AuthorTopic: Sandy Hook School Shooting Clean Version of Investigation.  (Read 3784 times)

Offline peter

  • Administrator
  • Waitstaff
  • *****
  • Posts: 413
    • View Profile
Re: Sandy Hook School Shooting Clean Version of Investigation.
« Reply #15 on: January 28, 2013, 10:47:19 PM »
joandarc | January 28, 2013 at 2:34 pm | Reply   

Thank you Dr. Eowyn. I did not understand the pre-dating issue and what happened.

Offline peter

  • Administrator
  • Waitstaff
  • *****
  • Posts: 413
    • View Profile
Re: Sandy Hook School Shooting Clean Version of Investigation.
« Reply #16 on: January 28, 2013, 10:48:23 PM »
Jeremy | January 28, 2013 at 1:56 pm | Reply   

Joandarc,
Good question. “here” posted a comment on the technical thread showing that ALS had been routinely pre-dating news posts for months. They did this because of a glitch on their website that was causing news items to not appear on their home page when dated with today’s date. We could have fixed the glitch for them, but weren’t aware of the problem. This was a “hack” way to make the news items show up on the home page.

Offline peter

  • Administrator
  • Waitstaff
  • *****
  • Posts: 413
    • View Profile
Re: Sandy Hook School Shooting Clean Version of Investigation.
« Reply #17 on: January 28, 2013, 10:49:25 PM »
Dr. Eowyn | January 28, 2013 at 2:02 pm | Reply   

Jeremy,

Does this comment mean you will accept my invitation to be the counsel for the Defense in our mock “The People v. Crisis Management Institute” trial? Recall that I had extended the invitation to you by email, but you declined.

http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2013/01/26/how-to-know-sandy-hook-guide-predated-massacre-technical-discussion/
« Last Edit: January 28, 2013, 10:52:38 PM by peter »

Offline peter

  • Administrator
  • Waitstaff
  • *****
  • Posts: 413
    • View Profile
Re: Sandy Hook School Shooting Clean Version of Investigation.
« Reply #18 on: January 28, 2013, 10:52:11 PM »
Jeremy | January 28, 2013 at 2:09 pm | Reply   

No. I feel like I have presented my case already, and Peter’s approach is ridiculous. I don’t have time to go through it at that level. When I see other readers that care enough to ask questions, I will clarify my viewpoint with them, as I did here. But I’m not going to go through a process that Peter dictates only to have my credibility and/or existence (!!!) questioned later like he did last time. I’ve laid out tons of evidence, and I am accepting the fact that people will ultimately believe what they choose to believe. That’s why we have blogs, right?

Offline peter

  • Administrator
  • Waitstaff
  • *****
  • Posts: 413
    • View Profile
Re: Sandy Hook School Shooting Clean Version of Investigation.
« Reply #19 on: January 28, 2013, 10:54:25 PM »
Dr. Eowyn | January 28, 2013 at 2:12 pm | Reply   

“But I’m not going to go through a process that Peter dictates….”

Peter is a commenter on FOTM, just like you. I really don’t appreciate your portraying FOTM as being “dictated” by Peter. My invitation to you is precisely so that you get a forum to present your case, systematically and in your own fashion.

Offline peter

  • Administrator
  • Waitstaff
  • *****
  • Posts: 413
    • View Profile
Re: Sandy Hook School Shooting Clean Version of Investigation.
« Reply #20 on: January 28, 2013, 10:55:43 PM »
Jeremy | January 28, 2013 at 2:38 pm | Reply   

Dr. Eowyn, fair enough. I didn’t mean that FOTM as a whole was dictated by Peter. I wouldn’t still be contributing at all if it were. I just meant that this suggested “prosecution” vs “defense” approach allows the prosecutor to set the tone and then the defense must respond to his claims. And frankly, I quit reading what he wrote 3 days ago. When he’s done, let me know. In a few paragraphs, I will then summarize what I already had to say and let readers reach their own conclusions. Thanks for including me.

Offline peter

  • Administrator
  • Waitstaff
  • *****
  • Posts: 413
    • View Profile
Re: Sandy Hook School Shooting Clean Version of Investigation.
« Reply #21 on: January 28, 2013, 11:54:46 PM »
Peter | January 28, 2013 at 11:53 pm | Reply

I am up and running again and will be present here most of the day tomorrow.

This material is confusing enough to understand going through it in an orderly fashion. Jumping all over the place makes it impossible. I will continue on in a plodding but orderly way. My estimation currently is that it will take about 4 days to go through the evidence still before us and make sense of it.

I will respond to all the points Jeremy has made when we reach the place in the investigation they apply to. At that point we will explore in detail what he says as well as what happened.

The exploration needs to be as detailed as what I have presented above. Vague statements from Jeremy about what happened are not proof. We will take the computer processes that Jeremy says caused the bug requiring pre-dating of news items at Arlington Schools apart step by step and see if they make sense. If not we will explore other ways to explain the documents in question.

Because this is not an official investigation we do not have the right to gather all the required evidence. We cannot compel anyone to contribute. We will need to work around that problem.

 At times the investigation will be like putting together a jig saw puzzle. It will be acceptable to place pieces on the table that we don't know exactly where they fit, or are true, were we think they might go.

We will then go on and fit as many other pieces around them as possible, that we do know for a fact are true. Eventually the area around the unproven pieces will become so small they can only fit in the puzzle in one way. At the end of the investigation if all the pieces fit together, leaving no holes, or left over pieces, we can assume the result proven.

I am after the truth here not to build a false case. If there is an innocent explanation  for these document, we will come to know that for a fact. Even though I have serious reservations about such a possibility, I hope that is the case. If the documents are shown to prove foreknowledge of the events of December 14th 2012, the list of possible culprits is very small. That is a very scary thought.

If an investigation proving definitely that the Sandy Hook School Shootings were a False Flag ever became public on a large scale, it would be a world changing event.

I will start the morning tomorrow by responding to two points Jeremy made above. One relates to material I presented above, the other relates to what we will explore next.

See you all tomorrow.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
19 Replies
5488 Views
Last post February 07, 2013, 02:23:42 PM
by Surly1
0 Replies
831 Views
Last post February 16, 2016, 06:35:13 PM
by RE
0 Replies
704 Views
Last post July 04, 2019, 01:54:25 PM
by azozeo