I am not sure any of these shootings are "fake" in that they didn't happen at all. I think they are fake because the shooter was programmed to do the deed. Often, after the event, the shooters look dazed and confused.

[deleted]

As for the child actor part of him being somebody else and not actually "Dylann", I still to this day haven't seen any pictures of "Dylann" as a child.

I think the same thing.

The people he murdered are obviously dead, which is a true shame. It's terrible innocent people have to die in order for the elites to make excuses to push their agenda.

With that being said, it was a planned event. It wasn't a sporadic shooting spree.

Someone went into that building and assassinated a Senator. The rest of it is fake as shit.

I've heard this but what was the Senator's name?

Clementa Pinckney.

And it's sad I didn't need to look it up, but the President just did a eulogy thing...

Thank you very much. I don't bother listening when Obama is talking; if his lips are moving, he's lying.

Believe it or not though, earlier in the week when I was searching for terms in regards to this rumor, I could not get a single result to give me the Senator's name.

Pinckney.

[deleted]

I've no idea how many people were actually in that church. The parking lot doesn't appear to have many cars parked. How many bodies came out of that building? How many EMT's were allowed to enter?

Pinckney was under some serious charges of corruption. What if he was trying to get some cover to save his own pathetic skin in the local scandal? He gets a meeting and ends up dead. Problem solved.

[deleted]

I've read that he reloaded 5 times. Fifty rounds or more? So that church got the shit shot out of it! And yet, with all those bullet riddled bodies, bleeding and oozing all type of bodily fluids, they held Church Services there four days later?

Like Sandy Hook, which Haz-Mat company was hired to Sanitize the crime scene?

I've also read the church was going to be condemned due to Termite damage beyond repair.

[deleted]

Hadn't heard that part. Thanks. Been a long time since I was a kid and my Methodist raised Step Mother answered so many of my questions, sincerely! She was pretty cool and found it entertaining that I was buzzing around Dallas Tx. popping into churches. Bible studies and Sunday School classes, the kitchen, were almost always in the basements.

As for the Hero in the crowd? Elderly folk are not very agile? I'd like to think my old ass carcass would spring into action at 50 + and die trying! Who knows...

This was my first thought, too.

This whole thing is fake as fuck.

It is 100% legal for our dear leaders to propagandize us citizens.

Where were the trauma helicopters?

Shouldn't they be harvesting organs from the deceased for transplants?

All we have is a very carefully crafted narrative--too perfect I'd say--and a photo of the kid climbing the church steps and reaching for the door handle.

Reminiscent of the death of Usama bin Laden. No photos at all. Just a "We did it, you must believe us."

Fucking criminals running the show.

Get a good tax man and bleed these motherfuckers dry.

It is 100% legal for our dear leaders to propagandize us citizens.

Care to show this law?

I am happy to share this info right here.

The Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 was introduced by U.S. Congressman Mac Thornberry (Thanks, asshole!) on May 10, 2012 in the House of Representatives. The bill's purpose is "to authorize the domestic dissemination of information and material about the United States intended primarily for foreign audiences." The act was added to the 2013 NDAA bill as section of 1078 to amend certain passages of Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 and Foreign Relations Authorization Act of 1987. The Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 passed Congress as part of the NDAA 2013 on December 28, 2012. Amendments made to the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 and Foreign Relations Authorization Act of 1987 allow for materials produced by the State Department and the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) to be released within US borders.

So the original Act was to disseminate propaganda to foriegn audiences, but it was ammended to now include domestic audiences.

Fuck these people.

Get a good tax man and bleed these motherfuckers dry.

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG.

I KNEW you were going to post Smith-Mundt , because apparently everybody has been mislead as to what actually happened.

Guess what buddy?

Does ANYTHING in the Smith-Mundt Act prohibit the entire federal government from disseminating domestic propaganda?

NO! Read the text of the resolution:

SEC. 208. CLARIFICATION ON DOMESTIC DISTRIBUTION OF PROGRAM MATERIAL.

(a) IN GENERAL. — No funds authorized to be appropriated to the Department of State or the Broadcasting Board of Governors shall be used to influence public opinion in the United States.

