California shooting WARNING: GRAPHIC PHOTO

by eddie Wed Dec 02, 2015 7:58 pm

First topic message reminder :

On BBC news now

Units responding to a shooting incident may be 20 casualties

Nothing further yet

by Guest Wed Dec 09, 2015 4:59 pm

Righ catch you all later

by eddie Wed Dec 09, 2015 5:03 pm

Original Quill wrote:
eddie wrote:I can't find any evidence of USA newsreaders calling anyone "actors"

Perhaps I'm not looking in the right places?

What data evidence do you have of newsreaders? Check with news producers or police. They are the ones calling people that.

2 - 3 men or individuals. At this point it is unclear. But there is definitely conflicting evidence.

Exactly. Always unclear. And when something is unclear then there's a lie being told somewhere.
That's all I'm saying.

by Raggamuffin Wed Dec 09, 2015 5:04 pm

eddie wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

What data evidence do you have of newsreaders? Check with news producers or police. They are the ones calling people that.

2 - 3 men or individuals. At this point it is unclear. But there is definitely conflicting evidence.

Exactly. Always unclear. And when something is unclear then there's a lie being told somewhere.
That's all I'm saying.

I'm not at all sure what you are saying eddie.

by Raggamuffin Wed Dec 09, 2015 5:05 pm

Of course I admire the attention to detail, but there must be more to say about your theory eddie.

by Original Quill Wed Dec 09, 2015 5:08 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:Of course I admire the attention to detail, but there must be more to say about your theory eddie.

Obviously there's confusion. I think she's saying she would like to clear it up...i.e., eliminate false leads. Were there 2 or 3 men? I think it's just questions at this point; no need for theories right now.

by Raggamuffin Wed Dec 09, 2015 5:11 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:Of course I admire the attention to detail, but there must be more to say about your theory eddie.

Obviously there's confusion. I think she's saying she would like to clear it up...i.e., eliminate false leads. Were there 2 or 3 men? I think it's just questions at this point; no need for theories right now.

Whether there were 2 or 3 men isn't related to the issue of anyone being an "actor" though.

I've already said there might have been a third person. Whether Malik could be mistaken for a man is another issue, and I've already said it's possible she wasn't actually there, but that she was certainly involved in the later shootout.

by eddie Wed Dec 09, 2015 8:24 pm

I don't think it's obvious she was involved and I don't think it's obvious this was done by Muslims and I don't think it's obvious how many shooters there were and I don't think it's obvious that the shooters were the three (where is the third?) people the police said they were and I don't think it's obvious that the scene we saw on TV was the scene that played out...and I don't think it's obvious why newsreaders call gunmen "actors"

I don't think anyhing about this case is obvious.
It's all confusion. Smoke and mirrors.

by Raggamuffin Wed Dec 09, 2015 8:29 pm

eddie wrote:I don't think it's obvious she was involved and I don't think it's obvious this was done by Muslims and I don't think it's obvious how many shooters there were and I don't think it's obvious that the shooters were the three (where is the third?) people the police said they were and I don't think it's obvious that the scene we saw on TV was the scene that played out...and I don't think it's obvious why newsreaders call gunmen "actors"

I don't think anyhing about this case is obvious.
It's all confusion. Smoke and mirrors.

She was in the vehicle and someone was shooting at the police after Farook left the vehicle. Who do you think that was if it wasn't her?

Do you really think the police planted all that stuff on them and in their house then? Do you think they were not Muslims?

by eddie Wed Dec 09, 2015 8:32 pm

I think they were Muslim and perhaps the police played it or perhaps they had acquired it.
Read up on false flag events rags. That's the direction I'm looking atm

by Raggamuffin Wed Dec 09, 2015 8:33 pm

eddie wrote:I think they were Muslim and perhaps the police played it or perhaps they had acquired it.
Read up on false flag events rags. That's the direction I'm looking atm

I'd like to know what your alternative theory is. Do you think they just picked on those two randomly and pretended that they were the shooters? How could they hope to get away with that? Do you think that the Government hired people to do the shooting?

by eddie Wed Dec 09, 2015 8:56 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
eddie wrote:I think they were Muslim and perhaps the police played it or perhaps they had acquired it.
Read up on false flag events rags. That's the direction I'm looking atm

I'd like to know what your alternative theory is. Do you think they just picked on those two randomly and pretended that they were the shooters? How could they hope to get away with that? Do you think that the Government hired people to do the shooting?

