Mass shootings aren't hoaxes/false flags. Prove me wrong.

[Quag]

Yes, you're curious in the sense that you would like some pictures shown to you, and have some thinking done for you.

However you are not curious enough to read or view the work of others who have taken the time to research the many details that expose the hoax.

I think you've convinced yourself you are curious, but by your actions, including refusal to examine the work of others, you're not really curious. You have just convinced your own self that you are.

Sorry, I'm a big fan of the common wisdom that you can bring a horse to water but you cannot make him drink. You can bring a man to knowledge, but you cannot make him think. eace

Says the guy who isnt curious enough to look into his sources who have even admitted that they lie.

 

[SkyFox76]

Yes, you're curious in the sense that you would like some pictures shown to you, and have some thinking done for you.

However you are not curious enough to read or view the work of others who have taken the time to research the many details that expose the hoax.

I think you've convinced yourself you are curious, but by your actions, including refusal to examine the work of others, you're not really curious. You have just convinced your own self that you are.

Sorry, I'm a big fan of the common wisdom that you can bring a horse to water but you cannot make him drink. You can bring a man to knowledge, but you cannot make him think. eace

So you have a website with your own work on these theories? Or have you gone to other websites and used other peoples research to make your conclusions?

As I stated above I have a buddy (about 35 years now) who's into the CT/hoax stuff and guess what? He uses the thinking of others work to make his claims. He uses articles and websites where none of the work is his own. So you'd be wrong in that I've not read many theories (including Halbig) on not just SH but also Vegas, 9/11, Parkland and so on. There is certainly no lack of youtube videos or websites out there.

Earlier on the thread you made a few claims the "sign" was there for the "participants" to sign in. Was your original conclusion because you personally saw that sign and said "hey wait a minute what's this?" Or did you have someone else do your thinking for you? They told you that sign was there on the 14th so you adopted that theory. Then, when it was pointed out by myself and someone else who took the time to research the claims you were left with having to admit that indeed the sign was not there the morning of the shooting.

Next you've mentioned the shadows. I didn't just wake up yesterday with the knowledge that those making the claims had used the wrong calculations. I looked at several random sites on the topic to see that there were people who took those findings, did their own labored research, saw where the original errors had been made (such as not allowing for DST) and they came to the conclusion the sun/shadows were exactly where they should have been.

I'm also aware of the websites that suggest these kids were never killed and then they show pictures of them being older. MUCH older. Like Senior prom older. Somehow Noah Pozner (age 6) and other classmates who would now be around 12 years old have warped into high school students around 17 and 18. And sadly some people will be too lazy to do the math and say oh hell yeah, that's them!

So it's really up to you on whether you want to be challenged on things you believe as a result of others work. What I've noticed with my buddy is, he no longer can look at a simple event without trying to find some obscure angle. I can question some events but generally do enough reading to find a peace of mind in what looks to be true. So yes, the sky is blue.

 

[mike2810]

So you have a website with your own work on these theories? Or have you gone to other websites and used other peoples research to make your conclusions?

As I stated above I have a buddy (about 35 years now) who's into the CT/hoax stuff and guess what? He uses the thinking of others work to make his claims. He uses articles and websites where none of the work is his own. So you'd be wrong in that I've not read many theories (including Halbig) on not just SH but also Vegas, 9/11, Parkland and so on. There is certainly no lack of youtube videos or websites out there.

Earlier on the thread you made a few claims the "sign" was there for the "participants" to sign in. Was your original conclusion because you personally saw that sign and said "hey wait a minute what's this?" Or did you have someone else do your thinking for you? They told you that sign was there on the 14th so you adopted that theory. Then, when it was pointed out by myself and someone else who took the time to research the claims you were left with having to admit that indeed the sign was not there the morning of the shooting.

