They Pretty Much Ask For It
Feb 11, 201402:28AM
Mike: this what Herr Davila thinks of your blog post. Art Davila All that post proved is that the author is way too obsessed over this. So he wanted to immortalize the woman who created the original meme. The meme that was an answer to the original was created by an individual who actually goes out and protests in public at risk to his own life. He is not at home whining about things he doesn't like. He is an individual who has his own opinion not bought and paid for by any gun lobby. It's not even bought by this page which supports his opinion. That link is just one man's disgruntled diatribe over pages that delete any opposing viewpoints. I have been banned from Tea Party Patriots, Molon Labe Industries, Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, and various other Conservative and pro gun sites. All I did was post constructive opposing viewpoints and not silly name calling diatribe or personal attacks. Despite my banning, the worst I ever do is send a final email to the administrator telling them they banned me in haste. After that, I move on. I suggest you tell Michael Z Williamson to do the same.
2 minutes ago · Like
Where to start?
Well, first, they "answered" Oleg's original photo, with a bunch of false assumptions about a young woman, because liberals never make assumptions based on gender. Then they refused to actually debate the subject, because liberals are all about public discourse.
It was created by someone who actually goes out and protests. Hey! I go out and protest, too. How about that? And at risk to his life! I respect that. He must protest in Africa or Communist China or Russia, then. Since there's absolutely no risk to his life at any US protest on the subject of firearms, proven by the fact that no one has been killed protesting against that particular civil right in this country.
So, the man's been banned by a bunch of pages. Neat. I, also have been banned by a bunch of pages. However, I've been banned by liberal pages who claim they're tolerant. See, the thing about claiming to be tolerant is, it only works if you're actually tolerant.
Then he's upset that I actually get paid for my "diatribe." Indeed I do, because what I have to say is interesting enough to earn me a living. Sorry he's jealous. But then, he's risking his life and all. I totally understand, having deployed twice to the war zone. Those protests can be dangerous.
Then the worst he ever does is send an email to the people who banned him, because that's always so effective at arguing with tolerant people. He doesn't engage in diatribe or personal attacks...such as pointing out the hypocrisy, sexism and complete erroneousness of the opposition. I guess that constitutes an "attack" to a "liberal." Facts are cruel things. Especially teenage girls. Those can be dangerous. Better to not learn too much about them.
Tell you what, Mr Davila: Come to my FB wall. You have my word I will not block you, not a single word you post. Do please refute any fact I've actually posted. I genuinely want you to show me where I'm wrong in my years of experience in this field, what facts I've confused. There are liberals and conservatives on my wall (because I try not to block anyone), and we'll let them judge how you do.
You won't have to send any final emails. I'll open the floor to you, to say whatever you wish on this subject. I'll even tag the 16 year old so she can debate you herself, if a 16 year old girl doesn't scare you too much.
Because unlike some other people, I actually AM liberal.22 May 2014: Mr Davila was afraid to debate a 16 year old girl. Enough said.
Responsibility for Liberals
Feb 10, 201411:10PM
Ah, yes. "Liberal" "Truth." The kind that doesn't need fact checked, because when several of us did so, our posts were deleted. Because liberals love truth and support accurate statements.
Assuming the above post will be deleted shortly, to protect its honesty from my alleged hatred, it's a picture of a little girl, captioned: "If you think giving me a gun is teaching me responsibility, someone needs to teach you about responsibility."
The hilarious thing is they deleted posts that showed the original image that caused the butthurt. http://www.olegvolk.net/gallery/technology/arms/allpink4803.jpg.html
But this comment jumped out at me, so I feel compelled to immortalize the woman:
Breann Louise Hall This looks like my kid. If i gave my kid a gun, she would shoot me.
And 6 people agree with her, so there are at least 7 people who think their kids would shoot them if given a gun.
Breann Louise Hall has a degree in socio-anthropology and claims to be a mediocre author and poet. Oh, and is big into supporting slut culture.
I find a poster she likes that equates Harriet Tubman and Rosa Parks with Angela Davis and Assata Shakur as 'not well-behaved women'.
