There is fuckery afoot.

Powerful.

Train by day...

podcast by night.all day

The. Joe. Rogan. Experience.

Meow.

ya silly bitch

How dare you??

Brian....... God damn it.

What most people don't understand is.....

...(♫kiss me song playing in the background♫ )...

...that Alpha Brian is not just supplements, it's a way of life.

BLUE CHEESE OR GO FUCKYASELVES

Is anyone interested in these answers to the questions posed in the video? At the very least, it can help you prune down your questions for a second round of debunking.

There is a huge list of questions NOT included in that video that need to be answered. There is also absolutely no real way to go about proving any of the debunking to be correct independently. The government has a history of killing, sponsoring terror, running guns and killing people all over the world. I am no too terribly trusting of anything they do. I certainly want to believe they wouldn't do this but the truth is we will never know, and I wouldn't put it past them. Aurora Colorado certainly seems strange. I think that one was probably staged as well as Sikh temple shooting. Saying that this one couldn't have been is like saying the government blew up building 7 but had nothing to do with the other 2 towers. I remain skeptical of both sides when it comes to Sandy Hook.

That's the problem with conspiracy theorists. You accept questions as evidence and evidence as - not evidence.

I can't claim Obama is from Kenya and say well...his father is from kenya. Why isn't he in Kenya? Why wouldn't he want to be in Kenya? Isn't kenya a nice place? If you rearrange the letters in Kenya you get "Yekan" sounds like "Obama is a kenyan" doesn't it?

Questions are not proof. "strange" or "interesting" things are not evidence.

You have no evidence and when people provide the answers for your questions you brush it off as not contradicting the claims you make based on nothing BUT questions. Questions are not evidence.

The government can suck. The government has been involved in terrible things. BUT you have no evidence which could suggest this is anything except a terrible tragedy. You are content to make huge assumptions and baseless conclusions and then attack the victims.

isnt questioning the only way to find truth, Isn't the big deal about the socratic method.

Questions are good. Questions based on ignorance, shaped to incite fear and used as a form of accusation are not good.

When someone asks - Why does he look nervous, why is he smiling, why is he laughing, why isn't he sad!?

You are suggesting the person is lying. When another person comes along and gives a perfectly acceptable answer for your questions- e.g a psychiatrist states it's a perfectly normal reaction to this form of trauma. People start saying SHILL!!!!!!!!!! SHILL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! SHILL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Most conspiracy theorists don't want truth. They want to be afraid. They want to demonize the government and other people in any way possible. If you want to actually do something then you should be working with organizations to fight government corruption. Not posting on your blog about how the NWO is about to begin.

Anyone who is paying attention knows Obama is not from Kenya. It sounds as though for you nothing short of a smoking gun confession is going to convince you of anything. The government is definitely so trustworthy and we should just believe everything that they say unless somebody confesses otherwise. All of the things are nothing but circumstantial evidence and enough of that can make somebody very suspicious of what may be going on. That's not to say that, I know what's going on this is what happened. That's to say that I don't know what happened I want to know what happened and something stinks. We have no proof other than that to know that something stinks, it doesn't seem right, and the most untrustworthy group in the history of the world is the government, so it stands to reason we should be very skeptical. You try to discredit people by calling anybody that questions the official narrative in whatever situation it may be a conspiracy theorist. What I am in search for is the truth, whether it leads the direction I wanted to or not. In this case I am very partial toward it not being a government conspiracy. That would be far more terrifying than anything else. I just want to know what's going on in the world and that shouldn't be something that offends people.

Here the the problem you don't seem to understand. There is no evidence. Nothing you can provide can be define as anything in the same universe as evidence. It is not circumstantial evidence. It is not "kind of" evidence.

It's nothing. The only justification in your mind is paranoia. Everything presented in these conspiracy videos is accusations based on misinformation and ignorance. You are claiming 2+2=5 and therefore we need to be skeptical of the number 4.

Nothing "stinks". A terribly tragedy such as this is not abnormal in the world. Gun violence is not abnormal. People getting upset about guns after a tragedy is normal. The government trying to respond is normal.

I guess the government being involved in something bad is abnormal. No way that we should even consider it.

Conspiracy theorists making up stories for financial gains- nothing abnormal about that.

So you're going to call me a conspiracy theorist, then you say that conspiracy theorists are doing what they do for financial gain. Do you really believe that anyone on here is financially gaining from discussing these issues? In fact they are not. I also am not. I like spending some of my precious time when I'm not working 70 hours a week, when I'm not coaching my kids team or spending time with my family, to try to learn more and make sense of the madness that is planet earth. Meanwhile there is a group of chip on the shoulder, narrow minded people such as yourself that like to call names, talk down to, speak condescendingly to, annoy, and generally derail the conversation wasting all of our time.

People like Alex Jones lead the charge in creating these ridiculous theories. They are the ones profiting from it.

Narrow minded people such as myself are the people considering the facts while people like you waste your time thinking of contrived theories solidified by your own paranoia.

It must suck being you.

Huffington post is speaking on debunking this.

That post makes so many claims that aren't backed up by anything, just like the video it is arguing against. Sure google's publishing date may sometimes be inaccurate, but it is nearly 100% accurate when it comes to publishing dates. Couldn't find a better source but: http://www.labnol.org/internet/search/find-publishing-date-of-web-pages/8410/

Here is a screen shot I took the other day. http://imgur.com/lfTdi sandyhookhoax.com shows up as created the day before the shooting. Don't you see the government conspiracy is a conspiracy to make the conspiracy theorists seem crazy. I BROKE THE CODE!

In reality, you don't want evidence because you take all the questions and accusations from these nutjobs as evidence. They don't offer anything real. They don't offer anything tangiable or solid. They offer accusations and assumptions about how a family is suppose to grieve. What a person is suppose to look like after losing a child. How emergency services is suppose to operate (sever hours after all the victims were evacuated). Were suppose to believe it's much more logical that Emilie parker is alive and it's not her sister who is the same age in the picture (they used a 2 year old photo of emilie for the comparison).

IT's "odd" that sally cox isn't a registered nurse but it's not proof that the school nurse is real when you find "sally D. cox" has been a registered nurse in Connecticut since 1974. It's not weird that the medical examiner is really telling the truth- the accusations that adam's AR-15 wasn't with him are entirely false and a shotgun was in the trunk (it's clear as day in the video) BUT WAIT THE MEDIA HAS FABRICATED THAT VIDEO TO DECEIVE YOU. It's much MORE likely Christopher manfredonia is a secret government agent than a man who works at Sandy Hook elementary school and is a parents one of of the children and the husband of one of the teachers.

The burden of proof is on you and you alone to provide evidence that anything is happening here. Not questions. Not accusations based on misinformation and lies. You need evidence, not everyone else who has gone beyond their necessary obligations and provided overwhelming evidence to the rational world.

The one thing I don't understand abou the whole Facebook thing is what about the comments? Ok, they made the page for an unrelated reasons and then changed it (which is weird but ok), what about the comments on the page asking why it had been created? And what about the comments on Emilie's page (I think, it's early) that express sadness over the loss of their daughter. These are comments on a page, not the page itself, sent before the school was even on lock down.

I agree that it's probably nothing, I just haven't been able to square it away.

Plus, the mock drills thing is weird.

I just can't believe that anyone would think that conspirators would make such an incredibly pointless and stupid mistake. Why have people fake commenting on Facebook at all? It serves absolutely no purpose.

If you can be troubled and find inconsistency with something like this, what does that say about the rest of these apparent inconsistencies?

There was a planned FEMA meeting scheduled 20 minutes from the time of the shooting which helped slow down the response time of first responders.(Added due to popular demand). I went to the emergency services website for CT to investigate this. This class is offered regularly. It was offered on 11/17, 11/27, 12/3, 12/6, 12/14, and 12/17 In fact, digging a little deeper you can see they have had training classes like these for a long time, such as this one way back on 4/2/2012 called Emergency Planning for Schools (2 day course): http://www.ct.gov/demhs/ical/eventDetail_page.asp?date_ID=CACBCCCDCE83CDCACA These tragedies have been happening for awhile, and so has training people to respond to them.

That's not really an answer

An answer to what? Your pointless question about facebook comments? I honestly don't even know what you're talking about. The notion of these mastermind conspirators accidentally writing facebook comments early is so mind-numbingly ridiculous, but please give me precisely what you're referring to. And I'm sure, just like with every other alarming "discovery," it will have a perfectly reasonable explanation.

Did you watch the video? If not, watch it, they talk about it during it. Conspiracy or not, what's the explanation?

I have watched some of the video. It is difficult for me to watch, because of how mind-numbingly stupid the commentary is.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/newtown.asp#uw

Read the last bullet point. It explains how you could get something similar to what you're describing, through google. I imagine that there is a similar explanation for "early" facebook comments.

Think about how incredibly stupid it is to be suspicious about early pages and comments. That would literally be just about the most absurd mistake that conspirators could make. Multiple times? I just...don't understand how this is even worth considering. The people that have to debunk this stuff must be in a constant state of facepalm. To a rational thinker, that video comes off as presumptuous garbage from a person who doesn't understand much about anything, and who lacks critical thinking skills.

Calling it stupid over and over again doesn't actually make your case any stronger. And no, that's not an explanation. If you have no explanation than don't try to explain it. I'm sure there is an explanation out there, I'd just like to know what it is.

I already told you a likely explanation, did you even read? What do you want, a detailed description of how facebook dates work? Email snopes or something, it's obviously something similar to what they said about google. So...fucking...stupid.

I already said it's not an answer. It's a completely different thing and does not in any way involve google.

The dates are imprecise and do not always accurately reflect the date on which the referenced material first appeared. If you want a technical answer from Facebook about why their dates are sometimes erroneous, email their technical support staff. Once they get over their disbelief that someone is so stupid as to think this is evidence of anything but an imperfect website, they might provide you an answer. Although to be honest, your lack of knowledge is not their responsibility, and you have no right to demand specifics about the inner workings of their website. I'm done with you, fuck off already.

I don't remember demanding anything, I asked a question and if you could read you would already know I don't believe Sandy was a conspiracy. There's nothing wrong with asking a question. And btw, the burden of proof is on you. Show me one other Facebook comment that has had an incorrect time. The dates are wrong, if you want to say it's a technical problem of Facebook, prove it or shut up.

The dates are wrong, if you want to say it's a technical problem of Facebook, prove it or shut up.

Typical conspiratard logic. It's not my responsibility to answer your dumbass question in detail. Email Facebook if you're so interested in the technical details. Sick of you miserable, half-witted freaks demanding answers to your misguided questions. Waste of fucking time.

It's an extreme abnormality. It's not wrong to ask questions, don't be pissed at me because you lack answers. Name calling doesn't make you right. Again, you can't answer the question then just keep your mouth shut. "It just is" doesn't work.

It's an extreme abnormality.

No it is not, as illustrated by Google.

It's not wrong to ask questions, don't be pissed at me because you lack answers.

I gave you an answer from Snopes, you refuse to accept it. Why, exactly, is unclear, other than "FACEBOOK ISNT GOOGLE DURRRR, SO I DONT SEE HOW IT CUD BE RELEVANTZ."

Name calling doesn't make you right.

No, what makes me right is common sense. I am aware that websites and algorithms, especially large ones, are inevitably going to have flaws. You seem to think that one should assume that Facebook dates for pages and comments are always correct, and that you can't change the title of a page or edit in other ways without changing the date.

Again, you can't answer the question then just keep your mouth shut. "It just is" doesn't work.

Snopes answered the question, you're just so obstinately stupid that you refuse to acknowledge the fact that there is a similar explanation for Facebook.

There are two possible options. Either there is an explanation for Facebook dates that is likely similar to the Google explanation, or Facebook's date system is infallible and therefore the pages and comments were literally posted before the event happened. If you believe the latter, then you are a fucking moron.

Again, we're not talking about google. That is a completely separate thing. How are you not getting this. The google times is for Facebook pages not comments. They are unrelated in every way. It's not common sense. It's you not knowing.

Wow, I'm shocked at how unbelievably stupid you are. Common sense failure. Have a nice life, you miserable moron.

I'm shocked at how defensive you are because you don't have an answer.

Maybe they are too busy mourning

I like that phrase a lot.

Gripping.

Ha thought the same thing.

http://www.reddit.com/r/skeptic/comments/16lkhq/this_sandy_hook_conspiracy_video_has_been_making/c7xjgzr[1]

Since no one has really taken the time to debunk this here you go:

First off I want to note - the main contributor of information in this video and around this conspiracy is Alex Jones. He is, in my opinion, a paranoid nutjob, as was pretty evident by his CNN interview - seriously skip to 3 minutes in and tell me this guy is sane. (My intent here is not ad hominem, just wanted to give some context as to the presenters of these "facts" and their origins) Now that that's out of the way let's look at the content of the video...

Theory 1: The first thing the video tries to allege is that there is a second shooter. They love to grab early media footage and then use that as "evidence" of their claims, as if the media's first reporting is somehow golden. Odd that conspiracy theorists distrust the media, then turn around and use its raw reporting claims as evidence. Anyway, you can easily google and figure out who the guy in the woods was.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Y6C2YmOLWnM[2]

He is the father of a student there and the athletic director at the highschool. He was on his way to the school to help make gingerbread houses with 1st graders when he heard the shots. He was unarmed, arrested, detained, questioned, and let go. The story of the guy in the woods was a dead end, so the media dropped it. That is the problem with the 24 hour news cycle, they will report any lead they get before sorting out facts. However, this is hardly evidence of a conspiracy.

The video even makes the ridiculous claim that since the guy was sitting in the FRONT of the police car, that he must have some "crazy" credentials. Yeah, what is more likely...that this guy was a concerned father or that he was a man with some "crazy" credentials on a black ops mission to shoot up a school but he just didn't have the skills to properly vacate, and so he ended up getting himself captured by lowly local law enforcement, AND broadcast on national tv, potentially exposing his super secret black op? C'mon.

Theory 2: The gun discrepancy. This can be chalked up to contradictory reporting, which is going to happen when the media competes with itself to be the first one to break any new details. There have already been articles clearing up the discrepancies: http://edition.cnn.com/2012/12/18/us/connecticut-lanza-guns/index.html[3]

Theory 3: The nurse is fake and does not exist. This is completely false, and has been debunked with evidence: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r61PvN4U3x0[4]

Theory 4: The laughing/crying father. This means absolutely nothing. No one can judge how a father copes with the loss of his daughter, and it's offensive that people are criticizing him for it. I have been to several funerals, I have witnessed family members and friends switch in and out of laughter and tears. They think of fond memories of the one they lost, they tell stories, they laugh, and they cry. People grieve in different ways. To me it does not seem right to criticize his reaction here, and it's not evidence of a conspiracy.

Theory 5: Emillie Parker is not dead. This is the most absurd thing I have seen so far in the video. The video alleges not only that the girl is not dead, but that the parents were so stupid they brought out the wrong sister for the photo op. What? Do people honestly believe that? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTaC580hfPo[5] It's a picture of her sister. Obviously. They look alike because, you know, they're sister's. This guy uses the same photoshop trick as the conspiracy video and gets the same effect. Check out their noses in this picture for further evidence: http://i.imgur.com/iSuf4.jpg [6]

Theory 6: One piece of footage of the crime scene does not show many ambulances and shows no children. The author claims this means this was all staged. He goes on to say that only one ambulance was there the whole time and they quickly blocked off all exits. The problem with this is twofold. Firstly, there are several pictures of multiple ambulances (here are a few):

http://imgur.com/hb6kZ,XGWSd#1 [7]

http://www.politico.com/story/2012/12/connecticut-school-shooting-official-says-gunman-killed-85094.html[8]

Secondly, this footage that the videos author is commenting on looks to be taken well after the shooting took place, which easily explains why there aren't a bunch of ambulances around and no one is panicking anymore. More things taken out of context because they fit the authors narrative.

Theory 7: Time stamps on the webpage set up for donations state the page was created before the shootings took place. Google search results do not always accurately reflect the date the content was published. Example) Here is a date restrictive search of sandy hook, listing all articles that appear to be published before the shooting took place. Well shit, according to google this there are articles and videos from these dates talking about the shooting: Jan 14, 2012 , Jun 19, 2012 , Sept 16, 2012 ..well before the shooting took place. Debunked.

Addition: People keep bringing up the facebook page that was made prior to the shooting. The creator of the page said they had made an unrelated page previously, it had no fans in it. After the shootings took place, she renamed the page to be a memorial for one of the victims. This changed the URL, but kept the original creation date of the group. Many claim this is not possible or this is not how facebook works. Here is proof that it is: http://imgur.com/a/U6wWH [9]

Theory 8: There was a planned FEMA meeting scheduled 20 minutes from the time of the shooting which helped slow down the response time of first responders.(Added due to popular demand). I went to the emergency services website for CT to investigate this. This class is offered regularly. It was offered on 11/17, 11/27, 12/3, 12/6, 12/14, and 12/17

In fact, digging a little deeper you can see they have had training classes like these for a long time, such as this one way back on 4/2/2012 called Emergency Planning for Schools (2 day course):

http://www.ct.gov/demhs/ical/eventDetail_page.asp?date_ID=CACBCCCDCE83CDCACA[10]

These tragedies have been happening for awhile, and so has training people to respond to them. Debunked.

