Thread: Was Sandy Hook a Hoax?

Yeah I picked it to prove a point. That it is totally absurd yet you still think it is evidence of something. The Dark Knight Rises is a major block buster, it was in pretty much every theater in the US at that time, so that is meaningless. There is no weird coincidence at all. There are probably hundreds of names located all throughout the movie on stuff, and there where dozens of movies showing at that time as well. So there was probably thousands of names in movies at that time, the fact that one happened to have the same name is entirely meaningless.

You keep saying the videos are green screen, even though I already explained how they are not. I proved that objects at a distance can appear nearer when using a telescopic lens like they were using. I explained how all those visual errors are due to video being compressed to lower quality video. They are common errors and you can find them in pretty much any video if you switch formats and compression rates.

I already explained why the dates of the websites were off, and proved that you can create a website, then later change it and it will still give the old creation date.

I pointed out videos of where people were crying, proving you wrong when you said no one ever cried, and I also explained how those people were all acting normal. They are not acting, you are imagining that.

Little children were shot at school, people wanting to pass gun control law after that is normal. How is that even remotely strange? Little children dying is a horrific and emotional imagine so people felt strongly about it, that is entirely normal, nothing strange at all.

I explained how that video of people walking around the firehouse, doesn't actually show a single person walking around the firehouse. It is played on a loop to give the impression people are circling when they are not. That video is just someone manipulating you into thinking these silly things.

I already posted images of Emilie Parker and her sisters, in which you can clearly see that the girls are always who they claim they are. People who say she was photographed after the attack used an old outdated photo of when she was much younger to confuse people. Why don't you ever use the newest photos where it is clear it is a different girl?

There was ambulances at the school, there is a ton of videos of them. Pictures of ambulances at the firehouse also doesn't mean they weren't' at the school, they have wheels, they can drive around and be at different locations and there is more than one of them.

I already went over how the guy in the woods was reported as being suspicious and so the cops investigated and it turned out it was just some guy out for a walk, so had nothing to do with sandy hook.

None of these things are even remotely compelling. They are just a collection of random nitpicks attached with absurd conclusions you jumped to. You personally think someone looks kind of like they are acting, so that means they are proven to be actors right? No, that isn't how evidence work. In fact, your opinion on someones behavior is pretty much meaningless. You are already biased so are going to judge them based on the opinions you already hold, and secondly you are not an expert on behavior.

What is the most ridiculous of all however, is that you know all that stuff isn't true, yet you still push it. If all of it was true, that means the school, the police, the fire department, the medical examiner, the children, the parents, the entire city, the producers of the batman movie, the president, all main stream media outlets, congress, and everyone who made webpages, and Meskhetyw in this website, are all involved in it.

Either you are suffering from a massive paranoid fantasy in which everyone in the world has joined together for a massive conspiracy against you, or you don't believe that everyone was involved. If you don't believe everyone is involved then clearly some of the holes are not actually holes, and if some of them are not actually holes, shouldn't you first figure out which are true and which are not before believing in them all?

The reason you believe all of them, is because it gives you flexibility to defend your position. If one turns out to be untrue you just switch to the next, then to next. The flaw in that however, is that you have to give up all critical thinking abilities, because so many contradict each other, and there is no way all could be true.

Steph:

I wasn't making any particular statements about the current political balance in the state of CT; I was only speaking from my experience of living there as a very regulatory and restrictive state.

I am not affiliated with any party, but if you had to label me I would choose "constitutionalist". I was not contradicting anyone on purpose, just providing information that people where actually killed. I don't watch TV and do not trust the media either.

There are very few respectable modern politicians, as they do not know constitutional law in the original understanding, which if one has any doubt of can be surmised from the records of the state ratifying conventions (when the states agreed to accept the constitution, they made it clear what various clauses meant to them as a condition of agreement). So when one wants to know which states are worse than others, one needs only examine their laws. States have their own constitutions as well, in line with the point of the 10th amendment; thus resolving the problems of consolidation. This means little these days unfortunately. People generally care about what concerns them in the present (or what they fear), and politicians care about getting re-elected.

...and yes, trying to convince people on the net is pretty pointless, but so it is in reality. I think Nietzsche's "Flies in the Marketplace" is fitting.

I apologize if I misunderstood your post and answered with completely irrelevant information. Thanks for the polite reply.

Now I will *respectfully* leave this thread.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I think there is a good chance that the person or people behind Sandy Hoax got their kicks by slipping Sandy Hook onto a map in Dark Knight Rises.

Ok, I have to admit, I thought you were serious this whole time. Now I know you're just a Poe. A halfway decent one at that.

