The Smoking Gun That THEY WANT YOU TO KEEP! The REAL Story.

page: 8
175
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


You're kidding me----we had investigators go through his house and found NO EVIDENCE that he was on medication or even had a mental disorder, but now the onus is on ME or the people stating the facts that there's no evidence he was medicated to prove he WASN'T medicated? Seriously? So you're going to believe the news media's reports that he was nuts and medicated over the POLICE who have stated there was no evidence of this? Talk about cherry-picking and witch hunts with no evidential basis.




posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by NightGypsy
 


I will happily go off and do the research. I highly doubt you, proverbial you, are going to be able to link the two together in any mathematically significant manner though.

T



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by 00nunya00
 


The purpose of this thread is to divert attention away from the real conspiracy behind the event.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by 00nunya00
 


Because the police haven't confirmed or denied anything officially and all there is to go on is an unverified 'source' that could be anyone. The article proves nothing.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by LarryLove
reply to post by 00nunya00
 


Because the police haven't confirmed or denied anything officially and all there is to go on is an unverified 'source' that could be anyone. The article proves nothing.


Yeah, well, that's the problem----you have nothing but articles to prove he *was* on medication. Got any police interviews saying he was on meds?



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by LarryLove
reply to post by 00nunya00
 


Because the police haven't confirmed or denied anything officially and all there is to go on is an unverified 'source' that could be anyone. The article proves nothing.


Then where is the proof that he WAS on drugs?

You must know that this is not how it works buddy.

So you are doing this on purpose.

Why?



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by SPayne
 


This, and this. There are many, many more options I could use, but since you seem to have a predisposition, I figured I'd stick with the MSM versions - and avoid any sources that would just be dismissed outright.

Lanza's uncle told the press that the shooter was on Fanapt at some point - and there is indication this Lanza's mother was pushing towards an involuntary commitment for her son:


Nancy Lanza, the mother of the Sandy Hook shooter, was in the process of having her son committed to a psychiatric facility when he went on the mass shooting spree, a lifelong family acquaintance told Fox News.

A senior law enforcement official also confirmed that 20-year-old Lanza's anger over his mother's plan is being investigated as a possible motive for the Newtown shooting.

Source

IF the shooter was not currently on a prescription, all the evidence points to the fact that he recently was taking at least one. As my OP sources show, the withdrawal period from these medications is also a period when psychotic behavior can arise. The fact that his mother was seeking commitment is telling as well.

I find it funny that the OP clearly demonstrates that, even if we ignore and eliminate THIS shooting from the equation, there is still a pattern. Further that I am not being specious here. I sourced hard facts that PROVE these medications can cause psychotic breaks and violent behaviors. And yet it seems that a few people simply want to argue for the sake of argument?



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


All of the ARTICLE-BASED evidence, to you, points to the conclusion you've already reached. The POLICE-BASED evidence, to the rest of the world, points to the fact that he was NOT on medication, especially if his mother was taking vacations and leaving him home alone for a week right before the murders.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:12 PM
link   
Exactly, in the past twenty years prescriptions for psychiatric drugs have gone up 400%, 1 in 10 Americans are currently take psychiatric drugs. Studies also show that there is a link between those drugs and aggression and suicide. Also well known that we do not know all the interactions of said drugs, and how those drugs effects change varying on stimuli per individual (that is one drug could work while an individual is at one age while years later the drug could have a different result)

Also, it is well known that a persons environment can help develop a persons personality while growing up. What I have noticed the last few decades is that a lot of parents don't raise their children anymore. Kids sit in front of the television, computer and games for hours on end - and you wonder why some people aren't exactly socially well adjusted individuals.

Society to me is broken, where people care more about getting the latest electronic toy. Until these issues are addressed, ban whatever you want, you are still going to see the mass types of violence.

(and btw, the UK is trying to ban large kitchen knives now)



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by 00nunya00
 


The police aren't releasing ANY aspects of their investigation. Fox news jumped the shark. What part of this is hard to grasp?