Other stuff: The people that made this video clearly have their own agenda, which is why they keep bringing up 9/11 and the London bombings (two completely unrelated events). Any time a large, tragic event occurs, many of these conspiracy theorists do their best to gather all of the media reports, then pick and choose to take the media out of context and create their own crazy conspiracy driven narrative for the events that took place. If you are skeptical of this video, you should be. It's crap.

More debunking: http://www.salon.com/2013/01/18/your_comprehensive_answer_to_every_sandy_hook_conspiracy_theory/

Good job debunking. This conspiracy theory is so obviously dumb and motivated by pro-gun paranoids few bothered to debunk.

I would like to point out that I didn't do the research - I simply posted it. The person who did the research is linked in the first link.

[deleted]

Exactly. I love the arrogant "Debunked." at the end of it all too.. you haven't debunked anything. You have provided a weak counter argument and nothing more.

I would like to say that in Theory 4 (the only one you don't have a concrete explanation for) a possible explanation could be that police encourage victim's family to get really emotional when they go on tv to encourage the viewers to give up any information relating to the crime. It's pretty standard. So that could be a contributing factor.

[deleted]

Mate, it's right there. It's point number one.

Re: Theory 1:

The "Man in Woods" was actually a SWAT officer from another town and HAD A GUN!!! Read for yourself. Very last sentence:

http://newtownbee.com/News/2012-12-27__14-58-27/Police%20Union%20Seeks%20Funding%20For%20Trauma%20Treatment

"A man with a gun who was spotted in the woods near the school on the day of the incident was an off-duty tactical squad police officer from another town."

So which story is REAL? Gingerbread cookies? Or the SWAT agent "dressed in camo" with "crazy credentials" who was put into the front of a police car as per the story of multiple adult and child witnesses?

Now seriously ask yourself WHY this story was dropped from Mainstream news coverage.

[deleted]

a 5 minute walk down the road

AKA a one minute drive...

I'm guessing you've never worked on an ambulance before so listen up. Literally the first thing any ambulance crew member learns is that his first responsibility is NOT the patient, but is actually the safety of himself and the rest of the crew. It would be an enormous breach of protocol to go anywhere near any building that has had and may still have a gunman inside. I have been on calls where people have pulled (and not even used) a knife, and the police and crew chief do not want us going anywhere near the house. If it was a gun we'd be even further. Ambulance personnel aren't interested in risking their own lives for the patients, no matter what the call is.

The people that made this video clearly have their own agenda, which is why they keep bringing up 9/11 and the London bombings (two completely unrelated events).

Unrelated? Really? Like, for real for real serious?

These tragedies have been happening for awhile, and so has training people to respond to them.

Tragedies like what? Tragedies where people kill 20 kids for no reason with no motive whatsoever and the only conceivable source of information into the event or the alleged killer's mindstate (his hard drive - the operative BLACK BOX) was irreparably damaged in his fit of unmotivated unorganized lunacy that led him to commit the massacre all by himself in the first place?

I think he means unrelated to the sandy hook shootings, not to each other. And yes, believe it or not there are whackos out there who really do just lose it and shoot kids. WHY is that so hard to fathom? It's ugly but it's real. Believe it or not, not everything has to have a reason, or a reason that you can understand/know. There are ugly mental illnesses out there that lead people to do things that don't make sense to every one else. He may have been hearing voices telling him to do it for all we know... which we never will.

We NEVER WILL, won't we?

[deleted]

hardly

even huffpo reports that more states are going to WEAKEN gun control laws instead of strengthen them and the only ones strengthening laws are the same states as always.

good job on cuomo tho costing the state of New York a ton of legal fees and a no change end result after the courts strike it down

source:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/19/gun-control-bills_n_2507219.html?

Ok dip shit, explain to me why all the caskets were closed and the parents weren't allowed to see their children? Explain to me why there is absolutely no video footage from inside the school and it's 2013 yet in 1999 in columbine they had enough to make documentaries out of it. Explain to me why the medical examiner acted like such a fucking nutcase and kept saying things that contradicted the entire story. Please tell me why the bus lady dropped those 6 kids off at a random guys house and not the police? Explain to me why Obama needed kids with him to sign the gun laws similar to Hitler hmmmm? Explain to me how you can see no truth at all in the video let one in the dark knight rises sandy hook was on the map they show? Look it up its there.

You can't tell me that Robbie Parker, Emilie's father wasn't acting. Jesus. He was all laughing and suddenly when the camera rolls he's trying to fake his emotions hyperventilating. Who the fuck does that?! I understand people grieve differently, but that dude's poor acting job was just...nope!

The guy's kid was murdered and he's got 100's of reporters sticking cameras in his face. No one knows how a person "should" react and basing a conspiracy theory off of seemly strange behavior isn't very convincing.

And, let's just go with your theory...he was an actor. That means he didn't have a kid at the school, meaning 1. Someone hired him to act, 2. He agreed and did a terrible job, 3. No one in the community pointed out he didn't have a kid there. 4. None of the reporters attempted to verify who he was. and 5. All to do what???? Take your assault weapon?

Please, this is just so friggin retarded. This conspiracy theory needs to be mocked for the outlandish stupidity it is so that more reasonable theories aren't discredited by association.

Who the fuck does that?!

A small subset of the population behaves that way when exposed to very traumatic events. Happens in war too - you should perhaps research the issue.

never heard of nervous laughter??

It's SUCH a coincidence that there's all these mock drills being set up. It's almost like they're there in case something doesn't go as planned. "It was just a drill people, nothing to see here." On 9/11, there was a "drill". On the day of the London Bombings, there was a "drill". Now with Newtown, another "DRILL". Come the FUCK ON America, are you really THAT fucking stupid?

Also the Norway bombing/shooting, 2004 Madrid bombing, Taft High School massacre. The odds of just one of these drills coinciding with the actual event being drilled are astronomical.

Have you worked out those odds? I'd like to see them.

The "mock drill" at Aurora was in a classroom and wasn't a drill.

How do you know this is genuinely extraordinary without information about how common these sorts of drills are?

"The drill" is put in place so the government has an excuse to take over an investigation and issue gag orders like a Pez dispenser. They can say "Oh, our drill became reality? This is going to look bad on us. We should take over so that nothing 'erroneous' gets out and blows up in our face. Let all the local officials know that their job is done here."

It is a good cover story to remain in control.

Why would they leave such obvious trails?

[deleted]

If they had the power to fake such things, they wouldn't leave trails THIS blatant. A two year old would spot them.

Well, I always remember my 4th grade teacher. She took an egg timer and said, "Class, I am going to hide this. First one of you to find it will get a piece of candy. Now, put your heads down". The countdown began and when we started searching, not a single person, out of the thirty kids, had located it. She finally gave us the end signal and the game was over. She walked to the overhead projector and picked it up following that.

I will never forget what she said after that game.

"The best hiding place is in plain view".

Really? You get one shot at this. No do overs. The whole world is watching once you release the media hounds. Not to mention every little fucking thing you say, do, or put on tv will be reviewed, studied, and shared over and over again by groups of people who are already suspicious of the government.

They can't get away with all this shit anymore because we have access to technology and their game hasn't caught up with that. Why do you think they want to take away the internet? Because we are informing each other instead of the mainstream media telling us what is the gospel truth. We are investigating and asking all the fucking questions that the "press" are supposed to be asking.

First answer me this: who are they? If you don't know, then how do you know anyone is doing this? If you do know, how?

If they had the power to fake such things, they wouldn't leave trails THIS blatant. A two year old would spot them.

Why don't you tell me who it is you are referring to when you say "they" and "them."

The same as you, whoever these hypothetical people are.

Ok and by your logic how do you know they're not? Really it's just never ending assumptions but for you to just assume everything is ok and there is no foul play really outlines how naive and in vehement opposition you are.

You can't know they're not. But you can't guess that they are either. When without evidence, we default to assuming the negative.

Either way you're still assuming.

Not assuming. I am merely making an informed guess based on the data I have.

What the fuck are you talking about?

The fact that you even asked that makes me want to flip a table. Did you fail high school logic or something?

Obvious shill being obvious.

Good argument.

sigh Its called 'The Null Hypothesis'

Source please.

Also, this is just a worthless coincidence. What's your point? Even if there where drills on all three occasions, what does that imply?

Holy shee, wake up, dude. Read about how the Third Reich worked, then maybe you will begin to understand what it implies.

No. Tell me. What are you implying?

I contest I know exponentially more about the Third Reich than you, if you are comparing it to your government.

Long time reader, first time poster...

Anybody remember this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayirah_(testimony)

Though not completely orchestrated by the U.S. government, our government was complicit in allowing this testimony to be heard in order to rally the U.S. populace around the idea that our presence was needed to put a stop to the savagery that was being perpetuated by Saddam Hussein and his regime. Here's how it worked back when George Bush the 1st was at the helm:

Problem: Baby Killers Reaction: Nationwide Disgust Solution: Invade Iraq

I'm sure people around here are familiar with the Problem - Reaction - Solution method. Since then, it was found that this woman was ACTING. I'm not necessarily convinced yet that this was done at Sandy Hook but I am fully convinced that hiring actors to put on a show for the media and our politicians HAS HAPPENED.

Her actual testimony can be found on YouTube. Haven't looked into how to post video links yet but should easily be found by just typing Nayirah testimony.

Edit: http://www.prwatch.org/books/tsigfy10.html Link to more info

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmfVs3WaE9Y Video of her testimony

They are in vehement denial it would seem.. and it is obvious. They're completely ready to call it debunked without even having an intelligent debate about it. Anyone who thinks they're right before even having a discussion well... you know what I'm saying.

Although some could argue racism was the perpetrator here, still proof that our government allows things to pass without regard for whom they might affect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_syphilis_experiment

Bravo. Only big one missing is JFK's magic bullet.

Great post! Very well thought out and level headed. Now just prepare for the paid shills to come in try to discredit everything you posted.

The News Media is basically using the Sandy Hook event for a full out Assault on America to ban guns...

Timeline: - November 2, 2012: Feinstein met with ATF to finalize “Assault Weapons Ban” http://www.examiner.com/article/feinstein-rumored-to-be-pushing-semi-auto-ban-if-obama-reelected - November 4, 2012: Presidential Election - News Media Elects Obama - December 14, 2012: 5 Weeks later… Sandy Hook - News Media comes for your guns - January 15, 2013: New York State Bans Guns and Magazines

Sandy Hook Questions Not Asked by the News Media:

-Arrested 2nd shooter? Apprehended man lying on the ground in woods? Other “Camo pants” man handcuffed and sitting in “front” of the police car? Video at 5:55 mark: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6W6b-voc-Ds Did the news media report who these people were?

-Does there exist another mass shooting with more deaths than wounded? Has anyone seen even one video or picture of the dead or wounded? -Responding officers don’t know the difference between used pistol and rifle rounds sitting on the ground at the crime scene? Any pictures exist of the “hundreds of rounds” of shell casings? Pistol or AR spent cartridges are very easy to tell apart. - Are there any pictures or video of bodies coming out of the school? -Any pictures of broken glass from shooting his way into the school or any broken windows anywhere? -Who has seen video footage or photos of ANY of the damage at the school? -What was Adam Lanza’s motive for the shooting? What was his connection to the school?

-Victoria Soto's class picture for 2012 shows 15 children. According to official report: 6 children were shot trying to escape 7 children were found in closet by police 6 children escaped and were in Eugene Rosen's house Total = 19 children. 4 extra children since the class picture?

-Sandy Hook Nuns? Police scanner: “One of them may be wearing a nun outfit, headed toward Danbury and Stoney Hill, purple van, unknow plates...” What is the box outline under the skirt of the taller nun’s dress? http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?noframes;read=265022

-School Nurse tells reporter that Nancy Lanza was a Kindergarten teacher? Nancy Lanza didn’t have anything to do with the school? http://youtu.be/uHEs-XAJqfU

-Teachers listed as Victims NOT listed on School Website as Faculty? Screen shots showing Cameras are IN Newtown Schools. Who has the video from the school? http://sherriequestioningall.blogspot.com/2012/12/sandy-hook-research-teachers-listed-as.html

-Adam Lanza’s Photoshopped Face? No other current pictures of Adam Lanza exist? http://nodisinfo.com/Home/2013/01/09/adam-lanzas-photoshopped-face/

-Robbie Parker is 59 years old? http://www.intelius.com/results.php?ReportType=1&formname=name&qf=robbie&qmi=&qn=parker&qcs=Ogden%2C+UT&focusfirst=1

-Robbie Parker’s wife “Alissa” is 77 Years old? http://www.lookupanyone.com/results.php?ReportType=1&qf=Robbie&qmi=&qn=Parker&qs=CT&searchform=name&focusfirst=1

-Helicopter footage of the scene, where are the hundreds of students? http://youtu.be/qxsv_z8Sx4E

-CBS sent out a text message to a parent? Kids at scene didn’t hear sounds of gunshots? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhLe2i8uFwc

-Cop photoshopped into background of picture? http://i2.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article1498303.ece/ALTERNATES/s615/Victoria+Soto http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maKW70lm5s8&t=0m21s

-No lawsuits filed yet from any of the parents?

-Adam Lanza no records since 2009? People don’t know him around the neighborhood? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmSKS4hwJ24

-Father not allowed to see the dead body of his daughter? http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/12/18/lauren-rousseau-newtown-shooting-sandy-hook-canada_n_2324787.html Gilles Rousseau, told Radio-Canada that he wanted to see his daughter’s body but was informed by authorities that it would not be possible. “They told me, ‘You can’t see (the body),’” Gilles Rousseau told Radio-Canada, the French-language CBC. “Because most people he shot, it was two or three shots in the face, point-blank.”

Why did so many of the victims recently move to Sandy Hook? - Madeleine Hsu, within the last 2 yrs - Ana Marquez Greene, moved from Canada this yr - Avielle Richman, moved to Newtown last yr - Ben Wheeler, moved to Sandy Hook April 2011 - Emily Parker, moved from NM to Utah, then Sandy Hook - Charlotte Bacon, moved there in the last 4-5 yrs - Racheal D'Avino, worked at school less than one week (teacher) - Dylan Hockley, moved to SH in Jan 2011

-“[My staff] and I hope the people of Newtown don’t have it crash on their head later.” –Connecticut Medical Examiner D. Wayne Carver II, MD, December 15, 2012

The news media is not asking questions because they want America disarmed.

Please take this massive paragraph to askreddit. This is a lot of very good info. I really hope you don't mind if i refer others to it.

The amount of downvotes anyone who is on the side of it being a hoax is receiving in this thread is really upsetting. The shills are out in full force. No matter what evidence we present or what questions we ask they are just so vehemently against it being a hoax that they get emotional and passionate about making us seem like lunatics. Quite sad. Everyone asks for a source.. do you really think any reputable news source/company would commit social suicide and post a source? They hear one counter argument to our argument and they stick to it like glue. Sad sad sad.

But you don't provide any evidence. Not real evidence. It's all bullshit speculation from photos and garbled early news reports. Provide ONE bit of substantiated, real evidence.

No real evidence is exactly our point, the lack of any real evidence that a shooting even occurred besides filmed families of victims is really the entire issue. Every other time there is a shooting that isn't trying to be quickly covered up and exploited there is always footage of bullet holes, wounded people, not just one wounded adult on a stretcher. The photos would exist somewhere. All that anyone would need to debunk this conspiracy is just SOME footage of the school in any respect but of course there is none and somehow that sits well with you?

Why did so many of the victims recently move to Sandy Hook?

I have been wondering exactly the same thing. This is the first time I have seen the question asked. Thanks for the additional info. I definitely think this is a piece of the puzzle. It makes people anonymous. You can be who you want to be when you move to a new town.

What are you saying with this? I just can't understand the way that some of you think.

(AFP) – No video has been released of Adam Lanza entering the SandyHook school but the school had recently spent $300,000 on a new security system including state of the art video cameras and door locks. One of the big questions is how did Adam Lanza get into the school did someone let him in as he was carrying an assault rifle? Was the door left open? Did he shoot out the door? This is a key question from the event. No pictures exist of the crime scene. No one was wounded. No one survived. Out of 20 no one survived? Maybe because they blocked the road to ambulances?

http://collapsereport.com/2013/01/13/new-sandyhook-security-system-had-video-surveillance-where-is-it/

Just wondering, why would someone photoshop that cop into the picture when clearly it's not in the video? Could it have been some guy just trying freak people out and get reactions?

It's fully photoshopped. The newspaper photoshopped a picture together of shots of people leaving the church to show the faces of various people. It's not suppose to be real. The UK papers do it a lot.

