Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
preacherman76

Sandy Hook AR-15 hoax?

198 posts in this topic

I've watched that video like 100s of times, and even when I close my eyes and pretend, I do not see an AR-15. That is CLEARLY a shotgun. Anyone who believes that is an AR-15 has never seen one. My brother's best friend owns an AR, and it looks nothing like the gun in that video. If he did have an AR, which they say was there, my money is on him having it on him and using it. It wasn't in the car, so the only other logical place for it, would be with him.

Yup. Anyone with the slightest knowledge of firearms can see that it is a shotgun. The size of the breech alone gives it away. Not to mention the shotgun sized shell that flies out.

There was no AR in the trunk.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never met anyone who believes 'everything' the media tells them. Not one.

I have. There are a few that have posted in this thread.

But why are you drawing your lines so narrowly? If you don't think that things coming from the hundreds of thousands of people who comprise 'the government' can be trusted at all because the government have stated things that didn't turn out to be true, then likewise why trust any conspiracy theorist since we have ample evidence that conspiracy theorists have also said things that are not true?

I dont trust every conspiracy theorist. I dont believe in every conspiracy. In this case I believe he didnt bring in the AR cause "several offcials" have directly said so. Im also more then curious who the man in the cammo was that ran from the school to the woods. We have a man running from the school as the shootings were taken place, and its as though the media doesnt find that interesting enough to even talk about it any further. Something about that is very fishy.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, they "told" wrong. Have a look at the video of the weapon coming out of the trunk. It's a shotgun.

Yes they took a shot gun out of his car. That doesnt mean that again"several officials" didnt also take a AR 15 out of his car. Especialy considering they directly said so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes they took a shot gun out of his car. That doesnt mean that again"several officials" didnt also take a AR 15 out of his car. Especialy considering they directly said so.

True, "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the kicker: The "conflicting" accounts DO NOT come from either the State Police or the Chief Medical examiner !!!!!

I understand what you're saying, but let's consider who controls the narrative, if you don't mind.

Do the police control the narrative, or does the media control the narrative? From where does the media get its information?

Simple answer there Pallidin, if you care to answer it.

Example, the medical examiner clearly stated the wounds he saw were made by a rifle. Yet, there are pictures of a police officer taking a rifle out of the trunk.

Both Columbo and Friday would have trouble with this conflicting information, and so would Sherlock Holmes.

It seems you do not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where's the pictures? I'm completely prepared to call Photoshop on them. Whew, it's a lot easier playing by the rules of the conspiracy theorists in order to debunk them.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Socrates

I would like to ask you the same question I've asked Pallidin and Tiggs regarding this story, if I may.

What is it about the official story that you find so compelling? What is it about the story that makes it so certain, so true and accurate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two words. Occam's Razor.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Socrates

I would like to ask you the same question I've asked Pallidin and Tiggs regarding this story, if I may.

What is it about the official story that you find so compelling? What is it about the story that makes it so certain, so true and accurate?

While this wasn't directed at me, I'd like to at least comment.

The only agenda the media has is to get the scoop, to report something the others don't have. Add that to our instant communication society, and not a shred of journalistic integrity, and you can see where rumors, misunderstandings, and fallacies all become part of the 'official story'. That's the thing, the official story may actually change quite often, as facts are checked.

Currently, I don't think there is a solid 'official' story. But that certainly doesn't open the door to a President Obama run Mission Impossible storyline.

Things are beginning to be clearer as some of the mud gets washed away and we are seeing what's left.

I'm sure you've all played the game of telephone where you start with one fact, and pass it to your neighbor. By the time it goes full circle, it's never what it started out as being. Then imagine people jumping in and out of that circle with different intentions and adding to the already jumbled message.

No conspiracy, just confusion.

Edited by supervike
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Example, the medical examiner clearly stated the wounds he saw were made by a rifle. Yet, there are pictures of a police officer taking a rifle out of the trunk.

Both Columbo and Friday would have trouble with this conflicting information, and so would Sherlock Holmes.

Yes, it's true. Holmes was a firm believer in Monorifleism - a philosophy wherein it's impossible for one person to own or transport more than one rifle, ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While this wasn't directed at me, I'd like to at least comment.

The only agenda the media has is to get the scoop, to report something the others don't have. Add that to our instant communication society, and not a shred of journalistic integrity, and you can see where rumors, misunderstandings, and fallacies all become part of the 'official story'. That's the thing, the official story may actually change quite often, as facts are checked.

