Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 117

Thread: Newtown

  1. #41
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,765
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Newtown

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    I'm done with this for now. Maybe so many people want to believe its a hoax because reality is far worse that 20 children were gunned down by a psycho. Even if it really was a hoax I dont understand how people with no evidence can harass alleged victims. Its one thing to ask questions but quite another to jump to conclusions.

    Just look at the ignorance and spam on Robbie Parkers FB page.

    Gene Rosen is also being harassed. the man that found 6 sandy hook kids in his front yard.
    http://www.salon.com/2013/01/15/this...rassed_for_it/

    I honestly find it hard to believe that the media doesn't cover this harassment, and that makes me suspicious. I guess we will see what happens.
    You will find that those that believe in conspiracies (e.g. the moon, Benghazi, Newtown, Obama not being born American, the lack of birth certificate that turned out also to be a forgery when it was finally presented, 911, WTC7 etc.) are not swayed by facts. One very telling post I saw once one of the Newton smoking guns was found to be false said that they had to try harder to find something: they were more convinced of the original premise being true and facts do little to change their minds and indeed sometimes turn into more fuel for the conspiracy.

    You end your post believing it could be a conspiracy because the media isn't covering one aspect enough: how about another explanation - that there's really not that much to cover, it's a boring story, they may well have covered it once but the story hasn't changed. There are plenty of legitimate reasons which are more likely to be true than it being a 'media conspiracy'. Yet you choose to be on the fence even after all the facts are given.

    It's odd and you should really explore it. Maybe not here since you seem to have lost steam. But I was hoping that you would read the other side where all your claims have been debunked and then move on.

  2. #42
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,483
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Newtown

    Jim Jones, you are employing typical, and very tired Liberal debate methods;

    1 ) Present a point aimed at bashing Conservatism or any view point or idea that you dont agree with. Also, be sure to present you stance as the only possible one that can be accurate / true / moral....whatever

    2 ) When any opposition presents itself, ignore the points and instead focus your attacks exclusively on the individual making them using such words as "nut" "crazy" and so on.

    3 ) Proclaim victory and pat yourself on the back while announcing that Conservatism is dead.

    It gets really old after awhile and lost its effectiveness a decade or so ago. Come up with an original idea.

    As for the Newton question: Was it a governmental conspiracy? I doubt it, but it is possible. I do not put it past Obama to do something like this to push his Liberal ideology. The sad part is that even if it was proven beyond doubt that he was responsible for it, too many of you Liberals would still worship him as your god.

    I dont see any reason to take the governments "official" position on things at face value. The government is notorious for lying and deceiving the public on a great number of issues.

    People who accept the governments word on things are fools.
    I will no longer be replying to any post from a Liberal going forward. I will continue, as normal, to discuss topics and engage in intellectual exchanges with non-leftist

  3. #43
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,765
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Newtown

    Quote Originally Posted by Someguy View Post
    Jim Jones, you are employing typical, and very tired Liberal debate methods;

    1 ) Present a point aimed at bashing Conservatism or any view point or idea that you dont agree with. Also, be sure to present you stance as the only possible one that can be accurate / true / moral....whatever

    2 ) When any opposition presents itself, ignore the points and instead focus your attacks exclusively on the individual making them using such words as "nut" "crazy" and so on.

    3 ) Proclaim victory and pat yourself on the back while announcing that Conservatism is dead.

    1) This is a debate site isn't it? If I wanted an agreement site, I would get karma from reddit or slashdot or facebook instead. The framing of a debate or a response is always going to be from a position of confidence in one's argument otherwise what's the point. I'm sorry you're new to how debating works. Hope I helped.

    2) So I choose my one's battles - what's wrong with that? If there are salient points then anyone is free to raise them for clarification. If you don't then they couldn't have been that important in the first place. Strange how 'nuts' and 'crazies' seem to be on one side of the political spectrum - would you not entertain the possibility that it may be true *cough* Benghazi *cough*?

    3) Conservatism isn't dead - the current brand of lunacy as typified by the Tag Baggers and their obstructionist ways just shows what happens when you give loons power: they squander it and just get in the way. You guys couldn't even vote for your own ideas! So if conservatism is dead it wasn't murder - it was suicide. Good luck continuing to hate gays and hispanics and women and black people and poor people. Watching you guys backtrack is hilarious. For example see this exchange between Soledad O'Brien and (src):

    “In many ways, we’re at square one,” the delegate told WSJ. “There are large portions of the population — African-Americans, Hispanics, Asians, young voters — who simply don’t know us.”

    “Is it that they don’t know you? Meaning you as the GOP,” O’Brien asked Martinez. “Or is that they know you and they decided they don’t like you?”
    Hilarious. You guys crack me up. So keep it coming.


    It gets really old after awhile and lost its effectiveness a decade or so ago. Come up with an original idea.
    I don't even know what this means.

    As for the Newton question: Was it a governmental conspiracy? I doubt it, but it is possible. I do not put it past Obama to do something like this to push his Liberal ideology. The sad part is that even if it was proven beyond doubt that he was responsible for it, too many of you Liberals would still worship him as your god.
    Glad you wanted to get back to the thread at hand rather than bash on a newcomer to the site. You must be the resident typical red-neck spouting typical right-wing nonsense:

    1. "I doubt it, but it is possible" - Typical conspiracy lingo for "It's actually not possible but if it's politically advantageous then I will go along with it" **cough** Benghazi **cough**
    2. Obama would do anything if it's evil. He's completely immoral. Of course, he would kill children whilst they're in school.
    3. Liberal ideology includes killing children.
    4. Obama is worshipped!
    5. Obama is like a God!

    Conspiracy Theorist: check
    Non-fact-based reasoning: check
    Lies: check
    Nonsensical scenarios: check
    Disproved ideas: check
    Presidents having more power than it is possible to have: check
    Gut over-riding brain: check

    Congratulations!

