A list of already debunked theories, re: Sandy hook

reply to post by MidnightTide


I am aware of the thread being discussed and can understand the point of the Admins and owner...speculation should not be let allowed to grow into outright assumptions...especially when concerning innocent victims, the family members of the shooter...and anyone who may have ever had a relationship (albeit personal or professional) with the shooter.

No one...and I mean no one....saw this coming...and to start a thread that delves into what-if's and blame goes against everything that I come to ATS for ....if you want tabloid and conjecture, and a little bit of hate...start a thread on that "other" ungodly forum.

That is all I have to say on the subject...Merry Christmas...I hope that some people got what they needed-a lesson in critical thinking and humility.

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
claim: The nurse has told different versions of the story:
Answer: No, she hasnt. THE NURSE NEVER SAYS SHE LOCKED EYES WITH THE SHOOTER.

The MSM had her locking eyes with the shooter. What is your source that she didn't?

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Posting personal information of private citizens, then casting nasty aspersions on them, is the lowest of lows

Even more so when the target is dead. Does not Adam Lanza deserve the same consideration?
[Although I agree we shouldn't be slandering anybody.]

Originally posted by notquitesure



But if you entertain the notion that this was some sort of black operation, then a handful of the participants could be actors or agents, imbedded for some period of time, even years. These folks could have been there to participate in the event as well as to control the aftermath, along with the media (many of whom are likely agents themselves).

Entertaining this was a "black operation" with actors and agents embedded for years is retarded. You might as well entertain the theory that the shooter was an evil fairy from planet Zorgatron sent from the future. There is equal evidence of the time traveling Zorgatron theory as there is that this was a secret operation.

Sorry. Had to say it.

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.

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


I haven't taken part in most of the conversations (as it is useless to do so, in my estimation). So I have no idea what you are referring to, specifically. I likely won't research, either. But this has to be one of the best posts I have seen in months.

What I HAVE seen has been enough to make me just stay away from that hot potato altogether.

Kudo's to your ideals. It is why I am on ATS

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


Point taken and agreed.
I also posted some stuff (keyword acting) which, looking back at it, was not cool.

I did not make any accusations, but I understand that it can have been understood that way.
Shock, grief and trying to make sense in the sensless did let me post what i deeply regret now.

I can only hope i did not hurt anyones feeling.
My most sincere apologies to everyone: The Involved families in Newton, ATS-Members and ATS-Staff.

reply to post by captaintyinknots


I agree with everything here. I will say that I think some of the things the media got wrong were strange (ie: naming the brother as the shooter, how? It gives the impression that a reporter walked up to the dead body and found the brothers I.d. and reported it. ) I'm not saying there arentt legit answers, but there is some weird stuff.

Also, the father did act strange it wasn't just a smile, it was the whole thing, joking around seemingly happy and the "ok?" And appearing to go into a solemn mood. Why was he even talking? Why obviously change his demeanor. I mean you have to agree that he changed for the camera, why? Again, not saying the whole thing was a connspiracy, but there are some strange things.

Finally, poor reporting and follow ups. The media doesn't ask questions anymore. What about the guy running from the school. I've heard explanations but most of them (ginger bread dad) were wrong and taken from other parts of the story. What about the cars plates? Has that been solved yet (it may be)?


Again, I don't believe in out and out conspiracy, but there are glaring anomalies. Also the convenience, timing, and agenda for the government always raises flags for people. Everyone wondered if Obama would come after guns if he secured his second term, now he can. I don't believe in no kids theory because it's absurd, but it would be foolish to dismiss the possibility of a second shooter.

reply to post by sconner755

If you played poker or knew anything about calculating odds you'd realize that it's more likely humans lied to each other than any alien involvement. What kind of odds do you think you'd get in Vegas?

I noticed that this was a big issue within the US .. I'd comment once or twice on the topics that were related to the sandy hook incident but since it's not my national problem a watched it more from the sidelines.

What I do notice is was the chain reaction of threads emerging on the scene... something I can understand because of those young lives that were lost.. But somehow I hoped that there was some halt to it not because of the entourage but because of the stars and flag seekers who think another thread could score allot..

Put some thread marshals within heavy discussed threads ...

ATS should a regulated maximum on the treads released on curtain topics before it escalates .. Just some thoughts nothing more nothing less...........

Peace

Deleted.

Originally posted by Charmeine
I for one don't appreciate receiving messages like this when I have only commented on one discussion about Sandy Hook - at which I expressed my disgust at the people participating in the thread. There are a lot of us here who do participate in discussions with respect and follow the rules. Please don't lump us all in with the few people who ruin it for the rest of us. I've seen on too many threads the same few people who turn threads into an opportunity to bash each other. Perhaps there needs to be a revision in ToR for posting replies because I've reported many posts by people that were way out of line...I logged in and was hoping that perhaps AtS had sent out a friendly Christmas greeting but no instead everyone got a slap on the wrist. Not necessary in my books. Hopping off my soap box now.

Lose the attitude, it got sent to everyone.

Oh also, the local paper reporting that they talked to the principle. Even quoting her. Then in their near buried retractionn the blamed the bad reporting on someone else saying they came up claiming to be the principle. So the reporter didn't ask the name of this person? I doubt that, they always ask and in the story her words were attributed to the correct principle.

So they are basically saying the reporter was lied to by a woman she didn't know and forgot to get her name then when writing the article realized she forgot the name and hadnt heard the principle was shot yet, so she looked up the right name and included it? I mean they didn't say that but that's the explannation we are left to fraw. That or she makes up the news.

Also there was a story that he came to school and argued with 4 teachers. So we were eagerly waiting to hear from the one teacher he argued with that survived and they tell us that's just made up and never happened. Where did the story come from? It's pretty specific and unusual for a rumor and included four specific people.

