Batman massacre: People killed at Dark Knight premiere

[bassman]

So what you're saying is, smiling makes your nose bigger? Are you serious dude? Maybe not for everyone, but it's certainly possible for his nose to flare when he smiles. Mine does. Just about everything you've listed are things that slightly change according to what expression the face is making. Play in a mirror for a minute and note the differences.... It's the same guy. Put your tinfoil hat back on and go back to your bomb shelter.

[LouCipherr]

Maybe not for everyone, but it's certainly possible for his nose to flare when he smiles. Mine does. Just about everything you've listed are things that slightly change according to what expression the face is making. That's not a "nostril flare" bass. It's physically larger the entire length of his nose. When your nostrils flare (whether it be from laughing, smiling, or a grimace), the openings of the nostrils will get bigger, but the cartilage the entire length of your nose doesn't suddenly get larger. And leave my tinfoil hat alone. I've been wearing it so long it fits perfectly now.

[babomb]

So what you're saying is, smiling makes your nose bigger? Are you serious dude? Also, take a look at this: http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_21...cise-at-parker Same day, same scenario. Coincidence? Isn't that just the strangest coincidence that when these events happen, 9/11, the subway attack in the UK, this theater shooting, that they just happen to be doing identical simulations at the time? I don't know what it means, but it's awfully coincidental! BTW, the 2nd part of the theater shooting audio is up:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4bGB...&feature=share

[LouCipherr]

Isn't that just the strangest coincidence that when these events happen, 9/11, the subway attack in the UK, this theater shooting, that they just happen to be doing identical simulations at the time? I don't know what it means, but it's awfully coincidental! Why, yes it is! Thank you, babomb. I was going to point those out too with links, but figured it would just be pushed aside and blamed on me wearing my tinfoil hat (which looks good on me, btw.. ) Let's also not forget that one day before the Haiti earthquake, the military just happened to be performing exercises based on what? Oh yeah, Haiti suffering an enormous natural disaster: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17122 http://noliesradio.org/archives/11301 If these things are indeed coincidence, I think we need to redefine the term.

[bassman]

That's not a "nostril flare" bass. It's physically larger the entire length of his nose. When your nostrils flare (whether it be from laughing, smiling, or a grimace), the openings of the nostrils will get bigger, but the cartilage the entire length of your nose doesn't suddenly get larger. The nostrils are the only thing different about his nose. Whatever difference it is that you think you're seeing, is probably down to realistic factors such as angles, lighting, expression, quality, etc. Not a friggin conspiracy. Give me a break, man. I would expect this from some of these members here, but not you. Don't join 'em Lou!!!

[Sammich]

Another incident that the national news won't cover because it doesn't support their hysterical animist anti-gun agenda. Gun carrying man ends stabbing spree at Salt Lake grocery store SALT LAKE CITY (ABC 4 News) - A citizen with a gun stopped a knife wielding man as he began stabbing people Thursday evening at the downtown Salt Lake City Smith's store. Police say the suspect purchased a knife inside the store and then turned it into a weapon. Smith's employee Dorothy Espinoza says, "He pulled it out and stood outside the Smiths in the foyer. And just started stabbing people and yelling you killed my people. You killed my people." Espinoza says, the knife wielding man seriously injured two people. "There is blood all over. One got stabbed in the stomach and got stabbed in the head and held his hands and got stabbed all over the arms." Then, before the suspect could find another victim - a citizen with a gun stopped the madness. "A guy pulled gun on him and told him to drop his weapon or he would shoot him. So, he dropped his weapon and the people from Smith's grabbed him."