I think I've seen some pictures like that before. Makes sense, I guess. Thanks.

If you watch the video they didn't come out in a line like that and with the stairs at the front they couldn't all be at the same level even if they did.

True, true. I was thinking the same thing. Angles, man.

I see it. That is not the nun's right knee. There is obviously a rectangle box shaped object in front of her unbent right leg in the one picture. School faculty websites are usually accurate with their staff lists, especially if they are in the education business. They release videos of everything else on the planet and they can't show even 2 seconds of any video? Not even of the crime, but even someone entering the building? Adam's face is obviously photoshopped in the picture they showed everyone what he looks like. Intelius showing Robbie Parker and His wife at 59 and 77 years old is accurate because it shows all their previous addresses and also works correctly when looking up anyone else. There is no footage anywhere of the hundreds of students coming out of the school. Only 1 picture exists with about 20 kids. There are no pictures of 600 kids coming out of the school. The parent clearly says "CBS sent me a text message". You can call her a liar if you want. Adam Lanza hasn't been seen by anyone in the last 3 years, not just the neighbors. The cop is photoshopped into the picture. It is a coincidence that so many victims moved to the town in the last year or 2.

There are so many questions and so little we know. I really do find it strange that there is only that one still image of the kids running out with those police officers(?) and absolutely no video of any teachers, parents, students running out of the school. Some use the shadows to explain the time of day and to debunk that "no kids running out" theory. What's even stranger is how someone could be a complete ghost for three years. Isn't that almost impossible? There has gotta be something.

Also, why not show the surveillance footage? No need to show the massacre to the public, but at least show something! There is probably some legal issues with this but come on. At least show Adam walking into the fucking school, show bullet holes, show broken glass, etc.

Every time there is an explanation to something, there is an explanation to that explanation. I just wish there was at least one piece of the story that we actually know and have evidence about that can't be disproven.

It almost seems to me they didn't actually want to damage the building in any way whatsoever. When there is a shooting in my town you bet your ass the local news will be there taking footage of the bullet holes and of the crying people involved. They literally showed nothing in this case, and the "shadows show what time of day it is!" argument is crap since local news crews arrived while the shooting was still ongoing and were kept at the same exact road block shown in the aerial footage. They completely half assed this and they assume we really wouldn't notice, and the ones who do notice will just be cast aside as insane conspiracy theorists/terroists. Just goes to show how people will fight tooth and nail to believe that nothing is going on because how could they not know about it if it was?

Google was running two distinctly different photos of the two nuns. Both photos were supposedly taken shortly after the Sandy Hook Hoax.

In Photo One, the taller nun was wearing a thigh-length, dark coloured (black or dark grey) jacket

In Photo Two, the same tall nun was wearing a CALF length GREEN coat. She also had a large handbag over her shoulder

So --- did they hold rehearsals for the shooting? If so, were photographs taken AT that rehearsal ?

Do nuns rushing to an alleged multi-child massacre carry spare jackets in order they can be photographed in a variety of costumes ? If so, WHY would a nun be photographed at the SAME scene in two distinctly different jackets ?

And in addition to the two different length, different colour, jackets -- one of those nuns appeared distinctly male in size and comportment AND very much appeared to be concealing something beneath at least one of the jackets

So where are the two nuns now? Why were they wandering around, one of them looking distinctly masculine in different jackets, one of which was concealing something largish in the opinion of many?

Where are those 'nuns' ?

Why were they there ? What was their 'purpose'? Why did they appear so odd ? Why the jacket change mid pandemonium? Why did they wander around looking bizarre? What was under the jacket? Who were those nuns really ?

Not one of these sources is or contains a reference to a reliable source.

What is the box outline under the skirt of the taller nun’s dress?

Her knee. Her right leg is bend a bit you can see the angles.

School Nurse tells reporter that Nancy Lanza was a Kindergarten teacher

It was found to be someone looking for attention.

Teachers listed as Victims NOT listed on School Website as Faculty?

New teachers? In small schools like that the website is usually managed by one teacher when they get to it.

Screen shots showing Cameras are IN Newtown Schools. Who has the video from the school?

Why would you expect the videos to be publicly released when they never have before except when the police need help identifying people?

Adam Lanza’s Photoshopped Face

More like Adam Lanza's encoding messed up face. You can see the artifacts everywhere.

Robbie Parker is 59 years old?
Robbie Parker’s wife “Alissa” is 77 Years old?

Why do you assume either of those sources are correct?

Helicopter footage of the scene, where are the hundreds of students?

Look at the direction and length of the shadows. That footage is from much later in the day.

CBS sent out a text message to a parent?

You're assuming she didn't just confuse text with news alert?

Adam Lanza no records since 2009? People don’t know him around the neighborhood?

And? Most people don't know me around my neighbourhood either. I don't socialise with my neighbours. Sounds like he was even more of a recluse than most redditors.

-Cop photoshopped into background of picture?

The whole thing is photoshopped. It's from a newspaper trying to fit all the relatives onto one picture. You watched that video and didn't realize that?

Why did so many of the victims recently move to Sandy Hook?

Small towns either have completely static populations or transient ones.

CBS sent out a text message to a parent? You're assuming she didn't just confuse text with news alert?

The reporter is from CBS, waving a CBS mic in her face.

The text she received was from ENS, CT Alert ENS (Emergency Notification System) http://www.ct.gov/ctalert/site/default.asp

Easy mistake to make and easy for theorists to exploit for their youtube bullshit video.

Thanks for the info.

Helicopter footage of the scene, where are the hundreds of students?

Look at the direction and length of the shadows. That footage is from much later in the day.

Ok then please do explain the footage of local news crews trying to investigate while the shooting was ongoing but being blocked back at that road, with no signs of ambulances going in or out or any distressed peoples. Also the video footage of local news crews matches up perfectly with what we see from the helicopter footage.

You answered your own question for fucks sake. THE SHOOTING WAS STILL GOING ON! Reporters and the Ambulance would not be allowed on the scene until the shooting was OVER and safety was restored.

Ok then then that stupid argument of "the shadows clearly show it's later in the day" is a load of shit.

Paid shills!?

Fuck, my check hasn't shown up yet...

"He just can't accept that an individual is capable of such atrocious acts - the conspiracy theories are a way of coping with the reality that at any time a madman could pull a similar incident"

Am I doing it right?

I love how they say it like that haha, then turn around and say

"How could someone be capable of such atrocities!!!" even when you show them hard evidence...

I love how the huffington post "debunking" the video says that google publishing dates are inaccurate. I couldn't find one source that said prior to this that google's publishing dates were ever inaccurate when dealing with newly created webpages. In fact I found quite the contrary. Like you said, hard evidence is nothing when they can pull some "official source" out of their ass. We can provide 10 sources and 10 pieces of evidence and they provide 1 counter argument and stick to it even if it is a load of bullocks. It's almost like the majority of people go on this website and it's almost like the majority of people believe the "official story".. either that or /r/conspiracy is filled with downvote bots or angry people in denial going on downvoting rampages.

I wouldn't even call it an argument haha. When you give some evidence or pose a reasonable question, and they ignore it and attack character, thats not really an argument.

What's the alternative?

As someone who is legitimately wondering... why should such large magazines be available? My only beef with the whole guns thing is why do people need assault rifles? I totally have no problem with the second amendment with concern to handgun and personal protection firearms, but anything that you can go on a massacre with should require some sort of proof you're not a madman. I don't see why this is too much to ask?

More handguns are involved in more shootings than 'assault rifles.' If the 2nd amendment has the right to bear arms, those arms need to be equal or sufficient enough to use against those that might want to take them away. If the day comes, the army aren't going to have tanks rolling down the streets with fighter jets bombing towns and cities, it will be swat type teams with small arms which needs to be equaled and that is the reason the weapons that are kept now by law abiding citizens need to remain.

It's no good passing off the possibility as a crazy notion because the indications are there the government does not act in your interest, does not care and sees people with weapons as a threat to their power. They have passed laws so your communications can be intercepted, they have done the same so Americans or terrorists can be arrested without trial and detained indefinitely and they are proposing gun laws because they are afraid of people and the fact the base of knowledge about their corruption has the possibility of reaching critical mass. It's been seen before throughout history and its being seen again with those laws and steps being taken.

Why do people believe the same people who backup Wall St, spend tax payers money on wars for private gain and cause social and economic hardship to millions of people have suddenly started giving a shit when people get killed by a mentally unstable person? Most of the things they do don't point to them caring and if you think Obama cares about kids dying, then you should ask why he is sanctioning drone strikes which is killing children.

This.

You're a tool and an idiot. You really think this government fears a couple hundred rednecks with assault rifles? For every redneck with an assault rifle, the government can provide 10 tanks against. So if Americans are supposed to have the same firepower as anyone opposing them, why don't we all have nuclear missile silos in our backyards? Nuclear submarines docked next to our fishing boats? C4 in every pocket? moron. Yee haww. If there is any kind of conspiracy it's probably from the NRA. Gun sales and new members have sky rocketed since they politicized the shooting by making you white trash paranoid. Oh and also suggested a police state.

you can go on a massacre with any weapon

if you read world news, you see massacres happening everywhere, even without a gun. there was one pretty recently where a guy in china went to a school and started slashing children. its not guns who kill people, its people who kill people. if you want to kill someone, youre going to do it. like people here said, we need to address the mental issue problem, not gun problem. a sane law abiding citizen isnt going to go on a rampage. heck, even gang members, in america, at least have enough decency not to go after kids. i heard in prison, inmates fuck you up if youre in for killing or harming children. source, idk. but yeah.

I think this is reason enough for me: http://abcnews.go.com/US/georgia-mom-hiding-kids-shoots-intruder/t/story?id=18164812&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Furl%3Fsa%3Dt%26rct%3Dj%26q%3Dwoman%2520hides%2520in%2520crawlspace%2520with%2520children%2520and%2520shoots%2520home%2520invader%26source%3Dweb%26cd%3D1%26ved%3D0CDIQFjAA%26url%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fabcnews.go.com%252FUS%252Fgeorgia-mom-hiding-kids-shoots-intruder%252Fstory%253Fid%253D18164812%26ei%3DJtv5UOLYM8ai2wWa54CADw%26usg%3DAFQjCNEv9LJFNU1oFHNAe70XjbajSZIXyA%26bvm%3Dbv.41248874%2Cd.b2I

I seriously can't believe the size of that link but the shorter one (that could be deemed as "credible") was a Fox news site and I'll just outright avoid the shit storm that would come from linking to them.

To summarize, this woman shot at an intruder after he found her and her twin children hiding in the crawl space, hitting him 5 times and he was still able to escape the house and get to his car.

We've all seen the scenario in movies, "He's only got one bullet left in that chamber! If he takes me out, I want you guys to hit him with everything you've got!" Let's say for a minute that this intruder wasn't by himself. Assuming that the second (or third or fourth) intruder wasn't scared off by the gunshots, she emptied the chamber of all six bullets in an effort to protect herself and her children, five of which hit the ONE intruder. I think we can all make a fairly predictable assumption as to what the fate of the mother and those children would have been.

All of that being said, taking mental stability and predisposition to crime into consideration, lawful gun ownership by reasonable people has never been an issue. It's when guns leave the hands of these reasonable people due to theft or improper care or storage that they become a problem. I am not a gun owner personally yet I have no problems with gun ownership, especially when it comes to protecting what's important to me. That's why drug dealers have guns, they are protecting what's important to them (drugs). Personally, I've always wondered if our failed war on many drugs hasn't perpetuated the violent use of guns in areas where drugs rule the streets (that's a much bigger question that probably has its own subbreddit, monopolies are bad mmmkay). After all, drugs are illegal and they still seem to make their way through our country in vast quantities. Is everyone really proposing that the same thing won't happen to these "assault weapons". Of course not. But then everyone says, "But they're not going to touch handguns!" Great, drug dealers and hardened criminals still get to have their smuggled in assault weapons, meanwhile i'm bringing a teaspoon to a knife fight. But I guess it's not the citizenry's job to deal with hardened criminals and their assault weapons. It's the police and they still get to keep their "Big Guns".

Which brings me to what I believe the writers of the constitution's purpose was in writing the second amendment. Though seemingly far fetched to most, the idea is that the population needs a way to protect themselves in the event that the government decides to stop coinciding with the wills and wants of the people. The reality is, the world of government and politics today isn't exactly as participatory as the world was in the time of the constitution. Everyone is EXTREMELY occupied in efforts to "win their bread" and to provide for their families in ways that I'm sure were inconceivable to our forefathers. People don't have the same opportunity (time) to directly interact with their representatives in great numbers like they did in the past. Not to mention that when the majority does interact (interaction being defined as receiving information about candidates from various forms of media) with politicians, the interaction we base our voting habits on rarely culminates in politicians sticking to their plans. This is not an anti-Obama sentiment as it may be absorbed by some. I say this with regard to any politician that gets to the pulpit and ignores what got them there.

If we can qualify who might be a risk to own a gun, many would say criminals convicted of violent crime and people diagnosed with mental instability or disability. Let's focus for a minute on the former. Many people who are reduced to crime in order to make a living arguably lack the skills to make a crime free living and see it as more profitable to hurt, steal and otherwise cause pain to others in order to elevate themselves. Is this not due, at least in part to our educational system failing the children we are supposed to educate in one way or another? I know what is learned in school needs to be reinforced at home and in some cases that reinforcement is severely lacking, yet it seems that around the nation, cuts are being made to education in one way or another. Usually the first to go are the arts and other "electives" that don't necessarily rely on state sponsored books to teach. Not everyone excels at just the core curriculum and by eliminating the only things that some "problem children" relate to, we are defaulting them to the path of least resistance (in their eyes). Why don't we stop fear mongering a little bit and put some effort into the roots of what could, in reality, prevent children from feeling the need to turn to guns as a solution to their lack of a skill set. Imagine that, a country up to its gills in debt yet still feeling the need to spend, actually investing into the future of its youth instead of putting a band-aid on the problem that seems to be a result of the kids that missed out and decide a gun can fix that.

Now, let's get to the latter from the previous paragraph. Mental illness is obviously a very real problem. Many people who might be defined as mentally ill, I feel in some cases are just masking symptoms like depression that can't be fixed because of their unfortunate circumstances that are seemingly impossible to change. Some medications do help people, I've known that to be true from people I am acquainted with. Others though have been medicated to make them more "manageable". What's very interesting though is that SSRI's or similar drugs have been in the picture in A LOT of these massacres that keep coming up in the news. I don't really know how the government plans to police this with doctor-patient confidentiality issues in the balance. The only thing I've ever heard that trumps that confidentiality is if a doctor hears directly from a patient that they plan to either hurt themselves or hurt others. I really don't know what the answer is but it's certainly not making my medical history available to some guy at a register at Walmart or at a gun show. I've also wondered about the person who takes antidepressants in their freshman year of college because the love of their life just broke up with them. How long and how far does that paper trail of being diagnosed and medicated once follow this person?

The moral of the story to me is, most of the time people are blinded by baby steps in the now because they don't realize that the plan is to take many, many baby steps. I agree with many when I say it's very rarely the arrow but the person pulling the bow string that does the damage.

A 50 or 100 round magazine is a large magazine. A 30 round magazine is the standard size used in the AR-15, and really 30 rounds is not a lot. To answer the second part of your question, assault rifles were banned in 1986 and have not been used in a mass shooting since then as the definition of an assault rifle includes the capability to fire more than one shot per pull of the trigger.

and i believe a lot of these shootings, massacres, etc.. that have happened over the years, were done with the very weapons we just made completely legal. so the entire thing is just a big political game to keep certain people happy.

I have a (radical) conseravative uncle and he told me that, and I quote,

"...it's really not about needing them and more about wanting them and getting them because you're an American and you can do whatever the hell you want."

So there you have it. More about showing off and saying that you have one rather than actually using them to kill people.

You can get paid for that?

No, not really. But it's easier to say that people are being paid to make you look stupid than it is to actually realise you're stupid.

Honestly. If it was possible to be a paid shill, I'd be one already.

My biggest problem with any conspiracy theories is that no one can agree on what info can be trusted. Skeptics Will debunk something and source something like a cnn article, theorist Will say they are in on it and that its a lie. Then they Will post a link to some website like info wars or whatever and skeptics say those are just crackpots on the internet. What are you supposed to do when both sides just dismissed each others information?

You go with the source that has a better history of correct reporting. News sites like Al Jazeera and the BBC are usually spot on, and have a history of journalistic integrity. Sites like Inforwars are a joke. They have a history of pure bullshit. Hell, Alex Jones advertise perpetual motion machines on his website.

Exactly but that's for you, how is anyone supposed to convince the other side?

You can't convince a conspiracy theorist with evidence. If a CT presents a skeptic with evidence, the skeptics mind will change. Skeptics used to say MKULTRA was nonsense, now it's accepted.

it's possible, shilling is one of the oldest occupations on earth.

The internet just brought about the importance of leading discussions.