Thank you Alric - I was getting an ominous feeling, I might be in for a lot of work!!

goodsigh2.gif



At least in one video the claim is raised that there were only dead, and no hurt children there.
This made me think a bit ..

I do not know, if the claim is true.
But even if, or if only few hurt children - it is not so strange at all.

Imagine - you are the shooter - you go after one child after the other.
The ones not acutely followed get away - for a while.

So - all the shots are in the furniture, the walls - everywhere.
They point out that the culprit highly probably was not an expert shooter - that does not lead to the conclusion of no/few hurt children.
But a lot of smashed up stuff.

This is conjecture of mine - have there been numbers on that - how many bullets recovered?


If there were only either dead children, or ones without a scratch ..
The parents would not "fly about in a panic" - no emotional super gau live on camera.

But that is normal - what would you do?
Get the heck away with child or with grief - or not?
While in other scenarios - doctors were fighting for children´s lives - and on camera too, I guess.

The only "whitecoat" here was a physician, specialised in forensic autopsy - totally out of himself with all the "work" and on top of that - the press and amateurs with cams on his neck.



With no hurt children - you need no ambulances near the school.
You use the big cars to block the road from reporters and nosy people in general - potentially ambushing traumatised children.

So - all the pictures make perfect sense - in my view.
All the superfluously called in techs - med- and otherwise - will stay - no upheaval wanted from nobody.

And that there is so much seeming "peace" - as in contrast to the other dramas.
That is why I think, the others were so very different - "normal" - that there was (still) life-saving and drama going on, when the first camera churned away..

Originally Posted by Alric

What is the most ridiculous of all however, is that you know all that stuff isn't true, yet you still push it. If all of it was true, that means the school, the police, the fire department, the medical examiner, the children, the parents, the entire city, the producers of the batman movie, the president, all main stream media outlets, congress, and everyone who made webpages, and Meskhetyw in this website, are all involved in it.

Hm..

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Unlike the other schools where shootings happened, Sandy Hook is being demolished.

Maybe what tips your opinion towards this deep suspicion is really the above^^?
All the fellow puzzle-ers-outs making lots of seeming sense.

This I think, is really your point Universal Mind - isn´t it?
And does it not make sense, that Sandy Hook is bound to appear "strange" aka different, than "past school-shooting-tragedies" in the above light?

But here - if the children were either dead - and the parents in shock and going away ..
or their kids were alive - and the parents in shock and going away ..
Then nobody realistically emotional is left to film.

Like real-life-common-sense-understandable-behaviour - ripping their hear out ..

What is left are spectators - silently looking on and going about.
Including many oifficials and professionals of some colour or other - gathered there for dealing with a disaster - when the in truth were dealing with a tragedy.
This will look suspicious - the "peace" - hence the hobby scepticists go all over it.

And with mostly - or at least often - not naming sources for their claims, even - the hobby-video-filmers.
This comes off as poor.

I know - don´t attack - there were one or the other fitting source mixed in.
Regardless.

This is not the above-mentioned answer even yet .. I am pretty active tonight on here ..

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

Ok, I have to admit, I thought you were serious this whole time. Now I know you're just a Poe. A halfway decent one at that.

Originally Posted by urbandictionary

Poe

A person who writes a parody of a Fundamentalist that is mistaken for the real thing. Due to Poe's Law, it is almost impossible to tell if a person is a Poe unless they admit to it.
"The Bible is true because it's the inerrant word of God! I know because the Bible says so! Glory!"

You sure?
Now - I learned a new English word - day saved - hallelujah

Originally Posted by Alric

Yeah I picked it to prove a point. That it is totally absurd yet you still think it is evidence of something. The Dark Knight Rises is a major block buster, it was in pretty much every theater in the US at that time, so that is meaningless. There is no weird coincidence at all. There are probably hundreds of names located all throughout the movie on stuff, and there where dozens of movies showing at that time as well. So there was probably thousands of names in movies at that time, the fact that one happened to have the same name is entirely meaningless.

Right, all kinds of obscure geographical locations are all over movies everywhere all the time, including a blockbuster like Dark Knight Rises right before a huge news story at a place called Sandy Hook happens. That's so realistic. Not even a coincidence. Nothing to see here, folks!

Originally Posted by Alric

You keep saying the videos are green screen, even though I already explained how they are not. I proved that objects at a distance can appear nearer when using a telescopic lens like they were using. I explained how all those visual errors are due to video being compressed to lower quality video. They are common errors and you can find them in pretty much any video if you switch formats and compression rates.

No, they are not common errors. Anderson Cooper's nose disappeared. A woman walked through a woman. Parts of bodies at the firehouse disappear from the screen when they cross a line. A lot of weird shit.

