A list of already debunked theories, re: Sandy hook

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


You think it was cute. I think you're responsible for what you write and who you write it to, not your phone.

reply to post by captaintyinknots


I agree that the no kids theor and some other ones (israeli death squads???!) Are crazy, but there is something, I don't know what, maybe a new symptom of social media and 24 hour news, nbut something is off.

A reporter doesn't write a whole interview with someone (well maybe hunter s), name them, and include quotes and then that person turn up dead. I have no doubt she's dea d, but the article is weird. I've been interviewed by th local paper twice and the first thing they do is get your name and the spelling.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Those who have the urge to speculate on the minute oddities of the "story line" as is currently known should take fair warning that if the ethical quality of the discussion does not immediately improve, the staff will have no choice but to place a temporary hold on all discussions related to the massacre..........

..............and make the contents of those threads inaccessible to the Google search engine. (I know for a fact you can that SO) We don't want the innocent stumbling across nonsense like the type you pointed out. I'm sure I don't have to tell you this SO, but if this type of content stays up on the site, you're just going to attract more people of that ilk making it all the more harder to thin the herd.

You might also want to look into stricter enforcement of the TOS regarding this matter by way of the wording of this:

15). Posting: You will not Post any material that is knowingly (or otherwise) false, misleading, or inaccurate. You will not solicit personal information from any member. You will not use information gathered from this website to harass, abuse or harm other people.

(or otherwise) meaning that if a higher level of common sense isn't shown...........delete it. People will cry and moan about censorship, but this is your site. By all means put the hammer down and keep it there. Those 6 years you spent sticking to your guns? Rinse and repeat again because as a member who's seen the rise and fall of the intelligence level of a lot of posters I can tell you that I personally censor my own activity here. Gone are the days of just randomly clicking on a subject. I have a friends list for a reason. I'm not walking into the bullpens of 9/11 and Sandy Hook at feeding time. Screw that, because I know that by page 5 the conversation will have degenerated into a pissing match about a sub-topic that vaguely resembles what the original post was about anyway. That's not very becoming of my reputation. Not saying the mods aren't doing their job, they do the best they can, but unless you get more.....more threads like this will happen and the more censorship will be needed.

I like the premise of this site. That's why I joined. But you gotta admit SO, the quality of the content has gone down because the quality of the posters has gone down. And if you censor, 404 posts, threads or outright delete the accounts of sub-standard posters......good riddance to bad rubbish. They can go cry to GLP where they belong. And just like all those years ago when you had to suffer the fools who ridiculed you........you can weather this as well, I'm sure. On top of that, if you make it known that this is going to be your intent, myself and others like me can do what we do via social media, SEO, etc, to help get this site known to a wider and more learned audience.

I don't mind getting woke up for something like this, but my daughter wore me out and I have to get back to my cave.

Merry Christmas.

PS. Could you look into putting a business forum in the current events section up please?

Well SkepticOverlord, I agree with you that some members have gone way overboard. I wonder if some are just trolling for attention or they are sincere. I don't know. The only conspiracy I see regarding this tragedy is the medicine this young man was on could have been culpable with the known side effects of Fanapt.

Thank You for the reminder of how our personalities might get carried away with a particular tragic topic trying to reason why, why, why ...... sometimes we must accept there is no rational explanation when dealing with mentally challenged people.....

FNPMItch

reply to post by Druid42


Driud: I stated it once before and I will again for the sake of everyone who may have missed it.. In every single major crime that has happened in this state, the Connecticut State Police do not release any substantial information until their investigation is done, they did this with Cheshire and they are doing it again with Sandy Hook.

This is the same logic people used when they tried to claim things about cars and registration expiration's because we don't tie our vehicle registrations to our birthdays here.

the CSP will not, as is practice with them, release a report, or otherwise until their investigation is 100% complete and (in the case of a live suspect) be able to be sent to a States Atty for further process.

I think in the end this is the more responsible way to do it, that way if information changes they don't have to keep backpeddaling.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
I will repost, again, what I posted in other threads dealing with Sandy Hook, because I want in know how I -- one of the chief architects of what ATS is today -- thinks of our membership in respect to the subject:

The Tragedy at Sandy Hook

HAS BROUGHT OUT THE WORST

of AboveTopSecret.com


I and our staff have witnessed the most incredible shameless self-absorbed credulous nonsense from our members following one of the worst horrors ever to hit a small community -- much less any community.

And this thread is the absolute worst display of your ludicrous narcissistic conjecture -- outing personal details of a private citizen and mocking him on the pages of our precious ATS for the world to see.


