Connecticut Elementary School Massacre

[DrEvil]

These parents..something is wrong with them. I don't know what, but something isn't right here.

Shock, PTSD, pills, booze, denial, weed, narcissism.

[compared2what?]

Nevermind.

No. Sorry. If I thought you literally couldn't stand to think about harm befalling defenseless babies without lashing out, I guess I'd say better me than them and move on. But since I'm sure that's not the case, that really isn't an adequate response.

So. I'd just like to note for the record that when you launch a hurtful personal attack on someone who wasn't doing anything to you because you're too consumed by the fear and rage that you imagine you'd feel over something that didn't happen to you to care about anybody else's feelings and she objects to being hurt by it?

That's not censorship. You're not the injured party. And you're not proving how sensitive you are to the suffering of innocents. Or to suffering. I mean, we're all very keenly attuned to our own pain. If that's all there was to empathy, everyone would be born a saint.

I don't want you to shut up. I just don't want to be attacked for being heartless enough to have a different experience of grief and loss than you do. I do my crying in the rain. I'm sorry that gets on your nerves. But I have a right. And I'm sure you can figure out how to handle it somehow.

I hope you keep posting. No hard feelings.

That's all I got.

[Sounder]

Sounder wrote:I normally stay as far as I can from talk of these ‘tragedies’ because I am forced to compare them with daily tragedies times one thousand that are inflicted all round the world.

When I wrote that I was trying to imply that I do not comment much on ‘conspiracy threads’, because I feel that other issues fester and get worse precisely because these localized events get presented as watershed events.

Check my posting history, I generally do not do ‘conspiracy theory’ because there are bigger fish to fry.

Thank-you C2W?, your fastidiousness has done you in, as per my evil plan. You see I have posted to RI for seven or so years. In that time you have done your best to respond to the ideas I present in only the most perfunctory or trivial way possible.

Now I have your attention and I trust others are paying attention also, so thank-you. Wrong can be tactical, right?

I am a slow thinker and this is one of the reasons I do not do so well in fast paced contexts such as RI. I usually don’t think about what to write until after the thread is already spent. Still, slow thinking has advantages also.

We have a situation here where two styles of personalities are trying to be useful to each other. Jack termed these styles, the skeptics and the speculators. I would like to suggest; analyzers and synthesizers as a pair that might be less pejorative as well as being more accurate. Analyzers have a natural, and I think appropriate ‘upper hand’ in that their understanding deals with knowing well the correspondences between categories that build our culture. The analysis element is responsible for much if not most progress in society. At the same time the analysis types, or the analyzer element in each of us, tends to reinforce existing understanding because that is what their/our personal identity is built on.

Synthesizers would tend to have less attachment to normative treatment of a given category. The interest of synthesizers is in new correspondences between categories and/or new categories altogether if need be. As even a simpleton should know and as Paul Feyerabend shows in my reading of Against Method, the early work that builds around new ideas is near always sloppy and wrong in the particulars if not larger issues. And probably only expressions of discontent to begin with so it’s not like the person should expect a medal.

Oh, and it’s also not well funded for obvious and perhaps sensible reasons.

Still life goes on and even the scholastics surely did tire of their arguments over angels and pins.

You see C2W?, ever since I was a child (fourth grade maybe) and had my first contact with science, the lesson had to do with pesticide resistance in India, I have been horrified at the idea that if you threw chemicals at something that it would adapt and the only recourse would to throw still more chemicals at the issue.

This then progressed to concern about effects of the many chemicals manufactured for various purposes that when combined are bound to impact our immune systems and health. It is simply common sense that if one puts toxins into ones body there are likely to be negative effects.

I was put off, and put on the trail of sussing out the nature of your prevarications after you made a comment about SSRI’s not contributing to violence because when the feelings are deadened, well the feelings are deadened. I thought someone might call you on that one, instead Jack saw fit to compliment you. First there is the example of ‘cutters’. They cut to have something to feel. If you lived a life of muted feelings, you might go to extremes to get feeling back. It’s kinda important to being human.

