Interesting perspective from a Navy Seal Sniper

Here is an Army Sniper and reinforced what I said:

Easy shot, 130 yards, mid target in Basic Army training, far one is 300 Meters.

Get rid of these hard shot two football field bs... It was 130 yards. Easy shot. I never missed this target in my basic training.

"Can teach you within 5 minutes to make this shot 9/10 times" Sniper says.



He also says it was stupid they had Pacman cut out area in perimeter with this roof top not covered. There should have been law enforcement on that roof. It is obvious spot.

"Obvious negligence"

a reply to: pianopraze


Ummm...sooooo...if he only shot once and one second later received the killshot...then who shot the other three people in the stands...killing one and leaving the other two in critical condition...?

Also...was the picture of the bullet just passing Trumps head the one that perforated his ear...?

Or was that another round fired...and by whom...?


Being as your claiming that all the other shots were...the counter sniper...sniper...and law enforcement...

Also...if all the other shots were law enforcement...then who were they shooting at...?

Being as none of them were at that time either...

A...on the rooftop with the would be assassin...

Or...

B...at any line of site angle to shoot the perp...


These too...are questions...





YouSir

a reply to: pianopraze

If your claim is he fired right after the first shot then how did the attacker get multiple shots off after that?

a reply to: pianopraze

No one is answering the question of... if you claim he shot and was immediately killed where did the 5 or 6 other shots come from that shot people in the stands, your claim does not hold up

a reply to: YouSir

He fired several times. It is not hard to get several shots off very quickly with an Armalite rifle. Each shot is progressively going to walk from recoil and be less accurate. That is why only the first was a hit, the rest pulled probably up or to the left (if they pulled right they would have hit Trump again). My Army issued AR 15 (semi auto) pulled up and to the left when I was in.

I will guess 3-5 shots fired from sniper for the record. Time will tell. They will probably announce it at some point months or years from now.

And the first shot that hit sniper might not have killed him. He could have started firing at counter snipers. Second counter sniper ducked down and backed away in video for some reason. Maybe taking fire from wounded sniper.

The bloody pictures I posted in the main thread show sniper was hit multiple times.


I said he did not fire all 15 seconds. And that counter sniper fired on him within one second of snipers initial shot. Sniper fired several shots then the rest of the gunfire was probably return fire. Sniper was probably dead or incapacitated by time that last shot was fired 15 seconds later.

Ive already given up on figuring out the "truth"of this event. You will go around and around in circles if you listen to the plethora of narratives popping up. This was such a sub-par performance for Secret Service it cannot be excused as incompetence. How events unfolded we will never know but the key takeaway is IT WAS AN INSIDE JOB. That is all any of us can know. Who shot who when and where - does it matter?

a reply to: pianopraze


Thank you...the reasons for my questioning was so that you would clarify your statements...your earlier comments left a certain ambiguity about who shot what...and when...

Now that you've added some cohesion...my job here is done...




YouSir

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
Ive already given up on figuring out the "truth"of this event. You will go around and around in circles if you listen to the plethora of narratives popping up. This was such a sub-par performance for Secret Service it cannot be excused as incompetence. How events unfolded we will never know but the key takeaway is IT WAS AN INSIDE JOB. That is all any of us can know. Who shot who when and where - does it matter?

Regardless of what it was; IF anything was staged, it was an intentional lack of proper security. Anything more would be FAR too easy to connect the dots back to some agency. They 'allowed' (possibly even encouraged) someone to do this, BUT "they" didn't orchestrate it. They might have wished it to happen, even allowed it, but they didn't stage it. Why?

It would have been far easier to use a foreign national to do this. A person whom no one could ever trace, and even if someone did, the background would be sketchy and easily obfuscated. There is nothing about this shooter which is any of these things. He can be easily traced, he's young, so no indoctrination by foreign operators...there's absolutely NO WAY some (3) letter agency set this up with this kid! He WAS just a punk kid, not some CIA operative, or anything of the sort.

Regardless of his capability, his training, or anything else...he was simply NOT old enough to have reached this level of "crazy". No, this shooter did this on his own.

Now, could he have had accomplices? Yes, that's possible, even likely, BUT it wasn't some government agency. He was likely inspired by some hateful social media website (Gawd knows, there's plenty of them!). And, he may have even had help, but I seriously doubt there will be any trace back to anything other than questions. This "bullied" dork simply wasn't SMART ENOUGH!

originally posted by: Justoneman
a reply to: TinfoilTophat

Unless it was an M4, it was not an assault rifle. The AR type without Automatic fire machine gun capability has been labeled by the media and the leftist in Congress as an "assault rifle" when that style gets you killed in battlefield testing.

i read that it was an M4 but thats just a rumor. cant tell well at least i sure cant tell from this photo but im sure someone can.

a reply to: Shoshanna

It's NOT an M4. It just isn't! It's a simple flat-top sporting AR-15. The M4 is not made in a flat-top version (it could be modified that way, but it would require a different lower...which would make it not an M4. Changing the trigger group and sear out of an actual, real, M4 would be highly illegal, and would require gunsmith level skills.

