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.
Mass Murder "Investigators:" What's it to you?
page: 2share:
FlyersFan
Can you imagine armchair detectives on the internet playing forensic investigators with pictures of dead children.
You bring this up in EVERY thread related to Sandy Hook. No one is asking for that.
ShillBill
You seem adament to make it look llike people are only interested because children were allegedly murdered.
'Allegedly' ??? See that right there is why conspiracy theorists get a bad reputation. There were two dozen funerals. The list of the dead and their ages has been published. The people were real. Their graves are real. There is nothing 'alleged' about their being murdered.
The notion is ridiculous and only devised to make the CT's look bad, it is pathetic.
Some advice - Don't go tossing around words like 'notion' and 'ridiculous' and 'pathetic' ...
Your 'allegedly murdered' statement is all that, and more.
Taggart
You bring this up in EVERY thread related to Sandy Hook. No one is asking for that.
YES they are. Fortunately those people get their posts deleted by the moderators.
And that's exactly what would be in the FULL INVESTIGATION information that people
are whining about. They have no need to have any of that stuff.
reply to post by Taggart
AHEM! Please read the title and OP of this thread. IT IS NOT ABOUT ANY SPECIFIC MASS MURDER!
You bring this up in EVERY thread related to Sandy Hook. No one is asking for that.
AHEM! Please read the title and OP of this thread. IT IS NOT ABOUT ANY SPECIFIC MASS MURDER!
reply to post by DJW001
It doesn't, you are talking nonsense. Was I in any way involved in a major incident that was covered by the media which has many loose ends. I don't think so. Dumb argument.
Way to take my response to another poster out of context.
We can only judge if something is a conspiracy if we ae able to talk about it. Some cases may have more aspects to them that would make a sane unbiased and honest person doubt them, then other cases.
Again, everybody is free to think and investigate what they want.
Hmmm, the statement made by the poster that post was directed at? A little hint, it was not you......
Very well; let's investigate you! I demand to know everything about your police record, your sexual history, your credit rating everything! I'm sure if we look hard enough, we can find a conspiracy in there somewhere.... How does that shoe fit?
It doesn't, you are talking nonsense. Was I in any way involved in a major incident that was covered by the media which has many loose ends. I don't think so. Dumb argument.
Leave what to the professionals?
Way to take my response to another poster out of context.
Excellent question! But first, you need to explain what you mean by "conspiracy." Is everything a conspiracy? Why choose to investigate one event rather than another? That's one of the fundamental questions I am posing and you are refusing to answer.
We can only judge if something is a conspiracy if we ae able to talk about it. Some cases may have more aspects to them that would make a sane unbiased and honest person doubt them, then other cases.
Again, everybody is free to think and investigate what they want.
Which statements are you referring to?
Hmmm, the statement made by the poster that post was directed at? A little hint, it was not you......
Since I did finally post on a Sandy Hook thread, I'll just say that the same mentality of people denying the moon landings was at work at ATS since
this started. I'm not criticizing the interest in the factual trail of evidence (a new thread questions how DNA was on two guns when, on first
glance, it had no way to be there) but when posters say Sandy Hook didn't happen and that it was all actors (again, Moon landing deniers premise)
they seem to be missing a gene or two somewhere.
reply to post by DJW001
No, I'd rather stay on this level, you figure it out.
Pardon my stupidity; please answer in words I can understand.
No, I'd rather stay on this level, you figure it out.
reply to post by ShillBill
Would it make a difference if he were shot in the head? That's my pointt.
What are you talking about? This is strictly hypothetical. You have no reason to believe that there is any conspiracy. As hypothetical Governor, I have explained why I am not divulging certain details of a hypothetical mass murder. All you have to do is persuade me that releasing them is in the public interest. Get it?
Well?
I'm not the one making CTs look bad. You have a golden opportunity to justify your activity and you are unable to do so.
But how did you know he was shot in the gut?
Would it make a difference if he were shot in the head? That's my pointt.
There are lots of potential conspiracies being discussed that don't directly involve murder, this one happens to do, it is being singled out because it doesn't add up.
What are you talking about? This is strictly hypothetical. You have no reason to believe that there is any conspiracy. As hypothetical Governor, I have explained why I am not divulging certain details of a hypothetical mass murder. All you have to do is persuade me that releasing them is in the public interest. Get it?
You seem adament to make it look llike people are only interested because children were allegedly murdered.
Well?
The notion is ridiculous and only devised to make the CT's look bad, it is pathetic.
I'm not the one making CTs look bad. You have a golden opportunity to justify your activity and you are unable to do so.
DJW001
7. Psychological studies suggest that mass murderers find inspiration from previous atrocities. It is my opinion that giving them as little publicity as possible is sound and wise policy.
