Why did the United Way post a condolence page for the Sandy Hook victims THREE DAYS before the shooting?
Sandy Hook and the United Way
|by Anonymous||reply 131||01/29/2013|
The United Way supports the Boy Scouts so don't give anything to the United Way
|by Anonymous||reply 1||01/27/2013|
Sounds like a misconstruction of a Hurricane Sandy page.
|by Anonymous||reply 2||01/27/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 3||01/27/2013|
You're a ninny, OP.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||01/27/2013|
Op knows nothing about internet and the way date-stamps work.
Why are you posting this "truther" dribble on Datalounge, OP?
|by Anonymous||reply 7||01/27/2013|
Because google date stamping is unreliable and this nonsense is based not on someone actually seeing the United Way putting up a website before the event but from a google time stamp.
But telling conspiracy theorists this will accomplish nothing because they will refuse to believe it.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||01/27/2013|
See, that's why it's not worth bothering with conspiracy theorists. You will believe anything that confirms your paranoid fantasies, no matter how little it is backed up with facts, but you set the bar extremely high on any evidence that refutes your theory.
So a google search seen AFTER the event is weightier evidence than the fact that Google admits now and has admitted in the past (see the article) that their time stamps are not all that accurate.
And to top it all off, you completely accept the ridiculous idea that the conspiracy would include the United Way in their conspiracy. The first rule of a conspiracy is to involve as few people as possible. Why would they include the United Way?
|by Anonymous||reply 12||01/27/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 13||01/27/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 15||01/27/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 16||01/27/2013|
I have a crazy conspiracy theorist friend who tried to say that the entire town was in on the conspiracy. I tried to explain to him in a clear, calm and rational way how unfeasible it would be for the US government to include an entire town in on a conspiracy and ensure the absolute silence of everyone involved but he just wouldn't listen.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||01/27/2013|
OP, don't make me come over there.
I snuffed-out Harvey Milk and I can do the same for you. Do you feel me?
|by Anonymous||reply 18||01/27/2013|
You know, OP, the reason people like you just piss me off to no end is that my sister lives in Fairfield, knows the Pozners and is close friends with a woman whose daughter teaches at the school and who survived the shootings. Yup, there that day. Saw the carnage. Knows it was one insane, twisted fuck who carried them out.
You and people like you are, quite simply, cunts.
I pity you almost as much as I loathe you.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||01/27/2013|
Thanks for taking the bait, r19.
HuffPo, Salon, The Atlantic...
|by Anonymous||reply 21||01/27/2013|
r14/OP, no one said anything like that. More typical conspiracy theorist bullshit.
But are YOU saying no one went to the United Way website in the three days before the event? No one in those three days noticed this supposed plea for money for a tragedy that hadn't occurred yet and raised a red flag? Wouldn't someone have noticed that?
|by Anonymous||reply 22||01/27/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 23||01/27/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 25||01/27/2013|
r26, Google itself provided a concrete example of bad time-stamping. Why would there be hundreds of examples available? Why would they matter? In most cases no one would care, and in the rest they would be fixed before most people even know.
To accept the OP's version of things you have to believe that an enormous conspiracy involving thousands of people for some reason included the United Way who was so foolish that it put up a webpage soliciting donations before the event and no on noticed the webpage.
To accept the debunking argument you have to accept that Google has acknowledged a problem with time-stamping, as they did in the example provided, well before and completely unrelated to the event.
One view is plausible, the other is not. But believe whatever you want.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||01/27/2013|
The reason why right wing nutjobs are proposing all these bizarre conspiracies is that they are trying to cover up their real conspiracy to take over America and sabotage its elections in perpetuity on 9/11.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||01/27/2013|
Hi, Ricky Ricardo! (R10)
|by Anonymous||reply 31||01/27/2013|
OP, you asked a question. Are you so stupid you don't understand that when you ask a question you are asking for people to respond?