Originally Posted by Alric

I already explained why the dates of the websites were off, and proved that you can create a website, then later change it and it will still give the old creation date.

And I said that creating a Facebook page for a cause and then deleting everything to create a new page a few days later would be absurd, especially when starting a whole new page would be much easier. I also pointed out that the Social Security Death Index listed Adam Lanza's death date as December 13, 2012 although the alleged incident happened on December 14, 2012.

Originally Posted by Alric

I pointed out videos of where people were crying, proving you wrong when you said no one ever cried, and I also explained how those people were all acting normal. They are not acting, you are imagining that.

Anybody who can spot a bad acting job can see that they are clearly acting. In what videos are they showing tears? I know of three, none of those show a tear actually coming out of an eye. Find me the crying you are talking about. Who did it?

Originally Posted by Alric

Little children were shot at school, people wanting to pass gun control law after that is normal. How is that even remotely strange? Little children dying is a horrific and emotional imagine so people felt strongly about it, that is entirely normal, nothing strange at all.

Strawman. I didn't say it's crazy that any family member would support gun control. I said it is crazy that they all, aside from one token dad who went on Fox News, support gun control instead of some other measure. When my cousin was shot, I was never mad at the gun. I was mad at the son of a bitch who shot him. These people bitch about nothing but the damn gun. I challenge you to find me one alleged family member expressing anger toward Adam Lanza. I bet you can't do it. I would be in support of arming teachers and increasing the number of armed guards at the school. Why did a gun control bandwagon arise while no other bandwagon did? More fishiness.

Originally Posted by Alric

I explained how that video of people walking around the firehouse, doesn't actually show a single person walking around the firehouse. It is played on a loop to give the impression people are circling when they are not. That video is just someone manipulating you into thinking these silly things.

The loop stresses the fact that a long ass line of people went out of the firehouse, around it, and back into it.

Originally Posted by Alric

I already posted images of Emilie Parker and her sisters, in which you can clearly see that the girls are always who they claim they are. People who say she was photographed after the attack used an old outdated photo of when she was much younger to confuse people. Why don't you ever use the newest photos where it is clear it is a different girl?

Uh, find me those "newest photos." Find me a picture of Madeline and Emilie in which they look identical. The famous picture was supposedly taken very close to the alleged massacre.

Originally Posted by Alric

There was ambulances at the school, there is a ton of videos of them. Pictures of ambulances at the firehouse also doesn't mean they weren't' at the school, they have wheels, they can drive around and be at different locations and there is more than one of them.

Really? Pictures of ambulances right in front of the school? Please show them to me. I haven't seen them yet. I also haven't seen photos of hundreds of kids in front of the school that day. Can you find me those too?

Originally Posted by Alric

I already went over how the guy in the woods was reported as being suspicious and so the cops investigated and it turned out it was just some guy out for a walk, so had nothing to do with sandy hook.

Yeah, some guy was just out for a walk in camo pants and got chased through the woods by two other guys, though they veered off in separate directions. Good story.

Originally Posted by Alric

None of these things are even remotely compelling. They are just a collection of random nitpicks attached with absurd conclusions you jumped to. You personally think someone looks kind of like they are acting, so that means they are proven to be actors right? No, that isn't how evidence work. In fact, your opinion on someones behavior is pretty much meaningless. You are already biased so are going to judge them based on the opinions you already hold, and secondly you are not an expert on behavior.

You are in denial. I don't think "someone looks kind of like they are acting." I think they ALL look VERY MUCH like they are acting. I didn't watch that with bias. It is what really caught my attention. I was never a conspiracy theorist until I saw their extremely terrible acting. I have a history of acting and writing scripts, and I have always been very opinionated on who is good at acting and who isn't. I know bad acting. These people are horrible actors. They are what drew most people into thinking Sandy Hook was a hoax. Sandy Hoax 101 is the obviously bad acting. I also am in fact an expert on behavior. I have a degree in psychology and worked as a case manager at a mental health center for almost three years. My job to analyze behavior and write reports on it, among other things, including grief counseling. I know human behavior. Those crisis actors are phony as $7 bills.

Originally Posted by Alric

What is the most ridiculous of all however, is that you know all that stuff isn't true, yet you still push it. If all of it was true, that means the school, the police, the fire department, the medical examiner, the children, the parents, the entire city, the producers of the batman movie, the president, all main stream media outlets, congress, and everyone who made webpages, and Meskhetyw in this website, are all involved in it.

No, it does not mean they are all in on it. Do I really need to explain this to you again? It would take a few actors and a whole lot of fooled people. Do I need to say that again for you?

