Thread: Was Sandy Hook a Hoax?

You literally just described both sides of this argument.

Originally Posted by Tiresias

Holy shit! Your world view is so completely insane... So, let's clarify.

Columbine -
Virgina Tech -
Aurora -
Santa Barbara Rampage -
Norway Island Shooter -

Which of these were real?

Did you read what I wrote about that? It looks like you were trying to respond to it. Are you sure you are being honest here?

Originally Posted by Tiresias

Except it does. You are looking for smoke where there is no fire. The day of, it was weird as news came out, maybe even the week later, but beyond reasonable doubt, we have a story that most people have accepted for over 2 years. It's part of the fabric of history now. Keeping that in mind, very little has come out of it. Gun sales, sorta, went up, but they went back down since. Gun laws have been in motion for decades, and we have laxer gun laws than any other country in the world. Fear of the government or preparation? Both zero. The NSA leaks are still coming out, and people are as trusting of the government as ever before.

No, people are not as trusting of the government as ever before. People are a lot less trusting now than they had been for a long time. Also, the country is better armed. School security is stricter. Gun legislation was passed, other gun legislation was merely attempted, and certain government departmental policies have changed.

23 Gun Safety Victories Since Sandy Hook | Blog | Media Matters for America

Why did I need to post that yet again?

Originally Posted by Tiresias

How many people, in your estimate, would be part of this conspiracy?

It's hard to say. Definitely at least one orchestrator, some cops, a medical examiner, and some actors playing witnesses and family members. How many people were involved in Project Artichoke? What about Operation Mockingbird? How many people would have been involved in Operation Northwoods if Kennedy had approved it?

Operation Northwoods - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Operation Northwoods was a series of proposals for actions against the Cuban government, that originated within the Department of Defense (DoD) and the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) of the United States government in 1962. The proposals called for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) or other US government operatives to commit acts of terrorism against American civilians and military targets, blaming it on the Cuban government, and using it to justify a war against Cuba. The proposals were rejected by the Kennedy administration.

Originally Posted by Tiresias

There's a good median ground. 9/11, as the official story said was purported by 19 hijackers (quick Googling, forgive me if that number is wrong). With rudimentary flight training and capability. They were able to commandeer 4 planes, I think, with three striking critical buildings, one being the Pentagon. What's scarier? A government conspiracy or just some random lunatics attacking AND SUCCEEDING at destroying buildings that are still being felt almost 15 years later?

Why are you asking me about 9/11? I don't think it was a U.S. government conspiracy. Check out some of the threads here on that. I think the U.S. government pulled some tricks in dealing with the public in regard to the situation, but I don't think they orchestrated the attacks.

Originally Posted by Tiresias

Looking at Sandy Hook with the same goggles (you won't), and you can see how this official story is far scarier and freakier than any other argument. Literally the guy next to you on a bus could open fire.

What is your point on this?

Originally Posted by Tiresias

H
Attachment 8223

Yes, I see a person reacting... This is so mind-blowing that you believe ACTORS are portraying grieving parents, but they are so poor at their craft they would laugh on camera. Have you ever been duplicitous? You don't let your guard down the entire time while lying. This all has to assume the media isn't in on it or they would simply edit the footage. So, these actors have fooled journalists, which despite your opinion have credentials and experiences to suss out total whack job liars, and maybe 90% of the population, but you caught it because you can pause a video. That doesn't gel. It's just finding smoke where there's no fire and not taking the totality of a situation.

Also, she is crying. If you cannot see that, then I don't really plan to engage you on any more argument about whether or not people are grieving. As Alric said, you simply are ignoring what tears look like.

You trust the media not to run with something like this? Do you know what kind of viewership they got for it? They are not on some conscientious hunt for the truth. What rock have you been living under? Also, my conclusion about acting is not based on merely this one freeze frame. You know that. Carlee Soto had a devilish smirk on her face, and what is the downfall there? That masses refuse to question such things. You are among them. However, I still ask you to get a look at the actual smirk.

Click to enlarge:

Attachment 8225

Tell me where in the interview you see a tear coming out of an eye.