That you don't like their responses is your problem, not theirs.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||01/27/2013|
9-11 was a government conspiracy, a false-flag attack intended to make Americans angry enough to allow the government to take away their Constitutional right to own commercial airplanes.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||01/27/2013|
To make it clear to all and sundry that you're a malevolent idiot who parrots garbage.
The more important question - the one which really merits a good conversation the next time you meet with your therapist - is why you would post such crap when you know that there is a reasonable explanation for it.
You want attention. You want to stir up shit. You want to be "provocative".
Well, bully for you.
But, let's be clear, you want this attention because you are powerless in real life.
I know you. I know people like you.
And you're just sad little men.
|by Anonymous||reply 34||01/27/2013|
r33, honey, when people own planes, they're no longer commercial.
So your theory is debunked!
(But it was a false-flag attack orchestrated by conspiracy theory big business interests who wanted to profit from the weak-minded people who believe it was a conspiracy theory promoted by the government. There were billions of dollars at stake. Alex Jones is the mastermind behind 9/11!)
|by Anonymous||reply 35||01/27/2013|
No the better question is why are YOU here op?
You proved you are a gullible, paranoid moron with this thread.
Are you a GAY gullible paranoid moron?
|by Anonymous||reply 37||01/27/2013|
This thread is an abomination.
What happened to those children in connecticut happened.
To question it in any way is the mark of stupidity and paranoia.
|by Anonymous||reply 39||01/27/2013|
Right. The people providing actual evidence are rude and crazy.
The conspiracy theorists are poor victims.
|by Anonymous||reply 40||01/27/2013|
The United Way has a Tardis.
|by Anonymous||reply 43||01/27/2013|
The difference, r42, is one side truly has actual evidence and the other side does not.
You may read whatever tone you want into that, but you also might expect people who have had friends affected by the tragedy might not be the most dispassionate.
|by Anonymous||reply 44||01/27/2013|
Stuff like this is why you can't talk about conspiracy theories that are more plausible.
|by Anonymous||reply 46||01/27/2013|
Love that crackpot video. It posits that since the police followed other leads, there was "evidence" of a second shooter. It posits that since there were news reports that similarly treated this as "evidence" of another shooter, there must be some sort of cover-up.
The fact is that the police often pursue leads that don't turn out. The fact is that witnesses typically get things wrong with any story that receives attention, or with any story that doesn't. Humans are fallible. Police follow leads that turn out not to yield anything. The press often gets things wrong. Anyone who's ever been personally involved with an event that's received media attention, knows that.
And when you consider this was a rapidly evolving story receiving immediate press attention, the chances of the press getting something wrong are multiplied exponentially.
The sad thing is that so many Americans can't think analytically and read shit like this and take it as true. They believe everything they read, that they want to believe.
As to the google discrepancy, google date discrepancies do happen. Not infrequently. And when you consider how many google results there are relating to Sandy Hook, it's not at all surprising that there were glitches.
|by Anonymous||reply 47||01/27/2013|
[quote]It makes you appear to be paranoid and ugly.
You know what's ugly?
"“We all saw how beautiful he was. He had thick, shiny hair, beautiful long eyelashes that rested on his cheeks. He looked like he was sleeping. But the reality of it was under the cloth he had covering his mouth there was no mouth left. His jaw was blown away. I just want people to know the ugliness of it so we don’t talk about it abstractly, like these little angels just went to heaven. No. They were butchered. They were brutalized. And that is what haunts me at night.”
So, yes, those of us who are two or three degrees of separation from the Pozner family and one or two degrees away from someone who witnessed the events think people like OP and his ilk are lowest of the low.
Easy to talk about it in the abstract.
Those aren't people to you. There little parts of your ridiculous theories.
And so I say again: fuck you.
You're an abomination.
|by Anonymous||reply 48||01/27/2013|
r48 is right.
Whoever you are, OP, you should be deeply ashamed of yourself for being stupid enough to even post such a thread.
How old are you?
What kind of education have you had?
Unless you're still in junior high there is no excuse for your ignorance.
|by Anonymous||reply 49||01/27/2013|
[quote]But no one cares to answer the question as asked...making politicians of you all.
