Debunked: Emilie Parker Still Alive after Sandy Hook

Status
Not open for further replies.

dayna

New Member
Yes, those are three different women. I'm seriously thinking there's some kind of Prosopagnosia going on here. It's quite interesting.
and this news video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JV3KYBS64R8
its the medical examiner speaking.

What about it? Can you find a video of a similar person in a similar situation?


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.
 
U

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.
 

dayna

New Member
says 'pete' an anonymous person, whom you believe because he was on tv.

there has not been one iota of truth from this event. there has not been one solid fact presented. zero of the bodies were seen by the parents. none of the official stories match up with each other.

where is the security footage? why do witnesses contradict each other? why do witnesses contradict themselves? why was there a facebook memorial page put up on dec 10 when the even happened dec 14? why was that taken down when it was pointed out of it was legit? WHY DO THEY INSTANTLY GO AFTER ASSAULT WEAPONS, WHEN THERE IS VIDEO OF THEM PULLING THE AR FROM THE TRUNK? are we to believe that the kid ran out to the trunk, deposited the ar, then went back into the school to shoot himself? all within the ~3 mins it took police to arrive? what about the guy they detained in the woods?

there are only questions, there are no real answers. keep standing on the graves, that's an easy point to defend no? oh, you're questioning the horrible deaths of children, you must be a horrible person, gtfo 'truther'! as if one whom seeks the truth is in anyway bad. stop buying the zionist media's lies. IT'S ALL FICTION, EVEN PER FCC REGISTRATIONS ALL NEWS PROGRAMS ARE CLASSIFIED AS ENTERTAINMENT AND ARE NOT BEHOLDEN TO TRUTH.


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.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
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.

It was Emilie's dress in 2010, as shown by the photos taken when they were all younger. It was handed down to Madeline.
 
J

Joe

Guest
This should be posted on every single message board post, every youtube video, and pretty much any time one of these demented "truthers" starts talking about this massacre not happening. Have some decency and grow up.
until you read the comments over there . Its worse then You tube . I posted a comment on it and now Im a shill ? :)
:0
 

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.
 
L

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?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
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?

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.
 
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?
 

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member.
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?
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.
 
U

Unregistered

Guest
I am in Australia and came across this thread.
Are all you nutters conspiracy theorists.
Why don't all you nutbags go to Sandy Hook and see for yourself.
As for you gun lobbyists, you can all go and shoot yourselves at the local gun club. Happy and free to live in gunless society in Australia and be safe. (along with Canada)
I hope you conspiracy theorists step out of your dungeon and away from computer for more than a day and see the real world. Maybe even go down to the Bronx or somewhere where life is tough and see how far you get in the night.
I have travelled the world and been many places and seen some bad shit, maybe you nutters and computer nerds who have theories should get out and try to either see for yourself or resolve them through facts!


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.
 
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.

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.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Last edited:
U

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.
 
can you help me with this one mick?

299062_556337421060542_408316315_n-630x616.jpeg


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.
 

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.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
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.

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.
 
U

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.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
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.

As seen by other posts above, people respond differently to sudden deaths. Most of the Sandy Hook families did NOT talk to the press.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff 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.

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.
 

Belfrey

Senior Member.
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.
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.
 

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.
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.
 

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?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff 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?

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.
 

PCWilliams

Senior Member.
Gawker has an interesting rundown on this conspiracy theory. It all boils down to these people excusing their lunacy by claiming, "I'm just asking questions!"

http://gawker.com/5976204/behind-th...ple-have-watched-in-one-week?tag=conspiracies

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.
 

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member.
It makes you wonder how far they are willing to go.

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.
 
D

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.
 

Clock

Senior 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.

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

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Interesting Mick, can I ask why you think this way?

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.
 

Met Watch

Moderator
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.

A fascinating rant, but unfortunately I don't think this post is going to be enough to revitalize the Republican Party.
 

jhgraf

New 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.

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.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
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.

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



And see also:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/5392/trust-government.aspx
 
Last edited:

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!
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff 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!