You should be ashamed -- but clearly, you're not capable of that.

This site, and its discussion board, was refashioned between 2003 and 2005 to hold conspiracy speculation to a higher standard and ideal than the typical mayhem and lunacy that was then popular throughout Internet communities dealing with similar subject matter. Our motto of "Deny Ignorance" was a call to action to be skeptical critical thinkers with regard to official stories and the ever worsening mass media. We took a great deal of flak, absorbed consistent criticism, and often saw ourselves smeared simply for holding to our ideals that these subjects deserve better of us. ATS management and staff held strong, never wavered, and grew to one of the most popular discussion boards of any topic.

The wildly foolish self-absorbed conjecture regarding the massacre in Newtown, CT has, in my opinion, thrown the quality of conversation on ATS all the way back to how horrible it was before we started our 6 years of hard work. Posting personal information of private citizens, then casting nasty aspersions on them, is the lowest of lows I've ever seen on this site for which I was once proud.


Those who have the urge to speculate on the minute oddities of the "story line" as is currently known should take fair warning that if the ethical quality of the discussion does not immediately improve, the staff will have no choice but to place a temporary hold on all discussions related to the massacre.

The staff and I will not let you ruin our years of hard work and suffer your ridiculousness.

Thank you SO much for this. It has restored my faith in the Admin of ATS. I was having a hard time with this. I made a complaint about it a couple of days ago after yet another disgusting thread was started.

Conspire away....but keep it civil. Questioning the death of these children and publicly calling these grieving parents liars just goes way beyong that. It is crossing over a line that should be very clear to all of us.

It is a sad state that you, the admin, would even have to say something that should be obvious, but thank you for doing it.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
I will repost, again, what I posted in other threads dealing with Sandy Hook, because I want in know how I -- one of the chief architects of what ATS is today -- thinks of our membership in respect to the subject:

The Tragedy at Sandy Hook

HAS BROUGHT OUT THE WORST

of AboveTopSecret.com


I and our staff have witnessed the most incredible shameless self-absorbed credulous nonsense from our members following one of the worst horrors ever to hit a small community -- much less any community.

And this thread is the absolute worst display of your ludicrous narcissistic conjecture -- outing personal details of a private citizen and mocking him on the pages of our precious ATS for the world to see.


You should be ashamed -- but clearly, you're not capable of that.

This site, and its discussion board, was refashioned between 2003 and 2005 to hold conspiracy speculation to a higher standard and ideal than the typical mayhem and lunacy that was then popular throughout Internet communities dealing with similar subject matter. Our motto of "Deny Ignorance" was a call to action to be skeptical critical thinkers with regard to official stories and the ever worsening mass media. We took a great deal of flak, absorbed consistent criticism, and often saw ourselves smeared simply for holding to our ideals that these subjects deserve better of us. ATS management and staff held strong, never wavered, and grew to one of the most popular discussion boards of any topic.

The wildly foolish self-absorbed conjecture regarding the massacre in Newtown, CT has, in my opinion, thrown the quality of conversation on ATS all the way back to how horrible it was before we started our 6 years of hard work. Posting personal information of private citizens, then casting nasty aspersions on them, is the lowest of lows I've ever seen on this site for which I was once proud.


Those who have the urge to speculate on the minute oddities of the "story line" as is currently known should take fair warning that if the ethical quality of the discussion does not immediately improve, the staff will have no choice but to place a temporary hold on all discussions related to the massacre.

The staff and I will not let you ruin our years of hard work and suffer your ridiculousness.

Well said. It has been ridiculous and shameless, I agree. I for one have posted about moderation in regards to Second Amendment issues, advocating for compromise from both extreme ends of the spectrum.
I'm glad you spoke up.

reply to post by Druid42


Quote:

www.orwelltoday.com...

16. Ministry Of Truth

The Ministry of Truth, Winston's place of work, contained, it was said, three thousand rooms above ground level, and corresponding ramifications below.The Ministsry of Truth concerned itself with Lies. Party ownership of the print media made it easy to manipulate public opinion, and the film and radio carried the process further.The primary job of the Ministry of Truth was to supply the citizens of Oceania with newspapers, films, textbooks, telescreen programmes, plays, novels - with every conceivable kind of information, instruction, or entertainment, from a statue to a slogan, from a lyric poem to a biological treatise, and from a child's spelling-book to a Newspeak dictionary.

