Shooting Reported At Brashear High School in Pittsburgh

reply to post by noonebutme


Gun owners aren't responsible to keep others from harm. Every person is responsible for their own safety. Besides, if you would have read the updated reports, not many would rush to the aid of thugs anyway. This was a drug, robbery and beating retaliation... not many have much sympathy for those who to choose to live the violent lifestyle and get what's coming to them, only unfortunate thing was this kid was a terrible shot.

I would be highly interested to know what ATS'ers think of this speech by the Police Chief Of Pittsburgh where she refers to the gunman/gunmen as "actors"!!!! I may not be up on American police terminology but surely that one word is a bit of a give away to say the least!

around 1.37 (for some reason the youtube button asks for video number but then doesn't work!)

Video Link

reply to post by phyllida


"Actors" Hmmm.

Maybe She slipped.

Actors? Come on guys, let's not start that ridiculous theory again. It's just like the disinfo about the Newtown false flag, the real meat of the conspiracy gets lost in the crazy fringe. It's the same as the Truthers who talk about holographic planes and fake passengers etc., it's one of the reasons people still believe the ludicrous OS.

reply to post by OMsk3ptic


It was not I that said they were actors but the Chief of Police herself. Seems a very strange "slip of the tongue" and it did go rather silent after she'd said it that's for sure! How on earth could you say actors for shooters or gunmen?

reply to post by phyllida


"Active" shooters maybe she meant?

reply to post by RUFFREADY

Hmm suppose its possible except the sentence was "We do have units out there looking for the actors" and she didn't correct herself although to me her facial expression kind of intimated she had made a mistake and the obvious silence after she had said it I would have thought would have prompted her to correct herself. Just seems an odd word to use even in error

reply to post by RUFFREADY


More likely she said exactly what was on her mind. She isn't used to
dealing with events that use actors instead of real perps. That's why
this kind of thing is happening. And always points to exactly what
most would seemingly fall over from shock if they had to accept as truth.

That there is something completely hokey about these shootings.

But go ahead ignore it some more. Pretend she couldn't possibly have said Actors.
The fact is, she did. And it isn't anyones fault but hers.

reply to post by phyllida


Well, I don't think we will ever know And I hope I don't think about much either lol!!

I hate seeing news like this, it seems more and more shootings in public places lately, like malls, schools, army bases, etc. The only other thing i hate seeing more than news like this is comments like that must be an irresponsible gun owner, or its obviously a mentally ill person etc. Maybe people should not have as much freedom when it comes to owning, carrying and transporting weapons. Im not saying take away the right to bare arms, but maybe just modify it a little bit.

Well it seems another chief of police also slips up in connection with the Boston bombings and again at 1.32 calls the 2 guys "actors" then quickly changes it to individuals. All very odd indeed unless this is some kind of new police jargon

randyvs

That there is something completely hokey about these shootings.

But go ahead ignore it some more. Pretend she couldn't possibly have said Actors.
The fact is, she did. And it isn't anyones fault but hers.

I fully believe that many of these shootings, especially the Batman and Newtown shootings were clearly false flags. The fact is though, the globalists have no problems murdering massive amounts of people, so why would they be using actors when they can clearly just do the job? Yeah the woman said actors, big deal, it's an unusual, but not unheard of use of vocabulary. And anyway, this seems to be too small of an incident for a false flag, usually they trumpet their work everywhere.

reply to post by OMsk3ptic

so why would they be using actors when they can clearly just do the job?

It isn't hard to speculate an answer to this at all. I speculate that what has been going
on lately with all of these horrific incidents ? I can imagine first of all, that if a very powerful
elitist group of people were perpatrating these events? Thru what ever means available to them.
Mind control, propaganda, politicians. For whatever purpose might accure to them.
And it could be anything from entertainment to power, we could even be witnessing
a developing addiction to this kind of power. The power to quit literally write the history
of world events and preside over them in Godlike manner.

If this is at all possible ? Then what we are seeing is exactly - all - we would see. And those
who could see this would never be able to prove it. This is exactly what I believe we're seeing
cause I have no other way of explaining all the B.S.

Or maybe we have pre cognitive cops these days and they just know what to train for next.

reply to post by Jefferton


That's dumb.. "pro gun nazis."
Didn't Hitler strip the citizens of guns?

So anti gun nazis, pro freedom pro gunners. The poster below you said he didn't like throwing nazi around because it detracts from what they did.. I think when you say anti gun nazi it actually helps remind us that people like you embrace ole Adolph's philosophy of stripping people's means to protect themselves.