Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. dayna

    dayna New Member


    people say the way he is acting (which how is someone to act after seeing as many dead children as he has)
    and they say the gun he used is not the gun they are reporting that he shot with. And because he has seen thousands of gun shot wounds in such a small town. jeez I feel bad for that guy. "sir where were the bodies?" "Um...all over"

    ughhh sickens me.


    do you have any proof of it being 3 different women? I believe it, I just want to show my friends.


    a lot of my friends think this really happened, and they are LYING about what guns he used to try and ban assault rifles...so the government can attack us LOL.
    IN MY OPINION! people who believe this shit, are the same paranoid crazy assholes shooting places up! all of them believed in conspiracy theory's.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Unregistered

    Unregistered Guest

    Um, I remember watching the story on the news..the mother claimed that was Emilies BRAND NEW CHRISTMAS DRESS..and she insisted on wearing it that day..no hand me down.
     
  3. dayna

    dayna New Member


    are you not anonymous?
    all the facebook page things have been debunked already...You do know that I have like pages, I can go on them right now and change the name of it...do you THINK if the government was doing something like this, they would not be more careful? that they would make a facebook page days before the shooting??? COME ONE NOW!
    Adam Lanza used a semiautomatic Bushmaster .223 rifle during his rampage.
    all you people have WAY to much time on your hands...welcome to EARTH! there really are people crazy enough to do these kinds of things you know.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    It was Emilie's dress in 2010, as shown by the photos taken when they were all younger. It was handed down to Madeline.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. dayna

    dayna New Member

  6. Unregistered

    Unregistered Guest

    regardless, this makes the whole incident a hoax?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Joe

    Joe Senior Member

    until you read the comments over there . Its worse then You tube . I posted a comment on it and now Im a shill ? :)
    :0
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. SR1419

    SR1419 Senior Member


    I agree, the comments were truly frightening.

    TCS...a shill?? Ha- welcome to our world- you have joined the darkside :)
     
    • Like Like x 2
  9. Joe

    Joe Senior Member

    Wheres my check ? :)))
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. tcoals

    tcoals New Member

    Like many others, I have stumbled onto this whole "hoax" thing. With a few searches I came here, along with a few forums. Not going to say I believe or not what has been posted (pics, videos, etc.) but it is all interesting with what has been dug up.

    Not trying to hijack the thread but, what if any connection is there being imagined with Sandy Hook and Aurora theatre?????

    Here, along with other sites have mentioned similar coincedences to the Aururo theatre shooting. I'll just say it; Any and all doubts to the Aurora theatre shooting are crazy. If there is any doubt that it did not happen or was a hoax, try again. I never would of even considered the Aurora shooting to be considered a hoax, because I actually live here in Colorado and have been exposed to everything here first hand. It occured 6 miles from where I work (downtown Denver). It was very real, as there is actual proof of everything that happened.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. leaverus

    leaverus Guest

    i've never been to australia. i've never met anyone who's been there. i could go my entire life believing australia doesn't even exist because to me there is no proof that it exists. to some people sandy hook is as real as australia because there's no PROOF that it happened. what's wrong with requiring proof for something before believing it to be true? if i were that naive, i'd be poor and homeless. do i know for sure bin laden is dead? no, people say so and i can choose to believe it or not. do i know for sure people have been to the moon? no, people say so and i can choose to believe it or not. do i know for sure air is 21% oxygen? no, people say so and i can choose to believe it or not. do i know for sure sandy hook happened? no, people say so and i can choose to believe it or not. why are people so angry at those who are skeptical? why exactly does it matter whether they believe or not?
     
  12. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Quietly believing whatever you like is no problem. It's when there are public accusations that harm is caused. Do you think Robbie Parker is unharmed by all the internet posts calling him a bad actor and accusing him of having a fake daughter? Do you think it's fine to similarly accuse the first responders who had to pick dead kids up out of pools of blood? Sure, if there's actually some real evidence. But there isn't. There's bunk. So I debunk.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  13. Unregistered

    Unregistered Guest

    • Useful Useful x 1
  14. One thing I like to point out about early reports of the AR-15 being found in the car is that those reports came during daylight hours the video looks to be after the sun has gone done.

    Has the the emily facebook donation page being created during the shooting been Debunked yet?
     
  15. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    read the first pages of this thread by clicking on the numbers at the top right and you will find many elements of the conspiracy theory been debunked. There have been over 150 postings here.
     
  16. Unregistered

    Unregistered Guest


    You do know that Canada has more guns per person than the US, right? So, do some research on "gunless" societies before injecting your opinion. Thanks.
     