I know of Davis, but had to look up Shakur:
"In May 1973, Shakur was involved in a shootout on the New Jersey Turnpike, in which she killed New Jersey State Trooper Werner Foerster and grievously assaulted Trooper James Harper. BLA member Zayd Malik Shakur was also killed in the incident, and Shakur was wounded. Between 1973 and 1977, Shakur was indicted in relation to six other alleged criminal incidents—charged with murder, attempted murder, armed robbery, bank robbery, and kidnapping—resulting in three acquittals and three dismissals. In 1977, she was convicted of the first-degree murder of Foerster and of seven other felonies related to the shootout. In 2013, the FBI announced it had made Shakur the first woman on its list of most wanted terrorists."
Fascinating. I'm a best-selling author, and my kids have never tried nor expressed an interest in killing me, despite access to firearms, kitchen knives, flammable liquids in the shop, and heavy exercise equipment in the gym. I guess I'm not only a better writer, I'm a better parent, since I haven't raised kids who are incompetent, amoral or psychopathic or who worship terrorists. That may be because I figured parent culture was a more important pursuit than slut culture and endorsing terrorism, once I was a parent. Liberalism is starting to scare me, if that's their default and publicly admitted outcome.
This explains why they don't understand responsibility. See, FIRST comes the responsibility, THEN comes the gun. I realize that's a large intellectual leap for a "liberal," so I'll elaborate further:
My daughter started shooting at age 4:
At age 7, I dropped $1000ish in materials and parts to build her that pink AR carbine, and have since added about $1000 in accessories, because I believe in having quality tools. Her favorite guns are a 1916 Smith & Wesson in .45 Long Colt and an Astra .44 Magnum. She's proficient with both.
In those 12 years, she's never once proposed or attempted to kill me, nor been so incompetent as to do so by accident, nor even have a negligent discharge. So I guess she meets their standards of responsibility.
Oh, yes, she also has $1000ish worth of harp that she half paid for, a couple of thousand bucks' worth of Luna and Schecter guitars we bought for her, a couple thousand more bucks' worth of keyboard, signal processor, amplifiers, and various small instruments, as well as lessons, because like the ancient Greeks, I believe a warrior should also be a scholar and an artist. She maintains excellent grades, pursues athletics on occasion, and also has an interest in painting and writing. She's more than a mediocre writer, in my professional opinion (apart from my biased opinion. I've seen much worse writing from adults twice her age).
Of course, the Rolling Stoner article that referenced her missed all this, too, because being good "liberals," they didn't need to actually talk to a woman to know all about her failures. They just mansplained away. They even rose to the hysteria of insisting the gun lobby is "desperate" to get her money, when in fact, she's appeared in promotions and ads in several shooting magazines. To be precise, lots of firearm and accessory manufacturers are desperate to throw money at her for endorsement.
This is like pointing at Alex Lifeson as a bad example of the dangers of an obsession with guitars, or using Sage Kotsenburg to claim snowboarding will ruin your life.
So, yeah, my daughter's an honor student, musician, artist, experienced in household tasks including cooking and budgeting, a reasonably good martial artist, an actress with professional TV credits, is socially conscious, supports marriage equality and reproductive choice, understands the economics of recycling and logistics, and is exploring college programs.
Sadly, she probably won't be getting a degree in socio-anthropology or slut studies, because we ruined her life with guns.
If only liberalism could have saved her.
So I Saw This Panicky Article...
Feb 06, 201412:34AM
This is one of those articles where the quotes are just too silly-looking to not be suspect. So I made some polite inquiries. I've only heard back from one administrator. Our exchange is below, correspondent's comments in bold:
“One of my biggest concerns as a principal is safety and security,” Tinley Park High School Principal Theresa Nolan said. “It is bothersome to have to post a sticker of a gun that says, ‘Hey, folks, leave your guns at home.’ ”
I appreciate the question…The logo created is to inform those who have undergone the training and licensing protocols to carry a concealed weapon that they are not allowed to carry on this premises. The onus for knowing where you “can” and “can’t” carry is placed upon the individual who has undergone the training. To our general public, who has not undergone the training and is not familiar with the logo or legislation, may associate that we are simply reminding the general public that guns are not allowed in our building, as if that is a necessary reminder.
Anyone who works in a school these days, especially in my role where I am the one responsible for everyone’s safety and security, seeing a “no guns allowed” sticker on our entryways is just awkward. My attempt was to educate the public as to why these stickers will be displayed. I was not passing judgment on the legislation, nor am I ignorant enough to believe it will deter someone with criminal intent.
