newtruth221 and her private sub reddit has been banned for furthering S.H. investigation!
37 2014-03-30 by TemptingOwl
newtruth221 has been passionately investigating the events concerning Sandy Hook and because of her efforts any attempt to view her post history is blocked and her private sub reddit concerned with privately investigating Sandy Hook has also been taken offline.
We are on the verge of taking legal action against the perpetrators of the Sandy Hook Hoax and these childish efforts to silence true progress cannot be just brushed under the rug.
newtruth221 NEVER suggesting contacting anyone in Newtown, no private information was ever released to the reddit community, no calls were made to effected families, etc. newtruth221 did nothing wrong
Were her efforts to inspect physical documents in the Newtown registry crossing the line between allowed internet speculation and real world detective work?
It appears to me now that as this movement is gaining momentum, uncovering evidence at ever increasing speed, and forming a coherent case the efforts to crush it grow in tandem.
I commend newtruth221 and encourage others to do the same
edit: newtruth221 may be a dude, but honestly the users gender means nothing in regards to the core of this post.
edit #2: The private sub created by newtruth221 that I now cannot access is www.reddit.com/r/privateinvestigate
edit #3: if newtruth221 is reading this I'd appreciate it if you contacted me.
485 comments
115 Totally_not_a_shill 2014-03-30
On one post, newtruth221 does the following:
Provides the name and a headshot-style photograph of a Newtown resident with a tenuous connection to the Lanza family.
Posts a link to the homepage of the family practice where he practices medicine.
Posts the man's home address AND a picture of the man's home.
Posts the man's business address AND a picture of the building.
This is called doxxing and it's a bannable offence. She has herself to blame and no one else.
Are you seriously going to try that? I would be surprised if you actually found a lawyer who would represent you. Just save yourself the time and money and frustration and let it go, you are going to accomplish absolutely nothing.
-21 Zanzibareous 2014-03-30
In your post, you claim that OP broke certain rules by posting personal information. However, you add on at the end that nothing will ever come about with the research and investigation. Why so quick to add that facet into your comment when the OP has not presumed anything about the events, save for the official narrative not making sense.
Are you saying you follow and wholeheartedly believe all details of the official story?
13 Totally_not_a_shill 2014-03-30
OP and newtruth221 are different people (I assume). The last part was in response to OP who says they are about to take legal action. I'm just saying that absolutely nothing will come of it. Unless they have some crazy new evidence that they haven't let anyone in on, which I'm positive they don't, then there is literally nothing they can do.
And I believe that a crazy kid shot up a school, I don't think the government had anything to do with it.
-8 TylerTheNomad 2014-03-30
A school getting shot up is a tragic thing. It's extreme enough to get people against guns and further efforts for gun regulation. When total control is the government's goal, taking away our ability to defend ourselves is near the top of their to do list. You don't think the government would sacrifice some children to accomplish that goal?
11 Totally_not_a_shill 2014-03-30
I don't think the government is trying to take peoples guns. People have been going on about that for decades now. It's not going to happen. Let's also remember that this whole incident resulted in no major changes to gun control laws.
3 tatonkanator 2014-03-30
You're wrong about there being no major gun control laws being passed due to Sandy Hook. http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2014-01-31/connecticut-gun-law-passed-after-sandy-hook-ruled-legal.html
10 Random_letter_name 2014-03-30
So, the state passed a law banning assault weapons and high cap magazines. Nothing national. Not even close.
-4 tatonkanator 2014-03-30
False again, sighting Sandy Hook Obama Pledges Gun Control 'With Or Without Congress' In 2014 State of the Union Address
4 Random_letter_name 2014-03-30
Yeah, that is never going to happen. Congress can stop it or the Supreme Court can stop it. Also, nothing has actually been passed nationally.
-2 TylerTheNomad 2014-03-30
That's a fair point about no major changes coming from it, but I do believe they're trying to get rid of civilian gun ownership. People would be too pissed if they did ban them all together, so they're just making it harder and harder to get them.
1 tatonkanator 2014-03-30
That's not a fair point because it is false. http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2014-01-31/connecticut-gun-law-passed-after-sandy-hook-ruled-legal.html
-5 toontoon3 2014-03-30
Gun laws are a dynamic, complex thing that change through time. It is categorically true that Sandy Hook is often used as an example in anti-gun TV spots or debate on gun control within the US. Therefore, the operation was successful and will continue to create ripples throughout society for decades.
Even if it was true that legislation has not been passed as a result of the event, and that's false, the event has scared the shit out of millions of people, it has altered their thinking and behavior, just as it was designed to do.
6 toontoon3 2014-03-30
basically, this plot would have gotten some traction with those involved with the basic logic that "we are going to stage a shooting to prevent real ones in the future." But if somebody within a government is to start suggesting "let's hire some psycho to kill children to get the guns!" it isn't going to get off the ground. There WOULD be whistleblowers in such a plot because it involves the death of innocent children.
-7 scott5280 2014-03-30
What about mind control? MK Ultra?
-8 oblivioustoobvious 2014-03-30
I'd believe that to be the case in which there were actual injuries: Auroa.
-9 TemptingOwl 2014-03-30
Wolfgang's FOIA requests constitute legal action
If some of us truly believe that we are being lied to, whether it be through Sandy Hook, 9/11, Aurora, or [insert whatever you believe here]... then wouldn't the next logical step be to take action?
We can talk about it, make Youtube videos, go on the radio, make posters, write a book, or take legal action. There are plenty of routes.
You're just awfully negative about all this
8 Totally_not_a_shill 2014-03-30
I'm just being realistic, go ahead and do it if it's important to you. But don't expect it to lead you anywhere. Even if you do get additional information, what's going to happen? There will be no amount of information that will ever convince you it was just a crazy kid with a gun, and you will never get enough information to prove it was the government.
-4 shadowofashadow 2014-03-30
Speak for yourself. I'd be satisfied just to see video of him breaking into the school or walking through with weapons.
7 Totally_not_a_shill 2014-03-30
You would likely be in the minority. People would just start to say the video was faked. This is why people rarely indulge conspiracy theorists. No matter how much evidence you give, conspiracies will never die.
-5 shadowofashadow 2014-03-30
I disagree. There will always the out there theories but it's pretty easy to see where the general community falls on these things. I think pictures of Lanza's body or him shooting a gun in the school would mostly put it to rest.
One big problem is that it was allowed to go on so long. At this point it might be out of the bottle and impossible to go back in, but I think it would more or less end it.
-5 _Roland_Deschain_ 2014-03-30
Sure, it's important to "us".
What's more concerning is; Why it is important for "you" what is important to "us"?
I'm genuinely concerned.
6 Totally_not_a_shill 2014-03-30
To be honest, the sandy hook conspiracies, more so than almost any other strike me as completely unrealistic and outside the realm of possibility. I don't understand how people can believe them and it makes me curious.
1 _Roland_Deschain_ 2014-03-30
I can understand that. Thanks for the reply. I guess I just don't understand the lengths some go to to remove people that have opposite beliefs of their own.
1 Grandest_Inquisitor 2014-03-30
You are correct to doubt the motives of people like Totally not a Shill. Well put.
Why can't people handle inquiry into a theory on a sub like this? Why cut off inquiry? If you think a theory is unlikely simply say it's unlikely and then let people try to present the evidence for why they have suspicions and then investigate the facts.
-5 [deleted] 2014-03-30
9/11 was just a crazy guy in a cave. Did we need to go all crazy and kill a miilion iraqis? I guess people who are affected by it will remain bound by it.
-5 oblivioustoobvious 2014-03-30
You say that with certainty while you are not in a position to.
-5 rave2020 2014-03-30
In my humble opinion you Sr are an ASSS (and I added an extra S because you are that extra special kind)
-44 TemptingOwl 2014-03-30
Totally_not_a_shill - Have you read any of the police report/data dump?
http://cspsandyhookreport.ct.gov/
If not I believe it may influence you to be more skeptical about many of the elements in the official narrative.
21 wafflesareforever 2014-03-30
In one sentence, what's your theory? What happened in Sandy Hook?
-90 TemptingOwl 2014-03-30
That's impossible
I believe it was a staged drill planned for at least 3 years but maybe more involving both real characters (police, EMT, coroner, firemen, Townspeople) and created identities (The LanzasPeter is IMO obviously imaginary , the children, school faculty). Those parading themselves on MSM and advocating in opposition to the 2nd Amendment are living the lives of one of their many AKAs and faking all emotion. Bribes took the form of real estate, lottery fixing, and the absurd number of fundraisers that swept the country. The intentions of the hoax were to use the "save the children" card to further gun grabbing, control schools through fear, intimidate parents into entrusting the gov. with their children, and creating an ideology that we could all be victims to such madness.