"Why did the United Way post a condolence page for the Sandy Hook victims THREE DAYS before the shooting?"
"It was not posted three days before."
Do you have a reading comprehension problem?
The problem is you think this is politics when it's the story of the bodies of first-graders being ripped apart by multiple bullets fired by a madman.
There are many idiots who post on DL. Almost all of them are ignored.
You're a malicious idiot so you deserve to be called out on what a twisted fuck you are.
But, hey, you got the attention you crave.
Now go upstairs and ask Mom for a HotPocket.
Maybe she bought your favorite.
|by Anonymous||reply 50||01/27/2013|
Agree with R7 and R9 - as an IT professional, I can tell you that if you're looking for a time stamp on a search engine to be the last word in accuracy you would be very wrong.
If this article was about someone actually seeing this page three days before and alerting Sandy Hook Elementary, that would be a story. An errant time stamp is not.
Give it up, tinhats. Go make sure all those water glasses around your house are full.
|by Anonymous||reply 51||01/27/2013|
And I am saying, r42, is you are seeing something that isn't there. The pro-conspiracy side was the side that made fun of the grief of people with a "widdle" insult. Of course, this somehow doesn't count.
|by Anonymous||reply 52||01/27/2013|
"Nobody is saying the children were not murdered"
Actually, yes, this is one of the conspiracy theories about Sandy Hook.
|by Anonymous||reply 54||01/27/2013|
I did not seen that theory raised in this thread, r54.
|by Anonymous||reply 55||01/27/2013|
Then you were not clicking on the links, r55.
|by Anonymous||reply 57||01/27/2013|
"...and the anger and insults continue."
Boo hoo hoo. Along with the anger and insults are points which none of the conspiracy theorists have even bothered to address. And the anger and insults have been provoked by the ridiculous and insulting positions of the conspiracists.
|by Anonymous||reply 58||01/27/2013|
[quote]...and the anger and insults continue.
Yes, because the trivialization of the brutal slaughter of children through the propagation of easily debunked conspiracy theorist propaganda should go unchallenged.
You want anger?
Go to Newtown and go door-to-door with your little theories.
Go do some firsthand research and publish your findings.
Clearly you are invested in your theories so you should go and investigate.
I think it is important when you have this strength of feeling on a subject that you interview those involved.
I could easily arrange for you to meet with some of the surviving teachers and maybe one or two of the parents. Or better yet, let's arrange a public forum in Newtown for folks like you so you can come and ask these probing questions.
You wouldn't have the balls to come within miles of that town.
Your unwillingness to defer to those with direct knowledge or to accept as given the accounts of hundreds of people just paints you as a willfully ignorant lower quartile thinker.
You cannot fix stupid. But you can call it out at every turn.
|by Anonymous||reply 59||01/27/2013|
hugs, r59. i am with you 100%.
|by Anonymous||reply 60||01/27/2013|
Sure, OP. Talk about whatever you want.
But don't cry and whine when people call you out for being an idiot and an asshole.
|by Anonymous||reply 63||01/27/2013|
You clear your cookies frequently OP.
I think I know why.....
|by Anonymous||reply 64||01/27/2013|
In almost every one of your posts you whine something along the lines of "can't I pose a simple question" as if anyone said you could not...rather than respond to the actual point made.
|by Anonymous||reply 66||01/27/2013|
"And the cookie clearing thing is a myth"
Then why are so few posts of yours showing up on troll-dar?
Or is the government turning its attention onto the OP?
Morbidly obese man found dead in parent's basement.
|by Anonymous||reply 67||01/27/2013|
[quote]And the cookie clearing thing is a myth.
|by Anonymous||reply 68||01/27/2013|
[quote]And the cookie clearing thing is a myth.
Wait. No, really.
|by Anonymous||reply 69||01/27/2013|
[quote]And the cookie clearing thing is a myth.
Wait. Now wait just a second.