Winston worked in the RECORDS DEPARTMENT (a single branch of the Ministry of Truth) editing and writing for The Times. He dictated into a machine called a speakwrite. Winston would receive articles or news-items which for one reason or another it was thought necessary to alter, or, in Newspeak, rectify. If, for example, the Ministry of Plenty forecast a surplus, and in reality the result was grossly less, Winston's job was to change previous versions so the old version would agree with the new one. This process of continuous alteration was applied not only to newspapers, but to books, periodicals, pamphlets, posters, leaflets, films, sound-tracks, cartoons, photographs - to every kind of literature or documentation which might conceivably hold any political or ideological significance.

When his day's work ......

In the walls of the cubicle there were three orifices. To the right of the speakwrite, a small ....

Similar slits existed in thousands or tens of thousands throughout the building, not only in every room but at short intervals in every corridor. For some reason they were nicknamed memory holes. When one knew that any document was due for destruction, or even when one saw a scrap of waste paper lying about, it was an automatic action to lift the flap of the nearest memory hole and drop it in, whereupon it would be whirled away on a current of warm air to the enormous furnaces which were hidden somewhere in the recesses of the building.

As soon as Winston ......

What happened in the unseen labyrinth to which the tubes led, he did not know in detail, but he did know in general terms. As soon as all the corrections which happened to be necessary in any particular number of The Times had been assembled and collated, that number would be reprinted, the original copy destroyed, and the corrected copy placed on the files in its stead.In the cubicle next to him the little woman with sandy hair toiled day in day out, simply at tracking down and deleting from the Press the names of people who had been vaporized and were therefore considered never to have existed. And this hall, with its fifty workers or thereabouts, was only one-sub-section, a single cell, as it were, in the huge complexity of the Records Department. Beyond, above, below, were other swarms of workers engaged in an unimaginable multitude of jobs.There were huge printing-shops and their sub editors, their typography experts, and their elaborately equipped studios for the faking of photographs.

There was the tele-programmes section with its engineers, its producers and its teams of actors specially chosen for their skill in imitating voices; clerks whose job was simply to draw up lists of books and periodicals which were due for recall; vast repositories where the corrected documents were stored; and the hidden furnaces where the original copies were destroyed.And somewhere or other, quite anonymous, there were the directing brains who co-ordinated the whole effort and laid down the lines of policy which made it necessary that this fragment of the past should be preserved, that one falsified, ......

My opinion:
As somebody from the media industry, i can assure that in today's media production you will always see and read fabricated and scripted information only. Just view our reality shows in TV. Do you really believe that those guys are always drunk and the girls are always hot for boys? Do you really believe that the dialogues in the "models" shows arent scripted? Do you believe that ... even in the dancing shows the text of the jury isnt pre scripted and pre determined today? Everybody on TV plays a character but not himself. Actors? Yes. Media uses them.

Now going to the news coverage.
News on TV are reality shows. Government officials will never speak without briefing and text given to them about what to tell and what they arent allowed to tell. Sometimes there is not much truth in what they are allowed to tell, but then that is deliberate. Even Obama will be getting a briefing with text and even an emotional intelligence script before he goes public with a speech. Th

Originally posted by happykat39

The wildly foolish self-absorbed conjecture regarding the massacre in Newtown, CT has, in my opinion, thrown the quality of conversation on ATS all the way back to how horrible it was before we started our 6 years of hard work. Posting personal information of private citizens, then casting nasty aspersions on them, is the lowest of lows I've ever seen on this site for which I was once proud.

Those who have the urge to speculate on the minute oddities of the "story line" as is currently known should take fair warning that if the ethical quality of the discussion does not immediately improve, the staff will have no choice but to place a temporary hold on all discussions related to the massacre.

I beg your unbelievable pardon?

The 'ethical' quality of the discussion?

ATS is a web-site where any and all of the following topics are routinely open for discussion:

- Racial theories of intelligence
- Holocaust denial
- That some races may not be human
- The summary execution of individuals in positions of power
- Claims that some (NAMED!) individuals are not really human (Do reptilian aliens have human rights?)
- The violent overthrow of a perceived oppressive government
- Violence against law enforcement officials
- Advocating for voluntary human extinction
- Advocating for eugenics
- Anti-vaccine discussions
- Encouraging schizophrenics not to take their medication

All of that is A-OK.

You can say that the mass-murder of 6-million Jews never took place, and no one will bat an eye. But if you say that 20 children didn't really die two weeks ago, you've gone too far.

You can say that the Catholic Church or the Illuminati perform ritual child abuse and blood sacrifice, and no one will blink, but if you suggest that one individual appears "creepy" around children, you've gone too far.

