It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by swansong19
Originally posted by captaintyinknotsThe ME qualified everything he said by saying it would be thrown out of court. Meaning it was not official. Meaning it was his OPINION, not the official statement.
That's not true. His comments about being thrown out of court were in regards to the caliber of the bullets not the type of gun used. His comments were clear. All victims killed with a long gun. At which point a reporter asks..."Wasn't the long gun found in the car?"
I continue to see you laboring this point, but I fail to see what youare trying to prove...we do not have the OS yet. Period. That you infer that this means that no statements have been made is on you, and no one else.
I'd like you to notice how many times in that one sentence you attempted toi make this about me. It's not. Please deal with the information I'm discussing...and not make this about me in an attempt to goad me into an argument.
edit on 26-12-2012 by swansong19 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by captaintyinknots
Originally posted by swansong19Have you watched the interview, or just read the transcript?
Both.
Second line.
Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by mc4denmark
Can you imagine if you were a friend of one of the families or one of the parents and heard someone saying the government is behind this or they were paid actors taking the blame off of the monster who did this? These sick theories were being put on here before the kids had even had funerals and some are so outlandish that it only takes a scrap of common sense to know better. The one about them being actors was dependent on a facial expression it demonstrates a lack of common decency on the part of who started it.
Originally posted by captaintyinknotsFair enough, so, in watching the video, did you notice his body language? The fact that he kept looking at others to see if he should answer certain questions?
the guy wasnt sure what he should or shouldnt say, and this is exactly why. And I emphasize, again, that an ME is not qualified to give the official statement on the guns. That is not what ME's do.
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.
Originally posted by usernameconspiracy
Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by mc4denmark
If only some of these sicko's had the balls to drive up to those parents and say that to their faces. They don't. They hide behind their computer, screaming conspiracy at everything they see from the protection of anonymity. Some of you should be ashamed that you actually accused these grieving parents of being actors or claiming that the kids are not really dead. Seriously, what is wrong with you people?
PHELPS. JENNIFER SEXTON.
Do you need me to dwaw you a piccure?
Originally posted by vkey08
reply to post by swansong19
Wow I just love being told that I have to tape my neighbors and fellow citizens of Connecticut just to make it more real to you..
Get a grip.. if you really don't get it, fly out here and start talking to people in state, you'll find out how fast theory's of actors and non-events and government conspiracies get you an angry mob scene. So far not one person seems to be taking into accounts the feelings of anyone here..
After 9/11 we were asked to grieve for NY
After Columbine, for Colorado
After Sandy for NY and NJ
After Katrina for Louisiana
(etc)
After this? Oh well, CT is too small it doesn't matter.
I am not going to post the names of my fellow Nutmeggers that are feeling like everyone is really off the deep end, I guess people are going to say the funeral I went to didn't happen either (rolls eyes)
This is where I lose it... I'm sorry but enough is enough is enough. Unlike everyone here that seem to want to turn this into something it probably isn't, the families WANT TO BE LEFT ALONE. Plain, simple to the point and THEIR RIGHT... Or because it hit the national news, doe sit make it your right to rip them apart as they are trying to get on with their lives? I certainly didn't like it when my daughter died earlier this year and someone I knew was more interested in why I hadn't shipped something to them, small incident but still.. The amount of apathy for these families is amazing... I can only hope that nothing like this happens to you or anyone you know, because you may not get the respect you RIGHTFULLY deserve..
Originally posted by swansong19
Originally posted by captaintyinknotsFair enough, so, in watching the video, did you notice his body language? The fact that he kept looking at others to see if he should answer certain questions?
the guy wasnt sure what he should or shouldnt say, and this is exactly why. And I emphasize, again, that an ME is not qualified to give the official statement on the guns. That is not what ME's do.
Just so I have this straight.
You and others on this board have said some very unkind things about people that have provided an opinion on the behaviour/body language of some of the participants in this event.
Now...you'd like me to examine the body language of the M.E. instead of just listening to the words coming out of his mouth.
At 4:15 of this vid...his full presser...the question was what caliber of bullet...tell me what he says...and point out the equivocation.
www.youtube.com...
Originally posted by captaintyinknotsThat said, what you are asking, is to ONLY consider one factor of what he said, without any thought given to the context and qualification, not to mention the body language. It doesnt work that way. If we are to investigate, we must look at the ENTIRE conference, not just the few words that (sort of) fit with the points you are trying to make.
Originally posted by captaintyinknotsFurthermore, I ask, again, what it is that you think this proves, or contradicts.
Originally posted by Sek82
reply to post by captaintyinknots
I know what the official statement on weapons were on day one, and on day two.
It changed.
Along with just about every detail.
Somehow, through the power of opinion, you have debunked every listed theory, simply by saying they are wrong rather than providing evidence to support it.
Take #3 for example.
That claim is still wide open.