    I dont see any reason to take the governments "official" position on things at face value. The government is notorious for lying and deceiving the public on a great number of issues.
    Yes, and of course, lying about things that are possible cannot be distinguished from lying about things that are impossible, ludicrous and non-sense. Taking the official position of not killing US citizens on face value is obviously not the way to go when it involves the deaths of 24-children.

    People who accept the governments word on things are fools.
    As are those that apply unrealistic and impossible situations to governments.

  4. #44
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,483
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Newtown

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    1) This is a debate site isn't it? If I wanted an agreement site, I would get karma from reddit or slashdot or facebook instead. The framing of a debate or a response is always going to be from a position of confidence in one's argument otherwise what's the point.
    There is a very distinct difference between debating and spewing irrational dribble. Debaters can respectfully and directly address the POINTS of the opposition, trolls and poor debaters do what you do, spew irrational dribble that attacks individuals instead of points. You do the former nearly exclusively.

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    I'm sorry you're new to how debating works. Hope I helped.
    You are proving my point above right here. For the record though, you can go look at my registration date, reputation level, and number of debate posts and clearly see I am well versed in not only debating, but in forming logically arguments. Your 60 posts and zero reputation seems to suggest you cant.

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    2) So I choose my one's battles - what's wrong with that? If there are salient points then anyone is free to raise them for clarification. If you don't then they couldn't have been that important in the first place. Strange how 'nuts' and 'crazies' seem to be on one side of the political spectrum - would you not entertain the possibility that it may be true *cough* Benghazi *cough*?
    Not sure what point you are trying to make here apart from attacking people and not points...again. Nuts and crazies exist everywhere. They are not defined by not agreeing with you...contrary to what you may, and obviously do, believe. What about Benghazi?

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    3) Conservatism isn't dead - the current brand of lunacy as typified by the Tag Baggers and their obstructionist ways just shows what happens when you give loons power: they squander it and just get in the way. You guys couldn't even vote for your own ideas! So if conservatism is dead it wasn't murder - it was suicide. Good luck continuing to hate gays and hispanics and women and black people and poor people. Watching you guys backtrack is hilarious. For example see this exchange between Soledad O'Brien and (src):
    Yeah, this seems like a well-thought out, rational, unbiased opinion........this is way rational, logical people reject your brand of extreme Liberalism. Conservatism doesn't hate anyone. Conservatism isn't capable, as an inanimate thing, of displaying or having any such emotion. Certain people that claim to follow Conservative ideas, may hate your gays, blacks, whatever....just as certain followers of Liberalism, like you for instance, have hatred and fear of white, Christian, gun owning males. Again, you fail to address any points and fall back on the attacking people Liberal boring train.


    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    Hilarious. You guys crack me up. So keep it coming.
    You guys make me feel pity. I hope you change.

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    I don't even know what this means.
    Im not surprised.

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    Glad you wanted to get back to the thread at hand rather than bash on a newcomer to the site. You must be the resident typical red-neck spouting typical right-wing nonsense:
    AGAIN, you attack me, individually, rather than attack ideas or points. Notice that in all of your prior responses, you fail to address and attack any point that I make and instead resort to attacking me (ad hom) or attacking something else all together. Please show what "Right-wing nonsense" I am "spouting" and attack those points specifically. Calling me a red neck is a violation of the rules (flaming) and does nothing to advance the debate. I can tell you are new to debate, so I am trying to help you out here. I can only show you the door, you must walk through it. Otherwise, I imagine that your "new guy" status will be quickly replaced with a "banned" status.

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    1. "I doubt it, but it is possible" - Typical conspiracy lingo for "It's actually not possible but if it's politically advantageous then I will go along with it" **cough** Benghazi **cough**
    Are you saying that it is absolutely impossible for it to be a conspiracy of sorts? If so, please show how it is so. PROTIP: the whole ***cough *** insert nonsense here *** cough **** thing doesnt qualify as support. Either try to make a point, or dont.

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    2. Obama would do anything if it's evil. He's completely immoral. Of course, he would kill children whilst they're in school.
    It is possible. If you are saying that this isnt, please provide support for your claim.

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    3. Liberal ideology includes killing children.
    Doesn't it? Doesn't Liberalism support abortion? You justify it by claiming that the children are fetus' instead of children....why not say that 5-6 years are simply post fetus' and not children? Anyway, we are getting off topic. I dont make ridiculous board-sweeping generalizations about Liberalism like you do Conservatism. I am saying that it is possible that this is the case, not that it is the case....perhaps you can't differentiate between the two.

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    4. Obama is worshipped!
    5. Obama is like a God!
    By certain people on the left, like you I imagine, he is.

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    Conspiracy Theorist: check
    Non-fact-based reasoning: check
    Lies: check
    Nonsensical scenarios: check
    Disproved ideas: check
    Presidents having more power than it is possible to have: check
    Gut over-riding brain: check
    Again....you are just reciting your Liberal talking points. "Oh, he doesn't agree with me and Lord Obama....he must be crazy, nuts, etc, etc. I can't explain how using rational dialogue or logic, but he is!!!" It gets old.

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    Taking the official position of not killing US citizens on face value is obviously not the way to go when it involves the deaths of 24-children.
    No, it isn't

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    As are those that apply unrealistic and impossible situations to governments.
    What situations are unrealistic or impossible to governments that you are speaking of? Killing kids? Obama has managed to kill thousands of women and children in other countries...why not here? I'm not saying it is likely, but it isn't unrealistic to think he would, nor is it impossible.

