Things Don't Add Up: Anomalies in the VA Tech Slayings

[Lucky7s]

Things Don't Add Up​

​

Anomalies in the VA Tech Slayings​

​

​

​

by Salvador Astucia, April 27, 2007​

​

(updated April 29, 2007)​

​

<hr style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; text-align: -webkit-left; font-size: medium; ">
As the world knows, April 16, 2007 was a horrific day in America. 33 students and faculty members died in a shooting rampage at Virginia Tech University in Blacksburg, Virginia. At 7:15 am, two young people–male and female–were shot and killed in a Virginia Tech dormitory room at West Ambler Johnston Hall. Two and a half hours later, at 9:45 am, police responded to shootings at Norris Hall, but the doors were barricaded shut. Within ten minutes, they entered the hall and found 31 dead bodies and approximately 30 injured students and faculty members. Among the dead was a 23-year-old male, of Korean origin. His face was badly disfigured from what police concluded was a self-inflicted gunshot wound. There are conflicting reports regarding this young man's name. The Washington Post has referred to him interchangeably as Seung Hui Cho, and Cho Seung Hui. Most reporters are calling him Cho Seung Hui; however, on April 21, 2007 (five days after the slayings), the Washington Post published a front-page article entitled "An Isolated Boy in a World of Strangers" where they repeatedly called him Seung Hui Cho. One would think our best and brightest journalists could get a few basic facts straight before they conclude without question that this young Korean man was indeed guilty of committing mass-murder. One would think a basic point of agreement would be the name of the perpetrator. But why trifle with minor details like the name of a dead Korean who reportedly shot roughly 60 people with two handguns, left approximately 30 survivors, none of whom were able to identify him? But the media says he's guilty, so that's all that matters. Case close.

Nevertheless, since the young man's name is a question, I will refer to him as Cho for the remainder of this article. Besides the anomaly of Cho's name, I have noticed lots of inconsistencies and peculiar occurrences regarding the Virginia Tech slayings. The "case closed" mentality centers around the fact that a package was received by NBC News a few days after the slayings, allegedly sent by Cho before he reportedly committed mass-murder and took his own life. The package reportedly contained a video tape of Cho spewing hateful remarks. It also contained voluminous documents, including two plays he authored, and other writings that espoused extreme political views, according to NBC News. He reportedly mailed the package to NBC News in between the two sets of killings, an event that is highly questionable in its own right. Upon receipt of the damning package by NBC, all serious investigations essentially evaporated. Did it occur to anyone that Cho had been set up to take the blame for the actions of others?

Here is a summary of questions and anomalies I have gathered so far:

• How could one person kill 30 people in a matter of minutes?
• No eye-witness identified Cho as the shooter.
• Jay Leno publicly compared Cho to Lee Harvey Oswald.
• Matt Lauer and the Washington Post claim Cho believed the U.S. Government murdered ex-Beatle John Lennon.
• The news media has collectively labeled Cho an insane person, but with little evidence.
• Emmanuel College professor, Nicholas Winset was fired for facilitating a discussion about the Virginia Tech slayings and the pros and cons of gun control.
• There are conflicting accounts about the clothing worn by Cho while he was allegedly shooting his victims.
• Why would a Korean–of all ethnicities–shame his family the way Cho did?
• Cho was reportedly a loner, but Korean men are often shunned by Americans because of vast cultural differences.
• Why did Cho commit suicide by shooting himself in the face?
• How do we know it was Cho who mailed the incriminating video and documents to NBC News?
• Why is Karl Thornhill not a suspect for the double homicide on the morning of April 16, 2007?
• Could a satanic cult near Blacksburg have been involved in the slayings?
• Why did Bush endorse witchcraft within the military shortly after the slayings?

The following points are the same issues previously raised, but with additional commentary:

Point # 1. How could one person kill 30 people in a matter of minutes? According to the news media, Cho shot approximately 60 people at Norris Hall, 30 of whom died immediately. Cho had no training in firearms and only used two handguns. Had he used a machine gun or a bomb, the high casualty number might not seem so strange. But he only used two handguns, and apparently no one tried to overpower him. One would think that with approximately 60 shooting victims, at least one would have successfully overpowered him. No one is questioning how he accomplished this task, but it seems like an impossible feat for one person with no firearms training.

Point # 2. No eye-witness identified Cho as the shooter. Some witnesses said the shooter appeared to be Asian, but to my knowledge, no one actually saw Cho fire the shots. The news media has reported that approximately 30 people were wounded during the shooting spree, but so far, none of the survivors have specifically identified Cho as the shooter. All we know is several witnesses said the shooter appeared to be an Asian male, and an Asian male (Cho) was found dead at the crime scene with his face shot off. Shortly thereafter, NBC News received a package containing a video tape and writings reportedly by Cho. This material was essentially a confession, assuming they were sent by Cho. Because of these events, people have concluded that Cho was the shooter, but no eye-witnesses have identified him specifically as the shooter.

