Who Posted?

zoo22

zoo22

Well-known member
chrysostom said:
I did consider it an insult to have to comment on the impostor and the staged part which you did misrepresent
Click to expand...

Chrysostom, that's what the article you posted is suggesting.

You can not discuss it all you want. It doesn't change what the article says.
 
annabenedetti

annabenedetti

like marbles on glass
Here's my post from this morning:

annabenedetti said:
Okay, next one:

Along these lines on December 19 the Connecticut State Police assigned individual personnel to each of the 26 families who lost a loved one at Sandy Hook Elementary. “The families have requested no press interviews,” State Police assert on their behalf, “and we are asking that this request be honored.[1] The de facto gag order will be in effect until the investigation concludes—now forecast to be “several months away” even though lone gunman Adam Lanza has been confirmed as the sole culprit.[2]
With the exception of an unusual and apparently contrived appearance by Emilie Parker’s alleged father, victims’ family members have been almost wholly absent from public scrutiny.[3] What can be gleaned from this and similar coverage raises many more questions and glaring inconsistencies than answers. While it sounds like an outrageous claim, one is left to inquire whether the Sandy Hook shooting ever took place—at least in the way law enforcement authorities and the nation’s news media have described.
Click to expand...

It's interesting they put forth outrageous hypotheses while couching them in a protective coating. In this instance:

"While it sounds like an outrageous claim..."

And in the first quote I gave you, when conjecturing about Carver being an imposter:

"While the latter sounds untenable it would go a long way in explaining..."

Do you see what's happening? They distance themselves from the conspiracy theory by couching it in language that protects them from being called out for actually making the claim. But their goal is realized the minute someone takes that theory and disseminates it to a wider audience. The bait's been spread. Like it has been right here when you posted it to this forum.

So here we have them putting out the idea that what? The shooting was staged?!
Click to expand...
 
The Barbarian

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
Similarly, if there's a poster you can't stand, the best way to get them to go away or change their behavior is to attack them every time they post.
Click to expand...

You know what worked for me? Forgiving him, and asking for his forgiveness. I didn't actually want to make him go away. But he did.

God bless him.
 
chrysostom

chrysostom

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
resurrected 154
chrysostom 113
zoo22 102
annabenedetti 87
Town Heretic 77
noguru 39
Christ's Word 36
This Charming Manc 20

I could lock the thread
but
they need a place to play
and
someone to beat on
 
zoo22

zoo22

Well-known member
Rather than waiting the entire year, we might as well just get this out of the way now:

And The TOL Busybody Award for 2013 goes to...

Chrysostom!
 
Totton Linnet

Totton Linnet

New member
Silver Subscriber
annabenedetti said:
I was trying to think who you reminded me of here, and then it came to me:


eeyore-rainwallpaper.jpg



Hey chrys, how about a new avatar for a new year? :)
Click to expand...

I used to like the ol' white nag avatar
 
Delmar

Delmar

Patron Saint of SMACK
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
chrysostom said:
do you know how to turn them off?
I know my avatar turns them off
and
that is what it is supposed to do
Click to expand...

I do like your avatar. He was a lot more electable than "the most electable candidate".
 
annabenedetti

annabenedetti

like marbles on glass
chrysostom said:
resurrected 167
chrysostom 116
zoo22 103
annabenedetti 92
Town Heretic 82
Christ's Word 45
noguru 39
This Charming Manc 20
rainee 11
Arthur Brain 6

art is now joining the fray with his friends zoo, anna, and town
and
they have a lot of posts saying things like:
I don't know
you can't know
he could have
are you suggesting that it didn't happen?
so
their real job is to attack cw and myselfwho are trying to make sense of what happened
and
notice anna and town have yet to enter the other thread
so
maybe it is just me that they are after
or
it is just town
and
anna comes after him
Click to expand...

I can think for myself, all your gossipy potshots to the contrary. And I think your repeated insinuations regarding intent are intentionally manipulative and deceitful.

You never answered my last post to you in sandy hook so I'll post it again for you here in case you want to answer it, and to let the record show what my "attack" method looks like when it's you I'm "after:"

annabenedetti said:
chrys, it's a little frustrating for you to say you want to know what I believe, what I think is reasonable - while admitting that you didn't ask me.

When all of this is resolved, it will either show there was a coverup - or there wasn't. I've never once said there isn't one, so we're not arguing coverup/no coverup. We're arguing coverup/I don't know. Which, when you look at it that way, kind of leaves me wondering why that seems to be such a problem. You will either being right or wrong, because you think there is a coverup going on. Right now I don't stand a chance of being either, because all I've said is "I don't know." You seem angry that I haven't staked out a position on whether there's a coverup, which is rather surprising and I haven't figured out yet why.

I will say that all claims to the contrary, no one here who hasn't taken a firm stand that there's a coverup has tried to prevent you from saying anything you want to say about it. I think those claims of us trying to shut you up/shut down discussion are damaging and I'm sorry to see them being made. It's too bad that my/our discussion of your premise is being portrayed as somehow dangerous to your free speech, because that's simply not the case. It seems a rather manipulative poisoning of the well.


You say that like we're the only ones posting.

Your numbers do illustrate that the discussion is rather well-rounded.

I've told you this already too. That weird stuff came from your link.

And, as I told you earlier, I'm guessing you didn't actually read the article and didn't know it was in there and so maybe it came as kind of a shock to see it highlighted.

It would have helped a lot if you'd said something like "I want to make it clear there's some information in the article I don't agree with, such as the imposter theory hinted at, but here's what I do think is important..." but you didn't. You just got mad that I highlighted your article. Even if you said it later, after the fact: "I didn't know those theories were being hinted at, and I want to make it clear I don't agree with them" it would have helped quite a lot.

You're welcome to believe that. I have no problem with that whatsoever. I appreciate that you thought what she had to say was interesting. I don't appreciate the ways she chose to say it. And in return you should have no problem with my opinion on that whatsoever. Because the freedom to hold a particular view extends to both of us, right?

I don't like to play rough. I will stand my ground though, especially when I'm being repeatedly misrepresented.
Click to expand...
 
annabenedetti

annabenedetti

like marbles on glass
chrysostom said:
I would have 300 posts in that thread
if
I answered everything you and your friends posted
so
anyone can see I just don't bother most of the time
Click to expand...

You bothered 116 times, just not for that one of mine. That's too bad. I would've been interested in your response.
 
Rusha

Rusha

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
chrysostom said:
resurrected 170
chrysostom 120
zoo22 104
annabenedetti 97
Town Heretic 91
Christ's Word 50
noguru 40
This Charming Manc 20
Arthur Brain 18

thanks art for stopping by to give town's friends added encouragement
it is not easy doing what they do
and
your support is appreciated
Click to expand...

You're welcome ... :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top