So that right there clarifies and proves that the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012, as part of the NDAA 2013, does NOT allow for the Department of State to use funds appropriated to the Department of State or the Governing Board of Broadcasters to be used to influence public opinion.

This text proves that the Smith-Mundt act was established to ensure that foreign propaganda would not also be used as domestic propaganda, as it directly prohibits the two primary foreign propaganda agencies from engaging in disseminating it as propaganda domestically.

Amendments made to the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 and Foreign Relations Authorization Act of 1987 allow for materials produced by the State Department and the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) to be released within US borders.

To those who request it for educational, research, or archival purposes.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/22/1461-1a

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_in_the_United_States

PLEASE read that wikipedia page.

Domestic propaganda always has been legal, is now, was then, still is, and always will be.

Does the "Smith-Mundt Modernization Act" have any legal authority over the "National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign" established through the "Office of National Drug Control Policy" established by the "Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988"?

NO! It only applies to the "United States Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948" (Smith-Mundt Act), which only has the legal authority to regulate the Department of State and Broadcasting Board of Governors.

Domestic propaganda is now and always has been legal in the United States of America, and the Smith-Mundt act has absolutely NOTHING to do with it.

You have been duped by a myriad of liar news organizations, many of which you should know you should not trust such as RUSSIAN TIMES.

Do you seriously expect Russian Times to bring you accurate reporting on United States legislation which you can read as our government gladly and openly hosts the legislation on the internet where you can easily read it and properly interpret it yourself?

Wake up and stop believing everything you read just because idiots sound like they know what they're talking about.

I have clearly proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that you can not just trust "news articles" because they are "news articles".

They say that the text of a bill says something, yet don't quote the relevant text from the bill? Yeah, they're liars, don't trust them.

So once again, I actually am right, and every "professional" writing articles about the Smith-Mundt act on the internet and television is literally wrong.

I am correct, and have proven them all to be liars.

Please learn to think critically.

Have a nice day.

That is what I'm saying.

It is legal.

Buddy.

That is what I'm saying.

No, you are saying that "Smith-Mundt Modernization Act" is what lead to domestic propaganda being made legal, as if it were ever illegal.

That is wrong.

Domestic propaganda was never illegal, it has always been legal.

You do not know how to read legislation, if you are coming to the conclusion that the "Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012" has anything to do with domestic propaganda.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/21/1708

That is a LEGAL domestic propaganda program enacted in 1989.

Man, that's funny, it's like domestic propaganda always has been legal, and that the "Smith Mundt Act" never has and never will have anything to do with it.

You're spreading good and true information, but your tone is going to turn people off. This isn't a competition as to who is more "correct." If your intention is to educate, please consider how your tone and delivery will affect your audience's perception of the information. If your intention is to let everyone know how great you are, continue as you are.

You're spreading good and true information, but your tone is going to turn people off. This isn't a competition as to who is more "correct." If your intention is to educate, please consider how your tone and delivery will affect your audience's perception of the information. If your intention is to let everyone know how great you are, continue as you are.

I know I need to work on my delivery.

I'm still reeling from people still being incorrect about this because all of those articles that came out that day are still online and still being cited by people, even though they're wrong and the text of the legislation proves all those articles wrongs.

I'm very frustrated with this situation, and vented too much about it.

[deleted]

All of these events are fake.. But the problem is we sound like lunatics to the sheep. It's just like when I say the elites want us dead, that's why they put poison in our products and food. The elites are winning the information war because the sheep are fighting for them unknowingly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroprosthetics

Seems like every time there's a mass shooting, this sub calls it out as fake. I'd just like to know if you guys think every single mass shooting is fake. Could someone point out a shooting that definitely isn't fake? I mean they can't all be orchestrated by the government.

[deleted]

i agree with the op. i don't know. i would like to know. but i fear a question like this will invite the troll army out to invade with lies and name calling to misdirect,mislead and distract. and by the time you get done reading here you will be left more confused. going from what i've seen ,it looks like something is very funny about the incident.

Disinfo agents and shills have done their job then. They want you to stay confused, and question why you questioned said event in the first place.

