A list of already debunked theories, re: Sandy hook

Originally posted by frazzle

Originally posted by RedBird

Originally posted by frazzle
reply to post by RedBird

 

The EMTs didn't even have access to the victims so the 3-11 bullets each is only if you take Dr. H. Wayne Carver at his word. Sorry but after that perfomance on camera I'm having a difficult time getting there .....

Really? I didn't find Dr. Carver's press statements suspicious at all! He struck me as flustered, overwhelmed, nervous, and perhaps in a little bit of shock. He had, after all, just finished performing medical examinations on seven young children with horrific gunshot wounds.

Gosh, considering how little evidence we have to work with, I'm glad we got anything out of the good doctor!

Like I said, we have ONE source of information. Everyone can watch and read it and conclude whatever they want. Luckily, I can do that TOO.

Incidentally, I've worked with MEs and pathologists and never once saw any of them flustered or overwhelmed or nervous or shocked. Carver is the CHIEF medical officer, not some wet behind the ears intern.

reply to post by DarKPenguiN


"Oh" Piers Morgan really needs to go home. He's a self-appointed pseudo journalist. He's the O'reilly of CNN and the O'leary of CBC. Even in the gun debate last week, he talked over John Lott with such exaggerated pomposity it made me side with the pro-gun arguments. Considering I couldn't even hear the pro-gun arguments over his loud and obnoxious interruptions.

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by frazzle

 

Psychology has everything to do with it.

It seems that if such and such doesn't react in a preconceived way, they're actors or liars.

I might be sounding like a broken record here but basing a theory around how someone act or reacts is the most stupid and absurd thing I've ever heard!

"He's an actor because he didn't act like I would if I just had my child murdered...I've never been in such a horrific situation but I know coz I'm not a sheeple"

Well then color me absurd because I don't agree with you. Your "good" opinion of my opinion means nothing to me.

Originally posted by bknapple32
I know about your source if its from who I think it is. Id keep it under your hat and dont make yourself look bad

edit on 25-12-2012 by bknapple32 because: (no reason given)

See, now I'm curious! Hats off, everyone!

Originally posted by FlySolo
reply to post by DarKPenguiN

 

"Oh" Piers Morgan really needs to go home. He's a self-appointed pseudo journalist. He's the O'reilly of CNN and the O'leary of CBC. Even in the gun debate last week, he talked over John Lott with such exaggerated pomposity it made me side with the pro-gun arguments. Considering I couldn't even hear the pro-gun arguments over his loud and obnoxious interruptions.

LOL- I know-

My point was that even the MSM picked up on the ME Press Conference for being disrespectful (which I have never seen happen before) and it wasnt just Morgan but that popped up first on google and I thought it fitting =P

-Regardless, guy acted weird. That doesnt mean hes an actor but I think I would not want to rent a room from the guy.

I'd just like to say that I, for one, am glad that we are back to talking about Sandy Hook, rather than talking about whether or not we ought even to be talking about Sandy Hook.

Whatever anyone thinks of each others' opinions and speculation, I for one am thrilled that we have been allowed to continue with the discussion!

Kudos to the mods for making their feelings known, dealing with the offenders, cautioning where caution was due, and then getting off the board and letting us back at it!

Thank you, Mods!

Back to the discussion at hand:

It seems that a lot of the suggestions of impropriety are being derived from the radio recordings not jiving with the "accepted" media timeline of events, or, those same recordings' suggestion that SOPs were not followed during the first response.

DarkPenguin has stated that he wants to start a separate thread regarding these things, and I personally am looking forward to reading it.

As for Dr. Carver, and the psychological profile: I don't think this is something we will be able to resolve with mere reasoned argument. There seem to be fundamental differences with how we all understand human nature and natural human responses' to stress.

All of this suggests a rather potent question:

"To what extent is social awkwardness/inappropriateness acceptable in the aftermath of a tragedy if it is the product of stress?"