Also, why don't you go shill for some product review company if you really want to break into the market?

People posting fake reviews of products is a real problem.

People posting on conspiracy forums on behalf of some shady wing of government isn't.

but it's far deeper than that.

http://par-anoia.net/forum-spies.html

many tactics contained within where utilized during occupy, and forum sliding occurs to this day.

The level of brain-deadness in here is astounding.

ASTOUNDING.

Are we to believe that James Holmes amassed an arsenal, rigged his apartment with explosives, and carried out this plan all by himself? And if so, what was his motive? Has that question ever been asked? What was Adam Lanza's motive? We're just supposed to sit back and accept that for some reason now in our world people can go completely crazy and carry out a precise assault on innocent people while leaving no explanation as to why?

These are good points. In the past (Columbine, V Tech) the killers always made their motive clear. They wanted the world to know exactly how they had been wronged, they wanted the world to know what why they were doing it. In fact telling the world this was a big part of their operation - they made lengthy narcissistic videos and writings. But interestingly these last two massacres appear to be motiveless. Further more we haven't gotten the typical media feeding frenzy that wanted to find out as much about the killers as possible. In other words not only have the killers changed their behavior from previous examples, but the media has too. Why is that?

What about Brenda Spencer? Her reason was because she didn't like mondays.

What was the motive for the columbine thing?

Vengeance against bully's by dweeby dorky kids.

That's been debunked. The shooters were actually fairly popular and were even reported to have done a fair amount of bullying themselves.

This person shouldn't be downvoted.

Watch the footage of them inside the school pre-shooting. It paints a different picture than the one I had imagined growing up.

source?

"Columbine" by Cullen. The shooters were frightenly normal. Plus the shooting was actually Plan B. They wanted to blow the high school up.

They were being bullied and hated Jocks essentially.

They was what the media claimed initially but subsequent investigations found otherwise.

Absolutely wrong. It was considerably more complex than this. The kid was depressed and suicidal, his motives were muddled and unclear.

That's not true, these theories exist after every tragedy including Columbine. The internet just wasn't the same at that point.

What a weird thing to say since my point was about the behavior of the killers and the media and actually had nothing to do with either the internet or conspiracy theories.

But...the behavior of killers has not changed. You just point to one example where the killers made their motives clear. Regardless, there will be conspiracy theories.

Further more we haven't gotten the typical media feeding frenzy that wanted to find out as much about the killers as possible.

WHAT? They spent so much time on James Holmes, and I don't know about you but I was hoping that they wouldn't focus on this fucker Lanza as much.

This video has been getting passed around Facebook a lot, too. I first saw it when my former high school math teacher posted it on her wall, and she is about the last person I thought would be into conspiracy theories and stuff.

exactly what caught my attention... I always check these things out but have almost no facebook friends that also do... not this time... this was getting passed around for once... sheep no more?

You guys should leave facebook. Just sayin

Why?

it's hard... I like the punishment of reading awful political posts... I stick to google+ these days mostly EDIT: and I'm getting down votes for both of my last two posts... that's... cute

Meanwhile on google+:

The same type of facebook friends that like a cause for clean drinking water?. That's a pretty reliable crowd of individuals who'll take up the mantle of the cause by liking something and moving on to other life chores.

Same here. When I saw it on my feed I had to make sure it wasn't me who put it up there. I normally don't post stuff like that on facebook. Its getting around.

"There is fuckery afoot" will one day, possibly soon, be tattooed upon my person. Probably my foot.

Why do we always have to back our "conspiracy theories' debating all these so called facts? One thing we all agree on is the 24 hour news approach to information is flawed. We can start by fixing the way information is delivered to us. One way we can start is by communicating with each other in a positive way

It's obvious that this video is part of a CIA disinformation campaign to mislead the public into pursuing a variety of dead ends. I mean why else are there conspiracies for about every other shooting out there that has eventually gone nowhere? I mean if we clearly look at the Aurora shooting, there were conspiracies and guess where that went? Nowhere. The CIA clearly planted misinformation so that the ignorant masses would follow continuous dead ends until the next tragic event occurs. This one will be forgotten in maybe a month or so and like the latest internet fad constructed by your favorite local CIA agent, you'll follow a new misguided effort for some sort of conspiracy. So wake up sheeple!

How is it obvious that it's a a CIA disinformation campaign?

It isn't look through his comment history. This guy is posting stupid shit just to prove that this sub is crazy.

man people must be bored, I sometimes wonder how many posts here are just trolls fucking with people.

I agree this sub is crazy, but I wonder how much of that is because of trolls? Man, some times I hate anonymity of the internet..

I mean why else are there conspiracies for about every other shooting out there that has eventually gone nowhere?

When faced by a horrifying event most people try finding some solace in finding some reason or explanation for why that horrible event happened. When there doesn't appear to be reason, they'll create one.

The first post in this subreddit about it being a conspiracy happened literally within hours without a single bit of evidence or reason. Everything since has been an exercise in confirmation bias. People believe it's true because they desperately want it to be true. The stark reality of a psychopath snuffing out 27 lives on a whim is unfathomable to most. There's no plot to unravel, no shadowy enemy to fight, just a collection of coffins and mourning families.

It's not a CIA disinfo campaign, it's a coping mechanism trying to create an explanation when no explanation is possible.

I'm so glad that you're absolutely sure of this as if it is fact. You couldn't be more full of shit though, honestly. I do not fear death. It is part of human life. See I believe the real coping mechanism is people like you who seek to debunk these videos because they make you uncomfortable. You will claim again and again that it doesn't make you uncomfortable and how you are 100% correct in the matter without even taking time to even discuss it. Being so positively sure you're right is quite a bad thing. You really think people want to believe that no one could actually do something horrific? Have you fucking seen our world? I'm pretty damn sure we know what humans are capable of. This is just the most convoluted bullshit I come across.

This is most likely correct. I keep tryin to tell people this but not many listen. They are too focused on trying to figure out the perceived Sandy Hook conspiracy (100% speculation) while they really should be focused on protecting our second amendment rights from being stolen. Wake the fuck up.

haha "Sheeple" love it

This man speaks the truth.

If Obama had wanted to take your guns, why didn't he do it his first two years when he had a Democratic controlled House and Senate???

Stop huffing gasoline.

Very true.

Also, where were all those people with their outrage when Bush was eroding rights who are a lot more essential?

these recent shootings? good chance to win the peoples morale, thus the gun control issue

Because he didn't have enough "flexibility" until after the election.

rumple shillskin, go back to sleep

Forbes deleted their story yesterday linking SSRIs to murders-

Psychiatric Drugs, Not A Lack Of Gun Control, Are The Common Denominator In Murderous Violence

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.forbes.com/sites/lawrencehunter/2013/01/14/psychiatric-drugs-not-a-lack-of-gun-control-are-the-common-denominator-in-murderous-violence/

Rather the lack of psychiatric drugs, I should say.

RoflCopter44: redditor for 4 days

You people banned my old account, you moron.

You had me at "There is fuckery afoot."

Can someone please point me to some major tragedies that occurred, but where we didn't have people asking questions and finding apparent inconsistencies?

And yet anyone who tries to post factual debunking of this gets downvoted / hidden in the sub.

For a bunch of truth seekers you have a rather weird view of openness.

SHILL!!

"The pursuit of the truth outside of the "official story" is not disrespectful to the victims. It is the one thing we can do to honor them. Your opinion on what is tasteful and distasteful regarding this documentary is irrelevant, and is exactly the type of attitude which can paralyze the mind from conducting an honest analysis."

My honest analysis of this video is that this man claims men, women and children who experience a terrible tradgey are not the victims but perpatrators of a national conspiracy to infringe on the 2nd Amendment.

These people are not innocent but evil masterminds of the government.

Anyone, ANYONE can spend 5 minutes checking his statements and see that it is out of ignorance, laziness, paranoia and stupidity that he makes his claims.

He bases his claims first on the premise that the news media is infalliable, the beacons of truth YET they are liars and thieves in the back pocket of a national conspiracy.

Mistakes during the first run of news after the shooting during which time people were scambling like crazy to be the first to report, that is the time to choose statements and see "what really happened". Therefore contradictory news stories are not mistakes made during an attempt at reporting a story BUT mistakes during the concoction of a conspiracy.

His claims concerning the weapons used- He shows video during which a shotgun is removed from the trunk of the vehicle. He claims it is an AR-15. He couldn't even recognize a shotgun compared to an assault rifle. Though after a couple thousand comments about it he retracts that statement. BUT CLAIMS THERE IS AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT VIDEO SHOWING ANOTHER WEAPON BEING TAKEN OUT OF THE TRUNK!. What the fuck. You can't accept you are just wrong?

His ignorance and misinformation therefore led to a mess of accusations that the medical examiner is lying, that he is "laughing" and acting strange. It's a lie that all the children were killed with an assault rifle because adam must not have had it with him (If they had found the assult rifle in the trunk that might have on some level made sense).

"Sally Cox" isn't a registered nurse in Connecticut. Sally D. Cox is and has been since 1974.

Time stamps are infalliable and entirely accurate yet I just took this screen shot the other day showing Sandyhookhoax.com was created before the shootings even happened. http://imgur.com/lfTdi

And now you are starting to get angry, you may have even stopped reading because you're "evidence" is being exposed as lies and misinformation provided by a man who is invested financially in providing convincing, yet poorly argued, poorly edited, poorly though out conspiracy theories.

But I must be a sheep and a shill. Here I am questioning evidence, checking sources and using critical thinking -NOT accepting the biased information of a conspiracy theorist whose job it is to fabricate lies on the internet.

Don't give me this bullshit about the victims. People like you are the reason Memorials are being flooded with hatred from ignorant people who can't seem to figure out how research works.

Check my post history for more info or one of the other 1000 extensive debunkings this video has spawned. Or since you guys love to research so much double check some evidence for yourselves.

Can anyone explain to me why there is so little information on Adam Lanza? How can a person leave such a small footprint on any records, online or off, for three years?

He probably was spending all his time gaming and porning.

He was on Reddit?

I don't understand why people think that there is some big push to "disarm Americans". Obama is just trying to stop assault weapons, and make background checks more ubiquitous. Someone please explain to me why everyone is freaking out thinking that they will be completely disarmed. No one ever said that.

Oh shit, it's my cakeday.

Yep, except there's no such thing as an "assault weapon". It's a sensationalized term given to guns that look scary. They have the same punch and firing rate as your dad's hunting rifle. Relatively speaking, gun violence has gone down. New regulations aren't done with efficacy in mind but as a way to score brownie points with a reactive public.

I think the world powers are becoming seriously concerned with the truth movement. A lot of people are starting to wake up to the bullshit, some people I never would have expected. Most major media websites have posted shoddy articles appealing to nothing but emotion attempting to demonize "conspiracy theorists".

Promotion and opposition of conspiracy culture is part of the plan. We are trying to save us from ourselves on this here pale blue dot.

Sometimes I wish people would step back and look at the scope of things. We're just a bunch of semi intelligent monkeys trying to destroy ourselves and everything possible on this here pale blue dot. Damn shame.

http://www.reddit.com/r/skeptic/comments/16lkhq/this_sandy_hook_conspiracy_video_has_been_making/c7xjgzr

Read this, you sick fucks.

I love the part where all the commenters circlejerk each other about 9/11 being debunked. Haha thats news to thousands of scientists, architects, physicists, engineers and analysts. Please link me anything debunking 9/11 then maybe I'll consider these uncle tom, government house nig&$*# credible. Please excuse my use of the N-word.

Haha thats news to thousands of scientists, architects, physicists, engineers and analysts.

Not news to tens of millions of them. If your going to play the numbers game with "experts" make sure you are on the bigger side.

Really there's millions of scientists, physicists and architects openly defending the governments official report?? Haha sweet, totally factual statistic you got there, I'm finished with this. Go back to r/skeptic and finish your circlejerk you philistine, or better yet go read up on your history a little. Believing that a government as young and as powerful as the US government can be trusted blindly shows your lack of general knowledge.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

buliding 7

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf

Here you go.

Did you honestly just use the 9 11 commission as your conspiracy buster? Just wow, not much needs to be said past that.

9/11 commision as evidence? You went there for real?

Ah, yes, he asks for evidence, and then ignores it upon it's appearance.

Have you, yourself actually read these documents? Also, even people who actually believe the official reports have found an overwhelming amount of problems , blatant lies, stumbles and inconsistencies within the documents presented by the 911 commission. This isn't even bringing up the insurmountable amount of factual evidence poking holes in almost every layer of the 911 commissions reports. If an event as big as 911 holds even a shadow of doubt, it needs to be investigated until every avenue has been fully explored and exhausted. Senators, reporters, military personal, first responders, scientists, engineers, physicists, architects have for the most part debunked every layer of the 911 commissions report, does this mean they're truthers? No, does It mean they're nutjobs? No, it means the government needs to figure out what the fuck actually happened. I'm not a truther, nor do I want to believe the government is cable of something this evil, but I do think they used 911 to their advantage and they were more worried about turning a war profit on it then giving us the truth. I also sure as fuck don't believe that planes took down those towers alone and tens upon tens of thousands of extremely educated individuals agree. The fact that the government cleared the evidence with out letting outside agencies investigate is proof enough that we're being lied to.

Feel free to back up that ramble.

It's cool if you don't have a response, I could tell by your initial comment that you have nothing substantial to say.

I did respond. There is nothing further to say. You're entire comment is completely irrelevant and off topic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuC_4mGTs98

Are we to believe that James Holmes amassed an arsenal, rigged his apartment with explosives, and carried out this plan all by himself? And if so, what was his motive? Has that question ever been asked? What was Adam Lanza's motive? We're just supposed to sit back and accept that for some reason now in our world people can go completely crazy and carry out a precise assault on innocent people while leaving no explanation as to why?

Yes. Look this is the problem. Bad things happen for no reason. There have always been mentally unbalanced people that have murdered others. It is peoples lack of capacity to understand and face the tragic and sad truth that things can just happen without logic or reason that gives rise to the need to then find a reason to try and make sense of these tragedies that then leads to these sad conspiracies gaining so much weight.

Bad stuff happens, yes without sense or logic and this then leads to people creating conspiracies as they cannot face the truth that so many people have died and been hurt simply at a mad mans whim.

It's possible that a mock exercise of a shooting was going on during the real shooting and this guy was the mock shooter. Thus why the media won't touch the subject.

[deleted]

Maybe they run these tests on the same day of the event so that people won't bother them when they do things like block off the entire school. To me it seems the preparation and planning could all be chalked up as running a drill. It serves to confuse people and spread misinformation about the event.

There wasn't a real shooting. That's the point.

Thus the down votes. This is also possible. Everyone knows the dog shit media and the alphabet agencies are lying sacs of shit. It is imperative to entertain all possibilities.

even the possibility of mayan aliens using mind control rays from their bases on the moon? that one sounds very entertaining to me.

Within a certain degree of reason? I'm still on the fence about the shooting. As for the the aliens they are Zionist reptiles not Mayans. And the moon is a base.

there's the rub, not everyone can agree what is within a certain degree of reason.

it is better to question than to accept any official narrative. What is truth?

ah, a skeptic. stroll on over to /r/skeptic and see what your brethren think of this theory.

And if he was a suspect, why would they put him in the FRONT SEAT of the squaddie?

The newton beee claims it was an off duty officer

ABC/ anderson cooper, says it was a father of a student who ran when he heard gunshots.

On my phone so no links sorry

But the Newtown Bee also claimed it INTERVIEWED the principal AFTER the shooting and quoted that principal's remarks verbatim

Uh oh. Then the msm declared the principal died DURING the alleged shooting

so who the hell would grant credence to the Newtown Bee OR the msm

Exactly, this whole thing is a huge mess, no wonder is has gone viral so fast.

It's been explained a hundred times. It was a parent who came to the school right when the shootings occurred. He was arrested briefly, questioned, and released.

Second question - where the hell were all the ambulances, and why were the only ones on scene at the school completely blocked from reaching the roads?

Third question - what in god's name was wrong with the medical examiner? Literally giggling, supposedly hours after he had just examined dozens of children who were shot to death?

Fourth question - if we have video of the only assault rifle on scene being removed from the trunk of the car Lanza supposedly drove (which reportedly belonged to someone else as well...), and he was only armed with handguns - why has the media and government response been so obsessively focused on "assault weapons"?

Please let me know if I'm missing any details. Seems that the official story and news presentation is almost completely a lie.

There were tons of ambulances there. Seriously, you people are fucking retarded.

I've only seen 3 in one picture.

You have another source?

Literally 15 seconds on Google yielded this picture, wherein I see 8. Considering most of the victims were DOA, 8 is a shitload.

This is the part where a sane person admits they had that part of their belief wrong and reexamines their way of thinking on this topic.

I won't hold my breath. I stand by what I said: if you think this is a government conspiracy you are fucking retarded.

Looks like you're counting a couple fire trucks. Either way, all of them are completely boxed in.

