A list of already debunked theories, re: Sandy hook

reply to post by Grimpachi


if you did not have over 2k posts i would have thught that you were illuminati because i just had an altercation with them and my red nose just had puppies n i kept 2 of them n named them grim and apatchi but call apachie pat chi

I agree with you, Grimpachi, that this is a violation of T & C... "some people decided to post others personal information" --- O.K. so the mods should immediately delete any post causing that violation. No problem with that kind of deletion.

It's possible that I'm just not understanding why Springer and S.O. are lecturing and threatening to delete all threads on a topic and ban the topic. Maybe I just don't get it.

If I speculate, for example, that a certain celebrity is fake and that the original person of the same name died tragically in 1966 and one or more British agents has been impersonating the original ever since, even up to the present time on worldwide TV, is that speculation too 'unethical' to be posted? We really don't know the absolute truth without fingerprint forensics, etc. but do we say that topic is unethical and off limits because it offends the person in the media using the name? Do we delete all threads on the topic?

I'm just making the point that it's a slippery slope when we start trying to judge which conspiracy theories are ethical or unethical. Is it unethical to speculate that the Federal Reserve is a scam?

This is relevant because the S.O. and Springer seem to be saying certain opinions speculating conspiracy in the Sandy Hook case are off limits, so it sounds like they are wanting all of ATS to chill and just take the mass media coverage as fact.

I think a lot of it is because some people are not showing common decency in their posts. It is fine to have an idea but the burden of proof should be met at least to some degree IMHO otherwise it is just gossip on par with tabloids. It is getting very hard to find a worthy subject in this matter.

I find much of it offensive and I can only imagine how others may feel. Common sense should have told many that if they can’t show something better as just there opinion that a facial expression is off that it isn’t worthy of a thread. However some feel that their opinion should be taken as fact or proof. That does not make a conspiracy.

To be honest I think some people are treating this as a game they only are seeking attention and are not concerned with finding the truth. Not everyone but there definitely are more than usual concerning this.

reply to post by lucifer6


Sorry but I do not see a connection to my screen name and the illuminate.

If you must know my screen name was my old call sign in the army it is a combination of two names from some Japanese manga.

The problem is, no one knows what to believe anymore---anytime anything happens. Sad but true.

Here are the loose strings I've been looking for answers on about SH since events unfolded: (Keep in mind that I don't have any feelings either way whether there was conspiracy involved. I am devastated by this event. But as a former reporter, I feel there are a lot of loose ends, and I am curious as to what the answers are....)

Anyone have the answers for me?

1. Someone was arrested that day and tackled to the ground and handcuffed. One of the kids reported seeing that as he went outside. There are many reports of this, remember? Someone in the woods, etc. I believe there may even be a police communication about it over the radio that I heard that first day. Does anyone know what ever came of this?

2. Fox News reported a few days ago that Lanza's mother was a volunteer at the school for the kindergarteners last year, and that Adam was jealous. He thought his mother loved the kindergarteners more than him. That's why Lanza targeted the 1st graders, as they were kindergarteners last year. Fox News went with this, but no one else did. Was his mother, in fact, a volunteer at the school? Why hide it if she was?

3. I still don't understand how the kids ran past Lanza in Soto's class. Anyone ever figure this out? I'm not saying they didn't, just wondering how they did. They ended up at the end of that guys driveway in a house across the street and he took them in and called their parents. The kids said they saw their teacher dead on their way out. Not sure if it was Soto's class or someone elses.

4. How did the events unfold there that day? Has a good timeline ever been revealed? Why all the secrecy?

5) Who officially called 911? Who turned on the school's intercom?


If anyone has heard any of these answers, I'd like to know.

Originally posted by switching yard
I would appreciate S.O. and Springer enforcing the T & C very strictly, but not issuing blanket warnings that seem to chastise those of us who question the veracity of what we see in the media.

To me, it seems simple. If the T & C are violated in any way by a post, delete the post. But please don't dictate what can or cannot be speculated by conspiracy theorists.

It's so vague for you guys to say that you're not going to let certain posts bring down the site you've built up. Then, you threaten to delete all threads on the subject. That really is so Orwellian, I can't believe you would do that. In the Soviet Union, they were always deleting things in the public discourse, trying to expunge or rewrite history. "Delete all threads on the topic!", the Soviets might say if they were still around and running ATS, but thank God that isn't the case. At least, I hope not.

