Sandy Hook (Long but worth watching)

I don't usually believe all the conspiracy crap I see online sometimes, but this video has a ton of strangely good points. It's definitely worth watching.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Wx9GxXYKx_8

It covers a ton of stuff and really makes you think.

A thread with this wackadoodle crap in it has already been locked.

If you think that Sandyhook was a conspiracy, PROVE IT. Otherwise, you are wasting bandwidth.

eye95 said:

A thread with this wackadoodle crap in it has already been locked.

If you think that Sandyhook was a conspiracy, PROVE IT. Otherwise, you are wasting bandwidth.

Click to expand...

They're working on proving it. What do you expect them to do without subpoena power and the investigative resources of the state?


With that said, I have now watched the video. I think the video creator is reaching on some of his points.

For example, he makes a point that no children are visible outside the school. He spends some time on this point. But, I noticed pretty easily that some of his news footage to support his point includes road and lots crammed with vehicles. In another, police tape is visible. If the children were mustered outside the school, I'm betting they were long gone home before the footage was shot, and so wouldn't be there anyway. If he wants to make this point, he needs to tie the footage and photos that lack kids to the relatively narrow time frame the kids would be mustered outside the school.

I think his strongest points are the inconsistencies in the news reports, the little girl who did but then didn't get shot, and the obviously fake grieving parent.

Some of his other stuff would just have to be verified on other channels, being careful to avoid circular citations. (Circular citation is where, for example, newspaper x makes a big deal out of something and cites magazine y as its source, and magazine y cites as its source journal z, and journal z cites newspaper x as its source.) So, if you're serious about trying to track something down, like his comment that some news interviewees are members of a particular actor association, you would follow the citations and make sure it wasn't just a buncha sources all citing each other.

I'm not convinced, but I'm suspicious something is going on.

If you consider that it was 2012 and there is a total lack of in-school footage of the shooter making it inside, that is odd (even 1999 Columbine footage was quickly released).

Supposedly he shot up the front of the school to make entry. No pictures.

AR-15 alleged as murder weapon. It's seen being pulled out of the vehicle in the parking lot.

Killed to wounded ratio: extremely high considering size of moving targets. Consider other mass shootings.

Definitely inconsistencies. Does it make a person a conspiracy theorist? No. There are areas that warrant more scrutiny because the facts do not add up. I do not subscribe to the notion that everything in the news is as it is reported, especially when it comes with freedom reduction implications.

Discussion is not accusation.

It kinda is--and it makes the "discussers" look a bit wackadoodle---and, by extension, this site and the rest of us.

eye95 said:

It kinda is--and it makes the "discussers" look a bit wackadoodle---and, by extension, this site and the rest of us.

Click to expand...

Right, it's wackadoodle to ask things like:

- if this was the work of a now dead lone gunman, why are the police still combing the school for evidence? Are they going to charge him posthumously?

- why have no pictures or videos of shot out windows or bullet riddled walls been seen in any from any media outlet? This is the same industry that sends undercover photographers to take pictures of dead celebrities at there funeral services. Not one image has been provided anywhere of the inevitable collateral damage from "hundreds" of rounds being fired in a short span of time.

- there are eyewitness reports and recorded radio traffic of people being taken into custody, yet not one of these individuals have been identified, come forwarded, or interviewed. Since it has been established that this was the work of one lone mentally disturbed young man, why are we not hearing from them.

- these and many other questions are out there and even if they are all completely erroneous why have the state officials in charge not answered the simplest of them and put this all to rest. A month after the Aroura shooting so much more information was available, why is it "wackadoodle" to ask were similar information is now?

The only thing I really find as stretching with all of the points brought up with that vid, is the pictures with Obama...I'm an only child so I've never got older sibling hand-me-downs, but I wouldn't find it impossible or even weird if Emilie Parker's surviving sister, Madeline Parker wore the same clothes that she wore in a 2 year old family photo...however, everything else is extremely fishy. Namely, Robbie Parker smokin' n jokin' for a press release the day after his daughter was brutally murdered, the fact that the Parkers set up a fund for their daughter within hours of the shooting before it was even known the status of their daughter, and the fact that Victoria Soto's Facebook memorial was made December 10th.