More on SSRI’s later. I know a thing or two about how the dominant narrative and normative thinking are maintained. GMO’s and vaccines both increase the chemical imprint on our bodies in ways that no one is incentivized to understand. You say (rhetorically speaking) there are no studies that show causation, I say; use your common sense, these things, especially when effects are added and/or combined, are bound to be a strain on our health.

Of course antibiotics, vaccines, GM foods, SSRI’s or what have you, have appropriate uses and should be studied thoroughly for their benefits. My issues are with the context of their use rather than the use itself. When things change from targeted to universal use I start to have problems. That is the kind of thinking that crashes systems.

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2012/1/prweb9146755.htm

A new Canadian study of the mechanisms of aluminum adjuvant toxicity in pediatric patients confirms that immune challenges during early development, including those vaccine-induced, can lead to permanent detrimental alterations of the brain and immune system function. Lucija Tomljenovic, PhD and Christopher A. Shaw, PhD of the University of British Columbia’s evidence-based study was recently published in Lupus, the only fully peer reviewed international journal devoted exclusively to lupus (and related disease) research.
Tomljenovic L, Shaw CA. Mechanisms of aluminum adjuvant toxicity in pediatric populations.
Lupus. 2011;21(2):223-230

http://journal.livingfood.us/2011/10/09 ... -children/

Salzburger Study
Results: of 1004 unvaccinated children, had
Asthma, 0% (8-12% in the normal population)
A-topic dermatitis 1.2% (10-20% in the normal population)
Allergies 3% (25% in the normal population)
ADHD 0.79% (5-10%) in children
Longterm Study in Guinea-Bissau (1 Kristensen I, Aaby P, Jensen H.:“Routine vaccinations and child survival: follow up study in Guinea-Bissau, West Africa”, BMJ 2000; 321: 1435–41)
The children of 15,000 mothers were observed from 1990 to 1996 for 5 years.
Result: the death rate in vaccinated children against diphtheria, tetanus and whooping cough is twice as high as the unvaccinated children (10.5% versus 4.7%).
New Zealand Survey (1992) (http://www.ias.org.nz)
The study involved 254 children. In which 133 children were vaccinated and 121 remained unvaccinated.
Result:
Symptom vaccinated unvaccinated
Asthma 20 (15%) 4 (3%)
Eczema or allergic rashes 43 (32%) 16 (13%)
Chronic otitis 26 (20%) 8 (7%)
Recurrent tonsillitis 11 (8%) 3 (2%)
Shortness of breath and sudden infant death syndrome 9 (7%) 2 (2%)
Hyperactivity 10 (8%) 1 (1%)

Now where things get touchy. GMO’s will be the next thing to be given legitimacy by the progressive left. I pray that our skeptical powers of analysis will build the necessary protocols to move forward safely. I have my doubts given the ongoing habits of very smart people.

I heard after the fact and fourth hand from authentic elders that 12/21/12 represents like a pivot point, not their words, sorry elders. They said if we as humans have not reached a certain level of development by then, times would get harder.

We synthesizers do not want to stop progress, we simply want progress with substance rather than what we get now, with hit or miss cocktails and where every symptom gets a new drug (and every drug creates new symptoms).

Mark Lynas presents a solid case for GMO’s in this talk. I think he is wrong on some crucial points but it might take a bit o figgern before a wit such as I can pin him down.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense ... wrong.html

in the commentsthis was found

Jacob Lawrence Crosby

"To admit that you got something wrong...in a single but influential article, like Allen did—is terrifying. It is also the mark of intellectual rigor."

Or rather, the mark of a man whose far-more-accomplished, New Yorker Staff Writer wife "wears the pants in that relationship" as one interviewer of Arthur Allen put it to me. I note that she, Margaret Talbot, is also "Senior Fellow" of the pharma-funded think tank "New America Foundation" that co-sponsors this blog.

I also note that her brother David Talbot is CEO and Founder of Salon, which claimed it was doing a "reader service" by yanking RFK Jr.'s article exposing the CDC's thimerosal cover-up from its website. This move was based on the pretense of a rumor spread by Allen's successor as the vaccine lobby's media marionette, Seth Mnookin, that Rolling Stone had secretly retracted the piece from its website - a rumor that proved to be utterly bogus.
http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/03/was-robert-f-ke...