Do we really expect state medical examiners to be men of super human will and fortitude, such that they can retain all the necessary dignity and solemnity required by a stressful situation? It's not as though he's president!

What's funny is I remember watching the ME conference live, and turning to my lady in the middle of it, and saying "this guys so nervous and doesn't seem to know what he is allowed to say. The conspiracy theorists are going to have a field day with this".

reply to post by DarKPenguiN


I admit I was a little taken back when he made his first chuckle but later on he mentioned (I'm paraphrasing here) "For those that know me, know that I'm not the most elegant at speaking and tend to say things not considered to be the best way of saying them"

The guy deals with death on a daily basis for the past 25 years. Perhaps he's always been insensitive to some degree and that's why he chose the field he's in. It's not for everyone. Like a proctologist

reply to post by SkepticOverlord

Remember that part in Ghost busters when they confronted Zool up on the roof and Dr. Venkman said "Go get her Ray".

...the staff will have no choice but to place a temporary hold on all discussions related to the massacre.

At first I thought heads were going to roll. They should. Right out of here and back where they came from. I dallied on the threads for a bit but became incensed as well and left it for people who can MOD this place with bug repellant.

Clean house. Chop chop.

reply to post by RedBird


I am just trying to be thorough. I mean it may seem like a lot but really most is depending on the first question which he seems to not want to answer for some reason. It is almost like he avoiding it.
Oh well I will just write it off for now as…… some bold statements by someone who isn’t quite ready to back them up.

He seems a bit pressed and threw out a little insult. It isn’t surprising. I will take him as credible if he decides to back up his statements later it’s not a big deal.

Sooner or later there may be a theory presented with corroborating evidence.

Originally posted by RedBird
I'd just like to say that I, for one, am glad that we are back to talking about Sandy Hook, rather than talking about whether or not we ought even to be talking about Sandy Hook.

Whatever anyone thinks of each others' opinions and speculation, I for one am thrilled that we have been allowed to continue with the discussion!

Kudos to the mods for making their feelings known, dealing with the offenders, cautioning where caution was due, and then getting off the board and letting us back at it!

Thank you, Mods!

Back to the discussion at hand:

It seems that a lot of the suggestions of impropriety are being derived from the radio recordings not jiving with the "accepted" media timeline of events, or, those same recordings' suggestion that SOPs were not followed during the first response.

DarkPenguin has stated that he wants to start a separate thread regarding these things, and I personally am looking forward to reading it.

As for Dr. Carver, and the psychological profile: I don't think this is something we will be able to resolve with mere reasoned argument. There seem to be fundamental differences with how we all understand human nature and natural human responses' to stress.

All of this suggests a rather potent question:

"To what extent is social awkwardness/inappropriateness acceptable in the aftermath of a tragedy if it is the product of stress?"

Do we really expect state medical examiners to be men of super human will and fortitude, such that they can retain all the necessary dignity and solemnity required by a stressful situation? It's not as though he's president!

There was a really interesting show I watched about 911 calls . I wish I could remember what it was so I could link it...

But anyhow there was this guy (if I remember right) who came home and found his family dead. The 911 calls were played and he sounded calm, guilty and very odd. Everyone listening to that recording would have convicted him and he WAS the suspect (partially based on the 911 call)

-Later on he was exonerated.

I am going to look for a link since it is pertinent to this discussion.

The problem is we ourselves have no ideal how we would act. I posted (days ago) that I was in a life or death situation once and it happened really fast and I came through totally unscathed- I laughed hysterically although it was not funny at all nor did I find it funny- It was uncontrolled as I seriously could not contain myself.

I do have issue with many of the Parents talking to the press immediately- Its their decision but I know I would be majorly medicated and totally distraught. I have lost friends (not family) to violent death like car accidents and I was a wreck for days and would have been incapable of talking to the "press" (not that these were press worthy incidents looking for interviews)

So I personally cannot understand that- But I am not those people, we all handle things differently. When my Dads own father died I know my dad was very upset but never saw him cry and he tried to stay in "good spirits" and if/when my father dies I am going to be a basketcase.

