Eyewitness: 4 Man Team Behind Sikh Temple Shooting

reply to post by deadeyedick


You never know. Just look back at the DC Sniper case and all the conflicting reports. You wouldn't think witnesses would mistake a 1990 blue Chevy Carpice for a white panel van but it happened. As of now no other witnesses have corroborated this story. So why does an account told by a second-hand witness invalidate what was observed by others?

reply to post by VeniVidi


Nice cover up of eye witness testimony declaring there were 4 shooters.......

Someone/s need to dig alot deeper in to all these recent shootings because they're clearly well planned out, possibly from one organisation.

I'd first start with finding out who walks among these Police units that first show up on the scene who may work for above and beyond the "call of duty".

It seems he had Targets.
one came over from India ?
political target?

"It seems the few casualties that have been divulged to me have been the equivalent of priests, the holy leaders of our people,"

CNN news Link

Temple spokesman: Hostages held inside

he says one gun man kill and two in the temple with Hostages?
go to the link and pan down on the right is the video.
its called "Temple spokesman: Hostages held inside"

Originally posted by coyotepoet
Hmmm. A shootout in Colorado exactly 7 days before the Olympic Opening Ceremonies where everyone was taken to Gateway HS, home of the Olympians. And then a shootout in Wisconsin exactly 7 days before the closing ceremonies at 10:15 (1+1+5=7) where 6+1 (the shooter) died. Now there is a police presence on Holmes St where the guy just moved into about a week ago (likely exactly 7 days if the pattern holds) related to the shooting. Nah. Just coincidence. Go back to sleep.

I would rather be asleep than bank my hopes on a stupid theory which most likely means nothing except too the inventor of it..

So you're telling that maybe not only one, but FOUR people we're payed big money to organize a killing to help sway in anti-gun laws?

Much respect for the victims of Oak Creek, Aurora and 9/11.

They'll do it again till they get what they want or that we stop them.

If it were a "co-ordinated" quartet, they would have killed more than jut half a dozen +1. They were in a temple--they were sitting ducks. Even a blind man firing randomly could have killed a handful under such circumstances.

Common sense: avail it.

reply to post by Vitruvian


When do we start using Drones against these terrorists, and kill some innocent women and children in the process, then allow the media to do the dirty process of injecting the "collateral damage" poison in our children's heads.

I was just wondering, I read somewhere that the cops actually shot the perp so, maybe, the four man team in black were actually the cops/swat/FBI whoever and, the witness heard shooting, saw them coming in with guns, maybe even shooting the perp and is confused about the sequence of events and who was doing what... I'm not saying this is watertight or anything but, given that eyewitness testimony is pretty poor (especially when the eyewitness is terrified out of their mind) it's a possibility....

And, in terms of the 4 man teams being dispatched to search etc, a four man brick for CQB is pretty standard and I think this counts as a potential CQB/FIBUA type situation....

Edit: come to think of it, it would likely he SOP for any militia/militant type group with a CQB tactics manual or even the most basic training...

theres is nothing more to this .. this was done by some one who was sick in the head and finally snapped thank god lawenforcement acted as quick as they did .. there were not multiple shooters thats just the dubest thiong ive herd as there was only 7 seven shot come on if there were more shooters there would be more dead wake up ppl

Looks like there are more than 1 witness claiming the same story of 4 shooters, all Caucasian, all dressed in black.
The odds of several people making the same mistake are very, very low.
We'll see how this detail gets spun by the MSM but my guess is they will say that what they saw was the police tactical response units.

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by deadeyedick

 

The physical evidence. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously inaccurate. For example a 1991 study found that in 45% of cases where an innocent person is found guilty it is due to faulty eyewitness testimony. There are other studies that place this number over 50% in the US.

Another example comes from the FBI. During training on of tasks potential agents witness a "crime." After they are asked to state what they saw. I can't remember the exact numbers but most fail this task. Most of these individuals have been trained to observe and even they have trouble accurately remembering what they saw. Do you really think an untrained observer is going to have a better memory of what occurred, especially when they're fearing for their life?

But then again there were 101 witnesses who claimed there were more than 2 shooters at the Columbine massacre, each one with a story that eerily matched the other witness stories.

