A list of already debunked theories, re: Sandy hook

Originally posted by swansong19

Originally posted by captaintyinknotsFurthermore, I ask, again, what it is that you think this proves, or contradicts.

The only thing it proves is what I wanted it to prove...that your assertion that there have been NO OFFICIAL STATEMENTS is completely, totally, 100% demostrably false.

I can only assume that if you continue to make similar assertions you are being purposely disingenuous.

I'm beginning to think your goal here is more to try and twist things in an attempt to discredit me, than it is to get to the truth.

Furthermore, please show me where I have said there have been "no official statements". I never said that. What I said was that we do not have the OFFICIAL STORY. Which we dont.

I say it again: WE DO NOT HAVE THE OFFICIAL STORY AS OF YET.

Originally posted by vkey08
reply to post by swansong19

 

It's anger not grief.. Anger that people in the stores and malls around here have to even be entertaining discussion on this sort of thing.. Kind of hard to point you to quotes online when most of this is the stuff we are all just hearing waiting to pay for food, or getting gas...

But that must mean it's not true in your eyes .... People can't live in an area and hear their neighbors talking without having to have them write it out for the almighty ATS army of experts to rip apart... I'm sick of it, I am sick to death of all the accusations of actors and no-one really dying, and claims of cover up...

With respect. If what you're saying is true...surely someone has contacted MSM to voice the deep offense taken by the community. Someone has written a note to the Newtown Bee...something.

I am genuinely interested to know what the people in this community are experiencing...and I doubt I'm alone.

And you know what...? 9,999,999 out of 10,000,000 times...so is the media.

Originally posted by vkey08
reply to post by swansong19

 

It's anger not grief.. Anger that people in the stores and malls around here have to even be entertaining discussion on this sort of thing.. Kind of hard to point you to quotes online when most of this is the stuff we are all just hearing waiting to pay for food, or getting gas...

But that must mean it's not true in your eyes .... People can't live in an area and hear their neighbors talking without having to have them write it out for the almighty ATS army of experts to rip apart... I'm sick of it, I am sick to death of all the accusations of actors and no-one really dying, and claims of cover up...

Its pretty funny. Out of one side of their mouths these people are screaming "THE MEDIA CANT BE TRUSTED", and out of the other they are saying "I dont believe these things unless they are stated publicly!"

Great example is the silly "i saw no bodies, therefore I dont believe they exist". Then they turn around and say "the father was on camera, I dont believe his statements!"

hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by vkey08
reply to post by swansong19

 

It's anger not grief.. Anger that people in the stores and malls around here have to even be entertaining discussion on this sort of thing.. Kind of hard to point you to quotes online when most of this is the stuff we are all just hearing waiting to pay for food, or getting gas...

But that must mean it's not true in your eyes .... People can't live in an area and hear their neighbors talking without having to have them write it out for the almighty ATS army of experts to rip apart... I'm sick of it, I am sick to death of all the accusations of actors and no-one really dying, and claims of cover up...

Its pretty funny. Out of one side of their mouths these people are screaming "THE MEDIA CANT BE TRUSTED", and out of the other they are saying "I dont believe these things unless they are stated publicly!"

Great example is the silly "i saw no bodies, therefore I dont believe they exist". Then they turn around and say "the father was on camera, I dont believe his statements!"

hypocrisy knows no bounds.

In light of the fact that almost all...if not all...the threads regarding Sandy Hook have been closed...I would please ask that we not allow ourselves to turn this into character attacks and insults.

It most surely can be difficult to let comments like the above stand without response and simply discuss the available details...but I would ask that we please try.

Thank you.

Why are we still talking about #3?

As far as I can tell, magikmaster was able to demonstrate that Gene Rosen was a local representative on the cable advisory council, as well as a (non-professional) "actor". That's as far as anyone got with the "actor" theory.

Robbie Parker is Robbie Parker -- he may have acted weird on camera, but the closest anyone came to "proving" he was an actor was claiming that he was really Tony Hawk! Absurd!

Not to mention that magikmaster and the other "no bodies" pushers took a Newtown town council website stating that Gene Rosen was a member of the local cable advisory committee, and tried to use that to prove that he was CEO of a major cable company, a professional actor, and a CIA plant.

The leaps of imagination are astounding.

reply to post by swansong19


While I do agree with you that we need to do out best to keep this civil,pointing out the hypocrisy is important. We have people screaming that the MSM is in on it, or is manipulating us, and then they turn around and say they dont believe anybody died because they didnt see the dead kids on TV.

It is a valid point showing how people are picking and choosing what they want to try and 'prove' a point.