Oh! I get it. Forget about the cookies.
Just post from different IP addresses.
That seems to work.
|by Anonymous||reply 71||01/27/2013|
[quote]by: You'll find me
Yeah, in a mental institution.
|by Anonymous||reply 72||01/27/2013|
R70 is a whole pile of crazy...
He is a "Faces of Death" type freako.
|by Anonymous||reply 73||01/27/2013|
tin hats on parade.
|by Anonymous||reply 74||01/27/2013|
You can pretty much see when someone has legitimately changed IP addresses if they switch to a mobile device or an office VPN or a different home network (I have cable and DSL back-up for work). You can use a VPN to mask IP addresses at will.
Troll-dar usually gives it away.
Someone who switches devices (PC to iPad, for example) isn't trying to hide anything (e.g., one set of posts chronologically from each device). But someone could just as easily switch devices/IP addresses as I did in r68, r69 and r72.
In fact, I could have posted each of my comments from a different IP address, changing my syntax and grammar each time.
And no one - except the webmaster, no doubt - would be any more the wiser.
It takes about 30 seconds to defeat troll-dar if you want to do it.
|by Anonymous||reply 75||01/27/2013|
[quote]This is a conspiracy thread is it not?
No, it's really an intervention for the mentally ill.
But judging by your post, we're failing miserably.
|by Anonymous||reply 77||01/27/2013|
I didn't realize you were part of a well-regulated militia, r76.
|by Anonymous||reply 78||01/27/2013|
check it how?
google and find equally crackpot conspiracy links?
|by Anonymous||reply 81||01/27/2013|
[quote]check all that I typed
Your typing is fine.
|by Anonymous||reply 83||01/27/2013|
" You will believe anything that confirms your paranoid fantasies, no matter how little it is backed up with facts, but you set the bar extremely high on any evidence that refutes your theory"
The above excerpt from R12 states it perfectly.
I will add, these people who believe this crap most likely have not spent 1/10th of the time monitoring the investments in their 401K, or exercising their bodies in or out of a gym.
|by Anonymous||reply 84||01/27/2013|
You've been debunked.
Can you accept that and admit it? Yes or no. Simple question.
|by Anonymous||reply 85||01/27/2013|
[quote]These have been crackpot conspiracies for decades but most are coming to light as truth.
Which "crackpot conspiracies" do you include in this list?
Let's start here and just unravel the rest of your statements working backwards.
This is a good place to begin.
You say that most are coming to light as truth.
A simple list of the crackpot conspiracies and those that have been revealed as the truth.
Keep in mind that there are dozens...Philadelphia Experiment, Montauk, HAARP, tsunami bombs, chemtrail theories, Pan Am 103, TWA 800, New World Order, Columbine, 9/11, 7/7, Madrid, JFK, RFK, MLK, Ron Brown, John Lennon, the Clinton Body Count, Birtherism, Holocaust denial, Eurabia, Vril Society, DTV transition, AIDS denialists, Bokemian Grove, Trilateral Commission, Illuminati, Le Cercle, Tavistock, moon landing, KAL 007 ...
You'll come back with Northwoods and Gulf of Tonkin.
No, you won't be able to show that "most" or even a substantial number have been proven true.
If anything, you simply cannot deny that the vast majority of these conspiracy theories are simply nonsense.
But, please, this should be fun.
|by Anonymous||reply 86||01/27/2013|
[quote]Look at all the press conferences and a complete lack of grieving or tears since you require some instruction on what to look at profound one.
Wow. This girl is some actress.
|by Anonymous||reply 87||01/27/2013|
Oh, the tedium.
|by Anonymous||reply 88||01/27/2013|
I happen to be a search engine expert, and I confirm what R9 said.
|by Anonymous||reply 89||01/27/2013|
You just know that "You'll Find Me" is furiously typing away as I type this.
|by Anonymous||reply 90||01/27/2013|
What did Nosferatu say about Sandy Hook?
|by Anonymous||reply 91||01/27/2013|
OP, you're a fucking libertarian asshat who's life is so vapid and miserable that you need to blame the government to make you feel superior.
