• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Woman Claims Her Daughter's Photo was used for a Sandy Hook Shooting Victim

505 said:
Hmm, a nice, juicy, yet plausible explanation in one hand... and a big ol' stinky pile of drippy conspirorhea in the other. Why do the same people always love the taste of **** so much?
Click to expand...

I'm not a reporter. I still know well that a basic standard for a reporter on news is who, where, when..... So that mistake is not plausible explanation. An explanation put in advance to cover up of flaw that is too evident.

The principal didn't follow the instruction. She didn't stay inside the room but went out to see what happened and saw something she was not allowed to see. So she was shot dead. But the New Town Bee still published the interview according to the original plan. One character of this case was there is no field witness. That's rare. Plus that the gunner was not an expert sniper.

They had drill for that case in advance. Plus there were many actors taking part in that performance.

DHS Terror Drills recently conducted in Sandy Hook
The HSEEP Training Course
The course will be held at the Sandy Hook Fire Department, address below.

Location: 18 Riverside Road, Sandy Hook CT
This event is 37 miles from you (06106).
8 AM - 5 PM

Contact: Tom Romano
Email: thomas.romano@ct.gov
Phone: 860 256 0844

Division of Emergency Management and Homeland Security
Click to expand...
 
katsung47 said:
I'm not a reporter. I still know well that a basic standard for a reporter on news is who, where, when..... So that mistake is not plausible explanation. An explanation put in advance to cover up of flaw that is too evident.

The principal didn't follow the instruction. She didn't stay inside the room but went out to see what happened and saw something she was not allowed to see. So she was shot dead. But the New Town Bee still published the interview according to the original plan. One character of this case was there is no field witness. That's rare. Plus that the gunner was not an expert sniper.

They had drill for that case in advance. Plus there were many actors taking part in that performance.
Click to expand...

the problem with your logic of who,what, etc. is when the who is improperly identified. Are you saying reporters never make mistakes?
 
Unreliable sources are used to try to get the scope on major stories. As information is received they change the story as needed. Its not a conspiracy its bad journalism and nothing new. ANd its pretty sad that your guys cannot figure it out and think that it proves some preconceived theory.

Then reason why you guys know how disinformation works is because thats all that conspiracy theorists do. To prove my point: What you guys are trying to do is add these shootings to the fema conspiracy theory. Here popular mechanics describes what you are talking about FEMA Camps - Debunking FEMA Camp Myths - Popular Mechanics


So you guys are going into any national event and are trying to make it a conspiracy. SO now that a couple posters in this forum are calling you on your bull**** you have your tin foil hats all in a ruffle. The thing is if all this was reality you and all of us would not be allowed to even mention this on the this forum. Wheres the the fema guys?
The fact is that there isnt some fantastic fema conspiracy to be found. Oh I am sure that you will dig up all kinds of links to conspiratorial sites that will be your big evidence. ANd you will fluff your feathers believing that you showed those shills who was boss. But I all ready debunked all of your theories by saying this: You have no evidence, proof or anything at all except echo chambers, websites, blogs, you tube videos and opinions. You have nothing real, nothing at all.
 
mike2810 said:
the problem with your logic of who,what, etc. is when the who is improperly identified. Are you saying reporters never make mistakes?
Click to expand...

Well, they definitely made mistake. Here is similar one.

BBC reports WTC 7 collapse 23 min BEFORE IT HAPPENED !!!!!!!

 
phoenyx said:
Responded here:
9/11: The WTC Collapses
Click to expand...

I see a trend,conspiracy here. Why are redirecting my comment when post 29 by K started with the bbc report line.? Is it because you side with K?:)

If your going to continue being the unofficial mod for the CT section, at least be consistant. Oh wait, maybe I should have posted this in the WTC collapse section.:mrgreen:
 
mike2810 said:
yep, the bbc was wrong.
Click to expand...

BBC was not wrong. It worked to the plan. It was WTC 7 didn't collapse to the time schedule, so there was such a conflict. So was New Town Bee. It reported principal's interview to the plan. They didn't expect the principal was put to death because she saw something she shouldn't know. Similar thing took place in Emilly Parker's death. His father(or someone else) set up a memory page in internet on same day. It's not his efficiency that surprised others. It's the question how he could know his daughter was dead two hours before police confirming the death. According to your logic, BBC was wrong, so Emilly's father was wrong too? What's wrong with them? They correctly predict what would happen. Now change your tactic of cover up - maybe they are prophets.

The Sandy Hook Shooting - Fully Exposed

 
katsung47 said:
BBC was not wrong. It worked to the plan. It was WTC 7 didn't collapse to the time schedule, so there was such a conflict. So was New Town Bee. It reported principal's interview to the plan. They didn't expect the principal was put to death because she saw something she shouldn't know. Similar thing took place in Emilly Parker's death. His father(or someone else) set up a memory page in internet on same day. It's not his efficiency that surprised others. It's the question how he could know his daughter was dead two hours before police confirming the death. According to your logic, BBC was wrong, so Emilly's father was wrong too? What's wrong with them? They correctly predict what would happen. Now change your tactic of cover up - maybe they are prophets.

The Sandy Hook Shooting - Fully Exposed

Click to expand...

See you guys are already talking absolutes as if you have evidence and facts. I remind you that you have nothing just theories and opinions. And that video is no better.
 
