David Hogg wasnt even at the school shooting He says so himself

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: Blaine91555

originally posted by: SailorJerry
he has claimed many times that he was there in a closet.

Which he was. Have you not seen the video's yet?

I do agree he is being used by the media and politicians which is wrong, but you got this one entirely wrong. He clearly meant he went home to get his camera so he could do interviews. He did make a video of himself and others where they were hiding in the school.

So he was in class then went home. He then hopped on his bike, rode back to the school (why was he not at school?), managed to get inside and make to it a closet during an active shooting to start interviewing people?

Hogg was quoted bragging on the school for allowing him to go home early on a regular basis.

a reply to: SailorJerry

I dont DOUBT who did it. but it leads me to believe this whole video was edited and staged

You mean like the garbage that CNN and the rest of the media has been putting out from the second they started reporting, right up to now.

The first thing I found suspicious was when the media was calling on the locals to come out to the school to bring water and snacks for the children that they were broadcasting walking out of school to walk 8 miles away to another school, were the shooting was too have taken place. We are talking about kids that won't walk two blocks to the mall and a community where "stranger danger" is drilled into their minds before the age of 3 months.

How does the media get away with encouraging children to be placed in a position of danger? How does that many children get organized to break all the school rules about leaving campus, in such a short period time. I have worked with the organization of activities for teens and trust me, it just isn't that easy to get that many children together, on the same page, and coordinated to do anything. We have been working on an summer teen event for months and we still are trying to get parental consents signed and turned in, along with the small amount of ten dollars for one whole week of teen camp.

I won't speak to the shooting, but I will speak of the the media's control and promotion of this event. This was a complete "Wag The Dog", media generated event.

a reply to: Wardaddy454

I wonder if you guys are deliberately being thick?

He was in a closet, filming while the shooting happened.

He got out, rode home.

He came back with an actual camera, not his phone and starts interviewing fellow students outside the school.

It’s not that hard.

a reply to: projectvxn

Read my post above.

a reply to: SailorJerry


Add to that, at least two of these kids that are pushing this liberal agenda have admitted to bullying Cruz.

These actors... I mean kids are part of the culture and the bullying that leads to school shootings.

a reply to: Chadwickus

I think that’s a pretty accurate assessment.

Way back on page one I posted his videos from inside the school. I will readily agree that I find it extremely odd that he goes immediately to gun control while talking to other students. His behavior reeks, at a minimum, of a person that saw an opportunity to use an event to make a name for himself.

But I don’t know how it is we’re pages and pages into this and it has nearly 70 flags and people are still acting as if there’s no way he was in the school, or that he couldn’t have been in the school, or that this is some kind of gotcha moment.

originally posted by: SKEPTEK
a reply to: SailorJerry


Add to that, at least two of these kids that are pushing this liberal agenda have admitted to bullying Cruz.

Which two "shining stars" of this movement are the self-admitted bullies?

While I'd love this to be true, it appears more that he rode BACK to school, LATER and brought his camera, and did interviews. Unfortunately, the light level during his interviews seems to support this narrative.

He's still an opportunistic little snot, and still being used as a pawn, but sadly, we can't get him on this one.

a reply to: Shamrock6

If he was wearing a mask how would any of the students know who was behind that mask?

originally posted by: Shamrock6
... people are still acting as if there’s no way he was in the school, or that he couldn’t have been in the school, or that this is some kind of gotcha moment.

So riddle me this:

--If he already had the camera with him while the shooting is taking place, why then did he have to go home before returning?

--If he had to go home to get his camera, did he then sneak back through the police perimeter and re-enter the lock-downed school and return to the same classroom?

What am I mssing?

a reply to: Chadwickus

Except he gives a time that was about 5 hours before the shooting happened in the interview I watched. He states the girl's name he's interviewing, the date as Feb. 14th, and the time if iirc was 9:34a.m.

I've also seen interviews of him on the day of the shooting where he says he was in one class when it started, and another where he says a different class. In both interviews he had the same lady standing next to him. I do believe he was at school that day...I just don't believe he was present at the time of the shooting.

a reply to: Thejaybird

All it does is give certain folks the opportunity to wreak havoc on innocent people with no provocation.

Your chance at writing and controlling the narrative is over. Those of us with a better view of humanity are taking charge and pushing your narrative out of existence.

Don't like that? Evolve with the rest of us, or rot away.

Boy-oh-boy those were some mighty big ideas there... and I bet those were real fun words to say... and it means squat.

