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 masta12d
. "Proof or it didn't happen".
Could it just be that there really are no crime scene photographs on file that depict injured, dead, and/or mutilated bodies of little children: not to mention the bullet riddled crime scene photographs? Could this just be a secretly conjured "legislative" ruse designed to "legally" cover-up those very facts.
Not only do they want to do this (withhold information) only in the case of Sandy Hook - but across the board. This is an obviously unconstitutional 'act' intended to subvert the public interest - in effect, the publics legal rights to crime scene and investigatory information - either on site or through the FOIA process of seeking information to which the American people are entitled.
This is the part that I find most troubling, but please read the entire article - it is ominously enlightening.
As envisioned by Kane, the bill wouldn't be limited to the Newtown file.
"We are seeking legislation to protect crime scene photographs protecting victims and certain 911 tapes,"
Originally posted by FlyersFan
Originally posted by masta12d
. "Proof or it didn't happen".
:shk: the funerals of the dead children and the police reports that were given to the press are enough 'proof' that the children were massacred in a bloodbath . No one needs to see the photos of dead children to get it through their thick skulls that the massacre did in fact happen. Even if the photos were relased to the general public, people like you would just claim 'photoshop' or something.
edit on 5/23/2013 by FlyersFan because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Thunderheart
reply to post by CasaVigilante
Just wondering if you tried the search function before you made your thread?
Originally posted by FlyersFan
Even if the photos were relased to the general public, people like you would just claim 'photoshop' or something.
A straw man or straw person, also known in the UK as an Aunt Sally,[1][2] is a type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[3] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and to refute it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.[3][4] This technique has been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly in arguments about highly charged, emotional issues.
Originally posted by Thunderheart
The only reason for this new law is to keep cover ups covered up.
Originally posted by Thunderheart
reply to post by CasaVigilante
Because I haven't had any luck with that search engine, I now google the thread title to see if anything has been posted, it seems that ATS threads pop up in the first few returns of a search on google.
Yes that's right ATS, google finds threads here better than your internal search engine. sad but true.
Originally posted by Thunderheart
Please try to keep up,
The staffs of the state's top prosecutor and the governor's office have been working in secret with General Assembly leaders on legislation to withhold records related to the police investigation into the Dec. 14 Newtown elementary school massacre — including victims' photos, tapes of 911 calls, and possibly more.
Originally posted by FlyersFan
No. What I said isn't even close to being a 'straw man'.
Nice try at deflection. But failure. I did NOT take it to an extreme absurdity.
People like him would just claim the photos were photoshopped.
It happens all the time here. So ... no absurdity .. no 'straw man'.
Originally posted by neo96
Dont think there needs to be a 'law' for this it's just common sense.
Also agree that crime scene photos should not be released.edit on 23-5-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)