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by 00nunya00
 


and I guess this brings up another issue that some people won't like to hear:

Some people really don't have "what it takes" to have children, some people shouldn't have kids.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 

That makes a lot of sense. I bet she threatened him like that all the time, not just before the shooting. I bet she always belittled and demeaned him to the bursting point.

The straw.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide

This only means that they found no prescription bottles in the home. But without toxicology and medical records, making a flat statement that he was not on medication is simply assumption and, IMO, proof that Fox is also getting a bit of kickback from pharma.


That ALL the major media outlets get kickbacks from Big Pharma would not surprise me at all.

I've read that Big Pharma is actually richer & more powerful than the Oil Industry.

Considering Adam Lanza's history, I would be shocked to find out he was NOT on prescribed psychotropic medication of some type.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by 00nunya00
 


Your statement is not precise. The article (by FOX News) states they just have not found the drugs, it does NOT say he did not take drugs. Quote (bold added by me):

Authorities armed with search warrants are still working to obtain the 20-year-old man's medical records, according to the report. Lanza's parents told friends and divorce mediators that their son had Asperger's syndrome, a form of high-functioning autism, but it was unclear if he had ever been formally diagnosed.

And would you honestly believe that someone with Asperger's is not heavily pushed to take SSRIs? It is a recommended treatment according to the Mayo Clinic:
A treatment for Asperger's is SSRIs!

It should not be interpreted as a "witch hunt for people on medication". The hunt is for the pharma corps and the goal is establishing real help for people with mental problems and protecting them from dangerous pseudo science that has disastrous results.


Originally posted by 00nunya00
There's a little problem with your thread:

Lanza WAS NOT on medication before the murders.

So I'm as offended by this easily-debunked witch hunt for people on medication, or the people who make them, as other people are offended by the *other* threads.
<snip>
edit on 26-12-2012 by SacredLore because: (no reason given)
edit on 26-12-2012 by SacredLore because: (no reason given)
edit on 26-12-2012 by SacredLore because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by 00nunya00
 


There is no police-based evidence to support your assertion and I have never claimed to know for sure his mental condition was to blame, but believe that is likely. Making an opinion here and unlike some, not laying unsubstantiated claims of fact.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


No you claimed that,




Having said that? Now it seems people are trying to find a scapegoat to sacrifice - or are personalizing these events into some belief that this is all a false flag to take away the Second Amendment. Meanwhile we seem to be ignoring the HUGE elephant in the room with us.


You specifically mention the shooting and the False Flag theory which is completely viable, in a manner that makes it look as if there is nothing of substance there and then you go on to say this,




There is a special interest group behind it all, IMO. But it's not anyone with a direct desire to take away any assault weapons. This special interest is one of the largest lobbies in Washington, has power beyond any and all rational understanding, and they dictate their own terms, to a large degree, regarding almost every aspect of their own interests.


You are implying that this group is behind the shooting, loosely based on the assumption that the alleged shooter was on meds.

Btw, this is a qoute from your own link,


UPDATE: Since the publishing of this article, New York Daily News has removed the reference, the originator of the quote from Lanza's "uncle," because they believed him to be an "imposter." Read more: www.businessinsider.com...



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by 00nunya00
 


The police aren't releasing ANY aspects of their investigation. Fox news jumped the shark. What part of this is hard to grasp?



So the venues reporting that he WAS on drugs didn't jump the gun?

The uncle saying he was on meds was an imposter, this was in your own link.




This only means that they found no prescription bottles in the home. But without toxicology and medical records, making a flat statement that he was not on medication is simply assumption and,


So how can you say that he was on meds without those same toxicology and medical records. Or does it not work like that when it doesn't fit your agenda?