As if anyone else could possibly cause a writer of Arthur Allen's mediocrity to regret writing an article - an unusually high-quality piece especially for Allen I might add - that was published in The New York Times Magazine, a magazine that his own wife had already been a contributor to for three years. I guess her brother's online magazine Salon running RFK Jr.'s expose was the last straw for the vaccine lobby and its New America Foundation to the point that Mrs. Talbot was warned that she better compel her hubby to clean things up if she wants to stay a "Senior Fellow" of the group that boasts it "invests in new thinkers."
http://newamerica.net/about

But what on earth is the vaccine lobby doing hauling out Arthur Allen now? His credibility was already sacrificed to spare HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and her department from considerable humiliation on national television when they were questioned by Emmy Award-winning investigative reporter, Greg Dobbs, about a quote Allen attributed to her saying that DHHS was pressuring media outlets to censor vaccine safety concerns.

DHHS and Sebelius' response?

"No one here can remember or determine that this quote is factual."

Ah well nobody's going to untie the Gordian knot tonight, so I sppose its time for sleep. Later

[MacCruiskeen]

The series of articles on this guy's website:

http://www.niallbradley.net/

...are by far the best things I've read on this whole horrible mess, i.e., the Sandy Hook massacre, the execrable corporate-media coverage thereof, the astounding amount of grotesquely false information fed to the media by "unnamed law-enforcement officials" (or "sources"), and the numerous serious questions that are currently being so conveniently obscured by various outbursts of irrationality on the web (whether real or planted).

I’m left wondering if people have taken leave of their senses or if this nonsense is being deliberately propagated by the Pentagon’s social media division.

See especially:

The Sandy Hook Massacre: Unanswered Questions

and:

Sandy Hook massacre: Evidence of official foreknowledge?

[JackRiddler]

I recently watched the doc "Going Postal". It wasn't that great, but the common thread they found among shooters is that they are people who feel profoundly wronged, have a score to settle, and apparently saw no other way. The doc showed that workplaces were abusive and stifling. The incidents did not represent some mysterious phenomenon, but can be understood in the context of what it is to be a worker in contemporary society, treated as a mindless cog, isolated socially, with little means of seeing one's status or accomplishments reflected in a broader, invested, community.

Thanks. Where is this available? On Netflix the same title is a feature.

[Project Willow]

That's because I got the title wrong, sorry. It's called Murder By Proxy. It's on Netflix and Youtube.

[justdrew]

I recently watched the doc "Going Postal". It wasn't that great, but the common thread they found among shooters is that they are people who feel profoundly wronged, have a score to settle, and apparently saw no other way. The doc showed that workplaces were abusive and stifling. The incidents did not represent some mysterious phenomenon, but can be understood in the context of what it is to be a worker in contemporary society, treated as a mindless cog, isolated socially, with little means of seeing one's status or accomplishments reflected in a broader, invested, community.

Thanks. Where is this available? On Netflix the same title is a feature.

well, you'd probably like the 2 part Terry Pratchett movie of that name. It's nice
checkout Hogfather too

[MacCruiskeen]

the common thread they found among shooters is that they are people who feel profoundly wronged, have a score to settle, and apparently saw no other way. The doc showed that workplaces were abusive and stifling.

Well, that's fine as far as it goes, Willow, i.e, it's plausible as regards people who do demonstrably "go postal" at their workplace. But where's the relevance to Sandy Hook? There is no evidence whatsoever - none - that Adam Lanza ever felt profoundly wronged, ever had a score to settle, ever "saw no other way", or ever even had a workplace of any kind at any time. All we have actually seen so far is a mass of frequently slanderous misinformation about the dead youth and his dead mother, plus That Scary Photo.

[Project Willow]

Well, that's fine as far as it goes, Willow, i.e, it's plausible as regards people who do demonstrably "go postal" at their workplace. But where's the relevance to Sandy Hook? There is no evidence whatsoever - none - that Adam Lanza ever felt profoundly wronged, ever had a score to settle, ever "saw no other way", or ever even had a workplace of any kind at any time.

There is no evidence whatsoever that this was an op, or that Lanza was a patsy, or whatever other theory has been trotted out here.

