It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Sek82
reply to post by Mythology
Reading through it, but you can remove #8 in regards to father testifying before Senate. That detail was found to be a hoax.
The location of the gas mask does seem consistent with someone fleeing the scene... And I am curious about the two roommates MSNBC initially reported that public records showed he had.
reply to post by mainidh
Really? Someone puts that much effort into a thread and you decide to walk the thin line of T&C and mock him with such an empty response? Not amused.edit on 2-8-2012 by Sek82 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by jazzguy
bravo OP,
very indepth analysis and a lot of extra material to digest.
They say the truth is always stranger than fiction. This whole case screams that something is not right or that we're not being told all there is to tell. Thanks for the input.
Originally posted by jlm912
Maybe holmes was heading some clandestine revolutionary group that the government deemed a credible threat, so upon finding out, they infiltrated or got some "inside information" to the group that some super important target for the group was going to be at the theater, then after everything went awry they pinned it all on holmes as a means scaring the lesser members into being docile or something...
idk just throwing an idea out there
there's a lot of questions destined to remain unanswered about this case
Originally posted by Mythology
Funny at the shills simply just saying "no". Feel free to debunk any of the poitnts I made
The new doubts come from a motion prosecutors filed Friday, saying the package from Holmes, discovered in a University of Colorado mailroom, hadn't yet been inspected and any report of its contents -- that would be the notebook, though the motion never uses that word -- couldn't be trusted. "The contents were secured and not examined, and held for potential in camera review," the motion says. The motion comes in response to one from Holmes, arguing that his rights to a fair trial hadn't been violated (as he'd claimed) by that leaked information because the supposed leaks were either hoaxes the reporters fell for, or made up by the reporters themselves.
Originally posted by mainidh
reply to post by jlm912
when like a jigsaw the pieces are forced to fit to make a different picture to what it actually is supposed to be.
Originally posted by mainidh
Originally posted by Mythology
Funny at the shills simply just saying "no". Feel free to debunk any of the poitnts I made
Shills now!
You can't pay me enough to believe you're conspiracy bunk. Nor can you pay me to have an opinion.
Guess that means I'm an unpaid shill, without an agenda and without any motivation to sit here and pull apart your OP - all three posts of it - just to come to the same conclusion I've done with almost every other simple post that has said "Durr, woz holmes a patsy?" and "Look his knows is rong, must be a false flag!!!11"
Tedium ad nauseum.
sorry..
Originally posted by jlm912
Here's a bit on the notebook possibly being a hoax
Prosecutors say notebook story probably fake
The new doubts come from a motion prosecutors filed Friday, saying the package from Holmes, discovered in a University of Colorado mailroom, hadn't yet been inspected and any report of its contents -- that would be the notebook, though the motion never uses that word -- couldn't be trusted. "The contents were secured and not examined, and held for potential in camera review," the motion says. The motion comes in response to one from Holmes, arguing that his rights to a fair trial hadn't been violated (as he'd claimed) by that leaked information because the supposed leaks were either hoaxes the reporters fell for, or made up by the reporters themselves.
It did seem a little over-the-top, huh? The article says they're still awaiting comment from Fox and NBC...