    On a side note, you aren't going to find any friends here, even on your side of the aisle, with the way to engage and "debate". You need to take a step back and check your attitude or you will find your time here short and unfulfilling. You aren't the first one to act like you do, but you will notice that you are the only one that does currently. The reason is because all of the rest have been banned. I would like for most Liberals and others to show up here with new ideas or at least new spins of old debates. You aren't on a path that leads to acceptance.
    I will no longer be replying to any post from a Liberal going forward. I will continue, as normal, to discuss topics and engage in intellectual exchanges with non-leftist

  5. #45
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    200
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Newtown

    Quote Originally Posted by Someguy View Post
    Jim Jones, you are employing typical, and very tired Liberal debate methods;
    Yes, but you continually employ typical and very tired Conservative debate methods.

    1 ) Present a point aimed at bashing Conservatism or any view point or idea that you dont agree with. Also, be sure to present you stance as the only possible one that can be accurate / true / moral....whatever
    Doesnt anyone and everyone have the right to criticise thing they dont agree with? Do people not have the right to bash Conservatism if they choose to do so?

    2 ) When any opposition presents itself, ignore the points and instead focus your attacks exclusively on the individual making them using such words as "nut" "crazy" and so on.
    If you are "pro-gun" then you are a Nut. That is not a flawed argument, it is an assertion. If you disagree, then show why you disagree, just dont put down someone elses opinion, just because you beleive it to be un-true.

    3 ) Proclaim victory and pat yourself on the back while announcing that Conservatism is dead.
    Conservatism was never alive. It was aborted when still a fetus. It cant work, wont work and will never work. Things change, conservation of ignorance is a lost cause.

    It gets really old after awhile and lost its effectiveness a decade or so ago. Come up with an original idea.
    Oh because of the last 6 presidental elections, 5 of the popular vote winners have been, wait for it, drum roll please. LIBERAL.

    As for the Newton question: Was it a governmental conspiracy? I doubt it, but it is possible. I do not put it past Obama to do something like this to push his Liberal ideology. The sad part is that even if it was proven beyond doubt that he was responsible for it, too many of you Liberals would still worship him as your god.
    It is possible that the Loch Ness Monster exists too. and Big Foot. I am a Liberal, I am not Obama, I did not vote for Obama. The "Liberal people" are not a unitary actor with all of the same wants and desires. Not all Liberals beleive that Obama is God on earth. It is ignorant to think otherwise.

    I dont see any reason to take the governments "official" position on things at face value. The government is notorious for lying and deceiving the public on a great number of issues.
    Yah, the supreme court's position on the 2nd amendment. I dont take any "official government" position on anything for face value. The government is notorious for lying and decieving the public on a great number of issue. The only person I listen to involuntarily is myself.

    People who accept the governments word on things are fools.
    Smartest thing you have ever said.

    ---------- Post added at 10:14 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:53 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Someguy View Post
    There is a very distinct difference between debating and spewing irrational dribble. Debaters can respectfully and directly address the POINTS of the opposition, trolls and poor debaters do what you do, spew irrational dribble that attacks individuals instead of points. You do the former nearly exclusively.
    One man's irrational babble is another's religion. Who decides what is rational debate and what is not? You? Being critical of conservatism is NOT irrational, nor dribble.



    You are proving my point above right here. For the record though, you can go look at my registration date, reputation level, and number of debate posts and clearly see I am well versed in not only debating, but in forming logically arguments. Your 60 posts and zero reputation seems to suggest you cant.
    Congrats on figuring out how to successfully navigate the internet. Clap. Clap. Age and experience dont show quality. Quality shows quality.



    Not sure what point you are trying to make here apart from attacking people and not points...again. Nuts and crazies exist everywhere. They are not defined by not agreeing with you...contrary to what you may, and obviously do, believe. What about Benghazi?
    What about Benghazi? What about the 1967 Six Days War? or the 2005 London Tube Bombings? or the Norwegian Terror Attacks and shooting? or Fort Hood? or Black Sites? Do you want to debate guns, or conspiracies?



    Yeah, this seems like a well-thought out, rational, unbiased opinion........this is way rational, logical people reject your brand of extreme Liberalism.
    Logical people reject your brand (and most others) of extreme conservatism.

    Conservatism doesn't hate anyone.
    Just blacks and gays, and mexicans, and liberals, and muslims, and athiests, and people with college degrees.
    Conservatism isn't capable, as an inanimate thing, of displaying or having any such emotion. Certain people that claim to follow Conservative ideas, may hate your gays, blacks, whatever....just as certain followers of Liberalism, like you for instance, have hatred and fear of white, Christian, gun owning males. Again, you fail to address any points and fall back on the attacking people Liberal boring train.
    It just that free-thinkers, are generally liberals and not conservatives. I (as a liberal, rational or otherwise) do not hate
    white, Christian, gun owning males; I simply pity them and feel very, very sorry for them.


    You guys make me feel pity. I hope you change.
    As I hope that you change.



    Im not surprised.
    You and me both.....you and me both.

    AGAIN, you attack me, individually, rather than attack ideas or points. Notice that in all of your prior responses, you fail to address and attack any point that I make and instead resort to attacking me (ad hom) or attacking something else all together. Please show what "Right-wing nonsense" I am "spouting" and attack those points specifically. Calling me a red neck is a violation of the rules (flaming) and does nothing to advance the debate. I can tell you are new to debate, so I am trying to help you out here. I can only show you the door, you must walk through it. Otherwise, I imagine that your "new guy" status will be quickly replaced with a "banned" status.
    "New guy" equal banned? Wow Ive skirted the rules around here quite a bit then..... Is threating to ban someone for being "new" not also "flaming"?


    Are you saying that it is absolutely impossible for it to be a conspiracy of sorts? If so, please show how it is so. PROTIP: the whole ***cough *** insert nonsense here *** cough **** thing doesnt qualify as support. Either try to make a point, or dont.
    Occam's razor. It is extremely unlikely. There is no direct evidence. According to Francis Bacon's emperical method, you shouldnt beleive it unless you can see it.



    It is possible. If you are saying that this isnt, please provide support for your claim.
    It is isnt unless it is. The defence doesnt have a burden of proof, only the accusatory party does. If you assert that there IS a conspiracy, the you as the plaintiff have the burden of proof.



