You're comparing a small town with a local community, to a major disaster in a metropolitan area. People in different areas have different values, not to mention that it's much easier to put a hold on to a few 911 calls in a small area than it is to try and keep the thousands of calls that happened on 9/11 from the public. By the time New York officials could have had the chance to hold them, they were already all over the media and internet, by contrast, Sandy Hook probably only has a few emergency dispatchers, so nothing had leaked by the time that the local government could give the order to hold them.BakedSardine said:
Sandy Hook - the Conspiracy (with video)
- Thread starter BakedSardine
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Yeah, just going to put this here:
However, there's a big difference between that and every fast moving flying thing in the entire world being fitting with mind control chemicals.
Certainly, weather modification is nothing new. There's even a treaty limiting its use.BakedSardine said:
However, there's a big difference between that and every fast moving flying thing in the entire world being fitting with mind control chemicals.
NDAs are quite common in employment contracts, it doesn't necessarily mean anything. In this case it's most likely to stop explicit details of what happened inside leaking out - because that would have a devastating effect on the community. Or if NDAs are proof of a conspiracy then I want a cool theory made up for all the horrible atrocities I did at my last job...BakedSardine said:
Chemtrails are a load of bullocks.BakedSardine said:
Cloud seeding has been done for years and is well documented, they're completely different things and the planes used are tiny.
Ancient aliens are far more plausible (not that I buy into those either) but arguing that tourists, airport workers, contractors, constructors and officials are all "in on it" is madness. Just think of the logistics involved in moving insane amounts of chemicals, loading them onto planes and unleashing them into the air... and this is done by every country with airports.
the amount of people automatically dismissing governments involvement as "goverment is too stupid" is worrying. While in this case i do not believe it was a hoax, you cant just ignore the possibility of government involvement because you think the government is stupid. Thats the kind of thinking that allows anyone that pretends to be stupid do pretty much anything they want.
Geoengineering is nothing new (its been doable since cold war). It however requires no "Chemtrails". It was proven long ago that what people call Chemtrails are actually Contrails. Not to mention that Geoengineering the way its doable now if used at quantity people claim chemtrails were used would mean earth would already be a dead wasteland (not to even mention the fact that we dont evne have the amount of mercury needed to do that mined)BakedSardine said:
Im leaning the other way. Always attribute to malice unless proven to be stupidity. With Hanlon's Razor you will get a lot Malice that you consider just stupidity and notice it too late. With the opposite the worst is you blame stupid people for doing stupid things.Phrozenflame500 said:
I think it's more a case of people understanding the government wouldn't be as stupid as to just outright murder it's own citizens in broad daylight. Unless they already have a rich history of doing that. Governments can be thick, but they're not so stupid that they can't see two steps ahead. They plan some sort of scheme to kill a shitload of kids or a bunch of people on an airplane, and you can be sure the general public will find out sooner or later and wouldn't be too happy with it. Let alone the international outcry from foreign governments.Strazdas said:
I would think government schemes wouldn't be as direct as 'Gun them down/blow up building'. A government would have to have impossible hypnotic powers at their disposal to cover up something so blatant.
It's not so much people ignoring that its a possibility, its people recognizing that the more outlandish theories require an inhuman amount of organization and require a huge number of people to keep quiet about something that could shatter an entire country, see the earlier statement about the government somehow being able to convince blue collar construction workers to keep quiet about a hoax just by having them sign an NDA.Strazdas said:
Which is sort of the issue with a lot of conspiracy theories, they tend to go over the top and require the government to basically exert 1000 times the effort to accomplish otherwise simple goals. You never see the 9/11 conspiracy theorists talking about the government pulling off 9/11 by convincing the hijackers to hit the buildings through moles in Al Qaeda, you also never see them talk about the government just finding out about the hijackers and discreetly stopping investigation on them to allow them to carry out their plan. It's always fanciful conspiracies involving fake planes, thermite planted in the trade towers, cruise missiles hitting the pentagon, and fighter jets shooting down the Pennsylvania flight.
If you tried to tell people that elements of intelligence agencies conspired to allow 9/11 to happen after they found out about it, you could probably get more people to listen, but making any concrete statements would be hard to prove. If you tell people the government somehow planted bombs in three different American buildings, randomly disappeared entire planes full of people, and went through the effort to launch a massive cruise missile at their own military headquarters, you've complicated the plan to the point that the government would need to basically be hypercompetent ninjas to pull it off, and still need to involve hundreds of people on the conspiracy itself. These more fanciful conspiracies are what people generally refer to when they talk about the government being, "too stupid" to pull it off.
