posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 05:14 PM
Originally posted by esteay812
This whole thing is an absolute mess - which appears to be the exact goal.
I do not believe this tragedy was staged, even though I know it is possible that there may have been individuals involved, who played a fictional role
in the massacre.
I believe all the children were murdered there, as-well-as the adults, but the method employed by the suspect/s responsible for the murders is the
area where I feel the most deception comes from.
It's possible that this was not pre-planned in any way and the government picked up on the massacre immediately and began revealing details that
favor a push for their relevant agendas. There was a thread a while back that mentioned the 'no need' theory, which goes something like this;
The government has no need to perpetrate incredibly evil mass murders to further the agenda associated with firearm massacres. The only thing they
need to do is develop a plan with many discrepancies (used to keep the initial report malleable, so they can mold the 'official story' anyway they
please), then wait for the next person to have a bad reaction to their anti-psychotic meds, subsequently experiencing a massive mental breakdown and
going on a murderous rampage.
When that happens, they only need to reveal their pre-constructed storyline to satisfy the public launch of their agenda.
Personally, I do not believe this is what happened, though it is as plausible as any other idea.
I am sure most everyone has the MSM giving a lot of 'face-time' to the conspiracy theorist demographic. Just like with MSM reports of UFO sighting,
they try to use a broad brush stroke to paint all conspiracy theorists as unstable, half-cocked, un-educated, and paranoid individuals.
I mention this because they seem to be comeplete hypocrites when it comes to conspiracies surrounding this tragedy.
First post. So, perhaps it may or may not be relevant, but I will describe my qualifications as a skeptic. Not to derail the thread (and I will not
respond to any further discussion of these items, as I would encourage people to not even mention them again) I believe Oswald acted alone, 9/11 was
sheer incompetence on the part of the federal government, and there may or may not be a higher power much less an afterlife. All I know is I love
this country and I hold very dear to my heart the right to keep and bear arms as enumerated in the Second Amendment. I am an avid sportsman and
target shooter that enjoys guns, which may or may not disqualify me as being very objective about this incident.
This thing really lit a fire under me once I witnessed the story "evolve" aggressively, and I believe the quoted portion of my reply to be about the
best explanation that I have seen so far for the inexplicable morass surrounding this tragedy. The anti-gun sentiments have been building steam for a
while now, particularly since the Giffords shooting, and now that Obama has secured four more years in office the timing couldn't have worked out
better for this particular agenda to be resurrected with gusto. That being said, the coverage of this thing has stunk from word go. When it first
happened I kept my mouth shut, most people I know seem to more-or-less trust what they hear in the media. But now, there are so many "God-fearing"
red-blooded friends and relatives of mine who are becoming belligerent towards the coverage of this story I find myself feeling as though I am
witnessing some sort of paradigm shift in the way people are thinking about what they are being told about what is going on in this country.
Now then. On to what little I may be able to actually contribute to the thread as a "gun guy." I wouldn't read too much into the "Canta 12" vs
"Saiga 12" issue, most if not all of these shotguns that I have handled had "Canta" etched on them from the arsenal, but I confess I never paid
that much attention to it, I prefer American made pump weapons. At any rate, in close quarters, which the interior of a school would certainly
qualify as, I can think of virtually no other weapon better suited for mass carnage than a short barreled shotgun. You could literally rip a room
apart in seconds, pump/semi auto doesn't matter, although obviously a magazine fed weapon would be at an advantage in terms of reloading. My
preferred antipersonnel load that I use in my home defense shotgun is #4 buckshot, at the expected ranges it would be absolutely devastating.
If you were to force anybody who knew anything about weapons to choose what they would rather be shot with at close range they would beg and plead for
a .223. Make of that what you will.