Next you've mentioned the shadows. I didn't just wake up yesterday with the knowledge that those making the claims had used the wrong calculations. I looked at several random sites on the topic to see that there were people who took those findings, did their own labored research, saw where the original errors had been made (such as not allowing for DST) and they came to the conclusion the sun/shadows were exactly where they should have been.

I'm also aware of the websites that suggest these kids were never killed and then they show pictures of them being older. MUCH older. Like Senior prom older. Somehow Noah Pozner (age 6) and other classmates who would now be around 12 years old have warped into high school students around 17 and 18. And sadly some people will be too lazy to do the math and say oh hell yeah, that's them!

So it's really up to you on whether you want to be challenged on things you believe as a result of others work. What I've noticed with my buddy is, he no longer can look at a simple event without trying to find some obscure angle. I can question some events but generally do enough reading to find a peace of mind in what looks to be true. So yes, the sky is blue.

T72 makes the claim of being a "free thinker". He does use sources such as Veterans Today, authors like W. Halbig, and other conspiracy leaning sites. I use various sites to check and verify investigation findings. Enough sites verified the "sign" was not up prior to the shooting to dismiss the claim that it was. Much like the claim of it was a "drill". '

Authors like Halbig use partial facts to play to their audience. The same audience that will not accept any results that does not fit their view of the event. I also find it interesting that I encounter more malware on some of the conspiracy sites than I do with sites like Scientific America. Must be the "evil government". Just saying. :mrgreen:

 

[Thoreau72]

So you have a website with your own work on these theories? Or have you gone to other websites and used other peoples research to make your conclusions?

As I stated above I have a buddy (about 35 years now) who's into the CT/hoax stuff and guess what? He uses the thinking of others work to make his claims. He uses articles and websites where none of the work is his own. So you'd be wrong in that I've not read many theories (including Halbig) on not just SH but also Vegas, 9/11, Parkland and so on. There is certainly no lack of youtube videos or websites out there.

Earlier on the thread you made a few claims the "sign" was there for the "participants" to sign in. Was your original conclusion because you personally saw that sign and said "hey wait a minute what's this?" Or did you have someone else do your thinking for you? They told you that sign was there on the 14th so you adopted that theory. Then, when it was pointed out by myself and someone else who took the time to research the claims you were left with having to admit that indeed the sign was not there the morning of the shooting.

Next you've mentioned the shadows. I didn't just wake up yesterday with the knowledge that those making the claims had used the wrong calculations. I looked at several random sites on the topic to see that there were people who took those findings, did their own labored research, saw where the original errors had been made (such as not allowing for DST) and they came to the conclusion the sun/shadows were exactly where they should have been.

I'm also aware of the websites that suggest these kids were never killed and then they show pictures of them being older. MUCH older. Like Senior prom older. Somehow Noah Pozner (age 6) and other classmates who would now be around 12 years old have warped into high school students around 17 and 18. And sadly some people will be too lazy to do the math and say oh hell yeah, that's them!

So it's really up to you on whether you want to be challenged on things you believe as a result of others work. What I've noticed with my buddy is, he no longer can look at a simple event without trying to find some obscure angle. I can question some events but generally do enough reading to find a peace of mind in what looks to be true. So yes, the sky is blue.

I very much enjoy being challenged. That's one of the reasons I come here. I enjoy good conversation such as yours.

But I long ago became weary of "conversations" with people in denial of facts. I am weary of people allergic to facts. It is true that ignorance can be blissful, but engaging in conversation with such folks is a dead end.

Not to change subject, but San Bernardino was clearly a staged event with a false narrative. So too was Pulse, with many examples of crisis actors, and not one moment of time was spent by the mainstream media covering that obvious fact recorded by a handful of private individuals. Scott Pelley The So-Called Journalist utterly disregarded what he was told by an eye-witness who worked in the building, rather in the same way the 911 Committee utterly ignored the testimony of a janitor who had worked in the building for many long years.

There is behavior that is so consistent it becomes a pattern of behavior associated with many of these events. That you are unable to perceive such patterns is your own problem, not mine. I can see that pattern, and so would a sly fox if he were able to enunciate it.