Point # 3. Jay Leno publicly compared Cho to Lee Harvey Oswald. Around April 17, 2007, I watched comedian and talk show host Jay Leno interview Tim Russert on the Tonight Show. As the interview began, Leno became quite serious as he brought up the topic of the tragic Virginia Tech slayings. Leno said to Russert (I'm paraphrasing from memory): "I recall once before in my lifetime, a young man named Lee Harvey Oswald ordered a rifle through the mail that he used to kill President John F. Kennedy. Now it appears the same thing has happened." Russert did not respond to Leno's comment about Oswald, but it was interesting that Leno would compare Cho to Oswald. Leno was obviously using his influence to convince the public that Cho had acted alone, just as many propagandists did 44 years ago when Kennedy was killed. It was no surprise to me that Russert did not respond to Leno's comments because, as a professional journalist, Russert would not dare publicly endorse the Warren Report's conclusion that Oswald acted alone. To do so in this day and age would jeopardize his credibility. So he sat by and allowed Leno to do the dirty work. As someone who has done a great deal of research on JFK's assassination, I was quite intrigued by Leno's comment. Frankly, it seemed desperate. In addition, Leno's remarks were the first subtle efforts I heard–in the wake of the Virginia Tech slayings–to get guns banned from the populace, as if such a ban would have saved President Kennedy.

Point # 4. Matt Lauer and the Washington Post claim Cho believed the U.S. Government murdered ex-Beatle John Lennon. Shortly after hearing Jay Leno's reference to Lee Harvey Oswald being JFK's killer, I began observing media references to Cho's alleged interest in Lennon's murder. Cho reportedly believed the United States government sponsored the rock star's murder. Is that supposed to be evidence that Cho was criminally insane? Shortly after the slayings, Matt Lauer mentioned, on the Today Show, that Cho was obsessed with John Lennon's murder. (I saw and heard Lauer myself on live TV, broadcast around April 18, 2007.) As someone who has researched Lennon's murder a great deal, Lauer's comment grabbed my attention. Amazingly, a similar story was repeated in the Washington Post, on April 18, 2007, in an article entitled "Gunman's Writings 'Out of a Nightmare'," by Robert O'Harrow, Jr, page A10. The following is an excerpt from that article:

<center><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="78%" style="border-collapse: collapse; "><tbody><tr><td width="100%">For a look into the mind of a mass murderer, consider reading "Richard McBeef," a 10-page play written by Cho Seung Hui...Or consider "Mr. Brownstone," another Cho play, about a group of bored teenagers and a teacher who they claim raped them and then stole their $5 million in casino winnings...The two plays are filled with diatribes against Catholic priests and Michael Jackson, along with references to government conspiracies to kill Marylyn Monroe and John Lennon..."

</td></tr></tbody></table></center>​

​

<center><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="85%" style="border-collapse: collapse; "><tbody><tr><td width="100%">Robert O'Harrow; Washington Post; April 18, 2007; "Gunman's Writings 'Out of a Nightmare'," p A10</td></tr></tbody></table></center>​

​

Point # 5. The news media has collectively labeled Cho as an insane person, but with little supporting evidence. The main evidence to support the insanity claim is the crime itself, which is absurd. If we declared every convicted criminal insane merely because they committed an insane act, the prisons would be empty. The criminals would be declared innocent by reason of insanity. Perhaps Cho was quiet, troubled, depressed, or merely eccentric. Many people have similar issues, but they are not insane. The assertion that Cho was insane was merely an assumption, another rush to judgment. It has been reported, however, that the local police had Cho temporarily held for psychological evaluation over a year ago because he was allegedly bothering some female students. If this is factual, it only indicates that Cho had some personality issues, but it does not establish that he was insane. If Cho was able to murder 30 people and wound another 30 people at Norris Hall without being overpowered by his victims, he was an extremely cunning individual, which indicates he was in full possession of his mental faculties.

Point # 6. Emmanuel College professor, Nicholas Winset was fired for facilitating a discussion about the VA Tech slayings and the pros and cons of gun control. On Friday, April 20, 2007, Emmanuel College professor, Nicholas Winset was fired for reenacting the Virginia Tech slayings in his classroom. He also facilitated a discussion about the pros and cons of gun control, and he reportedly allowed at least one student to make pro-gun ownership remarks. It isn't clear precisely why Mr. Winset was fired. The story has been widely reported, and all versions I have read indicate that students were not offended by anything Mr. Winset said or did. To the contrary, there is an unsettling appearance that Mr. Winset was fired because he was not pushing anti-gun rhetoric hard enough. Emmanual College is a small private college in Boston, Massachusetts. (Source: Casey Ross, Boston Herald reporter, "The Blog Buzz," April 23, 2007.)