With that being said, if there was a logo that represented the Concealed Carry Legislation with the red circle and slash , or, an acronym with the circle and slash, or even just verbiage that stated “ NO Concealed Carry Allowed” it would remove the image of the gun from our entryway doors. Again, I am not opposed to the posting of it, but if the sticker serves as a reminder to those who are trained to look for it, then I felt that the community members who did not have training deserved to know why we are posing signage that represent, “No Guns Allowed.”
Again, I appreciate the question….and although I know I have touched a nerve, my intention was to make people aware of the legislation and it’s concurrent signage.
If I you have any other questions, please let me know.
If it won't have any effect on criminals, what is the point? Non-criminals are not a threat. (I realize you are not responsible for the law.)
I agree with you on the first part….I don’t have input in that.
I think it could be as simple as NO CONCEALED CARRY ALLOWED. Or an appropriate acronym with the red circle and slash. Those who are trained and licensed would know what to look for. And eventually the rest of the community will be aware as well. I am not saying those are the greatest examples, as there are far better advertising or marketing specialists that could come up with something better.
The purpose of my part in the article spoke to the fact to clarity what the stickers looked like and why we were posting them. Anytime guns and school are associated with one another, a certain panic ensues. . I never stated an opinion about the legislation…. I was simply trying to get ahead of the curve of public panic and assumption.
I actually would appreciate it! It’s interesting, because I thought I’d have more of a feverish response for NOT advertising why the signs were being posted! And I don’t mind answering the questions. I appreciate that you asked.
I see that you are an author, and have some significant experiences to share….congratulations and best of luck to you.
I checked out your Wikipedia page. It’s quite impressive. But that is why I give you the credit for sending me an email asking for more information. For the most part, I was just called names that high school students use!
Again….thanks for reaching out.
So, what I'm taking away from this, is the school isn't responsible for the frantic panic of IL legislators (obviously), and the principal is stuck in the middle between CCW activists, and "ZOMG GUNS ARE BAD MKAY?" parents, and trying to find a way to remain neutral.
So at least as far as this school is concerned, there's no hostility, just frazzlement, and really, namecalling and profanity doesn't help our, or any cause, eh?
Let's help IL join the rest of the states in CCW by being civilized and mature.
This is Why Honest Feminists Have A Hard Time Being Taken Seriously
Feb 05, 201409:00PM
A statue of a man in underwear, outside on the grounds.
From the article:
Others at the exclusive 2,400 student all-female private liberal arts institution are not buying any defense of the work.
Please, tell us all about the suffering and and repression you experienced in the The Hamptons.
“I go to a women’s college so that I’m part of an inclusive and supportive community, not one that supports male artists and statues of naked men instead of women,” wrote student Raeesah Kabir on the Davis Museum Facebook page.
Seriously, did you fail 3rd grade English? "Inclusive. To include, encompass." What you want is "Exclusive. To exclude, ostracize." So, real colleges are supposed to embrace the artistic, literary and verbal diarrhea of types like you, but you should be exempt from returning the favor? How about, "No"? Does "No" work for you? No? Tough shit. To be fair, the college is described as "Exclusive." I guess she forgot to read the pamphlet. If she can read. I'll be fair. I'll assume basic literacy is required for a degree in Haberdashery Studies.
“I think art’s intention is to confront, but not assault, and people can see this as assaulting,” Wellesley senior Annie Wang told the Boston Globe.
Liberal Literary "SF" And Its Irrelevance
Jan 29, 201410:32AM
Okay, I have to respond to this horseshit:
"To get your friends into SF, show them a whole bunch of shit that no one gives a crap about, along with a few classics that aren't really good for neophytes, and some hysteria-inducing leftism. And if that doesn't work, go with a 2nd previous generation's failed attempt at literary greatness."
I'd like to destroy the prejudicial notion that the entire future is leftist, and that this is normal, desirable and believable.
Near as I can tell, not a single "expert" they asked is within a standard deviation of center, and they're all on the left. The only one with reasonably good recommendations was John Scalzi. When he's your moderate, you may have a bit of a bias.
Heinlein's YA? Neal Stephenson? Lois Bujold? Larry Niven? Sci fi with, you know, actual science? Drake for any veterans. Hell, Ben Bova has lots of very good near future SF. Mercedes Lackey is both liberal (since that obviously matters to them) and a good writer, with some decent present-day urban fantasy.
I've read close to 10K SF books and written a few, and I've never even heard of most of those choices. That by itself proves nothing, except that they're not recommending anything anyone center, conservative or libertarian is going to be interested in, which is 75% of the population.
