-Caveat Lector-
Previous thread: The FACTS are still the FACTS.
Fellow Lollards,
I have ignored the majority of Revcoal's previous blather,
but feel the need to address the her following questions
that bring unneeded doubt and spawn misinformation.
Towards the end of this post are additional FACTS that you
may not hear on the news outside of the state of Colorado.
In a message dated 99-04-26 07:48:43 EDT, revcoal says:
<<Again, it was the mainstream media on which I heard the 'partyline'
of 'only 2 suspects, who committed suicide' story, and not from the lips
of any official police spokesperson...*...Davis pointedly NEVER said
they had conclusively determined that there were only 2 suspects>>
Official or not, I have Davis on tape, at the first impromptu press
conference, stating that there are "NO further suspects, as BOTH
of the ONLY suspects are dead".
Actually, I also have Jim Parr (sp?) stating the same thing.
In a message dated 99-04-26 07:48:43 EDT, revcoal says:
<<And again, what makes you feel the cops HAVE to reveal
details of an ongoing investigation to you?>>
Having previously owned a small local paper, I still have my press
pass. Considering that I was PRESENT for the press conference
that you think you know so much about, maybe you ought to go
back to doing dishes and quit playing internet detective.
People, these press conferences were about covering up information,
and most everyone out there understands that this was the point of
my previous post to this group.
Those of you who have *carefully* read my contributions to this list,
might recognize the fact that several contentions that I have brought
up, are now surfacing in some of the media outlets. Simply decide
who is contributing valid information, and who is playing Ace Ventura.
I previously reported that the full-time security guard on campus was
in direct contact with police from the moment the shooting began.
Housewife June has asked if I can document my "claim", and
adds that: "[S]ecurity guards as a rule are worthless in defending
the public, rarely if ever receive any sort of professional training,
rarely if ever even get trained in first aid and CPR..."
Gee June, did you happen to know that the security guard
was an off-duty Jefferson County Officer who, by radio, WAS
in direct contact with the dispatch center?
Here in Colorado, where we are one officer at a time becoming
a police state, off-duty officers rotate in shifts, or work opposite
of their regular police shift, in schools; video rental stores; high
traffic entertainment centers; etc.
People like myself, are part of a movement which is pointing out
that these off-duty officers are using state vehicles, gas, etc.,
while making money at their part-time jobs. Either way, this
was a COP on duty as the High School's security guard.
This proves to be only ONE of Revcoal's ill-informed statements.
Revcoal's entire argument about "point to point" radio contact,
as well as your assumptions toward the inability of the "security
guard, are BOTH completely irrelevant in light of the fact that
this was an off-duty POLICE officer.
Revcoal truly does not know what she is talking about, and
she is [unfortunately] spreading disinformation through her
own lack of credible data.
In a message dated 99-04-26 07:48:43 EDT, revcoal says:
<<Remember, there are over 2000 students at this school...even if
only one percent of them tried to call on pay and cell phones, you're
talking approximately 20 calls coming in at once on a system that
probably only has about 20 lines operational...>>
You have a valid point!!!
Let's see, 20 incoming calls, 20 lines operational.
Is there supposed to be a problem here?
Before you open your piehole, make sure that you
are not falling into the trap that I am setting for you.
Do *YOU* know how many emergency calls were placed
between 11:00 a.m.and 11:30 a.m on Tuesday the 20th?
In a message dated 99-04-26 07:48:43 EDT, revcoal says:
<<The teacher was only one of DOZENS of
callers who were kept online...>>
This is irrelevant. The point of contention, was that this teacher
could not have been on hold, blocking her OWN call's inability to
get through to 911; which, Revcoal's own contradictive statements
foolishly concluded.
In a message dated 99-04-26 07:48:43 EDT, revcoal says:
<<The teacher was only one of DOZENS
of callers who were kept online...>>
Considering that we have not been able to confirm ANY calls
more than the couple that have been released via tape, I would
sure like to see this assumption of Revcoal's documented.
The readers on this list should note that the great majority
of my own statements do not begin with, "we can guess"
or "presumably", "probably", as Revcoal's are forced to.
In a message dated 99-04-26 07:48:43 EDT, revcoal says:
<<I can't see any fault with the 911 operators themselves.>>
Readers, this is just one of June's semantic arguments which
were never the point of discussion in the first place. The point
was that the 911 dispatch operator's "hide and wait" plan, was
also what we witnessed to be the plan from the police who
patiently waited outside for the gunfire to end.