No, these Isis or Muslims are not picked at random, I'd say they'd been "groomed" and possibly employed by someone.
Look, several witnesses said the three men were athletically built
The police said one shooter got away - what happened to this third shooter?
The women's family have said she was slight and weighed only 90 pounds and couldn't have possibly carried a heavy weapon and she was nursing her baby so still "tender"
The cottage was live and then they all of a sudden cut it and said they couldn't show love footage anymore...cut to a scene where the car is found and the Muslims dead
Some eye witnesses described a completely different car to the one the police chased
The newsreaders call,them "actors"

Just do a little research rags

by Raggamuffin Wed Dec 09, 2015 9:02 pm

eddie wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

I'd like to know what your alternative theory is. Do you think they just picked on those two randomly and pretended that they were the shooters? How could they hope to get away with that? Do you think that the Government hired people to do the shooting?

No, these Isis or Muslims are not picked at random, I'd say they'd been "groomed" and possibly employed by someone.
Look, several witnesses said the three men were athletically built
The police said one shooter got away - what happened to this third shooter?
The women's family have said she was slight and weighed only 90 pounds and couldn't have possibly carried a heavy weapon and she was nursing her baby so still "tender"
The cottage was live and then they all of a sudden cut it and said they couldn't show love footage anymore...cut to a scene where the car is found and the Muslims dead
Some eye witnesses described a completely different car to the one the police chased
The newsreaders call,them "actors"

Just do a little research rags

Which Muslims had been groomed eddie?

I am looking into it, but you know there are always conspiracy theories. Look at the claim that the bloke was handcuffed and so couldn't have been driving. That was clearly nonsense.

by eddie Wed Dec 09, 2015 9:07 pm

Sorry what I meant is the couple may or may not be innocent entirely or they may have been planning something
But I don't think they did this
Land the timing was perfect for our "yes" vote too

by eddie Wed Dec 09, 2015 9:09 pm

Rags just do some reading and eliminate the crap lol

All I'm saying, as usual, more questions than answers and muddy waters

I daresay it'll all be cleared up by an "official statement"

As it alway is

by Raggamuffin Wed Dec 09, 2015 9:16 pm

Such a conspiracy would involve an awful lot of police officers eddie.

by eddie Wed Dec 09, 2015 9:18 pm

Not really
And do police always tell the truth?

Perhaps the FBI got there first?

All I'm saying is, too many descrepancies

by Guest Wed Dec 09, 2015 9:21 pm

Third Eyewitness To San Bernardino Shooting Says It Wasn’t ‘Terror Couple’ Who Carried Out Attack

“It’s not him,” a third San Bernardino shooting witness proclaimed about Sayd Farook and his wife.
The so-called “terror couple” have been accused of masterminding an ISIS terror attack on a Christmas office party where Sayd worked.

Earlier this month, the attorneys for the Farook family maintained that they do not believe the suspects are the ones who carried out the attacks in question.
Several eyewitnesses and family of witnesses and victims initially said that three athletic Caucasian men had been responsible for carrying out the attacks. Police immediately banned them from speaking with the media.
Just days ago, another eye-witness in the office came forward and said that in spite of what the law enforcement and mainstream media narrative is saying, the people who carried out the attack where very athletic, large, Caucasian men, who were three – not two – in number. Farook’s wife, it should be remembered weighed approximately 90lbs.
Now, a third prominent eye-witness, Chirs Nwadike, has stepped up to challenge the mainstream narrative. He recently told reporters he received a phone call from an unknown person around 7 p.m., on the evening of the shooting, who told him that he must say that Sayd Farook was the shooter.
You read that right, he says that he was called and told to change his story and say that Farook carried out the attacks with his wife, even though that is very different than what he witnessed.

