Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 1/15/13 11:00 AM, Fim wrote:

At 1/15/13 10:44 AM, Dry-Ice wrote: Have you seen the video? Paranoid maybe, unfounded no. People were making tribute pages for the victims of sandy hook BEFORE IT HAPPENED. What makes you say it's unfounded?

So you're argument is that the government orchestrated a mass culling of children and then accidentally made a facebook group about it too early?

No. My argument is why did people make facebook pages and online fundraisers before it happened? What makes you say it's unfounded?

At 1/15/13 11:02 AM, Dry-Ice wrote:
No. My argument is why did people make facebook pages and online fundraisers before it happened? What makes you say it's unfounded?

That isn't an argument that's a question, and the answer is obviously no they didn't, the person who made the video got it wrong. It's a huge leap to say that from that tiny bit of information than that means it MUST have been a government operation.

My argument would be that this is a very desperate attempt from someone who is pro-gun movement to discredit those who want to make rational steps towards regulating guns. It's sad that people are buying into this. It takes away from the fact of what a sad tragedy it really was.

Nothing's being concluded about it being fake, The maker of the video just shows allot of strange and peculiar things abut reported stories, facts and interviews. He's not making any dumb exaggerated statement that it's fake.

Fine I'll spill the beans it was Wade.

That guy did raise some valid points though.

At 1/15/13 11:19 AM, Fim wrote: That isn't an argument that's a question, and the answer is obviously no they didn't, the person who made the video got it wrong. It's a huge leap to say that from that tiny bit of information than that means it MUST have been a government operation.

I didn't make that huge leap. I don't have an argument here either, that was sorta my point by explaining myself with that question. I get that the person who made the video has an agenda, I get irritated with the rhetoric devices, music and overall tone of the video as much as anyone else would. I prefer to be shown the facts and have a chance to make up my own mind, and what's shown in that video - if anything that's been said is true - gives people a lot to think about.

So if the person in the video got it wrong? Does that mean he deliberately fabricated the screenshots and footage of him navigating the various websites and highlighting cached google search results which display the mismatched dates? If that's what you're saying that's fine, believe whatever you want to believe, but "obviously he got it wrong" doesn't answer my question.

My argument would be that this is a very desperate attempt from someone who is pro-gun movement to discredit those who want to make rational steps towards regulating guns. It's sad that people are buying into this. It takes away from the fact of what a sad tragedy it really was.

If you think i'm 'buying into' this you have problems evaluating what you're being told without jumping to conclusions. It might well be just a piece of propaganda, but what about the news footage of the guy who was caught in the woods by the police? The point is, the video is leaving a lot of questions unanswered and personally I'd love to see answers to them, regardless of if that answer is that it's just a crazy conservative nutjob stirring shit against gun control or if there actually is some sort of false flag coverup going on.

If there's anyone who has more information on the subject and can legitimately explain and disprove the points the video is raising, please speak up. I'm not taking sides here, I just want information.

At 1/15/13 11:51 AM, Dry-Ice wrote:
I'm not taking sides here, I just want information.

Fair enough, like I said, I haven't actually seen the video so I can't really debunk anything you said. Looks like I'm going to have to watch it now );

oh jeez, the tinfoil is strong with this thread.

seriously, what exactly would be gained by asking people to fake a mass shooting? If you think that Obama is behind this or the government in general is behind this, why the fuck would they take such a massive risk to fake something this big? Is it just to gain support for a ban on guns? why would individual people go along with a scheme that is clearly immoral just to drum up support for a gun ban? also, the effort required to keep hundreds, if not thousands of people quiet about some conspiracy would be immense. this stuff only makes sense if you already buy into the idea that the government, or the Illuminati, or the Jews, or some other shadowy organization wants to take away Americans' rights and haul us into concentration camps.

the people making these claims though? they get ad revenue, attention, book sales, they get to feel relevant again, and Alex Jones gets to go on Piers Morgan's show and tard rage for ten minutes or so. if ANYONE is benefiting from this tradgedy, it's these cranks. It makes a lot more sense that these guys are trying to spin things after the fact by throwing up a bunch of circumstantial evidence that there's some conspiracy afoot. It's certainly easier than faking a mass shooting, and the cranks profit.

but i do find it interesting that the same people who insist on not believing what is told to them by the major news outlets and tell us to "DO UR OWN RESEARCH, DON'T BE A SHEEPLE" are so willing to believe without question what is told to them by some guy with a youtube account. heh.

At 1/15/13 09:33 AM, Dry-Ice wrote: Watch it and make up your own mind, don't just make up your mind without considering any other possibilities, that's fucking dumb.

It isn't true because all conspiracies are bullshit.