Originally Posted by SearcherTMR

Thank god I am not the only one to see a person laughing - there is also Universal Mind...
Btw Universal Mind, I really don't understand why you try so hard to convince people.
Its so easy for someone to fit everything in his world view that you simply can't convince anyone unless they are open to the possibility that they might just be wrong...and this is definitely not the case here.

It's interesting to put the obvious right in people's faces when they are in complete denial and see what they have to say about it. It really amuses me.

The pic situation on this site has been screwy for the last two years. I don't know if the screen shot I posted is going to last. The moment you see this video hit 7:16, pause it. It's at about 7:16.2. The wicked smile lasts for only part of a second.



I hope the freeze frame screen shot I posted will last.

Nope.

Originally Posted by Merck

Nope.

Why do you disagree with the points I have made?

I get the sense that the only reason you're so adamant in believing this is fake is because you're scared of the government using an excuse to take your precious guns away. This whole thread is so laughable, if only it wasn't so deeply offensive towards the families of the victims...

Originally Posted by DeeryTheDeer

I get the sense that the only reason you're so adamant in believing this is fake is because you're scared of the government using an excuse to take your precious guns away. This whole thread is so laughable, if only it wasn't so deeply offensive towards the families of the victims...

That's some cute speculation. Do you have a debate point to make? Prove that there were victims. Counter my arguments that there were no victims. You have contributed nothing.

There were no victims. I have explained the logic supporting that conclusion. See what you can do with it.

The onus is on you. You are claiming something very fantastical and silly, but your "evidence" is atrocious. You are pointing at things that the majority of the population totally disagrees with as your sources, and you won't hear one way or another as to why you are wrong.

Alric gave you the opening; go dig up the bodies. Live stream it on Twitch, and prove there's no corpses in there. While there, take scrappings of any bones you find to absolutely prove those corpses aren't the purported victims of Sandy Hook.

The fact of the matter is, in science, when you challenge an accepted notion, you have to provide real evidence to oppose this notion. All videos on Youtube are automatically barred because the nature of them; you are just making conjecture from evidence that runs counter to what everyone else sees, and there's no shaking you on that. In my opinion, if a conspiracy happened to the level you suggest, they wouldn't have had slip-ups on national television in the year 2012/2013 when nothing is temporary. So, find me evidence that right now these people are acting. Using past examples of acting roles only proves it to you and the people who have already excepted this worldview.

And for the nth time, stop being a condescending bitch. Calling Deery's response as cute speculation is so completely unnecessary and just proves a weak character and argument. She upset you and mocked you? Cool, prove him/her wrong. It makes me, and I imagine others, not want to post here because the last concern I have in my life is whether or not someone online mocks me.

Originally Posted by Tiresias

The onus is on you. You are claiming something very fantastical and silly, but your "evidence" is atrocious. You are pointing at things that the majority of the population totally disagrees with as your sources, and you won't hear one way or another as to why you are wrong.

There you go again with your appeals to mainstream opinion. What the mainstream believes is not my basis for believing anything. However, it is yours, at least on this issue. What is your belief about the origin of humanity?

Originally Posted by Tiresias

Alric gave you the opening; go dig up the bodies. Live stream it on Twitch, and prove there's no corpses in there. While there, take scrappings of any bones you find to absolutely prove those corpses aren't the purported victims of Sandy Hook.

I told you why I am not going to go to Newtown and be a grave digger. Why did you press the reset button on that discussion? What an asinine challenge.

Originally Posted by Tiresias

The fact of the matter is, in science, when you challenge an accepted notion, you have to provide real evidence to oppose this notion. All videos on Youtube are automatically barred because the nature of them; you are just making conjecture from evidence that runs counter to what everyone else sees, and there's no shaking you on that. In my opinion, if a conspiracy happened to the level you suggest, they wouldn't have had slip-ups on national television in the year 2012/2013 when nothing is temporary. So, find me evidence that right now these people are acting. Using past examples of acting roles only proves it to you and the people who have already excepted this worldview.

Do you honestly believe that the burden of proof in science has anything to do with popular opinion?

You are confused. Positive claims establish burden of proof. I have made positive claims, and I have proven them. However, you have made positive claims and won't even say why you believe them aside from the fact that they are popular opinion and part of the official story. So far, your opinion on this issue is 100% about what other people believe. Is that the best you've got?