[babomb]

The nostrils are the only thing different about his nose. Whatever difference it is that you think you're seeing, is probably down to realistic factors such as angles, lighting, expression, quality, etc. Not a friggin conspiracy. Give me a break, man. I would expect this from some of these members here, but not you. Don't join 'em Lou!!! I'm not convinced that these are 2 different guys, but it wouldn't come as a shock if that turned out to be the case. But if you think that everything with this shooting/shooter is on the level you're either not paying close enough attention or just not even willing to consider anything but the official explanation. Too much of this incident doesn't add up. There's documentation to prove that Project:MKUltra was indeed a real project by America and canada dating back to the 50's. Not to mention that both governments freely admit that it was a real project. Over 30 universities were involved in research and testing on the project. It's a fact that these tests were performed on people without their knowledge and consent . And not just those involved in the project, they performed these tests on citizens. Among the tests performed were things like torture, hypnosis, administering an assortment of drugs for the purpose of inducing amnesia. From wikipedia: One 1955 MKUltra document gives an indication of the size and range of the effort; this document refers to the study of an assortment of mind-altering substances described as follows:[27] Substances which will promote illogical thinking and impulsiveness to the point where the recipient would be discredited in public. Substances which increase the efficiency of mentation and perception. Materials which will cause the victim to age faster/slower in maturity. Materials which will promote the intoxicating effect of alcohol. Materials which will produce the signs and symptoms of recognized diseases in a reversible way so that they may be used for malingering, etc. Materials will cause temporary/permanent brain damage and loss of memory. Substances which will enhance the ability of individuals to withstand privation, torture and coercion during interrogation and so-called "brain-washing". Materials and physical methods which will produce amnesia for events preceding and during their use. Physical methods of producing shock and confusion over extended periods of time and capable of surreptitious use. Substances which produce physical disablement such as paralysis of the legs, acute anemia, etc. Substances which will produce a chemical that can cause blisters. Substances which alter personality structure in such a way that the tendency of the recipient to become dependent upon another person is enhanced. A material which will cause mental confusion of such a type that the individual under its influence will find it difficult to maintain a fabrication under questioning. Substances which will lower the ambition and general working efficiency of men when administered in undetectable amounts. Substances which promote weakness or distortion of the eyesight or hearing faculties, preferably without permanent effects. A knockout pill which can surreptitiously be administered in drinks, food, cigarettes, as an aerosol, etc., which will be safe to use, provide a maximum of amnesia, and be suitable for use by agent types on an ad hoc basis. A material which can be surreptitiously administered by the above routes and which in very small amounts will make it impossible for a person to perform physical activity. James Holmes is claiming that he has no memory of the shooting. In the video of him in the court room he looks like he's drugged up big time. Although the CIA insists that MKUltra-type experiments have been abandoned, many CIA observers say there is little reason to believe it does not continue today under a different set of acronyms.[46] 14-year CIA veteran Victor Marchetti has stated in various interviews that the CIA routinely conducts disinformation campaigns and that CIA mind control research continued. In a 1977 interview, Marchetti specifically called the CIA claim that MKUltra was abandoned a "cover story" If you're one of those people who automatically dismisses anything that even resembles a conspiracy, then the world is a much bigger and more dangerous place than you have the ability to comprehend. You can't take anything at face value anymore. You have to question everything. If you don't question everything you put yourself in a very precarious and vulnerable position.

[AcesandEights]

If you're one of those people who automatically dismisses anything that even resembles a conspiracy, then the world is a much bigger and more dangerous place than you have the ability to comprehend. Yeah, but when people only ever see conspiracies they have their own set of problems. Events just happened, information is still unfolding and people are posting (not here, but on some of the media people have linked to) with a whole set of overblown theories that they seem to be certain are the truth. That's paranoia.

[Sammich]

This is from Ben Swann an investigative reporter at an independently owned FOX affiliate in Cincinnati. He does stories that the corporate controlled media refuses to touch and is very fair in his reporting. Reality Check: Unanswered Questions About Colorado Theater Massacre

[babomb]