By the way, that's the fire station, not the school. The school's parking lot doesn't go around the building:

http://hillnholler.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/sandy-hook-elementary-school.jpg

http://wnyw.images.worldnow.com/images/20579518_SS.jpg

Nice going, genius. So, they carted the injured children to the ambulances at the fire house - why no documentation of that?

Obviously you have no idea how emergency medicine works, since you keep harping on them being "boxed in". Once they arrive on scene, ambulances no longer do what is derisively called "throw and go". They stay on scene to offer care.

And the picture shows there was a shitload of emergency equipment being used for the tragedy. Like I said, this is where a sane person reconsiders their position.

Uh, no. They don't. EMT's are not equipped to handle severe traumas as well as a hospital. That's where there are seats inside the ambulance - to provide care on the way to the hospital. That's why they have sirens, and backwards "AMBULANCE" written on the front, so they can get to the hospital as fast as humanly possible. Anything that requires even precautionary hospitalization - especially an UNSTABLE patient - is going to make them drive to the hospital. And they're not going to park the ambulances half a mile away at a fire station, especially not after the area has been secured.

You are going to sit here with a straight face and say that ambulances were providing on-scene care for a mass shooting? That nobody moved cars out of the way for them to get to the goddamn hospital, and parked, what, 8 cars in front of them? I don't know what world you're living in where that's something you'll believe even once in a billion years. And you say the medical equipment was being used, but I also don't see any evidence of patients!

What is it you say - isn't that when a sane person reconsiders their position?

We certainly have reason to doubt the medical staff we saw on TV - the psychotic, giggling, possibly drunk 'medical examiner'. The one who said that all the children were shot by the 'long rifle', which NBC can't even seem to decide was present at the scene or not.

Uh, no. They don't. EMT's are not equipped to handle severe traumas as well as a hospital. That's where there are seats inside the ambulance - to provide care on the way to the hospital. That's why they have sirens, and backwards "AMBULANCE" written on the front, so they can get to the hospital as fast as humanly possible. Anything that requires even precautionary hospitalization - especially an UNSTABLE patient - is going to make them drive to the hospital. And they're not going to park the ambulances half a mile away at a fire station, especially not after the area has been secured.

Obviously you have no fucking clue what you're talking about. I sat on the board of a fire/ambulance district and managed operations of the district for two years. I know what occurs at a scene.

But, I can see that this is simply an exercise in moving goalposts for you. Like I said, a sane person would have admitted their position was flawed and reconsidered, instead, like the psychologically flawed conspiracy kook you are, you double down on your flawed belief, and instead move the goalposts and demand new and different proof than before.

Sure you did. You must know all about how ambulances don't transport gunshot victims to hospitals.

They don't right away. They stabilize them on scene. Getting to the scene is what the lights and sirens are for, not getting to the hospital. My work on the board is why, in an emergency. I'll take a paramedic or EMT over a non-E.R. doctor any day.

Anyway, it doesn't matter. You wondered why there weren't more ambulances working on the situation. I showed you there were. Are you going to drop that part of your list of asinine questions, or pretend like this discussion never happened?

You showed me a bunch of ambulances up the road, at a fire station. Completely boxed in by what, 8 cars?

In your probably made up experience, would ambulances get parked at the scene of a mass shooting, with a huge police presence, and then get boxed into a parking lot by a shitload of other cars, and have nobody intervene? The police wouldn't stop people from parking there? Or does the fire department just get its parking lot jammed up with cars every day?

What completely insane scenario does this happen in, where the emergency response is prevented from taking the victims of a mass shooting to a hospital, and staged a thousand feet away from the scene of the shooting, even after the scene has been secured?

your list of asinine questions

Right. Because what you're posting isn't asinine at all.

Anything truthful going to come out of your mouth, or should I just leave you alone?

Getting to the scene is what the lights and sirens are for, not getting to the hospital.

The fuck are you talking about?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seWVD7BUs9I

My work on the board is why, in an emergency. I'll take a paramedic or EMT over a non-E.R. doctor any day.

Ready to admit you're a liar yet?

I'd ask that you don't respond to my other comment. Let's deal with the overwhelming problems with the shit I just quoted first.

You told me you "sat on the board of a fire/ambulance district and managed operations of the district for two years". And you think ambulances don't use their lights and sirens while driving patients to a hospital?

Here is something on Yahoo Answers from somebody who apparently, unlike you, actually has relevant experience:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20091128114034AA9uMUw

I agree most with EMTDAD and DrLove. I am in an ambulance, on average, 5 days a week. The MAJORITY of my patients I do NOT transport with lights and sirens. You're putting yourself, your partner, the patient, and other drivers at risk. Unless my patient has a life-threatening illness or they may go downhill quickly, I transport without lights and sirens. So someone who I suspect or know is having a heart attack, I will go lights and sirens.

Critical patients. Patients that will go downhill quickly. Like gunshot victims. They don't stabilize gunshot victims on scene and then drive them to the ER with their goddamn sirens off, they stablize them and then get them there ASAP, as soon as possible, with their sirens on. Everyone on the planet knows that. You're talking about people who are losing blood by the MINUTE.

You're the worst person I've talked to in months. I can't believe somebody would just come here and lie like that - lying about you entire career, of all things - or if not that, then lying about what you learned from it, to try to bully your way through this conversation. What kind of sick freak are you?

So you link me to an article that says most times they don't use lights and sirens to transport, to prove me wrong when I said that most times they don't use lights and sirens to transport?

This is how far you'll go to avoid admitting that your preconceived notion of a giant secret conspiracy might possibly be wrong in one tiny aspect. It's pathetic, really.

You're completely full of shit.

You didn't work on any fire/medical board. If you did, you wouldn't have claimed that ambulances wouldn't drive gunshot victims to a hospital with their sirens on.

Fuck off.

Apparently you don't know what a fire board is (This was technically a fire protection board). It's not a full time job. It's an elected position in the community.

Please feel free to quote where I said that "ambulances wouldn't drive gunshot victims to a hospital with their sirens on."

Go ahead and quote that, and keep deflecting from the fact that one of your supposed "questions" (from the "just asking questions" playbook of spreading conspiracy bullshit) - the one "asking" why there weren't ambulances involved in Sandy Hook - is utter nonsense, and based on a complete falsehood.

You said:

Getting to the scene is what the lights and sirens are for, not getting to the hospital.

in the context of a conversation about a mass shooting. That makes me think you're a complete liar, when you claim you "sat on the board of a fire/ambulance district and managed operations of the district for two years" (your words). All I can conclude is that you slipped and said something really stupid, exposing your dumb lying self.

So, we have apparently no more than 2-3 ambulances at the school, and I think about 5-6 a thousand feet up the road, at a fire station - boxed in by a shitload of cars, unable to move to a hospital. That's just about all the available evidence, besides the, ahem, "witness testimonies", and police reports, that this shooting even happened. Oh, and that there was a car with a weapon in it, the removal of which is documented on video. Apparently there is absolutely zero evidence of actual victims of this crime, or of the identity of the shooter, or really anything of any importance. At least not that I've seen, in 30+ hours of trawling through this case. Maybe the man in camouflage pants shot some children, for all anyone knows.

And wouldn't those ambulances already be at the fire station anyway? I guess you would know!

No, they wouldn't already be there. It is well documented that Sandy Hook only has two, and asked for significant outside help.

But why bother with any of this? You've made it perfectly clear that you think this massive conspiracy with hundreds of people involved over the course of years is the only thing that could have possibly occurred, which means you are a fucking delusional idiot. There's not much point in trying to argue reason and evidence with you when you claim there's no evidence anyone died - which you apparently know through ESP, since you weren't there.

So the outside help came all the way to the town, and then got boxed in at the fire station, without anyone documenting them taking care of any victims?

Was this before or after they drove the bizarrely small number of injured victims to the hospital with their sirens off? In your version of reality, that is.

You've made it perfectly clear that you think this massive conspiracy with hundreds of people involved over the course of years is the only thing that could have possibly occurred, which means you are a fucking delusional idiot.

I didn't say anything about "over the course of years". Looks like you're just trying to cover your ass after you got exposed for lying about your experience.

There's not much point in trying to argue reason and evidence with you when you claim there's no evidence anyone died - which you apparently know through ESP, since you weren't there.

Show me some. You'd be the first, BullshitDan. Not that it would really surprise me, given the high numbers of deranged maniacs present.

Suck my dick.

Are you expecting them to hang around at the scene? It was a small town with 2 available. They called more in from surrounding areas they would have picked up who they needed and left. Given the media at large wasn't there until a time after the shooting they would have been gone by the time the press started doing reports.

He said there were tons of ambulances there. I said I saw 3 (may have only been two, have to double check), and asked him for a source - and then you replied and explained why I should believe they were there without any evidence.

Sure is weird how everyone, with their million cellphone cameras and ability to document the event, managed to avoid properly documenting the event at all. Not to mention how the press managed to only get a shot of two or three ambulances that were being blocked from leaving the school by a huge line of cars, by the time that everyone had been evacuated.

Speaking of which, where's the evidence of the evacuation of, as the video said, 600 children? All we have is that one picture with about 10-12 kids in it.

Any corrections to make there, slick? I'm starting to get the feeling that I've seen all the "evidence" that's going to be produced.

Look at the type of people in those situations that generally whip out their cellphone and start recording. They aren't parents of kids at a school thats just been shot up. They are generally kids/young adults themselves watching something exciting.

Oh, yeah, and kids would never put something like that on the internet.

So what, are you in charge of "debunking" tonight?

Sorry what kids were hanging around to document it and upload it? The school went up to grade 4. Kids at that age aren't going to be standing around with there phones out trying to document it for facebook or twitter they are going to be leaving the scene asap.

Yeah, actually, they are. 9 year olds do carry cellphones, genius. Parents will put their numbers on them for emergencies, especially in a rich town in southern Connecticut.

You know what else is strange? No pictures of a single gunshot wound. Anywhere. Correct me if I'm wrong on that one. Seems like all we have are the grinning, maniacal actors pretending to be parents of deceased children on Anderson Cooper 360 - like "Robbie Parker".

What'd you think of him, by the way? Normal guy having a great day, except that one of his children had just been shot? Smiling and grinning before getting into character? I bet you have an explanation for everything.

Did I say they don't? I said they aren't going to be standing around trying to document it.

I guess they were too busy not being evacuated from the school. Or is that something else I'm supposed to believe happened, without any evidence (besides a single photograph of about 10 children)?

None of the 600 children, or any of the faculty of the school, took a photograph documenting the event, huh? It's so easy on these new fangled phones. You just click the camera button, and then the capture button. Some of them can even record video.

That didn't happen even once, huh?

We don't know that none of them have. We only know that none of them have released them to the public.

But even if they did you would just claim it was doctored.

I don't have any predisposition to believing conspiracy theories. I tend to look to them only when I realize that what I'm being told elsewhere is completely made up. It's really just about the same skill as knowing when to avoid getting tricked into following a mugger into a dark alley. You know, a name brand bullshit detector (the readings go off the chart when I talk to you, by the way).

http://www.maxfarquar.com/2012/12/robbie-parker-laughing-sandy-hook/

So, I bet you think that guy "Robbie Parker" is totally normal. Do you?

I think he's one of the worst actors I've ever seen - that him, the blonde woman on Anderson Cooper (forgot her name), and the supposed 'medical examiner' - that they all completely blew their parts. The medical examiner looked like he had a little to drink, and was laughing off what he had been told to say. None of their reactions looked plausible at all.

We know nothing about what happened off screen there or what was said. Is it odd? Sure.

He definitely put on a face for the cameras there but to jump from that to the fact he is a paid actor pretending to be the parent of a kid murdered is a huge leap. It's more likely that someone told him something that made him smile then when he went to get on camera he realized how shitty that would look. An actor wouldn't be getting into character on screen like that.

Yeah, we can only make assumptions about what happened off-screen by what we saw on-screen. Which was, whether or not you want to admit it, a bunch of horrible actors.

And I didn't even mention that guy who supposedly found the 6 children at his driveway - supposedly with a huge pile of stuffed animals - who then took the children in at the request of a bus driver, didn't report it to anyone, and kept them for a few hours. Gene something. The video said he was a member of the Screen Actors Guild, and he definitely seemed to be totally full of shit. This guy:

http://pmchollywoodlife.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/gene-rosen-lead.jpg?w=600

http://a.abcnews.com/images/ABC_Univision/ap_121218_rosen_wg.jpg

Looks like he couldn't pin down his character one bit.

Every one of these actors broke out smiling at completely inappropriate times. You know, you can't really explain what got documented just by saying, "oh, they were putting on a face for the cameras". Yeah, they were, but it wasn't their emotions. They had to put on faces and try to control their body language, to lie about what they were feeling.

That's what all those videos show. You disagree?

So let me just get this clear. You honestly believe that a bunch of actors were hired by the government to pretend to be part of a school shooting for the media and not a single one has come forward to get more famous/attention/an actual acting career?

They wouldn't have acted in the fake scenario if they didn't think the government could control the resulting press.

Isn't that why the police chief threatened prosecution against anybody talking about alternative theories to what the police said happened? Either way, that seems like a pretty radical claim by the police that our free speech/free press rights will no longer be respected. Pretty unprecedented, for that matter.

So yes, that's the most likely conclusion, by a long shot, since there isn't a snowball's chance in hell that any of those people had actually lost a child, or even seen dead children (like the supposed 'medical examiner' had). They made a really shitty judgment, that people wouldn't uncover their piss-poor acting, and exposed their scam all over national TV.

I guess you just won't admit it. That just makes me think something is seriously wrong with you - that you come here every day just to try to bury what's obviously true. I see you in /r/conspiracy every single day, but you never admit you're wrong about anything, no matter how high the facts are stacked against you! Talk about bad acting.

Isn't that why the police chief threatened prosecution against anybody talking about alternative theories to what the police said happened?

See this is a common problem with your beliefs. You're taking any little rumour you find and running with it like its the truth. The police said no such thing at all. They said pretending to be a victim, or associated with the crime would be investigated. It was edited down to a fun sized soundbite for people like you to devour without questions. You have the right to free speech but you can still be arrested for things you say if they break the law. Threats for example. Impersonation is another.

Parker and the others clearly had not lost children - you would say the same thing

Because of their reactions you can say they definitely didn't lose children? Given how closely you've investigated other parts of it you'll have to excuse me for doubting your investigative nature.

I'm not impartial at all. I am fully on the side that believes there was a real shooting and it wasn't a conspiracy. I think I've made that pretty obvious.

I saw the video of the police chief threatening prosecution against people spreading alternative theories on social media. Not a "rumor".

I investigated it as much as I could, which has probably been 20-30 hours. I've put in no small effort to get to the bottom of what happened. I think that's part of being a responsible person - determining the facts for yourself when there's doubt, instead of gullibly following the crowd.

I don't think an honest person could investigate it and say that it really happened as we were told. So you can imagine what that makes me think of you.

I say they didn't lose children because they did not act like human beings act when they've actually lost children. Plain and simple. They acted like they were cheery about how much money they were going to get, and then struggling to get back into character for the cameras. And I sure as shit know how to tell the difference.

Really? Where did you see that? Because the one I saw was a police chief threatening people impersonating people related to the crime. Go watch it again and tell me where you saw him say that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=zkUAmAVEcsA#t=43s

One thing that's becoming somewhat of a concern and that is misinformation is being posted on social media sites.

There has been misinformation coming from people posing as the shooter in this case, posing using other I.D.s, mimicking this crime and crime scene and criminal activity that took place in this community. There's been some things and somewhat of a threatening manner.

It is important to note that we have discussed with federal authorities that these, these issues are crimes, they will be investigated statewide and federally, and prosecution will take place when people perpetrating this information are identified.

Again, all information relative to this case is coming from these microphones and any information coming from other sources cannot be confirmed and, in many cases, it has been found as inaccurate.

So, I simply, that's the newest twist today that we want to make sure that's perfectly clear that social media web sites that contain information relative to this case are not being posted by the Connecticut State Police, are not being posted by the Newtown police, are not being posted by any authorities in this case.

So, any of that information and people that are that are putting that information up there in any manner all right, can be construed as a violation of state or federal law will be prosecuted, will be investigated and prosecuted. Questions, I can take a few, understanding that we still are active in this case, OK.

Yeah, no plainly embedded threats to legally harass people dissenting from the completely made up story there.

So anyway, were you going to tell me some more about how Robbie Parker wasn't an actor?

Yes, sorry where did he threaten people for spreading alternate theories there? He said misinformation then went on to explain what he meant in the next sentence.

I suppose if you ignore the majority of the statement and take half of the first sentence and the last one you could make it sound menacing. Good work?

Yeah, I suppose if you completely ignore all the paid actors that got put on TV, the extremely disproportionate national response to the event, the political scaremongering, the month-long legislative/news/'executive order' blitz, and really all of the facts of the situation, then that statement isn't suspicious at all.