Do you at least agree that something is weird here?

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

What I HAVE seen has been enough to make me just stay away from that hot potato altogether.

Nothing happens by accident. And stay away, it might be a hot potato and you could get burned (up).

Political scientist W. Lance Bennett calls this the news media’s “authority-disorder bias.” “Whether the world is returned to a safe, normal place,” Bennett writes, “or whether the very idea of a normal world is called into question, the news is preoccupied with order, along with related questions of whether authorities are capable of establishing or restoring it.”[12]

... This well-worn script is one the public has been conditioned to accept. If few people relied on such media to develop their world view this would hardly be a concern. Yet this is regrettably not the case.

www.globalresearch.ca... Good article.

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by Corruption Exposed

 

No worries. I appreciate the apology.

The ME's statements on the weapon used would not be official, as he would not be qualified to make that judgement. He said multiple times in the interview that his statements would be tossed out by a judge, which means they aren't considered expert statements.

We also need to wait to see what the official report says about the weapons. So far we only have speculation from media sources, which are hardly definitive. Seeing the official police report is what will tell us what questions we need to be asking.

I disagree when you say the ME's statements would not be official and that he is not qualified to make that judgement.

He is the medical examiner and is the ONLY person who is qualified to make that judgement, if he cannot make that judgement who can?

He did say that some of his statements would be tossed out by a judge, but a judge would not toss out his statments made while under oath on a medical examination that he himself performed.

In your defense, I would also like to see the "official" police report. Regrettably, in my opinion, I believe we may never get to see this report for various reasons.

ETA:

Please let me know if you think I am derailling your thread by mentioning the ME and his interview as it was not part of your OP. If you believe it to be off topic or derailing your thread I will stop discussing this aspect of the incident.

edit on 12/25/2012 by Corruption Exposed because: (no reason given)

I dont think you are derailing at all.

The medical examiner is not qualified to state what caliber was used. He is thre to speak on injuries. Forensics and ballistics are the ones who make that call.

Deleted.

Originally posted by clairvoyantrose
Hell yea Dis-informant's are always a good kick in the pants! Only give us more reason to NOT believe what you present. YOU have no proof behind your information presented, and are pointing the finger at us for not having ours all together?

I'm gonna kick back with my tin-foil hat and keep looking into things because the evidence you presented was rubbish.

OP:
"1) This happened:
NOPE IT DIDN'T HAPPEN BECAUSE I SAID SO. PREPOSTEROUS. "

As I have said all along in this thread, if there is any of the things listed that you refute, please do so. The generality of your statements shows that you simply do not want to accepts what has been listed-not that you can prove otherwise on any of them.

Originally posted by Charmeine
reply to post by forgetmenot

 

It's not attitude - it's saying I don't think a message to EVERYONE was needed. Leaving the discussion now - and ATS for awhile. Later folks.

If everyone hadn't got it then people would be able to claim ignorance whether truthful or not and keep on with this parade. What is not needed is misplaced indignation upon receiving a message from the administrator of the site you use for free, referring you to a message from the owner of the website you use for free, for all members of of his free website to read.

Originally posted by AxelAxel
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

You did a terrible job debunking these 'theories'. You just inserted your own opinion or made the opposite claim. This debunked nothing. If you're going to attempt to counter compiled evidence, compile evidence of your own. Don't just say, "that's impossible, that's unlikely, that didn't happen".

Sandy Hook looks like a cover up to me. I am very afraid that these ignorant people are OKAY with being kept in the dark. How can you justify information being withheld? "It's sensitive." "They have to investigate it first."

When did keeping America in the dark become the precedent? When did it become the norm? An open flow of information is necessary on all ends for situations like this

Same standard response I have been getting all thread from those who dont want to hear it. As I have said, the theories have been debunked ad nauseum in other threads, or, like in the case of the actor theory, have absolutely ZERO evidence to back the theory in the first place.

If you'd like to challenge any of the statements I made, please do. Not that you will-none of you who scream about how wrong I am have yet.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
Oh also, the local paper reporting that they talked to the principle. Even quoting her. Then in their near buried retractionn the blamed the bad reporting on someone else saying they came up claiming to be the principle. So the reporter didn't ask the name of this person? I doubt that, they always ask and in the story her words were attributed to the correct principle.

So they are basically saying the reporter was lied to by a woman she didn't know and forgot to get her name then when writing the article realized she forgot the name and hadnt heard the principle was shot yet, so she looked up the right name and included it? I mean they didn't say that but that's the explannation we are left to fraw. That or she makes up the news.

Also there was a story that he came to school and argued with 4 teachers. So we were eagerly waiting to hear from the one teacher he argued with that survived and they tell us that's just made up and never happened. Where did the story come from? It's pretty specific and unusual for a rumor and included four specific people.

Do you at least agree that something is weird here?

Yes, what's weird is the obsession with trying to see nefarious motives in honest mistakes, all driven by a dark agenda.

Reporter mistakenly referred to the principal. Is that really less likely than a conspiracy to kill 20 kids between the dark forces of the government and the media?

What's totally weird is looking for the most bizarre conspiratorial explanations in everything that is easily explainable.

reply to post by Charmeine


As an admin at another site I know it is much easier to send a message to all rather than go to each indivicual abuser. I have not commented on any of the threads and I still recieved it. I was glad to see it myself,

The level of unproffessionalism and lack of maturity that has been going on around here has almost been enough to make me leave for good. I hope this will guide things back in the right direction. There is plenty of good content here when it's not being drowned out by the latest mega incident.

I wrote a simple poem for the children of Sandy Hook and that is all I had to say about the incident.


ETA; I don't know why poeple are getting bent out of shape over this messeage. If you have done nothing wrong then why fret about it. It is the owners right to say what they need to say when they need to say it.