So the sum of your argument is "something happened in one instance, but not another instance, therefore conspiracy?"BakedSardine said:
And you really can't think of why an international terrorist attack might be treated different than a grade school shooting?
And why are there rainbows in our sprinklers when there weren't any 20 years ago? Two people have already posted the video, but the point is still great. This is the sort of disinformation that CTs rely on. I mean, twenty years ago from 2007 I was 7 and we did have rainbows appear in sprinklers, and it makes sense because it operates on the same principle as the big rainbows we see after storms. But claim they didn't happen before a specific time, and people think conspiracy. Claim it shouldn't happen on a small scale, conspiracy. suddenly, science is an inside job. Claim this is the first time a steel structure has failed because of a fire, and people will take it at face value.
More specifically, they're pretty common in handling crime scenes. This is an issue because conspiracy theorists have made one and they're hoping people won't think too hard about it.Esotera said:
Except, of course, then you go into conspiracy territory. Our government has done an ass job at covering things up both currently and historically, and we've had a couple of major leaks in the last couple of years. To suggest that they are capable of operating with such precision defies the evidence and requires you to step the other way and believe that they have engineered their screwups, making them look not only bad but also incompetent.Strazdas said:
Benjamin Franklin once famously said "three can keep a secret if two of them are dead." Now, it's trite and cliché, but there's an element of truth: keeping secrets is hard. And on larger scales, it's borderline impossible. To think that the government had the level of competence required to keep this completely silent is absurd, and it gets worse when you scale things up to 9-11 levels. You have to constantly watch hundreds (thousands for 9-11) of people, controlling them. Because NDAs and even the law don't stop people from leaking such things. Unless the government is orchestrating those leaks.
Either they are smart enough that they can control all the variables, or they aren't and the argument stands. They're too stupid to pull off this sort of thing.
Or, of course, they already control reality to such a tight degree that it doesn't matter.
And this is why we have no real evidence of a conspiracy in the first place. All we do have is a bunch of still photos, people not answering questions or not answering them fast enough, and made-up notions like the NDA one. So to the CT, the government becomes this nightmare bordering on cyberpunk. Chemtrails and other dimensions aren't actually much more absurd.
Did you know that a card game warned us about 9-11 years and years beforehand? And that the feds only thought to raid the company and take all their documents well after 9-11? There's a real theory out there about the Illumninati card game and Steve Jackson games. A government that could keep thousands of people silent, including rescue workers who would have let their own die, is tipped off by cards from a game designed ages before, and then they raided the guy who made it afterwards just to keep him quiet. And worst off, they couldn't even keep it silent. Apparently, they're too stupid for this sort of work.
I think there is an ancient phrase Roman lawyers were known to use to applies here. We have, as a claim, that there is a vast conspiracy wherein children were maimed and murdered, and literally hundreds of people are complicit. As the romans would say, cui bono (Who profits)?
This is appropriate because in order for this theory to be anything other than a sequence of observations that one thinks strange (in a situation likely to elicit strange reactions all around), you'd need an explanation that's better than the official story. So, unless you can present a particularly compelling reason why hundreds of strangers, parents, professionals, and government works would be involved in a coverup, the official story is the most plausible. People didn't look "sad enough"? By what metric are we measuring sadness here? There was a lack of footage? How many cameras did the school even have and what in the absolute hell makes you think a person not involved in the investigation has the right to watch what would amount to a snuff film?
All told, this is one of the easiest conspiracy claims to dismiss that I've ever seen.
This is appropriate because in order for this theory to be anything other than a sequence of observations that one thinks strange (in a situation likely to elicit strange reactions all around), you'd need an explanation that's better than the official story. So, unless you can present a particularly compelling reason why hundreds of strangers, parents, professionals, and government works would be involved in a coverup, the official story is the most plausible. People didn't look "sad enough"? By what metric are we measuring sadness here? There was a lack of footage? How many cameras did the school even have and what in the absolute hell makes you think a person not involved in the investigation has the right to watch what would amount to a snuff film?
All told, this is one of the easiest conspiracy claims to dismiss that I've ever seen.
The unfortunate thing is that it'll stop nobody from continuing such claims.Eclectic Dreck said:
You would not actually need hundreds of people to be involved to pull something like this off. You would need some crisis actors, in this case about 5 or 6 - those who portray the parents, Robbie Parker, etc. You would need some intimidation to get guys like the chief of police and the coroner to do their part and keep quiet and once the events are set in motion, the media will run with it and not question it.