    Doesn't it? Doesn't Liberalism support abortion?
    I dont if I (as a Liberal) support abortion, but I do support the right to privacy and a women has the right to do to her body as she pleases and it is none of anyone else's business(especially the government's) whether she is pregant or not.
    You justify it by claiming that the children are fetus' instead of children....why not say that 5-6 years are simply post fetus' and not children?
    Why not stop the 'child soldier' phenomenom in Africa? Why not stop the explotation and murder of children that have actually been born.
    Anyway, we are getting off topic.
    agreed but you brought it up.
    I dont make ridiculous board-sweeping generalizations about Liberalism like you do Conservatism. I am saying that it is possible that this is the case, not that it is the case....perhaps you can't differentiate between the two.
    What like ALL CONSERVATIVES ARE PRO-GUN......is that not a generalization? or are there anti-gun conservatives?


    By certain people on the left, like you I imagine, he is.
    I didnt vote for Obama, or Romney.......certain is not all.



    Again....you are just reciting your Liberal talking points. "Oh, he doesn't agree with me and Lord Obama....he must be crazy, nuts, etc, etc. I can't explain how using rational dialogue or logic, but he is!!!" It gets old.
    You are reciting your Conservative talking points. "Oh, he isnt a conservative, he must hate america.....I cant explain how using rational dialogue or logic, but he is!!!" It is indeed old.



    No, it isn't
    Good rational argument. With the logic and the evidence.



    What situations are unrealistic or impossible to governments that you are speaking of? Killing kids? Obama has managed to kill thousands of women and children in other countries...why not here? I'm not saying it is likely, but it isn't unrealistic to think he would, nor is it impossible.
    Bush the Second did, Clinton did, Bush the First did, Reagan did, Carter did. What president didnt kill thousands of women and children in other countries?

    On a side note, you aren't going to find any friends here, even on your side of the aisle, with the way to engage and "debate". You need to take a step back and check your attitude or you will find your time here short and unfulfilling. You aren't the first one to act like you do, but you will notice that you are the only one that does currently. The reason is because all of the rest have been banned. I would like for most Liberals and others to show up here with new ideas or at least new spins of old debates. You aren't on a path that leads to acceptance.[/QUOTE]You are friend JimJones. You are not my friend Mr. Someguy Grammer Nazi.

    Being Liberal gets you banned on this website.

  6. #46
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    hoodsport, wa
    Posts
    86
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Newtown

    Quote Originally Posted by Squatch
    You are confusing two different conspiracy theories. The helicopter isn't videoing the man in the woods referenced as the off-duty police officer, that is a separate "unidentified man" who was later identified as Chris Manfredonia who was attempting to run into the school (which corroborates the video) because his daughter was there. http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/newtown.asp

    You are also referring to a video I haven't seen. The only helicopter footage available that I'm aware of just shows a man arrested at the edge of the woods, near the school between his googled address and the school. Can you show the video that shows him "in the field?"
    the video that i am referring to is the one submitted my michael in post #6. at approximately the two minute mark you clearly see police officers chasing someone into the woods running away from the school.

    in the first two minutes of the video you see a young child saying that they were led out of the school and over to the fire station where he saw a man on the ground in handcuffs. then you see and adult witness saying that he witnessed a man being brought out ot the woods and that this man was now in that police car over there. clearly two different men. snopes did, in fact, address the two man scenario, but the direction of chase shown in the video, again brings the debunker into question. but, ok, let's say the man at the fire station turned out to be an innocent byestander and the man in the woods turned out to be a concerned parent. so now where did the off duty policeman go?

    like i say, more questions than answers.

    the real eye opener for me is the nbc update (post crush) that reports that police have now said that there were four guns found inside the school, all hand guns. snopes answers this by saying that there were three guns found, two handguns and the bushmaster, and that the gun left in the trunk of the car was a shotgun. at the five minute mark of the video you see several officers surrounding the trunk of a car as one officer pulls the gun out of the trunk. i will give you that the picture is a bit blurry but not so much that the profile of the gun is not evident. this is not a shotgun but clearly a short barrel auto or semi-auto. the kicker is when the officer handling the gun pulls back the charging handle to clear the weapon. this is definitely not a shotgun.
    now we can question the veracity of the coroner's statement that the main weapon used was the bushmaster.

    i did, obviously, go back and revisit the video and while i was ready to mostly dismiss it, watching it again in light of the "debunkings" i saw no questions that could not be called legitimate.
    i would be happy to go over them point by point, but for now, it's this very curious gun thing that has me perked.
    Last edited by puma237; January 28th, 2013 at 09:15 AM.
    i fear the fate of all mankind is in the hands of fools.....
    -king crimson-

  7. #47
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,765
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Newtown

    Quote Originally Posted by Someguy View Post
    There is a very distinct difference between debating and spewing irrational dribble. Debaters can respectfully and directly address the POINTS of the opposition, trolls and poor debaters do what you do, spew irrational dribble that attacks individuals instead of points. You do the former nearly exclusively.


    You are proving my point above right here. For the record though, you can go look at my registration date, reputation level, and number of debate posts and clearly see I am well versed in not only debating, but in forming logically arguments. Your 60 posts and zero reputation seems to suggest you cant.



    Not sure what point you are trying to make here apart from attacking people and not points...again. Nuts and crazies exist everywhere. They are not defined by not agreeing with you...contrary to what you may, and obviously do, believe. What about Benghazi?



    Yeah, this seems like a well-thought out, rational, unbiased opinion........this is way rational, logical people reject your brand of extreme Liberalism. Conservatism doesn't hate anyone. Conservatism isn't capable, as an inanimate thing, of displaying or having any such emotion. Certain people that claim to follow Conservative ideas, may hate your gays, blacks, whatever....just as certain followers of Liberalism, like you for instance, have hatred and fear of white, Christian, gun owning males. Again, you fail to address any points and fall back on the attacking people Liberal boring train.




