Sandy Hook "truthers" vandalize memorial

[Byron Carter]

Wikipedia isn't useful yet a CT YT is? Come on man. This is one of the primary problems with CTers. They laugh when you research any information from mainstream sources like CNN, Washington Post, etc but then they end up having all their information from random people on YT ranting away.

The video is just showing news clips.

I'm not trying to use that video as evidence of anything.

 

[Byron Carter]

Not a Sandy Hook Troofer but this always threw me off a bit...

I'm not a psychologist but this isn't the "normal" behavior of a guy who just lost a child in a most violent manner.

Not allowed to question authority. That video is evidence of nothing.

See no evil, hear no evil. Obey.

 

[Ruprecht]

I think he had been dead for years before this shooting.

Wasn't he at the school the day before and argued with four of the staff?
Two of which were killed and one injured in the shooting?

Hey... maybe Sandy Hook is a spook town, like the fake American towns the KGB made for training during the cold war...

 

[Byron Carter]

Wasn't he at the school the day before and argued with four of the staff?
Two of which were killed and one injured in the shooting?

Hey... maybe Sandy Hook is a spook town, like the fake American towns the KGB made for training during the cold war...

No.

The police chief later said that story was fabricated, and never occurred.

MSNBC (subsidiary of GE) ran with it though and aired it all through the day, so people think it's the truth.

 

[Ruprecht]

No.

The police chief later said that story was fabricated, and never occurred.

MSNBC (subsidiary of GE) ran with it though and aired it all through the day, so people think it's the truth.

Must have been reported broader than that, I remember reading it and I only get my American news in print.

 

[Madmick]

Not allowed to question authority. That video is evidence of nothing.

See no evil, hear no evil. Obey.

All of your posts ITT sure make it sound like you're one of those Sandy Hook 2nd Amendment CTers who you insist don't exist. I knew you were fanatical, but I never would have believed you were this stupid.

 

[threelions]

Not a Sandy Hook Troofer but this always threw me off a bit...

I'm not a psychologist but this isn't the "normal" behavior of a guy who just lost a child in a most violent manner.

There is no normal behaviour for grieving. People react in many different ways, from breaking down completely for weeks on end to acting as if nothing happened. There is no normal in these situations.

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

There is no normal behaviour for grieving. People react in many different ways, from breaking down completely for weeks on end to acting as if nothing happened. There is no normal in these situations.

Yeah, I suppose you're right...

I guess I'm judging this person's behavior as to how I would behave in a similar situation.

I would not be laughing and cracking jokes...but yeah...different people, different reactions.

 

[IDL]

Yes, I believe that is where the term originated in American discourse...at least that's where I first heard it being used.

In terms of stupidity (ranging from most to least idiotic), Holocaust deniers > Sandy Hook truthers > Birthers > Osama Bin Laden death truthers> 9/11 truthers

So then is anyone who doesn't buy something at face value and looks into government involvement labeled a truther?

The reason I wonder is because I'm well aware of the power of labels. It plays an important psychological role in short circuiting peoples reasoning skills.

so now people can think 'someone harassed parents of lost child' = 'truther' = everyone guilty by association'

Once the psychological associations are established in peoples minds it becomes extremely easy to short circuit people. The media can slap the label on someone publicly and listeners won't be able to get passed their previous associations to logically analyze new information.

 

[weed]

I dunno man, typically I would be pissed but if I was one of those parents & someone claiming my kid(s) never existed, I'd be beyond distraught.

 

[speakhandsforme]

So then is anyone who doesn't buy something at face value and looks into government involvement labeled a truther?

It's generally restricted to those who do so with very little precedence and who are stubborn to facts or justifications.

There's a line drawn, whether in pencil or ink, between people who recognize the inconsistencies in the 9/11 details which were made public and the people who think George Bush orchestrated the whole thing.

 

[Madmick]

So then is anyone who doesn't buy something at face value and looks into government involvement labeled a truther?

Here comes the CTer persecution complex. More self-fulfilling dribble.

 

[HOLA]

Guess I'm late to the party, but what evidence do the "truthers" site?

Pretty good overview.
http://www.reddit.com/r/skeptic/com...hook_conspiracy_video_has_been_making/c7xjgzr

We had plenty of them here,too, although they are conspicuously absent from this thread. Ben236, for example, was all about this photo:

He claims they forgot to photoshop her legs into the photo, thereby allowing us to see their coverup. No, I'm not kidding.