Except aliens.

I think the only thing going on here is media profiting from tragedy and spinning it in various ways.

Pretty much every tragedy like this is going to attract conspiracy theorists that try to create weird-ass theories about what really happened. Like everyone knows that 9/11 attracted a shit-ton of people who made these bizarre claims about the disaster being an inside-job by the government or Illuminati or some shit instead of being done by a bunch of crazy fundamentalist muslims like it was proven to. I imagine similar things happened with Columbine.

At 1/15/13 02:57 AM, HighWay wrote: jews did columbine

ye
-sent from ipad

Some valid points were made, but I'm still stuck on the Aurora case because that one was even more bizarre because he was obviously drugged but with what is what I want to know

At 1/15/13 06:50 PM, Idiot-Finder wrote:

At 1/15/13 12:48 AM, Cootie wrote: Faker than Dolly Parton's titties.

sorry if thread already about this.

People are really unbelievable these days, guess if something happens, it's gotta be a conspiracy. I really feel like I want to punch someone, namely the conspiracy nut-sacks.

Your name really does suit you. you are an idiot alright.

I'm not saying the shooting didn't happen. I am asking you the same question someone else asked.

Why were there face book pages, and other donation pages raising money for the sandy hook shooting 3 days BEFORE it happened? Explain that one?

Explain why they are insisting he shot everyone with an assault weapon, that he didn't use and was found in his car well after the shooting happening. Not to mention the media is also saying 4 hand guns were found in the school and the rifle was never bright into the school.

The only thing I see is gun grabbing politicians feeding an army of anti-gun law toting idiots so they can try to ban everything that isn't a revolver. And soon those would come too.

At 1/15/13 12:59 AM, Cootie wrote:

At 1/15/13 12:50 AM, Phobotech wrote: What a crock of shit.

Where did I leave my tin foil hat?

I've got an extra one that you can have. Astrid doesn't want to wear it. her loss. Now, the government can read her thoughts.

Some people, even on a tragedy such as this have to try to spin it in a way that benefits them. Oh humanity, why hath thou forsaken me?

I'm not even going to look at the fucking video, that would mean validating any of this bastard's attempt at persuasion, furthermore, entertain a notion that is as thin as air. My time is more precious than that. From the gist of it, he thinks that the government set up a mass shooting to get mass support for gun control? That's so obviously fallible it scarcely needs to be explained as to why.

First off, do you REALLY think that the government would put out a massive amount of time, money and resources into something like Gun Control? Something that, in the grand scheme of government, doesn't matter in the slightest and doesn't directly affect any of the governing officials? It's just a tiny part of domestic policy, nothing that any one would risk a massive conspiracy on. If this was about money, if this affected the economy or helped with foreign policy, did SOMETHING that actually would benefit politicians or the government in general, it might have ground to stand on, but it doesn't. Assuming that Gun Control DID go through, it would only appease one side and piss off the other, slow Gun selling and put an emphasis on illegal weaponry. If the government is as "evil" and "calculating" as conspirators love to think, then why would they restrict a huge part of the economy such as gun buying and selling.

The shooting at Sandy Hook touched hearts and put a moral push to banning high power guns, "morality" shouldn't matter to Big Bother, it should only be profiteering and keeping the masses ignorant right? Seriously, at least learn how to use common fucking sense.

At 1/15/13 08:25 PM, fuzzum111 wrote:

Why were there face book pages, and other donation pages raising money for the sandy hook shooting 3 days BEFORE it happened? Explain that one?

because, contrary to popular belief, google search results do not always accurately reflect the date the content was published. For example, here is a date restrictive search of Sandy Hook, listing all articles that appear to be published before the shooting took place, and well holy fucking shit, according to this google thing there are articles and videos from these dates talking about the shooting: Jan 14, 2012 , Jun 19, 2012 , Sept 16, 2012, all dates well before the shooting.

Explain why they are insisting he shot everyone with an assault weapon, that he didn't use and was found in his car well after the shooting happening. Not to mention the media is also saying 4 hand guns were found in the school and the rifle was never bright into the school.

Which can be chalked up to contradictory reporting, which is definitely going to happen when the media competes with itself to be the first one to break any new details. There have already been articles clearing up the discrepancies: Like this one.