    You guys make me feel pity. I hope you change.



    Im not surprised.

    AGAIN, you attack me, individually, rather than attack ideas or points. Notice that in all of your prior responses, you fail to address and attack any point that I make and instead resort to attacking me (ad hom) or attacking something else all together. Please show what "Right-wing nonsense" I am "spouting" and attack those points specifically. Calling me a red neck is a violation of the rules (flaming) and does nothing to advance the debate. I can tell you are new to debate, so I am trying to help you out here. I can only show you the door, you must walk through it. Otherwise, I imagine that your "new guy" status will be quickly replaced with a "banned" status.



    Are you saying that it is absolutely impossible for it to be a conspiracy of sorts? If so, please show how it is so. PROTIP: the whole ***cough *** insert nonsense here *** cough **** thing doesnt qualify as support. Either try to make a point, or dont.



    It is possible. If you are saying that this isnt, please provide support for your claim.



    Doesn't it? Doesn't Liberalism support abortion? You justify it by claiming that the children are fetus' instead of children....why not say that 5-6 years are simply post fetus' and not children? Anyway, we are getting off topic. I dont make ridiculous board-sweeping generalizations about Liberalism like you do Conservatism. I am saying that it is possible that this is the case, not that it is the case....perhaps you can't differentiate between the two.



    By certain people on the left, like you I imagine, he is.



    Again....you are just reciting your Liberal talking points. "Oh, he doesn't agree with me and Lord Obama....he must be crazy, nuts, etc, etc. I can't explain how using rational dialogue or logic, but he is!!!" It gets old.



    No, it isn't



    What situations are unrealistic or impossible to governments that you are speaking of? Killing kids? Obama has managed to kill thousands of women and children in other countries...why not here? I'm not saying it is likely, but it isn't unrealistic to think he would, nor is it impossible.

    On a side note, you aren't going to find any friends here, even on your side of the aisle, with the way to engage and "debate". You need to take a step back and check your attitude or you will find your time here short and unfulfilling. You aren't the first one to act like you do, but you will notice that you are the only one that does currently. The reason is because all of the rest have been banned. I would like for most Liberals and others to show up here with new ideas or at least new spins of old debates. You aren't on a path that leads to acceptance.
    Not sure how to reply to any of this.

    Perhaps you should listen to Jindal and perhaps stop defending the stupid in your party; it does Conservatism and the (old) GOP a great disservice when you talk in this manner.

    Secondly, you should listen to Glenn Beck recently when he described Conspiracy Theorists and how they think. There is no gain in addressing any of your points.

    There so much right-wing garbage here that I'll have to withdraw from this: I've played this game before - good luck with life. I hope we can have a sensible discussion one day but please don't begin with "Jim Jones, you are employing typical, and very tired Liberal debate methods".

  8. #48
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,483
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Newtown

    Quote Originally Posted by JimJones8934 View Post
    Not sure how to reply to any of this.

    Perhaps you should listen to Jindal and perhaps stop defending the stupid in your party; it does Conservatism and the (old) GOP a great disservice when you talk in this manner.

    Secondly, you should listen to Glenn Beck recently when he described Conspiracy Theorists and how they think. There is no gain in addressing any of your points.

    There so much right-wing garbage here that I'll have to withdraw from this: I've played this game before - good luck with life. I hope we can have a sensible discussion one day but please don't begin with "Jim Jones, you are employing typical, and very tired Liberal debate methods".
    lol. Yet another typical Liberal tactic: When faced with opposition that you cannot overcome or address without losing ground, claim that the opponent hasn't addressed any points (while not addressing any yourself), flame by calling your opponent nutty or crazy and declare victory. Not very original....but, not unexpected.
    I will no longer be replying to any post from a Liberal going forward. I will continue, as normal, to discuss topics and engage in intellectual exchanges with non-leftist

  9. #49
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    200
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Newtown

    Quote Originally Posted by Someguy View Post
    lol. Yet another typical Liberal tactic: When faced with opposition that you cannot overcome or address without losing ground, claim that the opponent hasn't addressed any points (while not addressing any yourself), flame by calling your opponent nutty or crazy and declare victory. Not very original....but, not unexpected.
    Please stop with the conservative righteousness thing. You criticize Liberals for criticizing conservatives, but then it is okay for you to criticize liberals. It is one way or the other, you can't have it both ways. Either we can openly and freely criticize eachother or we agree to disagree and go our sperate ways.

    Conservatism, in my opinion, is a nutty ideology that promotes the ideals and norms of the 50's.

  10. #50
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    hoodsport, wa
    Posts
    86
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Newtown

    Quote Originally Posted by HCabret View Post
    Please stop with the conservative righteousness thing. You criticize Liberals for criticizing conservatives, but then it is okay for you to criticize liberals. It is one way or the other, you can't have it both ways. Either we can openly and freely criticize eachother or we agree to disagree and go our sperate ways.

    Conservatism, in my opinion, is a nutty ideology that promotes the ideals and norms of the 50's.
    h, believe it or not, i actually like you. i believe that you do truly mean well. but you just demonstrated that someguy was right about how you address criticism.

    your definition of conservatism was lacking, don't you think? could you try again and present a definition that conveys solid reasoning as to why you (apparently) have no use for it? it could be helpful.

    just one thing; what have you got against the 50"s? were you there?

    these last few post may seem like we are wandering off topic, but i think this will fold back onto the tracks shortly.
    i fear the fate of all mankind is in the hands of fools.....
    -king crimson-

  11. #51
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,483
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Newtown

    Quote Originally Posted by puma237 View Post
    h, believe it or not, i actually like you. i believe that you do truly mean well. but you just demonstrated that someguy was right about how you address criticism.

    your definition of conservatism was lacking, don't you think? could you try again and present a definition that conveys solid reasoning as to why you (apparently) have no use for it? it could be helpful.

    just one thing; what have you got against the 50"s? were you there?

    these last few post may seem like we are wandering off topic, but i think this will fold back onto the tracks shortly.
    Just about every time HCabnet says something it confirms something I, or others, have said about him or Liberalism in general. Rarely is anything he says worthy of any sort of rebuttal. Dont expect him to actually provide any sort of logical or reasoned response to anything he says....it never happens. He just rants on and on about ideas that are so incredibly far detached from reality that they are laughable by any standard and then he salts in some random thing about how guns are evil and self-defense is evil. Use his postings as a sort of comic relief to otherwise serious and educational debate, they aren't worth any more than that.