  17. I have skimmed through most of the 150 posts. I did find another forum thread talking about other donation sites(being created before the 14th) that are well debunked but I was looking to see if anyone has debunked the one mentioned in this video at about 9:50:

    http://www.youtube.com/verify_controversy?next_url=/watch%3Ffeature%3Dplayer_embedded%26v%3DWx9GxXYKx_ 8

    It first states that the fund was created the morning of Dec 14. Though I see a date stamp of Dec 14, there is no time stamp. It also assumes that the parents created this fund but after reading the post they highlighted I'm not sure they did. It could have been created by a concerned friend who felt the need to help the parents on a horrifying day. I guess I just debunked it myself.

    I used to feel that these conspiracy theorists really believe what they were saying. Though I still believe they are genuinely paranoid of government or some type or authority, they definitely are using deceit purposely to bring others to their paranoid state.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Last edited: Nov 20, 2013
    • Like Like x 1
  19. Unregistered

    Unregistered Guest

    It amazes me that people even engage with conspiracy theorists of the Sandy-Hook-was-a-hoax kind.

    It can be challenged on a ridiculous number of levels but surely the following renders all argument redundant:

    If we were to believe any of the following:
    -that Robbie Parker and other "grieving" parents are actors
    -that no children died at Sandy Hook
    -that children were killed at Sandy Hook but it was by the American government
    -etc etc

    THEN, all it would take is ONE PERSON to break cover and expose any of these "truths" and the American Government would be over with before the day is through. It would be the most astonishing revelation of all time. If any of the above was true then it is logical that there will be hundreds to tens of thousands of people who are aware of such "truths".

    If it was a cover up then the American Government would be risking their whole existence, and they'd be banking on not one person breaking cover until the day they die.
    Let us just consider the first suggestion, that these are actors: all it would take is one single person who knows these "actors" to simply say: "these are actors, this person is not Robbie Parker" and it would all be over... people in high office would go to jail- their lives would be over. Imagine the number of people who know the "actor" who appears as Robbie Parker... it must number tens of thousands. All it would take is ONE of them to break rank. I would suggest that it would be impossible to bank on tens of thousands of people managing to (or even wanting to) keep such a secret.

    I am arguing that the Government wouldn't risk that. I'm saying that it would be bat-shit mental to risk such a thing.

    If you argue with that logic then there is really no hope for you.
     
    • Like Like x 2

  20. Last year my friend "who happens to be a conspiracy theorist" showed me a site with a bunch of youtube videos saying the Greenbergs are actors who are used in real news events. The site also claimed that Jennifer Greenberg Sexton(the woman at the bottom of the photo) also plays Sarah Palin and that comedian who does the Sarah Palin impression. I found out the guy behind this site is Ed Chiarini. Ed Chiarini helped with the photographic "evidence" for JFK book, High Treason which was later adopted by Oliver Stone in his "counter-fiction" movie JFK. The site(wellaware1) would be hilarious to many but unfortunately to the people who believe our planet is run by shape shifting reptiles globalist bankers this is easily adapted into their doctrine.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  21. jhgraf

    jhgraf New Member

    Please look at the hair. Madeline's hair is consistently parted on the left, Emilie's on the right. Emilie's hair is slightly darker. This video shows that it's the same face in the family photo and in the photo with the President -- the same features, but at a different angle. Given the father's strange behavior and other discrepancies in the official account, a reasonable person may certainly entertain the suspicion that a child has been used, in this instance, for criminal purposes. Whether the President was aware of this scam or not remains to be seen. The matter certainly ought to be investigated. Please allow me to state that I have never held a loaded weapon in my hand and would not accept a gun if somebody gave me one. I'm a whistleblower, a person who seeks to know the truth and is willing to brave the animosity and derision that such seeking often provokes. I can only hope that all these children are safe and well, and will remain so.
     
  22. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Unfortunately you are dealing with people who all also believe that 9/11 was an inside job, so they have already made the leap into believing in the existence of large hyper-efficient conspiracies where nobody whistle-blows and the media and the scientific community is tacitly complicit. So it's not as much of a stretch for them as you might think.

    One would hope though, if they could be shown that some of what they believe is actually based on bunk, then they might also think twice about about other things.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  23. unregistered

    unregistered Guest

    I dont know what to think about all this.....it's almost mind boggling to even consider such a thing to be hoax......BUT......

    I have a 5 year old daughter and I can say with every fiber of my being that something is wrong when a father acts like that one day after his child was brutally murdered in such a horrible tragedy. If anything......he should've been unable to even go on camera that soon after such an event. I know I couldn't.....but maybe that's just me.
     