I understand America's history with the gun and the laws that are available for them. But America also had a history of slavery and laws enacted to sanction those rights too. Times change, laws change. There's nothing in the bill of rights that states that americans have the "right to keep slaves" though. Which is the issue at hand when it comes to gun rights. I can't help but notice that when it comes to these rights everyone vehemently protects the 1st amm of free speech, but when it comes to the 2nd amm people feel as if we can do without that one. Or that when the bill of rights was drafted assault rifles didn't exist, and if the founding fathers could see things today that they too would agree.. No. not at all. When you start picking and choosing which rights from the BOR should be upheld and which ones shouldn't you're putting every single right contained in the document at risk. The idea behind the 2nd amm is to give the people the means to protect all the other rights contained in that document. And the ability to form militias made up of the people to protect against tyranny and totalitarianism. There's a reason that it's the 2nd amm. The assault rifle is the modern musket. Since the 2nd amm isn't about hunting for food or sport, if you narrowed it down to mean only hunting or sport firearms and not assault rifles, then there's no difference between completely abolishing the 2nd amm. The people can't resist against a well equipped military force using hunting rifles and shotguns, when the opposition DOES have assault rifles. That's the idea behind the 2nd amm, to level the playing field. Otherwise there's no checks and balances to stop those in power from exerting total control over the populace. So IMO, the 2nd amm applies especially to assault rifles. And it makes no difference whatsoever that anti-gun people think that the people have no chance of winning such a war. Are we supposed to say "yeah, you're right. that is a silly idea. so we can just abolish the 2nd amm since it's intentions are no longer practical"? I'm not too familiar with the constitution you guys have, but do you guys pick and choose what rights you feel are worth upholding and which ones aren't? I would hope not. But then again, you guys probably don't have a government that doesn't give a flying fuck about it's people either. Our constitution states in very clear language that it's the responsibility of the people to uphold the constitution and BOR. I feel like some of you guys just totally disregard all the issues regarding our bill of rights and think that we as americans are just using that as an excuse to keep our guns. And I don't understand where you're coming from in that regard. If that's the case, then why isn't Ireland a hotbed of gun massacre. We watch the same films as the US. We play the same games too. But we can't walk off the street and but an AR15, TEC 9 or AK47 and blow a load of people away when we get pissed off. No, games and movies is not the cause and censorship is also not a solution. That's been tried and today, it would require a worldwide effort to deny people access to violent films and video games. I never said it was THE cause. I also said that the reason it plays a big role, IMO, is because parents are using films and games as babysitters. And aren't taking an active role in limiting kids exposure to it. Kids are being raised by the media because parents are too busy to do it themselves. So they see things in films and games that appeals to them and they don't have anything telling them that these things aren't acceptable. The line between fantasy and reality are being totally erased because of a long list of societal ills. So just access to violent films and games is not THE cause, just like access to firearms is not THE cause. So why then is restricting access to firearms THE solution, but restricting access to violent films and games is not? Because it's easier? That's my point entirely! And it's why this is such a problem here in the 1st place. Because so many people are willing to take the easy way out instead of actually solving the problem. Even if guns were abolished next year or 20 years from now, that doesn't solve the underlying problem behind this. So what would end up happening would be that after getting rid of guns many people would just consider the problem remedied and move on. But that underlying problem would then begin to manifest itself in other ways. So why give up a fundamental right as a quick half ass solution? It will also take a worldwide effort to deny people access to assault rifles. Very few assault rifles are designed and manufactured in the US. The most common assault rifle, the AK-47 and it's variants are manufactured mostly in eastern European countries and Asia. Just having a law banning them in no way means that they'll be eradicated from the country. This will propose other problems. They won't be regulated, won't have registered serial numbers, there will be no records of transfer on them, and they'll be much cheaper because they're cheaper to make. There will also be no reason for them to be restricted to semi-auto because they're illegal either way. Your standard AK and most variants are manufactured as select fire weapons, complete with bayonet lug and collapsible stock. Originally Posted by shootemindehead I don't think that would have been the case. More than likely there would have been more people injured with two or more people involved in a firefight...in a darkened theatre...with panicing people running for their lives. Besides, if someone did draw their pop gun, they would lack the training to deal with such a confused situation and Holmes was armed with this... ...and covered from head to toe in kevlar body armour. If you listen to the audio clips I posted, the cops give a description of the suspect more than once, and it was in fact only a tactical vest. Not a ballistic vest like everyone is claiming. A .22 will go through a tactical vest. So if there was an armed citizen in that theater 1 or 2 shots with a 9mm would've ended the rampage. I still lean toward the idea that this guy had help in organizing this massacre. In almost all other mass shootings the shooter has some sort of connection with the location and the victims. This was just totally random. Similar to the DC sniper. Who just happened to be a Gulf War vet with an elite unit. That itself throws up alot of red flags IMO.