Nwadike told reporters:
“No it’s not him [Sayd]. I told them about it. He’s quiet. He doesn’t make any trouble.”
“He was just spraying bullets everywhere,” Nwadike said. But the gunman was not Sayd, or his wife.

http://countercurrentnews.com/2015/12/third-eyewitness-to-san-bernardino-says-it-wasnt-couple/#

Two videos on the link

by eddie Wed Dec 09, 2015 9:25 pm

This is what I'm saying
I've asked rags to google it all and I've put up links so can't do much more tbh

by Raggamuffin Wed Dec 09, 2015 9:29 pm

So did this Nwadike assume it wasn't Farook just because Farook was quiet?

by Cass Wed Dec 09, 2015 9:51 pm

Eddie

As you yourself has said on many occassions - how can you know what its really like if you don't live it?

Quill and I both live it and I'm sure that Ben will concur that the context we are saying news people use when they say actors is correct.I personally watch and listen and read a huge variety of news sources here in the US and ive seen it all over in books as well.

Please stop.trying to make something out of nothing. The stations policy may say not to use that phrase in this type of situation or the producer may have whispered in his ear to stop.

by Raggamuffin Wed Dec 09, 2015 10:00 pm

Is there a way to check out if Malik was as small as people say she was? Don't forget she would have been wearing a tactical vest, and being small doesn't mean she couldn't use a gun.

by Cass Thu Dec 10, 2015 1:09 am

This story is still changing by the hour.

It all goes back to what I said a few days ago that in the mass chose of being caught up in a horrible situation like this, that witnesses, however well intentioned, could get easily confused as to what they saw and in how it went down.
In the initial stages most news media are guessing and speculating. In all of the press conferences from LEOs you will see that that the reporters are firing off questions and the LEOs will not confirm. Then another reporter will ask the same question but worded differently and still it will not be confirmed.
In this day of social media, what we used to call Chinese Whispers/Telephone kids game, happens instantaneously. One person shares something with unconfirmed data and in 5 minutes its gone around the world helped by people who don't evaluate the source. And then its a perceived truth.

You also gave people who put out misinformation deliberately because they get some sort of warped pleasure from that. And lets not forget the tin hat brigade. Anything is able to be manipulated to suit someones agenda.

by Cass Thu Dec 10, 2015 1:17 am

Pt2.

At the end of the day I think we should all just take a step back, breathe and let the authorities do their investigation before jumping to so many wrong conclusions. I'm guilty of it myself. We don't have any "rights" to know right now - that's a tagline that's been bandied about by so may types of media outlets as if not giving out information immediately something has occurred means a huge nasty government cover up is taking place. People please.

But the media and social media need to step up and become responsible but alas bad news makes big bucks. Also its the dumbing down of civilization with reality Tv because its easier than actually thinking and planning out decent entertainment.

I guess I'm ranting because ive been stuck in bed for the last few days and everytime I turn on the television it makes me sicker.

by Guest Thu Dec 10, 2015 3:28 am

Great posts me Lady

Sadly some people are already bought into a belief of a far greater conspiracy where they think something imaginary is behind many of the world events, because fundementally many of these people refuse to except the reaily of many of the killings and acts committed to incidviduals or groups but find it far easier to believe something more evil and bigger is behind this.

I blame James Bond films myself lol, even though I love the films. I think it is make believe that allows people to unconciously create something far sinister to explain all the murder and suffering. It is sadly fueld by an extreme paranoia and once a person is bought into this belief, which in this case in the US of a New World Order, then any such event is taken as an act and plan of this imaginary group. It does not matter what the mass killing is or what the facts are, people immediately have set it into their minds. That to them, this is again something orchestrated by this imaginary group they believe is planning all the violence in the world. It is far easier for some to believe in a good and evil concept and creating something that makes this easier to accept sadly clouds the ability of people to look at the evidence in total and that they sadly go off what seems unusal to then create an elborate and what can only be described as the worst paranoia to explain these events.

You explain this far nicer than I have to help people understand, but we both know this is what is sadly happenning and more so in the US where paranoia seems to be like an epedemic. The worse thing about this is that it actually stops people seeing what are the fundemental problems and makes them blind to the real problems in the world.

by Raggamuffin Thu Dec 10, 2015 1:42 pm

I like a good conspiracy theory, so I'm looking into it.