Since no one has really taken the time to thoroughly debunk this yet here you go:
Theory 1: The first thing the video tries to allege is that there is a second shooter. They love to grab early media footage and then use that as "evidence" of their claims, as if the media's first reporting is somehow golden. Odd that conspiracy theorists distrust the media, then turn around and use its raw reporting claims as evidence. Anyway, you can easily google and figure out who the guy in the woods was.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Y6C2YmOLWnM[1]
He is the father of a student there and the athletic director at the highschool. He was on his way to the school to help make gingerbread houses with 1st graders when he heard the shots. He was unarmed, arrested, detained, questioned, and let go. The story of the guy in the woods was a dead end, so the media dropped it. That is the problem with the 24 hour news cycle, they will report any lead they get before sorting out facts. However, this is hardly evidence of a conspiracy.
The video even makes the ridiculous claim that since the guy was sitting in the FRONT of the police car, that he must have some "crazy" credentials. Yeah, what is more likely...that this guy was a concerned father or that he was a man with some "crazy" credentials on a black ops mission to shoot up a school but he just didn't have the skills to properly vacate, and so he ended up getting himself captured by lowly local law enforcement, AND broadcast on national tv, potentially exposing his super secret black op? C'mon.
Theory 2: The gun discrepancy. This can be chalked up to contradictory reporting, which is going to happen when the media competes with itself to be the first one to break any new details. There have already been articles discussing these discrepancies. What is known for sure is he carried at least 2 handguns into the school and had a shotgun in his car. The discrepancies come in when talking about the other weapons, some sources claim it was a Bushmaster AR-15[2] , others claim it was 2 additional pistols[3] and the AR was left in the trunk with the shotgun. Recent reports have concluded that the shooter did in fact carry 2 pistols and a Bushmaster AR-15 into the school with him. The video just merges all of these conflicting reports to say how the story doesn't make sense. This isn't evidence of a conspiracy, just terrible reporting and fact checking.
Update: The State Police released a new report today January 22nd, 2013 (over a month after the shooting and a week after my post)...to clear up confusion around the conflicting reports. source[4]
Police released a news release on Tuesday, saying they provided details in news conferences but wanted to eliminate any confusion or misinformation.
Police said they found a Bushmaster .223 caliber model XM15-E2S rifle with high capacity 30 round clips, a Glock 10-mm handgun and a Sig-Sauer P226 9mm handgun inside the school.
Police identified Adam Lanza as the gunman who shot and killed 20 first graders and six staff members.
Police also searched Lanza

 

[speakhandsforme]

Pretty good overview.
http://www.reddit.com/r/skeptic/com...hook_conspiracy_video_has_been_making/c7xjgzr

We had plenty of them here,too, although they are conspicuously absent from this thread. Ben236, for example, was all about this photo:

He claims they forgot to photoshop her legs into the photo, thereby allowing us to see their coverup. No, I'm not kidding.

Has he simmered a bit as of late? Recently, his posts (at least the ones I notice) seem pretty reasonable, even if I don't generally agree with them. But I do seem to remember thinking him to be a bit of a quack back in the day.

 

[HOLA]

All of your posts ITT sure make it sound like you're one of those Sandy Hook 2nd Amendment CTers who you insist don't exist. I knew you were fanatical, but I never would have believed you were this stupid.

He is confused.

Peter Lanza is the Vice President of GE. General Electric is one of Obama's biggest supporters, and the parent company of.. get this: MSNBC.

Adam Lanza, the shooter, disappeared from the face of the earth 3 years before the shooting.

Adam Lanza reemerges from who-knows-where to shoot up a school of children, just in time for Obama to push gun-bans.

Oh, and someone was questioned with a rifle in the woods behind the school the day before the shooting.



But yeah, swallow that official story and don't ask questions. Be good little patriots.

He argues that gun regulation wasn't a part of the conspiracy, then includes it.

Everyone knows that was the supposed reason touted for this. And the complete lack of ability to pass even the simplest gun control legislation in its wake shows how all-powerful the government is.

 

[HOLA]

Has he simmered a bit as of late? Recently, his posts (at least the ones I notice) seem pretty reasonable, even if I don't generally agree with them. But I do seem to remember thinking him to be a bit of a quack back in the day.

I'm sure once the 2016 primaries heat up he'll be back in his element. Or the next terrorist attack.

 

[IDL]

It's generally restricted to those who do so with very little precedence and who are stubborn to facts or justifications.

There's a line drawn, whether in pencil or ink, between people who recognize the inconsistencies in the 9/11 details which were made public and the people who think George Bush orchestrated the whole thing.

That would be the perception of most people off hand.

 

[speakhandsforme]

That would be the perception of most people off hand.

Huh? I'm not sure I follow.

 

[IDL]

Here comes the CTer persecution complex. More self-fulfilling dribble.

Hey, I get shat on all the time and I don't complain. I understand the psychology quite well of peoples reaction to 'CTs'. It's a normal reaction in our society. People have a strong aversion to them in general.

I'll defend the concept of grassroots investigating of government though.

People typically think that anything of importance would be shown to them over licensed media, but that isn't true. The system is built around self preservation.

 

[IDL]

Huh? I'm not sure I follow.

Well how would you really know what a conclusion was based on? Out of context it won't make any sense lot of the time.

It could be based on thousands of man hours of investigation but that wouldn't be apparent on the surface.

Then I suppose you get not so bright people, who present someone else's work on a subject and make it look bad.

At the end of the day, it takes work. Most people will probably just label someone and be done with it