I guess we have to wait and see how many witnesses come out and say there was more than one shooter

reply to post by Asktheanimals


I wouldn't say very, very low. The farther we get out from the event the less reliance we can put on eyewitness testimony. We must also remember that false memory syndrome is a thing. All it takes is one person to say this is what happened and other witnesses can become completely convinced that's exactly what they saw, even if it is the thing farthest from the truth. I once again bring up the example of the DC Sniper. We had numerous witnesses from a number of locations claiming that the vehicle used was a white panel van. The actual vehicle used was a 1990 blue Chevy Caprice sedan. Eyewitness testimony is horribly unreliable and should only be given weight when the physical evidence corroborates what the witness claims they saw.

Originally posted by muse7
Guess you can't be a terrorist if you're white huh?

Is the label terrorist only reserved for brown people with AK-47s?

These were terrorists, these terrorists attacked innocent women and children just like the 9/11 terrorists killed thousands of innocent people.

You're already blaming the "left" and "liberals" when the ones that are politicizing this horrible tragedy are the people that have the 2nd amendment tattoo'd on their ass

Most definitely terrorists can be white, 9/11 terrorists were clearly so, we do NOT know about this one though, and noone has stated that they are...they COULD be, but in reality WHY they have done it is the ONLY thing that matters, not WHAT they look like.

Originally posted by hakalugie4u thats just the dubest thiong ive herd

Actually, ^^^ this ^^^ is the "dubest thiong" I've "herd" in a while

Joking aside though

Originally posted by hakalugie4u
there was only 7 seven shot come on if there were more shooters there would be more dead wake up ppl

Not if this was a targeted attack (and there have been suggestions that it may have been).. You'd go in, slot the targets and then fck off sharpish before the cops arrived....
Not that I personally think there's anything more to this than some idiot with a personal axe to grind (I read something about him hammering on his ex-girlfriend's door, at their old apartment, prior to the shooting, maybe she was banging a Sikh guy and he couldn't stand the thought.... People can be a bit whacky like that), i just think that your logic is a little off there...

edition.cnn.com... scroll down to the bottom, the last interviewee claims more than one shooter

reply to post by Asktheanimals


Apparently there was more than 1 person that saw Jesus turn water into wine, and make 1 loaf of bread feed an entire gathering.

And more than 1 person has seen an image of the Virgin Mary here in Sydney, overlooking one of the headlands of one of the beaches near Bondi. Even when it was proven to be a trick of light, and SHOWN to be a trick of light, people still say it's the Virgin Mary............

Just because more than 1 person has claimed to have seen something, doesn't make it true......

reply to post by Griff187


One of the gunmen.

Originally posted by Sablicious
If it were a "co-ordinated" quartet, they would have killed more than jut half a dozen +1. They were in a temple--they were sitting ducks. Even a blind man firing randomly could have killed a handful under such circumstances.

Common sense: avail it.

Common sense would have us believe that the representatives WE chose to lead us i.e. the government, would NOT lie to it's people, and only has our best interests at heart.

Things are not always as simple as 'common sense' would suggest. There can be a variety of reasons and hidden agendas behind something. It's UNcommon sense and an openness to various possibilities that we need to find out the truth and not be lead into the wolf's den like a blind herd of sheep. And this is especially required of us here at ATS. If we let common sense rule, this place wouldnt exist. And i certainly wonder what you're doing here.

Anyway it's possible that the gunman had only a specific few targets, and ended up killing more to either hide the targets among a bunch of other victims. Or maybe they were killed in self preservation by the gunman, because they were trying to be 'heroes'. Or maybe all 6 were the specific targets and not just random victims. Not saying this is the case or that there is any evidence to say so. Just considering a few of the possibilities why a 4-man team would end up killing only 6 people. IF there was a 4-man team to begin with.

reply to post by P-M-H

Originally posted by P-M-H
would a group really have that much hate for either and mistake the victims they chose?

Probably not a group, but one hater sure could make the mistake... Haters are not known for their intelligence. Many see one dark-skinned person with something on their heads the same as all the rest... Used to be they were pejoratively called "Arabs" and, since 9/11, haters call them all "Muslims", whether they are or not.

Te first person murdered after 9/11 was a Sihk, mistaken for a Muslim.

The first person murdered in retaliation for the 9/11 attacks was a Sikh - a gas station owner in Mesa, Arizona, named Balbir Singh Sodhi who was shot five times by aircraft mechanic Frank Roque
...
Some Sikhs had their houses vandalized; others were spat upon. In some extreme cases, Sikhs were set upon by groups of people and beaten.

cnn

reply to post by Vitruvian


The MSM says that it was one man that did the shootings...(Wade Michael Page) an Army veteran.

He was shot and killed by the police.