I found this website where some chap is going to explain how he knows that it was a set up or fake.

http://www.conspiracyclub.co/2015/12/04/san-bernardino-shooting-massacre-a-lie-hoax-false-flag-staged-shooting/

I've got 2.23 mins in, and the first problem I have is with his map. He's marked on it the place where the vehicle was first seen, the place where the witness filming it was standing, and the place where the vehicle ended up. So he's got the vehicle going from right to left on his map - ie, east to west. The problem is that it appears to me that the map is upside down so he has the car going from west to east instead. If anyone can be bothered to look at another map of that area, perhaps they could explain if I'm looking at it wrong.

The place where he says the witness filming the chase was standing appears to be outside an industrial unit, and yet I'm sure the chap filming it said he was outside his house.

by Raggamuffin Thu Dec 10, 2015 2:06 pm

This is doing my head in. Even the helicopter video looks the wrong way round to me.

Were they going from east to west, or west to east?

by Raggamuffin Thu Dec 10, 2015 2:21 pm

OK, unless my Google maps is upside down, they were going west to east - ie, not back in the direction of the conference centre.

by Raggamuffin Thu Dec 10, 2015 2:52 pm

So when they left their house they initially headed west back in the direction of the conference centre, but they ended up driving east before they were stopped, so it would be interesting to see the exact route they took.

by Raggamuffin Thu Dec 10, 2015 3:40 pm

So in that video I just posted a link too, the guy claimed that the black SUV was supposedly in one place, and then in the same shot it was in another place. It hasn't occurred to him that the first one was a completely different car. He said that the shadows on the body were wrong, but I think he's mistaking blood for a shadow.

Dismissed!

by Cass Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:06 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:So in that video I just posted a link too, the guy claimed that the black SUV was supposedly in one place, and then in the same shot it was in another place. It hasn't occurred to him that the first one was a completely different car. He said that the shadows on the body were wrong, but I think he's mistaking blood for a shadow.

Dismissed!

Lol. You go Colombo.

by Raggamuffin Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:10 pm

Cass wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:So in that video I just posted a link too, the guy claimed that the black SUV was supposedly in one place, and then in the same shot it was in another place. It hasn't occurred to him that the first one was a completely different car. He said that the shadows on the body were wrong, but I think he's mistaking blood for a shadow.

Dismissed!

Lol. You go Colombo.

It took me a while to work out which way they were driving because I've seen so many reports that they were heading back towards the conference centre, and actually they weren't - not in the end anyway.

I'm just watching a video of the immediate aftermath of the shootout. Interestingly, the wipers of the SUV are on intermittently. I also wonder why they were driving quite slowly with the hazard lights on before they stopped. The driver's door is open, which is presumably how Farook got out of the car, but the passenger door on the driver's side is also slightly open. I wonder if Malik was in the back and attempted to get out before she was shot.

I was hoping to see them handcuff Farook whilst he was on the ground because of these daft theories that he was handcuffed before, but they deliberately hid that bit from viewers so they wouldn't see any blood.

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

by Original Quill Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:17 pm

Marquez admits previous plots:

CNN wrote:San Bernardino shooting investigation: Past plot and recent loan are latest clues

(CNN)What happened to transform a trained pharmacist and a county health inspector into terrorists, and when did they take that dark turn?

Officials say it could have been years before last week's deadly attack in San Bernardino, California.

Investigators believe shooter Syed Rizwan Farook may have been plotting an earlier attack in California with someone else, two U.S. officials told CNN on Tuesday. One of the officials said the two conspired in 2012 and a specific target was considered. The pair "got spooked" and decided not to go through with the earlier attack after a round of terror-related arrests in the area, an official said.

And sources also told CNN that investigators believe Tashfeen Malik, Farook's wife and the other shooter who opened fire Wednesday, was radicalized at least two years ago.

Investigators are still trying to piece together profiles of the couple who killed 14 people and died in a gunbattle with police last week. They're also working to pinpoint whether anyone in the United States or abroad helped finance and shape the plot.

Farook took out a bank loan for $28,500 in November, multiple law enforcement officials told CNN on Tuesday.

About half the money was given to Farook's mother in the last couple of weeks, one official said, and some of it was spent on household items.

Investigators have accounted for all the money and do not believe any of it was provided to the killers by any outside entity backing the plot, according to one of the sources. Because of that, the officials said the loan is not considered of significant investigative value at this stage.

But one expert told CNN the loan could be another sign that Farook had been preparing for the attack.