Like I said, I hope the mods are alert and diligent. Please delete all posts that violate T & C. But also, please don't engage in censorship just because in your view people should accept what the mainstream media put on TV without question. We do question it. We do question when a 'father' laughs and smiles apparently not realizing he is being recorded on camera and then changes his demeanor seemingly with some effort consistent with an actor getting into character before a dramatic scene. We do question that.

Was it unethical for 'conspiracy theorists' to question the official story that 'lone nut' Oswald murdered a policeman and a president and no one else was involved? There must be a thousand anomalies and unanswered questions in the JFK assassination case making it un-American NOT to question the official story.

Please enforce the T & C without lecturing everyone on ethics. Thanks!

Couldn't have said it better myself.
Very nice comparison made with the JFK situation.

Originally posted by RedBird

Originally posted by Tecumte
Ok, as to address the topic. I tried to read through some pages of this thread (34 pages)) and wasn't able to find where these 'theories' have been 'debunked' (or even addressed) if they have fully been explained my apologies, But one of the major problems I have with 'trying and convicting' "Adam" in this court of public opinion (and hopefully some facts, so hard to come by) is first and foremost the possibility he may not have been ALONE (in *whatever* capacity).

One of the first things that I'd like to see addressed is how exactly did this "Adam' get into the school (assuming his body was found there, FACTS anyone?). One of the earlier stories floated by the press was that he was BUZZED in (I think there was a link in one of the banned threads). And most importantly that he was at the school door yelling 'let me in, let me in'. Now this is an important point IMO. WAS this true. The next story floated seemd to change to 'he? blasted his way in". Ok. which one is true and how do we know? I assume a school with a brand new security system surely has some very compelling video. So as this is apparently an 'open and shut' case, I would have to wonder why that video hasn't been shown by the media? Or has it. Has anyone seen compelling video (or even VALID pictures) that would lead them to believe Adam acually shot his way into the school? (If that is now the story) Please share I'd like to get some of these ideas of Adam possibly being a patsy and brought to the school, and used to allow access to the school by someone else out of my consideration.

If you listen to the radio scanner recordings (or read the transcripts) you'll see that the first thing reported to dispatch by the first unit on the scene is that the front plate-glass door has been smashed.

That doesn't 100% explain how he got in, but it's the closest thing we have to a credible fact (and far superior to any of the witness statements, imo)

To put it simply, he shot his way in.

I'm not sure if the glass was supposed to be shatter-resistant (to kicking, or bodychecking, or rocks, or whatever) but it obviously wasn't bulletproof.

To put it simply, he shot his way in.

Wow, that's quite a leap from allegedly finding a 'smashed' front glass to saying 'Adam' shot his way in. Who is to say it was even Adam? What about the alleged brand new security system? What about the alleged mask (now that's changed too I suppose?) I assume any security system worth it's salt has an extensive array of cameras. Where's the footage or even some pics? How about some real PROOF it was 'Adam" that 'shot his way in, not someone else? And why was it reported he was 'buzzzed' in? People need clear facts and evidence here if they are going to believe any conspriracy theory floated by a usually lying bungling kept press, otherwise they'll have to try and put together their own.

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


I think the warning is apt. But ATS staff have a role to play too. I had a thread up and I requested it be closed because it had come to a conclusion and was fast turning into a thread dishing the parents. The MODs never closed the thread. I then found my thread be a duplicate thread and again requested my thread closed. It was on these grounds it was closed. Poor show..

Originally posted by MRuss

1. Someone was arrested that day and tackled to the ground and handcuffed. One of the kids reported seeing that as he went outside. There are many reports of this, remember? Someone in the woods, etc. I believe there may even be a police communication about it over the radio that I heard that first day. Does anyone know what ever came of this?

One less conspiracy:

According to Deadline Live, the Connecticut mystery man in the woods has officially been identified as Chris Manfredonia, who was found by police in the woods next to Sandy Hook Elementary School after Adam Lanza took the lives of 27 people.

Initially after the shooting, no one knew who the Connecticut mystery man in the woods was as people witnessed police placing him in handcuffs. The LA Times found out that Chris Manfredonia, whose 6-year-old daughter attends the school, was heading there Friday morning to help make gingerbread houses with first-graders when he heard popping sounds and smelled sulfur. He ran around the school trying to reach his daughter and was briefly handcuffed by police. Chris Manfredonia was later reunited with his child, who had been locked in a small room with a teacher.