377 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
73 AsaKurai 2014-03-30
As a fellow Sandy Hooker, I second this and also can say as a friend of one of the victims brothers, nothing hurts more than people who don't believe you.
37 [deleted] 2014-03-30
You should probably find a new nickname to refer to yourself by. "Sandy Hooker" is a little... yea.
17 AsaKurai 2014-03-30
Hah hey that's what it's been for a long time, it's funny but it's who we are, can't change it now.
8 AntiJournalist 2014-03-30
There's no looking back.
-4 [deleted] 2014-03-30
There's no hooking back
I'll show myself out
2 dawnloveszombie 2014-03-30
I am so sorry this happened to you.
-40 UrASmurf 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot UrASmurf
11 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
11 UrASmurf 2014-03-30
Actually this is my main account :(
Replied to the wrong person when testing out the user history, so I guess I deserve the downvotes.
0 Ignorantsplooge 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot ignorantsplooge
2 [deleted] 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot JimmyVega
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 AutomaticGats 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot AutomaticGats
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 998 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
2 PepsiColaX 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot. PepsiColaX
1 PepsiColaX 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot PepsiColaX
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 907 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 999 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 907 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 998 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-17 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 261 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot grumbix
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot smiggballss
1 FUCKINGVELOCIRAPTOR 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot FUCKINGVELOCIRAPTOR
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 Shitty_Human_Being 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot Shitty_Human_Heing
-1 FrickMarketPark 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot FrickMarketPark
-1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 207 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 pepito420 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot pepito420
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-5 [deleted] 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot grumbix
-6 MoarOranges 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot MoarOranges
-3 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 Homsar98 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot homsar98
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 975 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 Capatown 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot Capatown
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
UPDATE If you summon this bot on your own username, a private message will be sent to your inbox
0 JayPetey 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot JayPetey
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 992 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 sprokket 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot sprokket
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 i_love_my_ball 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot i_love_my_ball
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 kerrigan7782 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot kerrigan7782
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 427 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 996 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-1 Light-of-Aiur 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot Light-of-Aiur
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 980 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 trendygrub 2014-03-30
/u/User_History_Bot trendygrub
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 946 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 DawggyH 2014-03-30
Guys.
Stop.
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 981 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 981 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 Metalgrowler 2014-03-30
/u/User_History_Bot metalgrowler
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-1 hambooty 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot hambooty
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 172 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
/u/User_History_Bot cheezoncrack
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-332 Sabremesh 2014-03-30
Oh look, the 756th person commenting in /r/conspiracy who claims to "know someone who is related to someone who died" at Sandy Hook.
Not a single of one you blowhards have ever provided any evidence to back up your story, so all you are actually doing is adding to the suspicion that Sandy Hook was a hoax.
149 wafflesareforever 2014-03-30
I'm happy to provide you with proof over PM, though I suspect that no amount of evidence will make any difference to you. If you're interested and willing to reasonably assess the proof that I can provide, then shoot me a PM.
-190 Sabremesh 2014-03-30
I am not soliciting personal information, just to be clear.
As far as I am aware, though, no legal document (such as a death certificate) has ever been published naming a specific child victim of Adam Lanza at Sandy Hook on December 14, 2012. Media "reports" of such documents existing do not count as documents, I'm afraid.
Notably, the Connecticut State Attorney's report fails to mention a single one of the "20 child victims" of Sandy Hook by name. These children were born and died with no official documentation attesting to their existence.
If you are able to provide a link to a public legal document issued by the State of Connecticut, naming a specific victim, this might actually be a world first.
118 wafflesareforever 2014-03-30
Wait, what?
Do you want evidence or don't you? I suspect it's the latter.
Offer still stands. Do you want to know the truth or not?
-145 Sabremesh 2014-03-30
Stories from users about their Sandy Hook "friends" or "relatives" are made in the knowledge that they cannot be verified, because revealing personal information is a bannable offence.
Do you have evidence which doesn't identify you (or anybody else) but which proves that Sandy Hook was a real event?
123 wafflesareforever 2014-03-30
I don't mind identifying myself to you privately. You've got enough of a rep built up here that I don't think you'll do anything unethical with the information. Famous last words, I know, but I'm curious enough to see what will happen that I'll take the risk and trust an Internet stranger.
Here's what I propose:
First, I'll prove to you that I'm a real person and that I am who I say I am. I'm a web developer, you're hopefully reasonably tech-savvy, and I'm sure that between the two of us we'll be able to figure out a way to establish my identity and credibility.
Second, I will establish my connection to the family of one of the victims. I can do this quite easily once we've established who I am. This should take care of your complaint:
I'm not sure what else you need in order to be convinced, but I'll try to provide it.
If you're wondering why I'm doing this, imagine this - a beautiful child is ripped from your family forever, and people you know and love are deeply wounded by the loss. Then someone has the audacity to claim that it didn't ever happen, and that you're a fraud for saying that it did. How would you feel? Some people just shake their heads and move on, but my first instinct is to fix it.
-103 Sabremesh 2014-03-30
I appreciate your suggestion, but the Rules of reddit state unequivocally that:
Posting personal information will get you banned.
This would presumably include providing somebody with your contact details, or even information that could be used to scrape your contact details, so I don't want any part of that!
If your wife had a cousin once removed who was a victim at Sandy Hook, it surely shouldn't be too hard to provide evidence of this girl's EXISTENCE without revealing any personal details? That's all I'm interested in - proof that the victims were real.
76 wafflesareforever 2014-03-30
I'm not planning on posting any personal information on reddit. I will set up a secure, encrypted, private chatroom on Cryptocat and send you the room name via PM so that you can join me there. I don't know how to prove her existence in a way that would satisfy you without sharing personal information with you.
-130 Sabremesh 2014-03-30
I appreciate your offer, and your obvious willingness to engage in constructive dialogue. However, if the information you have cannot be anonymised, I would be reluctant to go "off reddit" and risk getting a ban.
If you have some genuine information about the Sandy Hook event, there are a many people here in /r/conspiracy, including myself, whose theories that this was a staged event would be blown out of the water. This would need to be publicly verifiable information, however. The ball is in your court.
102 wafflesareforever 2014-03-30
Strange, your account has been active since my reply, and yet you haven't gotten back to me. It's almost like you're avoiding the truth. You're not, are you?
64 TripleSLifestyle 2014-03-30
At least you tried. I honestly have NO idea what else he or anyone else would need. You offered everything.
39 TheVacillate 2014-03-30
If it's worth anything, I thank you for trying. It makes me immeasurably angry to hear all this conspiracy bs about this situation, and I'm sorry he gave you the runaround.
37 spaghettiohs 2014-03-30
you called his bluff. nice
13 TheStarkReality 2014-03-30
Honestly, even if you could prove that you were related to one of the victim's families, he'd then ask you for a death certificate or something, and if you showed him that it'd, dun dun dun, be faked.
76 trollocity 2014-03-30
Genius.
-43 Dignified 2014-03-30
Any proof he could offer would be dubious at best. I have no reason to believe nor disbelieve him, nor do i have a way to prove/disprove his statements. And so I'll ignore his statements and focus on his attempt to personally control the content of a sub because it might offend him.
No one cares if he's offended, save the conspiratard retards. If I'm gay, in not going to walk into a church and make everyone stop doing what theyre doing. That's their place to do that. I should/could not go there, since I'm not comfortable there.
It's easy to block a sub. Rolling around everywhere trying to control what people think, talk about, and do is what a pussy does.
15 trollocity 2014-03-30
Wait, I'm confused here. Who's trying to control what who says? If you're talking about the guy who was trying to provide proof, I fail to see how he was trying to control what people are saying o_o
72 wafflesareforever 2014-03-30
There is no rule on reddit or this subreddit of any kind which would put you at risk of a ban for something that happens outside of reddit. Even if we had the conversation via reddit PM, you'd be in the clear - the only one taking any risk at all would be me (and even then I'm not aware of any rule that I'd be breaking, as the rules regarding PI only appear to apply to public posts/comments). I'm suggesting that we have the conversation on another website entirely, one which offers a secure, encrypted, private connection.
You already have access to a mountain of "publicly verifiable information," yet you choose to discredit it because it is incomplete due to obvious and reasonable privacy concerns, or because of easily-explained and understandable errors made by officials and the media in the aftermath. There's already plenty of that stuff out there. You don't need me to Google it for you.