For the number of people who were directly affected from the deaths of 28 people, including Lanza, very few have actually been heard from. There have probably only been the parents of 3 or 4 kids who have appeared on TV - mainly Parker and the guy who appeared in front of Congress (who aged probably 20 years from the time his son was born to age 6.
For the number of people who were directly affected from the deaths of 28 people, including Lanza, very few have actually been heard from. There have probably only been the parents of 3 or 4 kids who have appeared on TV - mainly Parker and the guy who appeared in front of Congress (who aged probably 20 years from the time his son was born to age 6.
No. Wrong. Stop. Right there.BakedSardine said:
All of that is pure bunkum. 5 or 6 crisis actors? No. When school gets back in session, the teachers will have to know which students to take off the rolls (their being dead and all). The students themselves are going to notice if their classmates -their friends- are missing or not missing.
The beat cops securing the grounds are going to notice whether or not there are blood stains and bullet holes on the walls and floors, and the EMTs carting away the bodies are going to know if those body bags are empty.
I mean seriously. SERIOUSLY! Just because you haven't heard from anyone doesn't mean no one has been talking about it or doing, you know, ACTUAL investigation. A high-profile event like this is not -CAN NOT- be limited to an odd-dozen people. It is literally impossible.
No one is obligated to satisfy every petty query or quandary you might have about an event that doesn't effect you in the slightest.
Hmmm, I wonder why people who just had their children killed by a sociopath may not want to go through the stressful process of invasive television interviews, exploitative public appearances, media hounding, and general unsavory contact with the rest of the world.BakedSardine said:
Its almost as if those people were in some state of mourning or something.
Seriously though, people handle crises like this differently. Some want to get their word out because it helps them cope to remember that their story won't be lost in the confusion. Most, however, simply want to grieve in private. This happens in any traumatic incident and is definitely not a symptom of conspiracy.
Yes, yes you would. First, there would be the leaders who masterminded the whole thing. Then, anyone they associate with in their daily work. Then, the local police, fire department, and medical services. Then the parents of the children (even those who weren't killed). Then of course there would be the people who actually killed Lanza (to stop the twenty something year old from revealing that he was a hardened CIA operative with either extreme patriotism or an insane paycheck he will never see), and the various media outlets that they needed to pay off to not dig too deep, then the local government to withhold sensitive information, than anyone who was in a two block radius at the time of the incident (including everyone in the school), than anyone who may happen to know the paid actors who appeared on TV. And that's just off the top of my head, there are probably many more I can't think of at the moment.BakedSardine said:
Let's not forget that it wouldn't just be the chief of police or the coroner who would need to be bought of/silenced. You would also have to ensure the compliance of every single person who had contact with anything from the scene of the conspiracy.
And in all of that, we wouldn't have people who "didn't look sad enough". If these people were paid to look sad, they would look bloody sad.
And in the end, why? Why do this? To reduce the size of assault rifle clips one can legally buy? That seems like a lot of effort, human lives lost aside, to accomplish a tiny goal.
This is really one of those instances where the simplest answer is likely the true one: a kid went insane. That's it.
I don't believe this for the same reason I believe pretty much no conspiracy theories ever.[footnote]I'm saying "pretty much" because obviously it's theoretically possible for some conspiracy theory somewhere to be true; it's just that they never seem to be.[/footnote] People always manage to find something that they think is weird, or that's weird unless you know more about the subject, or that they decided doesn't made sense.
You seem to misunderstand how police, emergency dispatch, emergency services, and crisis situations work. The government would also have to fool multiple emergency dispatchers, dozens of police officers who showed up armed to the scene and investigated the original bodies. Coroner offices also don't look like they do in CSI, for a small town your going to end up with having to haul the corpses through a hospital or other crowded public medical building not to mention the paramedics that would have removed the bodies from the site to begin with, coroner also isn't a single position, and corpses will often go through dozens of doctors that examine various aspects of the death even if there isn't an official autopsy. You've also got to fool the people who entered the building afterward as well as the repair and construction crews who cleaned up bullet casings and repaired bullet holes in the walls, as well as the cleanup crews tasked with cleaning up blood, and anyone who entered the building in the meantime before repairs and clean up took place. Criminal and other investigations like this also involve dozens of lawyers, social workers, investigators (at both the state and local level), and city or state officials who have full access to information coming out of the scene, as well as being required to investigate the site themselves in various capacities. Hell, you'll even have city building inspectors crawling around making sure an errant bullet wouldn't have caused an electrical fire.BakedSardine said:
As for only a few appearing on TV, I remember it being more than 3 or 4, in the beginning there were quite a few. But like most tragedies in disasters, people tend not to want to continually appear in front of media to talk about loved ones they just lost, that's pretty much human psychology 101. People tend to avoid situations that would result in them being questioned in public on a traumatic event, especially events that result in loved ones dying.
