Sandy Hook conspiracy theory

[Len Colby]

Snopes debunks the points raised by Don and others:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/newtown.asp

[Ron Ecker]

It's not only a perfectly reasonable explanation it is the most likely one. Makes more sense than believing that the MIBH were unable to or forgot to lie to the SSA

What is the MIBH?

was he (the ME) 'in on it' too?

If there was a conspiracy, do you think it would be the first time that a ME was "in on it"?

Remember the sham autopsy at Bethesda with Moe, Larry, and Curly?

How about the ME who did the "autopsy" on Vince Foster? Reportedly he didn't bother with x-rays because "the machine wasn't working."

I doubt that the Sandy Hook ME was in on anything, but don't act like it couldn't happen.

Edited January 24, 2013 by Ron Ecker

[Ron Ecker]

nm. dupe.

Edited January 24, 2013 by Ron Ecker

[Ron Ecker]

Snopes debunks the points raised by Don and others:

http://www.snopes.co...uns/newtown.asp

Thanks for the link. There will be books written about Sandy Hook, and I look forward to reading a couple in the process of sorting out this mess.

One thing that bugs me in the Snopes link is the man seen handcuffed on the ground who was later released because police said he was an innocent bystander. Where is the media's curiosity about this person's identify?

It is not an idle question. In Dallas, which we know was a conspiracy, three tramps were arrested, later released because, the police said, they had no involvement. Why did it take about 30 years to identify these people (supposedly)? Where was the media's curiosity (other than the years-long speculation, hardly widespread, that one was E. Howard Hunt)?

When Oswald was arrested at the Texas Theater, another man was reportedly seen under arrest and escorted out the back of the theater. Why has he never been identified? Are we supposed to simply accept that he wasn't involved (with the police, as far as I know, offering no word on this person's existence one way or the other)?

According to my quick read, the Snopes site fails to mention one of the two Sandy Hook surviving wounded adults, who as far as I know remains unidentified to this day. This person is in effect missing, and the media, despite its saturation coverage of the tragedy, seems afflicted with complete disinterest in this person's story and identity. (If this person simply wants privacy, why doesn't the media simply say so?)

I think it is natural for those familiar with the JFK conspiracy to be suspicious about such stuff, and the media and authorities seem to want to play right into that suspicion and then dismiss us as wackos.

Edited January 24, 2013 by Ron Ecker

[Len Colby]

So all you've got is speculation.

[Mark Wengler]

Come on it was a mentally disturbed person that did it he killed his mother and went to the school and we know the rest.

Of course if anyone is right near by when it happened they may take that person in to custody to see if he had anything to do with it.

Once they found out this person had nothing to do with it the police let this person go. Did it occure to anyone that this person may not want thier name released. Because some people would think that he did have something to do with it an they ma try to harm this person.

[Don Jeffries]

The official narrative for what happened in Sandy Hook is impossible (that is, if you can even figure out exactly what the official narrative is, as it has never been consistent). The snopes "debunking" piece Len notes is the internet equivalent of the Popular Mechanics "debunking" of 9/11 "truthers." Snopes exists to "debunk" independent reporting from those unconnected to the msm.

The live helicopter footage that day is available in numerous videos online, and it reveals no one coming out of the school, and no one going in, either. All you see are pockets of police and fire fighters, standing in small groups, looking anything but concerned. The lack of activity is astonishing. No video anywhere of an evacuation of the students, and since there were supposedly some 600 students at Sandy Hook (I've seen various numbers reported, but this seems to be the most common figure), there would have had to have been at least that many parents coming to pick them up. Thus, the helicopter footage should have revealed a real madhouse- more than 1000 people milling about and the mass evacuation of students should have been caught on tape by someone.

One can also see that there are ZERO ambulances or rescue squads at the school. Once this kind of horrific mass shooting was reported, a slew of emergency medical vehicles should have been racing to the scene, to try and render assistance to the victims. Yet we are supposed to believe that not a single EMT person entered the building, to try and save anyone? There were initially two adults reported as injured, one of them shot in the foot. We have heard nothing more about these injured persons, and they have not been interviewed. One would think that kind of interview would have real dramatic impact, but evidently no one in the msm has been interested. If what we've been told is true, the bodies of these little children and adults were not removed from the school until about 10 p.m. that night. Does that sound like standard operating procedure?