But you're really great at taking evidence totally out of context and then lying about what it means. Hell, it seems like all you do around this site. I mean, you are just a total fucking scumbag, right?

But you're really great at taking evidence totally out of context and then lying about what it means. Hell, it seems like all you do around this site. I mean, you are just a total fucking scumbag, right?

Really? Look at your last post and tell me who is taking lines out of context to make their argument.

That's just the thing - you only seem to want to go into arguments you think you can win. You're fine throwing stones at me for interpreting cryptic messages by the police, but you won't confront the fact that "Robbie Parker" was clearly an actor.

If I had to guess, it's probably because of the PR campaign he went on after the shooting. Having his children (some people think it was his supposedly dead daughter!) taking photographs with the President...in a room that looks alarming like it has some kind of timpani (you know, those huge drums that school bands have) in it...hey, you don't know where they took that photo, did you? I tell you, if my daughter died, I don't think I'd be up for a photo op with Obama the drone-bomber, I don't think my kids would be, either. And that girl sure seemed happy in that picture. Not a care in the world.

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/A-SFxAwCcAAUwdD.jpg:large

Where'd they take that picture? Another school? Pretty weird, even if you don't think that's the girl who supposedly died:

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/12/15/article-2248823-16888C2E000005DC-413_634x421.jpg

Man, the parents sure look fucked up.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-qRtnhgUThw8/UNYKApDs8uI/AAAAAAAAILA/APTTmuyFJII/s1600/Obama+and+family+members+of+Sandy's+school+shooting.jpg

Why is the mother grinning that evil grin in every picture?

Anyway, seems like you're just parroting the official story no matter how much direct evidence conflicts with it. Thus, me calling you a fucking scumbag.

Just out of curiosity how many times are you going to delete this comment and post it again? Thats 3 times now. I'm just wondering how long I should wait before actually replying.

Just making sure to pack in as much evidence as I can to contradict your bullshit. If you have some more smartass lies to tell me, just post them whenever you want.

I already responded to the Robbie Parker claim.

timpani (you know, those huge drums that school bands have) in it...hey, you don't know where they took that photo, did you?

The high school. Where did you think they took it?

I tell you, if my daughter died, I don't think I'd be up for a photo op with Obama the drone-bomber, I don't think my kids would be, either.

I would, he showed up a picture with the president isn't that difficult.

And that girl sure seemed happy in that picture.

Kids aren't the best at understanding tragedy.

Another school? Pretty weird, even if you don't think that's the girl who supposedly died:

You're assuming they have another atrium in the town.

Man, the parents sure look fucked up.

You can't put on a brave face for a photo op with the president? You find that difficult to believe?

Can't even imagine how you ended up where you are. I'd give up my life before I gave up my integrity.

Hard work, a willingness to take on risk for reward and a bunch of luck.

You are posting in a thread where you intentionally chose choice sentences from a statement to make a point that was a lie and you're lecturing me about integrity? I have absolute faith in your integrity. You seem like a rock to me.

Huh, to me it just seemed like you lied a lot and then pretended you didn't.

Show me these lies. Because I don't believe what you do about them being actors I am lying? Again a great sign of integrity on your part.

You not only made a mistake, you openly and willfully false quoted someone to make a point. People with integrity don't do that.

It's how you speak lies with such a convincing air that you think they're true. Not that convincing, once you carefully read the conversation, but maybe enough for somebody stupid enough to believe you without knowing better, at first glance.

I copy and pasted the transcript of his entire speech. I highlighted the thinly veiled threats. Amazing how you accuse me of having a lack of integrity, when you're defending this false narrative and tyrannical weapons control push that the guy who signs all of the U.S.'s war budgets is pushing.

Let me just conclude the conversation, because I can see you will never admit your own horrific goals. I'll sum it up for everyone to read.

You're a fucking liar. You lied about everything you could lie about in this thread, and tried to corner me on the least conclusive of my claims to make me look bad. You're defending mass murderers trying to disarm a population, you're looking at pictures of people grinning maniacally after they've supposedly lost children just days before and pretending it's completely normal, and - to top it all off - I recognize you from how you're in here every single other goddamn day to lie about what the truth is. What kind of empty-hearted bastard hangs around in a forum designed to expose the most deadly empire in world history, just to discredit the people who put everything at risk to do so?

Change your life. Stop whoring yourself out for money. Fucking shame on you, man. It's NOT worth it.

He never mentions conspiracy theorists or conspiracy theories. He defines exactly what he means in the same statement and you pretend he didn't.

You ignore the second sentence because it completely dismantles your argument about his claims.

[deleted]

Maybe a Saiga 12

agreed it looked like a shotgun. My big question about that vid though is if you watch it there are 3-5 guys standing behind the guy unloading the gun dressed in white suits I assume so they dont contaminate anything. The guy holding the gun is touching it with his bare hands which seems so odd to me (wouldnt you want to dust it for prints etc). Its very strange to me. Especially cause its not even adams car?

Yeah, you may be right about that.

A little strange if he brought that and then left it in the trunk. And that he would have supposedly brought all 4 weapons, but then only used the assault rifle, as the media says. Those may not be facts that seal the case.

Answers to the questions posed in the video.

I'm not trying to be insensitive to the lives that might've been lost that day, but I'm not even sure that there was life lost. The use of actors by our media and government disturbs me less than psychopaths on pointless murdering sprees.

In the case that there was a shooting, I would think it was a shooter/accomplice.

In the case that there was no shooting, it's a false lead to make us think there was a shooter.

In the case that there was no shooting, it's a false lead to make us think there was a shooter.

My thoughts exactly.

Reading this reminds me of that one effeminate Hispanic guy who gave his testimony on TV. I remember thinking that he seemed like an actor

He is the father of a student there and the athletic director at the highschool. He was on his way to the school to help make gingerbread houses with 1st graders when he heard the shots. He was unarmed, arrested, detained, questioned, and let go. The story of the guy in the woods was a dead end, so the media dropped it. That is the problem with the 24 hour news cycle, they will report any lead they get before sorting out facts. However, this is hardly evidence of a conspiracy.

he was actually the dad of a student..he was going into the school to cook cupcakes or something of the sort with a class when he heard the commotion..he was captured, questioned then released..its out there if only you would do your own research instead of taking comments as fact from reddit..

What about the man in the woods?

Central to proving any conspiracy theory is finding co-conspirators, which in this case means multiple shooters. Theorists have seized on helicopter footage of a man getting chased by police through the woods behind the school as evidence there was more than one shooter. Who is this man?

Answer: It was Chris Manfredonia, the father of a 6-year-old who attends the school. He was on his way to the school to make gingerbread houses with first-graders when he heard gunfire and smelled sulfur, so he ran.

source: http://articles.latimes.com/2012/dec/14/nation/la-na-1215-newtown-school-shooting-20121215

But there was another man in the woods (maybe): Eyewitnesses saw a second man in the woods wearing camouflage pants and a dark jacket, and said that he may have been armed. Must be a second shooter.

Answer: Actually, he was, according to the Newtown Bee, “an off-duty tactical squad police officer from another town” who heard the gunfire.

source: http://newtownbee.com/News/2012-12-27__14-58-27/Police%20Union%20Seeks%20Funding%20For%20Trauma%20Treatment

and if you wish to answer all the other questions visit http://www.salon.com/2013/01/18/your_comprehensive_answer_to_every_sandy_hook_conspiracy_theory/

The gym teacher.

newtown bee said it was an off duty officer from a nearby town, some other source reported it was a childs father, but either way why did he run from police, and also why would he be screaming "i didnt do it" if he was police he wouldnt need to scream that, and also unlikely for a childs father to feel the need to profess their innocence in that way. i dont want to dig up my sources search for yourselves

Dramatic much? He didn't run from the police and he wasn't screaming I didn't do it. He said he didn't do it to a few of the parents that were standing by when he was walked past them.

Really? School shooting, you're in handcuffs being walked past other parents and you wouldn't feel the need to explain that you didn't just kill/attempt to kill their kids?

The bounds you people take to believe what you do amazes me sometimes.

video shows him running from police they even had a k9 chasing him, and a witness said he said i didn't do it at a group of parents/bystanders.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6OoUNsun2o

Which video shows the chase?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=apdj39gseIA#t=113s

That a fair point and that's what happened but the question still remains who that gentlemen was and what was he doing in close proximity to the school while a shooting was going on. If there was a simple explanation to it I don't understand why it hasn't been addressed to rule that person out. If the media are covering aspects of the conspiracy that are stupid, why not cover this, debunk it and shut people up?

remains who that gentlemen was and want was be doing in close proximity to the school while a shooting was going on.

The question doesn't remain it's been answered extensively. We even know his name.

If there was a simple explanation to it I don't understand why it hasn't been addressed to rule that person out.

It was addressed then the media moved on because it wasn't interesting anymore.

If the media are covering aspects of the conspiracy that are stupid, why not cover this, debunk it and shut people up?

They did cover it extensively. But people that want to believe will ignore any explanation that doesn't fit the narrative in their mind.

The people claiming this is a conspiracy are often claiming the media is involved in a big cover up. Yet using the medias own reports as evidence that it was faked. Seems silly to me. If they were involved in a coverup surely they would warn the people in charge early on and get the story right.

The fact is in major events like this everyone wants to be the first to break a piece of news so every rumor they hear gets pushed out to the news. Since stuff is moving so fast though they rarely feel the need to retract statements.

What was the gentleman's name? I'd like to have a look myself so I can clear this part of it up.

Chris Manfredonia

Thank you.

Psyop to make you believe there was a shooter in the first place. I think the guy giving the interview about the man in camo could be an actor as well. Just my opinion.

i think you could be an actor as well. just my opinion.

Excellent post. There should also not be collective punishment for law abiding gun owners.

Whoever put the soundtrack on this video is a fucking shill.

Furthermore, the overt and immediate attempt to connect all of these attacks to gun control should be transparent enough. The issue with people killing other people has never been about which weapon they used, but why they wanted to kill in the first place. It is about behavior. A killer is going to kill regardless of what kind of weapon they have access to.

I am sorry but you are missing the point of why this is a gun control issue. The point is that Yes, people will kill if they want to kill, however they can kill many more people a lot more efficiently with a civilian version of a military assault rifle than they can with a knife or their bare hands, so of course it raises questions about gun control.

Also.

A killer is going to kill regardless of what kind of weapon they have access to.

You have already stated in you argument that you cannot accept that someone would just go crazy and then kill others seemingly without motive, I would say this statement contradicts that by implying that someone can be predisposed to kill and will do it regardless, simply because it is in their nature. I would call that a crazy person.

Unfortunately your first point is true, however the purpose of the 2nd amendment is that people can protect themselves against the government. If we the people deem the government tyrannical and try to overtake power there is no way except to fight the military with mil spec weapons.

Well I believe it is vastly outdated. The constitution was not written as a static document, it was intended to change as the needs and will of the people changed. That is why there are amendments, I do not see why another amendment would be such a big issue.

I also find the notion of the American Government becoming a tyrannical dictatorship laughable, and the idea that civilians would be even able to overthrow the most powerful military in the world with Assault Rifles ridiculous. The Taliban hold there own with vastly outdated rifles though that is an entirely different case.

Think Timothy Mcveigh. One man. People are capable of a lot of things.

[deleted]

Costas' rant came right after the Chief's guy shot his gf and blasted his brains out in front of his coach. ...so, no, it had nothing to do with Sandy Hook.

It's really scary how obvious it is that we're being lied to, yet instantly get labeled as crazy for believing so.

Misguided questions do not prove that there is a lie. Answers to the questions posed in the video.

Call me crazy but all those drone strikes in Pakistan, they're all fake and never happened! How do I know this? Because I know the truth and you have to DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH! Guess what, if your research results are opposite to what I say, then you obviously didn't research the subject matter enough therefore, you're obviously a shill. In order to find the truth, you must ignore the scientific method of basic research because the scientific method lies all the time when obtaining the obvious truth. It's not a lie if it means rejecting the scientific methods since you're going against the Mainstream media.

*In conclusion, yes you deserved to be labeled crazy for rejecting the basic fundamentals of research.

It can be hard to tell around this place... sarcasm?

Wouldn't outlawing guns make bombs the new meta?

Since making bombs is exponentially more difficult than pulling a trigger its safe to say 'no'.

roughly 5 percent of usa , and we need 30 percent to reach any kind of mass awaking,I think.

Sandy Hook conspiracy theory is almost as stupid as the Tupac was killed by the Illuminati conspiracy theory.

I hadn't realized they found his killers, interesting.

"I hadn't realized they found his killers" How do you know there were killers and not a single killer? What do you know that you're not letting on?

Let me get this straight.

Obama wants to take your guns...because...umm....ok, he just does. What a dick!

So, Obama's like, we need gun laws, but no one will go for it unless we have a mass shooting.

Even though these seem to happen every year or two, Obama's all like, f that noise, I don't have time for a real mass shooting, let's make one up. Come up with a plan, FBI...Go!

The plan Obama settles on is something like this:

1. Send subliminal Manchurian candidate super-psycho cue to secret agent Lanza. (Also send a second shooter? Or maybe a team of agents dressed as nuns?) Anyway,

2. bring in the cast of crisis actors we auditioned last week--these guys are ace! ...yeah one of them kind of is cocky and likes to laugh, but I'm sure he'll be good enough.

3. Threaten/bribe all the 100's of reporters and their crews. Nah, don't bother with Alex Jones, that guy is legit, no way we get him to go along with...DAMN Alex Jones! Obama: It's one thing to slaughter 23 children, but no way am I willing to risk going after AJ....Bloomberg's mafia can scare him or something.

4. Threaten/bribe/silence the families, friends, neighbors, co-workers, extended families, acquaintances of the 23 families. And the state police, the Newtown Police, the FBI...the state medical examiner and office.

5. Get Anderson Cooper and Piers Morgan on the phone...stat! This won't work without them!

6. Pay shills on Internet forums to debunk and ridicule the Internet theorists who may trip us up!

7. Roll out the assault weapon ban to GOP controlled Congress.

Damn that clever Obama!

Truth is stranger than fiction. And it's not Obama. Obama has bosses.

I prefer to think of them as "stakeholders"

That is a fair and acceptable monicker sir.

You know Obama isnt personally resposible he is just afront man who has to sign off on shit he doesnt make the rules

Of course, it was the Illuminati/Fed Reserve/Reptilians who didn't want the guns?????

The Bilderberg group, actually. Or anybody that steps foot inside Bohemian Grove. Maybe not the employees, but still.

You know what they do at Bohemian Grove? Fucking camp, and talk about money. They don't plot the enslavement of the nearly 7 billion people out in the woods

Because you would know.

camping seems like a pretty reasonable thing to do when you're in the woods..

Evidently, you haven't looked into Bohemian Grove very much. Here is the film that exposed it.

Really? Alex Jones? This guy's listed on the Southern Poverty Law center's website..

And I am well aware of what this video contains. You can jazz it up all you want but Its just a hedonistic retreat for the rich and powerful that invokes pseudo-pagan bullshit mysticism to give itself a sense of heritage and self-importance.

Either that or you're right, they use "camping" as a cover up to hide the fact that they're planning a world government to enslave every man woman and child on earth, in between their sadomasochistic rituals and human sacrifice.

But Occam's razor must not apply to them.. I guess they're too rich or something.

I understand Alex Jones isn't the best source when it comes to most things, but his work on the Grove stands out. You're fine with our leaders masquerading as god-fearing christian men in light of day and in shadow of night wear hooded robes and engage in pagan rituals to 40 foot stone statues and pretending to murder human beings to appease it?

Yea. I mean honestly its no different then other (albeit more prevalent) religions.. What ever takes the edge off i guess. As you said, it is just pretending after all. I'm a pretty average guy, but every now and again i enjoy escapist fantasies, like video games or plays. some are graphic and violent.

So you're ok with religious nutjobs being in charge?

no, but that will never not be the case.

Bullets change governments far surer than votes. It can happen.

whoa, hold on, how does this at all relate to what was being discussed?

It relates because religious nutjobs run our country, and they are running it into the ground. They need to be stopped, and a revolution is the only way to do it.

What about just moving to a place that you feel suits you better?

Well naturally I would be inclined to say yes, but seeing as how these people have controlling interests across the entire globe, I don't feel it is possible to escape them any longer. The time for a showdown is near.

can you name any of "These people" please? i am genuinely interested

Here, have the list.

I was not talking about Bilderberg... It seems like you assume these are overlapping groups? is that fare to say?

Yes sir, fare to say.

okay then why have two different groups, with different groups of people? and why exclude the worlds largest population centers and economies?

I look at it sort of in a pyramid shape. Bohemia Club would be the apex, and Bilderburg sitting just below it. All Bohemia Club members are Bilderburg members, but not all Bilderburg members are Bohemia club members.

so why are they both almost exclusively made up of members from north America and western Europe?

I don't understand the question. Both sides travel freely to and from each other?

I'm asking you why these supposed "secret rulers of earth" groups contain almost no members from south america, africa, oceana, or asia.. where the majority of the population and industry is located?

