posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 11:05 PM
Very interesting timing! That entire story over the so-called massacre stinks, though! Has from the beginning. To start, they had contradictory
reports. First, it as a "group of drunken soldiers", then it was "one methodical soldier", then he was "drunk". It was all in one attack, then
it was off base, attack, back on, and off again for another attack. They can't even get the story straight! The first village is supposed to be
within hearing of the base. Meaning that, if the guy snuck off (VERY unlikely on a smaller base with tight security), and fired his weapon that many
times, the people on the base would have heard, and there is NO WAY he could have gotten back on the base. Much less gotten back on AND off again,
AND back on a second time! I don't know what did happen, but one would have to be blind to believe that what they SAY happened is the truth. To top
it all off, as soon as the man started getting sympathy from people, a story "breaks" that he was supposedly responsible for "ripping off" some
elderly man! In fact, he was NOT prosecuted for this, and apparently wasn't responsible. Near as I can tell, from the vague reports, he was a
broker for the company that DID rip the man off, but he didn't do it himself. But he's pained as some "whacko, out of control soldier". Just the
sort of target an anti-military administration likes! Systematically, we see race being made an issue, and the military demonized, and a push for
taking away our guns. Those that deny this, look up the UN crap he's supporting! These days, it's all about gaining control. Riots, maybe, to
declare martial law? Military not trusted, since they would not support such things? No guns for you to defend yourself against international
forces?