 

[gamolon]

But I long ago became weary of "conversations" with people in denial of facts. I am weary of people allergic to facts.

You mean like the "facts" you present such as Lanza supposedly carrying his own weight in guns and ammo? Which was then smacked down with the following?

More garbage "facts" from you.


He weighed 112 lbs. He carried just over 30 pounds of weapons and ammo into the school.
Weight of Adam Lanza's guns and ammo

Looks like the "facts" you are using to determine SH was a hoax are nothing but lies.

Your history os when people provide the REAL facts against your claims, you put them on ignore.

 

[SkyFox76]

I very much enjoy being challenged. That's one of the reasons I come here. I enjoy good conversation such as yours.

But I long ago became weary of "conversations" with people in denial of facts. I am weary of people allergic to facts. It is true that ignorance can be blissful, but engaging in conversation with such folks is a dead end.

Not to change subject, but San Bernardino was clearly a staged event with a false narrative. So too was Pulse, with many examples of crisis actors, and not one moment of time was spent by the mainstream media covering that obvious fact recorded by a handful of private individuals. Scott Pelley The So-Called Journalist utterly disregarded what he was told by an eye-witness who worked in the building, rather in the same way the 911 Committee utterly ignored the testimony of a janitor who had worked in the building for many long years.

There is behavior that is so consistent it becomes a pattern of behavior associated with many of these events. That you are unable to perceive such patterns is your own problem, not mine. I can see that pattern, and so would a sly fox if he were able to enunciate it.

So the short answer is no you haven't done the work yourself and are using other people's thinking and work to reach your conclusions. The same as I would do to refute what you might offer.

I have no aversion to looking at other people's claims and doing my own research with what is out there on the www, however I prefer to discuss one fact at a time instead of jumping all over the place from one shooting (or incident) to the next. With the exception of recent events I think enough time has gone on where most of the conspiracies that existed have been debunked. Do I have questions about 9/11? Sure. And I spent countless hours reading and watching various videos. Some of them so absurd a five year old could see the faulty thinking. Others have made me stop and think. It's a very complex event like no other in history. Mass shootings are an entirely different animal though.

 

[Thoreau72]

So the short answer is no you haven't done the work yourself and are using other people's thinking and work to reach your conclusions. The same as I would do to refute what you might offer.

I have no aversion to looking at other people's claims and doing my own research with what is out there on the www, however I prefer to discuss one fact at a time instead of jumping all over the place from one shooting (or incident) to the next. With the exception of recent events I think enough time has gone on where most of the conspiracies that existed have been debunked. Do I have questions about 9/11? Sure. And I spent countless hours reading and watching various videos. Some of them so absurd a five year old could see the faulty thinking. Others have made me stop and think. It's a very complex event like no other in history. Mass shootings are an entirely different animal though.

Do you mean have I visited Newtown myself and gone over public records including real estate transfers? Heavens no! I used to visit Bridgeport often back in the 80s, but I've never been to Newtown.

No, but I've read the work of several others, and it seems much more in line with common sense to me than that absurd story about a 90 pound child shooting his mother and then raising hell with an AR15.

The story has always been odd, and right from the beginning. My first clue was the odd briefing by the coroner, besides the claims regarding Lanza. Both he and Cruz are similar patsies.

Mass shootings are a different animal in what way?

Have you ever read the book by Lance de-Haven Smith, "Conspiracy Theory in America"? It's quite interesting how the term came into public use, if you're interested.

 

[Maccabee]

Right, common sense says they would bring in the sign AFTER the exercise. :doh

You're assuming that it was an exercise. It wasn't.

 

[Maccabee]

Thank you for a courteous comment and question.

I will, for the sake of discussion, concede that you are correct, and the signs went in after the shooting.

