Sandy hook ...

[Nathan K.]

Aaron, I agree with you. Correlation is not causality. There are many conspiracy theories without much real evidence to support them. Some of them are created by those with something to gain. Some of them are created by those who see evidence where it doesn't exist. Most of them are created by the powers that be for diversion and disparagement of activist groups and alternative media sources (COINTELPRO). In any of these cases, there are those who cling to these "theories" like gospel and use any random correlating factor to help support their case.

There is, however, a counter syndrome which I believe is far more serious. It is that of the denier. One who does no personal research yet discards any information categorized as "logically impossible" by their internal programming. Everyone has their own personal world view, a reality unique to their experiences and individual thought patterns. Sadly, most people's reality is a fabrication, a mythological framework manufactured by mass media and public schooling, the creators of modern culture. Both of which are controlled by the government which is in turn controlled by the elite. This is no secret or theory. It is fact.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_in...public_opinion

http://theintelhub.com/2012/02/27/ci...ulate-the-usa/

You admit that there are examples of corruption. Adding to Iran-Contra, I would include Operation Northwoods, Operation Mockingbird, Fast & Furious, Operation Ajax, The Gulf of Tonkin, and Watergate among others. And these are only the times they were caught.

Take this kind of track record, add it together with a highly controlled, propagandist culture, mix in examples of deadly police action like Waco and Ruby Ridge, note that these are the same people who unleashed the atomic bomb upon hundreds of thousands of women and children and funded the Nazis, acknowledge that all world politics and economics are overseen by an underground cabal of influential globalists, and sum it up with the fact that those involved are all a part of highly ritualistic secret societies enamored with the occult... You create a situation in which it is crazy NOT to look for conspiracy and subversion at every corner. Every "official" story should be intensely scrutinized. Conspiracies should not be analyzed for "fun", as you say. These issues are severely urgent and of great importance.

At this point, casually dismissing any counter-mainstream notion is foolishness. You haven't put in the time, and you aren't operating from a reality which has been prepared to participate in a debate on these topics. I don't expect you to believe what I do from the beginning. It SOUNDS crazy... But please don't patronize me.

You haven't studied ritual abuse. Are the thousands of survivors just lying? (And the Holocaust never happened either, right? Maybe you should take a look at the many victim support websites and their communities.) Have you read Cathy O'Brien, Brice Taylor, David Shurter, Svali? Ted Gunderson is a fake? You've probably never even heard of the Franklin Coverup. Have you even read about MK Ultra and Monarch Programming? How much have you researched cult groups and how they operate?

Don't you think you might be somewhat unqualified to pass judgements?

You don't even have to agree with my conclusions to realize that something is not right. The problem with you and your kind is that you like to clump information as well as people together. You disagree with one of my statements, so you disregard everything else I say. It is the same as a racist or a sexist who disregards an entire portion of humanity because of their perception of a few of the group's constituents.

If you choose to respond, although I would see no point in it as we're clearly beyond the possibility of agreement or understanding... please spare me the pseudo-intellectual pontification.

[Eddie Bravo]

Aaron, I agree with you. Correlation is not causality. There are many conspiracy theories without much real evidence to support them. Some of them are created by those with something to gain. Some of them are created by those who see evidence where it doesn't exist. Most of them are created by the powers that be for diversion and disparagement of activist groups and alternative media sources (COINTELPRO). In any of these cases, there are those who cling to these "theories" like gospel and use any random correlating factor to help support their case.

There is, however, a counter syndrome which I believe is far more serious. It is that of the denier. One who does no personal research yet discards any information categorized as "logically impossible" by their internal programming. Everyone has their own personal world view, a reality unique to their experiences and individual thought patterns. Sadly, most people's reality is a fabrication, a mythological framework manufactured by mass media and public schooling, the creators of modern culture. Both of which are controlled by the government which is in turn controlled by the elite. This is no secret or theory. It is fact.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_in...public_opinion

http://theintelhub.com/2012/02/27/ci...ulate-the-usa/

You admit that there are examples of corruption. Adding to Iran-Contra, I would include Operation Northwoods, Operation Mockingbird, Fast & Furious, Operation Ajax, The Gulf of Tonkin, and Watergate among others. And these are only the times they were caught.