And I had to explain to some enlightened, outraged "liberal" in comments about Heinlein's _Friday_. "It starts off with the character being gangraped and she shrugs it off like it's no big deal! Disgusting!"
Why is it necessary for me to explain this to people?:
To Dayman: I'm amazed at how many SF readers don't get Friday.
Quite obviously, as is stressed throughout the book, the character does not think of herself as human. She's in a world where she is reminded every day that her status is beneath everyone else, she can never be what they are, even though she IS fully human.
She has been taught to completely suppress everything about herself. Her very expensive membership in a line family that considers her only a source of money is more of the same. (And even her racial background is bothersome to them.)
The character spends a book learning HOW TO BE HUMAN and to love and be loved.
That so many readers don't get it is a tragedy.
And that so-many so-called "liberals" don't get it just exposes modern liberalism for the complete sham it is. They don't actually see prejudice or POV, they only see the color or group affiliation they've been taught to look down on as "oppressed." They're clueless about the concept itself, however.
This is why literary SF will continue to grasp at relevance and market share.
I Met One Of Those People
Dec 18, 201308:30PM
I was at the Christmas Party for the Indiana Filmmaker's Network and the state film commission. And my badges says I'm a military consultant, among other things.
Grizzled Old Fat Guy With Beard: "What qualifies you to be a military consultant?"
Me: "Lots of research, and 25 years of service."
GOFGWB: "What branch?"
Me: "Army and Air Force."
GOFGWB: "Oh, I'm sorry."
The following went through my head in .0035 seconds.
Gee, let me guess, you used to be a Marine, right? One term of service, four years, in a support MOS, during the Cold War, with no trigger time, nor even any time in anywhere remotely hot. And you never actually did anything with the Air Force, you just want to jerk your dick about how you were once a Marine, trying to recapture the glory that 80 lbs and God knows how much booze has stolen from you. I mean, I've been downrange twice, in support, and don't make a big deal about it, and cleaned up after a major national disaster, and put in 6 years active and 19 Reserve, including a bunch of extra duty I didn't need to, as well as volunteering for said mobilizations. I'm Retired Reserve, still subject to recall, and can still meet the physical requirements and pass the PT test for both branches. But you used to be a Marine. So I guess that shows me.
Two minutes of polite conversation proved I batted 1.000.
Hey, Usetabe: Fuck you.
LTC Bob Bateman: Less Manly Than a Little Girl
Dec 10, 201302:20AM
There's an article about gun control that's all the rage on Esquire.com, by one Lieutenant Colonel Robert Bateman, but he says to call him Bob. Okay, "Bob," is that your name or what you do?
LTC Bob makes a big deal about being a combat arms officer, but discreetly alludes to the fact that it doesn't appear he's ever actually served in combat. He told someone:
“You may disagree with my analysis, but let us focus on that debate rather than getting into a dick-measuring contest about my qualifications as a US Army Strategist. Unless, of course, you are also closely familiar with Strategists? In which case, I’d be happy to engage in a critique of my functional area, and your belief that you are a better strategist than I am, but then you would have to give me your qualifications as a strategist.”
So, if you want to have a debate about the Second Amendment, I’m hear [sic] to listen and argue. Obviously we both have some pretty strong opinions about the topic.”
“PS~ You don’t need to use my rank. You’re retired and LTC is not exactly such an exalted rank that one needs to stand upon it. “Bob” will do just fine.”
He also is vague on his credentials but demands them from others. How cute.
And if "Bob" is good enough, why did he use his irrelevant title (likely in violation of the UCMJ) to promote his credibility? Why claim the Infantry status he admits isn't relevant, then switch to being a strategist? And what would being a strategist matter to the criminal use of small arms?
He's an FA59, which isn't really managing violence. From a 2007 Military Review article:
FA 59 officers execute key institutional and operational core processes, including formulation and implementation of strategy and strategic concepts and policies, and the generation, strategic projection, and operational employment of decisive joint and coalition land combat power.”1
In addition to the common leader competencies discussed in the chief of staff of the army’s “Pentathlete Vision,” FA 59 officers perform four unique functions: strategic appraisal; strategic and operational planning; joint, interagency, intergovernmental, and multinational (JIIM) integration; and strategic education.
He's a buzzword generator, and real warriors pay little attention to that bullshit. It's makework created by the lefticle desire to make war decent and kind and hearts and minds and such. Real warrior want beans, bullets, bandaids and batteries for the purpose of breaking people and killing things. Or vice versa.