You can say that George W Bush is really a blood-drinking reptilian alien who personally ordered the ritual murder of thousands of Iraqi children, but if you suggest that a private citizen may have been involved in the commission of a crime, you've gone too far.


Slander and libel are criminal offenses, and should of course be of serious concern to the Mods and Staff at ATS. But that is an issue of practical reality, not abstract justice. Ethically, there is no meaningful difference between accusing a public figure of nefarious deeds and accusing a private citizen. The only difference is that George Bush and Queen Elizabeth II are not likely to sue ATS if someone calls them lizards.

So, yes, I get it. The Mods and Owners needs to watch their butts. Fine.

But get off your high horse and stop pretending its some issue of moral rectitude and ethical uprightness when it's not.


The bloody hypocrisy I am seeing around here lately makes me sick to my stomach. A few kids get shot, and all of a sudden we're all about 'ethical' discussion.

I don't know what it is, but something about tragedy seems to bring out the moral self-righteousness of people.

You're the same schmucks you all were in October. So am I.

-R

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


i know i have been trying to be all cool with everybody about all this,really trying hard to discuss these things from my perspective, and debating coincidences, and with all the name calling i'm not shaken by perfect strangers calling me names, my father in law is a bostonian who communicates in colorful euphamisms and he gets my unconditional, so strangers bugging me about how i percieve historical events and recent historical events leads me to think they just as me or you gets tunnel vision once in a while. we're discussing something in the course through the passage of time that may cause freedom or enslavement depending on what they are skeptical about

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow

Do you at least agree that something is weird here?

Yes, there seems to be some incongruity in the news coverage of this incident that is sounding-off all kinds of alarms in this matter, perhaps signalling all is not as it may appear to be.

If I were a reporter that was being pressured by my editors to present a specific slant to an event against what my senses were telling me then I may have to write my report according to their wishes knowing they would edit it to their reflect their wishes if I didn't do so and that I might also be out of a job or banned from employment. As a last resort to get a warning across to readers I might be tempted to enter some inconsistencies into the report that would alert attentive readers that this deserves more intense investigation. If I were under similar pressure as a witness or an expert speaking to a reporter I might do something similar to signal an alert for closer scrutiny.

The possible repercussions that could result from this incident demand a very thorough examination before accepting all things at face value. However, the false flag incidents and cover-ups I am familiar with all had an "official story" going that seemingly was in place even before the event occurred, such as the Kennedy assassinations and 9/11. One conclusion we were seemingly being led to early-on in this instance is that there were assault weapon(s) involved. That would play into a popular on-going agenda if true but at this time it appears that is not what had actually occurred.

I believe that the average age of members has gotten younger since ATS has been discovered....
Maybe the problem is that we are just shocked at how that generation thinks..after all they are OUR youth...And tact has not been a priority subject to teach kids for many years..
Though i think there is no place for generating hysterical and heresay based discussions.
And it does apear that there has been some grasping at straws for so called facts......it is partly the media and police who are to blame as well...reflect on the plethora of misinformation........
If theres was real transparency and honest reportage, without sensationalism.......perhaps people wouldnt be jumping onto every soap opera like report generated for headlines and aimed at maximum traumatic drama..........
The tradgedy has had an effect on everyone ......it is no wonder the threads on it are like a chinese fire drill.....
They go all over the place....
Some of us have differing opinions on many facets of this event could be construed to be offensive to others..... I for one have to aplogize for any offensive ruhminations on my part. .........though i dont try to think ill of anyone at first acquaintance.
The whole thing has convinced me that we are in as serious danger both mentally, and spiritually,
as we are from financial or national security issues.
As a father, and grandfather,..... Both, my applogies, and my opinions, stand .
respectfully............s

DP How about you point me to where I'm "bashing theorists"? Seems you are a little emotional the other thread got shut down and you are taking your frustration out on me - if you consider yourself a theorist then being rush and misquoting ('fine explanation') are not ideal qualities to posses - it certainly won't improve the likeliness that your 'theory' is correct.

There are 20 dead children and 8 adults, in the 21st century, in a society that hails itself as one that is paving the way forward as far as evolution is concerned.

How about these questions:

1. What went so terribly wrong that a member of this evolved society decided to shoot up and kill 27 innocent humans?
2. Subsequently, think about what went so terribly wrong that members of that same society, aka 'theorists', are actively 'debunking' the situation and constructing a "conspiracy theory" in which ALL humane aspects of the situation are ignored and all of a sudden everyone is responsible for the shooting, but the shooter.

Once you've thought about that, now think about this theory:
- Perhaps the cause of the problem lies in the core of the society, of what it's become.

