A list of already debunked theories, re: Sandy hook

Originally posted by EffTheCIA

Originally posted by daaskapital
What's wrong?

Your CIA handler decided that the people of ATS should shut up about the massacre and thus summoned you to do the job?

Yeah their regs weren't cutting it for keeping the legitimate discussion at bay.

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by EffTheCIA

 

Why won't you provide any legal proof as I asked. Why won't you answer my question about being fired for language?

Sorry man, you're a cool guy. Work is another place I'd be willing to challenge on free speech.

You wanted legal proof on what? 2nd amendment covering ammunition? Or something with the 1st amendment? I can't legally prove that the 1st amendment covers the internet. I just have a good hunch that it does.

This is still going on. Wow. I have noticed a lot of complaining on par to a preteen about how they should be able to do what they want. (In regards to delicate subject matter) People basically saying it is there right to do so. It’s like they don’t understand what T&C mean or that this isn’t their street corner. I am actually surprised the MODs haven’t intervened.

Meanwhile I haven’t seen a single person provide a shred of proof that can refute the Captains OP but it doesn’t stop people from claiming that those theories aren’t debunked. Unless I missed something in-between the battle of wit and witlessness those theories are officially done right?

Has anyone come up with a theory that is even remotely plausible with some strong supporting evidence? Sorry its 22 pages in so I am asking at this point.

-Here is what kills me.

I am on the side of feeling there is a "conspiracy" or "cover up" yet I am debating against the people who feel like I do? Its like everything has to be "Black" or "White" where as I see things in shades of grey and think that reducig everything to black and white is simplistic and a way of social engineering (wedge issues everywhere- Red vs Blue- etc...)

But I agree more on most fundamental things with the very people who I disagree with regarding this discussion and the Sandy Hook Incident.
And this happens alot to me. =/

Whenever I debate 911 on james Randis board I end up arguing with people claiming it was Holograms and siding with the people who buy the official story- Which I dont.

Why does this # always get bogged down into all this...Craziness.

reply to post by EffTheCIA




Can you please quit detailing the thread now? You proven to have no backing of your claims.

Originally posted by bknapple32

Again, not a claim because you say so. Its fact. Ammunition is not protected by the second amendment.

Uhhh....dude someone has already pointed out to you that the supreme court has ruled that ammunition is indeed covered by the 2nd ammendment.

Deny ignorance.

Originally posted by DarKPenguiN
-Here is what kills me.

I am on the side of feeling there is a "conspiracy" or "cover up" yet I am debating against the people who feel like I do? Its like everything has to be "Black" or "White" where as I see things in shades of grey and think that reducig everything to black and white is simplistic and a way of social engineering (wedge issues everywhere- Red vs Blue- etc...)

But I agree more on most fundamental things with the very people who I disagree with regarding this discussion and the Sandy Hook Incident.
And this happens alot to me. =/

Whenever I debate 911 on james Randis board I end up arguing with people claiming it was Holograms and siding with the people who buy the official story- Which I dont.

Why does this # always get bogged down into all this...Craziness.

Penguin, this is a really good point. And some people have theorized that part of the motive for these crimes is to polarize the citizenry. Basically to get pro-gun and anti-gun people at eachothers' throat. "United we stand, divided we fall" is entirely true.

The Pentagon attack is the clearest example of this. People arguing over whether it was a missile that hit it, bombs, a fly over, etc...when really they agree on the fact that it was something other than a plane that hit it!

reply to post by Grimpachi


No, no one has even tried to. Which is really all that needs to be said.

reply to post by Shark_Feeder


Out dated... Ammunition is regulated and can be taxed any amount of money. Deny ignorance

Originally posted by DarKPenguiN
-Here is what kills me.

I am on the side of feeling there is a "conspiracy" or "cover up" yet I am debating against the people who feel like I do? Its like everything has to be "Black" or "White" where as I see things in shades of grey and think that reducig everything to black and white is simplistic and a way of social engineering (wedge issues everywhere- Red vs Blue- etc...)

But I agree more on most fundamental things with the very people who I disagree with regarding this discussion and the Sandy Hook Incident.
And this happens alot to me. =/

Whenever I debate 911 on james Randis board I end up arguing with people claiming it was Holograms and siding with the people who buy the official story- Which I dont.

Why does this # always get bogged down into all this...Craziness.

And I am on the side of feeling that there is NO conspiracy at all, yet here I am defending the people who say that there is.

