So what could be the true identity of the shooter? Someone who has volunteered to spend the rest of their life in prison being raped every day?
No, that will be the fate of Cruz. The real shooters escaped, as planned, just as happened at San Bernardino and Newtown. They were mercenaries in the employ of whoever it was that staged this.
So who is Cruz then if not the shooter? Whoever he is, doesn't he have to agree to go to prison for the rest of his life and get raped every day?
Considering the many and typical contradictions emerging in this story, it's likely that Cruz is just like Oswald or James Earl Ray--patsies, fall guys, scapegoats, whatever.
An excellent question! Maybe something like MKUltra? I don't know, but they've been playing similar games for decades at least. I am suspicious of those "adopted" parents who were so quickly shown on TV.
Yes I think he was real, but like this case, the real shooter was not Adam Lanza, he was not the name released with the story.
I am not certain. The one father in particular appeared to be play-acting. There are so many weird things about SH that it is hard to say for sure.
But you think that the shooter was real. Why would there need to be a real shooter if kids being shot was not part of the false flag operation?
Please check the meaning of the word I used to answer your good question, "UNCERTAIN". You may be correct that nobody died at SH. It is absolutely possible, all things considered. I am uncertain that any kids died there. I tend to agree with you--none died. But I am not certain. I am absolutely certain that it was a staged event meant to advance a gun control agenda. I am uncertain as to whether kids died, or not. English.
You are uncertain whether kids died however my understanding is that you think that there was definitely a shooter. If you think there was a shooter, doesn't that mean that you have to also believe that kids were at least shot? If the false flag plan was for no kids to be shot, then why was a shooter required? Actually I don't think that nobody died at SH.
Your last sentence is a double negative with the literal meaning that somebody died at SH. Is that what you mean?
You were implying that I said that I think that nobody died at SH. I'm saying that I do not think this. You are uncertain whether kids died however my understanding is that you think that there was definitely a shooter. If you think there was a shooter, doesn't that mean that you have to also believe that kids were at least shot? If the false flag plan was for no kids to be shot, then why was a shooter required?
Let me elaborate. SH was a staged event, and that means there were actors involved, people who knew they were acting in a staged event. So my more precise statement would be that I am not certain there was an actual shooter. IF children were killed, obviously somebody had to do the killing. IF children were killed by gunfire, SOMEBODY had to do the shooting, but it was NOT Adam Lanza.
That would be the logical assumption, but as you probably know, we never were allowed to see inside the building, and the demolition company that eventually demolished the building was sworn to secrecy about what they saw in there with a non-disclosure agreement. As with other such events, forensic procedures were ignored regarding preservation of evidence.
In general terms is all I can speak, but it was staged by politicians supporting the gun control agenda. Those who could arrange to have a "training exercise".
As far as I know, that is a picture of Adam Lanza. I've never met him. What's your point? All I said is that Lanza is rather like Cruz and Oswald and James Earl Ray--fall guys, patsies.
I mean presumably the person in that picture is either dead or alive but locked up somewhere. Otherwise he would be recognised all of the time.