[bassman]

If you're one of those people who automatically dismisses anything that even resembles a conspiracy, then the world is a much bigger and more dangerous place than you have the ability to comprehend. You can't take anything at face value anymore. You have to question everything. If you don't question everything you put yourself in a very precarious and vulnerable position. No, not everything can be taken at face value. I agree with you on that. But as Aces mentioned before me, when you start applying crazy conspiracy theories to everything, even the most simple of events such as this shooting,...well....then you're just being paranoid. If that's the case, it's time to peel off from the computer and work your way into the real world....

[shootemindehead]

There's nothing in the bill of rights that states that americans have the "right to keep slaves" though. Perhaps, but the point remains. White people had the "right" to own slaves in the States, until such a time that it was altered. Which is the issue at hand when it comes to gun rights. I can't help but notice that when it comes to these rights everyone vehemently protects the 1st amm of free speech, but when it comes to the 2nd amm people feel as if we can do without that one. I cannot recall anyone suggesting this. The call is for tighter regulations, which is still withing the spirit of the actual document. "A well regulated militia..." Clearly the regulations which are at play at the moment aren't working, or at least aren't working enough to help prevent these type of massacres and it comes down to a matter of regulation, not banning, as some people would like to suggest. Most people who would agree with tighter regulation on guns don't want to see banning. They want to see guns not falling into the hands of those who would use them for nefarious purposes. The "Yall ain'tn takin ur gunnns!!!" approach is not helpful in any situation and comes across as completely careless and oblivious to incidents like these. But then again, you guys probably don't have a government that doesn't give a flying fuck about it's people either. I wouldn't be so quick to draw that conclusion. Unfortuanately, our political system (while not as farcical as America's) is riddled with corruption, cronyism and self interest. Our own people have been entrenched in bullshit party politics, that thankfully has been changing over the last few years. In addition, I haven't the time to go into a debate on films etc. But, I agree, people of a certain age SHOULD be restricted from viewing certain material. But banning movies? (not that I'm saying that you are suggesting this). That's nonsense and it's been tried in Europe aleady with little success. There is no single issue regarding these type of massacres at play. There's a combination. But, it seems to me that there just isn't enough people who actually give a damn about kids getting blown away to do anything about it and until that happens, these incidents will continue to occur. It's a combination of a lack of substantial healthcare that isn't financially prohibitive, America's gun fetish, the ridiculously easy access to weaponry and other societal issues (like an over-inflated sense of entitlement) that allows these middle class white guys to carry out their deeds.

[babomb]