Funny, huh?

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
Can you please quit detailing the thread now? You proven to have no backing of your claims.

Hey sorry man. I do feel it was the mods who derailed your thread though.

I agree with all the points you made in your original post. However, you do still think this was a false flag right? People DID die, just like at the theater. The real question is WHO killed them. And WHY. I hope that is better subject matter for you.

reply to post by RedBird


What people seem to be missing here is that no one is saying there can't be discussion. They are saying that the baseless slander of innocents, and the attempts to create a conspiracy with no basis whatsoever needs to stop

I guess what it really boils down to is this:

Some believe in TV, others dont.
No need to insult and condemn those who disagree.

All I have seen mostly are personal attacks and insults the last week.
Very disappointing.

Originally posted by bknapple32

Originally posted by vkey08
reply to post by Druid42

 

Druid: this is more for the gentleman you were replying to, but I didn't wanna have the long quote in my reply...

BKnapple: Druid42 is one of the most intelligent and well grounded people I've ever had the pleasure of meeting on this site, I have debated him a few times, and come very close to losing to him as well, he does his homework and will not comment unless he is at least pretty sure he's correct, and very quick to admit if he is wrong. I have learned to cut him a bit of slack, and he has never been so off the wall with his suppositions. Just a personal note on Druid, as I think that you took him entirely the wrong way.

Fair enough, but the argument was so similar to telling a father how to grieve. Fact is we dont know what the church decided to do and why. Assuming just perpetuates the problem

And this is exactly why I am arguing in favor of ATSers being able to speak their mind -- regardless of what their questioning might imply, or whom it might offend.

You were ready to throw druid under the bus because he was making a statement, and asking questions that offended your sensibilities. Without knowing better, you would have casually dismissed or deleted his "absurd" statements about grieving church-goers.

You see what happens when once it becomes OK to "forbid" a topic for discussion, merely because it offends? Real inquiry and genuine discussion and investigation get suppressed.

What an excellent example of just the kind of thing I'm talking about!

reply to post by captaintyinknots


With 22 pages…. That is really telling when no even tries.

So basically people are just throwing ideas out hoping one sticks. That’s a low point for conspiracy theorists when it comes to that. Reeks of desperation.

You ever get the feeling it is all just a game for some?

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by RedBird

 

What people seem to be missing here is that no one is saying there can't be discussion. They are saying that the baseless slander of innocents, and the attempts to create a conspiracy with no basis whatsoever needs to stop

...and it's right with the bolded text that I lose you, because: Who decides?

Who would you nominate to decide for you which theories have a basis and which do not? The entire purpose of this community is that we can decide for ourselves!

-R

Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

With 22 pages….

That is really telling when no even tries.

So basically people are just throwing ideas out hoping one sticks. That’s a low point for conspiracy theorists when it comes to that. Reeks of desperation.

You ever get the feeling it is all just a game for some?

exactly. It really feels like people are trying to stumble onto something that will gain them some notoriety. It's not about truth, it seems, but ego.

reply to post by bknapple32


Ammunition may indeed be taxed(As is nearly everything. Paid a tax when I bought my gun also), but access to ammunition has been tied to Americans right to bear arms....as I said earlier. Do you actually have any argument against the supreme court's ruling?

Originally posted by RedBird

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by RedBird

 

What people seem to be missing here is that no one is saying there can't be discussion. They are saying that the baseless slander of innocents, and the attempts to create a conspiracy with no basis whatsoever needs to stop

...and it's right with the bolded text that I lose you, because: Who decides?

Who would you nominate to decide for you which theories have a basis and which do not? The entire purpose of this community is that we can decide for ourselves!

-R

It's up to the site owners and admin to decide, and they have(although it seems some are trying to reject that decision).

That said, I have challenged every single person in this thread to provide any type of facts to refute what I have claimed. So far, 20-some pages in, not one person has done so. Not one. What does that tell you?

Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

With 22 pages….

That is really telling when no even tries.

So basically people are just throwing ideas out hoping one sticks. That’s a low point for conspiracy theorists when it comes to that. Reeks of desperation.

You ever get the feeling it is all just a game for some?

What was the "High Point"? has there been conspiracies discussed here which have been proven with evidence?

Just curious what the "high" point was if this is the "low point" (described by you a as merely "throwing ideals out and hoping one will stick") evidently you have been involved in uncovering and proving conspiracies...Or none of your "ideals" have stuck either, amirite?