This response comes up every time there is some type of shooting or event. This sub is made up of numerous people, some posting in good faith, others not. Each time, at least some people are going to doubt the official story and post what they see as evidence to that effect. Most of this evidence will be thin.

This does not mean the entire sub thinks the shooting is fake, or even that most of the people who thought SH or BMB were fake think this one is fake. What is usually consistent is that many of us doubt the official narrative because government and media have a proven track record of lying to us. Doubting the official narrative is at its root skepticism. The media has delivered a narrative, but we want strong evidence before we accept it.

Doubting the official narrative is at its root skepticism.

Doubting a narrative because it is the "official" is in no way skeptical. Skeptics rely on evidence.

The media has delivered a narrative, but we want strong evidence before we accept it.

Okay, and you should require strong evidence before you accept a narrative. The problem is, conspiracy theorists present their own narrative. A narrative involving lies and cover ups. A narrative for which they have no evidence at all. They then deny any evidence to the contrary.

Columbine was real, auraura, Sandy hook and Boston bombing were staged.

[deleted]

What did I see at Sandy Hook that proved to me that it was real? Very little.

So because there was less video/photographic evidence you don't believe in the Sandy Hook shooting. Okay I get that.

Columbine, I know was real, there is a ton of evidence made public, including pictures of the dead shooters.

There is more photographic evidence of Columbine, so you believe that one was real. Seems consistent.

I truly believe it's possible for an event like this to be staged with just enough video to manufacture a perception that it did.

Wait, what? If you believe that, why do you believe that Columbine was real? Couldn't all those photos be fake? And if the photos can be faked, why weren't there more fake photos made of Sandy Hook, or Charleston?

EDIT: I know you didn't say anything about fake photos, but I'm assuming if you think they can fake video, then you think they can also fake photographs as well.

[deleted]

I give reality and inner worlds to others. Everyone is not lying.

Not everyone, just the dozens of people involved in the Sandy Hook and Charleston shootings.

I'd wager that most of these high profile events happened ("real"), but fake in the sense that the released details are to push a narrative or tell a story. Additionally, it gets more complicated as these events might not all be fakes, but maybe only some of them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7LmxyZXMw0

You might find that talk interesting.

Is there any evidence that it happened in any way other than the official story? Is there even a single piece of contradictory evidence?

[deleted]

They arrested and charged a suspect. There was an eyewitness. The victim's families aren't disputing that they died. There's not been anything whatsoever suspicious about the event. So... I guess I just don't understand what the big deal is.

[deleted]

Didn't you find the arraignment to be kind of strange and like a big show?

It's a high profile and politically charged event. I didn't find it strange in that context. What specifically should have happened? Why?

A report of an eyewitness doesn't make it true.

Of course it doesn't. That's why we as a society came up with a court system. This kid is going on trial and the evidence will be presented. You are already getting what you want.

Why has 28 million dollars of tax payer's money been paid to the church and the victims families? What does a funeral cost?

It hasn't. Justice Dept set aside money to deal with managing the aftermath of the event. Of that 29 million, a portion of it may be spent on the families in some way. No one knows what that portion is. I don't know why you guys think they're handing multimillion dollar checks to families.

[deleted]

Why is any check being handed to them?

It's called a Crime Victims Compensation fund. The government does this all the time. All over the country, every day. Since at least the 70s: http://www.ovc.gov/

http://www.nacvcb.org/index.asp?bid=14

How many terrorist were coerced into committing acts by government manipulation? A sheep doesn't know it's going to be slaughtered.

What research OP? how do you expect to do research sifting on your ass on a computee hundreds of miles away?

[deleted]

Don't care about voting. Yea I only pointed it out because people always want to call things a conspiracy with half baked ass information trying to play couch potato investigator. If you were serious about finding out the truth, you'd call the police non emergency phone for the Charleston PD in that area of the shooting. Might also call the coroner office to verify etc, basically get actual facts.

It's almost like.... You don't want to believe it happened? Because, you have a reason on agenda not too.

Imagine that.

I give reality and inner worlds to others. Everyone is not lying.

Not everyone, just the dozens of people involved in the Sandy Hook and Charleston shootings.