Thanks, dude. Same to you. And I should clarify. I don't think you're an idiot, but I think believing that 9/11 was a huge inside job-style conspiracy is idiotic. Maybe a distinction without meaning to you, but maybe not.
Witnesses report all kinds of things immediately after the fact, when adrenaline is pumping and things are in a confusion. How many of those same witnesses are continuing to support those claims, a week later? I guess they were probably silenced by the masterminds behind the grand conspiracy, right?
And on another note, got any sources for these eyewitness claims?
Typically because it's based on recorded evidence rather than unfounded suppositions by people who were nowhere near the actual event.
I called you an idiot because I can see no logical grounds to assume that there's anything more to this incident than a crazy person mowing down innocents. It's not like this is the firs ... has happened or anything. The US has a serious problem with mass shootings, for reasons that are an endless subject of debate. (I have my own ideas as to why, as I'm sure does everyone else here.)
You can say that everything (truth, evidence, etc) is subjective, but that's not a very useful way to view the world unless your only goal is to muddy the waters and propagate theories that lack rational grounding. It's the same tactic that Christian conservatives and such use to argue that the earth is 4000 years old. I understand the urge—I come from a liberal arts background where I was strongly encouraged to doubt the truth of accepted facts and consider alternative viewpoints, but skepticism can be a tool for disinformation as well as truth-seeking.
Let's take an alternative, Occam's razor approach to this cop's statements: He's emotionally shaken by the shooting, he (and others who live in the immediate area of the shooting) see people on the internet propagating falsehoods regarding to what happened there, and in his emotional state he makes a foolish threat that he can't legally back up.
One guy's emotional response to a couple dozen schoolkids getting gunned down in his community, or a national/worldwide conspiracy to limit first amendment rights to free speech? Yeah, must be the latter.
You're right, I can call you an idiot for this. And I do. There's plenty of evidence that it was in fact a passenger jet that hit the pentagon if you'd like to open your eyes to it, but you won't. Sure, there are just as many resources that you can find arguing that it was a missile, or an alien ship, or a bomb. OMG, who can you trust?! Obviously no one, right?
If you disbelieve everything you don't witness with your own eyes, you must live in a very different world than most of us. You think you're enlightened because you choose to believe something different than the majority, but that's an error. You're unenlightened for ignoring evidence and logic in favor of conspiracy and paranoia.
There is near constant coverage of Israel and Palestine, though of course it's not as hyperbolic as the coverage of shootings like this. The conflict over there has been going on for more than 50 years. How are you surprised that a fresh new tragedy gets more coverage than a half-century-old undeclared war?
Why is it more plausible to you that there's some massive conspiracy, rather than the Occam's razor explanation that a nutjob shot a bunch of unarmed teachers and kids?
You kidding? That was a great race, and Vettel (like him or not) is a great driver and champion. I would have preferred Alonso, but in the end they both did a great job. People get way too wrapped up in the fanboy game sometimes.
At least on the Speed broadcast they said Whiting looked at it exhaustively and found no evidence. There's one view that shows a yellow light, but they said it's a "track condition" light and not a yellow flag light.