Perhaps, but the point remains. White people had the "right" to own slaves in the States, until such a time that it was altered. Nobody in America at this point had anything to do with that. And average American citizens didn't have slaves. Only the Aristocratic elite had slaves. And they still do. They turned the people at large into slaves. I don't understand what you're trying to infer here? That the 2nd amm somehow violates civil rights? And/or that some of what Americans claim to be "rights" are not or should not be considered rights? Or are you calling out white people in America for being some sort of evil race that subjects other races and nations to it's violent and war obsessed ways? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you're NOT saying any of that, and not respond according to it. But I'd like you to be honest and tell me if that's what you're saying or not. I am in no way opposed to putting a regulation on assault rifles(or any firearms for that matter) where someone that has a history of mental illness or abuse is no longer eligible to own or purchase them. That's common sense, and it will also go a long way to stop people who seek to further limit firearm ownership from limiting them to the point where responsible law abiding people are at risk. Convicted felons can't own guns. And that isn't a big deal to me or pretty much anyone else who's against stricter gun laws. They shouldn't have them. Neither should mentally unstable people. The question is what constitutes mental illness? A serious mental illness such as Bi-polar disorder or Schizophrenia? I couldn't and wouldn't argue against something like that. However, if that were extended to include anyone who has ever had any sort of therapy, that I wouldn't support because it could be extended to apply to anyone. Which is the major concern. That what starts out as a logical measure ends up going way farther than it should.. Doctors push drugs, so if you go see one they're gonna diagnose you with something. Not because you definitely have a real disorder, but because it's a business and they want you to keep coming back and paying for office visits and keep filling your prescription because doctors own pharmaceutical stock. This is a symptom of the perversion of capitalism that has become the American way. And this is why when it comes to law and politics, nothing is ever as simple as it seems. My younger brother was diagnosed as a child with Tourettes Syndrome[sp] and medicated for it. He displayed none of the symptoms, and it wasn't until High School that the diagnosis was reversed and he was taken off the meds. It was determined that he never had TS at all, all he had was a minor learning disorder. And this was a specialist that diagnosed him with it to start with. Things like this happen all the time here. I'm not saying it would apply to tourrettes, just showing how inept and self serving doctors can be. So what happens when a law goes into effect that stops people with mental illness from owning guns and people are still constantly being improperly diagnosed because of policy? There are people within our government who feel threatened by the 2nd amm. And they will capitalize on anything they can. This is the basis of our concern regarding gun laws. Nobody will dispute the *idea* that mentally ill and abusive people shouldn't have guns. Putting that into effect in a way that achieves it's goal but doesn't restrict the rights of law abiding citizens is the challenge. Especially when the tendency is for the goal of the law to be an absolute priority, and the rights infringement is seen as an unfortunate but unavoidable consequence. Everytime rights are stepped on it comes in the guise or form of best intention.

[Sammich]

There are people within our government who would like nothing more than to see the 2nd amm totally abolished. And they will capitalize on new laws to push that agenda. This is the basis of our concern regarding gun laws. Nobody will dispute the *idea* that mentally ill and abusive people shouldn't have guns. Putting that into effect in a way that achieves it's goal but doesn't restrict the rights of law abiding citizens is the challenge. Especially when the tendency is for the goal of the law to be an absolute priority, and the rights infringement is seen as an unfortunate but unavoidable consequence. I have been in the "gun culture" for a long time and have seen all types of schemes by those in the medical/psychiatric field using their positions to push a political agenda of banning guns. Everything from shrinks wanting to define as a mental illness someone who merely wanted to own guns to one doctor trying to argue that firearms are a pathogen and controlling of guns should fall under the jurisdiction of federal health agencies like the CDC. All in it just came down to quacks twisting cherry picked data and anectodal incidents to fit their pre-determined conclusions and thus completely bypassing the accepted the scientific method. This is much like what is going on with "global warming" scam. The problem when doctors declare someone "unfit" it is almost impossible to get the ruling reversed even when it was in error, intentional or not. Here is a recent example of this happening to a youtube prepper named dsarti1. Do you really want anyone with an MD after their name able to arbitrarily determine when your rights can be terminated? The only time this should be allowed is by determination of a jury trial.

[babomb]

No, not everything can be taken at face value. I agree with you on that. But as Aces mentioned before me, when you start applying crazy conspiracy theories to everything, even the most simple of events such as this shooting,...well....then you're just being paranoid. If that's the case, it's time to peel off from the computer and work your way into the real world.... You could be right. And i don't think that all other mass shootings are false flag. There's a sizable and growing amount of people that question these events like I do. Are they all just individual cases of paranoia? That would be something, no? There has to be a reason for that to occur. What would that be? Maybe because our government lies to us about almost everything? And if the government was doing clandestine tests on people with drugs and torture in the 50's with limited amount of success for the most part, then you have to wonder what they're doing now and what is the extent. That seems like common sense to me. What exactly is the real world? Everyone's perceptions of the real world are different. Can you tell me what it is that makes the way that you see the world the way that it really is?