I can only suspect that they don't factor in those areas of the world as important enough to have a chair. Bloodlines have something to do with it too I think

China isnt important enough? What about India? We westerners like to entertain the notion that we are the centre of the world, we're not at all. Those two countrys alone have just about half the worlds population.

If i was aiming to control the worlds economies, id sure as hell start there. so either these groups aren't trying to enslave the worlds population, or they're doing a shit job at it

Good point. Maybe control is split in half right now. Like China has their own Bohemia/Bilderberg thing going over there, but both sides are fighting to control their own people fully before they make their move on the other side? Idk even I'm getting confused about it now.

I wasnt trying to confuse you, i just think its a valid point that is never brought up

You apparently do.

It's funny you said "fucking camp" when Nixon described the grove, which he attended from time to time, as the "single faggiest goddamned thing you can imagine."

Look the only hoax and conspiracy that are true are lance Armstrong and Manti Te'o's just look at the media!

Well, Sandy Hook conspiracy theory is insane paranoia and people are dumb to believe it.

I'm just commenting to save this page. Looks like it will be an interesting read that I just don't have time for at the moment

Very well written.

Hi - it's the crystal bell-like voice of the Englishwoman again - so ready yourselves for some pearls! If it's true that real-life events and The News are being organized by the authorities, it's likely that the conspiracy theories are being organised too. (Is that the meaning of 'shill'?) The people directing us are the finest psychologists that governments can find! First they put out slogans such as 'Battle for Hearts and Minds', which they hope the lower orders will swallow (though anyone slightly raised from an amoeba will realise that this is as effective as using an antibiotic against a virus), then they get on to the advanced stuff. I don't know what it is, but planting over-the-top conspiracy theories, controlling random people via the internet, then egging on a potential nutter to do some shooting, which they augment, could be routes. There are likely to be very few people 'in the know' (actually at first I thought it might be many), because of course, such operations function on a 'need to know' basis. So Real Life becomes Hollywood! 'If we create the Bad Guys, we can defeat them in the end!' Forums such as this are like when, in 'The Truman Show', the character sails out to sea and touches the sky - which he finds to be made of cardboard. Is there any hope for a better world? Yes, because Top Dog Mind-Control Man will eventually want to spend time with his wife and kids. Although it's a very rewarding job, isn't it? All that power! However, one day he or she will look at a plant growing from the earth, and realise that that is more rewarding. Or events will change to another dynamic.

I'm just glass this has been exposed the common Joe

Insane production and absolute 100% conjecture-free proof that Christopher Manfredonia (the man in the woods) was Adam Lanza's next door neighbor!!!: http://sandyhookwaskindaweird.bl­­ogspot.com/ No conjecture, this is real. This is a break in the whole understanding of the event, and everyone has to save as much evidence as possible before it gets swept up further. They already withdrew Rodia's registry and are saying it's bunk, but this is solid fact, see for yourself.

Say that "they" succeed and try take all the guns and the people rise up to stop it. Who would you use those guns against when you fight back against the government in a patriotic revolution? Private Schmuckatelly from down the street who joined the army a year ago who joined because he wanted to serve his country and enjoys shooting? Who are we supposed to use our gun collections on exactly?

It seems to me like this is the case with any sort of traumatic event, not only in mainstream US media, but worldwide. The government preys on fear to exact their agenda. Fear is powerful, because it is a strong emotion. When something bad like this happens, the government can now say "Oh, don't worry, we can PROTECT you! Don't worry, we got this! Don't worry, we have your best interests at heart, and we can implement CONTROLS to "PROTECT" you." The sad thing is that because so many people are brainwashed by their individual country's mainstream media, they are conditioned to believe what they hear. This is not a matter of whether or not the "conspiracy" regarding this event is true or not, but it has everything to do with the general populations inability to think critically. We live in an age where we are conditioned from birth to do what we are told, think how we are told, and believe what we are told. Only a small portion of the population actually takes the time to question things like this, yet they are labeled as crazies, lunatics, and conspiracy theorists. Whether Sandy Hook was staged, planned, or used to fulfill an agenda seems to me to be irrelevant. I think the real thing we need to be paying attention to and questioning is our own ability to think for ourselves. We need to be questioning why we are subjecting ourselves to these various methods of social control. I'm sorry for sounding sort of off topic, but this is all I could think about when reading this post. <3 you reddit.

I wish i could like this post more than once, well written and thank you for pointing out such an important observation (the number of views).

So, 10 million people watch a Youtube video and that somehow legitimises its information?

This post is slanted as all hell. It's about the term "official story" - it's meaningless. There is no official story - there exists a large amount of erroneous reporting and an inordinate amount of YouTube sleuthery. There are a ton of people who are coming at this with the certainty that a conspiracy is at play. Yet that strong belief is based on "evidence" that is flimsy as fuck.

MSM is not some monolithic entity, and the"official story" is simply the collected published reports of scores of individual companies and individuals. Any Redditor should understand that social media are now the vanguards in any fast-breaking story like this, and MSM is looking to us to provide the details - look at the initial reports of Ryan Lanza being the shooter for a perfect example of how MSM reported false information.

Now before people start in with the fucking "sheeple" comments, let me say this - I question everything any government says, and I know full well that governments conduct psychological operations, and occasionally disappear people, and occasionally abuse citizens, from MK Ultra, to Bradley Manning, to 9-11, to feeding radioactive materials to mentally handicapped children. Which is why this idiotic fucking story pisses me off so much - it dilutes inquiry and injures the community's ability to raise questions about REAL conspiracy.

As to the theory being espoused here - let me be frank - the idea of crisis actors portraying the parents of dead children is utterly retarded. Those 20 murdered children all had parents. Those parents would never remain silent at the death of their kids. Any 'actors' would never be able to play another role in their entire careers - what actor would take that job? It simply doesn't make sense - and anyone who has worked with professional actors will tell you the same thing. What do these "crisis actors" do for a living once their entire country believes them to be parents from Newtown, CT!? The idea is absurd.

Some here will label me a shill or a dupe - but the truth is, this fucking sub used to mean something and used to be about information. The Newtown Shooting Conspiracy is an attempt to derail the CT community and I, for one, will speak against it wherever possible.

Your assuming the number of views correlates to a general disbelief. It's just as likely that its a bunch of people shocked that anyone could believe what the video says.

10 million views and you think the like/dislike(total of 40,000) is indicative of the overall feelings? People that are heavily invested in the theory are far more likely to vote on the video to try and get it more coverage than people just watching it from a link on facebook.

No it's not because it's a self selecting sample.

Are you under the impression that there is some sort of conspiracy to drive up the "like" votes on this video?

No I'm under the impression that only people with an interest in it beyond a passing glance will vote one way or the other.

Seriously. I'm having a hard time believing that someone can make the arguments you make while also feeling confident that it all has meaning behind it.

Guessing you never studied statistics?

I've seen a lot of hate for the conspiracy theorists in the Sandy Hook case. So much so that Anderson Cooper (or whoever writes the stuff on the teleprompter) thought it necessary to address the issue. I've also seen thousands upon thousands of comments, on Reddit, news sites, etc., from people hating on the conspiracy theorists. My point: In this particular case, the anti-conspiracy folks have been very vocal. Why wouldn't they also be vocal on the Youtube video? Surely if these people feel so strongly that Sandy Hook is not fishy at all, to the point where they write long winded comments on websites about it, they'd be more than willing to thumbs-down a Youtube video?

That sounded better in my head. Let me try and rephrase it: I think in this case, the like/dislike count WOULD be indicative of the overall feelings, because I've seen both the conspiracy theorists and the anti-conspiracy theorists being vocal on the net. Usually, all I see is the conspiracy theorists, and the anti- don't voice opinion at all.

It's a self selecting sample though. Conspiracy theorists(and this whole thread is an example) are seeing it as something to rally around and are trying to get it more attention and credibility which they see upvoting as doing. Most people that think it is bad though and since downvoting isn't going to do anything aren't going to bother.

I get what you're saying. I've seen a lot of people rally against the conspiracy this time around however. I don't remember the Aurora conspiracy getting cable news time (not saying it didn't, just that it was never brought to my attention).

Because this one involves 20 little kids so people are more emotional about their deaths than 12 strangers at a theatre.

I hate to admit it, but that's a valid point. Driven home by Obama signing 23 gun laws on stage while surrounded by children.

http://www.salon.com/2013/01/17/the_23_executive_orders_that_weren%E2%80%99t/

I'd like to see the increase in spending for mental health ones go through first though.

I agree. I've read stories of various states and counties (mine, Larimer, CO, included) that pledge to not honor any gun laws enacted by executive order. I hope the intent isn't to throw the baby out with the bath water and ignore the mental health side of things. Conspiracy or not.

You sound like a child. 14-15 for sure.

Crisis actors are at the heart of this conspiracy - without them, the entire theory falls apart. I mention them, because I have a lot of experience with actors and I find the idea of clandestine actors to be the weakest link in a weak theory.

I'm with you on this one. Telling the media to "do your job" is like telling cats to get in line. And there will always be conflicting reports the first 24 hours after a major event. Frank Reynolds reported Ronald Reagan wasn't hit, then yelled at his staff for incoming information that Reagan was dead. (Let's get this right, people!).

That being said, though, I don't understand why Anderson Cooper will just say people are cooking up hurtful conspiracy theories but won't debunk them. That's where I get off the bus.

[deleted]

"The MSM is not some monolithic entity"

LOL.... ever try to get a 3rd party candidate on the media for equal time during an election?!!!!

Tell me another fairytale.

Those parents would never remain silent at the death of their kids.

And yet, silent "they" are. No tears (not one). Lots of smiles, happy memories all-too-ready at hand in the midst of 'crisis', lining up for press interviews, NO ONE has reported seeing the deceased body of their child. NO WAY are real parents going to let their deceased child go into the ground without seeing them.

I had two friends who were husband and wife that were brutally murdered by (many) multiple gunshots to the face. Guess what? They both had open casket funerals. The son of my friend committed suicide by gunshot to the head. He had an open casket funeral. Make up does a lot, and funeral homes are used to it.

I CRY FOUL. There were NO dead bodies. If there were truly victims, first responders would have been allowed to enter and triage / resuscitate.

And yet, silent "they" are. No tears (not one). Lots of smiles,

What? WHAT?

NO ONE has reported seeing the deceased body of their child.

Nevermind the funerals/

I had two friends who were husband and wife that were brutally murdered by (many) multiple gunshots to the face. Guess what? They both had open casket funerals. The son of my friend committed suicide by gunshot to the head. He had an open casket funeral. Make up does a lot, and funeral homes are used to it.

What's your point?

I CRY FOUL. There were NO dead bodies. If there were truly victims, first responders would have been allowed to enter and triage / resuscitate.

Cry foul on what? What's your alternative explanation?

Nevermind the funerals/

Even Tom Sawyer knows a coffin can be empty.

What's your point?

Obviously, my point is that a funeral home can make a corpse look "natural" -- and every parent of a 'dead' child could have had the chance to mourn their child properly and have a last contact with them. Pictures to prove they are dead? Pictures of the bloody crime scene, taken raw, in the act - and /that/ is what the parents were shown, "photos of their facial features" -- supposedly to assuage their grief they were spared seeing their child lying cold and dead. Such pictures would be far more ghastly to view (if they existed, that is) than would a body that had been "prepared" for viewing by a funeral home. Thus my point that no parent had to be denied the chance to "say goodbye" (and yes, it does give closure, don't be a nincompoop). Yet, they ALL were forbidden to see their child.

A real parent would demand to see their child.

What's your alternative explanation?

If only I had one. Maybe they were kidnapped for government experimentation, forever to be locked up in a detention center (they do have swing sets). Maybe they never existed. THERE WERE NO DEAD BODIES. NONE. Nada. Zilch.

NONE of those parents were grieving.

Sandy Hoax rots to high heaven. Exactly why the government has created such a sloppy psy op escapes me. Obviously, the common man has noticed the details, therefore, they were meant to.

If only I had one.

That's not what I mean. I want a full explanation of what happened. Who planned this? Why? When? Where? How did they pull it off? What proof do you have?

You have NONE. NONE AT ALL. You're inferring from some fucking photos of people crying that they're actors, and then concluding that the government set it all up. This is the most intellectually dishonest bullshit I have ever seen. You should be ashamed.

How did you even get through high school with such a pathetic understanding of critical thinking?

Oh! Now I get it. You've convinced me.

"None of this is evidence for a conspiracy at all. It's completely irrelevant garbage."

Just keep saying it, over and over. Over and over. And over.

Don't you understand? For it to be evidence it has to hold up under scrutiny. For evidence of government actions you're going to need some kind of expressed proof that the government did something. You'll need a confession under oath, or a document, or something like that. You need actual evidence, not this stupid crap about analyzing photos.

Nailed it. Best post in this discussion

Tell that to the Medical Examiner.

NO ONE has reported seeing the deceased body of their child.

You obviously have no idea what you're talking about.

http://www.dartsociety.org/cms/choosing-sensitive-details-in-one-sandy-hook-story/

Any others?

hahahahahaha it was flagged as "offensive".

oh God I can't stop laughing.

Incredible post, I've linked some friends to read it.

This says it well. Nice post.

These highly publicized attacks have left the public with far more questions than answers. The incompetence of the media and the lack of any real solid evidence to support the official narrative of HOW the attack was carried out is alarming.

If I just lost my beloved child to a gun murder in a school. My wife & I would be absolutely howling with sorrow, NOT: 1) Immediately setting up Facebook 'fund' pages for our child 2) Giving speeches in front television cameras & smirking before speaking on camera.

And I can guarantee we would be trying to see the body until successful and not going on national television giving smiley interviews.

I call bull.

The family never setup a facebook fund page.

http://scienceblogs.com/cortex/2010/02/22/laughter-and-grief/

If you ever have a child shot 5 times in the face, please make sure to let us know how much of a rock you will be.

the video says they made the page on december 14th, but when you goto the page and click on about, it says december 15th. either the video is lying, or they got facebook to help them change it. and yeah, its not a donation page, just a RIP page.

You are you, not someone else

I've seen a family that lost a child. They weren't smiling afterward. They looked in shock and cried for many weeks afterward. Why are people condemned for asking questions?

omg that Robbie Parker dude's acting was priceless.

The amount of government shills in this thread is astounding...what person on the right side of history defends an oppressive, wasteful, powerhungry, secret society like the U.S. goverment.

It was a huge hoax put on by the Obama administration to help try to dearm america. No one died at sandy hook. If you watch videos closely the parents do not even cry and are smiling before they know they are filmed. This is just the beginning of our country trying to make us helpless so that they can control us all!

10 million potential nutters

Conspiracy busted. Next.

Youtube views can be bought. There's a conspiracy going on with these views.

[deleted]

9......11

How about how all these shootings keep happening around political time lines... like election time or right before an inauguration.

You're a fucking lunatic as are the rest of these fucking nutjobs.. seriously fuck off with your bullshit. some conspiracies i buy but not this .. it is not even remotely funny. I hope one day your own kids get shot so you understand the pain those parents are going through

Calling someone a lunatic, and then wishing his kids get shot? Class act, you are. And no one thinks this shit is even remotely funny, FYI

Yeah, almost as classy as considering yourself more intelligent and educated than the entirety of "the masses" because you watched a fucking youtube video.

hey, thanks for assuming things about me!

You're very welcome. I am quite confident that you believe you're "awake" compared to the "sheeple."

all anyone do is read your history....one trick

What about my history?

[deleted]

What about that?

Actually I don't sit around and try and compare myself to other people, especially someone's 'level of awakness', but again, nice assumption ass hat, perhaps you can't read who submitted comments

This right here is what they learn second semester of trolling school funded by the cia

Really? That's a pretty ridiculous thing to say.

its ridiculous to find people making light of a slaughter of children? i have two kids in school and frankly im terrified that this will happen in their school. Think what you want wacko.

Interesting that you didn't get that I was referencing your wish that his children die.

Do you only care about certain kids, or do you just pretend when it fits your narrative?

nutjobs

How about you try to state your views to debate instead of making yourself look stupid regurgitated what you read on Yahoo news.

Probably because all of this has been thoroughly debunked several times here. The conspiracy community doesn't like the truth so they just downvote us and call us shills.

It looks more like the NRA is using the community to push their agenda.

I feel your pain. I continue to see questions raised in this thread such as "who was the man in camouflage?" which have been answered through and through. They find one little snippet that sounds entertaining, take it out of context and run with it.

In the end, they just want an entertaining story, and LOVE to feel oh-so smarter than all the sheep and shills. It'd be funny if it weren't so disgustingly sad.

Answers to the questions posed in the video.

No. How about you state your fucking views for once, instead of putting some goddamn questions and "inconsistencies" in a fucking list for the billionth time.

You spineless cowards.