But I see why people are zeroing in on all this- because there is so much here and so little info and so many "weird" things... Its just tragic.

Originally posted by RedBirdReally? I didn't find Dr. Carver's press statements suspicious at all! He struck me as flustered, overwhelmed, nervous, and perhaps in a little bit of shock. He had, after all, just finished performing medical examinations on seven young children with horrific gunshot wounds.

By his own words he's seen 1000s of gunhot victims. He testified in trials...inquests...has been an m.e. for 33 years and is the chief pathologist for the state. There's very little...if anything this man hasn't seen or had to report on.

As he says in his presser...with a grin...my sensibilities may not be those of the average person.

To portray him as some sort of shellshocked victim...or a basement dwelling mortician-type...and both have been suggested in terms of this man, is, imo, not very logical.

reply to post by swansong19


But to say he is in on some grand conspiracy because he didn't act the way you think he should IS logical?

Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by RedBird

 

I am just trying to be thorough. I mean it may seem like a lot but really most is depending on the first question which he seems to not want to answer for some reason. It is almost like he avoiding it.
Oh well I will just write it off for now as…… some bold statements by someone who isn’t quite ready to back them up.

He seems a bit pressed and threw out a little insult. It isn’t surprising. I will take him as credible if he decides to back up his statements later it’s not a big deal.

Sooner or later there may be a theory presented as credible.

edit on 25-12-2012 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)

The "insult" was directed more towards your hostile tone than at you.

I will be presenting my theory - Your deciding upon my credibility or not means little to me (not just you but anyone...) If torrent links are allowed I will also upload training manuals which will outline SOP (they are not specifically for school shootings but will suffice)

Its not a big secret as class are offered everywhere for these things like this from my a nearby County www.lenconnect.com... offered by www.co.jackson.mi.us... which is in my County.

-This is pretty basic and common stuff here- Anyone involved in first response is pretty well versed in SOP and I am sure you can find manuals online from criminal Justice Schools if I can not upload torrents of parts of mine.

-But yes, you will get your chance to pick my theory apart - But my theory is that a bunch of amateurs made a bunch of mistakes and are trying to save themselves a bunch of trouble will be difficult to prove as the official Story will never say that- hell, we arent even seeking charges against the leak(s)- But are threatening others for "spreading rumor" Which is very odd.
EDIT: Another thing which needs to be understood here- IF they completely botched this and unintentionally had a worse tragedy as a result- There is no bringing anyone back. Getting sued beyond belief brings nobody back but will cost the city/County/State in spades- Law Enforcement has covered things up before to protect themselves in issues where they did intentional wrong- if this was unintentional (and yet still negligent) I see no reason a cover up could not be in place to protect careers and money.

I have now brought up the escaped children next door to the firestation twice. It is perhaps even more relevent now that we know that rescue personnel were not allowed into the area and were stacked up next to where they were gathered...yet no one came to them? 6 children likely covered in the blood of their teacher that they had just stepped past to escape the school.

No one seems to want to touch it.

Unfortunately most of the info is contained in a thread that is now closed. But it is reported by a man being held up as a hero of sorts.

The entire scenario, as reported, stretches credulity, to be kind.

This bears repeating...

Originally posted by Laykilla
TBH, I think we're being overly sensitive here.

It happened, sure it's sad -- but it's certainly not something that is uncommon. Where I live in FL, a guy went crazy and shot up a daycare center and killed his wife. It didn't make international news. It didn't even make national news.

People are entitled to their own opinions too. If someone happens to believe such and such was on heroine, that's his prerogative. It doesn't change anything for anyone.

I will agree that personal information sharing is a touchy subject, but at the same time -- isn't that what we do all the time with people in the spotlight?

So we can share all of Obama's personal information, or any senator.... but people involved in a massacre are off limits?

Sure there will be less than stellar people on the internet, but I mean -- denying ignorance is done through investigation, is it not?