And, again, i would like to say, that if anyone can bring to this thread a fact based, valid rebuttal to any of the things I posted, I will gladly address them. So far the only rebuttals have been "well thats your opinion", or "Its still up for discussion", while bringing absolutely NOTHING to the table to refute it.

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by swansong19

 

While I do agree with you that we need to do out best to keep this civil,pointing out the hypocrisy is important. We have people screaming that the MSM is in on it, or is manipulating us, and then they turn around and say they dont believe anybody died because they didnt see the dead kids on TV.

It is a valid point showing how people are picking and choosing what they want to try and 'prove' a point.

If it's of any matter to you...I don't think MSM had anything to do with it. If there was anything to be "in on", I don't think they were.

Nor do I think the people of Newtown were "in on" it. From the interviews I've seen at the scene the folks seem genuinely confused as to the level of attention....if I may be allowed to perceive and examine body language

reply to post by MidnightTide


I think these theories should be allowed (I know sometimes when it gets crazy ATS staff blocks discussion), but I agree. I saw some people posting names and facebooks of people they were taking large leaps to connect to a theory of their own and I wasn't a huge fan of that. You could potentially turn some crazy people on to an innocent persons private information.

That said, I hope this isn't all being brought up because it seems like the right thing to do. Like many gun stores taking their guns off the shelves, it really looks like people are walking on eggshells. If we change our lives, give up rights to speech or arms, then essentially these nutty spree killers are winning one over on us, regardless of whether or not that was their intention.

I personally think there are some anomalies in this case, but I don't think it was some kind of insane conspiracy involving simulated victims or a town full of cia plants lol. I haven't discounted the possibility of a second attacker though, and won't until the officials set down and address inconsistencies.

Look at the batman map overlayed with Sandy Hook CT:

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by Illuminated1126
Look at the batman map overlayed with Sandy Hook CT:

www.youtube.com...

discussed to death. There is a thread about just that, if you'dlike to discuss it.

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by Illuminated1126
Look at the batman map overlayed with Sandy Hook CT:

www.youtube.com...

discussed to death. There is a thread about just that, if you'dlike to discuss it.

scooz

Originally posted by starviego

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.]

Absolutely, the case Imo against Adam is weak , it's amazing how many people have tried and convicted him on so little shakey (at best) evidence. (What if he and his mom were both victim's?) Doesn't he deserve the same consideration, until a reasonably credible story can be pieced together. I think it's very natural people deeply question a horrendous tragedy like this. What IF some of the alleged shooters escaped? It seems too early to tell. The press has done no favors constantly changing the story and failing to ask the right questions?

My thread on the subject was not closed. This may be an oversight which should be addressed. In the end, I concluded that conclusive evidence was not present, although my original suspicion that the truth has been hijacked for political expediency has not changed. If Iin any way contributed to this dilemma I apologize and offer myself for appropriate punishment.

My life, since my mid twenties (when dinosaurs roamed the earth), has been devoted to both finding truth when it was available, and writing about it when I could verify it. The most damnable lie is the one wrapped around a core of truth, and I still suspect that this is the case.

However, as they say, the truth will out. I will self cesure, here at least.

reply to post by Illuminated1126

Absolutely, the case Imo against Adam is weak , it's amazing how many people have tried and convicted him on so little shakey (at best) evidence.

I question your common sense. He is dead true with guns from his mother and you call it shaky. Just wow honestly you do not show much talent for figuring out fairly obvious things. You must be horrible at even board games like clue.

I suggest you give up on conspiracy theories you seem inept in figuring out the simplest things

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.

reply to post by RedBird


I also saw some Tony Hawk "comparison" photos with a guy that didn't look anything like Tony Hawk. Ridiculous that anyone should be wasting their time sifting through garbage like that to get at the truth.

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!

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.

You do understand that the blanket letter was the best way to get the message out?

It wasn’t a big deal IMO.

It was because some people decided to post others personal information and make some very despicable accusations which is very unbecoming of this site.



I like that this site has a higher standard than others but lately people have been posting things based on the equivalent of their spidey sense was tingling.

Every good conspiracy has an ounce of truth but should be taken with a grain of salt.

Unfortunately most of these theory’s lack even a shred of supporting evidence and are so offensive they can only be considered trash.

Theorists should have a higher standard otherwise it only hurts the reputation of all theorists across the board. When the time comes and a solid conspiracy is shown because of the actions of some it will be just that much harder for it to be considered credible.

Ideally people will self-censor themselves but there are a lot of new accounts which I know a few are teenagers and they do not show restraint and have been in some cases have shown poor taste to say the least.