Newtown Legislation - Why?

[cjjtulsa]

So is it likewise your position that 91 were actually killed in the Moore tornado, and not the revised number of 24? Do you also feel that Alex Jones may be correct that something about the tornado smacks of Obama wagging the dog?

What?!? I don't see what any of that has to do with the above.

Do you likewise believe Fast & Furious was on the level, and the DOJ knew nothing about it? Do you believe that Benghazi was the result of a protest over a video?

 

[Glocktogo]

What?!? I don't see what any of that has to do with the above.

Do you likewise believe Fast & Furious was on the level, and the DOJ knew nothing about it? Do you believe that Benghazi was the result of a protest over a video?

You're the one that says the initial reporting doesn't jive with the revised assessment of what happened, or what you saw on TV. Well why not create a conspiracy on tornado inconsistencies?

I don't believe a word the Obama admoinistration says on F&F, Benghazi, the AP surveillance or IRS audits. I don't have any proof either, so unless someone comes up with a smoking gun, they're going to get away with it. Wthout said evidence, no one should go to jail. That does not make me believe that something fishy happened in podunk Conneticut because there's no evidence AND no motive. If you feel different, have at it. Just don't look at the rest of us like we're crazy because we don't agre with you.

 

[cjjtulsa]

You're the one that says the initial reporting doesn't jive with the revised assessment of what happened, or what you saw on TV. Well why not create a conspiracy on tornado inconsistencies?

I still don't get that; because the revised assessment doesn't jive with what a person can actually see on video, and hear on audio, then anyone who'd question it is the equivalent to someone who'd make up asinine tornado conspiracy theories? Christ almighty.

I don't believe a word the Obama admoinistration says on F&F, Benghazi, the AP surveillance or IRS audits. I don't have any proof either, so unless someone comes up with a smoking gun, they're going to get away with it. Wthout said evidence, no one should go to jail. That does not make me believe that something fishy happened in podunk Conneticut because there's no evidence AND no motive. If you feel different, have at it. Just don't look at the rest of us like we're crazy because we don't agre with you.

That's fine, and don't look at us who don't buy the bullsh*t as crazy because we don't agree with you. Fair enough?

 

[Glocktogo]

I still don't get that; because the revised assessment doesn't jive with what a person can actually see on video, and hear on audio, then anyone who'd question it is the equivalent to someone who'd make up asinine tornado conspiracy theories? Christ almighty.



That's fine, and don't look at us who don't buy the bullsh*t as crazy because we don't agree with you. Fair enough?

You're the one who oened up that can of worms, not me. Evidence has only proven that Sandy Hook was a lone shooter. This is in spite of initial news and LE reports that there "may" have been more than one suspect. Initial news, ME and 1st responder reports said 54, then possible 91 tornado deaths. Revised, it's 24. If you think Newtown PD, Connecticut State Police and the rest of the world are hiding additional shooters, then why not also believe that Moore PD, OHP and the rest of the world are hiding bodies? With all the pressure they're getting over storm shelters, they'd have a hell of a lot more motive to hide that than Newtown hiding additional shooters (which wou make ZERO difference in the gun debate).

 

[DA 20]

So is it likewise your position that 91 were actually killed in the Moore tornado, and not the revised number of 24? Do you also feel that Alex Jones may be correct that something about the tornado smacks of Obama wagging the dog?

Every thing about the Moore tornado was open to the public. No one attempted to hide anything about not having a safe place for the school children. Cjjtulsa is making the point that if there was nothing to hide why is “A bill is being crafted in secret, according to the Hartford Courant, that would affect information connected to the Newtown shooting investigation. WTIC’s Michael Guerrera reports” If they had nothing to hide no need for the bill.

 

[Glocktogo]

Every thing about the Moore tornado was open to the public. No one attempted to hide anything about not having a safe place for the school children. Cjjtulsa is making the point that if there was nothing to hide why is “A bill is being crafted in secret, according to the Hartford Courant, that would affect information connected to the Newtown shooting investigation. WTIC’s Michael Guerrera reports” If they had nothing to hide no need for the bill.