Originally Posted by Alric

Either you are suffering from a massive paranoid fantasy in which everyone in the world has joined together for a massive conspiracy against you, or you don't believe that everyone was involved. If you don't believe everyone is involved then clearly some of the holes are not actually holes, and if some of them are not actually holes, shouldn't you first figure out which are true and which are not before believing in them all?

There you go again. See my previous comment. I am not saying I am 100% positive that none of the holes can be filled, but I do say that you have filled none of them.

Originally Posted by Alric

The reason you believe all of them, is because it gives you flexibility to defend your position. If one turns out to be untrue you just switch to the next, then to next. The flaw in that however, is that you have to give up all critical thinking abilities, because so many contradict each other, and there is no way all could be true.

Tell me about the contradictions. If you think you can fill the holes, do it. You haven't done it yet. You didn't even address these in you post:

lack of evidence that Adam Lanza was alive in the previous three years, the fact that many of the alleged parents are proven stage performers, Gene Rosen's nonsense story, contradictory and absurd witness accounts, cops video at wrong school, no video or photo of Lanza at the school although the school had a high quality surveillance system, ambulances blocked in at the firehouse, scheduled school demolition, Wayne Carver saying he would examine the suspect's body last, parents not allowed to see bodies, cop threatening people who express public disagreement with his story, photoshopped Parker photos (kids with no legs), etc.

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

Ok, I have to admit, I thought you were serious this whole time. Now I know you're just a Poe. A halfway decent one at that.

Why do you waste your energy posting in here? It's not like you have had anything worth a shit to say.

You seem to think that all names in the world are unique or something. Do I really need to remind you there are 9 billion people on earth? What does that mean? First off, the school probably isn't the only place in the US called sandy hook. Your assumption that the batman movie was about that specific place is just that, an assumption. You are assuming that because it fits your theory. You came up with a theory and then tried to shove things into it, to fit it. Instead of looking at things objectively. Otherwise you would realize that sandy hook could of been referenced to many other things.

Secondly, that goes for the 'actors' as well. The claim that the parents are professional actors came from someone using a list of actors, who are totally different people, living in different places, who just happened to have the same name. That is extremely common. There is like three people in just my state alone that has the same name as me. There are probably people with your name around the country as well.

I already went over it and over it about the tears, and how it is difficult to see tears in videos, yet you kept ignoring it. You can see it in the eyes and face though and tell they are crying. Especially the people who's face are all red with puffy eyes, they are clearly crying but you claim they weren't. You are just ignoring the facts.

Go back in this thread to post #29 and look at the pictures I posted. The two pictures are both recent photos of the two people and they don't look identical at all, they are clearly two different people. The only pictures of the two girls that look extremely similar is a recent picture of Emilie, compared to a picture of her 2 years prior. A fact that you keep ignoring no matter how many times I point it out.

I don't know what the point of even talking to you, when you just ignore everything I say. You keep posting things that are clearly manipulated and set up to get a specific response out of people. Like the firehouse video, that is put on a loop to make people look like they are walking in a circle. They are not walking in a circle. When not played on a loop that is obvious. It is played on a loop for the sole purpose of tricking people into thinking they are going in a circle when they are not. Just like the videos played at lower quality so that errors appear in the footage. Just like you using a 2 year old photo instead of a recent one to get the results you want.

If they are real holes then why the manipulation? Why the lying, why try to trick people? I don't think you are doing it but you fell for it. The people making those videos did it for the sole purpose of tricking others. Most of those videos the person tells you how to react, and how to read the situation before they show you the video, to prep you into think line of thinking. Most of those videos, if you watched on your own you would not see what they see, and you would never come to their conclusion. They are just manipulating people into seeing things that are not there.

If you think Adam Lanza was dead 3 years prior to the situation, then show me the proof. I am pretty sure you don't have any proof at all. That is how conspiracies theories work, you just pull random shit out of your ass and make a ton of random claims until someone sticks. It is easy to claim there are a lot of holes when you flat out ignore all the evidence put forth proving you wrong. Such as the videos I showed that were higher quality and so the minor video errors didn't happened.

That is absolute evidence and you even ignore that. I posted a high quality video that showed a person walking around an object. Then posted a lower qualified video where there was slight bleeding of colors and for a fraction of a second it looks like the person walked through the object, and I explained how it was due to the low quality. And what did you say? That the high quality, original version was edited to trick people. That makes no sense. You are obviously wrong and I proved it, and you just ignored the evidence that was right in your face.

Originally Posted by Alric

You seem to think that all names in the world are unique or something. Do I really need to remind you there are 9 billion people on earth? What does that mean? First off, the school probably isn't the only place in the US called sandy hook. Your assumption that the batman movie was about that specific place is just that, an assumption. You are assuming that because it fits your theory. You came up with a theory and then tried to shove things into it, to fit it. Instead of looking at things objectively. Otherwise you would realize that sandy hook could of been referenced to many other things.