Take this kind of track record, add it together with a highly controlled, propagandist culture, mix in examples of deadly police action like Waco and Ruby Ridge, note that these are the same people who unleashed the atomic bomb upon hundreds of thousands of women and children and funded the Nazis, acknowledge that all world politics and economics are overseen by an underground cabal of influential globalists, and sum it up with the fact that those involved are all a part of highly ritualistic secret societies enamored with the occult... You create a situation in which it is crazy NOT to look for conspiracy and subversion at every corner. Every "official" story should be intensely scrutinized. Conspiracies should not be analyzed for "fun", as you say. These issues are severely urgent and of great importance.

At this point, casually dismissing any counter-mainstream notion is foolishness. You haven't put in the time, and you aren't operating from a reality which has been prepared to participate in a debate on these topics. I don't expect you to believe what I do from the beginning. It SOUNDS crazy... But please don't patronize me.

You haven't studied ritual abuse. Are the thousands of survivors just lying? (And the Holocaust never happened either, right? Maybe you should take a look at the many victim support websites and their communities.) Have you read Cathy O'Brien, Brice Taylor, David Shurter, Svali? Ted Gunderson is a fake? You've probably never even heard of the Franklin Coverup. Have you even read about MK Ultra and Monarch Programming? How much have you researched cult groups and how they operate?

Don't you think you might be somewhat unqualified to pass judgements?

You don't even have to agree with my conclusions to realize that something is not right. The problem with you and your kind is that you like to clump information as well as people together. You disagree with one of my statements, so you disregard everything else I say. It is the same as a racist or a sexist who disregards an entire portion of humanity because of their perception of a few of the group's constituents.

If you choose to respond, although I would see no point in it as we're clearly beyond the possibility of agreement or understanding... please spare me the pseudo-intellectual pontification.

U strangled the correct. All government official stories should be dissected like a detective on a criminal case

[Aaron Gustaveson]

A You haven't put in the time, and you aren't operating from a reality which has been prepared to participate in a debate on these topics.

Go fuck yourself on that one, you dont me. "Operating from a reality" give me a break.

Im not a holocaust denier, dumbass, thats a fucked up thing to imply about someone.

I never made or remotely attempted to make the point that causality can dismiss any counter-mainstream notion. That's a straw man on your part.

I have only passed judgment on the same topic you have so what the hell are you talking about unqualified to pass judgments?

My difference of opinion is not based on disagreeing with any, one single statement you made, dont know where your getting that.

You are your own best argument for allowing parents to kill their children.

I also agree that all governments are generally untrustworthy and should be subject to review by its citizens. My viewpoint is not contrary to that in any way.


sorry I dont know how to put multiple quotes in a response.

[Aaron Gustaveson]

thou doth protest too much

I believe in your attempt to sound smart by parroting something you heard you actually exposed your ignorance. The phrase means that insisting over zealously about something not being true is grounds to suspect that the person actually believes it is true and is lying.

Unless you meant to imply that I actually believe sandy hook was a hoax then you didn't understand what you quoted.

grow a pair and use your real name.

[Nathan K.]

Go fuck yourself on that one, you dont me. "Operating from a reality" give me a break.

You're right, I don't know you. However, I can infer from the things you have said that you've not studied the necessary topics involved in this discussion. That means that you cannot justifiably pass judgement one way or the other as your specific reality (your personal world view, formed by experiences, knowledge, and personality) is deficient in regards to this conversation. You wouldn't expect to debate someone on medieval European history without first doing some intensive research on the subject, would you? And I'm not implying that your current reality is static. In fact, I encourage you to try and learn as much as you can.

Im not a holocaust denier, dumbass, thats a fucked up thing to imply about someone.

I didn't imply that you were a Holocaust denier. I used an easily recognized and congruous example to point out the absurdity of denying the existence of something without researching it for yourself, in this case, ritual abuse. You see, it's a large part of an incredibly complicated issue, and you indirectly disregarded its existence due solely to your ignorance of this topic. I was only trying to help you see your error with an attention-grabbing statement. Apparently, it was too successful because the result was that you entirely ignored the point.

I never made or remotely attempted to make the point that causality can dismiss any counter-mainstream notion. That's a straw man on your part.

I think you mean "the coincidence of correlation can dismiss", and you're confused. Your entire argument focused upon how the nature of the universe's infinite correlations lead to false positives, and therefore, "outrageous conspiracy theories". You go on to explain that we must use logic and probability to decipher truth from coincidence. I responded with a counter-argument: Most people have not acquired adequate knowledge about certain subjects to accurately employ their logic and reason in such a manner.

Now look at my statement one more time:

"At this point, casually dismissing any counter-mainstream notion is foolishness."

Notice the word "any". The definition of any: "one or some indiscriminately of whatever kind". Have you dismissed any counter-mainstream notions during the course of this discussion because of your impaired "logic" systems? Yes, you have, and I told you how foolish it was to do so.