NY Daily News - Newtown Shooter Obsessed with Columbine
Also at the link - some photos from the crime and of Lanza.
reply to post by ShillBill
But then you say:
So, which is it? Why can't I investigate you?
It doesn't, you are talking nonsense. Was I in any way involved in a major incident that was covered by the media which has many loose ends. I don't think so. Dumb argument.
But then you say:
Again, everybody is free to think and investigate what they want.
So, which is it? Why can't I investigate you?
reply to post by FlyersFan
Yes, allegedly. My stance was already clear so I'm not sure why you act all offended by the word.
Probably for some added drama.
Nothing you mention actually proves these people were murdered, and murdered by Lanza, no matter how many times you repeat these talking points.
'Allegedly' ??? See that right there is why conspiracy theorists get a bad reputation. There were two dozen funerals. The list of the dead and their ages has been published. The people were real. Their graves are real. There is nothing 'alleged' about their being murdered.
Yes, allegedly. My stance was already clear so I'm not sure why you act all offended by the word.
Probably for some added drama.
Nothing you mention actually proves these people were murdered, and murdered by Lanza, no matter how many times you repeat these talking points.
reply to post by DJW001
I never said you couldn't. I said your argument was dumb and not comparable to this case.
So, which is it? Why can't I investigate you?
I never said you couldn't. I said your argument was dumb and not comparable to this case.
reply to post by DJW001
How did you know he was shot in the gut?
I obviously have, and there obviously are.
I don't even have to justify anything, even though I did give my reasons in my first post in this thread.
Would it make a difference if he were shot in the head? That's my pointt.
How did you know he was shot in the gut?
What are you talking about? This is strictly hypothetical. You have no reason to believe that there is any conspiracy.
I obviously have, and there obviously are.
I'm not the one making CTs look bad. You have a golden opportunity to justify your activity and you are unable to do so.
I don't even have to justify anything, even though I did give my reasons in my first post in this thread.
reply to post by ShillBill
Please do not derail this thread by references to any specific mass murder. Every single mass murder gets picked to pieces on these boards. This thread is an attempt to investigate why. Why must every shooting be treated as a conspiracy? Why do some people feel that they have a right to invade other people's privacy to satisfy their own curiosity?
Please do not derail this thread by references to any specific mass murder. Every single mass murder gets picked to pieces on these boards. This thread is an attempt to investigate why. Why must every shooting be treated as a conspiracy? Why do some people feel that they have a right to invade other people's privacy to satisfy their own curiosity?
DJW001
4. Many witnesses will testify only on the promise of confidentiality. (That one is guaranteed by the Constitution!)
6. Crime scene photographs can be traumatizing, even to those not directly involved, and certainly anguishing to survivors. They should only be released on a "need to know" basis, such as in the case of a legal proceeding.
Columbine crime photos and witness list withheld from public
But in ordering the documents released, Jefferson County District Judge Brooke Jackson is withholding from public disclosure crime-scene photos, medical records and autopsy reports.
Names of targeted students, some witness names and how the killers' bombs were made and their effectiveness also will be blacked out.
The crime scene photos were withheld from the pubic in the Aurora Colorado shooting as well.
There is no need for the public to see dead teenagers in the Columbine library and no need to see all the dead people in the theatre. None of us have forensic science degrees and wanting to see them is just ghoulish and disrespectful to the victims.
reply to post by ShillBill
So what aspect of this hypothetical mass murder, the details of which have never been specified, leads you to believe that there is some sort of conspiracy involved?
I obviously have, and there obviously are.
So what aspect of this hypothetical mass murder, the details of which have never been specified, leads you to believe that there is some sort of conspiracy involved?
reply to post by DJW001
Good thread DJW001.
Judging by Shillbills join date, his name may give a clue to his intention. Just by his ridiculous rhetoric so far, the original premise has been derailed. I wouldn't be surprised by malicious intent.
Back to the subject at hand...I feel the that the MSM sees a need to keep their viewers scared and fearful. Hence the tossed about term, mass murder. I abhor this combination of terms, and find the use of it very distracting to many stories. Beyond people thinking they need to report it more, and keep the fearmongering going full steam ahead. I'm not confirming or denying any reports or conclusions, but I am saying that we should try not to further perpetuate the stories of tragedies.
Conspiracies will happen every time we see something out of the norm. Especially when it comes to coverups, inaccurate reports and just bad journalism. But what can we do? Come up with our own conclusions based on the facts? What if the facts presented are merely to confuse and distract an entire nation? As in the case of the horrendous Warren Commission? (Which in my personal opinion found to be chock full of lies, should have been the end of a few dozen mens careers itself)
This is why we question everything.