"What it indicates is he was financing this operation or his life or his afterlife for his child and mother, using what is now wire fraud and bank fraud, so it's just two more additional charges that the FBI will be looking at," said Tim Clemente, a former FBI counterterrorism agent.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/08/us/san-bernardino-shooting/

by Cass Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:19 pm

^cheers Didge. Its just common sense and I guess a reaction to all the bullcookies that is floating around every time I turn on something....

One thing ive noticed over the last few years. Social media has led to much more divideness in our world. At first it was great I can connect with people and share good things and now its all about I'm going to spread my own brand of hats because I can. And the media outlets seem to play the same game with their cutsie story tagged on at the very end. Its a very sad indictment on today's society.

Except my kitchen appliances cause then its all deliciousness - apart from when I'm sick cause God love him, Mr. C is not a cook apart from slinging in a frozen pizza and chips so ive been living on soup and sandwiches. No hot toddys I'm afraid as that would make a bad situation much worse. Ah well.

by Cass Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:20 pm

The paragraphs above are mixed up. Pfft. Sorry.

by Guest Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:24 pm

Cass wrote:^cheers Didge. Its just common sense and I guess a reaction to all the bullcookies that is floating around every time I turn on something....

One thing ive noticed over the last few years. Social media has led to much more divideness in our world. At first it was great I can connect with people and share good things and now its all about I'm going to spread my own brand of hats because I can. And the media outlets seem to play the same game with their cutsie story tagged on at the very end. Its a very sad indictment on today's society.

Except my kitchen appliances cause then its all deliciousness - apart from when I'm sick cause God love him, Mr. C is not a cook apart from slinging in a frozen pizza and chips so ive been living on soup and sandwiches. No hot toddys I'm afraid as that would make a bad situation much worse. Ah well.

i agree completely on the point of social media, where it has turned everyone into judge and jury all set into one, on many aspects of our life. On the one hand in the past what you did not know, did not make you fear or intefere with what was fundemental in securing the saftey of a nation. On the other though at least there is more openess to what goes on, but to me there needs to be a balance as what people should know and what is not in their interest.
Hard and difficult thing to even find a balance.
I think the media is one of the biggest problems today

Bugger the bad situation, have a drink if it makes you feel better.

Laughing

by Original Quill Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:40 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:It took me a while to work out which way they were driving because I've seen so many reports that they were heading back towards the conference centre, and actually they weren't - not in the end anyway.

Me too. And we may still be confused.

San Bernardino streets go on an east-west and north-south grid. Running east-west through the south part of town is the I-10 Interstate, LA to Jacksonville, so this area is within that corridor.

The Inland Center is in the SE corner, near where the Santa Ana river cuts through the city limits diagonally. As you move along I-10 east, you have Redlands, the city where they lived. They lived about 5-miles from the Center.

Right now, I'm understanding that he was at the meeting, departed and went home to get the wife and guns, returned, whence the shooting began. Then the two of them quickly left the Center and drove to the home. They were there for a period, but left the home when they noticed the cops. They got into the SUV and were stopped while driving west on San Bernardino Avenue. Thence the shoot-out on San Bernardino Avenue.

I don't get what they were doing. Any thinking person would have abandoned the home as a lost cause. Compare Paris, where they left theater and high-tailed it to Belgium. Why go back to the home?

Then, when they leave the home, why are they heading west, right back to where the hot activity is? In fact, why aren't they acutely aware that they are known, that they are being hunted and followed, and that they are still in a shitload of trouble? That's the biggest question that I don't get...it's like they were living on another planet. Here they are spinning around town in their SUV like they are on a Sunday drive. What kind of disconnected world were they living in?

by Original Quill Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:44 pm

Cass wrote:The paragraphs above are mixed up. Pfft. Sorry.

Get better, Cass. So soz you are sick. I'm not ignoring you; just our paths are crossing on two different subjects here. Get well soon, hon.

by Raggamuffin Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:56 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:It took me a while to work out which way they were driving because I've seen so many reports that they were heading back towards the conference centre, and actually they weren't - not in the end anyway.

Me too. And we may still be confused.

San Bernardino streets go on an east-west and north-south grid. Running east-west through the south part of town is the I-10 Interstate, LA to Jacksonville, so this area is within that corridor.