I have only passed judgment on the same topic you have so what the hell are you talking about unqualified to pass judgments?

I've already answered this question.

My difference of opinion is not based on disagreeing with any, one single statement you made, dont know where your getting that.

Okay, here are some quotes from you:

"I just couldn't spend my time responding when the first thing in the list was 'why aren't the parents sadder?'. What a crock of shit." -- Here you disregard my entire response to your question and the multiple issues it covered because you disagree with one point (adding to this, you somehow believed it to be my personal point although I made it clear that I was merely giving counter-points to a ridiculous article, which is what you asked for me to do).

"With your manner of thinking it is just as possible that the sandy hook conspiracy is simply to distract from a different and even more sinister plot." -- Here you attack my "manner of thinking" and use it to avoid my actual statements.

"You are 100% wrong on the camera stuff... etc." -- Here you go on and on about a technical issue that I might very well be wrong about. However, it has absolutely nothing to do with the point I was trying to make. In fact, you ignored the point entirely and became obsessed with the camera itself. There WAS a high definition security camera at the front door, and yet the authorities have not even provided one photo of the event. The exact specifications of the technology involved is irrelevant.

"yeah your right, its more lily that the government lead by a multigenerational, secret, elite social order orchestrated the entire thing than a old school nurse thought she was talking about someone else." -- Here you again use a belief with which you do not agree to discredit a valid suspicion.

"These types fail to see that our reality is filled to the brim with correlation and coincidence." -- Here you indirectly provide a label for me. Now that I'm categorized as your Type 2 Conspiracy Theorist, everything I say is untrustworthy.

"You are they guy who said parents should be able to kill their children on another thread, right?" -- Here you attack my character and bring up a completely unrelated topic to somehow discredit the sensibility of anything else I might say. It's a sign of weakness. And you continue: "You are your own best argument for allowing parents to kill their children." Trust me, you really don't want to get into it.

I also agree that all governments are generally untrustworthy and should be subject to review by its citizens. My viewpoint is not contrary to that in any way.

Then it's time for you to wake up. Take care.

[Aaron Gustaveson]

you can infer what ever you want, incorrectly.
You are inadequately educated in these topics to participate in a discussion. Se. I can infer too, maybe incorrectly.

Your holocaust analogy is absurd, because you are comparing holocaust deniers to people who dont believe in the less probable conspiracy theories. I dont have to explain this further for rational people but I'm sure you wont get it.

You failed to understand my point on causality and correlation, causality is not the baises of any argument to refute conspiracy theories generally or specifically, I was pointing out a common misstep in reasoning that has much more to do with coincidence and and misidentifying the implications of correlation than the topic of causality.

"Your entire argument focused upon how the nature of the universe's infinite correlations lead to false positives, and therefore, "outrageous conspiracy theories"." your own words no mention of causality as a key point. causation was a side note to comment on correctional and coincidence leading to inference of causal relationships. Causality is the lest important aspect of the thought.

You just posted many points I disagree with you on, so aren't you proving that my disagreement with you is not based on a single point like you said?

Your last statement is nonsensical as you quote me saying that "my view point is not contrary . . " then write, "then its time for me to wake up"

If you left out the word "then" it would make sense in a different way but because the statement you quoted already contains "My viewpoint is not contrary to that in any way." what is the reader to think you are suggesting I wake up to, as you already excluded the possibility that you mean walking up to the fact that "governments are generally untrustworthy and should be subject to review by its citizens. "

My post wasn't a response to you just a general musing for people who happen across the thread. I never intended to or have I attempted to engage in any manner of real debate as I just have time to debate silly things in any serious manner. Like I said I just want people to see not everyone here is, you know, like you.
take care.

[Eddie Bravo]

Where's the surveillance footage?

[Aaron Gustaveson]

Where's the surveillance footage?

I asked before and you didn't respond. What do you mean where is the footage?

If the school had cameras, which they certainly could have (not facial recognition) then wouldn't the FBI have the video? I was amazed to hear that video was released from inside any of these school shootings. Why would they release it? Especially before all the trial stuff is done with, they couldn't release it before that, legally, could they?

Or is there denial that the school even had cameras at all?

If you believe the footage would show that the guy wasn't the shooter or something then you must believe that the teachers, school administration, kids and parents are in on the conspiracy right? I guess people do believe the parents are actors but seems like a stupid way to run a hoax hiring actors, maybe you could kill them all afterwords, I dont know.