Lots of commentators here seem to require a simple, linear motive, but that's pretty rare when it comes to a lot of human violence. What Lanza did might not ever make sense to you, as you are not he, but it certainly made sense to him, in one way or another.

The crime itself is evidence, it is a form of communication. Whom did he target? His mother and children connected to her through her work at the school. It may not be the only possible answer, but I don't need Lanza here to suggest he might have had an issue with his mother, because he did that on December 14.


Reposting this from up thread:

James Gilligan wrote a couple of very important books called Violence and Preventing Violence. One of the many great insights he shares is that a huge percentage of what is called “senseless violence” is not senseless at all if you’re the shooter. There is an internal logic to their actions that makes sense. In a huge percentage of cases where men commit heinous acts of violence you see they’ve experienced shame in a profound way. The way the culture helps to shape their response to these feelings of shame is to create and even glamorize narratives for how they can externalize their pain and reclaim their manhood.

The story in many of these men’s heads goes something like this: someone has taken something from me, so I’m going to take it back. The victims of that “taking back” aren’t necessarily the original perpetrators or bullies of these guys. As I’ve said they’re merely props in a gendered enactment of revenge. But people don’t want to face this uncomfortable fact. Better to put it in a category of “mental illness” and not delve too much further into it. He just snapped, and so on.

But James Gilligan, a psychiatrist who worked with really violent men for many years, says it’s not true. It’s not how it works. These guys aren’t detached from reality and unaware of what’s going on around them. They’re intentional with what they’re doing and why.

This makes people very uneasy. They’re more comfortable with the idea that he’s a sociopath, or he just went off.

[MacCruiskeen]

You are not responding to anything I said, implied, or even hinted at. Here again is what I actually did say - in full (including the concluding line, which you missed out) because my whole post was very short and I would have thought very clear:

Well, that's fine as far as it goes, Willow, i.e, it's plausible as regards people who do demonstrably "go postal" at their workplace. But where's the relevance to Sandy Hook? There is no evidence whatsoever - none - that Adam Lanza ever felt profoundly wronged, ever had a score to settle, ever "saw no other way", or ever even had a workplace of any kind at any time. All we have actually seen so far is a mass of frequently slanderous misinformation* about the dead youth and his dead mother, plus That Scary Photo.

If you'd care to actually respond, belatedly, to what I actually wrote, do please feel free.

*Regarding the misinformation.

[Project Willow]

Why don't you detail exactly what misinformation you're talking about if you want me to respond to it, though frankly, I'm not that interested. I have no way of knowing what in this case in terms of details about Lanza or anyone else is misinformation. Surely there's been a lot of speculation. The only thing I'm referencing is the general fact that Lanza was the shooter, as I have no reason to doubt that at this point, as well as exploring, again, some of the theories as to why people commit mass murder.

Also, why is such a damn crime to do so?

[DrEvil]

All we have actually seen so far is a mass of frequently slanderous misinformation about the dead youth and his dead mother, plus That Scary Photo.

What about all the frequently slanderous misinformation about people involved in this mess?

Rodia is being harassed because some dumb, lazy fuck can't tell the difference between two different cops in two different places talking on the same frequency.
That poor sod who helped the six kids and the bus driver is being harassed and accused of being a paid actor. Because he helped hysterical children.
The Parents are being accused of lying and/or being actors, while at the same time trying to deal with the loss of a child.

*closes gate*

[MacCruiskeen]

Why don't you detail exactly what misinformation you're talking about if you want me to respond to it, though frankly, I'm not that interested. I have no way of knowing what in this case in terms of details about Lanza or anyone else is misinformation. Surely there's been a lot of speculation. The only thing I'm referencing is the general fact that Lanza was the shooter, as I have no reason to doubt that at this point, as well as exploring, again, some of the theories as to why people commit mass murder.

Also, why is such a damn crime to do so?

Willow, what's going on here? If we weren't talking about a mass murder of children, I would presume you were joking.

Why don't you detail exactly what misinformation you're talking about if you want me to respond to it, though frankly, I'm not that interested. I have no way of knowing what in this case in terms of details about Lanza or anyone else is misinformation.

I wrote, in the post you now pretend to be responding to:

Well, that's fine as far as it goes, Willow, i.e, it's plausible as regards people who do demonstrably "go postal" at their workplace. But where's the relevance to Sandy Hook? There is no evidence whatsoever - none - that Adam Lanza ever felt profoundly wronged, ever had a score to settle, ever "saw no other way", or ever even had a workplace of any kind at any time. All we have actually seen so far is a mass of frequently slanderous misinformation* about the dead youth and his dead mother, plus That Scary Photo.

If you'd care to actually respond, belatedly, to what I actually wrote, do please feel free.

*Regarding the misinformation.

^^I've now bolded that link and made the font colour red. HTH.

This is, by the way, the third time on this page that I have posted that very same link, which you are still claiming to be unable to locate. I now fully expect you to accuse me of repeating myself.

The only thing I'm referencing is the general fact that Lanza was the shooter,

You are begging the question. You are also appealing to authority. That's already two basic logical fallacies in one line alone. Adam Lanza's guilt is - as you well know - the very point at issue. It's as if I were to say, "The only thing I'm referencing is the general fact that Osama planned 9/11" or "The only thing I'm referencing is the general fact that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone" or "The only thing I'm referencing is the general fact that Mumia Abu-Jamal murdered a policeman".

Do you see why this might matter?

I honestly don't understand why you're carrying on like this. I also don't understand why I should need to spell it out in such pedantic detail, to you of all people.

Also, why is such a damn crime to do so?

Don't be daft.

[barracuda]

There is no evidence whatsoever - none - that Adam Lanza ever felt profoundly wronged, ever had a score to settle, ever "saw no other way", or ever even had a workplace of any kind at any time. All we have actually seen so far is a mass of frequently slanderous misinformation about the dead youth and his dead mother, plus That Scary Photo.

There is evidence that Adam Lanza committed the crime though, right? Should a commission convene for a determination of guilt, a district attorney would simply call any of the numerous witnesses who had seen Lanza dead in his battle gear with the weapon at his side at the scene. A medical examiner would testify regarding the self-inflicted gunshot wound that caused his death, and the use of the weapon found with Lanza in the slayings. The testimony of family members would be used to determine the identity of the body. For starters. And this is evidence we have actually seen published. It's not sworn evidence in a court of law, no. But we know we're not going to get that.

This evidence might be bolstered with photographs, but it's doubtful these images would be published for your assessment in any case, as they would likely out-scary even That Scary Photo, especially if he shot himself with the Glock in the face or head as reported. The 10mm slug can do incredible damage both coming and going.

Now if you don't accept the eye-witness testimony of police officers and medical examiners and family members, you are at least probably aware that in many, many cases, juries do. I guess you could call that an appeal to authority. This is not to say that there is no defense at all against these witnesses. You might ask if there are any eye-witnesses to the actual shootings themselves, any of them. We know there were, even if we don't have their testimony. Maybe Natalie Hammond, for instance, or some of the surviving children. Surely these people have been relentlessly interviewed by investigators. And you could attempt to throw their testimony into question, particularly if the shooter wore a mask.

But there's no point in acting like we don't already have evidence that he committed the crime. We do. It's incumbent upon us to assess that evidence and make our personal determinations regarding how useful or truthful it is.

My personal list of Shit I Want Cleared Up With Regards To This Case:

1. The reported altercation at the school between Lanza and staff.

2. Nancy Lanza's relationship with the school.

3. The identity of the person or persons pursued by the police outside the school.

4. Forensics regarding the type of ammo and the stray bullets hitting the three cars in the parking lot.

5. Details regarding the police search of the Lanza house.

6. Medical/psychiatric evidence regarding Adam Lanza.

7. The definitive ability or inability of law enforcement to determine his online history.

[Elihu]

My personal list of ... I Want Cleared Up With Regards To This Case:

1. The reported altercation at the school between Lanza and staff.

2. Nancy Lanza's relationship with the school.

3. The identity of the person or persons pursued by the police outside the school.

4. Forensics regarding the type of ammo and the stray bullets hitting the three cars in the parking lot.

5. Details regarding the police search of the Lanza house.

6. Medical/psychiatric evidence regarding Adam Lanza.

7. The definitive ability or inability of law enforcement to determine his online history.

would you like some cake with that sir? j/k....