What I'm offering you is a personal perspective from someone whose family was directly involved. I want to prove to you beyond a shadow of a doubt that I am a real person with a real life, a wife, kids, a career, etc., with no reason to lie to you. Then I'll show you unmistakable evidence that one of the victims was a member of my family.
I think you're able to keep this conspiracy alive in your head precisely because you have no personal connection to it, and you don't know anyone who does. If you did, the whole "it was a hoax" thing would seem as absurd and disgusting to you as it does to me. I'm offering to let you in so that you can see it from my world. All I ask is that you report back here and, if you were convinced, say so.
There's zero risk that you'll be banned for this, and you know it. What are you really afraid of?
43 TheVacillate 2014-03-30
There are situations all over reddit that involve giving PM's to people that include private information. In fact, the mods of AMA ask for private messages as verification for certain situations. Private messages aren't included in 'posting private information' because it's not a post. You're smart enough to know that.
The ball is not in his court, but in yours. You have yet to respond and it's been two days. How disappointing.
19 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
2 TheVacillate 2014-03-30
SOME conspiracy theorists. My mother used to label me a conspiracy theorist because I would talk about the government collecting data through phones and email and stuff, without the world as a whole knowing it or believing it. She laughed at me, and boy... that was a weird day when I could say "I told you so".
I understand what you mean though. There are some that go so far into the realm of what they believe that it's hard fact to them, instead of a possibility. It's hard to see. :(
3 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
2 TheVacillate 2014-03-30
True, but in many minds all conspiracy theorists are the same.
That's why I don't like blanket statements, since I'm sure some would call me a conspiracy theorist, even though I don't buy into the false flag stuff, or the other way out there things. I don't wanna be lumped in there! Please?
5 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
2 TheVacillate 2014-03-30
Hah, that scenario made me chuckle.
36 cHEatsKYJelly 2014-03-30
He's trying to find ways to prove it to you. But you keep pushing it off. If you're not going to listen then just shut up and stop being such a bitch. Ohhh a ban on reddit all of my karma points will be gone.
15 Deweyrob2 2014-03-30
So, dude offers proof, real proof, and you won't take it? Ridiculous.
41 [deleted] 2014-03-30
Very clever, /u/Sabremesh.
2 mannymix03 2014-03-30
Yep, hiding under the "I don't want to be banned blanket "
23 noncommunicable 2014-03-30
Posting personal information is not the same as PMing it. That is fully allowed by Reddit.
3 Virulentt 2014-03-30
Here's a better question that you should answer. Do you have any evidence that it didn't happen? And just the fact that the death certificates haven't been publicly released (because if privacy concerns) does NOT mean Sandy Hook didn't happen.
23 starryeyedq 2014-03-30
I know I'm a bit late to this, but just fyi: The death certificates were INITIALLY not released by the Newton Clerk's Office for the sake of the families' privacy. They were eventually released through the Freedom of Information Act. They have been publicly accessible for ages.
1 Agrees_with_Dumbass 2014-03-30
don't worry, i agree with you
5 scam_me_please 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot Sabremesh
18 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 964 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
23 I_am_Appalachia 2014-03-30
Picked a winner
1 OMG_TRIGGER_WARNING 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot omg_trigger_warning
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 999 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 aubgrad11 2014-03-30
/u/User_History_Bot aubgrad11
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 706 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 NoPunsForYou 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot NoPunsForYou
-1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 230 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-5 pyratus 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot Pyratus
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 871 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 871 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
6 AfroKing23 2014-03-30
Pokemon Black Market eh? You sly little bastard.
2 GreatCornolio 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot GreatCornolio
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 997 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 [deleted] 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot poor_holy_shit
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 861 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-6 I_am_Appalachia 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot I_am_appalachia
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 144 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
10 1sagas1 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot User_History_Bot
5 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 998 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 maynardftw 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot maynardftw
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 drflans 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot drflans
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 94 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 Spin1441 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot Spin1441
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 999 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 1sagas1 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot 1sagas1
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 [deleted] 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot The_Spider-Man
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 934 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 Trei_Gamer 2014-03-30
1 PerseusRAZ 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot PerseusRAZ
2 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 367 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 567 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 Drakan290 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot drakan290
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 999 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 999 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 567 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 myriadic 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot myriadic
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 856 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 856 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 smithmatt445 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot smithmatt445
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 540 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 540 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
2 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 513 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 MrRibbotron 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot MrRibbotron
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 513 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 993 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 JohnBigbooty 2014-03-30
I was not aware of this bot. Thanks.
-2 OneMoreAcct 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot AverageThinker
-1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 833 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 Emighty 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot Emighty
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 388 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-2 UrASmurf 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot UrASmurf
2 domaa 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot domaa
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 975 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 tgrich 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot tgrich
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 317 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 166 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 166 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
2 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
1 Virulentt 2014-03-30
Almost. You need more unverifiable facts and/or facts that provide evidence for your case but have been debunked or answered to but you ignore that
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
1 Virulentt 2014-03-30
There you go
-373 Flytape 2014-03-30
Please don't tell people to shut the fuck up in a forum that exist explicitly to talk about these things.
318 wafflesareforever 2014-03-30
Has a member of your family ever been brutally murdered, followed by a bunch of loons claiming that it never happened and your deceased family member never existed? Try for one second to imagine what that's like, and then give me another lesson on etiquette.
-43 brentmcdonald 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot brentmcdonald
-13 [deleted] 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot polymercury
-4 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-7 Eggfibre 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot eggfibre
-2 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 ThePhychoKid 2014-03-30
/u/User_History_Bot ThePhychoKid
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 374 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-1 DorianGainsboro 2014-03-30
/u/User_History_Bot DorianGiansboro
-7 [deleted] 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot polymercury
-1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 WestcoastWelker 2014-03-30
/u/User_History_Bot westcoastwelker
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-2 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
2 xu85 2014-03-30
Please get banned
-14 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-219 Flytape 2014-03-30
Look I'm sorry for your loss but if you feel these people are loons then why exactly are you here talking to them?
Any national tragedy is going to be followed by people of all opinions, that is an unavoidable fact and you have no authority to force people to support your own belief.
There are people out there who celebrated the branch Davidian compound in waco being burnt down with people inside it because they were "religious loons" and other people who felt like it was murder (Timothy McVeigh).
Now for the lesson on etiquette you requested, if you continue with abusive comments and/or name calling you will be banned from this subreddit. If you don't like the discussion here there are thousands of other subs you can go to.
165 wafflesareforever 2014-03-30
What happened in Sandy Hook is real. It's a fact. It's not a belief. I wish you were right, because then maybe there would be some hope that it was all made up and those poor kids (and adults) weren't brutally murdered, but sadly for my wife's family and all the others, that's not the case.
-219 Flytape 2014-03-30
You do realize that you can't force someone to believe something even if it is true? Even if it is a fact?
I'm not going to debate this with you because I don't care about this topic. I do care that the conversation remains civil, your connection to this event doesn't grant you special privileges here to break our rules.
Have a great night and sorry for your family's loss.
61 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
3 erfq12 2014-03-30
Ass burgers!
-1 Kazaril 2014-03-30
I'm sad that that only works for people in the US. Arse Burgers doesn't work.
21 NoodleGlue 2014-03-30
Well you do care about it. Until someone disagrees with you and you can't dismiss it because you have some human empathy and know they're closer to it that you. It's at this point you should re-evaluate your life and look at some different, and achievable goals.
-3 crapadoodledoo 2014-03-30
There are some mighty ignorant people in this thread and you're not one of them.
-30 pejaieo 2014-03-30
Even though I vehemently disagree with everything you're saying I have mad respect for the fact you're a mod of this subreddit and don't seem to be tempted to abuse that power.
Downvote the shit out of me, please vindicate me.
2 antimushroom 2014-03-30
You got it, dude. Consider yourself the proud recipient of +1 vindication.
37 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
-24 Flytape 2014-03-30
Pissing in the popcorn?
Is that against your clan's rules?
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
No seriously, you can be a holocaust denier and racist, whatever, I don't really care, but how can you be such an active conspiracy theorist and at support soccer's censorship on /r/xkcd? Aren't you being hypocritical?
1 SuicideMurderPills 2014-03-30
Only reddit could bring someone like this out of the woodwork.
-1 crapadoodledoo 2014-03-30
This is a perfectly valid and appropriate point of view. Thanks for not yielding to the mob.
58 StarLiner42 2014-03-30
Weird, you've never had an issue censoring people before...