I don't know why they feel the need to do that either. Perhaps it's a misguided effort to spare the parents the horror of seeing it all over the web and TV? Keep in mind that certain details of Coumbine were never officially released either, though that information has leaked out over the years, if you look hard enough for it.

 

[cjjtulsa]

You're the one who oened up that can of worms, not me. Evidence has only proven that Sandy Hook was a lone shooter. This is in spite of initial news and LE reports that there "may" have been more than one suspect. Initial news, ME and 1st responder reports said 54, then possible 91 tornado deaths. Revised, it's 24. If you think Newtown PD, Connecticut State Police and the rest of the world are hiding additional shooters, then why not also believe that Moore PD, OHP and the rest of the world are hiding bodies? With all the pressure they're getting over storm shelters, they'd have a hell of a lot more motive to hide that than Newtown hiding additional shooters (which wou make ZERO difference in the gun debate).

Because equating them is a leap of absurdity, and a non-argument. "Evidence shows"......what evidence? Have you seen anything? I haven't seen a hell of a lot. We've been told all kinds of things, but are shown very, very little. Break out the security cam footage, that'll help. But with this new hush-hush legislation, we'll likely never be privy to that, either. And if things were on the level, we wouldn't have sealed reports, unavailable to the public evidence, etc. And don't forget: if you report anything on social media other than what the Conn. State Police tells you, you might be eligible for prosecution. Don't make it stink, and no one will notice the smell.

And yes - it would make a big, big difference in the gun control debate if it was proven that there were multiple shooters - particularly if we knew just who those additional shooters were, and what their motive was. Would sure throw of the "lone nutcase on psychotropic drugs" narrative that has become the preferred motive. If it was a setup, then it makes a world of difference.

Let's not make these leaps that "if you believe this, then you might as well believe that". Those tactics are typically used by the left to demonize those who don't agree with them.

 

[Glocktogo]

Because equating them is a leap of absurdity, and a non-argument. "Evidence shows"......what evidence? Have you seen anything? I haven't seen a hell of a lot. We've been told all kinds of things, but are shown very, very little. Break out the security cam footage, that'll help. But with this new hush-hush legislation, we'll likely never be privy to that, either. And if things were on the level, we wouldn't have sealed reports, unavailable to the public evidence, etc. And don't forget: if you report anything on social media other than what the Conn. State Police tells you, you might be eligible for prosecution. Don't make it stink, and no one will notice the smell.

And yes - it would make a big, big difference in the gun control debate if it was proven that there were multiple shooters - particularly if we knew just who those additional shooters were, and what their motive was. Would sure throw of the "lone nutcase on psychotropic drugs" narrative that has become the preferred motive. If it was a setup, then it makes a world of difference.

Let's not make these leaps that "if you believe this, then you might as well believe that". Those tactics are typically used by the left to demonize those who don't agree with them.

My comparison may have been a little tongue in cheek, but was it really Reductio ad Absurdum? I beg to differ. There have already been people come out with wild suppositions on the tornados, from man made due to global warming, to Obama wagging the dog.

I fail to see how one vs. multiple assailants would change the gun control rhetoric one iota. Obama got re-elected. We knew he was waiting till he didn't have to get re-elected again to mount certain attacks. The bills were aleready drawn up and waiting for the ink to dry. Do you really think the number of shooters would make a bit of difference? He had markers to pay and he did it.

Unless you're willing to go so far as to suggest that a government assassin set Lanza up as the fall guy, in order to kick start the anti-gun mean season, and that local officials are in on the targeted killing of innocent children, your theory has no legs.

 

[Spata]

show me the security tape of lanza walking up to the school with a rifle and then managing to get past a locked door and i;ll let it go.

 

[twoguns?]

So is it likewise your position that 91 were actually killed in the Moore tornado, and not the revised number of 24? Do you also feel that Alex Jones may be correct that something about the tornado smacks of Obama wagging the dog?

LOL ..well DUHH these are know-brainers....dont cha know?