Maybe I'm missing something, but I haven't seen anything that I thought was personally unacceptable in regards to Sandy Hook. Nothing that takes the community back to 2003. There has been a whole lot of discussion about it too -- I think ATS Staff needs to calm it self. If people violated the T&C suspend them, ban them -- whatever. If the T&C was not violated... then you are allowing personal opinion to override what is right.

Simple.

Threatening all of ATS with a mass U2U is out of line. Saying a topic could be "Banned" of discussion is pretty draconian, and I'm sure will go over like lead balloon.

I made it all the way to Page 2 before I even noticed there was a U2U msg.

I didn't think ANYone was out of line (in this particular thread up to the point I stopped reading). I was astonished at some of the claims, yes, that 1) clearly I had missed, and 2) were obviously being supported by many members, which was clear.

I hadn't given much thought to this case up until this post over here, in How the Newtown massacre became a Mind-Control television event.

Originally posted by SquirrelNutz

Originally posted by sumgai
reply to post by ShakaDoodle

 

You know what else is messed up that no one noticed or is currently glossing over? On the EXACT SAME DAY a man in China killed 22 children at a school and he did it with a KNIFE.

Exactly - I actually *had* heard about that story - thanks for linking it here.

People who think this whole Newtown Massacre is (going to be) about gun control are not thinking deep enough.

They will not be taking your guns (yet) - first step, is getting the populace used to armed personnel on every street corner... starting with schools and getting the sight of it 'normal' at a young age.

'Cause that's what's coming. (Especially, with our troops coming home and a jobless economy) - the 'need' has been created!

Other than that, I was just thinking it was a senseless event and knew that - Psy0p or not - was going to be a good opportunity to usher this in. After all, you never let a good crisis go to waste...

Lot of good points being brought up - just sayin'.

Seems anything that remotely touches upon the truth gets stricken and termed "insensitive". I guess we should just post about bigfoot and space aliens until the deed is done as now it is considered "wildly foolish" to question what's put before us by a media that has proven itself unworthy of our trust. A media, by the way, that use "our airwaves" to profit from and has enabled the disenfranchisement of the populous that's happening here in The United States of America. This is no longer a nation that has a government for the people and by the people. It's now a nation for the government to rule over the people.

ATS has built a reputation? Really? I thought those participating in the dialog brought that about by questioning what the mainstream and the government put before us?

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by swansong19

 

But to say he is in on some grand conspiracy because he didn't act the way you think he should IS logical?

Nice deflection.

I've never said he was in on some grand conspiracy (as opposed to the garden variety?)...but I do contend that his behaviour is odd for someone so used to dealing with sensitive issues such as this.

Having said that...I did see a pic of him walking into a hearing to testify on some rather gruesome deaths...and he was smiling. Maybe he's the one with aspergers. Oh Oh...did I just impugn the character of this man by suggesting his odd behaviour might ba symptom of a clinical condition?

Now no ONE of these...oddities...by themselves...mean anything.

Added together they start looking odd...like no one is really that upset. Like the girl, when asked what happened, said...nothing much. No mention of gunfire...even when asked specifically about it.

Each, on their own, would mean nothing. But together they smell weird.

Originally posted by Bilk22
Seems anything that remotely touches upon the truth gets stricken and termed "insensitive". I guess we should just post about bigfoot and space aliens until the deed is done as now it is considered "wildly foolish" to question what's put before us by a media that has proven itself unworthy of our trust. A media, by the way, that use "our airwaves" to profit from and has enabled the disenfranchisement of the populous that's happening here in The United States of America. This is no longer a nation that has a government for the people and by the people. It's now a nation for the government to rule over the people.

ATS has built a reputation? Really? I thought those participating in the dialog brought that about by questioning what the mainstream and the government put before us?

anything that remotely touhes on the truth? Like blindly accusig people of being child molestors? Or claiming these poor kids didnt die? Or saying parents who lost children are actors because they didn't react the way some think they should?

Come on now. Show me some proof of any of the things you claim are close to the teuth that are labelled.
..
...
...
I'll wait