8 scam_me_please 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot Flytape
14 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 999 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 Deathcon900 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot Deathcon900
1 Ericzander 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot Ericzander
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 824 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 824 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 999 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 999 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 999 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 999 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 muzz3256 2014-03-30
/u/User_History_Bot muzz3256
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 242 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 Kazaril 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot Kazaril
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 768 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-1 soxandpatriots1 2014-03-30
/u/User_History_Bot soxandpatriots1
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 harry_pooter123 2014-03-30
/u/User_History_Bot harry_pooter123
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 271 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-1 IAmTheZeke 2014-03-30
/u/User_History_Bot IAmTheZeke
0 HappyTerrorist 2014-03-30
/u/User_History_Bot HappyTerrorist
0 murrypurryfurryfury 2014-03-30
your unloved.
-1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 728 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 Infandous 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot Infandous
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 178 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 ewbrower 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot ewbrower
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 dragonblade629 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot Dragonblade629
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 811 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 278 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 75 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 MrDudeGuy907 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot mrdudeguy907
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 425 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot didact343
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 376 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 36 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 ice-king 2014-03-30
/u/User_History_Bot ice-king
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 ice-king 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot ice-king
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 bigbagger2247 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot bigbagger2247
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 470 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 720 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 720 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 chitturding 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot Chitturding
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 999 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
2 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 866 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 866 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 999 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 PirateNinjaa 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot pirateninjaa
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 jshimmy 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot jshimmy
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 956 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 23Heart23 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot 23Heart23
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 128 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 FireTigerThrowdown 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot FireTigerThrowdown
-1 TheDeadWhale 2014-03-30
/u/User_History_Bot TheDeadWhale
-1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 863 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 ceslek 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot ceslek
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 998 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 LordOfCows 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot LordOfCows
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 365 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 365 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-1 FrailRain 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot Frailrain
-1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 999 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 james_bonged 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot james_bonged
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
UPDATE If you summon this bot on your own username, a private message will be sent to your inbox
-1 Amplifiedsoul 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot Amplifiedsoul
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 611 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 Riipa 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot Riipa
2 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 466 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-3 Okayloll 2014-03-30
Shut. The. Fuck. Up. Neckbeard.
10 Bombingofdresden 2014-03-30
Wow
8 oblivioustoobvious 2014-03-30
Can you elaborate on, "Wow"?
I'm assuming you're in disbelief but considering the subreddit I don't understand.
8 Bombingofdresden 2014-03-30
I guess, and I'm not judging here so please believe me, I can't wrap my head around thinking that this is at all possible. The incredible amounts of people that would have had to not utter one single word ever is insane. People that are paid off talk all the time but for not one person to come forward in a situation like that does not seem likely. The same thing goes with the theories about 9/11.
There are very real, very definitive conspiracies that take place every day throughout the world. I'm not taking anything away from that. I just can't believe this one in any way shape or form. I have relatives that lived in that town and knew those people. I have current contact with them and I feel for the families involved in that tragedy. I guess I never found it difficult to believe that someone would be capable of performing an act like that seeing as how people have done horrible shit since time immemorial.
-7 ALLIES313 2014-03-30
I can't even begin to address all the assumptions you rely on here.
So many people who are vocally skeptical of conspiracy theories here do!
2 ingy2012 2014-03-30
Obviously we'll probably never know for sure but I definitely agree.
3 unnerve 2014-03-30
Alternatively they could've waited for another school shooting which is regular in US.
3 oblivioustoobvious 2014-03-30
What/when was the last school shooting? Can you name one without google?
-2 unnerve 2014-03-30
This year I guess, but yeah, I can't. Probably because I'm not following US newws that much.
6 oblivioustoobvious 2014-03-30
This year was what shooting? Honestly. If school shootings are "regular in US" then you should be able to list them. If the last one is Sandy Hook which is regarded as a false flag I have a hard time agreeing with your point. Sure, the major ones are known such as Columbine, Virginia Tech, and Sandy Hook. But name others.
0 unnerve 2014-03-30
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/12/school-shootings-newtown-study-gun-violence
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_the_United_States#2010s
Not as massive as Sandy Hook, but still enough.
0 oblivioustoobvious 2014-03-30
Again, I didn't say link. I was asking you to recall.
Now why are those 44 shootings since Sandy Hook not in our memory?
3 unnerve 2014-03-30
I told you I can't. So if I can't they didn't happen or something?
0 oblivioustoobvious 2014-03-30
No. That's a retarded straw man argument. I never said or thought such a silly thing.
1 unnerve 2014-03-30
Because Sandy Hook is the easiest to talk about and use as a leverage for conspiracy theories and guns control laws. It's in the news worldwide and it's horrific. But you can also use something like "there was 44 school shootings since that day" which isn't that small. Add up other shootings and here you have nice stats for regulating guns without staging anyway.
1 oblivioustoobvious 2014-03-30
Media coverage.
1 unnerve 2014-03-30
In fact, I rarely read foreing news but I clearly remember that school shooting are often reported even by Russian media. They were not as highlighted, hence why I don't remember them but there were many. (still, I may mix-up them with other shootings, it's kinda a stereotype that if shootings happen, they're in US)
-13 Karl_Cross 2014-03-30
You're actually insane.
8 oblivioustoobvious 2014-03-30
Why are you in a conspiracy subreddit calling somebody insane for believing in a conspiracy?
[REDACTED]
-7 Karl_Cross 2014-03-30
If I go to a sub about horses, doesn't mean I'd respect those that believe in unicorns
4 oblivioustoobvious 2014-03-30
Why isn't Sandy Hook a conspiracy? What conspiracies do you believe in?
-10 Karl_Cross 2014-03-30
It was a massacre. A horrible masssacre committed by a very troubled person. How anyone can honestly regard it as a "false flag" and think themselves a decent human being is bewildering. People like you only cause further hardship to the grieving families.
I belive in any conspiracy theory that actually has verifiable evidence that can not be debunked in a half hour. 99% of the stuff posted here doesn't fall in to that criteria.
2 oblivioustoobvious 2014-03-30
What conspiracies do you believe in?
I didn't ask what kind of conspiracies you believe in I asked what conspiracies you believe in. You said that 99% is BS so that leaves 1% being a legitimate conspiracy. So, again, what conspiracies do you believe in?
-6 Karl_Cross 2014-03-30
Recently? That the UK governent made the decision to deliberately privatise the UK Royal Mail in a way that finacially benefited those close to the Tory government.
3 oblivioustoobvious 2014-03-30
Can you link me to the /r/conspiracy submission about it? And that's the only conspiracy you believe in? Do you believe in any conspiracies involving the United States? And no, I didn't just ask recently.
-4 Karl_Cross 2014-03-30
So to qualify as a conspiracy theory, it must be US related and have been posted in this sub?
I know you didn't ask for a recent one, you also didn't specify it could not be a recent one. What's your point?
2 oblivioustoobvious 2014-03-30
Nope. I'm just curious if you've actually found a submission in this sub that you found to be a legitimate conspiracy. I was relating back to the 99% BS line you spoke of earlier. I was curious what that 1% was that you have found in this subreddit to be legitimate.
The US question was simply because I am a US citizen and not a UK citizen so it's genuine curiosity.
My point is you've admitted to believing in one conspiracy. What other conspiracies do you believe in, and, if you believe in other conspiracies why can't you fathom the idea of SH being a conspiracy while many here can?
0 Karl_Cross 2014-03-30
I'm using 99% as a safeguard because there is bound to be something posted here that has some remnant of believability in it. Off the top of my head, no I can't think of anything I've ever seen posted that is likely to be absolutely correct. Will there be things that have something correct about it? Yes! However the conclusions drawn from any "evidence" are more often than not completely wild and speculated.
Sorry, I can never relate to anyone that thinks the murder of schoolchildren is nothing more tha a pantomime. Human beings lost the things they love most in the world on that day and to accuse them of being actors and liars is despicable. I hope to god nobody ever actually does this but if someone wanted to find those families as proof then it would be so easy to do. It's so easy to sit behind a keyboard and tell tall tales and spread lies about those poor, innocent relatives of those kids but I suppose leaving hardcore theorists to do that in their own warped little world is better than them ever having the gumption to prove themselves wrong.
-1 33degree 2014-03-30
You should probably watch this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1yfJDCMU64
2 Dignified 2014-03-30
This is a conspiracy sub, talking about conspiracies. Youre wandering into a unicorn sub and bitching about unicorns.
1 Karl_Cross 2014-03-30
wat
I'm "bitching" about people griefing families over the death of their kids.
-1 33degree 2014-03-30
No kids died, don't worry.