As critics have noted, we've seen no footage of the crime scene whatsoever. Why no photo of the shot out glass at the entrance to the school, for instance? Instead, we have been shown the same ridiculous photo of about 20 kids being marched, with their eyes closed for some unknown reason, across a parking lot. It has been suggested (don't know if proof on this is clear) that this photo was actually taken during a drill a few months earlier. At any rate, why is that the only photo we're ever shown? Are we seriously going to believe that none of the photographers on the scene thought to snap other photos of students emerging from the building, or of tearful reunions with their relieved parents?

Instead, we have to be satisfied with a slew of interviews with one Gene Rosen, who is so bizarre and unconvincing that he single handedly creates doubt about this incident in a lot of minds. Again, I won't comment specifically on the parents that have been interviewed, but they do all share in common a startling lack of emotion about the sudden and violent loss of their children. And we must heed the warnings of Police Lt. Vance, who early on indicated that those who post "information" about this event online would be prosecuted. Exactly what crime would someone commenting on this widely publicized event be prosecuted for? Is it now a crime to dispute what government agencies say?

This event, like others of significance, goes well beyond the phony left-right paradigm. Thus, right-winger Glenn Beck attacks the Sandy Hook "truthers," along with his leftist co-hort, ex-CIA intern Anderson Cooper, who absolutely raged out on air against a college professor who questioned the official story, and in fact pretty much demanded he be fired. Good old Anderson- always ready to skewer the rich and powerful.

The attacks by Beck, Anderson, snopes and the like are all part of the Cass Sunstein campaign to make "conspiracy theories" illegal. Anyone who raises questions about the inconsistencies in this story is instantly labeled a "conspiracy theorist." The reason so many individuals are putting out these videos on the internet, focusing on the flaws in the official narrative with varying degrees of success, is because the mainstream "journalists," as always, just swallow every "official" pronoucement without question, and fawn over the likes of Gene Rosen. An average preschooler could do a better job of critical reporting than these msm "journalists" do.

The most basic questions about this event have not been answered sufficiently. What weapons were used? How did Adam have his brother's identificatin, when he hadn't seen him in two years? Why was a body-initially said to be that of Adam's father-reportedly discovered in Ryan Lanza's home in New Jersey? If it wasn't his father's body, what body did they find there? Who owned the car Adam drove to school that day? Was it Adam's mother, or a career petty thief that was seemingly unconnected to the Lanzas? How did Adam get into the school? First, a witness told reporters she saw the principal buzz Adam in, and that she did so because she recognized him (remember, this was early on, when all reports indicated his mother was a teacher there). Then, we were told Adam blasted his way in. Finally, police claimed they shot the glass out to open the entrance door. So which of the three versions are we to believe?

There are so many more questions here. If we truly had a free press, and real investigative reporters, there would be a huge story here. Instead, all we get from our establishment press are hit pieces on those "conspiracy theorists" who dare to point out that, once again, the emperor is wearing no clothes.

[Len Colby]

The official narrative for what happened in Sandy Hook is impossible (that is, if you can even figure out exactly what the official narrative is, as it has never been consistent).

You've yet to post any evidence that it unlikely let alone “impossible”. Please point out any contradictory information coming from official sources with citations.

The snopes "debunking" piece Len notes is the internet equivalent of the Popular Mechanics "debunking" of 9/11 "truthers." Snopes exists to "debunk" independent reporting from those unconnected to the msm.

I largely agree but wouldn't use the 'scare quotes' and would replace the underlined phrase with 'nonsense'. Get back to us when you can refute anything in it. I doubt you even read it, it addressed a few of your 'points'.

The live helicopter footage that day is available in numerous videos online, and it reveals no one coming out of the school, and no one going in, either. All you see are pockets of police and fire fighters, standing in small groups, looking anything but concerned. The lack of activity is astonishing. No video anywhere of an evacuation of the students, and since there were supposedly some 600 students at Sandy Hook (I've seen various numbers reported, but this seems to be the most common figure), there would have had to have been at least that many parents coming to pick them up. Thus, the helicopter footage should have revealed a real madhouse- more than 1000 people milling about and the mass evacuation of students should have been caught on tape by someone. One can also see that there are ZERO ambulances or rescue squads at the school. Once this kind of horrific mass shooting was reported, a slew of emergency medical vehicles should have been racing to the scene, to try and render assistance to the victims. Yet we are supposed to believe that not a single EMT person entered the building, to try and save anyone?

Please post a link to this supposed footage with the time and location confirmed. Based on this you seem to think most of the town (school workers, 1^st responders, parents neighbors) was 'in on it'. And how exactly do you discern the facial expressions of people on the ground in aerial footage?

There were initially two adults reported as injured, one of them shot in the foot. We have heard nothing more about these injured persons, and they have not been interviewed. One would think that kind of interview would have real dramatic impact, but evidently no one in the msm has been interested.

Some people do not seek media attention, considering the treatment Rosen is receiving that's understandable.

If what we've been told is true, the bodies of these little children and adults were not removed from the school until about 10 p.m. that night. Does that sound like standard operating procedure?

Get back to us with a citation. I don't think any of us, except Greg Burnham, Evan Marshall, Sherry Gutierrez and perhaps a couple of others are qualified to say. If true how does it fit in to your 'theory'?

As critics have noted, we've seen no footage of the crime scene whatsoever. Why no photo of the shot out glass at the entrance to the school, for instance?

Because the MIBH can pull off these kinds of elaborate 'psyops' but are unable to shoot out a glass entrance.

Instead, we have been shown the same ridiculous photo of about 20 kids being marched, with their eyes closed for some unknown reason, across a parking lot.

Obviously the kids are “in on it” too! Perhaps they are “crisis actors”. Some appear to be crying, I don't see any who clearly have their eyes closed. What exactly is “ ridiculous” about the photo?

It has been suggested (don't know if proof on this is clear) that this photo was actually taken during a drill a few months earlier.

On yeah two cops evacuate groups of 15 kids during drills all the time. The people pimping these theories are ridiculous they claimed Emilie Parker was still alive because her younger sister wore the same (or a similar) dress Emilie was photographed wearing a few years ago and her younger sister looks sort of like she did when she was the same age

At any rate, why is that the only photo we're ever shown? Are we seriously going to believe that none of the photographers on the scene thought to snap other photos of students emerging from the building, or of tearful reunions with their relieved parents?

OK so not only was the entire town, including perhaps even the kids “in on it” so are the entire press corps.

See more pix here:

https://www.google.c...1ac.SkhlA75YI-M

Instead, we have to be satisfied with a slew of interviews with one Gene Rosen, who is so bizarre and unconvincing that he single handedly creates doubt about this incident in a lot of minds.

Rosen is only “bizarre and unconvincing” to people who are already convinced Sandy Hook was suspicious.

Again, I won't comment specifically on the parents that have been interviewed, but they do all share in common a startling lack of emotion about the sudden and violent loss of their children.

Though our world views are very different you have up till now stuck me as a reasonable person, only two months ago I described you as the DPF's “voice of reason” but sadly you seem to have suspend critical judgment concerning this matter. And even more sadly you strayed from foolish to offensive with that remark. This was addressed by Snopes.

And we must heed the warnings of Police Lt. Vance, who early on indicated that those who post "information" about this event online would be prosecuted. Exactly what crime would someone commenting on this widely publicized event be prosecuted for? Is it now a crime to dispute what government agencies say?

I agree that Vance's comment was stupid but he said “misinformation” and from context was referring to people posting as Lanza and/or making threats.

http://www.nbcnews.c...crime-1C7648194

This event, like others of significance, goes well beyond the phony left-right paradigm. Thus, right-winger Glenn Beck attacks the Sandy Hook "truthers," along with his leftist co-hort, ex-CIA intern Anderson Cooper, who absolutely raged out on air against a college professor who questioned the official story, and in fact pretty much demanded he be fired. Good old Anderson- always ready to skewer the rich and powerful.

As a pointed out previously your description of Cooper's program was totally inaccurate which is why I keep asking you for citations which so far you've failed to do. And calling him a "leftist" is a real stretch. Rule 3 of the forum is, “Wherever possible, members should give references (books, documents, etc) concerning the comments that they make. This will help those carrying out academic research into this area;” rule 5 states “Members should take care over the accuracy of their postings...” but apparently you couldn't be bothered to follow either. As a moderator you should strive to set a good example.

A liberal and a conservative agreeing that something you believe in is absurd can indicate two thing a) the “left-right paradigm” is “phony” or what you believe IS absurd, this is an obvious case of the latter.

The attacks by Beck, Anderson, snopes and the like are all part of the Cass Sunstein campaign to make "conspiracy theories" illegal.

Got any evidence in support of this silly claim?

Anyone who raises questions about the inconsistencies in this story is instantly labeled a "conspiracy theorist." The reason so many individuals are putting out these videos on the internet, focusing on the flaws in the official narrative with varying degrees of success, is because the mainstream "journalists," as always, just swallow every "official" pronoucement without question, and fawn over the likes of Gene Rosen. An average preschooler could do a better job of critical reporting than these msm "journalists" do.

Even "an average preschooler" can see that "conspiracy theorist" and less diplomatic terms are apt descriptions of people backing such theories.

The most basic questions about this event have not been answered sufficiently. What weapons were used?

Answered repeatedly since day 2, his mother's Bushmaster AR-15 .223

How did Adam have his brother's identificatin, when he hadn't seen him in two years?

Huh? I don't see a dilemma here. Why would the MIBH make this up?

Why was a body-initially said to be that of Adam's father-reportedly discovered in Ryan Lanza's home in New Jersey? If it wasn't his father's body, what body did they find there?

You think it sinister the press could get facts wrong in a major breaking news case? Really? Really? This happens all the time. Get back to us with an article confirming his dad's body was found in his bother's apartment.

Who owned the car Adam drove to school that day? Was it Adam's mother, or a career petty thief that was seemingly unconnected to the Lanzas?

His mother's but apparently it was registered in a relative's name (no not the thief) see Snopes.

How did Adam get into the school? First, a witness told reporters she saw the principal buzz Adam in, and that she did so because she recognized him (remember, this was early on, when all reports indicated his mother was a teacher there). Then, we were told Adam blasted his way in. Finally, police claimed they shot the glass out to open the entrance door. So which of the three versions are we to believe?

As of Jan. 17 the local press was still reporting, “ Lanza shot his way into the school through a glass window at the front entrance” I have not seen any reports contradicting this. Post links.

http://articles.cour...-security-field

“

There are so many more questions here. If we truly had a free press, and real investigative reporters, there would be a huge story here. Instead, all we get from our establishment press are hit pieces on those "conspiracy theorists" who dare to point out that, once again, the emperor is wearing no clothes.

A “Truther” cliche is that they are “just asking questions” and a “Debunker” cliché is that they are “ignoring answers” though not about your post is a classic example.

[Ron Ecker]

So all you've got is speculation.

I would call it natural suspicion of the U.S. government, which has enough blood on its hands to pollute an ocean, till some questions are answered.

[Len Colby]

It's not only a perfectly reasonable explanation it is the most likely one. Makes more sense than believing that the MIBH were unable to or forgot to lie to the SSA

What is the MIBH?

Men In Black Helicopters

[Ron Ecker]

What is the MIBH?

Men In Black Helicopters

So that's what happened to the still unidentified second adult wounded survivor! She got a helicopter ride.

When I Google Natalie Hammond (the other adult wounded survivor), all I get are some of the early conflicting accounts of the tragedy. If anyone has any info at all on her present condition and if she has had a single word to say, please share it with us. Of course you'll have to have some mighty exclusive sources, since the media has no interest whatsoever.

Edited January 30, 2013 by Ron Ecker

[Ron Ecker]

Sandy Hook DA cites "potential suspects," fears for witnesses' safety.

http://digitaljournal.com/article/342829

[Ron Ecker]

Last night the husband of Mary Sherlach, the school psychologist who was killed, was on Piers Morgan. Robin Meade was filling in for Morgan. The subject, of course, was gun control, but Meade asked him to describe the heroic action of his wife. He said, "I don't have all the information yet." He said that she was one of four who left the meeting when the shooting started, and "Mary and Dawn (the principal) didn't make it back."

Two months after the shooting that's all he can tell us about the murder of his wife. Too bad the two adult wounded survivors, wherever they are, or the cops who have supposedly talked to them, can't tell him anything.

[Steven Gaal]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l911yxSqhI0&feature=player_detailpage

??

[Len Colby]

And??