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:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Rory Debunked: UK undertaker's claim that Covid vaccine is responsible for spike in deaths Coronavirus COVID-19 0
Marc Powell Debunked: 9/11 truth experts are knowledgeable professionals and their judgments are to be trusted 9/11 195
Marc Powell Debunked: Explosions preparatory to demolition of the WTC North Tower are visible as Flight 175 crashes into the South Tower 9/11 7
Mick West Debunked: Pfizer Developing a Twice-Per-Day COVID Pill, Taken Alongside Vaccines Coronavirus COVID-19 0
Marc Powell Debunked: Demolition “squib” is visible at top of WTC North Tower before Flight 11 crash 9/11 67
Marc Powell Debunked: Construction worker Philip Morelli experienced an explosion in the sub-basement of the North Tower 9/11 0
Marc Powell Debunked: ABC News correspondent George Stephanopoulos reported an explosion in the subway 9/11 1
Marc Powell Debunked: Debris from twin towers was projected upward by explosives 9/11 13
Marc Powell Debunked: Government officials revealed having foreknowledge of Building 7’s collapse 9/11 58
Marc Powell Debunked: NIST computer simulation of Building 7 collapse is inaccurate 9/11 22
Marc Powell Debunked: FEMA reported finding evidence that steel had melted. 9/11 47
Marc Powell Debunked: VP Dick Cheney ordered a standdown of jet fighters on 9/11 9/11 16
Oystein Debunked: Claim that Bobby McIlvaine's injuries ("lacerations") are best explained as result of glass shards and debris from bombs 9/11 22
Marc Powell Debunked: World Trade Center should not have collapsed due to 9/11 fires 9/11 3
Marc Powell Debunked: Firefighter reports of secondary explosions 9/11 3
Marc Powell Debunked: Steel was hurled hundreds of feet by explosives 9/11 4
Marc Powell Debunked: Demolition Explosion Before Collapse of South Tower 9/11 8
Marc Powell Debunked: Explosion in South Tower Lobby 9/11 7
Marc Powell Debunked: Mysterious Explosion Before the Flight 11 Crash 9/11 48
J.d.K Debunked: Marx: "The classes and the races too weak to master the new conditions must give way... They must perish in the revolutionary Holocaust" Quotes Debunked 0
dimebag2 Poll : Which DOD Navy video do you consider debunked ? UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 74
Mick West Debunked: Diving Triangle UFO Photos from Reddit [Fake] UFOs and Aliens 37
Theferäl [Debunked] Object Seen From Airplane Above Canberra: 04 Apr 2012 Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 5
TEEJ Debunked: Claim that Joe Biden's hand passes through microphone during White House press gaggle, 16th March 2021 Election 2020 8
bird_up Debunked: "Interdimensional being" caught on CCTV in Neza, Mexico Ghosts, Monsters, and the Paranormal 6
M Debunked: Atmospheric pressure on Mars is 9 PSI, not 0.09 PSI as claimed by NASA Science and Pseudoscience 75
Patrick Gonzalez Debunked: missing cable on Perseverance landing footage proves it is fake. General Discussion 3
TEEJ Debunked: Biden's Oval Office "Coming Apart at the Seams" [It's a Door] Election 2020 19
derrick06 Debunked: UFO over California Highway (TMZ) UFOs and Aliens 1
P Debunked: 7 Alleged photos of aliens UFOs and Aliens 9
Mick West Debunked: Biden signing "Blank" Executive Orders Election 2020 5
Mick West Debunked: Biden in "Fake" Oval Office Election 2020 27
P Debunked: UN hidden camera: the first UFO contact happened [Deep Fake] UFOs and Aliens 3
Mick West Debunked: 94% of Fulton County Ballots Manually Adjudicated [It's a Process all Batches go Through] Election 2020 0
Mick West Debunked: "Missile Strike" caused Nashville Explosion General Discussion 3
Mick West Debunked: Nashville Explosion was "Across the Street" from the RV General Discussion 0
Mick West Debunked: "Error rate of 68.5% Allowable is .0008%" [Neither is True] Election 2020 4
Mick West Debunked: Claim that the Electoral College Count On Jan 6 will Change the Election Election 2020 136
Rory Debunked: Einstein wrote "blind belief in authority is the greatest enemy of truth" Quotes Debunked 12
Mick West Debunked: Navid Keshavarz-Nia's Claims of "A Sudden Rise in Slope" as Election Fraud Evidence Election 2020 5
Mick West Debunked: Trump's Claim of "1,126,940 votes created out of thin air" in PA Election 2020 9
Mick West Debunked: Crowder's "Fraud Week" Title Graphic (and Why it Matters) Election 2020 1
JFDee Debunked: Democratic senators complained about 'vote switching' by Dominion voting machines in 2019 Election 2020 2
Mendel Debunked: The Democrats are trying to take away freedom of religion Election 2020 6
H Debunked: Dr. Shiva's Scatterplot Analysis of Michigan Precincts Election 2020 43
Mick West Debunked: Suspicious "Biden Only" Ballots in Georgia Election 2020 3
Mick West Debunked: "Nancy Pelosi's long time Chief of Staff is a key executive at Dominion Voting" Election 2020 0
Mick West Debunked: Wisconsin Turnout 89% Impossible High [Actually 72%] Election 2020 1
Mick West Debunked: Video of Poll Worker "Filling In" Ballots. Election 2020 3
Mick West Debunked: Pentagon has Evidence of "Off-World Vehicles Not Made on this Earth" UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 14
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top