David Guyatt Wrote:Have you yet formulated a theory that explains all the disparities in the evidence? Also, have you considered connecting your research to other school massacres elsewhere in the world?
I alluded to this in "The Columbine Cause" and discussed it more fully in my interview with David Eaton in August 2008.
According to the Columbine police files, many witnesses reported additional attackers at Columbine, often naming them. If we can agree that this is probably an accurate reflection of what happened during the shooting, then it behooves us to ask why these other individuals were protected and why the witnesses who maintained this stance were met with attempts to "clarify their perceptions".
The European Gladio attacks also involved mass shootings and have now been admitted to have been the work of CIA/NATO "assets". Were one or more of the non-suicided trench coaters at Columbine also "assets" of an intelligence agency? Also, was some kind of deal made for everyone involved or who had some kind of "forbidden" knowledge about it to shut up?
Michael Ledeen stated in BBC's special on Gladio that the general point of those attacks was to destabilize democratic processes. Another major thread which pops up with these high-profile mass shootings is the political leveraging of them into support for antigun legislation. The Dunblane shooting is an example of this as is the Australian Port Arthur shooting. According to mainstream polls about Columbine, however, Americans were found not likely to blame firearm availability as a cause. So, out came Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine". Aside from leaving the entire Final Report more or less intact, "Bowling for Columbine" focuses on appealing to Americans to disarm and socialize.