Currently, I don't think there is a solid 'official' story. But that certainly doesn't open the door to a President Obama run Mission Impossible storyline.

Things are beginning to be clearer as some of the mud gets washed away and we are seeing what's left.

I'm sure you've all played the game of telephone where you start with one fact, and pass it to your neighbor. By the time it goes full circle, it's never what it started out as being. Then imagine people jumping in and out of that circle with different intentions and adding to the already jumbled message.

No conspiracy, just confusion.

Thanks for the straight answer.

As I sit here at my computer, I also listen to the police scanner in the background. Doing it right now. And I have friends that work in the local newspaper. They too listen to police scanners.

By doing so, one really gets the "inside scoop" on breaking news. It does indeed provide a special perspective as to how stories develop. Frequently, a listener hears details of stories that never even make it into the newspaper.

Anyway, in this case the official story includes one outstanding contradiction to me. The boy shot up all those people inside the school with his rifle, then went back outside the school and placed the rifle in the trunk of his car, then went back inside the school to commit suicide. To me, that does not add up. I realize almost anything is possible, but that does not make sense.

And if they had to "buzz" anybody into the school, why did they let him in? Why are we not shown any footage of the boy entering the school, as we were shown videos and photos of all the 911 hijackers at ATMs, going through security, here and there and everywhere, but we're not shown any videos from the school? Kinda like we were not shown videos from around the Pentagon?

I dunno, there seems to be so many similarities to other suspicious events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the straight answer.

As I sit here at my computer, I also listen to the police scanner in the background. Doing it right now. And I have friends that work in the local newspaper. They too listen to police scanners.

By doing so, one really gets the "inside scoop" on breaking news. It does indeed provide a special perspective as to how stories develop. Frequently, a listener hears details of stories that never even make it into the newspaper.

Anyway, in this case the official story includes one outstanding contradiction to me. The boy shot up all those people inside the school with his rifle, then went back outside the school and placed the rifle in the trunk of his car, then went back inside the school to commit suicide. To me, that does not add up. I realize almost anything is possible, but that does not make sense.

And if they had to "buzz" anybody into the school, why did they let him in? Why are we not shown any footage of the boy entering the school, as we were shown videos and photos of all the 911 hijackers at ATMs, going through security, here and there and everywhere, but we're not shown any videos from the school? Kinda like we were not shown videos from around the Pentagon?

I dunno, there seems to be so many similarities to other suspicious events.

We didn't see any of these things until quite a bit of time AFTER the events.

Nibs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. Yet, there are pictures of a police officer taking a rifle out of the trunk.

No. There is not. There is video of a shotgun being pulled out of the trunk. That's it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. There is not. There is video of a shotgun being pulled out of the trunk. That's it.

I've seen the video. Looked like a rifle to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen the video. Looked like a rifle to me.

Then you don't know the difference between a rifle and a shotgun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then you don't know the difference between a rifle and a shotgun.

Yes I do. I qualified with the M-16 and others back in the glory days in the US Army.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I do. I qualified with the M-16 and others back in the glory days in the US Army.

So? You clearly can't tell the difference between an AR and a shotgun.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So? You clearly can't tell the difference between an AR and a shotgun.

I might be wrong on that one. Closer examination of a poor video DOES make it look like something other than M-16.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think its ok to own a M-16 or AR-15 Baberuth?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its ok to own an AR-15 or M-16. But I believe they need to be left at home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I already fessed up in the other thread. I was wrong in my first analysis. I had seen the video once. I too can experience cognitive dissonance, and in this case I did, have. I still cannot get my head around why they would do this. Who are they?

The medical examiner on TV was in an emotional state, which I can completely understand, and I was in an emotional state. I saw the pistol grip on the gun, and jumped to conclusions. Closer examination clearly reveals it was not an AR-15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it obviously isn't a hoax. No one hoaxes kids getting shot up in schools.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ali

Well, one would not think that somebody would "hoax" thousands getting killed at WTC and Pentagon, but 'somebody' did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ali

Well, one would not think that somebody would "hoax" thousands getting killed at WTC and Pentagon, but 'somebody' did.

Are you implying to everyone that 911 never happened?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you implying to everyone that 911 never happened?

I think he's implying the "event" happened, but that the "passengers" on the airliner's were whisked away into secret places and new identities.

Thus, there were no passengers on those jets, according to that conspiracy theory. They were removed prior to flight !!!!!!!!

I've heard that crap before. It's so weak of a theory that I can't raise my left pinky finger in support.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.