I also want to know what the deal was with the multiple shooters, and the discrepancies on which firearm was used, and why the M.E. was interviewed for a press conference. That's just unusual...his behavior however is IMO typical of someone in that field. You'd be an insensitive weirdo if you cut up dead people every day for years, too.

Notice how most "proof" presented for conspiracies comes in the form of questions, not facts that establish the truth of the conspiracy.

So, yes, when you use "Why is it...?" as proof, you come off as a conspiracy wackadoodle.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

eye95 said:

Notice how most "proof" presented for conspiracies comes in the form of questions, not facts that establish the truth of the conspiracy.

So, yes, when you use "Why is it...?" as proof, you come off as a conspiracy wackadoodle.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Click to expand...

Chill dude...I don't think anyone, even OP is claiming this is irrefutable proof of anything. They just bring up some great questions that I myself have been wondering since the get go. This is the same administration who clearly had no problem murdering Mexican women and children with "assault weapons".

eye95 said:

Notice how most "proof" presented for conspiracies comes in the form of questions, not facts that establish the truth of the conspiracy.

So, yes, when you use "Why is it...?" as proof, you come off as a conspiracy wackadoodle.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Click to expand...

What facts will establish the truth of a conspiracy?

Exactly how do people who do not have subpoena power and the investigative resources of government prove the truth of a conspiracy?

Notice that nobody has yet "proven" JFK's murder was a conspiracy? There are facts in view, but mainly questions.

Notice that nobody has yet "proven" MLK's murder was a conspiracy? Except in civil court. There are facts in view, but mainly questions.


Governments--including ours--have a long history of proven conspiracies. Its not like its anything stupid to suspect a conspiracy. Automatically railing against conspiracy theorists (CTs) makes you look almost as nutty them. Its not all that hard to spot where they're stretching conclusions. Why not just call attention to the stretched points and straighten out the logic or failures? Here, I'll show you how.




Regarding the Sandyhook situation, I don't yet think the shooting was the result of a conspiracy. But, the inconsistencies, and especially the fake grieving parent, make me strongly suspect the anti-gunners and perhaps media are telling lies to whip up emotion in support of anti-gun legislation.

I do not think the SH shootings was a conspiracy, I believe a conspiracy followed by government officials to take advantage of a horrible tragedy. There are things in the reporting and the changing stories that just do not make any sense what so ever. While I find some theories wacko, and some who live with tin foil hats as nuttier than a snickers bar, they are a check valve by asking questions.

eye95 said:

Notice how most "proof" presented for conspiracies comes in the form of questions, not facts that establish the truth of the conspiracy.

So, yes, when you use "Why is it...?" as proof, you come off as a conspiracy wackadoodle.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Click to expand...

Has anyone in this thread claimed that unanswered questions were "proof" of a conspiracy? I know I never made that claim. I simply pointed out that there were legitimate questions about the incident that remain unanswered and wondered how pointing that out was, in your words, wackadoodle. I offered no proof, since I was asking the question. Is it your belief that it is incumbent on the questioner to pre-offer "proof"? It seems to be, and is a good standard to remember for when you next pose a question.

Along the same vein, is someone a wackadoodle if they ask a LEO who has stopped them " Why is it you have detained me, officer?".

SavageOne said:

Has anyone in this thread claimed that unanswered questions were "proof" of a conspiracy? I know I never made that claim. I simply pointed out that there were legitimate questions about the incident that remain unanswered and wondered how pointing that out was, in your words, wackadoodle. I offered no proof, since I was asking the question. Is it your belief that it is incumbent on the questioner to pre-offer "proof"? It seems to be, and is a good standard to remember for when you next pose a question.

Along the same vein, is someone a wackadoodle if they ask a LEO who has stopped them " Why is it you have detained me, officer?".

Click to expand...

