Debunked: Sikh Temple Shooting Conspiracy Theories

[Mick]

The "just make stuff up" Natural News immediately pounced on the latest tradgedy, grasping at any straw of suspicion. Here's what they came up with so far, and I'm sure there's more to come:

http://www.naturalnews.com/036707_Si...witnesses.html

Content from external source:


The official and repeating scenario ("we believe there was only one shooter") has already been contradicted.

Two witnesses (one who was apparently inside the temple and one outside who obtained information from his father) state there were multiple shooters.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=zYCurbSAsd4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=9ecdSKi9_fs

The second witness says four white males unleashed a coordinated attack inside the temple. The first witness says gas was released.

Neither of the witnesses were inside the temple. The first young man had things told to him by a priest who called using his father's phone (his father was killed). The second says "from what I've been told ..." when describing what happened, and gives the time as a very vague sometime "between ten and ten thirty".

But the very idea that there were four shooters, and the plan was to pretend there was only one, should be something that needs no debunking. Consider there was around fifty eyewitnesses, it's entirely ridiculous to suggest that nobody would notice there were four shooters.

And then Natural News goes on to cast suspicions on their witnesses:

Content from external source:

As with the two witnesses in Aurora who contradicted the official scenario, these two in Wisconsin are remarkably calm.

Neither Wisconsin man is wearing the ubiquitous Sikh turban. One man has a beard (traditional for Sikhs). The other man is clean shaven. Unusual. They both cut their hair---not traditional for Sikhs. I'm bringing this up because sometimes witnesses are planted, for various reasons, to offer misleading accounts.

Again it's ludicrous speculation. These were men who were also NOT AT TEMPLE. So it seems reasonable that they would not be the most religiously observant members of the community. Here they are casting aspersions on a young man whose father was killed.

It's sad that these things now immediately result in conspiracy theories. But perhaps it's an inevitable result of the coagulation of the conspiracy culture on the internet. Debunkers need to be quick to address any errors immediately - even preemptively - to avoid this needless and hurtful speculation.

[GuitKitty]

Wait . . . wait . . . so they reported what the witnesses said as possibly being true, then basically said, "Well, maybe you can't believe these guys"? Are they just trying to rope in the Cover-up of Multiple Shooter CTers AND the Government Disinfo Agents CTers as well? Are they trying to play both sides of the fence?

[Mick]

Yeah, it's not clear if they are trying to claim that there WERE multiple shooters, or the multiple shooters is the fake official story.

Conflicting eyewitness reports should not be a surprise to anyone.

[plane852]

Geez. Why is every little story such a conspiracy with people?

[solrey]

Wait . . . wait . . . so they reported what the witnesses said as possibly being true, then basically said, "Well, maybe you can't believe these guys"? Are they just trying to rope in the Cover-up of Multiple Shooter CTers AND the Government Disinfo Agents CTers as well? Are they trying to play both sides of the fence?

It's from one of those hacks at Natural News where they, as Mick said, "just make stuff up", besides NN and their target audience are not exactly mainstream anyways. For example, they also pick up on the gun control conspiracy.

Then we had Aurora, and now Oak Creek, Wisconsin. Both massacres will be used to push the gun control agenda, minus the obvious government crime associated with Fast&Furious.

They also said Aurora was staged to provide an excuse to confiscate all guns in the US under authority of the UN Small Arms Control Treaty being negotiated at the time, when in fact the US subverted negotiations and refused to sign the treaty. Of course the US didn't sign the treaty because selling mass quantities of guns and ammunition to violent groups committing crimes against humanity in other countries is a lucrative business for the good 'ole US of A. Not to mention the treaty specifically protected and preserved the sovereignty of gun laws within each signatories borders, but we wouldn't want a few facts to get in the way of a good conspiracy now, would we?

[Mick]

Geez. Why is every little story such a conspiracy with people?

More like every BIG story is a conspiracy. The bigger the story (9/11) the bigger the conspiracy. Any story that makes headlines for more than two days in a row is "obviously" some kind of government plot.

[Belfrey]

Content from external source:

As with the two witnesses in Aurora who contradicted the official scenario, these two in Wisconsin are remarkably calm.

Neither Wisconsin man is wearing the ubiquitous Sikh turban. One man has a beard (traditional for Sikhs). The other man is clean shaven. Unusual. They both cut their hair---not traditional for Sikhs. I'm bringing this up because sometimes witnesses are planted, for various reasons, to offer misleading accounts.

Again it's ludicrous speculation. These were men who were also NOT AT TEMPLE. So it seems reasonable that they would not be the most religiously observant members of the community. Here they are casting aspersions on a young man whose father was killed.

One of my childhood neighborhood friends was/is Sikh, and he has always kept his hair short, has rarely grown a beard, and until his wedding recently I never saw him in a turban. Just as with other religions, there is a lot of variation in how closely the traditions are followed.