  24. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    As seen by other posts above, people respond differently to sudden deaths. Most of the Sandy Hook families did NOT talk to the press.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  25. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    I think you need to look at the other family photos, it's clearly Madeline. The video you link to simply fades between 2012 Madeline and 2010 Emilie, when they look similar because they are the same age.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  26. Belfrey

    Belfrey Senior Member

    As someone who has lost a family member, I remember vividly the fear of the sort of judgement you're talking about - that everyone would be scrutinizing my every action and emotion, and deciding whether it was sufficiently mournful. It's not fair to the bereaved to do that. Everyone deals with grief in different ways.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  27. jhgraf

    jhgraf New Member

    I've looked at all the other family photos. I still say, please look at the hair. The parents may have begun to comb Madeline's hair differently at the time of the funeral, after the embarrassing photo with the President, but every other photo of Madeline shows her hair parted to the left of midline, while every picture of Emilie shows a part to the right of midline, and Emilie's hair is noticeably darker than Madeline's. The girl with the President has Emilie's smile, Emilie's hair, Emilie's face, and Emilie's dress. You are assuming that the family group picture used in the fade was taken in 2010, but please note that the youngest child does not appear two years older in the 2012 photo and, moreover, is still teething.
     
  28. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    • Like Like x 3
  29. lorenzomagnus

    lorenzomagnus New Member

    Is the government always and in every instance to be trusted? Especially the Obama Administration? Is just asking a question a giveaway that the person asking the question- any question- a conspiracy nut?
     
  30. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    The government is not to be trusted. I don't think the Obama administration is either an exception to this, or a particularly strong example. It just something people should do.

    But not trusting the government does not mean you have to beleive EVERYTHING that people say the government is doing, especially when those things are quite frankly rediculous.

    Ask questions, sure, but think about it first. At least try to read the actual explanations before you storm the White House.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  31. PCWilliams

    PCWilliams Active Member

    I have a conspiracist in my family. I'm telling you, the video in this article getting 8 million views is considered a victory by these people. They believe it is their mission to "shake people out of their shells," to "move them out of their comfort zones." Forcing us to see "the truth" is first and foremost. The hurt and harm this theory is causing good people is secondary. My conspiracist family member believes there is only one, singular truth. It's scary how these people think. It makes you wonder how far they are willing to go.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  32. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member

    Some are willing to fabricate stories, overstate qualifications, deliberately avoid parts of stories which contradict, avoid discussing noted flaws and shut out commentary which disagrees.

    There is only one singular truth, but people who behave as above will never find it.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  33. Dajavou

    Dajavou Guest

    Hoax or not, (I think it is just a bunch of conspiracy nuts) you can't ignore the fact that the liberal democrats have all but fallen over themselves to, as Rahm Emanuel put it "Let no good tragedy go to waste", use this tragedy to immediately further their agenda. Assault Weapons might really be the problem but within a week Diana Feinstein said she had a Weapons Ban legislation ready to go. What do they want to do, 1) Ban all Rifles, essentially if you read the bill any rifle that has a removable clip is considered Assault. Then it goes even further to ban most semi-auto hand guns. A hand gun was not really used in this tragedy. They were present but only used by the suspect to kill himself. Then it goes on to say any clip over 10 rounds for current owners is banned. Why 10? why not 9 or like New York 7 or how about 11? Why, Knee jerk reactions. It just fits their agenda. When this doesn't work they will just add on clips above 5 then 3 then single shot, they will add in 7 shot pistols, then 5 shot then single shot, within 20 years they will have confiscated all guns and ammo. DON'T BELIEVE ME LOOK AT NEW YORK STATE within 2 weeks they had legislation (IN SECRET) drafted that banned certain ammo, more rifles, more pistols, and guess what over 7 round magazines. They even threw in having to register your gun, for current owners, every 5 years. What's with that? If you have it you have it. If you sell it the new guys registers it. Why, MONEY, a $400 registration fee! Sure makes the poor people not able to own a gun. (Ever heard of the POLE Tax). They even legislated that you have 1 year to get rid of any NEW illegal guns by selling them (what a joke, it's illegal to sell them) or turn them in. No true research can show that the gun is at fault. In fact time and time again where gun bans have been in place gun violence is way more prevalent (Chicago, New York City, Washington DC, Los Angeles). You want to know the direct proven correlation that no one in the Democrat party has even touched on! President Obama recently stated if he could save just one life by implementing a law that would work we have to try it! The direct correlation to increased gun violence and violence in general is the decrease in religious teachings in schools. There have been "Assault Weapons" since the 1920's when machine guns ran wild in Chicago and New York, (in fact were legal) yet mass shootings of unarmed civilians has only started since the late 1980's. What has changed most? Religion has been slowly taken out of the schools. As the lawsuits increased and religion has been removed and the teaching of the 10 commandments has been eliminated so has the unarmed civilian mass shootings increased. If the young don't have any moral guideline or higher power to answer to then anything is justified.

