Which guns did Adam Lanza use in the Sandy Hook shooting?

[andgar923]

That is stupid.

His explanation for the facebook pages: by using date restricted pages on Google, one can find erroneous dates on articles for the Sandy Hook shootings.

Still bullsh*t. The evidence wasn't based on some stupid search but an actual facebook page created and then deleted when people began questioning.

You anti-conspiracy nuts will believe anything.

I'm a bit sleepy and tired at the moment, but I wasn't impressed with the supposed 'debunking'.

Again, I'll take another look when I'm not falling asleep.

[IamRAMBO24]

Another stupid diversion and false reporting snopes.com stated:

Christopher Rodia, whose name can be heard on the police radio transmission was not the registered owner of the car Adam Lanza was driving.

If the cops have the license plate and clearly knows it by stating it in the transmission, then it is logical to assume they must know who the registered owner was simply by running the license plate.

The radio transmission clearly revealed the license plate and said it belonged to Adam Lanza when it was actually registered to Christopher Rodia.

This was not a mistake. Snopes.com is pulling whatever crap they can come up and they can get away with it since the anti-conspiracy nuts will accept any explanation hook, line, and sinker.

[Jackass18]

Conspiracy theory is just that: a theory. They don't make claims; they create hypotheticals and ask questions.

WTF? People are harassing the people of Newtown because they think those people are actors. You and others like you are going well beyond merely asking questions and posting hypotheticals. You people go around claiming the media and gov't is lying about everything and hiding the truth. They claim that the government set up Sandy Hook so they could enforce gun control laws. They claim those people are crisis actors. They claim that there were webpages about the shootings before it ever happened. They claim the assault rifle was found in his trunk. Many claims have been made, but none have really been backed up.

This is one example amongst a million I have.

What are the million bullshit claims that you have? What are you talking about with the Rodia thing?

http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative...k-2535800.html

[IamRAMBO24]

WTF? People are harassing the people of Newtown because they think those people are actors. You and others like you are going well beyond merely asking questions and posting hypotheticals. You people go around claiming the media and gov't is lying about everything and hiding the truth. They claim that the government set up Sandy Hook so they could enforce gun control laws. They claim those people are crisis actors. They claim that there were webpages about the shootings before it ever happened. They claim the assault rifle was found in his trunk. Many claims have been made, but none have really been backed up.

Stop putting words in my mouth.

The only claim I will stand by is the Victoria Soto page. It was created 4 days prior to her death and conveniently deleted.

The only objective claims out there are by the media and law enforcements; all of those are hypotheticals. Look up the definition of a hypothetical dumbsh*t.

[Jackass18]

I even switched to 'They'. So, you haven't said anything about the government and media lying? You don't act like the media is against us? You're not on here pushing an agenda? You want to play some stupid semantics game to make it seem like you're merely being skeptical? You haven't said the people were actors? You say you're merely asking questions and yet you basically ignore any answer that doesn't fit with what you want.

Don't give me that bullshit when people are stating that the government set it all up, the media is lying and covering up the truth and a bunch of assholes are harassing the people of Newtown. Don't act like people aren't pushing an agenda. But whatever, keep on playing your little games.

[IamRAMBO24]

I even switched to 'They'. So, you haven't said anything about the government and media lying? You don't act like the media is against us? You're not on here pushing an agenda? You want to play some stupid semantics game to make it seem like you're merely being skeptical? You haven't said the people were actors? You say you're merely asking questions and yet you basically ignore any answer that doesn't fit with what you want.

Don't give me that bullshit when people are stating that the government set it all up, the media is lying and covering up the truth and a bunch of assholes are harassing the people of Newtown. Don't act like people aren't pushing an agenda. But whatever, keep on playing your little games.

Just asking questions. The world would be a lot better place if people will seek out anomalies and ask questions instead of acting like a tool and destroying those who even dares to question.

1. A page was created by Victoria Soto 4 days prior to her death.

2. What was the possible explanation.

No agenda; no motive; no deception; you can call it a "conspiracy" but I would like to refer to it as simply being skeptical - a by product of a curious mind.

Sheeps hate it when people ask questions; they are perfectly content with the idea of "objectivity" which they have associated with those in authority. Fact.

[timlush]

You anti-conspiracy nuts will believe anything.

Oh the ironing...

[Riddler]

Oh the ironing...

[daily]

1. A page was created by Victoria Soto 4 days prior to her death.

2. What was the possible explanation.

http://www.firstpost.com/topic/organ...-37423-32.html

[Jackass18]

Just asking questions.

I've read multiple posts by you where you stated they were actors.

The world would be a lot better place if people will seek out anomalies

There's a difference between seeking them out and refusing to believe any explanation that doesn't say what you want it to say.

and ask questions instead of acting like a tool and destroying those who even dares to question.