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by 00nunya00
reply to post by Hefficide
 


You're kidding me----we had investigators go through his house and found NO EVIDENCE that he was on medication or even had a mental disorder, but now the onus is on ME or the people stating the facts that there's no evidence he was medicated to prove he WASN'T medicated? Seriously? So you're going to believe the news media's reports that he was nuts and medicated over the POLICE who have stated there was no evidence of this? Talk about cherry-picking and witch hunts with no evidential basis.


You can rant about the OP's lack of proof that Adam Lanza was on medication if you want to, but, as previously stated, a toxicology report is the only thing that will clarify this point. So, no....you have no basis to make a claim that he was definitely NOT taking prescription meds, either. You are only basing your claim on the fact no prescription bottles were found. It's not enough.

And then there's this.....

www.foxnews.com...


The gunman who slaughtered 20 children and six adults at a Connecticut elementary school may have snapped because his mother was planning to commit him to a psychiatric facility, according to a lifelong resident of the area who was familiar with the killer’s family and several of the victims’ families.



Flashman was told Nancy Lanza had begun filing paperwork to get conservatorship over her troubled son, but that could not be confirmed because a court official told FoxNews.com such records are sealed. The move would have been necessary for her to gain the legal right to commit an adult to a hospital or psychiatric facility against his will. A competency hearing had not yet been held.



After working in the legal field for many years and handling conservatorship cases in a public defender's office, I have to say that I never once came across a case where someone who was the subject of a mental health conservatorship wasn't prescribed some sort of psychiatric medication. As stated in my link, Lanza's mental health records are sealed and this is going to slow the public's ability to be informed of his true condition and medication use, if any.

My next point would be that as these shooting massacres pile up, people are becoming more illuminated to the fact that the shooters share an unpleasant common demoninator, which is outlined for us here in this thread. Now that people are becoming informed of this fact, the media is going to try like hell to conceal it because, as most of us agree, the media is assisting the government in this propaganda campaign designed to manipulate Americans into giving up gun rights. Publicizing or sensationalizing the facts about prescription medication use will distract from their goal and cause the public to focus attention on Big Pharma...which is a no-no...because Big Pharma is King of the World.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:39 PM
link   
I hardly call that a smoking gun that these drugs are directly responsible for the shooting sprees that have taken place. Do you have the proof for any of these cases that the suspects / guilty parties were on the drugs you mention? Do you know how long? The dosage? No? If not, you are guessing. And guessing isn't a "smoking gun."

Have you also done any sort of research to see if the evil big pharma have created medication that have actually reduced shootings / violent crimes? If such drugs did not exist, would there simply have been other shootings?

We love blaming a scapegoat. The reality of the situation is we have ourselves to blame. As modern day humans, we care a lot less about "that other person," and a whole lot more about ourselves. Even if that other person is in your family. How many shootings could have been prevented if irresponsible parents would have control over their children? If they knew what they were up to? If as adults, someone tried to get help.. they almost pleaded for it, but were ignored by people who just don't care... they don't want to be involved?

That's the age we live in though. Even big pharma is there because YOU the people demanded it. If they didn't have customers, they would not be in business. It's always some else's fault. The government, big pharma, the credit card companies - you name it, no one wants to take blame for what they want, for their selfishness, for their lack of caring. And when it comes back to bite them, they scream and holler, asking.. why didn't anyone do something?

Not saying big pharma is innocent by a long shot. No more than banks, no more than drug dealers. But to squarely blame someone else for these sorts of things is ridiculous. We are living in the age of not taking responsibilities for ones own actions.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by MisterMaster
 


Scary...I've been thinking this exact same thing. The gun control debate is a straw man set up in order for us to accept less freedom in exchange for more security (something the majority of Americans have no problem with). The ONE THING that people from both sides of the debate might agree on is to find ways to search people's personal belongings at certain venues (I had my purse searched when I went to see Dark Knight Rises after the movie theater massacre! ), and to make it easier, as you said, to intrusively investigate someone who is a POSSIBLE threat.

Case in point, 9/11. People will be more than willing to do support such a thing.





new topics
top topics
 
175
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join