What does the rest of the world have to do with anything? We are talking about a huge blockbuster American movie that came out right before a huge American news event. Why do I have to keep telling you that I am not completely convinced there was a connection? I said that it is at least a really bizarre coincidence. It is one more brick in the wall of the Twilight Zone. Understand? Don't respond to my points if you are not going to fully read them.

Originally Posted by Alric

Secondly, that goes for the 'actors' as well. The claim that the parents are professional actors came from someone using a list of actors, who are totally different people, living in different places, who just happened to have the same name. That is extremely common. There is like three people in just my state alone that has the same name as me. There are probably people with your name around the country as well.

No, I am not talking about mere lists of actors where the names happen to be the same. You made that up. Watch this at 21:30 and see the truth with your own eyes.

Originally Posted by Alric

I already went over it and over it about the tears, and how it is difficult to see tears in videos, yet you kept ignoring it. You can see it in the eyes and face though and tell they are crying. Especially the people who's face are all red with puffy eyes, they are clearly crying but you claim they weren't. You are just ignoring the facts.

Link me to them!!! Seeing is believing. Show me something! Show me a fucking tear coming out of an eye. I'm tired of your empty assertions. Show me a tear coming out of an eye. I want to see it.

Originally Posted by Alric

Go back in this thread to post #29 and look at the pictures I posted. The two pictures are both recent photos of the two people and they don't look identical at all, they are clearly two different people. The only pictures of the two girls that look extremely similar is a recent picture of Emilie, compared to a picture of her 2 years prior. A fact that you keep ignoring no matter how many times I point it out.

What???? The girl in the Obama photo is Emilie, but you claim it's Madeline. So, show me another picture of Madeline looking identical to Emilie. In other words, show me a picture in which Madeline looks the way she supposedly does in the Obama picture. Understand? This is just a challenge. You are not going to be able to do it.

Originally Posted by Alric

I don't know what the point of even talking to you, when you just ignore everything I say. You keep posting things that are clearly manipulated and set up to get a specific response out of people. Like the firehouse video, that is put on a loop to make people look like they are walking in a circle. They are not walking in a circle. When not played on a loop that is obvious. It is played on a loop for the sole purpose of tricking people into thinking they are going in a circle when they are not. Just like the videos played at lower quality so that errors appear in the footage. Just like you using a 2 year old photo instead of a recent one to get the results you want.

I explained the purpose of the loop. If it makes things clearer for you, pause the video and look at the human circle. It's there.

Originally Posted by Alric

If they are real holes then why the manipulation? Why the lying, why try to trick people? I don't think you are doing it but you fell for it. The people making those videos did it for the sole purpose of tricking others. Most of those videos the person tells you how to react, and how to read the situation before they show you the video, to prep you into think line of thinking. Most of those videos, if you watched on your own you would not see what they see, and you would never come to their conclusion. They are just manipulating people into seeing things that are not there.

Again, pause the video. The looping is not necessary. It is about emphasis. If some people are manipulative with their videos, it's to get extra hits. It doesn't mean Sandy Hook wasn't a hoax.

Originally Posted by Alric

If you think Adam Lanza was dead 3 years prior to the situation, then show me the proof. I am pretty sure you don't have any proof at all. That is how conspiracies theories work, you just pull random shit out of your ass and make a ton of random claims until someone sticks. It is easy to claim there are a lot of holes when you flat out ignore all the evidence put forth proving you wrong. Such as the videos I showed that were higher quality and so the minor video errors didn't happened.

The burden is not on me. You prove that Adam Lanza was alive. The lack of evidence that he was alive is a hole in the official story. Your claims about my personal intentions are unfounded and false. I suggest you stick to the holes issue. I know you are stumped on a lot, but I am not going to let you change the subject to me without calling you out on it.

What about the other holes? I posted them for you again. Have you found a picture of Adam Lanza at the school yet? They had a high level surveillance system. There are other holes too.

If you claim a person couldn't possible commit a crime because he was dead, then the burden of proof is most definitely on you. Otherwise you are just pulling it out of your ass, like you are doing everything else. You are just saying a bunch of stupid things in hopes that people get sick of looking up all the information to disprove you, so you can claim you won. The fact that his body was found at the scene, is pretty good evidence that he was alive.

Also someone being a musician doesn't mean they can't have children. Just because someone is an actor doesn't mean they can't have children. Are you mentally retarded? Are you being stupid on purpose? Having been in some third rate band when you were younger doesn't mean you are a paid actor, and anything you do is part of a hoax. Like a quarter of the US population knows how to play a musical instrument. You can find someone who was in a band almost any where you go.