People like you, OP, make everything WORSE and you deserve all the scorn you get here. I hope it makes you feel really lousy. You deserve nothing but the worst.
|by Anonymous||reply 92||01/27/2013|
Being stupid. REALLY stupid.
|by Anonymous||reply 94||01/27/2013|
OP - you're paranoid and insane. Seriously, get help.
|by Anonymous||reply 96||01/27/2013|
Call them "hookers"
|by Anonymous||reply 98||01/27/2013|
Again, OP: You've been debunked. Can you accept that? Yes or no.
|by Anonymous||reply 99||01/27/2013|
crazy and insane?
|by Anonymous||reply 101||01/27/2013|
Fortunately for us all, you were debunked. Thanks for stopping by.
|by Anonymous||reply 103||01/27/2013|
So, HIV was patented in 1984 by Gallo?
|by Anonymous||reply 104||01/27/2013|
By nature you can't debunk a question. There is no statement being made to debunk. Yes HIV was patented by Gallo. Glad to see it's approaching common knowledge.
|by Anonymous||reply 105||01/27/2013|
Tetrasilver tetroxide inhibits HIV transmission according to the patent. It does not claim to cure AIDS.
|by Anonymous||reply 106||01/27/2013|
In 1984...NINETEEN EIGHTY-FOUR. Years, maybe decades after the first person carried the virus. Which makes it unlikely he created it, as the conspiracy theorists argue.
|by Anonymous||reply 107||01/27/2013|
Especially given that he stole it from Luc Montagnier and his team at the Institut Pasteur in France. There's a reason why Montagnier has a Nobel Prize and Gallo doesn't.
|by Anonymous||reply 108||01/27/2013|
The voice of the night,
Nice work. I do remember that controversy and I'm shocked that Gallo still has not received a Nobel yet.
|by Anonymous||reply 110||01/27/2013|
I see lots of things, conspiracy theorist. I see that you are a typical conspiracy theorist who knows just enough to misinterpret things like patent applications.
|by Anonymous||reply 111||01/27/2013|
You see lots of things huh? You just can't see the title of a patent application nor do you know anything about intellectual property. There are some people that know though. Some of us are pursuing our own patents for things that actually help people instead of assisting them in death. Don't talk about things you don't know about and if you can't read a patent just say so and somebody will be glad to narrate to you.
|by Anonymous||reply 112||01/27/2013|
There is something very, very wrong with you.
[quote]The patent for HIV is U.S. patent # 4,647,773. The patent for the cure is U.S. patent # 5,676,977.
#4,647,773 was filed on April 23, 1984 and granted on March 3, 1987 based on Gallo's research throughout the epidemic. It relates to the development of additional test, vaccines and treatments.
The patent refers to a method of reproducing the HIV-1 retrovirus from an already-infected individual. The patent says absolutely nothing about creating the pathogen.
Learn to read,
Re: 5,676,977, "Tetrasil (or Imusil) is a substance containing tetrasilver tetroxide. A patent held by Dr. Marvin S. Antelman claims that this simple chemical compound cures AIDS by electrocuting HIV. Dr. Antelman admits his approach to AIDS is non-conventional and he does not trust viral load tests: Accordingly we have patients who display viral load reduction and those that do not who are nevertheless cured of AIDS, he has said. Tetrasilver tetroxide is more commonly used for disinfecting swimming pools. After it was promoted as an AIDS cure in Zambia the government banned Tetrasil because it has no proven benefits for people living with HIV."
So there's another theory of yours shot to shit.
[quote]but there is no hope for the blind and ignorant. An apology should be in order after you read these patents, if indeed you are capable. Let me also remind you that part of the conditions of being granted a patent is that your invention has to do what it is intended to do or the patent is not granted.
The standard for patenting non-pharmaceutical medical treatments is low.
The study on which the patent application was based has been thoroughly debunked.