Besides you know that even if they released HD video with a time stamp this wouldn't do anything to quell the conspiracy theory. If they could pull this off then the video part would be one of the easier aspects to fake. To me the conspiracy theory exist in spite of evidence not due to a lack of it.

[Nathan K.]

Aaron, I'm not going to keep going in circles with you. I've tried to express my thoughts in a very straight-forward, concise manner, yet you've failed to comprehend even one part of what I've said. I don't feel like I could be any clearer, so I'm just going to stop trying.

Although I can't speak for Eddie, I'll respond to your questions about the footage, but only because you are actually asking a few legitimate questions that others might have.

I asked before and you didn't respond. What do you mean where is the footage?

You know exactly what he means, so don't play dumb.

If the school had cameras, which they certainly could have (not facial recognition) then wouldn't the FBI have the video? I was amazed to hear that video was released from inside any of these school shootings. Why would they release it?

All information and available surveillance footage should be released to the public in any like scenario. This shooting doesn't just involve the victims, it affects all of us, especially considering the fact that they have created national legislation in direct response to it.

You said yourself:

"I also agree that all governments are generally untrustworthy and should be subject to review by its citizens."

So the members of these same entities which you deem "generally untrustworthy" are the only people who should be allowed to not only judge the evidence but to decide whether or not the information is disseminated? Are we, as citizens, without a right to review the details of this case and question the motives of those who attempt to prevent us from doing so?

We weren't only denied footage. They also placed a seal on the police records for 90 days (and they are talking about extending it). Adding to this, they are unlawfully denying the media access to the death certificates and are in the process of trying to change the law to make it illegal for people to access underage death certificates. All of this is in direct violation of the Freedom of Information Act.

Especially before all the trial stuff is done with, they couldn't release it before that, legally, could they?

There will be no trial; that is the point. Since they are labeling this as a "lone gunman" incident, and because the "gunman" in question supposedly committed suicide, no trial will take place (case closed, the public will have no involvement). That creates all the more reason to be incredibly suspicious of the secretive behavior officials are exhibiting.

Or is there denial that the school even had cameras at all?

No. There were surveillance cameras. The school itself confirmed as much.

If you believe the footage would show that the guy wasn't the shooter or something then you must believe that the teachers, school administration, kids and parents are in on the conspiracy right?

There aren't actually any witnesses who saw the shooter(s), so only some people have to be involved. On a peculiar note, in the class with the most fatalities, there was only one survivor. It was a little girl who played dead. Now an unnamed female survivor's parents have begun a 100 million dollar lawsuit against the state of Connecticut for allowing the shooting to take place. I wonder what she saw.

I guess people do believe the parents are actors but seems like a stupid way to run a hoax hiring actors, maybe you could kill them all afterwords, I dont know.

Consider this for a moment... If it is a hoax, that doesn't mean than no one was killed. It just means that the victims were most likely not the actual children of the parents. I don't think that the parents they have paraded in front of the cameras are actors in the traditional sense (as they are very bad at it). I believe they are just pawns devoted to and working for the agenda. It's also likely that some of the parents are legitimate victims, the ones kept well away from the media.

Besides you know that even if they released HD video with a time stamp this wouldn't do anything to quell the conspiracy theory. If they could pull this off then the video part would be one of the easier aspects to fake.

I agree. They've waited too long to be convincing. You must also realize that they like their deceits to be obvious, and they get pleasure from the fact that the masses will never accept nor inquire into the truth.

To me the conspiracy theory exist in spite of evidence not due to a lack of it.

There is no evidence. Only hearsay.

[Aaron Gustaveson]

I dont blame you for not wanting to "go rounds" I haven't really put any effort into this myself.
reposting a list from a conspiracy website is express your thoughts in a very straight-forward, concise manner? OK.

I kinda skimmed that but, I dont see why you think my question was playing dumb. You answered it for me, yes they acknowledged there were cameras and that they captured the event, law enforcement has the video. So when Eddie writes "wheres the footage" he means why haven't they realised it to the public. I assume he knows where it is, cops have it.

Since the guy killed himself, I think they will release the video soon enough, wont change a thing though.
If they had released the video right away, why would that have been more convincing? If this was pre planned then times constraints shouldn't be a factor?

Are you saying they might have killed 23 kids that didnt even go to that school, like orphans they planted or the real parents of the kids where all killed or are a part of this? Actually Nevermind.

Im surprised but I kinda disagree on with as far as there being no evidence this was a hoax, I think there's some very weak circumstantial evidence but I guess that really is worth very little.