Also I don't need to look up another picture of Madeline, I already proved it wasn't Emilie, and that is enough. You claimed it was Emilie so I proved it wasn't. I don't need to prove that it was someone else. That is kind of funny though, that you think you can basically claim anything you want and the burden of proof is always on the other person and you never have to back up anything you say.

Also, how many times do I need to point out that there was no loop at the fire house. There was some people walking to the left behind the building and some people walking right at the top of the building. THAT IS NOT A LOOP. For it to be a loop the SAME person has to walk in a circle around the building. If someone walks left, then an entire different person walks right, that isn't a loop, that is just two people walking in opposite directions. That is where the manipulation comes in. They looped the video to try to make it appear that the people walked all the way around when they did not. They were separate people who were going in different directions. Not a single person in that video went in a circle. Not a single one.

Isn´t the Obama with children photo supposedly incl. Emmily - based on the dress, Emily wore, when she was younger?
Maybe a sister wore it?
A question only.

Didn´t go back to check in the videos.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I think both of you just went off to Mars. I don't have a theory about what did happen.
What I know is that the official story is full of holes.

Oh no - this is not Mars - but thinking realistically.

You do have theories, too - you theorize it was some knuckleheads in Obama´s administration, doing it behind his back.
The official version has loads of evidence for it and it only being so - much more - otherwise it would be a scandal and not a conspiracy theory.
Just that evidence is not put forth by eager, fanatic persons.
Deceiving on purpose - surely at points.

So - you ignore all the evidence and logic, which contradicts your theory that something is wrong - maybe because it does not have as passionate followers?



My brand-new conspiracy-theory:
The strange internet-myth of Sandy Hook being a Hoax - stems from an anti-Obama conspiracy with lots of actors involved.

So much easier to create a discrepancy here and there - manufacture such holes - as the whole city as said.



like Alric says - this is to be counted on - and trying to stick this to Obama (at the least doubt indirectly concerning his competence - suggesting above mentioned "knuckle heads"):

Who would do such a thing?
How about Fox News?

..

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

It would not take the entire town being in on something for it to work.

I doubt it.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

If there really was a shooting, there could have been just a few people in on it.
If there was not a shooting and the alleged parents are crisis actors, it could have been them, their children who were sent somewhere else or else phony children who were created through computer tricks, a few cops, the medical examiner, and an orchestrator.

How can it be, that the other, regular children at that school are missing classmates?
You say - maybe they did not loose any - or - there were fake children added to then fake-shoot.


Why do we not hear these parents, hearing this from their children?
What about all the personnel - they sure would know, if a child is missing let alone - how many?

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

The rest of the town could have been fooled.

Really?

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Unlike the other schools where shootings happened, Sandy Hook is being demolished.

That is from where the wind blows I strongly feel..

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Sandy Hook Elementary School razing begins in Newtown, Conn. - NY Daily News

I do not easily accept conspiracy theories. You can't pin that description on me.

You are discussing it.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

http://www.dreamviews.com/extended-d...-9-11-a-4.html

Didn´t click - doesn´t feel on topic.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I don't have to explain what really did happen at Sandy Hook to point out that the official story is a huge WTF. These are the major holes in the official story:

You don´t - but what is "WTF"?
That I also might have thought on topic - and meant completely differently.
If you want to claim something as blatantly outrageous and unheard of - in this way - you better would have some explanations at least in your own head, I find.

Maybe another time..:

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Bad acting from alleged family members, pre-dated web pages, lack of evidence that Adam Lanza was alive in the previous three years, bizarre gun control (as opposed to some other political stance against murder) bandwagon, the fact that many of the alleged parents are proven stage performers, use of green screens, firehouse circle walk, Gene Rosen's nonsense story, Emilie Parker photo with Obama, contradictory and absurd witness accounts, cops video at wrong school. No video or photo of Lanza at the school although the school had a high quality surveillance system, no ambulances at the school, ambulances blocked in at the firehouse, "Sandy Hook" on map in Dark Knight Rises, police chase in woods, scheduled school demolition, Wayne Carver saying he would examine the suspect's body last, parents not allowed to see bodies, cop threatening people who express public disagreement with his story, photoshopped Parker photos (kids with no legs), etc.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Oh, really? You're from Newtown, which has a population of 1,973? And you found my thread? I think I have seen about 1,973 people on the internet claiming to be from Newtown. They all know somebody who knows somebody who knows somebody who heard something. I'm sorry that the love for Obama and hatred for guns in Newtown turned you into a hermit although you went to a different state.

By the way, I do study politics to the point of obsession, and I wrote the first draft of a world history textbook. You made a judgment error.