3 Flytape 2014-03-30
Please follow our rules listed on the sidebar ----->
If you want to continue to post in /r/conspiracy
2 catsfive 2014-03-30
Can you both calm down and examine the EVIDENCE? Who cares what someone believes? If the evidence shows that Mormon midget terrorists did it then that's what we should believe.
-3 Karl_Cross 2014-03-30
Okay... what rule did I break and how did /u/oblivioustoobvious not infringe the same rule by calling me a dumbass?
0 oblivioustoobvious 2014-03-30
Not sure where I am calling you a dumbass.
-2 Karl_Cross 2014-03-30
Good on you for sticking by your slurs.
-1 oblivioustoobvious 2014-03-30
Thank you for helping me realize that I shouldn't stoop to your level of slurring.
-2 Karl_Cross 2014-03-30
You already did. Editing a comment doesn't change time.
-2 oblivioustoobvious 2014-03-30
But you can't prevent me from having learned from the experience. Again, thanks. Still waiting on a reply to the other comment.
-1 Karl_Cross 2014-03-30
No you're not; I replied.
0 toontoon3 2014-03-30
When was the last one where the shooter targeted completely random children and adults with which he had no relation whatsoever? How often do we see shooters with absolutely no motive taking twenty six lives? Do you think that happens a lot? Because it doesn't.
1 unnerve 2014-03-30
Uh, they weren't completely random. They were at the same school as him, weren't they?
James Holmes is kinda random too, but it's regarded as conspiracy so we will just ignore it in this context.
Then again, weren't there sniper shootings that targeted random people?
2 Karl_Cross 2014-03-30
You're kidding.
Please tell me you're kidding.
1 smallwonkydachshund 2014-03-30
But none of that crackdown on guns happened. It's more than a year later, other shit has happened, no major legislation has passed and it clearly isn't going to. Like, I'm certain you happen to be wrong about this, but I'm genuinely interested in why you think anything that complicated would ever need to be attempted when one person could, simply, snap and kill a bunch of people. Effect? Lives ruined, but there are a FUCK of a lot more guns and ammunition out there than when Obama took office.
-2 catholic__cock 2014-03-30
Did they try though?
Did they parade the "sandy hook childrens choir" around the super bowl?
Did obama stage sandy hook survivors behind him during his press conference?
Did Bloomberg start plotting to take guns away within HOURS of it happening?
They tried, but people didn't care enough.
0 smallwonkydachshund 2014-03-30
Nope. But roll on, it's just mildly insulting to people who live their lives everyday and suffer a huge tragedy to be cast as actors in the least competent conspiracy theory ever.
1 catholic__cock 2014-03-30
Yeah man, that's what everyone that questions that event believes. That's why you're known as skeptards, wrap up every "truther" in one little retarded package so you don't have to think too much
1 smallwonkydachshund 2014-03-30
There's a difference between thinking and thinking and coming to irrational conclusions.
1 catholic__cock 2014-03-30
Nice job not reading my comment and then proving my point
1 Totally_not_a_shill 2014-03-30
I already looked through it. Are you referring to all of the redacted stuff or something else?
-9 TemptingOwl 2014-03-30
The lack of Lanza DNA on the .22 rifle (the NY Felon DNA)
The officer telling the little girl/boy [redacted] to go back into Rm.10 (the scene of the crime/suicide)
Adam's redacted medical records
The crime scene photos/video offer only speculation, but notice limited christmas decorations, grime throughout the school, lack of 20 sock per day pile in Adams room, etc
Not to be morbid but I don't see any evidence of blood in the videos
There are just inconsistencies throughout that at the very least raise suspicions
-2 oblivioustoobvious 2014-03-30
RES says 12 downvotes while you have 0 comments refuting you.
-23 33degree 2014-03-30
There are literally FOIA requests being filed every month. The CT police are breaking the law by not declassifying this information that is LEGALLY public.
37 ExultantSandwich 2014-03-30
Doesn't change the fact that newtruth221 doxxed a guy, still a bannable offense.
Even if newtruth was the 2nd coming of Jesus, even if he/she shot Bin Laden, even if he/she cured cancer, they would still be banned for doxxing that guy
-23 jefffffffff 2014-03-30
FUCK YOU
15 Totally_not_a_shill 2014-03-30
Can't handle the truth?
-26 AssuredlyAThrowAway 2014-03-30
Proof of these accusations?
28 JamesHamilton 2014-03-30
I saw it. Reported it as well. Get real, she did what she did.
-14 NameTaken410 2014-03-30
/u/User_History_Bot JamesHamilton
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 453 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 52 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
2 StartSelect 2014-03-30
/u/User_History_Bot StartSelect
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 999 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 NickHamburgers 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot NickHamburgers
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 812 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 812 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 999 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 Johnsu 2014-03-30
/u/User_History_Bot Johnsu
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
0 JerosScotland 2014-03-30
Neat.
/u/User_History_Bot JerosScotland
1 cass1o 2014-03-30
I think the neat breaks it.
1 JerosScotland 2014-03-30
/u/User_History_Bot JerosScotland
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 pSKY11 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot pSKY11
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 894 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
2 DasHuhn 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot user_history_bot
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 998 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 997 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-16 EV1L1 2014-03-30
is it public info? if yes pound salt
17 NickHamburgers 2014-03-30
Are they a public official? If no, fuck off.
11 Totally_not_a_shill 2014-03-30
Thread was deleted and I didn't take a screen shot. There were several threads all linking to it when it first happened, that's where I saw it.
-14 AssuredlyAThrowAway 2014-03-30
Are you sure you didn't report the user to the admins?
12 Totally_not_a_shill 2014-03-30
The guy who reported the user already took credit for it on another thread. I'm just making sure everyone is properly informed of all the facts.
40 FriendlessComputer 2014-03-30
Break the rules of reddit, get banned from reddit. I fail to see where the controversy is. I was subscribed to that subreddit, there was A LOT of personal information being tossed around, as was the previous incarnations of the subreddit.
-14 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
23 ChRoNicBuRrItOs 2014-03-30
...Are you seriously suggesting that the Reddit Admins are in on the Sandy Hook "conspiracy"?
8 Crash_says 2014-03-30
This one goes all the way to the top!
-1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
4 ChRoNicBuRrItOs 2014-03-30
I agree that the thing at r/legal was bullshit, but that's not the government. That's just internet assholes being internet assholes. That happens all the time. I remember when, for example, /u/karmanaut was downvoted constantly no matter what he posted after banning /u/shittywatercolor. This is the internet, and that happens all the time.
As for the unproven allegations, they are real, but I won't post the proof to protect the identities of the individuals, so I can't prove that it is :-/.
It doesn't matter if it was a private sub or what (it wasn't at first FYI), because if someone is posting personal information, they will be banned. Period. No matter what. This is because Reddit has gotten a lot of bad press in the past from people getting harrassed due to doxxing, and they don't want it to happen anymore. Call it overcautious or whatever you want, but that's the rule. The very clearly written rule. The very clearly written rule whose consequences for breaking said rule are also very clearly written. Even if it's not 100% proven, I'd wager they're gonna lean to the cautious side because it's better to be safe than sorry. And it's the same thing with people privately investigating. There's a high risk if doxxing in this, so yeah it makes sense that they'd do that even without some third party forcing their hand.
It sucks that your work was deleted, but that's what happens when people dox. It doesn't end well for anyone. Reddit does not want people to do that because of the high risk it poses to them as a business. You probably could have found a different place to do your research, I mean really now...
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
1 ChRoNicBuRrItOs 2014-03-30
It was posted in /r/conspiratard, the guy who reported it to the admins posted it himself. The only reason I won't directly link you is because I want as little chance as possible for someone to find out more info. That's not right.
-2 Ambiguously_Ironic 2014-03-30
So... no proof then? Gotcha.
It's now a day later and I still have yet to see a single person present even a shred of proof that the ban was/is legit.
2 ChRoNicBuRrItOs 2014-03-30
I just told you exactly where to look, it's not hard to find it. The post is from yesterday, if that helps. Considerig this is pretty important to you, I'd say it's at least worth a look. It doesn't actually show the names or any URLs to get to there (they were covered with boxes/URLs were erased), but I just don't want to take any chances of being banned for doxxing, or someone getting hurt. Sorry. It's pretty concrete evidence, though. What could you lose from looking?
0 Ambiguously_Ironic 2014-03-30
http://www.np.reddit.com/r/conspiratard/comments/21rl7i/unewtruth221_posted_the_home_and_business/
You mean that one? Which has absolutely no proof whatsoever? Where are these supposed "screenshots"?