B-b-but inconsistencies! No kids were murdered! Paid actors! Everyone's out for me and my guns! Muh constitutional rights!

lol nice account you spineless coward

Can't tell if trolling. But, it's pretty obvious what the common view is. The official story, as they often do, has holes in it. Which only makes sense since it's now being used to further an agenda for guess what?? More stripping of civil liberties under the guise of safety. It's a classic formula. Convince the majority, appealing to their emotions, they are under threats that don't exist and they need to give up their rights for Big Brother to protect them.

The official story, as they often do, has holes in it.

Holes in it, sure. So what? What does this imply? Because there are holes the whole thing must be false? That's absolutely mad.

In other words, what we are being told isn't the truth. The masses are being manipulated to change the way they think. Are you okay with that?

No, media coverage makes mistakes sometimes. My lord, you are narcissistic.

And almost simultaneously, there has been a national media campaign to expose conspiracy theorists as delusional, paranoid, and insensitive people.

FTFY

We're just supposed to sit back and accept that for some reason now in our world people can go completely crazy and carry out a precise assault on innocent people while leaving no explanation as to why?

Yes, people can do shitty things. Especially crazy people. Is reality too much for your tiny mind to handle?

Congrats on your first comment ever!http://www.reddit.com/user/meesahappy

This is such a non argument. You're a lunatic for believing something without any evidence to support it whatsoever, not because of some label.

Man.. it's hard making rational points with such a tiny mind.

Funny, this is how I feel around here. Though, at the very least I know it's wrong. You guys don't have tiny minds, you have normal ones, they're just full of bad cognitive habits and empty of basic rational thinking skills.

Correct

Reading these posts is by far the biggest waste of time...ever. And yet I read every single one. YOU ARE ALL...disappointing.

[deleted]

If I were attempting to be both open-minded as well as skeptical, I'd suggest that there may be more than just two possibilities to a given scenario.

However, if I were attempted to divide and conquer a thread, I'd vehemently insist there are "only two" possibilities and demand that everyone pick which "side" they're on. Heck, I might also throw a little insult at the end just to make things interesting.

To quote my post from earlier today:

...maybe we can let go of the "all or nothing" mentality that seems to pervade the debates.

For example, just because there are so many fishy things surrounding Sandy Hook doesn't automatically mean that the deaths weren't real or that the people involved were actors. (Personally, I'm not assuming one way or the other, either side has yet to be proven.)

On the other hand, let's assume for a moment that the deaths are all real and the people were not actors... let's entertain this possibility. (Any critically thinking person will not rule out the possibility simply because it doesn't emotionally appeal to them.) Even if this is truly the case, which it may be, it does not automatically mean that the whole thing wasn't set up. Real blood sacrifice is always more effective than fake any day... so ruling out the most seemingly popular theories of fake deaths and actors does not, in any way, disprove that it could be something more nefarious at work.

If the deaths are real and the people aren't actors, claiming otherwise would be the perfect way to discredit all the conspiracy theories. These could just be the straw men while the real issue isn't fake deaths or actors... rather it is some of the other information that points to another heavily coordinated operation (to push whatever agenda).

One supposed fact or another doesn't make the whole debate go away... but it could easily distract from what we probably ought to be paying more attention to.

One supposed fact or another doesn't make the whole debate go away... but it could easily distract from what we probably ought to be paying more attention to.

And let me guess: what we probably ought to be paying attention to is why the powers that be go to such elaborate measures to accomplish confusion around a "real blood sacrifice".

Sheesh.

This doesn't address the essential issue, which is the logical conclusion of the point you're trying to make. If you accept the explanation that it may be a coordinated operation, that implies that not only are there coordinators, but that many people played along with those coordinators' wills. This raises more than a few questions. Who are these people? How did they plan this? How did they enforce it? Who played along and who was tricked? Did the media know it was fake? If not, why are you using media information as sources?

You have no answers to these. You have no evidence. The possibility can only be thrown out. There is only one conclusion we can make at this point, which is that this is NOT a conspiracy.

Yes, it raises questions. Raising questions is exactly what this subreddit, and the quest for truth, is all about. That, and attempting to find the answers to those questions of course.

If there isn't solid evidence one way or the other, the "only" conclusion we can make is that we cannot currently make a valid conclusion. Hence the "theory" part of the conspiracy theory.

I personally can't take anyone too seriously when they start speaking in absolutes such as "the only" this or that.

You raise questions and then never, ever answer them. I'm sorry, but if you won't even attempt to find an answer, then you are wasting everyone's time. Calling your rambling assembly of questions a "theory" is an insult to the very word "theory," which means a collection of evidence and arguments about a particular phenomenon. You have neither, only questions.

Incidentally, the questions you do bring up are almost always answered by third party debunkers, who's answers are invariably rejected despite having no alternative answer whatsoever.

Give me a straight answer: if this was not a shooting by a single, deranged man, what was it?

I'm not forcing you into anything, so the only one "wasting your time" is you, not me. Go read a book if you think this is a waste of time, for all I care.

I'm not suggesting it wasn't a shooting by a single, deranged man. It very well could have been. Regardless of which story is true, that particular version of the story needs facts to back it up just like any other version. I don't see much of that right now, just a lot of confusion about what's fact and what's not. Strangers getting emotional on the internet does not constitute fact, no matter what story you choose to believe.

If I could provide you with legitimate facts to back up any story, assuming it was the true one, I would. So basically, if you want answers, asking the random redditor probably isn't going to yield much. Of course I don't know... I wasn't there. Sorry I don't have all the answers for ya.

You don't understand. What I'm asking you to do is follow up on your questions, which you refuse to do. You don't seem to be in search of the actual answer, but rather an answer you prefer. You are juggling possibilities right now and not addressing either.

Use a little rational thought here. Let's analyze the explanations we have now. One of them must be right. What explanations do you offer in lieu of the so called "official" one? If you have none, then we default to believing the official one. It explains the scenario perfectly with no assumptions at all and no gaps in logic.

Funny, you assume which answer I would "prefer", let alone that I would "prefer" one over the other. Maybe you don't understand.

In all honesty, I would "prefer" the official explanation - that would be a lot less scary than the alternatives.

I will gladly juggle possibilities all day and night before I would jump on thread making absolutist statements about an incredibly touchy subject for which I have no proof.

Rationalize this: asserting that one of the currently circulating possible explanations "must" be the right one... well I'm sorry, but your absolutist terms give you away as the one in this thread with the confirmation bias. I made my post to encourage an attempt at objectivity regarding this matter, and nothing more. Reading into deeper than that isn't going to prove anything one way or the other - and it certainly isn't going to convince anyone here that your ideas "must" be the "only" truth.

EDIT: grammar

Reading your replies is honestly the most depressing thing I've done in a long time.

You don't seem to understand anything, ANYTHING, about the scientific method, about Occam's Razor, about high school logic. It's depressing. I really don't have time to explain these topics to you right now.

I will gladly juggle possibilities all day and night before I would jump on thread making absolutist statements about an incredibly touchy subject for which I have no proof.

No proof? Really? There are mountains, MOUNTAINS, of proof for the official story. Seriously, that's the end of it right there. It has the most proof, it makes no fatal assumptions, it explains every detail of the event. There is no alternative at this time. You don't get to juggle things here, you're ignoring facts.

I genuinely apologize for depressing you, not my intention at all.

I'd love some links to the mountains of proof you speak of, since I have none of my own.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting

Wikipedia ought to be a decent start.

Ah! The good ole "Occam's Razor" rebuttal... The late George Carlin talks about how the term "conspiracy theorist" is a label used by the establishment to dismiss the idea that powerful people might get together and actually plan anything.

What Occam's Razor doesn't account for is the general stupidity of the American people. You don't need some shadowy operation to dupe the American people. Most are fucking morons, as displayed in the wildly popular "Reality TV" genre. Can you honestly say it would be hard to trick the viewers of Honey fucking Boo Boo(read: a very large portion of the population)?

You, my friend, give the American people far more credit than they deserve...

Uh, what is your point here? That people are dumb? Fair enough,I know people can be dumb. I'm responding to a dumb person right now. What does that have to do with my post?

Nice strawman buddy... You're under the impression that the general public would be keen enough to spot a plan in action. I refuted that point by pointing out the ignorance of the general public. See where I'm going with this? You don't need to trick people that are too stupid to realize what the "shadowy government" is doing in the first place. The general public has been willingly voting away rights and privileges since the days of Woodrow Wilson...

Look. Read what I'm writing here. Please try to follow along, I know thinking isn't your strong suit.

I don't care if the public is stupid. That is irrelevant.

There? See? Now, answer my question: did the government fake this event? Yes? No?

If so, who did? I want names. How? I want details. When? Where? You're making claims and then not providing evidence.

I doubt the event was faked. Was there gross sensationalization by the media, and children used as a tool to push an agenda that is an attack on constitutional rights? Most definitely! If you cannot see that, I don't know what to tell you. This isn't the first time the government has done this and it most certainly won't be the last.

Was there gross sensationalization by the media, and children used as a tool to push an agenda that is an attack on constitutional rights? Most definitely!

Except this never happened, did it? Yeah, a lot of stupid talk happened, a lot of simplifications were made, some opportunism, but nothing has actually happened.

Apparently you don't pay attention to politics. Obama issued a 23 point bill on Wednesday. Perhaps you should actually research the things you're denying before making yourself look like more of a fool.

Your claim was that he would overturn the 2nd amendment. He hasn't. Therefore nothing has happened.

You seem to be incredibly dense. Big changes on a national scale come in small doses. Anything more would cause mass civil unrest and get ugly. I'm glad you seem to think infringement upon constitutional rights is a non-issue because it hasn't gone far enough yet. You're exactly the kind of moron the government relies on to ruin the country. But please, by all means, keep your head buried in the sand. Just don't be surprised when people like me are laughing at you and telling you to man up because you were too stupid to realize negative changes to the structure and foundation of the country until it's too late.

No, you are the one missing the point here. If the government had some grand plan (who has this plan exactly?) to change the constitution slowly over years or decades, they wouldn't need to fake events wherein children are murdered to do it. They would just do it and come up with an excuse. Are you really incapable of seeing this?

The gradual degradation of the Constitution and Bill of Rights has been happening for decades guy... That is a fact. Did I say Newtown was faked? Nope, I sure didn't. Did I say it was politicized to attack a 200+ year old constitutional right? Yep, I sure did! It doesn't take a genius to notice it. You're also showing your complete and utter lack of life experience by saying the government would "just do it." Apparently you also need to research some history instead of acting like a twat on Reddit as well.

Did they politicize it? Of course! Did I ever say they didn't? All I'm saying is that it's incredibly difficult to overturn anything in your constitution.

Occam's Razor is a theory, not a scientific law num nuts.

It's neither, my friend. It's a principle. Besides, a scientific theory and a scientific law are basically synonyms. For something to be considered a "theory" it is essentially completely true, the difference is that a law is usually a single, simple thing, whereas a theory covers a broad range of science. For example, the theory of heliocentrism contains many scientific laws supporting it.

Also, speaking on the concept of Occam's Razor, it is a simple logical principle that simply states that any explanation that requires no untestable or unproven assumptions is preferable to one that includes some.

[deleted]

Glad to hear from you. Are folks from Newtown generally aware that this conspiracy BS is happening about the tragedy?

A few are, the harassment directed at folks who have dealt with direct tragedy is disgusting. I think most wouldn't even take notice. Would you stop to listen to a person raving about the sky being purple?

Also the Norway bombing/shooting, 2004 Madrid bombing, Taft High School massacre. The odds of just one of these drills coinciding with the actual event being drilled are astronomical.

The "mock drill" at Aurora was in a classroom and wasn't a drill.

How do you know this is genuinely extraordinary without information about how common these sorts of drills are?

Which video shows the chase?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&amp;v=apdj39gseIA#t=113s

"The drill" is put in place so the government has an excuse to take over an investigation and issue gag orders like a Pez dispenser. They can say "Oh, our drill became reality? This is going to look bad on us. We should take over so that nothing 'erroneous' gets out and blows up in our face. Let all the local officials know that their job is done here."

It is a good cover story to remain in control.

Source please.

Also, this is just a worthless coincidence. What's your point? Even if there where drills on all three occasions, what does that imply?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6OoUNsun2o

Huffington post is speaking on debunking this.

There is a huge list of questions NOT included in that video that need to be answered. There is also absolutely no real way to go about proving any of the debunking to be correct independently. The government has a history of killing, sponsoring terror, running guns and killing people all over the world. I am no too terribly trusting of anything they do. I certainly want to believe they wouldn't do this but the truth is we will never know, and I wouldn't put it past them. Aurora Colorado certainly seems strange. I think that one was probably staged as well as Sikh temple shooting. Saying that this one couldn't have been is like saying the government blew up building 7 but had nothing to do with the other 2 towers. I remain skeptical of both sides when it comes to Sandy Hook.

Holy shee, wake up, dude. Read about how the Third Reich worked, then maybe you will begin to understand what it implies.

I'm not forcing you into anything, so the only one "wasting your time" is you, not me. Go read a book if you think this is a waste of time, for all I care.

I'm not suggesting it wasn't a shooting by a single, deranged man. It very well could have been. Regardless of which story is true, that particular version of the story needs facts to back it up just like any other version. I don't see much of that right now, just a lot of confusion about what's fact and what's not. Strangers getting emotional on the internet does not constitute fact, no matter what story you choose to believe.

If I could provide you with legitimate facts to back up any story, assuming it was the true one, I would. So basically, if you want answers, asking the random redditor probably isn't going to yield much. Of course I don't know... I wasn't there. Sorry I don't have all the answers for ya.

But the Newtown Bee also claimed it INTERVIEWED the principal AFTER the shooting and quoted that principal's remarks verbatim

Uh oh. Then the msm declared the principal died DURING the alleged shooting

so who the hell would grant credence to the Newtown Bee OR the msm

We know nothing about what happened off screen there or what was said. Is it odd? Sure.

He definitely put on a face for the cameras there but to jump from that to the fact he is a paid actor pretending to be the parent of a kid murdered is a huge leap. It's more likely that someone told him something that made him smile then when he went to get on camera he realized how shitty that would look. An actor wouldn't be getting into character on screen like that.

I genuinely apologize for depressing you, not my intention at all.

I'd love some links to the mountains of proof you speak of, since I have none of my own.

They wouldn't have acted in the fake scenario if they didn't think the government could control the resulting press.

Isn't that why the police chief threatened prosecution against anybody talking about alternative theories to what the police said happened? Either way, that seems like a pretty radical claim by the police that our free speech/free press rights will no longer be respected. Pretty unprecedented, for that matter.

So yes, that's the most likely conclusion, by a long shot, since there isn't a snowball's chance in hell that any of those people had actually lost a child, or even seen dead children (like the supposed 'medical examiner' had). They made a really shitty judgment, that people wouldn't uncover their piss-poor acting, and exposed their scam all over national TV.

I guess you just won't admit it. That just makes me think something is seriously wrong with you - that you come here every day just to try to bury what's obviously true. I see you in /r/conspiracy every single day, but you never admit you're wrong about anything, no matter how high the facts are stacked against you! Talk about bad acting.

Feel free to back up that ramble.

Oh! Now I get it. You've convinced me.

"None of this is evidence for a conspiracy at all. It's completely irrelevant garbage."

Just keep saying it, over and over. Over and over. And over.

sigh Its called 'The Null Hypothesis'

The one thing I don't understand abou the whole Facebook thing is what about the comments? Ok, they made the page for an unrelated reasons and then changed it (which is weird but ok), what about the comments on the page asking why it had been created? And what about the comments on Emilie's page (I think, it's early) that express sadness over the loss of their daughter. These are comments on a page, not the page itself, sent before the school was even on lock down.

I agree that it's probably nothing, I just haven't been able to square it away.

Plus, the mock drills thing is weird.

How dare you??

Good argument.

People like Alex Jones lead the charge in creating these ridiculous theories. They are the ones profiting from it.

Narrow minded people such as myself are the people considering the facts while people like you waste your time thinking of contrived theories solidified by your own paranoia.

Really? Alex Jones? This guy's listed on the Southern Poverty Law center's website..

And I am well aware of what this video contains. You can jazz it up all you want but Its just a hedonistic retreat for the rich and powerful that invokes pseudo-pagan bullshit mysticism to give itself a sense of heritage and self-importance.

Either that or you're right, they use "camping" as a cover up to hide the fact that they're planning a world government to enslave every man woman and child on earth, in between their sadomasochistic rituals and human sacrifice.

But Occam's razor must not apply to them.. I guess they're too rich or something.

I don't understand the question. Both sides travel freely to and from each other?

I'm asking you why these supposed "secret rulers of earth" groups contain almost no members from south america, africa, oceana, or asia.. where the majority of the population and industry is located?

So you link me to an article that says most times they don't use lights and sirens to transport, to prove me wrong when I said that most times they don't use lights and sirens to transport?

This is how far you'll go to avoid admitting that your preconceived notion of a giant secret conspiracy might possibly be wrong in one tiny aspect. It's pathetic, really.