dogsmilk wrote:
Why is the murder weapon in question?

andyh wrote:

Can I draw any attention at all to the link I posted some pages back concerning the car?

andyh wrote:
Even if that was the case, I guess we'll never know...

dubmeup wrote:
Not if I delete this post.

Kumatora wrote:
That was the whole point I was trying to get across given the bloody atrocious shitty media coverage
Which only goes to underline why so many people see it that way, which ofc infers that the media is not doing its job.

i-baster wrote: Guevarista wrote: andyh wrote:
Since this is where we are at after 40 pages and 800 post i just wan't to add a few quick thoughts.

If this really was a massive conspiracy with all these parents being played by actors that's wild...

Like i-batser said if tptb wanted to change gun laws they could just use the James Holmes story.

But this can't be about gun laws because there is already 300 million guns in America so it won't matter.

Andy the bold part about some geezer dragging adam lanza to school all drugged up is kinda crazy...tbh

^ Honestly just tell me who would do that to change gun laws because it makes no sense to me.

Guev I would agree that if somebody was nice to Adam Lanza perhaps this would never have happened.

But he might have had no friends because all he did was take psychotropic drugs and play call of duty.

As an American i just don't understand what the point of this giant conspiracy would be.

I really have a hard time believing that everyone involved would be paid off actors for many reasons.

What about all the other kids who went to the school that did not die, what about their parents also.

In a community like sandy hook how could all this be covered up? what about the other teachers that lived?

For instance this guy Robbie Parker has to be from some community so his acting could be debunked in time.

All the parents friends? All the teachers friends? All the kids friends? All part of conspiracy for gun control?

Think about that.

You'll have to delete this post too then Oi

usahitman.com/alcrcr/

Click^^^

andyh wrote:
Sure - we all know a lot of journalists are shit and hang around waiting for press releases, we all know lots of stuff in the world isn't investigated and reported properly and we all know a particular worldview is promoted (generally unconsciously I think). It doesn't therefore follow that every time anything big happens it's some kind of immense cover-up guys in trenchcoats should be crawling all over on the basis of some mildly confused early reports. Why isn't John Pilger out in Sandy Hook demanding to see the murder weapon? Probably because he's investigating something worth investigating.

dubmeup wrote:
I can't see me ever deleting a post, not unless I was involved in that consensus decision

dogsmilk wrote:
Worth investigating as in profitable to investigate?

.......... wrote:
Yeah sure why not?

Do you think your leaders haven't discussed using nuclear weapons in the past just for the hell of it?
'I want you to think BIG for chrissake Henry!'



Does that bother you? LMFAO!!!

And you think people wouldn't construct events to get their own way like this? ROFL!!!!
Do you honestly think Nixon was the only lunatic in charge over there?

That nuclear weapon example makes absolutely no sense when pertaining to this thread...

Andy WTF?

.......... wrote:
Ofc it makes sense.
YOUR elected leaders have no issues with murdering hundreds of thousands of people.
So why bother with 20 kids to get what they want?
Why bother with 3000 in a single building?

The ONLY reason you know all this now is because of proper investigative quality journalism at the time which kept democracy in check.

Where is your proper investigative journalism now? I guess you don't give a shit right?

Andy i'm all for proper investigative journalism so i'm waiting for responses to post 807...

I'll go some way to giving you a response:My point was more in a society whereby alienation is accepted as a norm, where many young adults suffer complete isolation and rejection by peers, pop-culture and society at large, where psychology is little understood yet consistently exploited in the pursuit of wealth, where a cold, violent, dominating or oppressive parent might be your only human contact, point of reference in life, you are going to have cases of extreme backlash, extreme anger and internalized rage that can exist unnoticed for decades but manifest in extreme violence seemingly out of the blue.

So it's my view the conspiracy against humanity is the conspiracy movement and various information outlets that fundamentally misdirect attention from the social causes/rotten core of American society, the material causes, the psychological and social basis of these events and instead offer a confusing alternative to the mainstream narrative based in many ways on reactionary ideology, paranoia inducing supposition and complete subversion of the mainstream narrative..Every major event of this nature from now on from a military strategy pov now has a potential double impact, depending on the influence of Cointel, right wing, reactionary ideologues in the development of Alternative narratives, this is the basis of much of the Conspiracy genre as I can show you if you want?

The main point of critique is not the superficiality of the mainstream narrative, the lack of substance, the mere reporting of facts (as if Lanza metaphysically appeared from nowhere ready to kill), but is a critique of the factual authenticity or even honesty of the mainstream narrative in reporting the event,(ie Lanza was a patsy and some unknown quantity was the one who appeared out of nowhere ready to kill) both sides imo, the mainstream and the Alternative/conspiracy narrative, tend in my experience to discount the important/unspoken issues.

Hope that makes sense It's getting late here.

Guevarista wrote:
I have seen some very recent moves/attempts to address some of these issues...

Quote:
Lady Gaga will officially launch her Born This Way Foundation Wednesday at Harvard University’s Sanders Theatre.

The Queen of Pop and her mother, Cynthia Germanotta, are co-founders of the foundation, which aims to build “a braver, kinder world” for young people who are bullied by their peers.

Lady Gaga and her mother partnered with Harvard’s Berkman Center for Internet and Society, which released a set of working papers as part of its “Kinder and Braver World Project” in collaboration with Lady Gaga’s foundation.

The Berkman center has helped “with the framing for their research agenda and the kinds of interventions that can be used to empower youth and to address issues like bullying in society,” said John Palfrey, the center’s co-director.

Lady Gaga and Germanotta will share the stage with Oprah Winfrey, who will broadcast highlights from the event in an episode of “Oprah’s Next Chapter.”

www.wbur.org/2012/02/28/lady-gaga-foundation-harvard


More:
After Harvard president Drew Gilpin Faust introduced Oprah to a standing ovation, before a not-quite-capacity crowd of about 1,000 in the university’s Sanders Theater, Oprah boomed “HAAARRVVAARRD!” Gaga laughed. “This might be one of the best days of my life!” she said.
Oprah leaned in for one of her trademark moments of intimacy, and I worried she might lose an eye to one of the black bat wings of Gaga’s headdress. (Oh yes, the pop star, as ever, was in costume.) The mostly adult audience was pleased and relieved to hear Gaga say later on, “There’s all this focus on the victims but victims and bullies are on the same playing field. They both need our help. So how do we not just save the victim but save the bully too?” That dovetails nicely with the expert consensus that bullying prevention shouldn’t be largely punitive. It suggested Gaga was absorbing the wisdom she is marshaling with her foundation.

Oprah had left the stage by this point, and Harvard law professor Charles Ogletree was now monitoring a panel that included, Gaga, Chopra, Sebelius, University of Nebraska psychologist Susan Swearer, Alyssa Rodemeyer, the sister of Jamey, and a father whose kids had been bullied. When Gaga spoke, I listened for clues to her evolving thinking on bullying. I liked how she boldly repeated “We don’t have the answer” in response to various impossible how-will-you-fix-everything questions. I winced when she talked about how the Columbine school shooters were bullied, since that’s a myth long busted.

www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics...ion_at_harvard_.html

I'lll guarantee there's a reactionary conspiracy theory about Lady Gaga too, right Novum?

Guevarista wrote:
I dont know what others thoughts are on this.

I think that leaders in society do not want people to feel isolated, for a number of reasons, they can see that it is creating problems, so they are beginning to address it.

As for other things about Ms Germanotta...well yes there is a lot of crap out there.

novum wrote: Because "she subverts good old fashioned American Christian values", yes values and social relations that give rise to massacres and children who think nothing of ending lives they must consider to be worthless.