Point # 7. There are conflicting accounts about the clothing worn by Cho while he was allegedly shooting his victims. Early media accounts cited witnesses who claimed the shooter was dressed similar to a Boy Scout. In the video that was mailed to NBC News, Cho was dressed in a similar outfit–light brown, or slightly greenish looking clothing that resembled a Boy Scout suit. This physical appearance conflicts with an eye-witness account by Virginia Tech janitor, Gene Cole. On April 17, 2007, Media General News Service published an article entitled "Janitor was Confronted by Gunman." In the article, Mr. Cole recalled that the shooter "wore a hat, blue jeans and a sweatshirt-type of garment." I read a similar description of Mr. Cole's observation in the Washington Post published around the same date.

Point # 8. Why would a Korean–of all ethnicities–shame his family the way Cho did? Anyone familiar with Korean culture knows that Korean people place a great deal of importance on public image, and keeping in good standing within their community. Being publicly shamed is one of the worst fates for a Korean. With this in mind, it seems particularly odd that Cho would shame his family in such a manner.

Point # 9. Cho was reportedly a loner, but Korean men are often shunned by Americans because of vast cultural differences. Other students and faculty members at Virginia Tech described Cho as unfriendly, a loner, eccentric and so on. As someone who has spent time with many Koreans in a work environment, I can honestly state that many Americans typically have similar opinions of Korean men in general. I observed that the two cultures do not mix well. Americans tend to loath Korean people for reasons that appear to be purely cultural. It seems perfectly natural that any young Korean male would be shunned in a non-Korean environment.

Point # 10. Why did Cho commit suicide by shooting himself in the face? When Cho reportedly took his own life, why did he shoot himself in a manner that would disfigure his face? Wouldn't it make more sense to simply shoot himself in the temple? Many people in the media have said Cho was narcissistic. Would a narcissist disfigure his face as he exited the world? For that matter, would a narcissist commit suicide at all?

Point # 11. How do we know it was Cho who mailed the incriminating video and writings to NBC News? A great deal has been made about the package sent to NBC News containing a video tape of Cho—it is regarded by many as a confession—and his alleged writings. He reportedly mailed the package to NBC News in between the two sets of killings. Amazingly, no one has entertained the possibility that infamous package may have been mailed by someone other than the young Korean. If someone else committed the crimes, it would make sense to blame it on a loner like Cho. In other words, just because Cho's image was in the video, and just because the documents had his name on them, this does not mean he mailed the package to NBC News. Isn't it possible that someone filmed him as part of a theatrical effort? Perhaps he was roll-playing when he was video-taped. Then the video could have been used to discredit him after he was killed.

Point # 12. Why is Karl Thornhill not a suspect for the double homicide on the morning of April 16, 2007? On the day of the slayings, Karl Thornhill was considered a "person of interest" by the university police for the killings of Emily Hilscher and Ryan Clark at 7:15 am on April 16, 2007 in a dormitory room at Ambler Johnston Hall. Friends claim Thornhill was Hilscher's boyfriend, and he dropped her off at the dormitory shortly before she was killed. In the evening on April 16, 2007, Virginia Tech Chief of Police, Wendell Flinchum, gave a live televised press conference where he indicated that an unnamed Asian male had been killed, and he was considered a suspect in the mass murders at Norris Hall. Chief Flinchum also indicated that a second individual was still alive and not under arrest who was also considered a person of interest for the murders of Hilscher and Clark. Chief Flinchum refused to give any names at that time, but two days later, on April 18, 2007 the Washington Post ran a story about the mysterious person of interest in an article entitled "Between Shootings, Police Interrogated Boyfriend of Dorm Victim," by Michael Shear and Jerry Markon (page A11). The following is an excerpt from that article:

<center><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="78%" style="border-collapse: collapse; "><tbody><tr><td width="100%">Even as the world's attention is riveted by Cho Seung Hui, another person—the "person of interest"—remains a murky character who could help explain what police were doing in the hours between the two shooting incidents at Virginia Tech. Police revealed in an affidavit yesterday that they have searched the home of Karl D. Thornhill, a student at Radford University, for "firearms, ammunition, bloody clothing, footwear, and other tangible evidence associated with the alleged murders." Radford is about 15 miles from Virginia Tech, where Cho fatally shot 32 people and himself. Officials have not named Thornhill specifically as the "person of interest" that they have talked about repeatedly in news conferences. But friends said Thornhill was the boyfriend of a female student killed by Cho in the dormitory early Monday, before killing 30 more people in an academic building two hours later. Jay Miller, who described himself as a close friend of Thornhill's family, said Thornhill had dropped off Emily Hilscher at the West Ambler Johnston Hall dormitory a few moments before Cho arrived... In the affidavit filed in Montgomery County, Va., Circuit Court, Virginia Tech police detective Stephanie J. Henley wrote of conflicting information about guns owned by Thornhill. Thornhill told investigators that he had taken the guns to his parents' house in Boston, Va., and that he had been at his home over the weekend, the affidavit said. But after interviews with witnesses, "It is reasonable to believe that Thornhill has these guns still in his residence in Blacksburg," Henley wrote in the affidavit. Thornhill was not home yesterday, according to roommates who answered his door.