Mystery man in the woods identified

Originally posted by MRuss

2. Fox News reported a few days ago that Lanza's mother was a volunteer at the school for the kindergarteners last year, and that Adam was jealous. He thought his mother loved the kindergarteners more than him. That's why Lanza targeted the 1st graders, as they were kindergarteners last year. Fox News went with this, but no one else did. Was his mother, in fact, a volunteer at the school? Why hide it if she was?

No one is hiding anything, it is simple not clear any moment although it is heading in this direction.

Adam Lanza attended the Sandy Hook School as a boy, according to Flashman, who said Nancy Lanza had volunteered there for several years. Two law enforcement sources said they believed Nancy Lanza had been volunteering with kindergartners at the school. Most of Lanza's victims were first graders sources believe Nancy Lanza may have worked with last year. Flashman said Nancy Lanza was also good friends with the school’s principal and psychologist—both of whom were killed in the shooting rampage.

Fox news

A lot of things are not clear at the moment simply because everything needs to be checked/researched. This does not mean, they are hiding something.

Originally posted by MRuss

3. I still don't understand how the kids ran past Lanza in Soto's class. Anyone ever figure this out? I'm not saying they didn't, just wondering how they did. They ended up at the end of that guys driveway in a house across the street and he took them in and called their parents. The kids said they saw their teacher dead on their way out. Not sure if it was Soto's class or someone elses.

why in earth do you want to know this? I feel sick that I even have to quote this text. Isn't this enough for you?

Fellow teacher Anne Marie Murphy, 52, also pictured, was slain as well. She was said to have been found with her arms around one of the slain children.

With Lanza cutting his murderous path through Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., Soto hid her students in a classroom closet and cabinets — and put herself between them and the killer.

When Lanza entered the room, after killing 14 children in the classroom next door, she tried to steer him away by saying her students were in the auditorium.

But a handful of students, including Olivia, tried to flee. Lanza shot them.

Hearthbreaking smiles

Originally posted by MRuss


4. How did the events unfold there that day? Has a good timeline ever been revealed? Why all the secrecy?

5) Who officially called 911? Who turned on the school's intercom?

We just have to wait and see but there is no secrecy. Everyone want's to know what happened to see if in some way this can be prevented in the future. Why is it so important to know who called 911 or who turned on the school's intercom?? Instead, be happy someone called 911.

Could you please post evidence, proof, or documentation that supports your position? Thank you.

Originally posted by hypattia

Could you please post evidence, proof, or documentation that supports your position? Thank you.

You'll have to be more specific than that, as to what position and who you are talking to.

Assuming it is me, please, tell me what you would like clarified.

reply to post by MRuss


Another question, if he shot through the glass, why didn't an emergency system kick in...as in alarms, and some type of emergency message sent to the authorities automatically...along the lines of how alarm systems work? Seems odd to me that they had to wait for a 911 call.

Originally posted by citizenoftheworld

Originally posted by MRuss

3. I still don't understand how the kids ran past Lanza in Soto's class. Anyone ever figure this out? I'm not saying they didn't, just wondering how they did. They ended up at the end of that guys driveway in a house across the street and he took them in and called their parents. The kids said they saw their teacher dead on their way out. Not sure if it was Soto's class or someone elses.

why in earth do you want to know this? I feel sick that I even have to quote this text. Isn't this enough for you?

Fellow teacher Anne Marie Murphy, 52, also pictured, was slain as well. She was said to have been found with her arms around one of the slain children.

With Lanza cutting his murderous path through Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., Soto hid her students in a classroom closet and cabinets — and put herself between them and the killer.

When Lanza entered the room, after killing 14 children in the classroom next door, she tried to steer him away by saying her students were in the auditorium.

But a handful of students, including Olivia, tried to flee. Lanza shot them.

Hearthbreaking smiles

Originally posted by MRuss


4. How did the events unfold there that day? Has a good timeline ever been revealed? Why all the secrecy?

5) Who officially called 911? Who turned on the school's intercom?

We just have to wait and see but there is no secrecy. Everyone want's to know what happened to see if in some way this can be prevented in the future. Why is it so important to know who called 911 or who turned on the school's intercom?? Instead, be happy someone called 911.

Who are you to question why someone wants to know something? People want to know because it doesn't make sense. Just because you buy what MSM sells you, doesn't mean everyone does. And "there is no secrecy"? How on earth would you know? Oh that's right, because we are always told the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth by the powers that be.