The Inland Center is in the SE corner, near where the Santa Ana river cuts through the city limits diagonally. As you move along I-10 east, you have Redlands, the city where they lived. They lived about 5-miles from the Center.

Right now, I'm understanding that he was at the meeting, departed and went home to get the wife and guns, returned, whence the shooting began. Then the two of them quickly left the Center and drove to the home. They were there for a period, but left the home when they noticed the cops. They got into the SUV and were stopped while driving west on San Bernardino Avenue. Thence the shoot-out on San Bernardino Avenue.

I don't get what they were doing. Any thinking person would have abandoned the home as a lost cause. Compare Paris, where they left theater and high-tailed it to Belgium. Why go back to the home?

Then, when they leave the home, why are they heading west, right back to where the hot activity is? In fact, why aren't they acutely aware that they are known, that they are being hunted and followed, and that they are still in a shitload of trouble? That's the biggest question that I don't get...it's like they were living on another planet. Here they are spinning around town in their SUV like they are on a Sunday drive. What kind of disconnected world were they living in?

No, they were heading east at the end. If you look at a map and can locate the place where the car was stopped, you'll see it was travelling east just prior to that. On the other hand, the area where they lived is south east of that spot, so they must have gone west at some point, and then changed direction.

by Original Quill Thu Dec 10, 2015 5:14 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Me too. And we may still be confused.

San Bernardino streets go on an east-west and north-south grid. Running east-west through the south part of town is the I-10 Interstate, LA to Jacksonville, so this area is within that corridor.

The Inland Center is in the SE corner, near where the Santa Ana river cuts through the city limits diagonally. As you move along I-10 east, you have Redlands, the city where they lived. They lived about 5-miles from the Center.

Right now, I'm understanding that he was at the meeting, departed and went home to get the wife and guns, returned, whence the shooting began. Then the two of them quickly left the Center and drove to the home. They were there for a period, but left the home when they noticed the cops. They got into the SUV and were stopped while driving west on San Bernardino Avenue. Thence the shoot-out on San Bernardino Avenue.

I don't get what they were doing. Any thinking person would have abandoned the home as a lost cause. Compare Paris, where they left theater and high-tailed it to Belgium. Why go back to the home?

Then, when they leave the home, why are they heading west, right back to where the hot activity is? In fact, why aren't they acutely aware that they are known, that they are being hunted and followed, and that they are still in a shitload of trouble? That's the biggest question that I don't get...it's like they were living on another planet. Here they are spinning around town in their SUV like they are on a Sunday drive. What kind of disconnected world were they living in?

No, they were heading east at the end. If you look at a map and can locate the place where the car was stopped, you'll see it was travelling east just prior to that. On the other hand, the area where they lived is south east of that spot, so they must have gone west at some point, and then changed direction.

Heading east? From where. They already live east of the spot, in Redlands. If they were just leaving the home, and they were found west of the home, it would suggest that they were driving west, away from the home. But, on another level, this begs the question of why they are heading back into the 'hot' zone. If they were thinking at all, they would have been halfway to Los Angeles by then.

But never mind, I trust your detail work. It just bolsters what I am saying: either they didn't know where they were, or what they were doing, or they were on another planet. They're driving around like they were on a Sunday drive...with no sense of purpose or, god forbid, escape.

by Raggamuffin Thu Dec 10, 2015 5:25 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

No, they were heading east at the end. If you look at a map and can locate the place where the car was stopped, you'll see it was travelling east just prior to that. On the other hand, the area where they lived is south east of that spot, so they must have gone west at some point, and then changed direction.

Heading east? From where. They already live east of the spot, in Redlands. If they were just leaving the home, and they were found west of the home, it would suggest that they were driving west, away from the home. But, on another level, this begs the question of why they are heading back into the 'hot' zone. If they were thinking at all, they would have been halfway to Los Angeles by then.

But never mind, I trust your detail work. It just bolsters what I am saying: either they didn't know where they were, or what they were doing, or they were on another planet. They're driving around like they were on a Sunday drive...with no sense of purpose or, god forbid, escape.

I know, it confused me at first. If you look at this photo, the white fence is on the south side of the street, and the car is facing east. Don't trust my detail work because I'm female and therefore clearly have no sense of direction. Laughing

California shooting WARNING: GRAPHIC PHOTO - Page 5 Shot-out-suv-again

The location is on East San Bernardino Avenue just to the east of Sheddon drive if you want to check.