Anger, no. Just skepticism and disagreement. I notice that you are playing professional victim. That too is common. I'm sure there are servers in Newtown that your account can use. There is clearly an organized effort to have people all over the internet saying they are from Newtown. It's every bit as pathetic as the hoax itself.

However, it's not impossible that you are from Newtown. I am just pointing out that your line of argument is all over the place and is typically bullshit. If the people of Newtown are really this determined to express passionate defense of the official story, go on television and do it. Let Ben Swann or RT interview you. The audience you are trying to reach on the internet will be watching.

And - towards Meskhetyw before:

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Oh, really? You're from Newtown, which has a population of 1,973? And you found my thread? I think I have seen about 1,973 people on the internet claiming to be from Newtown. They all know somebody who knows somebody who knows somebody who heard something. I'm sorry that the love for Obama and hatred for guns in Newtown turned you into a hermit although you went to a different state.

Anger, no. Just skepticism and disagreement. I notice that you are playing professional victim. That too is common. I'm sure there are servers in Newtown that your account can use. There is clearly an organized effort to have people all over the internet saying they are from Newtown. It's every bit as pathetic as the hoax itself.

However, it's not impossible that you are from Newtown. I am just pointing out that your line of argument is all over the place and is typically bullshit. If the people of Newtown are really this determined to express passionate defense of the official story, go on television and do it. Let Ben Swann or RT interview you. The audience you are trying to reach on the internet will be watching.

By the way, I do study politics to the point of obsession, and I wrote the first draft of a world history textbook. You made a judgment error.

..

A. Andrew Gonzales - Lucid Dreaming Artist

Think about it for a trying out, Universal Mind - you claim, the actors are the inconsistent ones - would make lots more sense they were hired by conservative knuckleheads (for example Fox News ..) instead of Obama´s obscure knuckleheads.

In order to put in some more substance into the arguments discrediting Sandy Hook - some things might have been pretty professionally done on the side of my hypothetical pro-gun conspirators.

But Fox News does of course not do such a thing directly, if.
Rather let youtube do it - keep the hands clean..
Or do they??

Counting on the natural reactions towards the dead kids/gun control equilibrium - it was definite, that there would be outcries for more gun-control.
Going with my thought-experiment - Fox news pushes the interest into said "holes" - the amateurs fall over themselves and some assholes laugh.

And children are dead and it is a tragedy.

Are you as open-minded, Universal Mind - as to take up this point of view just for trying, how it feels?

I just want you to go look at it from the other side of the fence, if you will.

Are your real objectives really the reduction of gun-control in America - and that is it?
So much internet-traffic of our´s here - is it about that, maybe mainly?

So you really assume that the effect on gun-control was the deeper motive of your conspirators?
The rise in control was not - and was not expected to be - overly harsh.
The key objective of such an also theoretically expensive maneuver?

I rather don´t think so.

Originally Posted by Alric

If you claim a person couldn't possible commit a crime because he was dead, then the burden of proof is most definitely on you. Otherwise you are just pulling it out of your ass, like you are doing everything else. You are just saying a bunch of stupid things in hopes that people get sick of looking up all the information to disprove you, so you can claim you won. The fact that his body was found at the scene, is pretty good evidence that he was alive.

You are being either really slow or really dishonest. I didn't claim Lanza was not alive. I said that there is a problem with the idea that he was. Again (this is getting ridiculous.), I am pointing out holes in the official story. There is stuff that does not add up about it. If you don't understand what I mean by that, let's work together on it. I keep having to tell you the same thing over and over. Your claims about my intentions are still unfounded and false. What evidence do you have that Lanza's body was found at the scene? I know it's part of the official story, which is what I am saying is full of holes. Lack of evidence that Adam Lanza was alive is a hole. Do you understand what I mean by that? If not, tell me. You have been missing the boat so far.

Originally Posted by Alric

Also someone being a musician doesn't mean they can't have children. Just because someone is an actor doesn't mean they can't have children. Are you mentally retarded? Are you being stupid on purpose? Having been in some third rate band when you were younger doesn't mean you are a paid actor, and anything you do is part of a hoax. Like a quarter of the US population knows how to play a musical instrument. You can find someone who was in a band almost any where you go.

WTF? Being an actor or musician doesn't mean a person can't have children? Who are you talking to? You have some of the wildest interpretations of my comments. Many of the Sandy Hoax actors were stage actors and/or stage musicians in adulthood. Lots of them! That is not just all that common. The vast majority of adults do not fit the label. It is as if you are just trying to be an attorney for a pathetic side of an argument. What is your deal here?