There are some people who believe that everybody that does not hold the same opinion is "wackadoodle". IMO they are nuttier than a Payday candy bar.

eye95 said:

A thread with this wackadoodle crap in it has already been locked.

If you think that Sandyhook was a conspiracy, PROVE IT. Otherwise, you are wasting bandwidth.

Click to expand...

Prove that it wasn't.

There has been NO evidence released/provided.

Columbine, VA. Tech., Tucson, Aurora, Port Arthur Tasmania, etc. cases are ALL sealed No evidence proving or disproving the actual facts.

eye95, you have just a little too much faith in Government.

You believing the official story has as much validity as me saying all these shooters are drugged up, programmed killers.

You have as much evidence to prove your point as we do ours.

SavageOne said:

Right, it's wackadoodle to ask things like:

- if this was the work of a now dead lone gunman, why are the police still combing the school for evidence? Are they going to charge him posthumously?

To make sure that only one lone gunman was involved

- why have no pictures or videos of shot out windows or bullet riddled walls been seen in any from any media outlet? This is the same industry that sends undercover photographers to take pictures of dead celebrities at there funeral services. Not one image has been provided anywhere of the inevitable collateral damage from "hundreds" of rounds being fired in a short span of time.

Police haven't released it yet, media hasn't been allowed to enter a crime scene maybe?

- there are eyewitness reports and recorded radio traffic of people being taken into custody, yet not one of these individuals have been identified, come forwarded, or interviewed. Since it has been established that this was the work of one lone mentally disturbed young man, why are we not hearing from them.

People who were mistakenly identified, called in, and quickly released. people can actually choose not to be interviewed, I know this may come as a shock to you

- these and many other questions are out there and even if they are all completely erroneous why have the state officials in charge not answered the simplest of them and put this all to rest. A month after the Aroura shooting so much more information was available, why is it "wackadoodle" to ask were similar information is now?
because they're difference indicents

Click to expand...

my response in Bold

If you want a good read I suggest you folllow this link

EMNofSeattle said:

my response in Bold

If you want a good read I suggest you folllow this link

Click to expand...

While your responses could very well correct, they are only speculation. The only ones who could answer them definitely are choosing not to at this time. I would also like to again point out that asking such questions is not the same as implying a conspiracy.

On a personal note, you don't know me or anything about me, so you don't have any idea as to what will or will not shock me.

I simply stated that the questions were very good and worth watching! It's definitely something to think about. As someone who's trying to join the Military, I tend to TRY (< Key word) to have a little more faith in our government than most. But...I'm definitely sensing something sketchy going on about this whole thing.

eye95 said:

A thread with this wackadoodle crap in it has already been locked.

If you think that Sandyhook was a conspiracy, PROVE IT. Otherwise, you are wasting bandwidth.

Click to expand...

Jeff. State said:

Prove that it wasn't...

Click to expand...

You're kidding, right?

A contention is made. Someone asks for proof of the contention. The response is a request to prove the contention is false????????????

Yeah, that's intellectually sound. Mature, too.

Moving on.

eye95, there has been NO evidence released in any of these mass shootings. NO EVIDENCE!

YOU are simply accepting what you are told by the media.

Did you know that in the Columbine shooting, some students were shot by policemen firing through skylights on the roof? The information is out there but very hard to find, because the case is sealed LIKE ALL THE OTHERS.

Jeff. State said:

eye95, there has been NO evidence released in any of these mass shootings. NO EVIDENCE!

YOU are simply accepting what you are told by the media.

Did you know that in the Columbine shooting, some students were shot by policemen firing through skylights on the roof? The information is out there but very hard to find, because the case is sealed LIKE ALL THE OTHERS.

Click to expand...

I've always found it kind of amusing that all of the "mass murders" that are key parts of Anti-Gun campaigns and laws, are always closed cases with only specific information being released.

This Sandy Hook crap has just seemed off to me...since the beginning. It's clearly not me too, if you type "Sandy Hook" In google now, there are hundreds of thousands of hits on people who are putting all of the pieces together and realizing there are many hidden facts.