[quote]I would gladly keep going and show you most of the conspiracies you mentioned are in fact true
Keep going. I'll shoot you down point by point.
|by Anonymous||reply 113||01/27/2013|
thank you r113. good god this op is insane.
|by Anonymous||reply 114||01/27/2013|
Tetrasilver tetroxide is a pesticide.
Good luck with that.
|by Anonymous||reply 115||01/27/2013|
More on the five-person "study" in Honduras which was used to substantiate the patent.
|by Anonymous||reply 116||01/27/2013|
Neem is also a pesticide and so is rosemary. Garlic is too for that matter. What is your point? If it will kill a virus, sure it will kill pests. You're coming from the stance that all pesticides are bad, which simply is not the case. There are natural insecticides and pesticides and silver is one of them. You can put a silver dollar (if indeed it is real silver) in your milk or water to keep it fresh longer. Sailors used to do that decades ago.
As for my AIDS patent friend, you can't shoot anything I submit to shit homie. You submitted something that explicitly tells they were curing people no matter the viral load.
"Accordingly we have patients who display viral load reduction and those that do not who are nevertheless cured of AIDS, he has said."
I suppose you are now going to tell me where AIDS really came from since the explanation I offered wasn't good enough. Go ahead, I'm waiting.
|by Anonymous||reply 117||01/27/2013|
[quote]I don't agree with the idea that OP is presenting, but its the rest of you that are coming off as crazy and insane
Come on now. There's a guy on here who thinks the moon landing was faked.
|by Anonymous||reply 118||01/27/2013|
[quote]"Accordingly we have patients who display viral load reduction and those that do not who are nevertheless cured of AIDS, he has said."
See links at r116 and above.
[quote]I suppose you are now going to tell me where AIDS really came from since the explanation I offered wasn't good enough. Go ahead, I'm waiting.
I don't know but it emerged many decades before Gallo's work. Lots of possible theories but we'll never know for sure. Most likely zoonosis.
But the patent you refer to makes absolutely no reference to the creation or origin of the pathogen.
You can read it over and over and over again but it does not change that fact.
But, look, you don't want to accept that these notions, which you parrot with such conviction, are wrong.
You are much too heavily invested in them to accept irrefutable facts.
But this is a good thing because it shines a bright light on the insanity which drives conspiracy theories and their cult-like believers.
And it underscores in a very strong and convincing manner how utterly ridiculous your claims regarding Newtown are.
And that was my goal. Just to let you throw enough out there to show that the emperor has no clothes.
I do not owe you an apology but I certainly owe you thanks.
|by Anonymous||reply 119||01/27/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 120||01/27/2013|
Thanks for an interesting read people.
My humble opinion: there are most likely some conspiracies in the world -- but the slaughter of these children isn't one of hem.
But like Rahm said, "Never let a good crisis go to waste." So there are those using this opportunity to push their agendas through (enhanced gun control) while ignoring the mental health and "Really Stupid Mother" issues in this sad event.
Many conspiracy theorists make some nice change pushing books and websites that encourage the more gullible amongst us; don't forget that little detail.
|by Anonymous||reply 121||01/27/2013|
The PDF file about how to talk to kids about the shooting was created late night on Dec. 14th. So your theory's silly, OP.
|by Anonymous||reply 122||01/28/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 123||01/28/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 124||01/28/2013|
WHET the OP?
Can only post on weekends?
|by Anonymous||reply 125||01/28/2013|
This is just the beginning. Pretty soon their gonna be knocking on you're door demanding your guns. Sandy Hooke was just a goverment plot to get hour guns!
|by Anonymous||reply 126||01/28/2013|
Parody post fail
|by Anonymous||reply 127||01/28/2013|
hardly. the op was not trying to be funny.
|by Anonymous||reply 128||01/28/2013|
Vile vile vile.
Father of Newtown victim heckled at hearing.
|by Anonymous||reply 129||01/28/2013|
r128, I meant r126
|by Anonymous||reply 130||01/28/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 131||01/29/2013|