Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,209 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 376,480
Pageviews Today: 471,410Threads Today: 131Posts Today: 2,149
04:09 AM

Back to Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
Back to Thread
Message Subject Debunking the Sandy hook conspiracy video, point-by-point
Poster Handle ssn708
Post Content
Debunking the debunking:
First, I am not at all sold on the conspiracy. However, the points in the link I feel can be easily discredited. This is just for the sake of counter argument, not personal belief:
Theory One: Second Shooter. If the man was actually the father of a student who was there for a legitimate purpose, why was he filmed running FROM the police? Would he not run TOWARDS the school his child was in after hearing gunshots? I sure would.
Theory Two: Gun Discrepancy. The initial report is that there were two handguns at the scene, and a “third weapon recovered elsewhere”. Another later report said four handguns on the scene. Something as concrete as how many weapons, what weapons, and where, is not “contradictory reporting”, these are statements made by the police who were investigating. These concrete, immediately discernible facts would not be subject to such wide sways. The number of casualties vs. injuries leads one to believe close range, handgun. A semi-automatic handgun can be fired just as fast as a semi-automatic rifle. If he had 4 guns at 10 rounds each, more than enough.
Theory Three: The nurse is fake and does not exist. This is not what was reported in the conspiracy video! What is stated by the on-camera reporter is that SHE DIRECTLY spoke with the school nurse who said she knew Mrs. Lanza as well as Adam. That Mrs. Lanza was a school teacher at the school. She was never a teacher there. So, the reporter either completely made up the interview (ENTIRELY POSSIBLE, in which case she should be fired) or there is something deceitful there.
Theory Four: The Laughing / Crying Father. Certainly, people react differently and that is not cause for suspicion. What is cause for suspicion is the way he obviously gets “in to character” before speaking. He works himself into an outward appearance of grief, yet cannot produce a tear. He lost his daughter 24 hours prior, but his eyes are dry despite obvious effort to cry? The very thought of losing my daughter brings real tears to my eyes, and I would find it remarkably disrespectful to her memory to work myself into an appearance of grief for the sake of the cameras, as he quite obviously did.
Theory Five: Emillee Parker is not dead. That seems like a no brainer. However, did her parents actually dress her younger sister in her dead sister’s clothing? If so, that is seriously creepy. And if you look at the earlier family picture, Emillee’s next youngest sister has a cleft in her chin. Emillee does not. Neither does the girl in the Obama picture.
Theory Six: Ambulances. It is stated that one piece of footage shows no ambulances. The fact is that NO footage shows ambulances near the school. The photo linked in the “debunking” is a photo of two ambulances on a street, not in the area of the school building. The closest you see them is what is shown in the conspiracy video, well away from the school, completely blocking any access to or from the school. About 20 cars would have to move to let any ambulance in our out. Yet a photographer could catch a teacher leading children from the school? An active crime scene and reporters are in the parking lot for this ONLY shot of the evacuation? With the entrance completely blocked?
Theory 7: Timelines. Sure, google stamps may not accurately reflect. Yet the time stamp would be later, not earlier, if due to some glitch. Furthermore, the timestamps from the actual facebook pages, as well as the responses thereto, were a couple of days before. Facebook timestamps do not fail in that manner. And you failed to mention the setting up of the memorial page prior to the shooting, the fact that Robbie Parker was making posts regarding Emillee’s death before the victims were released to anyone, etc.
This post debunks nothing, as mine proves nothing.
Please verify you're human:

Reason for copyright violation: