Cover up stories and conspiracy theories are always entertaining. This is why X-Files was on for nine years. It’s why people still talk about JFK. Everyone loves to hear what REALLY happened.
The latest conspiracy theory to be bounced around the Internet is the idea that the recent tragic shooting in Newtown, Connecticut in which a man murdered twenty children and six adults before killing himself is actually a big government conspiracy of some sort. This includes the allegation that a six-year-old girl killed in the massacre was not REALLY killed in the massacre and that her father is not really her father but a paid actor. Take a look at this video:
Of the twenty-six victims, it seems that they think this one six-year-old is the magic bullet to this conspiracy. For ‘evidence’ they cite that Emilie was not in her classroom photo and that there is a girl who looks like Emilie wearing the same dress as Emilie days after she was killed. Instead of making the obvious choices (that Emilie wasn’t in school the day the picture was taken and her little sister is now wearing her big sister’s dress,) these conspiracy people want you to believe that one of the three sisters from that family disappeared, the one who was murdered is really alive, and that for reasons unknown her father is being played by an actor.
There are dozens of ways to debunk this, but before we get that let’s talk about something else really quick. In order for a conspiracy or cover up to exist, there must be an agenda. People don’t go to the trouble of creating elaborate conspiracies unless they have an agenda. So even if someone came up with a viable conspiracy theory that COULD be true, you have to establish some sort of agenda. It’s all well and good to say, “On 9/11 the government fired a missile into the Pentagon. It wasn’t a plane.” But first you have to answer the question, “Why would the government fire a missile at their own building when the twin towers had already been hit ?” If there’s no agenda, then all you have is an overly-elaborate idea that no one would actually do.
It’s cute how the video linked above dismisses the earlier ‘Libor’ motive as a hoax. They do this because it sounds like the must know what they’re talking about but really, at least that conspiracy theory has a motive. They think that some guy running through the woods is some mysterious ‘2nd Shooter’ and that at least one of the children of the massacre isn’t really dead and her father is being played in the media by an actor. This sounds every bit as ridiculous as the Libor conspiracy theory.
The photos they are comparing are one of Emilie provided by the family. So it’s probably not a brand new picture. It could be a few months or maybe even a year old. They then compare it to photos taken days after the shooting in which a little girl in the same dress is with Obama. Emilie had a little sister who is only a year younger than her. So it would make sense that they’d pass down the dress to the younger sister who looks like Emilie because she’s her sister.
All of this may seem like harmless flights of fancy except for one thing. Emilie Parker was a real six-year-old girl who was killed by a mass murderer. Take a moment and think of a horrible reality in which your six-year-old daughter has been murdered. Then imagine that someone on the Internet starts posting pictures of dead daughter, your surviving children and you who they claim is an actor. This is a reality for Robbie Parker. It is disrespect on an abhorrent level. It would be like going to a random guy’s funeral, getting up in front of everyone and telling them in detail how you were viciously raped by the dearly departed.
Some conspiracy theorists like to point to things like Watergate where dogged and determined journalists blew the lid off a story that actually did go all the way to the President. The problem with this is that the journalists actually went out and talked to people. They knocked on doors. They fact checked. They had a hell of a lot more than two photos of two girls who look alike before they went to press with anything.
It’s fine to question authorities. It’s fine to think twice about the new you are provided and try to find ‘the truth’. But you’re not a crusader for truth when you look at a few things you find odd, make a wild accusation that if false is the worst kind of slander, and then try to find ‘evidence’ to fit your narrative. You have a hell of a lot more than a couple of photos that look alike before you start dragging a dead six-year-old girl into your fantasies.
For more on some other debunking of Newtown Conspiracy Theories, check out the links below where real journalists spent some time debunking those who apparently have nothing better to do than make up things about dead little kids.
- Jack Cameron