1 ChRoNicBuRrItOs 2014-03-30
No, it was in a comment. I'm not linking to it because I really don't want to take that risk. It's a pretty touchy subject right now. There is an actual screenshot. I'll go see if I can find it, and tell you what to search for or something
1 Ambiguously_Ironic 2014-03-30
I just found the user who supposedly took the "screenshots" and submitted them to the admins. Not a single one of these "screenshots" appears anywhere in his comments, aside from one showing messages between him and the admins discussing banning the user which, as I'm sure I don't need to point out, is not evidence of any wrongdoing at all.
1 ChRoNicBuRrItOs 2014-03-30
It is a screenshot of the comment where she was doxxing. The post starts with "Here we go" and the first three letters of the username of the commenter with the screenshot are "tha"
1 ChRoNicBuRrItOs 2014-03-30
...the thread is literally on the frontpage right now. It's in a comment not far from the top.
1 ChRoNicBuRrItOs 2014-03-30
For the record, I agree that the stuff on /r/law wasn't right either. But two wrongs don't make a right.
16 tuckerbest 2014-03-30
Oh, for goodness sake! Children WERE killed. When you start forming your bat-shit theories based on very weak evidence - 'Father getting into character', photo-shopped family pictures, Lanza too weak to carry guns and armour, etc - people are going to get pissed off. I watched an hour and a half long video last night and there was not ONE single piece of hard evidence supporting any conspiracy theory. It is more likely that the emergency services made a series of mistakes, or performed inadequately, than anything else. I expect to be down-voted to shit for this, because that's how this subreddit seems to work, but it needed to be said. IF this user didn't provide any personal info of Newtown residents, then fair enough, but this conspiracy theory HAS to stop. If you can provide HARD evidence, then I will of course be forced to change my opinion.
-1 ALLIES313 2014-03-30
You watched the wrong video
-8 TemptingOwl 2014-03-30
I provided a link to the police report. That contains plenty of hard evidence. I have not once referenced photo shop, crisis acting, or Adam's small and sickly stature in this thread.
Look into the report for yourself to see the inconsistencies, unnecessary redactions, and downright fabrications.
http://cspsandyhookreport.ct.gov/
4 tuckerbest 2014-03-30
Thank you. I shall read. I wasn't speaking about you, here. Unless you are NewTruth, in which case I had you mistaken for someone else who made a video on the subject, and I apologise.
-2 TemptingOwl 2014-03-30
No I'm not newtruth. Just to clear that up
8 unnerve 2014-03-30
Somewhat unrelated question: why would they even control guns? What legislations goverment are trying to push to control them? As a person who does not live in US I just don't get all this talk about "muh guns". Is there really no control now (i.e. you can go to your local and buy any gun without any license)? Why the hell would goverment stage something that atrocious if there are many other shootings each year?
14 Katana0 2014-03-30
I was directed here by a X-post, but as a US citizen that supports our rights to bear arms to a reasonable degree as I see it, I'll give you the best, non-biased information I can before someone runs in and gives you the "THEY'RE TAKING OUR GUNS" speech.
Essentially, there are many people out and about who believe that the government is putting in place legislation to try and control our ability to buy and own guns which is afforded to us by the second amendment of the Constitution. The argument arises because many politicians insist that weapons that are bought by the general public should be restricted to 'sporting use' weapons, like those that are used for hunting and such, while others seem to be pushing the agenda that firearms should not be purchased or owned by the general public at all. So on a state level, some areas have started to put in place restrictions on magazine size, and even the types of weapons that can be bought; banning the sale of weapons with certain features, calling them "features of an assault weapon", which is basically them saying that it is a military-style rifle that citizens 'have no business owning'.
Now it is important to note that fully automatic weapons, and those with barrels or overall lengths under a certain size have already been restricted and must be registered with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) on a Federal level. Also as it stands, before someone buys any kind of gun, the store owner has to have the buyer fill out a certain ATF form, then call the ATF who then runs a quick background check to see if there's anything on their record that would prevent them from buying a gun like a felony arrest charge, domestic assault charge, or some such. In some areas, special licencing can be required, although where I live there are not many laws regarding what can be bought and what cannot be bought; basically it mirrors what Federal law says and leaves everything else open.
I'm guessing people believe that the government would stage a shooting like that because it was so horrendous. It would wrench at the hearts and minds of the citizens and prompt them to help pass laws to disarm the country. But you are absolutely right that there are enough tragic shootings in the news (one or two a year, although they will go on about them for months for ratings) that I don't think the government would need to stage one just for that.
Sorry to present you with so much information so fast; it's a complex issue with no easy answer. And the way some people talk you'd think someone had just punched their puppy or something. I empathize with both sides in that public shootings are a pretty terrible affair all the way around, but magazine and feature bans are not the way to stop them; they're just a knee-jerk reaction to a bad situation that does nothing to actually fix anything.
2 unnerve 2014-03-30
Thank you for this comment, it was REALLY insightful. Though I still don't get WHY would they ban guns? Who does profit from banning them?
Additionaly, what are "spotring use weapons"? There was three public shootings in Russia "lately" and I want to check if that could be done with them. In other words, would restricting it to weapons like this help with shootings problem, cause it's weapons anyway.
6 Katana0 2014-03-30
No problem!
The question of profit is really one of rumor and conspiracy (so it fits well in this sub!). The politicians all say it is for public safety. But they are being paid by the lobbyists who say that by banning 'X' feature, the world will suddenly become a safer place. This is possibly being egged on by some of the higher guys in the NRA; the National Rifle Association, which is an organization that fights for the rights of gun owners. You see, some of them have invested in businesses in the firearms industry, and every time the 'they're going to take our guns' rumor starts to go around, prices on guns and ammo skyrockets. An AR-15 used to sell for maybe $400-$600, depending on what was on it. Now they sell for $800-$1400 depending on what's on it and who made it. Ammo is much the same, with people hoarding thousands of rounds 'for when they won't be available', which drives up the price due to the whole supply and demand dynamic. It sucks too; I turned old enough to buy a gun just as prices hit the fan!
Others say that the government is trying to prevent civil uprisings like the ones seen in Libya, Egypt, and Syria... But I just don't see the motivation in the public yet. It is true that they are quickly loosing public favor though, so who knows?
As far as sporting use weapons goes, it depends on the state you're in, but they're generally defined as weapons used for hunting, or other sport shooting like skeet or trap shooting. The problem lies in the definitions. For instance, in California there is a senator that keeps pushing this "Assault Weapons ban" bill which bans most weapons of military origin from being sold or traded. The Lee-Enfield SMLE I believe is listed on that bill, which was a rifle used by the British in WW2. It is a great hunting rifle; ammo is a little hard to find, but it would definitely work well on deer and elk, and is accurate out to about 1000 yards. The German Mauser Kar98 and the Russian Mosin Nagant are also listed on the bill IIRC; all WW2 bolt action rifles. Most shotguns with magazines under 5 rounds fall under this category
Now, on the opposite side the rifle that the US military uses; the M-16, is simply a fully automatic version of the AR-15. Not many people know this, but I'm a collector, and do quite a bit of research into various firearms because they really interest me (if you can't tell already) but the AR-15 is a downsized version of the AR-10 (chambered in .308 instead of .223), and the AR-10 was originally designed as a hunting rifle. Due to shitty politics at the time, the 15 was originally adopted as an Air Force base defense rifle, and then ended up being adopted as the main rifle for the US right in the middle of Vietnam. But it was very evident that the rifle wasn't designed to operate in those conditions, as they often jammed mid-firefight and had to be field stripped and cleaned (there was more than one reason they didn't work well in Vietnam, but that is a much, much longer story). But although it was designed as a hunting rifle, because it was used by the military it is now considered an 'assault weapon'.
EDITED: Added a detail to make things make more sense
1 TheNorfolk 2014-03-30
Want to jump in here and ask a question or two. What evidence is there that the SH was a hoax? I'm talking about evidence that would stand up in court since OP says they want to take legal action. Cheers.
0 Katana0 2014-03-30
I have no idea actually. To me it sounds like a bunch of people looking for smoke and mirrors when the scene is in clear view...
2 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
-3 unnerve 2014-03-30
Well, I see no problem in disarming people under gunpoint even if they have a gun on them, so if criminal is reckless enough guns won't stop him.
-1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
2 unnerve 2014-03-30
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGO505rvEuA
But seriously, I don't think it would stop anyone. There're quite a few videos captured by CCTV, like one where a guy grabs fucking shotgun from robbers hands. I know circumstances aren't quite the same BUT we are speaking about criminals who already have guns and are ready to use weapon on people who might have never used it for self-defense before. So yeah, I really don't believe gun alone will stop criminal who REALLY know what he's doing.