Well, at least I do.
Good thread DJW001.
Judging by Shillbills join date, his name may give a clue to his intention. Just by his ridiculous rhetoric so far, the original premise has been derailed. I wouldn't be surprised by malicious intent.
Back to the subject at hand...I feel the that the MSM sees a need to keep their viewers scared and fearful. Hence the tossed about term, mass murder. I abhor this combination of terms, and find the use of it very distracting to many stories. Beyond people thinking they need to report it more, and keep the fearmongering going full steam ahead. I'm not confirming or denying any reports or conclusions, but I am saying that we should try not to further perpetuate the stories of tragedies.
Conspiracies will happen every time we see something out of the norm. Especially when it comes to coverups, inaccurate reports and just bad journalism. But what can we do? Come up with our own conclusions based on the facts? What if the facts presented are merely to confuse and distract an entire nation? As in the case of the horrendous Warren Commission? (Which in my personal opinion found to be chock full of lies, should have been the end of a few dozen mens careers itself)
This is why we question everything.
Well, at least I do.
edit on 26-11-2013 by havok because: (no reason given)
reply to post by DJW001
What are you talking about? What reference?
There are shootings involving multiple victims every day. They don't all get attention. I can't talk for everybody but for me it is when too many things don't add up when I start to wonder. This is a conspiracy site right?
Because they have the right? There is no law that says you can't discuss other people on the internet. There are defamation and libel laws but each individual case has to be taken to court and won for it to be an offence.
Furthermore, you are again trying to make it look like people are scumbags for investigating others, when it is obviously just a natural process and response to a big shady case like SH.
Except from the fact that details have never been specified you mean?
You know damn well what all the points are.
Please do not derail this thread by references to any specific mass murder.
What are you talking about? What reference?
Why must every shooting be treated as a conspiracy?
There are shootings involving multiple victims every day. They don't all get attention. I can't talk for everybody but for me it is when too many things don't add up when I start to wonder. This is a conspiracy site right?
Why do some people feel that they have a right to invade other people's privacy to satisfy their own curiosity?
Because they have the right? There is no law that says you can't discuss other people on the internet. There are defamation and libel laws but each individual case has to be taken to court and won for it to be an offence.
Furthermore, you are again trying to make it look like people are scumbags for investigating others, when it is obviously just a natural process and response to a big shady case like SH.
So what aspect of this hypothetical mass murder, the details of which have never been specified, leads you to believe that there is some sort of conspiracy involved?
Except from the fact that details have never been specified you mean?
You know damn well what all the points are.
edit on 26-11-2013 by ShillBill because: removed one question because I misread.
reply to post by havok
But when I do it, or try to explain why I or we do it, I am derailing the thread and I have a malicious agenda?
Whatever.
This is why we question everything. Well, at least I do.
But when I do it, or try to explain why I or we do it, I am derailing the thread and I have a malicious agenda?
Whatever.
new topics
-
Those Drones over NJ and elsewhere
Aliens and UFOs: 4 hours ago -
South Korean coup was an attempt to start WW3
World War Three: 4 hours ago -
Archer aviation and the NJ drones
Aircraft Projects: 4 hours ago
top topics
-
Only two Navy destroyers currently operational as fleet size hits record low
Military Projects: 15 hours ago, 12 flags -
Those Drones over NJ and elsewhere
Aliens and UFOs: 4 hours ago, 6 flags -
South Korean coup was an attempt to start WW3
World War Three: 4 hours ago, 5 flags -
Archer aviation and the NJ drones
Aircraft Projects: 4 hours ago, 4 flags
active topics
-
One out of every 20 Canadians Dies by Euthanasia
Medical Issues & Conspiracies • 26 • : Xtrozero -
Something better
Dissecting Disinformation • 27 • : chr0naut -
Could rampant land speculation have caused the Civil War?
History • 32 • : Solvedit -
They Know
Aliens and UFOs • 92 • : CarlLaFong -
Only two Navy destroyers currently operational as fleet size hits record low
Military Projects • 21 • : UpIsNowDown2 -
Stalker 2 - Review from a Veteran
Video Games • 3 • : gortex -
More Bad News for Labour and Rachel Reeves Stole Christmas from Working Families
Regional Politics • 6 • : covent -
-@TH3WH17ERABB17- -Q- ---TIME TO SHOW THE WORLD--- -Part- --44--
Dissecting Disinformation • 3700 • : CarlLaFong -
Those Drones over NJ and elsewhere
Aliens and UFOs • 7 • : xuenchen -
Post A Funny (T&C Friendly) Pic Part IV: The LOL awakens!
General Chit Chat • 7909 • : baddmove