However, they must have gone west at some point, I agree. I wonder if they went around a few blocks at some point and ended up heading east.

by Original Quill Thu Dec 10, 2015 5:57 pm

At least women have the good sense to ask for directions. Laughing

They are driving around, seemingly with no motivation that can be derived out of this set of facts...

...could this be a case of the wrong people being killed, and a massive police cover-up, like we saw in Chicago recently with Laquan McDonald?

It sure doesn't make sense.

by Raggamuffin Thu Dec 10, 2015 6:06 pm

Original Quill wrote:At least women have the good sense to ask for directions.

They are driving around, seemingly with no motivation that can be derived out of this set of facts...

...could this be a case of the wrong people being killed, and a massive police cover-up, like we saw in Chicago recently with Laquan McDonald?

It sure doesn't make sense.

It is strange that the car was going fairly slowly with its hazard lights flashing. You can hear gun shots in the video filmed by a witness, and you can see something in the road next to Farook which looks very much like a large gun, so that would suggest he was involved.

If they had driven east after leaving their house they could have been out of Redlands into countryside pretty quickly, so yes, it's a mystery as to where they were going and why. Perhaps they simply didn't know the area that well, or the best way out.

by Raggamuffin Thu Dec 10, 2015 6:14 pm

Maybe they were driving slowly so Malik had a better chance to use the gun on the police cars following them. The back window was shot out, so maybe she shot through that. I reckon she was in the back of the car, and she maybe tried to get out when Farook did but got shot when she was still inside.

by Raggamuffin Thu Dec 10, 2015 6:19 pm

Well my sense of direction was OK, and I was right about Malik (or someone else) firing out of the back window.

“We are in pursuit of the suspect vehicle eastbound on San Bernardino Avenue from Richardson. We got shots fired out of the back window,” an officer says.

http://graphics.latimes.com/san-bernardino-police-dispatch/

by Original Quill Thu Dec 10, 2015 6:44 pm

No, you're ok. I believe, as I remember, the man was driving and the female was turned around in the front seat and firing out the back window.

So, if the police were hot on their trail, how were they able to move around so well? They say the police were on the scene of the Inland Center in 2-minutes. If they were the shooters at the Inland Center, they were allowed to leave, go to their home in Redlands, do or get whatever, and then drive back toward the west, whereupon they are fired upon by police, who find them driving east.

If this is a cover-up, it's the exact opposite of Chicago, where silence was the order-of-the-day. Here, there's too much noise. Rolling Eyes

by Raggamuffin Thu Dec 10, 2015 6:53 pm

Original Quill wrote:No, you're ok. I believe, as I remember, the man was driving and the female was turned around in the front seat and firing out the back window.

So, if the police were hot on their trail, how were they able to move around so well? They say the police were on the scene of the Inland Center in 2-minutes. If they were the shooters at the Inland Center, they were allowed to leave, go to their home in Redlands, do or get whatever, and then drive back toward the west, whereupon they are fired upon by police, who find them driving east.

If this is a cover-up, it's the exact opposite of Chicago, where silence was the order-of-the-day. Here, there's too much noise.

I said earlier that the back door behind the driver's door was slightly open. This was before anyone approached the car, so someone in the car opened it. I thought it was probably Malik, but that would mean she was in the back.

I think they had already left the centre when the police turned up, and it took a little while for someone to name Farook, and then they would need to get his address. I also think the timelines reported vary quite a lot, so it may well have taken longer for the police to respond. I wouldn't have thought they could have got there in two minutes tbh.

by Original Quill Thu Dec 10, 2015 7:12 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Original Quill wrote:No, you're ok. I believe, as I remember, the man was driving and the female was turned around in the front seat and firing out the back window.

So, if the police were hot on their trail, how were they able to move around so well? They say the police were on the scene of the Inland Center in 2-minutes. If they were the shooters at the Inland Center, they were allowed to leave, go to their home in Redlands, do or get whatever, and then drive back toward the west, whereupon they are fired upon by police, who find them driving east.

If this is a cover-up, it's the exact opposite of Chicago, where silence was the order-of-the-day. Here, there's too much noise.