6 maybesaydie 2014-03-30
Have. You. No. Decency.
5 SoundSalad 2014-03-30
Which sub?
-3 TemptingOwl 2014-03-30
The private sub that I now cannot access is www.reddit.com/r/privateinvestigate
Edit: confirmed to be banned
1 mfizzled 2014-03-30
/u/newtruth221
1 lukewarm2 2014-03-30
/u/User_History_Bot Lukewarm2
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 269 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-1 TheVacillate 2014-03-30
/u/User_History_Bot TheVacillate
Edit: My apologies for the random comment just to summon the bot, I've even taken away my own auto upvote. I just couldn't help myself.
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 Heroshade 2014-03-30
/u/User_History_Bot User_History_Bot
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 997 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 mullac1128 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot mullac1128
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 281 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-1 Ocolus_the_bot 2014-03-30
Here we go /r/conspiracy is going to rally around a guy who got banned for the third time for doxing. This time for posting home and business addresses of a Newtown Physician, as well as photos of his house,business, and headshot. "I commend newtruth221 and encourage others to do the same"
by: /u/75000_Tokkul
Upvotes: 66 | Downvotes: 31 | Timestamp of this thread.
Upvotes: 23 | Downvotes: 6 | Timestamp of cross-posting thread.
If this was an error, send me a message
-4 [deleted] 2014-03-30
Here we go. A skeptard trolling /r/conspiracy with the first post to tell us all what the sub he is obsessed with is going to do. Keep hoping. Keep praying that all your fantasies will be vindicated.
-2 oblivioustoobvious 2014-03-30
It's always funny just how quickly /r/conspiratard or /r/stalkerwatch is to mock us. The dedication it takes is so sad.
-1 Ocolus_the_bot 2014-03-30
Should r/conspiracy sue Reddit for banning newtruth221? /u/-money- thinks so
by: /u/Shilling4Life
Upvotes: 205 | Downvotes: 133 | Timestamp of this thread.
Upvotes: 4 | Downvotes: 1 | Timestamp of cross-posting thread.
If this was an error, send me a message
-2 my_newz_account 2014-03-30
She needs to be cautious in how she deals with her future investigation. With the amount of negative feedback this website alone has given her, it is obvious that a sore spot is being touched, and someone does not want this information to become known.
I hope she is successful.
edit: is our sub divided on this issue? Or are we getting brigaded to hell?
-4 RandoKillrizian 2014-03-30
As an innocent bystander in this rift between these two subs and lurking all around, I have to say with all honesty r/conspiratard and the users there seem to be driven by a ridiculous hatred of seemingly regular people trying to understand things in there own way. The anger displayed there for this user is borderline psychotic rage. The person clearly broke the rules sure, but what could be driving these tard users into such a frenzy? I'm not sure some of them are being honest about their motivations. I think Newtruth221 coming across as such a sweet and honest person is something they can't handle very well. I mean, if they talked to a girl like that where I live, everyone within a mile would be kicking some ass. It does seem like, they are the ones who are actually crazy. Maybe I need to do more research here, but there is no doubt about it. They got more nuts. I too suddenly think she is on to something and should continue her work. For no better reason than I like to watch people as they mentally snap.
1 metapunditedgy 2014-03-30
I don't know much about this story, but irrational frenzy is rare. There's usually an underlying cause.
-2 Ambiguously_Ironic 2014-03-30
It's the frenzy of the admins that is quite interesting...
0 [deleted] 2014-03-30
Quite interesting, and one might even say, quite telling.
-4 catholic__cock 2014-03-30
This is what we're dealing with over there
http://np.reddit.com/r/conspiratard/comments/21s9k9/here_we_go_rconspiracy_is_going_to_rally_around_a/cgg1oj7
I'm sorry, I didn't realize asking questions could promote such ridiculous levels of drama
-6 Mrg13 2014-03-30
Anyone who is going to harass someone in Newton is going to already have done it, or find the information on their own.
Nothing that was posted seemed to be all that hard to find.
If they want to consider it doxxing, why do they not consider what goes on in a sub I shall not name stalking, and harassing^ as they engage in what they claim goes on here as well.
3 catholic__cock 2014-03-30
Message the admins about it, chances are you'll get an asshole response back like i did lol
2 Mrg13 2014-03-30
If I felt the energy I would expend would cause a change, I would. But I'd rather not ruin my day by even trying.
Also maybe point out /r/rbi that's all about doxxing it seems. (granted for good causes).
-9 [deleted] 2014-03-30
/r/conspiratard is full of unstable individuals. Threatening murder, posing as racists as an excuse to post vile, ignorant, racist garbage.. hatred makes you ill. The sub went from a ha ha joke sub to a hate group when they ran out of content. Too many conspiracies holding water.
2 catholic__cock 2014-03-30
Don't forget posing as interested parties in a private subreddit just so they can get a print screen of doxing that conveniently can never be posted
1 arobitaille272 2014-03-30
Ive been trying to figure out what happened and this seems to be the crux of the issue. What do you mean a private subreddit? How did you learn of this transaction? It seems that all this drama is based on the post made by newtruth221 to r/law, is that where the personal info was posted?
1 catholic__cock 2014-03-30
you can make a subreddit and make it invite only. No one else can see what's in it. People purposefully became members there just to try and get it shut down.
The dox stuff wasn't posted on /r/law (if at all). They were supposedly posted on r/privateinvestigate
0 [deleted] 2014-03-30
Or conducting ongoing "experiments" where they express their racist compulsions to reveal how racist everyone else is. haha. It's awesome. It's science.
1 catholic__cock 2014-03-30
The funny thing is, they have no issues with that...going as far as supporting him and being ok with it because it was "a joke". Meanwhile, post a picture of a newtown doctor and the address of his practice and you're a MONSTER
-1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
They are providing a community service. They are so caring and sympathetic. It's not about their intellectual deficiency complex. Not at all. It's about truth, love and respect for all human beings for whom they devote their lives to. Tard means 'love of truth'. It's right in the sidebar of their sub.
-4 [deleted] 2014-03-30
It's hilarious.
-5 Conspirologist 2014-03-30
What happened is still nothing. In case of serious informations that can truly damage someone, they usually start harassing investigators physically, not only by banning their site. First rule of investigating a conspiracy - never do it alone. Always have somebody else with you who has the same informations. Always back up all the informations in a secure place.
-5 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
And not for spambots.
-7 NameTaken410 2014-03-30
Who can ban private subs? Reddit has gone to shit, and it's been happening for a while now.
19 Totally_not_a_shill 2014-03-30
Any sub can be banned for allowing doxxing to happen, which is exactly what happened.
-9 [deleted] 2014-03-30
Isn't doxxing mean publicly posting someone's info? If I email my colleague someone's info is that doxxing?
2 ShrimpFood 2014-03-30
Well, by definition, yes. But there's a different level of risk between sending one person whom you know information, and posting someone's info to a forum where you don't know every member.
And the admins say no to Doxxing, period, so messaging another user personal info is also bannable, if it's found and reported.
2 [deleted] 2014-03-30
Like LinkedIn?
3 ShrimpFood 2014-03-30
But what do you mean by that? I'll admit I don't know a single thing about LinkedIn, but I'm going to assume someone has to consent to having their information available on LinkedIn. Plus it's still just a choice by the Reddit admins to have zero-tolerance on doxxing, since it's gone badly before and Reddit always gets bad press when it happens.
1 [deleted] 2014-03-30
It's a joke.
3 ShrimpFood 2014-03-30
heh, my bad, a little tired.
2 JerosScotland 2014-03-30
Also don't post your own info, some subs don't like that.
-12 NameTaken410 2014-03-30
Proof?
7 Totally_not_a_shill 2014-03-30
Well, everything has been deleted, so I can't exactly link you to the post anymore, it's a well established fact at this point though.
1 Ambiguously_Ironic 2014-03-30
"well established fact" lol
Edit: I'm referring to the user being banned yesterday, not to the sub being banned (which was incredibly sketchy in itself what with the c-tard user "infiltrating" the private sub and another c-tard user preemptively creating a "troll post" about the deletion/ban).
-9 NameTaken410 2014-03-30
Likely excuse, ever heard of a screen shot?
6 Totally_not_a_shill 2014-03-30
Well I don't have one, do some searching and you can probably find something.
-7 Sabremesh 2014-03-30
Well, that's helpful, /u/Totally_not_a_waste_of_space
8 Totally_not_a_shill 2014-03-30
Hey, people are asking why this person got banned and I delivered the message. You guys don't want to believe me because you want to believe there is a conspiracy. Sorry to burst your bubble.