Do I really need to explain yet again how I know that the actors are acting, aside from the fact that they are in fact actors with histories of acting? Tears come of out none of their eyes in any live interviews, zero of them express anger, zero of them take a political stance other than supporting gun control (despite the fact that murder has a history of raising MANY political issues), zero of them blame anything but the gun (except one of them said Nancy Lanza didn't fully do her job as a mother, when asked), they all act like their supposedly murdered family members / friends were running for student council or local office and not dead, and all of that together proves that their speeches were scripted and staged. I also have a history of acting and grief counseling, so I know when a large group of people (remember... we are not talking about just one person) is being fake about losing somebody to murder.

Did you read it that time? Here's another example, of the MANY.



My evidence goes far beyond the obvious acting. You should read my entire posts.

Originally Posted by Tiresias

And for the nth time, stop being a condescending bitch. Calling Deery's response as cute speculation is so completely unnecessary and just proves a weak character and argument. She upset you and mocked you? Cool, prove him/her wrong. It makes me, and I imagine others, not want to post here because the last concern I have in my life is whether or not someone online mocks me.

That's the pot calling the kettle black. Have you read your own posts? I know you don't read much of mine, but at least be aware of what yours say.

Deery did nothing but insult me personally. Did you really not notice that? I told her that her post is worthless because it is. It is an ad hominem post with zero debate points in it. Let's see you admit that.

Why do you demand to be taken seriously for such a ridiculous, baiting conspiracy theory? I'm wondering what your motive is for wanting to deny that this tragedy actually happened at all... do you also deny the holocaust? The moon landing? It's one thing to believe in crazy conspiracy theories, it's another to completely disregard human life that was taken away in the process. It makes you come across as a cold sociopath. Again, you condescend me, in your tone trying so hard to sound superior (as usual), that it has nothing to do with pro-gun feelings, yet you continually mention how all the witnesses blame guns. It seems obvious that you don't like the fact that they're blaming guns. If the shoe fits, wear it.

Originally Posted by DeeryTheDeer

Why do you demand to be taken seriously for such a ridiculous, baiting conspiracy theory? I'm wondering what your motive is for wanting to deny that this tragedy actually happened at all... do you also deny the holocaust? The moon landing? It's one thing to believe in crazy conspiracy theories, it's another to completely disregard human life that was taken away in the process. It makes you come across as a cold sociopath. Again, you condescend me, in your tone trying so hard to sound superior (as usual), that it has nothing to do with pro-gun feelings, yet you continually mention how all the witnesses blame guns. It seems obvious that you don't like the fact that they're blaming guns. If the shoe fits, wear it.

Do you know what the ad hominem fallacy is? Learn about it.

ad hominem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mere personal insult is not argument, and neither is bare assertion. You claim that people were killed at Sandy Hook. Why do you believe any were? I don't believe any were, and I have been debating the issue for 16 pages. You have contributed zero to the debate. If you think a massacre took place at Sandy Hook, explain your reasoning. If you think I have made illogical points in this thread, counter them. If you are going to do neither, then you are just spinning your wheels in the mud when you address posts to me in this thread.

You are starting from the premise that people were killed at Sandy Hook, and that is the claim I am challenging. I challenge you to prove that there was a massacre at Sandy Hook. Make the best argument you possibly can. So far, you haven't shown the first sign that you even have one.

Well - the time I've been reading and answering in here are long gone, I just jump in shortly now, and maybe I just forgot that we were through this particular argument zig times before, but since I got reminded of this matter reading "Jennifer Government" by Max Barry, book about anarchy, in a way, I want to try this (once more?):


UM:

What would compel a government wanting to shock people into accepting gun-regulation to spend thousands of Dollars on pulling off such an elaborate scheme instead of just manipulating one labile individual into really doing the actual shooting?
Would that not be much more clever and just as effective?

That's a good point. I am not sure why it was done the way it was. I am not even sure at this point what the purpose was. I thought I knew for a while, but I have seen that the rabbit hole goes deeper than I realized. It might have been some kind of act of reverse psychology. It might have been a social experiment. It's a really bizarre mystery. What I do know is that the official story is phony as a $7 bill.