I said earlier that the back door behind the driver's door was slightly open. This was before anyone approached the car, so someone in the car opened it. I thought it was probably Malik, but that would mean she was in the back.

I think they had already left the centre when the police turned up, and it took a little while for someone to name Farook, and then they would need to get his address. I also think the timelines reported vary quite a lot, so it may well have taken longer for the police to respond. I wouldn't have thought they could have got there in two minutes tbh.

Well the news media (ABC News) made a big point of how it took only two minutes for the police to respond. I remember because that's how long it took for the Paris police to respond, and I was thinking they both were right on-the-spot.

Now, if you go to witnesses at the Center...who from there identified Farook and Malik? Some reporters were saying witnesses identified three men, which confuses the situation still more. I could believe that if Malik was dressed in heavy clothing she might be mistaken for a man, but where is the third man? Doesn't this sound like the Oklahoma City bombing? A missing perp?

I'm just wondering if these two episodes are even connected? There seems to be a huge discontinuity between the events at the Inland Center, and where we pick up Farook and Malik in the dark SUV on San Bernardino Avenue, heading into the 'hot' zone and going the wrong way, etc., etc.. It's like they didn't even know about the original assault at the Center.

by Raggamuffin Thu Dec 10, 2015 7:28 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

I said earlier that the back door behind the driver's door was slightly open. This was before anyone approached the car, so someone in the car opened it. I thought it was probably Malik, but that would mean she was in the back.

I think they had already left the centre when the police turned up, and it took a little while for someone to name Farook, and then they would need to get his address. I also think the timelines reported vary quite a lot, so it may well have taken longer for the police to respond. I wouldn't have thought they could have got there in two minutes tbh.

Well the news media (ABC News) made a big point of how it took only two minutes for the police to respond. I remember because that's how long it took for the Paris police to respond, and I was thinking they both were right on-the-spot.

Now, if you go to witnesses at the Center...who from there identified Farook and Malik? Some reporters were saying witnesses identified three men, which confuses the situation still more. I could believe that if Malik was dressed in heavy clothing she might be mistaken for a man, but where is the third man? Doesn't this sound like the Oklahoma City bombing? A missing perp?

I'm just wondering if these two episodes are even connected? There seems to be a huge discontinuity between the events at the Inland Center, and where we pick up Farook and Malik in the dark SUV on San Bernardino Avenue, heading into the 'hot' zone and going the wrong way, etc., etc.. It's like they didn't even know about the original assault at the Center.

There was some kind of police shooting drill going on down the road, so yes, they could have got there quickly. However, it does seem that the shooters had left because the police didn't indicate that they had seen them themselves - it was witnesses who told them about the black SUV wasn't it?

I think it is possible that there were three shooters. The car had driven off, and the next time it was seen, only Farook and Malik turned out to be in it, but that doesn't mean that Farook didn't drop someone else off in a different place.

It's even possible that Malik wasn't at the centre, but that she left with Farook from the house later. However, it seems clear that she was involved in the shootout when the police were following them, otherwise who else was shooting at the police? Farook could have done I guess if he was good at driving and shooting backwards at the same time. There are reports that a third person ran from the scene where the car was, but he was discounted later. I agree that there are big gaps in the story re the time the shooters left the centre and the time the SUV was stopped.

I think a witness at the centre identified Farook as a suspect. The calls between the police are on that link I posted before - this one.

http://graphics.latimes.com/san-bernardino-police-dispatch/

by Raggamuffin Thu Dec 10, 2015 7:34 pm

Is it possible that Malik was at the centre but was the getaway driver and waited in the car? Did anyone actually see a male person get into the driving seat?

by Raggamuffin Thu Dec 10, 2015 7:38 pm

The main person who can perhaps shed light on the gaps is Farook's mother.

Now I think she said that Malik at least had a doctor's appointment, but the rest of the family appeared to know that Farook was going off to that meeting at the centre, so she probably knew that too.

So they both went out and left her with the baby. Farook then probably didn't go home to collect his wife because she was already out - either at the centre or elsewhere. They then both went home after the shooting, so where was Farook's mother then? At home with the baby still or out with the baby?

At what point did Farook and/or Malik put the guns and stuff in the car, and at what point and where did they put on those clothes?

by Sponsored content