-9 TemptingOwl 2014-03-30
/u/newtruth221 getting banned does not in any way mean there is no conspiracy. The user has submitted valuable data and greatly assisted the communities efforts regarding the Newtown real-estate fraud.
Question: If a prominent submitter on r/911truth was banned for doxxing would the conspiracy behind 9/11 be kaput?
1 user gets banned and suddenly the movement must surely be wrong in its entirety.
2 ChRoNicBuRrItOs 2014-03-30
I think he was saying that people want to believe in a conspiracy against the user, not the conspiracy said user was talking about.
0 Totally_not_a_shill 2014-03-30
If people are getting banned simply for voicing their opinion on a conspiracy, which is what is being implied, then you could interpret that as a way the perpetrators are silencing people.
-12 Sabremesh 2014-03-30
Oh dear. Don't tell me, are you one of those people who has an imaginary cousin in Newtown?
10 Totally_not_a_shill 2014-03-30
Nope, I just have common sense.
-6 [deleted] 2014-03-30
[deleted]
3 ChRoNicBuRrItOs 2014-03-30
Or just upholding the clearly stated zero-tolerance policy on doxxing.
-7 Ambiguously_Ironic 2014-03-30
Check out the downvotes in here. I wonder if the c-tards brigaded this post...
-10 -Money- 2014-03-30
I hope someone sues the hell out of Reddit for stuff like this, and soon. Won't be long before they take this subreddit down, they clearly don't care anymore. We should get all of our money together and take these idiots to court.
1 BettyWhiteOnSteroids 2014-03-30
I am sure that will go over very well in court. Judges are very sympathetic to people who get banned from a website, especially ones where you can just create another account. It will go over even better after the judge finds out the reason for the ban.
0 -Money- 2014-03-30
It goes much deeper than just banning people, this website is trying to sway public opinion and I wouldn't be surprised if they were being paid a massive amount of money to do it. Banning news websites, banning people, banning subs, etc.. and these are mostly all having to do with politics and "alternate theories," they have subs where you can watch people literally DIE and those don't get the ax do they? /r/watchpeopledie. So come on, you also don't give 10-15% of your revenue to charity if you aren't making a massive amount of cash, this website is making money some other way and I guarantee if you dug deep you would find that this site is being totally manipulated and being paid to do it in some ghost account overseas.
3 sunshine-x 2014-03-30
Nailed it.
1 metapunditedgy 2014-03-30
I don't know much about this story, but irrational frenzy is rare. There's usually an underlying cause.
-2 Ambiguously_Ironic 2014-03-30
It's the frenzy of the admins that is quite interesting...
-4 catholic__cock 2014-03-30
This is what we're dealing with over there
http://np.reddit.com/r/conspiratard/comments/21s9k9/here_we_go_rconspiracy_is_going_to_rally_around_a/cgg1oj7
I'm sorry, I didn't realize asking questions could promote such ridiculous levels of drama
-4 [deleted] 2014-03-30
It's hilarious.
-9 TemptingOwl 2014-03-30
/u/newtruth221 getting banned does not in any way mean there is no conspiracy. The user has submitted valuable data and greatly assisted the communities efforts regarding the Newtown real-estate fraud.
Question: If a prominent submitter on r/911truth was banned for doxxing would the conspiracy behind 9/11 be kaput?
1 user gets banned and suddenly the movement must surely be wrong in its entirety.
-12 Sabremesh 2014-03-30
Oh dear. Don't tell me, are you one of those people who has an imaginary cousin in Newtown?
-14 AssuredlyAThrowAway 2014-03-30
Are you sure you didn't report the user to the admins?
3 ShrimpFood 2014-03-30
But what do you mean by that? I'll admit I don't know a single thing about LinkedIn, but I'm going to assume someone has to consent to having their information available on LinkedIn. Plus it's still just a choice by the Reddit admins to have zero-tolerance on doxxing, since it's gone badly before and Reddit always gets bad press when it happens.
3 ShrimpFood 2014-03-30
heh, my bad, a little tired.
0 oblivioustoobvious 2014-03-30
No. That's a retarded straw man argument. I never said or thought such a silly thing.
6 Katana0 2014-03-30
No problem!
The question of profit is really one of rumor and conspiracy (so it fits well in this sub!). The politicians all say it is for public safety. But they are being paid by the lobbyists who say that by banning 'X' feature, the world will suddenly become a safer place. This is possibly being egged on by some of the higher guys in the NRA; the National Rifle Association, which is an organization that fights for the rights of gun owners. You see, some of them have invested in businesses in the firearms industry, and every time the 'they're going to take our guns' rumor starts to go around, prices on guns and ammo skyrockets. An AR-15 used to sell for maybe $400-$600, depending on what was on it. Now they sell for $800-$1400 depending on what's on it and who made it. Ammo is much the same, with people hoarding thousands of rounds 'for when they won't be available', which drives up the price due to the whole supply and demand dynamic. It sucks too; I turned old enough to buy a gun just as prices hit the fan!
Others say that the government is trying to prevent civil uprisings like the ones seen in Libya, Egypt, and Syria... But I just don't see the motivation in the public yet. It is true that they are quickly loosing public favor though, so who knows?
As far as sporting use weapons goes, it depends on the state you're in, but they're generally defined as weapons used for hunting, or other sport shooting like skeet or trap shooting. The problem lies in the definitions. For instance, in California there is a senator that keeps pushing this "Assault Weapons ban" bill which bans most weapons of military origin from being sold or traded. The Lee-Enfield SMLE I believe is listed on that bill, which was a rifle used by the British in WW2. It is a great hunting rifle; ammo is a little hard to find, but it would definitely work well on deer and elk, and is accurate out to about 1000 yards. The German Mauser Kar98 and the Russian Mosin Nagant are also listed on the bill IIRC; all WW2 bolt action rifles. Most shotguns with magazines under 5 rounds fall under this category
Now, on the opposite side the rifle that the US military uses; the M-16, is simply a fully automatic version of the AR-15. Not many people know this, but I'm a collector, and do quite a bit of research into various firearms because they really interest me (if you can't tell already) but the AR-15 is a downsized version of the AR-10 (chambered in .308 instead of .223), and the AR-10 was originally designed as a hunting rifle. Due to shitty politics at the time, the 15 was originally adopted as an Air Force base defense rifle, and then ended up being adopted as the main rifle for the US right in the middle of Vietnam. But it was very evident that the rifle wasn't designed to operate in those conditions, as they often jammed mid-firefight and had to be field stripped and cleaned (there was more than one reason they didn't work well in Vietnam, but that is a much, much longer story). But although it was designed as a hunting rifle, because it was used by the military it is now considered an 'assault weapon'.
EDITED: Added a detail to make things make more sense
2 catholic__cock 2014-03-30
Don't forget posing as interested parties in a private subreddit just so they can get a print screen of doxing that conveniently can never be posted
1 ChRoNicBuRrItOs 2014-03-30
It was posted in /r/conspiratard, the guy who reported it to the admins posted it himself. The only reason I won't directly link you is because I want as little chance as possible for someone to find out more info. That's not right.
1 ChRoNicBuRrItOs 2014-03-30
For the record, I agree that the stuff on /r/law wasn't right either. But two wrongs don't make a right.
-145 Sabremesh 2014-03-30
Stories from users about their Sandy Hook "friends" or "relatives" are made in the knowledge that they cannot be verified, because revealing personal information is a bannable offence.
Do you have evidence which doesn't identify you (or anybody else) but which proves that Sandy Hook was a real event?
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 812 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 812 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
318 wafflesareforever 2014-03-30
Has a member of your family ever been brutally murdered, followed by a bunch of loons claiming that it never happened and your deceased family member never existed? Try for one second to imagine what that's like, and then give me another lesson on etiquette.
8 scam_me_please 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot Flytape
58 StarLiner42 2014-03-30
Weird, you've never had an issue censoring people before...
-3 Okayloll 2014-03-30
Shut. The. Fuck. Up. Neckbeard.
-1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 863 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 dragonblade629 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot Dragonblade629
0 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 1000 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 975 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 Capatown 2014-03-30
/u/user_history_bot Capatown
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 374 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 997 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME
-6 Karl_Cross 2014-03-30
Recently? That the UK governent made the decision to deliberately privatise the UK Royal Mail in a way that finacially benefited those close to the Tory government.
1 Virulentt 2014-03-30
There you go
1 User_History_Bot 2014-03-30
Data for the last 453 comments (MAX 1000)
To summon this bot, the first line of your comment should be: /u/user_history_bot USERNAME