FreedomFromAll said:
See you guys are already talking absolutes as if you have evidence and facts. I remind you that you have nothing just theories and opinions. And that video is no better.
Click to expand...

It's not a theory that atleast 2 of the children who were claimed to have been killed are in fact alive and well.
 
With the use of the internet, the best thing law enforcement and news outlets can do in the future is say nothing till the investigatiion is completed, then report.
 
mike2810 said:
With the use of the internet, the best thing law enforcement and news outlets can do in the future is say nothing till the investigatiion is completed, then report.
Click to expand...

And maybe show us some of the footage from the school cameras.
 
mike2810 said:
With the use of the internet, the best thing law enforcement and news outlets can do in the future is say nothing till the investigatiion is completed, then report.
Click to expand...

Personally, I think a far better solution would be that more people learn to think for themselves. Honestly, I think the reason that the mass media and law enforcement are able to get away with such obviously false information is that so few people have retained their ability critically analyze information they receive.
 
phoenyx said:
Personally, I think a far better solution would be that more people learn to think for themselves. Honestly, I think the reason that the mass media and law enforcement are able to get away with such obviously false information is that so few people have retained their ability critically analyze information they receive.
Click to expand...

yes you should think for yourself. One should filter out the false information and misuse of data, that some tend to do with websites/blogs/and vids.
I won't address your premise of "such obviously false information,.
 
mike2810 said:
yes you should think for yourself. One should filter out the false information and misuse of data, that some tend to do with websites/blogs/and vids.
Click to expand...

Why no mention of the mass media as well as statements from alleged anonymous LE officials as well as identified LEs?

mike2810 said:
I won't address your premise of "such obviously false information,.
Click to expand...

Point taken.
 
phoenyx said:
Why no mention of the mass media as well as statements from alleged anonymous LE officials as well as identified LEs?



Point taken.
Click to expand...

because its a conspiracy:lol:
Let me break it down for you.

"yes you should think for yourself." My statement was saying I agreed with that part of your statement.

"One should filter out the false information and misuse of data," [notice the the comma, that part of the sentence leaves it open to where the information/data comes from.

"that some tend to do with websites/blogs/and vids.." this I thought was clear that it was an opinion on what some people do with the information. but I admit is a jab at the truther sites. So to answer your question. I really didn't leave anything out. It is just how you chose to look at what I wrote.

It is becoming pretty clear how you look at things. Having done investigations (injury-death accidents, fire cause) one learns to look at what is said by witnesses, what the physical evidence says, knowing somewhere within all the evidence the actual explanation exists. That said, I have interviewed firefighters that gave differnt description of what happened. Yet, a common thread existed. Did one or both of the firefighters tell a lie?, Nope, it was just how they precieved the event.

In your other post, you would have to ask the LE officer why he didn't directly answer the question. Seems he takes lessons from watching politicians debate.:lol:
 
Theater shooter actors linked to Sandy hook actors- Exposed As a Fruad

 
Sandy Hook fundraising relief page created 3 days before shooting, Google search results confirm

Friday, January 11, 2013
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com (See all articles...)

Screenshot-Google-Search-Results-Sandy-Hook-Dec-11-2012.jpg


Learn more: Sandy Hook fundraising relief page created 3 days before shooting, Google search results confirm
 
katsung47 said:
Sandy Hook fundraising relief page created 3 days before shooting, Google search results confirm

Friday, January 11, 2013
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com (See all articles...)

Screenshot-Google-Search-Results-Sandy-Hook-Dec-11-2012.jpg


Learn more: Sandy Hook fundraising relief page created 3 days before shooting, Google search results confirm
Click to expand...

That one has already been debunked so many times its ridiculous. Start here if you truly want to understand what happened: Rich snippets (microdata, microformats, RDFa, and Data Highlighter) - Webmaster Tools Help

SOmeone explained it like this: "It's the difference between dynamic content description (rich snippet) and a cached link with a preview to show a user what the website looks like.

Google generates "rich snippets" algorithmically - based upon html markups by the webmaster.

"Snippets—the few lines of text that appear under every search result—are designed to give users a sense for what’s on the page and why it’s relevant to their query."

The snippet descriptions are generated whenever the content is changed or updated, not when the page is crawled and cached by Google. The content and snippet are dynamic - and independent of the page which was cached.

Given the amount of traffic generated about this tragedy, it's not surprising that the snippet describes the events AFTER the page was cached. Google does state that the current page might have changed.
"
BTW if you make the same exact search it turns up as Dec 14, 2012 https://www.google.com/search?q=htt...la:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&as_qdr=y15



Take a look at this search though..... https://www.google.com/search?q=Thr...dr:1,cd_min:12/10/2012,cd_max:12/13/2012&tbm=



Bwhaha you guys are in on it!!!!! The dates show lol you guys are funny!


Sandy Hook Fundraising Relief Page Created 3 Days Before Shooting
www.freedombrief.com/sandy-hook-fundraising-relief-page-c...Dec 11, 2012 - Sandy Hook Fundraising Relief Page Created 3 Days Before Shooting ... The Sandy Hook shooting took place three days later, on December 14, 2012.
Sandy Hook fundraising relief page created 3 days before shooting !
lifegoogler.com/sandy-hook-fundraising-relief-page-created-3...ShareDec 11, 2012 - Source: naturalnews.com. If you search on Google for the URL of the United Way Sandy Hook fundraising page (see instructions, below), you will get a Google ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom