View Single Post
Old 01-22-2013, 12:14 AM   #121
NBA lottery pick
IamRAMBO24's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,407
Default Re: Which guns did Adam Lanza use in the Sandy Hook shooting?

Originally Posted by bagelred
Well, as usual, one of the most basic problems is lack of video, pictures, and....well, most anything that actually proves (1) Lanza actually committed the murders in the school and (2) whether he did or did not do it, whether there were other people involved. Isn't that the most basic thing in the investigation? Make sure he wasn't framed and make sure there weren't other people involved?

Apparently not. No videos, no pictures, no eyewitnesses that can confirm it was Lanza doing the usual.

Do you really need to be a "conspiracy theorist" to ask questions?

Early reports said there were multiple shooters. Then just one. Early reports said use of handguns. Then it wasn't.

OK, we'll turn our brains off now......

Yup. This is the same problem I am trying to address. It seems like the anti-conspiracy nuts are using every logical deception at their disposal to discard the anomalies:

Appeal to emotions: they won't engage in the argument because there are kids involve. Imagine if no argument will ever be engaged if there are casualties. It is like saying we should not discuss the Vietnam war because so many soldiers died.

Appeal to authority: time and time again there are contradictory statements made, lack of evidence, child and adult actors, etc. and when someone points this out, all these nuts do is appeal to the official authority statement and say everyone is stupid for even questioning their position.

Above all, it is so stupid how they fail to see the many anomalies and ask themselves there might be more than what they are being told. First, there is a motive in all of this; second there are supporting evidences of child actors; third, there are instances of facebook comments and pages that were created prior to the deaths of the people, in fact, there was an interview of the principle in the newspaper on the day she was supposed to be dead (which all got conveniently deleted afterwards).

Of course, there will always be an excuse: media is incompetent, we shouldn't be talking about kids, everyone acts differently in a crisis although, conveniently, all of the stage actors acted the same (no real emotions, no tears, staged lines, etc).

You can't win with these idiots because they already have their mind set that such a thing can't ever happen and they will find every logical deceptive use of language to convince themselves and others.

My official position is this: if you have 1 anomalie and maybe a couple more, sure, you can explain those away if they were circumstantial, but c'mon, we have over 10 anomalies, I mean, in a court of law, with that many contradiction in the official statement of the defendant it would be logical to conclude he is lying no matter how many excuses he tries to counteract with the accusation.

It is like these nuts are willing to take whatever explanation pulled out of anyone's a*s as fool proof it is correct even if it is dumb as sh*t.

And they are calling conspiracy theorists stupid. Whatever dude.

Last edited by IamRAMBO24 : 01-22-2013 at 12:21 AM.
IamRAMBO24 is offline   Reply With Quote