Are you really so ignorant that you think you can take everyone's guns away? Of course not. Just some of those fun words to say to make yourself feel all good about yourself. It won't happen because it cannot happen. Guns are here to stay. Period. The best you can hope for is to take guns away from good people and let bad people have all the guns... and in the end? All it does is give certain folks the opportunity to wreak havoc on innocent people with no provocation AND NO OPPORTUNITY TO DEFEND ONESELF WITH EQUAL AND PROPORTIONATE FORCE. And, of course, we're not even talking about the knives and machetes and bombs and IEDs and rogue trucks and every other way bad folks hurt other folks -- with or without the availability of guns. Just how many people do you want to die because they had no way to defend themselves? How many people do you want to prosecute for defending themselves in a way that YOU don't approve of? I guess they just need to die if they can't live YOUR way, right?

Gee... do you really want that blood on YOUR hands?

As for controlling the narrative... I gotcha. Someone is controlling your narrative and so you think you can control everyone's narrative. You seem to believe that because you and a bunch of kids can be so easily led by the nose that the rest of us can be also. Ain't gonna happen. Not now. Not ever.

See all these words I typed? That's MY narrative. Mine. Don't like that? Feel free to just rot away then. I won't stop you.

a reply to: kyleplatinum

We may protect ourselves with the method and tool of choice, and we will definitely not be punished for the bad acts of others.

I like how this same sentence can fairly be attributed to anyone tired of these mass shootings.

a reply to: starviego

--If he already had the camera with him while the shooting is taking place, why then did he have to go home before returning?

Cell phones have cameras in them. They have for like...years.

--If he had to go home to get his camera, did he then sneak back through the police perimeter and re-enter the lock-downed school and return to the same classroom?

Since that question is entirely predicated on him not having a cell phone with a camera in it, it's pretty moot.

What am I mssing?

Some pretty basic stuff.

a reply to: Simon_Boudreaux

Except he gives a time that was about 5 hours before the shooting happened in the interview I watched. He states the girl's name he's interviewing, the date as Feb. 14th, and the time if iirc was 9:34a.m.

Now THAT was weird. That immediately jumped out to me when I watched his video.

I will say that, to me anyway, he kind of mushmouths the first part of the time stamp he gives. The second part is clearer to me. But if we accept the subtitle as a given, it's a very strange statement for him to have made.

originally posted by: Shamrock6

--If he had to go home to get his camera, did he then sneak back through the police perimeter and re-enter the lock-downed school and return to the same classroom?

Since that question is entirely predicated on him not having a cell phone with a camera in it, it's pretty moot.

OK, so you choose option #1. But you still haven't explained why he then bicycled three miles home and then returned.

a reply to: starviego

You're right, I didn't explain it because a) it's not what you asked and b) I'm not David Hogg, so I don't know what his thought process was.

I think he saw a chance to get on TV and took it.

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: SailorJerry

My reading of this is he is saying he was in the classroom, then went home.

He then grabbed his camera and went back because "he knew this couldnt be another mass shooting" as in he is in disbelief that this could happen again.

I think its a shame at how he is being pushed by the estalishment, but I dont think this is an admission he wasnt there during the shooting.

Last I heard the shooting only lasted 6 minutes?

Thats a fast kid to bike 3 miles one way to his house and back

He only had his phone (and it's camera) with him during the shooting. After he got home from school, he went BACK there, with a more professional camera (as he is reporter wanna be)....

It's easy to see how the video interviews could be taken as him not being there. In and of themselves. However, if you take ALL of the info in, including the light level of the pm interviews he did with his actual camera vs. the phone, the timeline becomes more clear. His own apparent confusion of it though, doesn't do him any favors.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
He said way back in February that he biked back up to the school later on in the day.

The evening after the shooting, Hogg says, he biked up to the school, where the media was still camped out. This time, he put himself in front of the camera, making his first — but not final — plea for an end to mass shootings. He made another on CNN on Thursday morning, calling on lawmakers to “get something done.”

Vox article less than a week after the shooting.

Though I will readily agree that he saw an opportunity to get on camera, took it, and is now running full-tilt with his media darling status.

Kind of sounds fishy that a week after the shooting he clarifies his story to say it was in the evening so as to fit the narrative of him being a school shooting survivor..... His other statement was "On the day of the shooting...", no mention of the evening and it also sounds as though he wasn't even at the school when the shooting occurred, you know sitting at home then when the shooting happened he says he "got on my bike and road as fast as I could three miles from my house to the school to get as much video and to get as many interviews as I could because I knew that this could not be another mass shooting."

..and I may have missed it but has he posted any of his video?