That is the bottom line.
In a message dated 99-04-26 07:48:43 EDT, revcoal says:
<<Press conferences are NEVER given to 'unleash facts'...they are
given to 'sell' something those holding the conference wish to provide>>
We must address this because this was the central issue.
Are the police not offering information because of an ongoing
investigation? Well of course, yes...and it doesn't take even
a numbskull to figure that one out, and June's presence on
this list has not failed to prove this to be true.
Readers, it is my hope that we understand-- when we agree with
the people who are *actually* covering up their OWN mistakes
under the guise of "not tipping their hand" to future suspects
--as June would have us foolishly believe-- we are part of the
problem and not the solution.
The reason I find Davis' press conference SO disconcerting, is that
the parents of children who were sent to school TODAY, have a right
to know the FACTS that Davis' did not answer.
If there IS another suspect; if there IS reason to believe that there
will be another attack today, the 26th, these parents have the RIGHT
to know that their children are in possible danger.
I just got off the phone, and have confirmed via channel 4's Brian Moss
that the janitor who IDENTIFIED Eric Harris as sneeking around within
the doors of a school called Stoney Creek (somewhat near Columbine),
the night before the shooting-- has stated that Harris "looked ready to
go to war", and also stated that the janitor should "watch T.V. news
tomorrow".
Now, if the suspects had pre-positioned supplies in the school(s?)
with part of a CORE GROUP that the police ARE now looking for....
If there is information regarding a second part of this CORE GROUP
striking a second time, then parents have a RIGHT to KNOW that
their children are at risk. Especially those at Stoney Creek.
Housewife June can call it "professionalism"; I call it
unneccessarily putting the children of this state into
harm's way.
Lastly, we have the fact that the second officer on the scene,
reports that he was literally there within two minutes. This
officer reports that he exchanged gunfire with one of the
suspects through one of the school windows.
This cop believes to have shot this *specific* suspect, but
believes that the assailant was wearing a bullet-proof vest.
This officer was alerted to the shooting, by a student
who had JUST fled from one of the shooters OUTSIDE.
Many students have reported that two of the shooters
entered the building AT THE SAME TIME.
What does this mean? It means that the assailant with
whom the officer exchanged rounds with at the second
story window, made some REAL TRACKS from the out-
side area where students were initially attacked by BOTH
of the attackers....T
hat is, of course, if it is the same suspect....
Again, we are forced to wonder if the Davis' press conference
could not have been more reasonable in offering parents AT
LEAST enough information to reasonably assess whether
their children were in harm's way TODAY, as information
to date points to more than two assailants.
Consider the following factors:
1) One shooting already has occurred, where
pre-positioned supplies were in place.
2) A (possible) threat made for a future attack.
3) One of the dead assailants already identified as being
suspiciously in a DIFFERENT school-- afterhours.
4) A press conference that confirms NONE of the above facts.
5) The possibility of MORE CHILDREN in harm's way.
Control's readers are wise enough to sort this out, and when
they do, they will clearly see the validity of my argument, and
will also clearly see the motive behind my contention.
It's about the safety of children, and if no
other attack takes place, then we all win.
June has failed in her quest to win her argument like this
is some kind of high school debate. She tries to assume
debate points based on mis-spelled words, from a person
[myself] that is typing forty words a minute, who doesn't
bother to spell check.
This is not about June and her prideful attempt to win herself
debate stars; it is about the possibility of more children's lives
NEEDLESSLY being on the line through the police's lack of
informing the public to the possibility of further danger.
Go argue with your husband, June.
I have already had more than enough of your foolishness.
Having read a few of REVCOAL's previous posts to CTRL,
I was *already* in the habit of automatically deleting her
worthless contributions to this list.
I have now had first hand experience with June's desire to
win brownie points; and seeing that her own desire for such
out weighs her ability to make reasonable judgments....
....seeing that rather than putting down her pride and admitting
that there are facts that should have been stated by Davis'....
....facts which could possibly affect
the lives of more innocent children.....
I will go out of my way to delete ALL future posts from REVCOAL;
as her posts prove themselves to be useless and self-centered
drivelous aberrations by someone who should be cleaning the
bathroom or making beds before hubby gets home.
We can at least hope that REVCOAL has the decency of
removing her future attack on me to an off-list mailing, so
that I may delete it without bothering the rest of the people
on CTRL's list.
Still muttering,
Tsadowq
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