    Moving back to the OP:

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    I have seen some info online that crisis actors may have been used for media involving newtown.

    Just to question mainstream reality... Is it possible for a government to stage a mass killing event for political purpose, and get away with it in modern times? If a government actually was evil enough to perform the act wouldn't anyone to question these events be demonized and blackballed? They could probably get away with it.

    I do not know what happened but this information is on the web. So I am posting it into the conspiracy section.
    In modern times it certainly would be more difficult. However, that does not preclude it from reality. The reality is, however, it would take a very serious effort to organize everything that it would take to successfully pull off a conspiracy such as Newtown. So much so, that I doubt that it would happen...certainly not for something like this considering that events like the Newtown tragedy occur relatively often.
    I will no longer be replying to any post from a Liberal going forward. I will continue, as normal, to discuss topics and engage in intellectual exchanges with non-leftist

  12. #52
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    200
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Newtown

    Quote Originally Posted by puma237 View Post
    h, believe it or not, i actually like you. i believe that you do truly mean well. but you just demonstrated that someguy was right about how you address criticism.

    your definition of conservatism was lacking, don't you think? could you try again and present a definition that conveys solid reasoning as to why you (apparently) have no use for it? it could be helpful.

    just one thing; what have you got against the 50"s? were you there?

    these last few post may seem like we are wandering off topic, but i think this will fold back onto the tracks shortly.
    I appreciate the complement.

    Unfortunately according to my conscious, the only conserved in conservatism is ignorance. It leaves no room for innovation or creative thought. I have no problems with criticism; I am willing to take as much as I give though. I'm am bothered by how things are often taken personally, whether offense is intended or not.

    If you aren't offended by something, anything, then are playing the game correctly. This is a debate website; meaning all debate tactics should be free game. Getting a ban threat because of one's views is inappropriate and counter to the whole point of this website: the free exchange and debate of any and all ideas.

  13. #53
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    hoodsport, wa
    Posts
    86
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Newtown

    Quote Originally Posted by HCabret View Post
    I appreciate the complement.

    Unfortunately according to my conscious, the only conserved in conservatism is ignorance. It leaves no room for innovation or creative thought. I have no problems with criticism; I am willing to take as much as I give though. I'm am bothered by how things are often taken personally, whether offense is intended or not.

    If you aren't offended by something, anything, then are playing the game correctly. This is a debate website; meaning all debate tactics should be free game. Getting a ban threat because of one's views is inappropriate and counter to the whole point of this website: the free exchange and debate of any and all ideas.
    alrighty then.
    fyi, i started my growing up in the 50's. it was a pretty good time to be alive in the good ol' usa.
    i fear the fate of all mankind is in the hands of fools.....
    -king crimson-

  14. #54
    Administrator

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Posts
    10,718
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Newtown

    Quote Originally Posted by puma237 View Post
    the video that i am referring to is the one submitted my michael in post #6. at approximately the two minute mark you clearly see police officers chasing someone into the woods running away from the school.
    That was a segment of the video I was referring to. I don't see anyone in that video. The article I posted points out that the only other figure leading the police officers is the K-9.

    Quote Originally Posted by PUma
    in the first two minutes of the video you see a young child saying that they were led out of the school and over to the fire station where he saw a man on the ground in handcuffs. then you see and adult witness saying that he witnessed a man being brought out ot the woods and that this man was now in that police car over there. clearly two different men. snopes did, in fact, address the two man scenario, but the direction of chase shown in the video, again brings the debunker into question. but, ok, let's say the man at the fire station turned out to be an innocent byestander and the man in the woods turned out to be a concerned parent. so now where did the off duty policeman go?
    Its actually quite simple. The man in handcuffs was identified as Chris Manfredonia. The man in the woods was identified as an off duty police officer. The direction of the "chase" is better identified as a police K-9 unit moving into the woods to clear it. You'll notice the "suspect" maintains a fixed distance, like he is on a lease, and none of the police officers are aiming weapons, nor does the helicopter follow the chase as it moves into the woods.

    Quote Originally Posted by Puma
    the real eye opener for me is the nbc update (post crush) that reports that police have now said that there were four guns found inside the school, all hand guns.
    Again, this is mostly likely fog of war. News agencies don't do well reporting things accurately under calm circumstances, let alone with adrenaline pumped up, traumatized witnesses.


    Quote Originally Posted by Puma
    and that the gun left in the trunk of the car was a shotgun. at the five minute mark of the video you see several officers surrounding the trunk of a car as one officer pulls the gun out of the trunk. i will give you that the picture is a bit blurry but not so much that the profile of the gun is not evident. this is not a shotgun but clearly a short barrel auto or semi-auto.
    The shotgun was a Saiga, which has a charging handle on the side. http://metabunk.org/threads/1083-Deb...Trunk-Handguns
    "Suffering lies not with inequality, but with dependence." -Voltaire
    "Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions. -G.K. Chesterton
    Also, if you think I've overlooked your post please shoot me a PM, I'm not intentionally ignoring you.


  15. #55
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    200
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Newtown

    Quote Originally Posted by puma237 View Post
    alrighty then.
    fyi, i started my growing up in the 50's. it was a pretty good time to be alive in the good ol' usa.
    Good for you my friend. I didn't. But then again the House Committee on Un-American activities probably would not have liked me very much.

  16. #56
    Administrator

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Posts
    10,718
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Newtown

    Quote Originally Posted by HCabret View Post
    Good for you my friend. I didn't. But then again the House Committee on Un-American activities probably would not have liked me very much.
    Because you are willing to act as a paid Soviet agent? I'm not sure what you think you are implying here.
    "Suffering lies not with inequality, but with dependence." -Voltaire
    "Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions. -G.K. Chesterton
    Also, if you think I've overlooked your post please shoot me a PM, I'm not intentionally ignoring you.


  17. #57
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    hoodsport, wa
    Posts
    86
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Newtown

    Quote Originally Posted by Squatch
    That was a segment of the video I was referring to. I don't see anyone in that video. The article I posted points out that the only other figure leading the police officers is the K-9
    .

    just as the vid starts, you see several officers run into the woods from the school. i didn't see and dogs, but there could have been.

    Its actually quite simple. The man in handcuffs was identified as Chris Manfredonia. The man in the woods was identified as an off duty police officer. The direction of the "chase" is better identified as a police K-9 unit moving into the woods to clear it. You'll notice the "suspect" maintains a fixed distance, like he is on a lease, and none of the police officers are aiming weapons, nor does the helicopter follow the chase as it moves into the woods.
    not simple at all. we are playing whack-a-mole with the initial suspect list now. we have the alledged passerby face down in handcuffs at the firehouse. we have the alleged off duty police officer, we have the alledged concerned father running either toward or around the school and we have the hapless adam. adam is reported to have been found dead inside the school. an eye witness tells us that a man in handcuffs was brought out of the woods and paraded across the parking lot and put into a police car. this has to be either the off duty officer or the distraught father according to the information we have at this point. a young gradeschool lad tells of the man in handcuffs (passerby) at the firehouse. so, either the off duty police officer or the distraught father is not accounted for in this roundup.

    this gets a lot more complicated later as i will explain shortly.

    Again, this is mostly likely fog of war. News agencies don't do well reporting things accurately under calm circumstances, let alone with adrenaline pumped up, traumatized witnesses.
    fog of war is getting pretty flimsy at this point. the newscast i am referring to was aired the next day and the commentator clearly qualifies the information when hes says that several official sources both state and federal have reported that four guns were found in the school. he then goes on to say that several officials have told us that the ar15 was found in the trunk of a car. no mention as yet of a shotgun. there had been, obviously, significant journalistic investigation prior to this report and the findings were not extracted from traumatized witnesses but by investigating officials with multiple corroboration.

    The shotgun was a Saiga, which has a charging handle on the side.
    yeah, after i had submitted my previous post and closed down the computer for the night, it did occor to me that an auto shotgun could be enterred into the mix.
    so, a couple things about that. there are three basic types fo semi auto shotguns. pump initated gas operated, charging handle intitated gas, and charging handle initiated inertia operated.
    on a semi auto rifle the charging handle is used to pull back a spring which uncoils as rounds are fired to force another round into the breech for continuing fire by trigger pull.
    usuall a 6 to 8 inch pull on the handle to ****. the charging handle on an auto shotgun simple loads the initial round into the breach where gas given or kinetic intertia in the case of inertial guns) off by the shell exploding in the breech crates pressure that is used. the charging handle on all of these guns is used to simply set the initital round into the breech. typically a 3 to 4 inch pull. the saiga has a nearly four inch pull. if you watch the video of the officer clearing the weapon found in the trunk of the car, you will note that he pulls the charging bar far past four inches.
    it is also important to note that semiautomatic shotguns are considerred to be very serious weapons. in some crime and enforcement circles they are known as street sweepers. i have a hard time believing that such a weapon would go so long unmentioned by police or media.

    as i alluded above re: further complications. i watched a very well done video in the past two days (my valid excuse for taking so long to respond to this) by a young man named brendan hunt.
    the video is approximately 2-1/2 hours. mr. hunt has done a very meticulous and thorough job of both gleaning and presenting information regarding sandy hook. in his vid, he runs a copy of the gun being pulled from the trunk that is a bit larger and a bit more clear. one interesting thing that shows up, although quickly, is that a shell is seen being ejected from the gun in question. it is, again, somewhat fuzzy. after several attempts i finally managed to get the vid paused on the ejection of the shell, it is not 100% definitive, but it does look a lot more like a brass cartridge than a shotgun shell.
    you can find this video here:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fIdNl_KwEo

    if the vid has been taken down, mr. hunt says he has made it available at his own website: brendanhunt.com

    there is way more; the time stamp "debunking", the second mr. rosen, two shadows seen by school staff running behind the gym shortly after the gunfire begins, police scanner chatter that clearly indicates that the front window of the school broken out by the initial officers on the scene to gain access to the locked down school. there is the teacher's car in the parking lot parked perpendicular to the school with gunshot holes in the side that police claim to be the result of stray bullets flying out from the school building which, curiously, would have had to take a 90 degree turn in mid air to validate this claim. the mr. rodia, who owns the car that adam allegedly drove to the seen is explored in much more depth in this vid. he turns out to be quite the interesting character as do the many question regaring possible connections between the highly accomplished criminal rodia and adam and adam's mother. soooooo much more.
    the final 10-15 minutes of the vid is an incredibly skilled wrap up.

    obviously, i recomment this video heartily. make some popcorn and take the time. i think you will see that this discussion is far from over.
    i fear the fate of all mankind is in the hands of fools.....
    -king crimson-

  18. #58
    Administrator

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Posts
    10,718
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Newtown

    Quote Originally Posted by puma237 View Post
    .

    just as the vid starts, you see several officers run into the woods from the school. i didn't see and dogs, but there could have been.
    Did you see someone they are chasing? What is the basis for the assumption that they are chasing someone as opposed to searching the woods as part of clearing the area?