</td></tr></tbody></table></center>​

​

<center><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="85%" style="border-collapse: collapse; "><tbody><tr><td width="100%">Michael Shear and Jerry Markon; Washington Post; April 18, 2007; "Between Shootings, Police Interrogated Boyfriend of Dorm Victim,", p A11</td></tr></tbody></table></center>​

​

Point # 13. Could a satanic cult near Blacksburg have been involved in the slayings? There appears to be a great deal of occult activity in the Roanoke/Blacksburg area of Virginia. I have talked personally to a former social worker who indicated that the occult had caused quite a bit of trouble for teenagers in the Roanoke/Blacksburg area over past dozen years. In fact, a few Google searches quickly corroborated what the social worker had said. Have the police investigated the possibility that the slayings may have been ritualistic killings associated with satanic cults? Were any of the victims or their friends followers of Wicca, which is another term for witchcraft?

Point # 14. Why did the Bush Administration endorse witchcraft within the military shortly after the slayings? Unbelievable as it sounds, the Bush Administration suddenly recognized Wicca (witchcraft) as a religion within the military less than one week after the Virginia Tech slayings. On April 24, 2007 the Washington Post ran an article entitled "Administration Yields on Wiccan Symbol" by Alan Cooperman (page A12). The following is an excerpt from that article:

<center><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="78%" style="border-collapse: collapse; "><tbody><tr><td width="100%">Facing lawsuits by veterans and their families, the Bush administration relented yesterday and agreed to allow the Wiccan pentacle–a five-point star inside a circle–on tombstones at Arlington National Cemetery and other U.S. military burial grounds. The Department of Veterans Affairs previously had given veterans a choice of 38 religious symbols... But, for nearly a decade, the department had refused to act on requests for the pentacle, without a clear reason. VA spokesman Matt Burns said that approximately 10 applications were pending from adherents of Wicca, a blend of witchcraft and nature worship that is one of the country's fastest-growing religions. In yesterday's legal settlement, the VA agreed to grant all the pending requests within two weeks and to approve new ones on an expedited basis for 30 days. The department will also pay $225,000 to the plaintiffs for attorneys' fees.

"This is a complete capitulation by the administration," said Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans for United Separation of Church and State, which filed suit last year on behalf of the Wiccan veterans...

During his first campaign for president, then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush told ABC's "Good Morning America" in 1999 that he was opposed to Wiccan soldiers practicing their faith at Fort Hood, Tex. "I don't think witchcraft is a religion, and I wish the military would take another look at this and decide against it," he said...

</td></tr></tbody></table></center>​

​

<center><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="85%" style="border-collapse: collapse; "><tbody><tr><td width="100%">Alan Cooperman; Washington Post; April 24, 2007; "Administration Yields on Wiccan Symbal," p A12</td></tr></tbody></table></center>​

​

How is it possible that a conservative Republican and born-again Christian like George W. Bush would suddenly allow witchcraft to be a bona fide religion within the U.S. military? This happened just a few days after Bush spoke to students, faculty members, friends and relatives of shooting victims at Virginia Tech. If the situation weren't so tragic, it would make a funny comedy sketch on Saturday Night Live. I can just picture a Bush imitator saying, "You young people have endured a great tragedy, and in times like this, we need to look to the Lord for guidance. And if that doesn't work, try witchcraft!" This is unreal. Is it possible the Bush Administration's capitulation on Wiccans in the military was a quid pro quoof some sort–a payment to the true killers?

Although it's difficult to imagine a 23-year old male with no training in firearms having shot approximately 60 people and killing 32 without any resistance, it isn't a stretch to believe a bunch of satanic military types may have committed such a heinous crime and made a poor Korean the scapegoat.

Final Thoughts
We could jump to several conclusions about the tragic events of April 16, 2007, but it is probably best to withhold final judgment until more facts are in. As you can see, there are many anomalies in what we're being told about the horrific Virginia Tech slayings. One thing that stands out the most, in my opinion, is the claim that one young man could walk into a University building, armed with only two hand-guns, and shoot approximately 60 people, killing 30, and no one attempted to overpower him, and none of approximately 30 survivors were able to identify him as the shooter. Not only that, Cho had no firearms training of any consequence. This version of events is like a bad fairy tale. It simply is not believable. Yet we are expected to believe that the case has been solved. All we need is some gun control legislation and all will be right with the world again. Things don't add up.