An actual M4 in civilian hands would be:

- Manufactured before 1986
- Heavily permitted and regulated
- Require a BATF Form 4 Transfer, official, submitted and approved.
- Require a Class III Federal Firearms license (which means you are a dealer)
- Require up to two years for approval

ALL of these things would be easily traceable (by anyone...including the media).

This was NOT an M4.

a reply to: Shoshanna

Candidly, If there is one thing I question...I question if the pictures being circulated are really the shooter. It doesn't look like him, regardless of the beard and long hair. His head and facial structure are different.

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: rickymouse

on top of all that, the security folks had to ignore the ladder for hours. I can grasp one guy flucking up, but the entire team? Something seems way screwed up.

Ignored, possibly because security was using that same building/location as a "staging area" for the rally?

Which makes the fact that the shooter was able to access that rooftop vantage point all the more unconscionable.



Also, if we note the location of the ladder, and consider the report that an LEO climbed that same ladder, and was confronted by the shooter aiming at the officer, just before the shooting started, another incongruity arises:


It appears that the shooter took aim from the ridge of the roof, based on photos of where he was lying after being killed by the SS countersniper. But the ladder both the shooter, and the cop who confronted him, used to access the roof appears to be Behind (relatively speaking) the ridge from which Crooks fired.


So how did a kid with supposedly limited sniper experience manage to threaten a LEO popping up behind him (remember where the access ladder is relative to the ridge of the roof), pivot 180° while on his belly, rifle in hand, so that he is then in his firing position facing the stage, just behind the ridge of the roof, re-acquire his target(s), and open fire,


All within seconds of facing down the cop?


That seems to be some action hero movie-level moves, especially from a 20 year old loner kid.


Or did I miss something?

a reply to: Mantiss2021

From the video I saw, the LEO was attempting to stand on another LEO's shoulders, and something caused him to duck (presumably the shooter). The LEO then fell backwards to the ground, off the other LEO's shoulders. He wasn't using any ladder at all. From the video, it was hard to determine where exactly this took place, but he definitely wasn't on a ladder.

So, it may be that the shooter didn't have to turn around at all. The LEO may have confronted him face-on or at a shallow angle (which would tend to explain the LEO's reaction). In any case, the LEO did not appear to be in a position to shoot as both his hands were occupied hanging onto the roof.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Can buy Colt M4 semi auto at cabelas for like 1000 I know i have one now i dont know if that is what the post i read was referring to or the military version because thats what i thought of was mine that i own.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: Shoshanna

Candidly, If there is one thing I question...I question if the pictures being circulated are really the shooter. It doesn't look like him, regardless of the beard and long hair. His head and facial structure are different.

i thought that too the profile looks different because the kid theyre saying did it had a flatter seeming face but ive only seen the photo i think its a school photo of him and who knows how old that is. but yeah the profile of the guys face on the roof doesnt seem right to me.

a reply to: network dude

Great realtime example of gaslighting unfolding around us with the analysis of this event. Imo it's clear that things don't add up, yet much effort is going into telling us we're wrong in thinking the sky isn't blue and down is up.

With veteran snipers calling it out, like this guy below, yet the denial of what's obviously suspicious being maintained it's in the spectrum of farce

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: Shoshanna

Colt manufactures a rifle they market as the "Law Enforcement" M4 Carbine. It's a bit of a marketing trick. Other manufacturers also make M4 clones. In the firearms enthusiast circles these are known as "M4geries" (or 'M4 forgeries'). Colt held the trademark on "M4" and had an exclusive contract with the US government up until 2010 or 11 I believe. These contracts were for military and law enforcement use and thus true M4's. However, later when other manufacturers started using this terminology, Colt just jumped on the bandwagon.

It's complicated, and probably not worth arguing about it other than to say the rifle used in the shooting was a "semi-automatic" rifle as opposed to a 'select-fire' or 'fully automatic' M4.

The video in the OP has the Navy SEAL calling the rifle an "M-16" which it most certainly is NOT.

a reply to: TinfoilTophat I can hit a watermelon from 250 yards with my 9mm pistol. Honestly that is an easy shot with an ar-15.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

yeah i didnt think this kid had the actual military version full auto and it is possible to convert but he doesnt appear to be a gun expert. i was just saying people throw around ar and ar15 but i dont know if its totally accurate thats why im just sharing that i read it was an m4 and thats what i thought of. didnt know the full background on the gun like you do so thanks for dropping some knowledge on me.

Soo, new videos show how the people in the ground spot the shooter climbing the building and positioning himself to take the shots, I mean that was plenty of time for the shooter to be taken care off before he killed one spectator and wounded 3 people inducing the president Trump.

This was despicable, videos even show a local police man looking at the shooter, While climbing the roof, just total failure and shame for American security services.