The only thing I see is gun grabbing politicians feeding an army of anti-gun law toting idiots so they can try to ban everything that isn't a revolver. And soon those would come too.

and i can see that you and some of the other posters ITT are awfully eager to believe that there is a conspiracy afoot.

and this is the thing with conspiracy theorists, whether they're Sandy Hook Truthers, 9/11 Truthers, anti-vaxxers, birthers, or whatever. these people aren't actually interested in the truth, they are only interested in pushing a narrative and keeping the theory alive. you can show them evidence that refutes their central point, but 99 point 9 repeating percent of the time, they just dismiss it and anything else that refutes their theory as "part of the conspiracy" and call you a "sheeple" and "closed-minded."

and you know what? for the rest of the points that stupid video makes, I'll just repost this thing from reddit, a rebuttal to every point the video makes, because they said it better than I could. I've already covered Theories 2 and 7 in my post above.

========
First off the guy that created this video is Alex Jones. He is a paranoid nutjob, as was pretty evident by his CNN interview - seriously skip to 3 minutes in and tell me this guy is sane. Now that that's out of the way let's look at the content of the video...

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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Y6C2 YmOLWnM

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

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

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

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

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

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

Theory 6: One piece of footage of the crime scene does not show many ambulances and shows no children. The author claims this means this was all staged. He goes on to say that only one ambulance was there the whole time and they quickly blocked off all exits. The problem with this is twofold. Firstly, there are several pictures of multiple ambulances: http://www.politico.com/story/2012/12/connecticut-school-sho oting-official-says-gunman-killed-85094.html Secondly, this footage that the videos author is commenting on is likely taken well after the shooting took place, which easily explains why there aren't a bunch of ambulances around and no one is panicking. More things taken out of context because they fit the authors narrative.

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

Other stuff: The guy that made this video clearly has his own agenda, which is why he keeps bringing up 9/11 and the London bombings. Any time a large, tragic event occurs, he does his best to take media out of context and create his own crazy conspiracy driven narrative for the events that took place. If you are skeptical of this video, you should be. It's crap.

and it looks like the cranks are now harassing a grandfather who comforted some Sandy Hook students during the shooting.

there is nothing that these assholes won't stoop to to keep their delusions alive.

Fuck 30 minutes of this.

At 1/15/13 12:48 AM, Cootie wrote: Faker than Dolly Parton's titties.

it's funny because they're the only thing real about her

At 1/16/13 12:01 AM, hiddeninthecrowd wrote:

At 1/15/13 12:48 AM, Cootie wrote: Faker than Dolly Parton's titties.

it's funny because they're the only thing real about her

Nope, she has implants.

Hey powerage, you are missing two things on theory seven.

You back up your "argument"(couldn't think of a better word, not meant to offend) with the valid point that cashed google results are not always accurate. I don't contest that.

Explain why on facebook itself there were pages made BEFORE the shooting, not search results but the raw page on facebook itself and there are even screen caps of people questioning why they were made days prior to the shooting.

At 1/16/13 12:04 AM, fuzzum111 wrote: Explain why on facebook itself there were pages made BEFORE the shooting, not search results but the raw page on facebook itself and there are even screen caps of people questioning why they were made days prior to the shooting.

Is it not possible to rename a group/page on Facebook?

In fact I made such a page years ago. Wow, it took me no time at all to let me change the name. See?

It doesnt matter whether its true or not

A lie repeated often enough becomes truth

SO PERPETUATE DAT CONSPIRACY!

The crab people can't pull the strings, they accidently cut them with their claws! Also, cupcakes? Biiiiig conspiracy.

At 1/16/13 05:13 AM, Ryanson wrote: In fact I made such a page years ago. Wow, it took me no time at all to let me change the name. See?

This one isn't Google or Facebook:

At 1/16/13 12:00 AM, Sensationalism wrote: Fuck 30 minutes of this.

Also, get the fuck out of here and don't post if you're not gonna watch the video. I'm gonna start banning people for chipping in based only on the thread title and who don't actually take the time to educate themselves on what is being discussed, it's just spam.

There are still a few unanswered questions and I'm still skeptical of these 'crisis actors' but mostly Powerage's linked Reddit article debunks the whole video. Thanks very much for that post Powerage.

At 1/16/13 08:45 AM, Dry-Ice wrote:

At 1/16/13 05:13 AM, Ryanson wrote: In fact I made such a page years ago. Wow, it took me no time at all to let me change the name. See?

This one isn't Google or Facebook:

Unfortunately I can't seem to find the link to that specific page -- all the links I find to that seem to be deleted. Are there any other pictures of the entire rest of that page, or does anyone have their own page they can make on that website? A little experimentation seems to be in order because Facebook, Tumblr, Youtube, and Vimeo allow for edits to be made to such pages/ Vimeo for sure allows one to replace a video entirely without altering the original date it was made. One could presume the same can be said for multiple websites -- it's not a necessity, the "edited on such-and-such-day."

At 1/16/13 08:45 AM, Dry-Ice wrote: This one isn't Google or Facebook:

That can and likely is a glitch. Happens.