-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Trump Assassination Attempt
- Thread starter OttoM
- Start date
It wasn’t, the counter-sniper took him out immediately after.
Key word: after.
He should never have been able to get to the ROOF, much less shoulder the rifle.
Right, proof that it was set up.
Immediately after having had eyes on him for 42 seconds and allowing the shots to be taken
Should have had creepy hippy sniffing dogs out.
Have you seen the proof of physiognomy that was the shooter yet? Eek
Have you seen the proof of physiognomy that was the shooter yet? Eek
When I made my last post, I was actually going to first respond to Sarah's comment here:
saying "and on the other side, there will be people pointing out that the beast will have a deadly wound that was healed, and equating Trump to this, which would be equally ridiculous". I actually typed it out, then deleted it from my comment as I decided that was going a bit too far given it's obvious he has not suffered a deadly wound, surely nobody would actually make that connection... And the very next post was somebody referring to that exact verse.
No, Trump has not had "one of his heads as if it were wounded to death", any more than he is "the last trump". Both are equally ridiculous.
That link does not go to the video you are referring to. It's broken also, but if you copy-paste it into the url bar it just goes to a link to this Disclose.TV video:
Trump shooter had explosive devices in his car, sources say
Breaking news from around the world.
www.disclose.tv
Please check your source and give us the correct link, then check the link works. I think you're having copy-paste issues again.
Zerohedge has article claiming explosive devices in shooter car:That link does not go to the video you are referring to. It's broken also, but if you copy-paste it into the url bar it just goes to a link to this Disclose.TV video:
Which is just another of the many thousands of videos of people talking about it. It does not have the footage you describe here:Trump shooter had explosive devices in his car, sources say
Breaking news from around the world.
Please check your source and give us the correct link, then check the link works. I think you're having copy-paste issues again.
The Next Day: Trump Shooter Had Explosives; Secret Service Denies Accusations; MSM Blames The Victim | ZeroHedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
I'm seeing suggestions the secret service & police may have seen him but may not have taken him out before he shot due to confusion around whether he was working for another agency. This is a possibility, and would allow a "gross incompetence" explanation rather than malice. And would be how he got so far - he looked official. Like how if you put on a fluoro jacket and carry a clipboard you can go anywhere. You always see people on roofs with rifles around an official event like this, and 99.99% of the time they're official security, who wants to be the secret service agent who shot a local policeman who just failed to follow protocol and showed up in an unexpected position?
Which reminds me of how the Australian satire show "the chasers war on everything" were able to get a motorcade carrying a man dressed up as Osama bin Laden right into the heart of the APEC summit in Sydney in 2007. The TV show had deliberately made it very obvious that their motorcade was a spoof - their security passes even said "joke" on them - but they were waved straight through. In the aftermath the TV presenters were publicly vilified for endangering APEC - but it was really a grossly embarrassing security failure. If they had been real terrorists it would have been a very different story. It's obvious that this wasn't a case of collusion, it was simply a security failure.
My point is that complacency and gross incompetence does occur. So we can't jump to the conclusion of malice - but Trump should still assume both are possibilities and act accordingly.
Which reminds me of how the Australian satire show "the chasers war on everything" were able to get a motorcade carrying a man dressed up as Osama bin Laden right into the heart of the APEC summit in Sydney in 2007. The TV show had deliberately made it very obvious that their motorcade was a spoof - their security passes even said "joke" on them - but they were waved straight through. In the aftermath the TV presenters were publicly vilified for endangering APEC - but it was really a grossly embarrassing security failure. If they had been real terrorists it would have been a very different story. It's obvious that this wasn't a case of collusion, it was simply a security failure.
My point is that complacency and gross incompetence does occur. So we can't jump to the conclusion of malice - but Trump should still assume both are possibilities and act accordingly.
When I first started doing radio, over 20 years ago, and encountered the 'conspiracy theorist' Kool-Aid, the standard rejoinder was the observation to, "never ascribe to conspiracy that which can be explained by incompetence." Or even idiocy.
But we went way, WAY beyond that years ago.
When 'non compos mentis' infests the Oval Orifice, and brainless harpies push 'the View' down dumbed-down throats:
it's time to realize that idiocy is just an excuse. As well as the public face of a Satanic Evil that worships death.
Lenin was right: the Useful Idiots are just cannon fodder.
Last edited:
I can understand how it might look that way, however I don’t think that is what we are looking at here. A security detail like that has someone (command) coordinating all positions. So a person with a weapon, in the wrong place, would immediately be taken as a threat and even if the threat was not eliminated on the spot, the agents around the protectee would converge and move the protectee to a secure space until the threat was mitigated. I believe the likelihood of malicious intent is well above 50%. Could it be pure, abject incompetence? Yes. Is that more likely the case? I don’t think so.
Nothing personal, but is not this
comment of equal uselessness?
This. What you said. I was watching video earlier that showed the Secret Service overwatch aiming two rifles at the shooter and doing nothing until the shooter had fired five to eight shots.
Trump needs to surround himself with Marines.