At some point maintaining a hoax is more effort than is feasible, in this case, if the government is willing to go through all the effort to set up a situation without any actual deaths or shooting, why not just take the easier route and find a mentally unstable person, give them a few anonymous ideas over the internet, and let your big hoax just become the truth instead.
Yeah; turns out very few of them wanted their grief turned into a TV spectacle. Doesn't really require a conspiracy theory to figure out why, though.BakedSardine said:
Maybe if this was a fictional town, but Sandy Hook, Newtown...It's a real place with a real community of real people. do you expect an entire town, an entire community not to notice?BakedSardine said:
Even ignoring senordesol's post (which you shouldn't, because it further shows the absurdity of saying you only need a handful of people), you still have to have a full community who would need to be duped or in on it, and both will require more than a few threats and some "crisis actors."
And then going to senordesol's point....
Multiple medical examiners, including one from NY state. The staff of the hospital or hospital used (I think I remember there was more than one). You had two state police forces involved and the FBI on top of the Newtown police. And the demolition crew whose Non-Disclosure Agreement is supposedly "proof" of the conspiracy.senordesol said:
So yeah. It's a large list. and we could probably make a larger list if we really wanted to buckle down.
But honestly? We shouldn't have needed to go this far.
Could it have been faked? Yes. And I have no doubt that there are people in Anti-gun organizations who would be more than willing to view faking this kind of incident as being 'part of the greater good'.
Are there oddities? Oh yes.
Are there inconsistencies? Oh yes.
Are there situations where individuals involved with this behaved strangely? Oh yes.
Is there anything that cannot be explained by individuals reacting to an extremely difficult and stressful situation?
No. There isn't.
Compound that with a voracious desire to be 'first' in the Media...along with a total lack these days of journalistic and editing standards or integrity in Network Television news.
You could have faked this. Nobody can deny that, they do it all the time and they call it movies and TV, and it's about ratings and money. These days Network news is about Ratings and Money. So yeah, it could have been faked. But if it's a fake, then something better needs to be presented as evidence other than someone having the same name or a passing News report by someone desperate to bump their ratings a fraction of a point, or some photo that has a few pixels out of place that looks slightly crisper than something else in a photo, or someone acting odd in a press conference.
Newtown was a horrible incident that got yanked by the media and special interests and politicians into their own camp for their own ends. Right wrong or indifferent, the people who are against those ends stand up against it, and instead of it being a dialogue about serious issues, it's turned into politics and conspiracy theories.
Are there oddities? Oh yes.
Are there inconsistencies? Oh yes.
Are there situations where individuals involved with this behaved strangely? Oh yes.
Is there anything that cannot be explained by individuals reacting to an extremely difficult and stressful situation?
No. There isn't.
Compound that with a voracious desire to be 'first' in the Media...along with a total lack these days of journalistic and editing standards or integrity in Network Television news.
You could have faked this. Nobody can deny that, they do it all the time and they call it movies and TV, and it's about ratings and money. These days Network news is about Ratings and Money. So yeah, it could have been faked. But if it's a fake, then something better needs to be presented as evidence other than someone having the same name or a passing News report by someone desperate to bump their ratings a fraction of a point, or some photo that has a few pixels out of place that looks slightly crisper than something else in a photo, or someone acting odd in a press conference.
Newtown was a horrible incident that got yanked by the media and special interests and politicians into their own camp for their own ends. Right wrong or indifferent, the people who are against those ends stand up against it, and instead of it being a dialogue about serious issues, it's turned into politics and conspiracy theories.
Sell, while i would agree that a government would not be that stupid to murder its own civilians in such manner in most cases (there were precedent where it did, both in old and modern times), what the posters are saying is that goverment is too stupid to murder its own people. those are different things. One is coming to a conclusion after observation and another is dismissing the thought entirely because "government is stupid". If we dont inquire into governments actions and just write them off as "too stupid" we put ourselves into very azardous situation.Casual Shinji said:
The public found out about agent Orange. Where is the outcry? The public found out about american soldiers posting as iraqi terorists shooting civilians in iraq. Where is the otucry? Its not like this hasnt happened before.