    Quote Originally Posted by puma
    we have the alledged passerby face down in handcuffs at the firehouse.
    The only report of this person is by a couple of terrified kids who couldn't form a cogent picture of the person detained. There really isn't much to go by for this character.

    Quote Originally Posted by Puma
    we have the alleged off duty police officer, we have the alledged concerned father running either toward or around the school
    Both of which seem identified and IDed. What is the issue here?

    Quote Originally Posted by Puma
    adam is reported to have been found dead inside the school. an eye witness tells us that a man in handcuffs was brought out of the woods and paraded across the parking lot and put into a police car. this has to be either the off duty officer or the distraught father according to the information we have at this point.
    It is the police officer, he was noted to have been moving towards the school through the woods (the most direct route) he was intercepted by police officers clearing the woods and later identified as an off duty police officer. The father was detained in the parking lot and released shortly after.

    Quote Originally Posted by puma
    fog of war is getting pretty flimsy at this point. the newscast i am referring to was aired the next day and the commentator clearly qualifies the information when hes says that several official sources both state and federal have reported that four guns were found in the school. he then goes on to say that several officials have told us that the ar15 was found in the trunk of a car. no mention as yet of a shotgun. there had been, obviously, significant journalistic investigation prior to this report and the findings were not extracted from traumatized witnesses but by investigating officials with multiple corroboration.
    Could you post the news report?

    Quote Originally Posted by puma
    usuall a 6 to 8 inch pull on the handle to ****. the charging handle on an auto shotgun simple loads the initial round into the breach where gas given or kinetic intertia in the case of inertial guns) off by the shell exploding in the breech crates pressure that is used. the charging handle on all of these guns is used to simply set the initital round into the breech. typically a 3 to 4 inch pull. the saiga has a nearly four inch pull. if you watch the video of the officer clearing the weapon found in the trunk of the car, you will note that he pulls the charging bar far past four inches.
    Not really, he appears to pull it about the distance of his outstretched hand, which is about the distance of a Saiga.

    Additionally, of the assault rifles that possibly could have fit this bill, we are really only left with the AK-47 or 74 as options (though I think it has to be the Saiga given the barrel size in the video). Both of those weapons have a nearly identical pull distance as the Saiga because it is based on the AK body.

    What rifle do you propose it could have been that would have fit the dimensions in the video?

    Quote Originally Posted by puma
    it is also important to note that semiautomatic shotguns are considerred to be very serious weapons. in some crime and enforcement circles they are known as street sweepers.
    They are also known as excellent bird hunting weapons, especially for smaller birds like Dove. They are perfect home defense weapons due to their lack of penetrating power into other rooms, quick fire rate and low kick. They are also great weapons for separatists, which by all accounts Lanza's mother was.

    Quote Originally Posted by puma
    i have a hard time believing that such a weapon would go so long unmentioned by police or media.
    How did it go unnoticed? It was found with minutes once they cleared the parking lot and identified his car.


    Quote Originally Posted by puma
    one interesting thing that shows up, although quickly, is that a shell is seen being ejected from the gun in question. it is, again, somewhat fuzzy. after several attempts i finally managed to get the vid paused on the ejection of the shell, it is not 100% definitive, but it does look a lot more like a brass cartridge than a shotgun shell.
    I really, really doubt that it could have been a brass shell. I've watched firefights with the AK on UAV feeds in Iraq that have much better optics, better lighting and fly lower than police or news helicopters. In none of those firefights could you see something as small as a 7.62 round ejecting. You identifying the firing by the muzzle blast. A shotgun shell might be visible, it never came up in my UAV experience.

    Doing a bit of ariel recon deduction I think we can show that it wasn't a 7.62 round. If you look closely at the video, the round being ejected (interestingly, only one round meaning they had presumably already removed the magazine) is about half the width of the trunk latch of his civic and about 3/4 the length, maybe more. That is clearly a shotgun shell given the comparison of images.



    The AK is the 7.62x39 round at the top





    Quote Originally Posted by puma
    there is way more; the time stamp "debunking",
    Any chance you could run some of this out in a bit more detail with the supporting data? Because watching the video is a bit problematic for me, he presents little evidence that is corroborated, most of his arguments are at best fallacies, at worst seemingly made up. If you would like to use it as an argument for discussion I'm all for it, but so far I've been chasing down stories from several people here rather than showing how the evidence they provide doesn't support the claim.
    "Suffering lies not with inequality, but with dependence." -Voltaire
    "Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions. -G.K. Chesterton
    Also, if you think I've overlooked your post please shoot me a PM, I'm not intentionally ignoring you.


  19. #59
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    200
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Newtown

    Quote Originally Posted by Squatch347 View Post
    Because you are willing to act as a paid Soviet agent? I'm not sure what you think you are implying here.
    From what I hear, you only had to be suspected of being 'anti-american' for the HUAC to take notice. Ring Lardner Jr. was given 12 months in prison for exercising his right to have a mind. If I even hinted that I might possibly disagree with something the government was doing, then I probally would have been gone too.

  20. #60
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,483
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Newtown

    Quote Originally Posted by HCabret View Post
    From what I hear, you only had to be suspected of being 'anti-american' for the HUAC to take notice. Ring Lardner Jr. was given 12 months in prison for exercising his right to have a mind. If I even hinted that I might possibly disagree with something the government was doing, then I probally would have been gone too.
    You claim to dislike the government, yet you are such a hardcore Liberal.....seems pretty inconsistent to me.
    I will no longer be replying to any post from a Liberal going forward. I will continue, as normal, to discuss topics and engage in intellectual exchanges with non-leftist

 

 
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Was God in Newtown?
    By Rodriguez in forum Formal Discussion
    Replies: 84
    Last Post: January 29th, 2013, 03:02 PM
  2. Was God in Newtown?
    By Rodriguez in forum Religion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: December 19th, 2012, 12:34 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •