I want to know why a father, whose daughter was just murdered the day before, changed his demeanor from laughing and relaxed, to beside himself with grief, just as he went on camera to give an update as to how he was coping with the supposed tragedy. That behaviour shows deceit. Why was he being deceitful? What were his motives and intentions?
No one would laugh and smile and joke around seconds before breaking down on camera. You can see him performing those exaggerated breathing exercises as he sets his own mood, for the purpose of appearing grief stricken for the audience that is watching at home.
The detractors can insult me all they want - it won't change my approach to this 'tragedy'. I would hate to see the detractors in any position of investigative authority - detective, police officer, defense attorney etc - because all of you would be fooled too easily by people who were obviously showing deceitful behaviour. You men are the type that would walk into a murder scene, with dead girlfriend laying in a pool of blood on the floor, and the boyfriend sitting on the couch, watching Comedy Central and laughing his ass off at the tv, and none of you would think anything of the boyfriends odd behaviour, for as long as he started to cry as soon as he 'needed to', you would all take his word that he had nothing to do with his girlfriend's murder. Because after all, he said he didnt.
And just an fyi, the United States was Sadaam's best friend when he was buying weapons from America, and using those weapons to attack Iran and continue their 8 year regional war. Then, all of a sudden, Sadaam was the biggest threat in the region and had to be removed. The CIA conveniently 'discovered' WMDs, gave 'evidence' that Sadaam was further making WMDs in portable trailers, and so the invasion took place. Of course, no WMDs were found.
The question is, as always, when did the CIA realize that there were no WMDs? The war lasted years, but how long did it actually take for the CIA to realize that their 'evidence' was not accurate? Why did the CIA start a war based on 'evidence' that was so inaccurate? Why didn't they know where the WMDs were being stored and why didn't they actually see physical evidence of the WMDs before they presented that evidence to the power players that started the invasion?
Everyone knows the Iraqi war was a big lie. And if the CIA is willing to lie and start a war, and cause trillions in economic loss and lose hundreds of thousands of lives, would they not lie about other things going forward, especially since there was no real punishent for their Iraqi War debacle?
Lie and start a War? Yes, the CIA did that.
Lie about a shooting tragedy at a local highschool? No! The authorities would never do that, right?
SMH.
And now of course, we are supposed to believe the CIA and FBI in regards to Russian 'interference' in the election.
Right...........................Right.....................Right..............Right........................
And the sheeple keep following the Shepperd, as they always do.