If one looks at the big picture, too many details of the official narrative fail upon closer examination. The players, the actors are in many cases recognizable from facial photography as being the same person at yet another crisis event, like Boston. The fact that broken glass and other things photographed do not comport with the official narrative.

It would be helpful if you give specific examples and sources rather than broad accusations

That the demolition crew who eventually destroyed the building were forced to sign non disclosure agreements. Why the secrecy?

Source?

And it goes on and on. Real estate records on properties involved in the families involved. Photos taken closely analyzed show improper shadows from the sun for December.

Again, it would be helpful if you actually show us what you're talking about.

 

[Maccabee]

Do you mean have I visited Newtown myself and gone over public records including real estate transfers? Heavens no! I used to visit Bridgeport often back in the 80s, but I've never been to Newtown.

So instead you rely on bloggers to do the work for you.

No, but I've read the work of several others, and it seems much more in line with common sense to me than that absurd story about a 90 pound child shooting his mother and then raising hell with an AR15.

As I said, from personal experience, I can tell you first hand that its not that difficult for soneone of that size to carry out something like that. I weigh 110 and can operate an AR15 with little difficulty even while moving and carrying wieght like loaded magazines.
[Quote[
The story has always been odd, and right from the beginning. My first clue was the odd briefing by the coroner, besides the claims regarding Lanza. Both he and Cruz are similar patsies.[/quote]

What was odd about it?

Mass shootings are a different animal in what way?

Have you ever read the book by Lance de-Haven Smith, "Conspiracy Theory in America"? It's quite interesting how the term came into public use, if you're interested.

So in order to validate your view point, I have to buy a book that may or may not deal with this subject in-depth?

 

[SkyFox76]

You're assuming that it was an exercise. It wasn't.

The sign is debunked. There is dated video showing the location the day of the shooting and the sign is not there. So that's one we can scratch off the list.

 

[SkyFox76]

Do you mean have I visited Newtown myself and gone over public records including real estate transfers? Heavens no! I used to visit Bridgeport often back in the 80s, but I've never been to Newtown.

No, but I've read the work of several others, and it seems much more in line with common sense to me than that absurd story about a 90 pound child shooting his mother and then raising hell with an AR15.

The story has always been odd, and right from the beginning. My first clue was the odd briefing by the coroner, besides the claims regarding Lanza. Both he and Cruz are similar patsies.

Mass shootings are a different animal in what way?

Have you ever read the book by Lance de-Haven Smith, "Conspiracy Theory in America"? It's quite interesting how the term came into public use, if you're interested.

So let me see if I understand you right. When I asked you for more information on the hoax, your reply was that I wanted someone else to do my thinking for me. That's incorrect. What I wanted was for you to show me something more that I could look into myself to gather more information. Much like the "sign" you spoke of. That's exactly how you've gathered your own information to create an opinion. You're using other people peoples research.

As for a 90lb child. Lanza was 20 years old. Reports are he was 6' and weighed 112 lbs. The weight of guns and ammo was 30.47lbs. Sadly people with mental issue to kill their own family members. Parents, siblings, grandparents. And for foolish reasons like would let them borrow the car, or go to a party. So no it's not out of the realm of possibility that a guy obsessed with killing would first off his mother. Possibly it was his not wanting her to have to deal with the horrendous actions he was about to engage in.

Shootings are a different animal because buildings being hit by planes and collapsing with 1000's being killed is not on the same level as gunmen killing a large number of people. Not even in the case of LV.

I'm not much of a reader other than things on line dealing with specific topics. Thanks.

 

[Thoreau72]

So instead you rely on bloggers to do the work for you.


As I said, from personal experience, I can tell you first hand that its not that difficult for soneone of that size to carry out something like that. I weigh 110 and can operate an AR15 with little difficulty even while moving and carrying wieght like loaded magazines.
[Quote[
The story has always been odd, and right from the beginning. My first clue was the odd briefing by the coroner, besides the claims regarding Lanza. Both he and Cruz are similar patsies.