Along with the OP, I think I am probably one of the members who tried to fight this the most. Not to somehow say Im great for that. I got sucked into it instead of just ignoring it.

But I didnt ignore it. I fought it. I tried using logic and reason. Then I ignored it, then I fought it again with anger.

Then I ignored it... Then I tried to fight it by being nice....




All the while no matter how I attempted it, I was called a shill, a dis info agent, a sheeple, and whatever else you want to come up with. Im glad ATS has taken the hard stance it has.

Originally posted by Feltrick
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

S&F for posting this, I really appreciate it! For a while there I was thinking that everyone on this site had gone overboard.

I believe the theory that the police found a Bushmaster in the trunk of the car has been debunked by many.

Again, thank you for posting!

Can you bring me up to speed on the weapon used? I know the coroner has said that there were multiple injuries in most cases, caused by a long barrel.

reply to post by pinkbirdatabase


Follow up.

So then, do media use actors for making up better and more interesting news coverage? Yes, they do. It's not ethical, but it is done. Period. When one channel is going to do this, then the other one often will do the same too. Simply because of competition. There is no conspiracy involved. This is a matter of money and competition. I am not saying that all journalists are doing this, some are still doing a perfect job in regards to ethics and moral standards. However, competition often challenges the bad sides of media corporations and journalists, too.

Unfortunately, due to all those fake reality shows on TV, most people lost their sensitivity to distinguish between real and fake in our news coverage.

Does media use actors? Yes, they do. Are their text and their behaviour scripted in news coverage? Not all the time, but unfortunately more often than we would wish that it were. Media often display a fake world. Not everything is conspiracy. Something unfortunately is bad journalism of a copy/paste media industry.

Therefore it is important for every freedom loving individual to see this world critical and to be suspicious when there is the slightest chance of lies being detected in media coverage. Otherwise we would immediately call our submission to the power of the media and its ministry of truth.

Not every leaked actor nor every lie are conspiracy. However, better be suspicious!

Originally posted by bknapple32
Along with the OP, I think I am probably one of the members who tried to fight this the most. Not to somehow say Im great for that. I got sucked into it instead of just ignoring it.

But I didnt ignore it. I fought it. I tried using logic and reason. Then I ignored it, then I fought it again with anger.

Then I ignored it... Then I tried to fight it by being nice....

All the while no matter how I attempted it, I was called a shill, a dis info agent, a sheeple, and whatever else you want to come up with. Im glad ATS has taken the hard stance it has.

You're right. You were right to fight with reason and logic. You were winning. Then you appealed to the power of censorship, and at that moment you lost all of your moral authority in MY eyes.

You were right! But sometimes It's not enough to be right. Sometimes the reason is more important than the right answer. Sometimes it's better to adhere to a right principle than to sacrifice that principle to popular demand or passing notions of appropriateness or economy.

If we allow discussion of Sandy Hook conspiracies (even outlandish and bizarre ones) to be censored because they are insensitive, offensive, or personally insulting to us, we are closing the door on free inquiry forever. What happens next time there is a school shooting? What happens the next time a child dies? What happens the next time there is a terror attack?


"I lost a cousin in the shooting, buddy, so just. you. shut. your. mouth. No, you can't have your theory - not here! - because I'm hurt, and grieving right now, and your exercise of your fundamental freedoms is bumming me out right now!"

Silence. Thought crime. Better watch out.

..

Sometimes being brave is better than being right. Be brave enough to let other people be wrong, even if it hurts. Take two to the gut for freedom of speech, and thank yourself in the long-run.

-R

reply to post by bknapple32


the thing about being nice and discussing something with certainty is to never be shook. a river can freeze in the winter, but in the spring when the ice melts, all the logs and leaves depart from your part of the river

Thank god someone said something. After arguing that we know next to nothing about any of it, I've actively avoided the threads.
There's no arguing with people who wantt to jump at shadows.
The sad fact of the matter is, people are more worried about digging up the dirt in any manner possible than actually finding and validating facts.
This one topic (as well as the 2012 threads) are the main thing keeping me away right now.

reply to post by RedBird

The bloody hypocrisy I am seeing around here lately makes me sick to my stomach. A few kids get shot, and all of a sudden we're all about 'ethical' discussion.

......and YOU'RE talking about ethics?

This kind of statement is exactly the kind of crap we are talking about.

Yes...some of things you listed, I agree with you, there is too much liberation in those discussions. But how can you write about all of that in your post, postulating that none of that is okay, and then say THAT? Completely unvalidates any of your post, IMO.