posted on Nov, 1 2017 @ 09:23 AM
It's a pity people use the confusion of crowds under fire to come up with "conclusions." I know even from pre-planned military war games, that often,
it was confusing as hell. People going down from friendly fire, not knowing where shots are coming from, miscommunication, etc. I imagine a good # of
people in the heat of the moment, under attack, have no idea what is really going on. But people here latch onto accounts or comments or fuzzy videos
of shadows and draw up all sorts of conclusions.
If there is one conclusion I usually come up with after these events, it's that I can't even remotely count on the conclusions people on these sites
come up with. They are based on the flimsiest of evidence. It's why after 9/11, I think it's sadly ironic that there were so many people positive that
say.. the plane flying into the Pentagon did not happen. But.. using the same brilliant reasoning they use in cases like this one, they came up with
it being.. a missile.. a planned explosion.. a flyover / bomb, a different plane.. MANY conclusions, by people who were positive they were correct in
their Sherlock Holmes like brilliance. They can't all be right. They are probably all wrong.
Something shady may have occurred. We may not ever know what really happened. But I think probably a majority of what is "deduced" by these threads is
usually just dead wrong for many reasons. Many leaps of logic and guesswork to fill in the gaps created by mass chaos and confusion.