That's what you want to think. People aren't out to destroy those who dare to question. Stop trying to play the victim card. Some people want compelling evidence before they'll start jumping on board. I don't see compelling evidence. I see people trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. If you want people to see your side then provide compelling evidence. There's just too many things against the conspiracy theory to jump on board. I don't see you questioning the conspiracy theory side. I only see you defending it.

1. A page was created by Victoria Soto 4 days prior to her death.

That has been explained to death. There are other pages. One is from November 4th.

2. What was the possible explanation.

Here's some questions: What is the explanation for why someone would put it up 4 days too early? Where is any evidence to support it?

Sheeps hate it when people ask questions; they are perfectly content with the idea of "objectivity" which they have associated with those in authority. Fact.

Who are you referring to? Who in here is afraid of people asking questions?

[andgar923]

http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/newtown.asp

I re- read it and while they make some logical explanations, it doesn't fully debunk the vid. It also doesn't address some key claims made in the vid. It gives half assed excuses for others that are just as much of a reach like the ones theorists make.

I think the article will only raise more questions. I can already see theorists focusing their attention on making their claims even stronger.

[daily]

I re- read it and while they make some logical explanations, it doesn't fully debunk the vid. It also doesn't address some key claims made in the vid. It gives half assed excuses for others that are just as much of a reach like the ones theorists make.

I think the article will only raise more questions. I can already see theorists focusing their attention on making their claims even stronger.

Instead of speaking in generalizations why don't you address the points you find half "assed"?

I think you'll find if you look into things deeper you'll find half assed conspiracy theories get half assed responses.

Most of those claims made by conspiracists surrounding Newtown are so far off based that there's really no way to respond to them other than with a quick dismissal

[RaininThrees]

Horrible line of rebuttals. I can't believe you will just accept any explanation without any skeptical thought put into it at all.

His explanation for the facebook pages: by using date restricted pages on Google, one can find erroneous dates on articles for the Sandy Hook shootings.

Still bullsh*t. The evidence wasn't based on some stupid search but an actual facebook page created and then deleted when people began questioning.

You anti-conspiracy nuts will believe anything.

The facebook page has been explained about 10 times to you.

If you're too dense to figure it out, it's no wonder that you believe all of this garbage.

[andgar923]

Instead of speaking in generalizations why don't you address the points you find half "assed"?

I think you'll find if you look into things deeper you'll find half assed conspiracy theories get half assed responses.

Most of those claims made by conspiracists surrounding Newtown are so far off based that there's really no way to respond to them other than with a quick dismissal

For starters, they give a half assed excuse when it comes to the guy that discovered the kids. I accept that people are usually confused and their reports vary a bit. But this guy's story was completely different almost every time he gave an interview. I understand some sort of confusion, but he was so sure of himself and what happened, yet his testimony was very different.

The article didn't cover why the roads to the school blocked all aid, it didn't cover why there was that one picture taken but yet there wasn't ambulances, and other response teams all over, why there's only that one picture with no other footage of any sorts. Not saying that this is the end to the argument and that it proves without a shadow of a doubt that it was all a hoax, but what the article doesn't do is debunk the theorists.

Theres other shit that simply asked the reader to dismiss anything and everything without making a concrete argument as to why.

In regards to the actors, I don't know if the information regarding the Actor's Guild is true or not. But the government has used actors in other instances. Two examples that stand out at the top of my head are the daughter of a Kuwait oil baron used as a testimony to invade Iraq (the 1st time), another was eye witness related to drug war in the late 80s (or was it early 90s?). Whether they are from an actor's guild/group who knows, but they were exposed as following a script and were associated with a government in some fashion.

Another recent example that comes to mind is the 9/11 Pentagon cab driver. Extremely suspicious behavior and completely different testimonies that were impossible. Yet his testimony was used endlessly, he was used as a key witness for the official story. There's been other interviews given by groups with ties to the government (think tank groups, donors, etc.) or people used as key witnesses that had ties, some of them were promoted as non-partisan or just average folk, yet had ties to conservative think tanks and so fort.

These aren't conspiracies either, these aren't stretches or assumptions, these are FACTS.

So it doesn't surprise me if allegations are made of "actors" or manipulated (scripted) interviews. The government (or government related groups) have had a rich history of orchestrating, covering up and manipulating events for their gain.

Again, not to say that THIS event is a hoax. All I'm saying is that I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't, because the Snopes article sure as hell doesn't debunk most of what was presented in the vid. I don't fully believe everything stated in the vid, some of the things can be easily explained once one takes a closer look. But it still raises some legit questions that have yet to be answered with a legit response.

[andgar923]

What I do find somewhat ironic is how sides have been turned.

Some of the same people defending Bush and laughing at the theorists, have now switched sides and are attacking Obama, with idiot liberals crying wolf.

At the end of the day, most people will side with their political identity. They'll believe/disbelief with what their party allegiance lies.