It's these kinds of posts that attack other people for simply throwing questions out there that surround any posts on this topic. People can't question anything about this topic without being attacked personally, and made to feel bad for even logically questioning something. For a forum that's supposed to be open to exploring all possibilities, I've seen an awful lot of closed minds.

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by hypattia

Could you please post evidence, proof, or documentation that supports your position? Thank you.

You'll have to be more specific than that, as to what position and who you are talking to.

Assuming it is me, please, tell me what you would like clarified.

how about ANYTHING regarding your claims in the OP as i have asked for since page 4.

everything is speculation, which has been my point.

ONGOING INVESTIGATION

what is so hard to understand about you speculating and not "debunking" anything

reply to post by captaintyinknots


How is this "debunking" anything? None of what you posted is fact, it is simply your opinion. You didn't offer up a single shred of anything to support your opinion. Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but just because you believe everything you wrote, does not make it fact. Just because you say none of the parents doing interviews are actors, doesn't make it true. There may very well be grieving parents, but personally, I don't believe the ones doing the interviews (and there are not many, it seems to be a select few - Red Flag) are the real grieving parents. Believe what you want, but don't try to pass it off as "debunking" anything unless you have cold hard facts to back it up.

Originally posted by CinnamonHearts
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

How is this "debunking" anything? None of what you posted is fact, it is simply your opinion. You didn't offer up a single shred of anything to support your opinion. Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but just because you believe everything you wrote, does not make it fact. Just because you say none of the parents doing interviews are actors, doesn't make it true. There may very well be grieving parents, but personally, I don't believe the ones doing the interviews (and there are not many, it seems to be a select few - Red Flag) are the real grieving parents. Believe what you want, but don't try to pass it off as "debunking" anything unless you have cold hard facts to back it up.

This is a great example of why SO, the site owner, said he's never been more embarrassed for the ATS community, and why he used the word "self-indulged."

Let's break this down into simple steps:

1. Grieving parent is on television making a statement about his daughter.

2. ATS members see this man making a statement and compare him to some idea that have in their own head about how he should be acting.

3. Rather than be open to the possibility that their preconceived idea of how a grieving parent should act may be wrong, the ATS members conclude their preconceived idea is correct, and the mass murder of 20 children must be a conspiracy with actors posing as grieving parents.

See where the self-indulgent part comes in?

Maybe you're preconceived ideas are wrong. Maybe if it's so important to get to the "truth" you should go to Newtown and visit the Parker family, then report back what you've found.

Honestly, it's mind-numbing to see how #ing retarded "normal" people can be. Maybe Adam Lanza was this far gone too. Maybe he thought the school was filled with alien spies posing as students and teachers and he was going to save the world.

That's how #ing retarded the whole "parents aren't real" theory is.

reply to post by sconner755


I'm going to take the high road, and not respond to your personal attack.

I have one question for you, why aren't you open to being wrong? There is nothing in my post to indicate that I am not, contrary to your attack.

You think I want to doubt that any of those people are genuine? Of course not. I'm a very decent human being, even though you try to paint me and others as "Adam Lanza." I would obviously love it if no children died. It's almost incomprehensible to me to think that there IS a possibility that at least some of this is not on the up and up. You think I don't feel guilt for doubting Robbie Parker? Of course I do. But, my GUT says something is off with him. Am I right? I have no clue. But, you or anyone else has NO right to tell me that how I FEEL is right or wrong. What makes you more right than me? You claim I have no right to judge Robbie Parker, yet you're judging me for not reacting the same way you did to him. We all have gut instincts. Mine is telling me something is wrong. I do not know this is fact, but I'm also not here telling you that you're wrong and I'm right.

Originally posted by Hardstepah

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by hypattia

Could you please post evidence, proof, or documentation that supports your position? Thank you.

You'll have to be more specific than that, as to what position and who you are talking to.

Assuming it is me, please, tell me what you would like clarified.

how about ANYTHING regarding your claims in the OP as i have asked for since page 4.

everything is speculation, which has been my point.

ONGOING INVESTIGATION

what is so hard to understand about you speculating and not "debunking" anything

By all means, as I have said all along, tell me what you want to know. These things I have listed have been discussed to death, and I am not going to go through them one by one, AGAIN, so tell me where your confusion is, and I will either post clarification.