    How about trying to increase the teaching of the Bible, Koran, and Torah in our schools. As President Obama says, "If even one law will save one life we have to try it!". Put religion back in school, or at least the concept of the 10 commandments and see if that helps. I'm not a religious zealot, I believe in some separation of church and state. I am of a certain faith and wouldn't want any other faith rammed down my throat, but the concepts are valid. Also how about much tougher prison sentences for guns associated with crime. It's ridiculous that in the gun ban states someone who has never broken the law is caught with a 30 round clip, can face more jail time than someone convicted of manslaughter. I agree with background checks, I also agree with waiting periods. I even think that someone who owns a gun should be responsible for that gun. If a child takes it and uses it the adult should be responsible. Guns are easy to lock up when children are around. Something as easy as a gun safe in the home of Adam Lanza's mother would have stopped Adam. She should have had one since she knew he was mentally unfit. We must realize that in some cases nothing could stop this type of violence. If someone wants to kill a bunch of people we can't stop them. Look at Oklahoma City or 9/11, even Fort Hood. But banning guns currently is not the answer. Even if we turn in all guns the criminals will still have them and there are other ways to kill. Over 10,000 people are killed every year by drunk drivers, 1 in 3 accidents are caused by drunks. There are about 11,000 homicides each year due to guns. California has the highest rate and the 3rd toughest gun laws in the nation. The government now wants to ban guns but not cars. Why is that? Actually drunk driver deaths have continued to decline with the increase of awareness and harsher penalties. As far as Cars, they didn't ban them, they made them safer, they did study after study on drunks behavior, they are constantly tweaking their approach, but they didn't ban certain cars. They could have banned Sports Cars, put governors on cars so they could only go 50 mph, and what about Breathalyzer to start your car, what a great idea. Am I the only one to think of that? Maybe we should try that first. Common sense and not knee jerk reactions is the answer.
     
  34. Clock

    Clock Active Member

    Interesting Mick, can I ask why you think this way?
     
  35. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Because not trusting the government is a function of democracy. There should be evidence that they do what they say they are doing. If we simply trust them without evidence, then they will do whatever they want. Government needs to be open and accountable, and this needs to be continually verified.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  36. Met Watch

    Met Watch Moderator

    A fascinating rant, but unfortunately I don't think this post is going to be enough to revitalize the Republican Party.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  37. jhgraf

    jhgraf New Member

    Government (the "Intelligence Community") includes personnel whose objective is to see how big a lie they can foist on the public. These personnel operate with insufficient oversight, so that the White House may even find itself caught up in their shenanigans. On this site, I often see words like "lunacy," the presumption being that anybody who questions the official information provided by government and the corporate media is mentally ill. That could be true, in some cases, or there could be a secret agenda. An example is the video showing Emilie Parker making the ASL sign for "I love you," and suggesting that this makes her a Satan worshiper. Lunacy, however, also exists in positions of power, and government secrecy shields from view the activities and agendas of persons who lack any semblance of conscience and display capricious megalomania.Objective-minded persons owe it to themselves to be aware of this.
     
  38. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    I don't think that's the case. Firstly I actively discourage such impolite terms. I've allowed more opinionated discussion in this thread because it's such an extreme example.

    But if you do see a suggestion that someone is mentally ill, then it is NEVER such a broad statement as saying this is simply because they don't trust the government. Nobody trusts the government. Nobody trusts the media. The suggestion comes into play when they believe a particularly ridiculous theory, or take it to extremes - like believing the earth is falt, the moon is not real, the Queen is a reptile, rainbows in sprinklers are a sign of the NWO, the twin towers were destroyed with nukes, cats are robots, - that type of thing.

    In fact, I think I'd ALMOST go as far as saying the OPPOSITE of your statement is true. I'd almost say that anyone who unquestioningly believes the official information provided by government and the corporate media is mentally ill - or at least a little dim.

    But do you know any of these mythical sheeple? I think you'll find if you question them that everyone is skeptical to some degree. Some just take it way, way too far. It's the people on the extremes that are the problem. The unquestioning believers in one narrative or the other. See:
    View attachment Trust_in_Media_120921.pdf
    (source) http://www.gallup.com/file/poll/157601/Trust_in_Media_120921.pdf

    [​IMG]

    And see also:
    http://www.gallup.com/poll/5392/trust-government.aspx
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2013
  39. crazyinternet

    crazyinternet New Member

    Mick thanks for cleaning many of these issues up that the internet likes to make sound quite questionable. I suppose Info Wars is known for this. I still wonder why so much media and govt attention on assault rifles when supposedly it was not used in Sandy Hook? Am I missing something here? I am also curious about the dates on the web pages created. How are pages created on the internet incorrectly dated? Not much internet page understanding here.
    Thanks!
     
  40. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    See the pages linked from here:

    https://www.metabunk.org/threads/1074-Debunked-Sandy-Hook-Newtown-Conspiracy-Hoax

    Particularly:
    https://www.metabunk.org/threads/10...-Guns-Assault-Rifle-Gun-in-the-Trunk-Handguns
     
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2013
    • Like Like x 1
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.