And if you think government wouldnt be as direct....they werent. They claimed it was "teh terrorizm". (i am not saying goverment created 9/11, merely an example of deniable plausability)
You do realize that the only organization in the world that have "inhuman amount of organization" is the goverment right? It does not get more organized than this. I am not saying that government did it in this case, im saying that automatically assuming goverment cant do it because stupid is dangerous way of thinking.EternallyBored said:
As for Hoax and NDAs, any of you remmeber the story Sleekit told about the melted electricity fuses? How many of you believed him? How many of you would if the company would have denied it? Yeah, a single whistleblower will just be easily written as "conspiracy nut".
Actually, conspiracy theorists DO talk about how when the hijackers were reported the military simply responded that they are nto going to intefere since military exercises were going on and they wrote it off as part of exercise, even though the people who did it knew what the exercise was and that it wasnt. Now this can be caused by two things: lack of knowledge or intent for hijackers to suceed. which one we will never know. But conspiracy theorists do talk about these things.
That being said, the pentagon explosion didnt look at all like plane crash too from what little unconfiscated media we have of it. it looked like a bomb. As for thermite, well, the two theories of wheher termite or plane fuel was the casue of the cuts in structure are still battling. One thing is certain, even experts said that those cuts look like something a thermite could do easily. in fact, thermite has been used for very same thing in construction industry for years. now tecnically plane fuel could do that as well, hence the problem. but this is not what the topic is about.
there are hundreds of different theories surounding 9/11, some of them more plausable (like you mentioned) and some are completely nuts. such is the case with conspiracies.
The leaks you talk about i guess are the whole wikileaks and its spiritual sucessors. Or does that include the government admitting of poisoning its own people, 40 years after its done?Zachary Amaranth said:
If anything, those leaks shown us that goverment is capable of doing massive things, secretly. As far as doing things "under your noses", need i remind you of Project Greek Island [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Greek_Island]? They managed to build a underground base under a WORKING hotel, with people living in it, while all workers working on it pretended to be maintenance and using secret wall entrances. Neither the hotel guests nor the workers have said anything about it till 1992 exposition - thats over 40 years of keeping it under wraps. So yes, goverment is VERY capable of orchestrating a huge project right under your nose and not letting it leak out.
As far as leaks, i adressed it in reply to previuos poster a bit, if one or two people decide to leak it its easy to write them off as conspiracy nutters, especially with what the outlook for conspiracy followers are in general populace. all you need is to use word such as "conspiracy" and the public will automatically think your just mad. We have people that claim to have worked in underwater military bases, first hand experience, with excruciating detail. Do we believe them? no, in fact, we commit them to mental institution. What if they actualyl worked there and broke their NDA?
Im not saying you have to believe every conspriacy, what im saying is that automatically assuming its impossible based on "goverment is stupid" is not the smart way to go about it.
But the schol is not getting back in session. It was closed. It was raised to the ground and it is being rebuilt a new. The rolls will be built from scratch from people who will apply. And many wont because "i dont wnat my child to go to place of such tragedy".senordesol said:
The students themselves are a better argument, but a simple relocation without telling anyone will cause same effect.
The cops, as said, woudl have to be intimidated obviuosly. You can use medicalcadevers like ones university uses for fake bodies in bags really. Im not saying conspiracy is true, merely that your attacking it from an angle that isnt really going to put it to rest.
No, you wouldnt need to pay off media. Media will just run with story they are presented and this was an easy take. in fact there was otucry form edia to shut up about it, not to dig deeper. Local government would withold sensitive information regardless if it was real or fake becuase it just does that anyway.Adamantium93 said:
Yep, you pretty much presented the best argument agaisnt this theory at the end: why? Thats one that noone is able to answer yet.
On the contrary. There is a lot of things labeled conspiracy theories that were proven to be true, for example that earth is round, that black matter exists, that we are made of atoms, that earth is millions of years old, ect. Its just that we grew up thinking most of those things as facts and not conspiracy theories anymore, since they were proven right, and you hear most about the craziest ones.Queen Michael said:
No, I think people are saying that the government would have to be comprised of a race of super brain beings from beyond the galaxy, if they would want to cover up such heinous acts performed in their own backyard. And they're not. They're just a bunch of humans like you and me.Strazdas said:
Terrible acts performed in foreign countries are a different matter. They shouldn't be, but they are. They generally fall under the umbrella of 'casualties of war'. People tend to care less about bad things happening in foreign countries, even if their own government is involved. And if you remember, there was quite a bit of outcry over those American soldiers gunning down those civilians (if indeed you are refering to that leaked video). And Abu Ghraib was another colossal fuck-up that the government wasn't able to cover up so well, and the backlash was pretty substantial.