made those bombs - as a fact.

Lot's of people get lucky... ever see those videos of people almost being killed by cars and trains and whatnot?

Are they evidence that those people are super heroes? As most people in that situation would die?

Or was James a smart guy, who spent a few months designing and making a boobytrapped house, and arming himself?

Care to state that he didn't make it, AS A FACT? I wouldn't.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 03:01 PM
link   
Why is this thread in the hoax bin? This information can be found on Robert Holmes Linkedin page www.linkedin.com...



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Emergingtruth
Why is this thread in the hoax bin? This information can be found on Robert Holmes Linkedin page www.linkedin.com...


There is nothing to say he was to testify about LIBOR there. It seems this unverified 'fact' was first shared by Sorcha Faal hence labelling the info as a hoax.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrHammondStoat

Originally posted by Emergingtruth
Why is this thread in the hoax bin? This information can be found on Robert Holmes Linkedin page www.linkedin.com...


There is nothing to say he was to testify about LIBOR there. It seems this unverified 'fact' was first shared by Sorcha Faal hence labelling the info as a hoax.


exactly...



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by longlostbrother

Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by longlostbrother
 


Of course if I said the sky is blue and you said it's green, I could'nt prove to you it's blue unless you opened your eyes and bothered to look out the window!

It does'nt take a monkey to figure out Holmes did'nt booby trap his crib unless he was a brillant expert with specialized military experience. Has Holmes done Military service? Not to my knowledge. Can you prove otherwise?
edit on 28-7-2012 by bluemirage5 because: (no reason given)


So you've seen the boobytraps?

And you think that they took an expert to construct, based on your... expertise?

Shoddy logic.

If YOU are gonna claim you have facts about something, and then your facts are just your, "common sense" then you don't ACTUALLY have facts. Just a theory.

That's not a controversial statement btw.

Galileo didn't go around saying, "The earth revolves around the sun - my proof is that it's just so obvious you nimrods". Einstein didn't say, "E=MC2 - don't believe it, then prove me wrong".

Only people on ATS (and similar sites) think that saying something is "obvious" makes it a fact and it can therefore be used as evidence.
edit on 28-7-2012 by longlostbrother because: (no reason given)


The same can be asked of you. So you've seen the boobytraps? and your expertise is? You can't knock his/her post when your in the same boat.
I think the poster was making a comment based on what the experts DID say on the news, go look it up.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Staroth
 


Ah nice try but no.

We both are saying that the cops are expert enough to determine it was well boobytrapped.

He is then claiming that it's a fact that it's too well done to have been done by James Holmes. Evidence? None.

I am claiming that the experts we bot trust to describe how well it's done are also expert enough to figure out who did it and they're not all lying.

So, I'm siding with the people who have actually seen it.

He, having not seen it, and not being an expert, and having no evidence but his gut, is claiming it, as a fact, that all of the cops are lying and that his gut is able to determine what's true and not.

Seems pretty unlikely.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by anywho
 


Who was in the theater to be eliminated, you ask? Maybe that Jessica Redfield (Ghwai) girl? Don't you find it odd that she was in two massacres in one month? And that she mentions on her blog (twitter?) there was a man in batman costume in the mall shooting? What would be her connection to this?

Rest in Peace, Jessica.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 04:38 PM
link   
Okay, let's deal in truth for a moment:

Looking on the other side of the coin let's spin the question - in Robert Holmes' field of study, expertise and considering what he does and who he works for, why wouldn't it make sense to have him testify at the LIBOR hearing as a credible witness?



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 04:42 PM
link   
Wow. So its being blamed on Sorcha Faal.

Whatever.

This link is very good:

deadlinelive.info... perfectly/

Censorship anyone! Did Acta pass? And even if it did, its unlawful legislation, not constitutionally backed law of any kind.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 05:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Staroth
 


Why would congress want a guy who uses computers to deal with credit card fraud to testify on a percentage fixing racket? It's not money laundering, it's not credit card fraud.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by longlostbrother
reply to post by Staroth
 


Why would congress want a guy who uses computers to deal with credit card fraud to testify on a percentage fixing racket? It's not money laundering, it's not credit card fraud.


You should look further into his credentials.



posted on Jul, 28 2012 @ 05:36 PM
link   
reply to post by longlostbrother
 


Look at user Unity_99's link just above your post, read the story this should shed light on that question.



new topics

top topics



 
102
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join