Holmes had TWO roommates! EVIDENCE that MSM is rewriting the official story before our eyes!!!

Alright guys.. I think I may have stumbled onto some seriously messed up stuff. If anyone has read 1984, and I'm sure many have.. This is going to look pretty familiar to you. I may be off my rocker, but I work in computer programming, web design, etc. and this pertains to my field somewhat. I think I have found evidence that articles are being edited to omit information after they were already released.

Okay.. So the other day some of you may remember me making some "What we know so far posts". I believe the first one I made was on page 67 concerning information we had gathered. HERE IS THE POST

That post was on Friday so there are undoubtedly elements to it that are not true per the official story today. So who cares if information has changed.. Why not say "initial reports suggested that Holmes had 2 roommates but we are now aware that this is false". Instead, from what I have found.. The information is being ERASED ENTIRELY.

The data I'm talking about is this:

Public records indicate that Holmes lived with two roommates at 1690 Paris St., Apt. 10. The roommates are also recorded as being from California.

Which was originally found in THIS article.

And here is some proof courtesy of Google...


See, Google uses a cache of previously stored data in certain instances to scan what is on a webpage to produce search results. In this instance it is seeing that 4 days ago, the article contained that exact quote.
As well as a couple other articles on the results that follow the top link that showed the same data.

BUT.. When you go to any one of those links, that quote is no longer present. It is completely ERASED or at the very least replaced by data that omits the fact that Holmes had TWO ROOMMATES ACCORDING TO PUBLIC RECORD!!

So those articles may be from odd sources.. Well what about a mainstream outlet reporting that he had two roommates.. How about MSNBC?



Cached articles USED to contain that same quote.. But NONE of them do. I can't find a single article that has that data anymore.

My question is this.. Why erase it completely? Why not just say the initial reports were incorrect?

Now I'm really doubting the official story. I was on the fence.. But this may have done it for me. I really wish I would have taken a couple screenies of that data on the MSNBC articles that day.

Just like in 1984.. They are changing the story and most people would be oblivious or just go along with it.

Any thoughts on this?

I think this spans more than just this particular story. I think this is evidence that cover-ups happen right before our eyes and we are lied to daily.

Perhaps my professional opinion is misguided.. Can anyone tell me if I've totally lost it?

Good find. It does not surprise me. There are quite a few suspect details in this case.

Obviously, you've done your homework. Coverup? I don't know.
Your methods seem sound though, and as this thing goes along, perhaps there were others who had saved those web pages or taken screenshots. Perhaps they are members and your thread will bring them out. Nice work though; I like the way you think...

And this couldn't be chalked up as a simple reporting mistake?

I don't get all the conspiracies surrounding this. Why would the police have not taken the shooter out to prevent him from talking?

Does not make sense.

Without the full article you have nothing. The next sentence is likely, "they moved out months ago, saying Holmes was a fruitcake."

Maybe it's a retraction after the sources of public evidence didn't stand up to scrutiny?

I would like to see what public records they were referencing?
And what keywords did you use in that search?

The two room mates were probably plants from the government. They could have been his handlers preparing him for his "mission".

Originally posted by ZiggyMojo cover-ups happen right before our eyes and we are lied to daily.

i agree with this 100%.

It's unfortunate but true that without the full article this will be chalked up as hogwash by many. Perhaps we can take this as initiative to gather any facts that we might find that have changed or have been erased and post them here as a collective.

Take this as my challenge to all of you to gather your OWN evidence in the future in order to root out the lies we are being fed.

Originally posted by ZiggyMojo
It's unfortunate but true that without the full article this will be chalked up as hogwash by many. Perhaps we can take this as initiative to gather any facts that we might find that have changed or have been erased and post them here as a collective.

Take this as my challenge to all of you to gather your OWN evidence in the future in order to root out the lies we are being fed.

Thank God for Screencaps and an understanding of how Google Cache works!

Star and Flagged OP!

reply to post by grey580


I searched for "Public records indicate that Holmes lived with two" in Google search.

My question is why would the article eliminate that data, but not other data that has been found to be false or inaccurate. Also, public records, of ALL the information would have been some of the quickest and easiest to obtain once an address and or name were given. The media outlets were probably on it before anyone had time to catch it. Once the info was out there they had to hide it somehow..

I think the fact that these are public records made it necessary to erase anything that might give an inclination that it is true.

Originally posted by CloseEncounter
And this couldn't be chalked up as a simple reporting mistake?

I don't get all the conspiracies surrounding this. Why would the police have not taken the shooter out to prevent him from talking?

Does not make sense.

While i have to agree that a lot of the story is highly suspect, we may be on the wrong path here. Why wouldn't they just shoot him you ask? If he is kept alive, so is the public interest. And does this not distract us from what was so prevalent on the net just days before?

Iran, Libya, Syria, Russia, China...ring any bells anyone?

That has all died down quite a bit since this event hasn't it? Keep him drugged in court and there is little danger of him telling his own name, let alone the truth.

We'll all be watching it unfold in the news, on conspiracy sites and in the televised trials (guaranteed it will be) while putting off the rest of the World so maybe a conspiracy was created on purpose. Kind of like " Let's see what's going on in Asia today...oooh, look at the shiny button."

Keep us busy.

IMO

Peace

Originally posted by CloseEncounter
And this couldn't be chalked up as a simple reporting mistake?

I don't get all the conspiracies surrounding this. Why would the police have not taken the shooter out to prevent him from talking?

Does not make sense.

Much more attention focused on a live gunman, and maybe it does not matter what he has to say if he has a story in in place in him ready to tell.

reply to post by jude11


I am in complete agreement with your statements as well. Slight of hand.. They keep us occupied with these things while the REAL important issues are swept under the rug or rushed past us before we know it.

You do realize that the media is grabbing at whatever they can to report because people are so damned hell bent on getting all the information right away? The only people that know what's really going on are the police and investigators. They don't have any duty to fill in anyone outside of the investigation regarding the details unless they choose to.

I remember when the media used to actually get the facts BEFORE they ran with the story, but not anymore.

Originally posted by groingrinder
The two room mates were probably plants from the government. They could have been his handlers preparing him for his "mission".

I know this seems a little too far fetched , but yeah , i`m reading from the same page here ..... they are professionals at this kind of thing ... set ups / murders / framing for sex cases / drug cases / fraud cases , the list goes on and on , every day since friday seems to bring more and more evidence that this is a set up ........... but why ? ......... what did this student who understood neurology do to get THAT MUCH attention ? .... discover something ? , invited to something top secret - refused - set up ....... who knows , America is corrupt as f*** .

And before anyone says that screencaps only show unreliable news agencies reported this...



I remember day 1, they were reporting this... I never once heard a retraction. So? Where did they go?

This article still has the room mates quote. It says it was last edited on the 20th of July.

www.torontosun.com...

There are plenty of forums that were discussing the room mates angle and quoted whole article with links to the news sites. Is that enought to prove it's being removed from the web, I don't know I'm not particularly well versed with this stuff.

reply to post by ZiggyMojo


you are so right OP...!!

i have just done a google search myself - typed in "records indicate that Holmes lived with two"

under every link is the phrase "Public records indicate that Holmes lived with two room mates"

however EVERY time i opened each link the information was gone... and it just says

According to public records, the last address associated with Holmes was about three miles from the theater, near the intersection of 17th Avenue and Peoria Street in Aurora. Records indicate that Holmes had lived at this address since May 2011.

thats it..... they have erased the data.... dodgy dodgy #######...!!!