"Managing violence" my ass.
And if he wants credentials, I do in fact have real world credentials in the use of the M16 (a lot more than he does, with military trophies to show for it), civilian rifles, and consults with clients that include firearm manufacturers who have real government contracts. So unless he's got some actual credentials in the field, he needs to take his own advice and STFU.
In response to comments and outrage, he called a documented SF soldier a "faker," a former AF Security Policeman who's now a federal agent a "peacetime veteran," and a gay, black 2nd Amendment supporter a "fake persona," because no gay black man could POSSIBLY support gun ownership. (That person's an acquaintance of mine. Gay, black, gun owning, conservative, union train engineer. How awesome is THAT combination?)
In short, he's the textbook example of the small-dicked little limpwrist who joined the military to prove he's not, and hates guns because he does have something to compensate for. Likely why he's been cuckolded twice and divorced. He doesn't measure up, literally and emotionally. Google "psychological projection."
Moving on, then, to his cute theories of gun control, which aren't worth dismantling, because they've been dismantled ad infinitum. It's like the junior high kid who can tell you why physicists are wrong about the speed of light, Creationists who can tell you why physicists, astronomers, geologists, biologists and geneticists are all wrong about the age of the Earth, and the guy who wants to insist there's no racism in America because he lives in an all white town and has never seen any. It's crap.
However, his legal and historical interpretations are wrong. The Dick Act doesn't say that. The Militia is defined in Title 10, USC, Ch 13, Sec 311, and isn't what he claims. "Well regulated" had a definition then, and still has a legal definition, and the unorganized militia IS well-regulated. It doesn't matter what Bob thinks about that process. He's not in Congress, he's not a SCOTUS Justice, and he's an ignorant little fuck. I'm quite happy the facts offend him.
Now, apart from violating the Constitution he swore to uphold and defend, this has another problem: It is retarded. It's also all crap we've heard before and laughed at. It's like the guy in the parking lot telling you what a badass he is, and how he's going to report you to the cops for taking his space.
That he had to give a lot of thought to this to come up with a retarded solution is not impressive.
Lessee: You'll pay 200% of "Face value," of all guns in the US. Awesome. Of course, "face value" is a currency term. You probably mean "market value." Cool. That works out to about $300 billion dollars. Really. Where is DoD going to get that money?
Oh, first of all, how did we establish DoD as a law enforcement arm? That seems to violate posse commitatus, AND make the military a domestic branch of the Executive. That's called "fascism," shitweasel.
But let's assume you proceed. A two year window. I wonder how many guns can be manufactured in that two year window? And what is their market value? I'm reasonably well known as a personality. If I get my 07 FFL, start cranking out single shot .22s and price them at $35K, I only need to sell one to a sponsor to establish that's the market value. If I don't sell any others, I can produce a few ten thousand with backing from my investor, turn in the inventory for $70K per rifle times 10,000, pay my investor 1000% on his investment, and still have enough money to retire to Macau. Me and 30,000 other people with machine tools. Let me guess: You never studied business, did you?
So, the list of things you suck at includes law, business, and being a military officer. You're good at throwing tantra, however. Maybe you should get a job with CAIR or PETA. They're about your speed.
Seriously, Bob, how the fuck did you get into the military? I thought incontinence was a bar to service. I don't think I've ever encountered a bigger pussy, and I first enlisted in the doldrums of the mid 80s and dealt with USAF supply who hated "camping" with the engineers.
Death threats? You threaten to ignore the Constitution based on your own retarded misreading, to ignore SCOTUS, threaten military violence against dissenters, and you wonder why you're getting death threats? Guess what: That's EXACTLY the purpose of the Second Amendment—so fascistic little shitweasels like yourself can be shot, tossed into a ditch, and anointed with beer, after it takes a short detour through our kidneys. There are about 100 million gun owners and families. Want to bet on the odds of one of them shooting you down like a rabid dog?
Count on it, Shitweasel. This is in fact a death threat: If you somehow get more than 50 votes (but you won't) and actually become president (you won't), should you order such a chain of events (you can't and won't), and should it actually appear it will come to pass (it won't), I will kill you. And being some uber-Infantry officer will not save you. Especially as you're not.