Halbig is not a blogger. He is a retired cop and security consultant, something you can only aspire to. Your cognitive dissonance becomes you.

His analysis is beyond your comprehension, likely because of your youth, to some degree or another.

Smallstorm is an intelligent and rational woman who pays attention to detail. You avoid detail and you disregard facts.

 

[Maccabee]

Halbig is not a blogger. He is a retired cop and security consultant, something you can only aspire to. Your cognitive dissonance becomes you.

First off, I'm making waves to eventually become a retired cop. So no, it's not merely something that I can only aspire to. Secondly, Halbig spent only one year as a Florida Highway Patrolman. He barely passed his probation period if that. He claimed to have been on the security detail for MLK Jr when in fact he wasn't even hired by FHP yet when MLK was killed. He sold a bogus bomb sniffer that was about as useful as a divining rod.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FtO4rMhgouE

His analysis is beyond your comprehension, likely because of your youth, to some degree or another.

As Einstein said, if you can't explain a complicated subject to a layman, then you don't understand it at all. Or something to that effect. Either way, his analysis can't even stand up to cursory scrutiny, much less beyond my comprehension. Also, remember, Halbig was one of the main figures that led me to believe that Sandy Hook was a hoax. I know his arguments.

Smallstorm is an intelligent and rational woman who pays attention to detail. You avoid detail and you disregard facts.

Really? Where have I ignored detail and disregarded facts?

 

[Quag]

WW2 the US Army required recruits to weigh a minimum of 105lb and they were expected to go into battle with full gear.
The 90 lb (a false figure intended to make it seem more impossible) was as already mentioned 112 and above the min for a ww2 soldier
The point is absurd in the extreme btu then all of HDs "evidence" are based on his complete ignorance of the subject at hand
https://np.reddit.com/r/AskHistoria...t_was_boot_campmilitary_training_like_during/

 

[Quag]

Halbig is not a blogger. He is a retired cop and security consultant, something you can only aspire to. Your cognitive dissonance becomes you.

His analysis is beyond your comprehension, likely because of your youth, to some degree or another.

Smallstorm is an intelligent and rational woman who pays attention to detail. You avoid detail and you disregard facts.

Cognitive dissonance! Everybody drink!

 

[Maccabee]

WW2 the US Army required recruits to weigh a minimum of 105lb and they were expected to go into battle with full gear.
The 90 lb (a false figure intended to make it seem more impossible) was as already mentioned 112 and above the min for a ww2 soldier
The point is absurd in the extreme btu then all of HDs "evidence" are based on his complete ignorance of the subject at hand
https://np.reddit.com/r/AskHistoria...t_was_boot_campmilitary_training_like_during/

Who's HD?

 

[zyzygy]

Who's HD?

Thoreau72. He changed his handle but not his unsupported claims.

 

[Maccabee]

Thoreau72. He changed his handle but not his unsupported claims.

Ok, thanks.

 

[zyzygy]

Ok, thanks.

He is a believer in magic mini nukes that cause no mushroom clouds, no radiation and no very high temperatures.

 

[Quag]

He is a believer in magic mini nukes that cause no mushroom clouds, no radiation and no very high temperatures.

While creating very high temperatures, and emitting radiation when they explode.
Oh yeah and they dont explode either

 

[zyzygy]

While creating very high temperatures, and emitting radiation when they explode.
Oh yeah and they dont explode either

They truly are magic. And non-existent.

 

[Thoreau72]

Yes, I'm a legend in my own time! :mrgreen:


In a time of universal deception, speaking the truth is a radical act for men like you.

 

[Maccabee]

Yes, I'm a legend in my own time! :mrgreen:


In a time of universal deception, speaking the truth is a radical act for men like you.

Don't gloat when you haven't even made one claim that stood up to scrutiny.

 

[zyzygy]

Don't gloat when you haven't even made one claim that stood up to scrutiny.

A legend in his own mind and nowhere else. Out in the world he's a laughing stock.