RYAN writes:

First off I would like to say I appreciate you pursuing the truth, and this is not a personal attack or an attack on conspiracy theories.

However, you have some faulty logic regarding this shooting being “faked.” First, you claim there should be blood splatter everywhere, and you expect there to be blood on Nikolas Cruz. This isn’t a Tarantino movie – gunshots don’t create “splatter” unless shot in the head, and even then splatter is minimal. If you don’t believe me, watch any shooting on Live Leak. Second, you claim Cruz being able to kill 17 and injure 14 in eight minutes is difficult and something a skilled commando wouldn’t be able to do. You’re forgetting how a school shooting would be executed – all he needs is to enter one classroom with 30 students to easily get those numbers, and in less than 8 minutes too. After all, most classrooms only have 1 entrance/exit. Accuracy isn’t hard when your targets are within 15 feet of you, and Cruz wasn’t a newbie with guns either. Thirdly, this event was HEAVILY documented by students on social media: bodies, blood, bullet holes, etc. To silence an entire high school from speaking about an “inside job” isn’t as simple as just “paying out everybody.” In general, most of your arguments seem to be a reach and you seem to be looking for anything that would validate a fake shooting theory. Unfortunately, these things do happen, and unfortunately it was quickly politicized.

Laura writes:

Thank you for looking closely at the evidence and for your appreciation. I’m not going to try to convince you of my view, but want to respond to your points.

First, regarding the blood spatter, Cruz shot people as he was walking down the hallway, shooting through windows and walls and directly at people in front of him. The evidence for this comes from the accounts of these eyewitnesses (here and here) and this CNN timeline, which was obtained by the police.

Yes, shooting someone does not always produce blood splatter but given that he was close to some of his victims and that he was shooting through walls and windows, which would likely have created ricocheting material, I find it unlikely that someone would emerge from shooting dozens of people like this with no evidence on his body.

Yes, it is possible, though difficult given the current state of medical treatment, to kill that many people in a few minutes but Cruz did not simply walk into one classroom and mow a bunch of people down. He walked through the building.

In 11 minutes Cruz allegedly did the following:

— walk from car to building

— apply gas mask to his face, don “full metal garb”

— take out gun and smoke grenades

— shoot 31 people, 17 fatally while walking through building and into classrooms

— remove equipment, take off flak jacket, and leave rifle in building

— exit school building and calmly mix with other students

— walk off campus and enter nearby Walmart

All this, I say, is inconceivable in such a short time, especially for a person who appears calm and dazed afterward. Someone who had done all this would be running on so much adrenaline, you would see the agitation. Cruz looks drugged.

As for the victims, it is extremely suspicious that the fatally wounded victims were not immediately evacuated; there are no images of them being immediately evacuated, unless you include one of a boy put in a golf cart, against all emergency protocols. I urge you to review this post about standard treatment of gunshot victims and how often they are saved. Why, given this, was there no immediate outrage by parents that their children were not immediately taken to the hospital? Why didn’t the media immediately pick up this huge story — teenagers who could have been saved were not saved. The same thing happened in Sandy Hook. The supposed victims were not treated and they were left to lie in the buildings.

You write:

Thirdly, this event was HEAVILY documented by students on social media: bodies, blood, bullet holes, etc.

That’s simply not true. Show me one clear video image and any clear images of the carnage. Remember, smart phones take very sharp images. Blurry, jumpy videos are not plausible. Sheriff Scott Israel has refused to release video evidence from a camera on an officer’s body and from surveillance cameras. Can you explain or justify that? The public has a right to all information about the shootings, especially since the event is being used for political purposes.

You write:

To silence an entire high school from speaking about an “inside job” isn’t as simple as just “paying out everybody.”

That’s absolutely true. Most people would believe it was real. Everything was in place for a drill of just such an event that was occurring that day. (Think of how unlikely that is — on the one day a school has a drill for a mass shooting, a mass shooting occurs.)

It’s a big school and most students were evacuated right away or were hiding. Most students did not see the carnage and a very small number of students would be involved in the core deception. (I believe the Carbocci sisters were definitetly lying.) Why would they participate? They believe in the cause of gun control and this sort of propaganda is perfectly legal. Think about that: it is legal for the government to do this. The National Defense Authorization Act, signed into law by Obama in 2012, made it legal for government entities to propagate and disseminate propaganda in America. This was done before, but this act closes legal loopholes. These are live drills for what is believed to be a legitimate public purpose.

Now it is possible that some people were killed in this live propaganda event. I sincerely hope not and I doubt it. No believable images exist of the victims and the carnage, and the relatives did not seem to care that they were so poorly treated. Also, relatives of real victims create huge problems for the playing out of the script.

If the alternative media continues to point out the glaring holes in this story with success, it will quickly drop from view, as has happened in other cases. Bernie Suarez writes in his book The Art of Overcoming the New World Order:

[I]n September-October of 2015 following the Virginia TV Reporter supposed “live” shooting of TV reporter Alison Parker which was later shown to have 2 distinct video takes and 2 distinctly differently dressed “shooters”. With 2 distinct video takes of the shooting and 2 different shooters shown wearing conflicting outfits the story became almost impossible to sell and we saw this story shortly thereafter completely disappear from mainstream media news, for the most part never to be spoken of again.

I also reported on the Alison Parker shooting and called it a hoax early on. (More here.)

Update:

A couple more points:

Individuals sick and evil enough to execute this kind of massacre on their own, as Cruz is accused of doing, are out there. It’s not as if I believe they don’t exist. That’s not the problem. The problem is the story does not add up.

A lot has been made of the gun control agenda. Another political agenda here, I believe, is simply the demonizing of men, especially white men. Demonizing men serves to weaken the family, as women view men more and more with suspicion. This weakening of the family unit is so important to the world controllers, who want humanity dependent on government and corporations, not the family unit. It’s about creating learned helplessness.

— Comments —

A reader writes:

Definitely no one dead. If someone died then it becomes a crime scene. Their actions would be against the law. They are very careful not to break any laws here.

The agenda as you say is to remove guns and demonize white men. This is already working as I have spoken to many white women that hate white men. White men on TV are usually portrayed as weak.
The government discriminates against whites in sports, as they don’t want white men displaying masculinity on TV. They peddle lies that blacks are better at sports when they aren’t. TV is anti-white-man.

Please follow and like us: