I vote for Sandy Hook. The most obvious one.
Piece of shit video full of utterly bullshit and made by foil hat morons. "This video will prove"...nothing. If you had any brains, you would notice these few points which are common with all foil hat propaganda:
1. there is always a subtitles to force you read instead of thinking.
2. there is always clips from numerous of different medias combined to "prove" mixed statements.
3. there is most likely a narrator who tells you what to think with monotonic voice, so you don't need even try to think what you see
What is truth about the situation like this? At the first shot, hundreds of news agencies will burst on the scene to interview anybody who has been in range of 100 miles of the situation. They interview everybody, including fucking cats and dogs, and fill all medias with that shit. This is the playground of infowar imbeciles, because without any trying, there can be found hundreds of contradictory statements. They dig this shit out for the video, and narrow your point of view to see only what they are showing to you. In real world situation like this will need days to clear out, and weeks to find all the facts. That's why any statement given in the situation or right after it happen, is futile bullshit, and statements changes as soon as more information is found. If you think about it, you realize that I am right. There is no way in hell to get reasonably statements from hysteric people, who has just seconds before slosh in the blood of killed children's. There is no way in hell to get reasonably statements from hysteric parents, who children has been shot to pieces. Will that stop the news reporters to interview these people? There is no way in hell to stop them, so they do, and that's why the statements are what they are.
And foil hat morons use this to fool you to believe all the crap they throw at your way. If you think claims in the video, what exactly they prove? Nothing. They present just claims, no evidence at all. And furthermore, not just claims, but fucking childish claims at it's best. For example, they ask how this autistic psycho can be better shooter than "pro shooters" in previous school shootings? What pro shooters? There have been teenage idiots shooting in all mentioned cases, and what proves that Adam has not history at shooting, while his mother was shooter himself? And the claim ignore completely differences about the place and situation, and victims. It will be quite easy to shoot and kill a bunch of scared children's, who has been paralyzed by fear. What exactly is the point of that claim? Adam was incredible shooter because targets were smaller? How about Anders Breivik, who killed 70 teen's in the Norway? Ha has to be best shooter in this world regarding that claim, because his victims was running around the island where shooting occurred
How about some reality for change?
http://news.msn.com/crime-justice/details-emerge-on-sandy-hook-shooting-lanzas-belongings
