Dave Watchman
Active Member
Where's the the earlobe piercings or scars indicating earlobe piercings on the first photo, of the deceased?
Crazy.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Where's the the earlobe piercings or scars indicating earlobe piercings on the first photo, of the deceased?
Apparently Biden was in church when it happened.
I think the statement came soon enough. I would not want him to make a statement too soon and get the information wrong, nor would I have wanted him to wait too long. I think what he did was perfect.
If the election was only a month away or less I would agree. But there are months before the election. The emotional boost will have largely faded away by then.This pretty much guarantees him more votes.
The emotional boost might taper off by then, but what about other types of boosts?If the election was only a month away or less I would agree. But there are months before the election. The emotional boost will have largely faded away by then.
I don’t know, there’s a whole section of the US public that loves this kind of drama. Conspiracies putting the ‘deep state’ behind this will already be doing the rounds. A lot of vacillators will now see Trump as their ‘hero’ just because some idiot shot at him, and he’ll milk that for all it’s worth, ’they’ tried to silence him etc. Those kinds of stories have a long shelf life.If the election was only a month away or less I would agree. But there are months before the election. The emotional boost will have largely faded away by then.
Those people are already mostly Trump voters.I don’t know, there’s a whole section of the US public that loves this kind of drama. Conspiracies putting the ‘deep state’ behind this will already be doing the rounds. A lot of vacillators will now see Trump as their ‘hero’ just because some idiot shot at him, and he’ll milk that for all it’s worth, ’they’ tried to silence him etc. Those kinds of stories have a long shelf life.
IMO, it is a total security failure.At this point there seems to be 2 different gross failures by the security team (as if 1 failure is unacceptable & isn't bad enough on its own).
One is the failure to assess the location prior to the event and to do things like set up a plan, implementation of that plan, fortification of the site, etc.
The other is the failure to receive and take in an alert by a concerned individual (Mr. Redhead who was interviewed by the BBC).
What is going on, here!?
At this point there seems to be 2 different gross failures by the security team (as if 1 failure is unacceptable & isn't bad enough on its own).
One is the failure to assess the location prior to the event and to do things like set up a plan, implementation of that plan, fortification of the site, etc.
The other is the failure to receive and take in an alert by a concerned individual (Mr. Redhead who was interviewed by the BBC).
What is going on, here!?
Yeah, this is the type of stuff I'm referring to as the 1st failure situation.IMO, it is a total security failure.
Every rooftop, window, fire escape, ledge, balcony, water tower, church steeple, etc. in a 1000 meter (at minimum) radius should have been scouted, covered and cleared.
Who would be in a position to deny the necessary resources someone in some Secret Service office or position, or someone in some other office?Of course, I can not help but wonder if there was a lack of willingness to pay for adequate security....
Trump.Who would be in a position to deny the necessary resources someone in some Secret Service office or position, or someone in some other office?
Ah, I see; to me it seems initially & summarily implausible for a POTUS candidate to be responsible for footing the bill or part of the bill for their own security, because otherwise such a policy would practically exclude anyone who's not wealthy from running for POTUS.Trump.
At least that is my first guess.
I am not familiar enough with the inside working of the Secret Service to give a better answer.
Though I freely admit my 'answer' is nothing more than a guess.
The thing that gets me is that Trump is not just a Presidential nominee.
Trump is a former President of the United States that the Secret Service is supposed to protect.
Thus it is my opinion, based on "former President that the Secret Service is to lay their own lives down for", aspect, the lack of security surrounding Trump at these rallies is down right embarrassing.
Or, at least, it should be.
It has crossed my mind as well & probably the minds of many other.Instead it looks far to much like Dallas Texas on November 22, 1963...
From what I'm hearing from news reports, there are a total of 5 casualties: 2 people dead and 3 people were injured.
The shooter is dead.
Trump was injured.
One individual attending the rally was killed.
Two individuals are critically injured.
I don't know severity of the two critically injured individuals, but obviously if either one does die, than that increases the number of victims who were killed by the shooter.
The shooter was likely only trying to strike Trump, but with the other victims involved, I think this might be considered a mass shooting.