Godlike Productions - Reply to Thread

Users Online Now: 1,882 (Who's On?)	Visitors Today: 1,013,566
Pageviews Today: 1,851,873	Threads Today: 606	Posts Today: 13,633
06:03 PM

REPLY TO THREAD

Subject Sandy Hook: Are most people crying "hoax" shills?

User Name

Font color: Font:

In accordance with industry accepted best practices we ask that users limit their copy / paste of copyrighted material to the relevant portions of the article you wish to discuss and no more than 50% of the source material, provide a link back to the original article and provide your original comments / criticism in your post with the article.

[quote:Anonymous Coward 40517590:MV8yMjQ0MDMzXzM4MTA5MjYxXzE3NTMwNjM0]
[quote:Anonymous Coward 40545546:MV8yMjQ0MDMzXzM4MTA2OTcyX0MzNzc5OTc4]
[quote:Zephyr 40478325:MV8yMjQ0MDMzXzYxMzNBMzhF]
Think about it - what's the number one slam you see in the regular media that is used to discredit people asking questions about Sandy Hook?

"Those crazy truthers say it was a hoax."

I don't doubt for one second that real people run the entire spectrum of opinions on Sandy Hook, and that that spectrum includes people who genuinely believe it was a hoax.

But what's the number one reason all other people questioning Sandy Hook are consigned to credibility trash heap?  It's being lumped in with people who (allegedly) think the entire incident was a "hoax."

I see a concerted number of people are trying to make it seem as if the prevailing opinion, among people who question Sandy Hook, is that it was a "hoax."  That cry of "hoax" is the single most significant reason the 95% of the rest of the theories are discounted.

That's a little too convenient, don't you think?

I notice that when my "I don't really think it was a hoax" tone gets too loud, someone always comes along with a bunch of (feigned?) profanity, screaming "Shut up, it was a hoax and everyone knows it!"

Imagine this:  You're a governor, and under your watch, a mass slaughter of children has taken place, some of whose deaths were likely contributed to by the actions/inactions of State employees.  Or you know there were about four guys shooting that school up, they all got away, and you barely managed to provide a body as a stand-in for "the lone killer."  Or you know State police went in and interfered with local response, so badly in fact, that lives were lost or even friendly fire cost a life here or there, and you have to cover that up.

The last thing you want is people talking about any of the above theories.  Wouldn't you go out of your way to generate a more scandalous theory yet, or knowing that people have a tendency to jump on the "hoax" bandwagon rather naturally, wouldn't you heartily encourage that theory?  Knowing it would all but obscure the relatively less-interesting theory  of  a State screw-up?

Listen to any  major media source that has taken pot shots at people asking questions--they always, always resort to pointing out how ridiculous it is to believe Sandy Hook was a "hoax."  And in that one statement, they write off ALL people with an alternate theory.

As the man said, "Who benefits?"

Again, I don't doubt some actually think it was a hoax, but I firmly believe there are people paid to post pro-hoax rants as a way of sabotaging serious investigation.
[/quote]

Hoax?  Let's just call it an enhanced drill.  Nobody died.  Too many holes in the "story". And what has been the solution?
 
Since the shooting created an agenda - now all these laws need to be passed to protect the " Sandy Hook Families"..they all have to do with limiting the FOIA act, not releasing information and restricting guns.

Sure sounds like many liberties to be given up by the country to make those families feel better.
[/quote]

The role of the disinformation agent is to discredit anyone trying to question this event. The discrepancies, the cover up, the shit that doesn't add up. When given all the facts, a rational investigator (whether it be a common person or a news reporter) can see that things are not what they seem.

So the best way to discredit anyone who were to question the official story is to make their claims so far fetched that anyone who were to question things are lumped into this category.

Disinformation agents are on the internet perpetuating the idea that everyone involved in this were actors, nobody was killed. By placing these theories out in the discourse, it makes others reluctant to question the official story because this hoax theory being pushed by disinformation agents is so irrational that no rational person would buy into it. Thus preventing the mass majority of people from questioning the official story.

Disinformation agents are successfuly grouping everyone who questions what really happened into one category. This category is seen by outsiders who don't follow conspiracy theory as plain crazy and rediculous. Thus alienating and discrediting anyone questioning the official story.
[/quote]

Original Message Think about it - what's the number one slam you see in the regular media that is used to discredit people asking questions about Sandy Hook?

"Those crazy truthers say it was a hoax."

I don't doubt for one second that real people run the entire spectrum of opinions on Sandy Hook, and that that spectrum includes people who genuinely believe it was a hoax.

But what's the number one reason all other people questioning Sandy Hook are consigned to credibility trash heap? It's being lumped in with people who (allegedly) think the entire incident was a "hoax."

I see a concerted number of people are trying to make it seem as if the prevailing opinion, among people who question Sandy Hook, is that it was a "hoax." That cry of "hoax" is the single most significant reason the 95% of the rest of the theories are discounted.

That's a little too convenient, don't you think?

I notice that when my "I don't really think it was a hoax" tone gets too loud, someone always comes along with a bunch of (feigned?) profanity, screaming "Shut up, it was a hoax and everyone knows it!"

Imagine this: You're a governor, and under your watch, a mass slaughter of children has taken place, some of whose deaths were likely contributed to by the actions/inactions of State employees. Or you know there were about four guys shooting that school up, they all got away, and you barely managed to provide a body as a stand-in for "the lone killer." Or you know State police went in and interfered with local response, so badly in fact, that lives were lost or even friendly fire cost a life here or there, and you have to cover that up.

The last thing you want is people talking about any of the above theories. Wouldn't you go out of your way to generate a more scandalous theory yet, or knowing that people have a tendency to jump on the "hoax" bandwagon rather naturally, wouldn't you heartily encourage that theory? Knowing it would all but obscure the relatively less-interesting theory of a State screw-up?

Listen to any major media source that has taken pot shots at people asking questions--they always, always resort to pointing out how ridiculous it is to believe Sandy Hook was a "hoax." And in that one statement, they write off ALL people with an alternate theory.

As the man said, "Who benefits?"

Again, I don't doubt some actually think it was a hoax, but I firmly believe there are people paid to post pro-hoax rants as a way of sabotaging serious investigation.

Pictures (click to insert)





\| Next Page >>