In reality, he's just jealous that my teenage daughter (who was 11 in this picture) is more of a man than he is, has more weapons handling experience, and thinks he's a pussy:
Yeah, as a warrior, this guy's a great excuse for a sniveling little bitch. And I don't mind telling him that to his face, if he wants to make an issue of it.
Bob, let me give you some advice: If you're going to shit your pants, don't do it in public. It's embarrassing to you, and makes the Army look bad. Have the decency to do it in private. And don't shame the Rangers, Airborne, Infantry by pretending you're some kind of warrior. You're a pathetic coward. That you even became an officer is a disgrace to the Army.
In conclusion, I'm running for Dictator, not President.
I have a better plank than his: Elect me, and Bob ("Mastur") Bateman will be lashed to a table and raped to death by rabid yaks on Viagra.
My platform only violates the rights of one person, therefore it is morally superior to his.
From me: Christmas Sales and Gifts
Dec 08, 201312:23AM
For those of you who don't follow me in other media, a couple of updates.
http://michaelzwilliamson.com/bibliography.html my books are here, and can be bought through Amazon and I make a few cents extra through that link, and on anything else you buy on that clickthrough. I appreciate it. If you prefer electronic editions, BaenEBooks.com is the place to go to get the best price and send me the biggest cut of royalties. If you'd like a signed edition of something, email me and I'll see what I have in the office.
http://www.sharppointythings.com/knives.html some of my custom knives can be found at this link, email me if you're interested. I make them intermittently, and they tend to sell fast when I do.
http://www.etsy.com/shop/ActionStudios?ref=ss_profile are my wife's cloaks, well made, great for costuming, and sturdy enough for use in re-enactments. They last for years.
Enjoy your holiday of choice.
Working on Thanksgiving--Waaaah.
Nov 26, 201301:18PM
Okay, so some bunch of whiners has decided to single out WalMart for demanding its employees work on Thanksgiving. THE HORROR!
What's going to happen when you run out of wine, realize you forgot to get any rosemary or need some condensed milk for the pumpkin pie? You'll want WalMart, or some other store, to be open.
What happens when your roasting pan breaks?
Are they planning to protest the airlines for making their employees work, taking them to see their families?
What about those police and fire departments that selfishly expect their staff to be working, to respond to your dinner brawls and cooking misadventures gone flamey?
When they get food poisoning, do they want the ER doc, interns, nurses and staff to have the day off "to be with their families"?
Perhaps DoD should shut down, vacate the missile solos, and let the ships float freely around the sea for a few days?
Maybe State Dept could tell all our foreign interests, "Sorry, we're not working today. Holiday! Stop your fighting and demands."
What about that hotel they're using to visit Grandma and Grandpa. Should it be closed, the desk staff home with their families? What's wrong with sleeping in a bus stop, or in Grandma's spare room full of used medical devices and creepy stuffed cats?
As for me, I'll be working on the meal, then loading my van, then setting up at a convention, because if I want any money, I have to go out and earn it. This doesn't bother me. It's called "life."
Sandy Hook Conspiritards Need a High Five...To The Face...With a Ball Bat.
Nov 25, 201307:50PM
I wrote this last year, but it was a little late to be relevant. Well, it is again:
"ZOMG! Sandy Hook was a conspiracy!"
Okay, I will try logic before a ball bat. Here goes:
Utterly Idiotic Insane Nutjob Tantrum #1: "No one actually died at Sandy Hook!"
If someone faked 26 people dying in your town, don't you think a few people would say, "Huh…I've never heard of any of them. Did you know any of them, son?" A few…or a few hundred.
UIINT #2: "See, the FB tribute page to this teacher is dated THREE DAYS earlier in this screen cap!"
1: FB glitches, as anyone who's used it will tell you.
B} People change names on their page to get a bunch of followers to spam later, and because it's "clever" to screw with idiots. Someone even demonstrated this by backdating a forum post to a year before the event.
III] Why would anyone setting this up make a mistake like that? Wouldn't they double check? After all, this is a conspiracy so competent they've got dozens of people who have all played their part so well.
d) In fact, why would you bother setting up a page at all, when someone else will certainly put up a tribute page? And why on FB specifically, not a dedicated website?
V| Since there are plenty of computer experts who CAN find out who did this and when, it would be stupid.
F. Why would they do so ahead of time? Wait until a few hours later. There's no rush.
Seven~ Why should I believe your claim is real? Photoshop, anyone? It's not like it's a birth certificate or something.
Hey, you could ask who set it up and see if that person actually lives in town and is real. Eh?
UIINT #3: "There was only one ambulance there!"
At what time? Says who? So what? "We need an ambulance." If they knew to send 26, THAT would be evidence of something. Sending one just proves there was only one in that general area who got the call at that time. How many came later? THINK.
UIINT #4: "This guy in this video looks like some other guy in some other video!"
So what? There's an entire internet meme based on this.
UIINT #5: "See, this guy is laughing before he's crying!"
Yes. People in shock often want to pretend nothing is wrong ("Denial" stage of grief). They do it at funerals, before surgery, when injured, during loss. Any health care professional will tell you this…if you believe in health care professionals. If not, we may have found part of your problem.
As to "Getting into character," people in duress want to appear affable and friendly. It would be a shame if the doc let them die on the table. It would be terrible if the detective didn't devote a hundred hours to recovering their stuff.
Age 18, in the ER, I was cracking jokes while they peeled my burned hands like gloves. Obviously, I wasn't really in pain, right?
And yes, people get excited and nervous about being on TV (having been on national networks a dozen times, I know this) and can react oddly.
Does this person match up with a real person? Is that person the father of a child?
If not, why aren't the REAL parents, and friends, and relatives, and neighbors, and acquaintances, screaming fucking murder?
If there is no such dead child, why aren't the friends, neighbors, classmates, all going, "Huh? WHO????"
It does not make ANY kind of sense for an "actor" to be doing it. Nor would it make sense for that smiling footage to be shot, much less released, unless it was completely innocent.
He may have been too shocky to do anything, and had to TRY to look upset, because he knows it's expected.
Or maybe he hated the little brat his wife burdened him with and is happy. Unlikely? More likely than being an "Actor" of a child who doesn't exist, or replacing a parent who does.
UIINT #6: "They interviewed one of the kids, but they didn't ask him for a detailed breakdown of the incident!"
You know what, you're right. They should totally have waterboarded that kid to get you the answers you want. Fuck his shock, loss and terror. THIS IS ABOUT THE TRUTH!
UIINT #7: "FEMA/DHS had ROLE PLAYERS in the area for an exercise. What do you think of THAT?"
I think I know of at least two groups of same within 100 miles of me, just based on community information. Regardless of the legion of problems both agencies have, they do actually get paid to study scenarios and practice, not just post drivel on Facebook. Sorry, was that close to home?
UIINT #8: "These two/three/four cops all gave slightly different accounts!"
So, like typical eyewitnesses, then?
If they all read from the same script, THEN I'd be concerned.
UIINT #9: "Why haven't we seen all the video/audio/reports?"
Compiling information for an incident like this takes weeks. Once it's done, there will be a copy available through FOIA. Though since you're not going to believe it anyway, why do you care?
UIINT #10: "We already know they set this guy up to kill!"
Waaaaaait, whaaaattttt? Based on what information do we "know" this? Who is "they"? How would they "Set him up"? And if you really believe there are groups of people in this country who'd do that for some kind of political point, you should already have gone and shot them, even if it means sacrificing yourself, to save others. PS: please don't.
UIINT #11: "Isn't the timing suspicious?"
For what? Politicians will always exploit an event for political gain. When is a non-suspicious time for a killing spree? Or a good time?
UIINT #12: "What about the bus driver who dropped 6 kids off somewhere else?" (or something. I really stopped listening by then.)
If someone was doing something stupid or questionable at that moment, as people often do, they'd DEFINITELY be in denial and damage control.
UIINT #13: "Isn't it suspicious that no one survived?"
Other than the survivors you mean?
UUINT #14: "Isn't it suspicious that they demolished the school immediately afterward to hide the evidence?"
In October 2013, a year later, after the FBI, the police, several other agencies went through it, and the school board and city council took a vote and agreed to pay $57 million for a new school? And all those actors, and fake parents, and...man, there must be 3000 people in this conspiracy. Who knew the 0bama administration was so competent? Oh, wait: They didn't get any relevant new gun control out of this. Oops.
What really happened: Some mentally ill individual, with poor grasp of reality, decided the only way to relieve his own pain was to kill a bunch of others for some reason that makes sense only to someone mentally ill in that fashion. May God, if he exists, have mercy on all their souls.
Not convinced? Then please go commit seppuku with a chainsaw.
You are free to comment as you wish, as always. I won't be wasting my time reading any conspiracy crap, so any "See this proof!!!!" BS will be ignored. Have fun.