Originally Posted by Alric

Also I don't need to look up another picture of Madeline, I already proved it wasn't Emilie, and that is enough. You claimed it was Emilie so I proved it wasn't. I don't need to prove that it was someone else. That is kind of funny though, that you think you can basically claim anything you want and the burden of proof is always on the other person and you never have to back up anything you say.

No, you did not prove that it wasn't Emilie. You said it was Madeline, and whoever it was looked identical to Emilie. Madeline did not look identical to Emilie. So I am giving you the challenge of finding a picture of Madeline in which she did look identical to Emilie. You can't find one. They don't exist because Madeline was not identical to Emilie!!! That is Emilie in the Obama picture.

Originally Posted by Alric

Also, how many times do I need to point out that there was no loop at the fire house. There was some people walking to the left behind the building and some people walking right at the top of the building. THAT IS NOT A LOOP. For it to be a loop the SAME person has to walk in a circle around the building. If someone walks left, then an entire different person walks right, that isn't a loop, that is just two people walking in opposite directions. That is where the manipulation comes in. They looped the video to try to make it appear that the people walked all the way around when they did not. They were separate people who were going in different directions. Not a single person in that video went in a circle. Not a single one.

This is another very simple concept that you are not acknowledging. Look at this, and you will see a circle. There are no people entering or exiting the circle. It is a circle, not a randomly structured crowd. Walking people form a circle. What on Earth is that about? Pause at 2:41.



StephL, my biggest concern here is not even loss of gun rights. It is having a government that is corrupt and controlling enough to pull something so evil. The government has way, way too much power over the people. Taking away gun rights is just one of the things I am worried they might do. We need to drastically shrink the size of government, and this hoax is strong evidence of that.

Why do you think it might be a conservative hoax if there was a hoax? I don't rule it out. Maybe they made the hoax transparent so that people would wig out and stand against gun control. Maybe. However, Dianne Feinstein introduced gun control legislation the next month. It failed in the Senate in April, but a very threatening and close call legislative process took place.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

You are being either really slow or really dishonest. I didn't claim Lanza was not alive. I said that there is a problem with the idea that he was. Again (this is getting ridiculous.), I am pointing out holes in the official story. There is stuff that does not add up about it. If you don't understand what I mean by that, let's work together on it. I keep having to tell you the same thing over and over. Your claims about my intentions are still unfounded and false. What evidence do you have that Lanza's body was found at the scene? I know it's part of the official story, which is what I am saying is full of holes. Lack of evidence that Adam Lanza was alive is a hole. Do you understand what I mean by that? If not, tell me. You have been missing the boat so far.

What do you want? Me to go dig up his body then drive it over to your house so you can see it? His body was found at the scene, and the police confirmed his identity. Your claim is in fact, that he wasn't alive, so where is your proof? Where is there anything at all that suggests he was dead? If there is nothing to suggest he was dead prior to the event, then there is no hole. There is just you saying you don't want to believe the official story for no reason other than it doesn't fit your theory. That is just a bizarre thing you pulled out of your ass, saying he died 3 years ago. You have nothing at all to support that. What happened three years ago that you think killed him?

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

WTF? Being an actor or musician doesn't mean a person can't have children? Who are you talking to? You have some of the wildest interpretations of my comments. Many of the Sandy Hoax actors were stage actors and/or stage musicians in adulthood. Lots of them! That is not just all that common. The vast majority of adults do not fit the label. It is as if you are just trying to be an attorney for a pathetic side of an argument. What is your deal here?

You are the one that implied that if a person was a musician and their child is reported dead, there is a chance they don't really have the child and it was just an act. That is what you are implying when you say stuff like that, and yea it doesn't make any sense when you say it out loud does it? So why are you saying it? First off why would a musician be hired as an actor? Being a musician doesn't make you an actor. Secondly there are a lot of them, a huge chunk of adults were in bands at some point. Also if they were actors who didn't have children, and didn't live in the state, why don't you show us evidence of that? Where is your evidence? Oh that is right, you have none. You just jump to the conclusion that if a person played a musical instrument they must be a lying scumbag who would make up having a child and claim that child die. If you had evidence that they didn't have any children, that would be a hole, someone happening to be a musician isn't a hole.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

No, you did not prove that it wasn't Emilie. You said it was Madeline, and whoever it was looked identical to Emilie. Madeline did not look identical to Emilie. So I am giving you the challenge of finding a picture of Madeline in which she did look identical to Emilie. You can't find one. They don't exist because Madeline was not identical to Emilie!!! That is Emilie in the Obama picture.

I don't know what to say, your eyes are just bad. There is clear differences between the two pictures I posted. If you think all blond girls look the same then I am not sure how to argue it, you are just wrong, and maybe consider getting glasses.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

This is another very simple concept that you are not acknowledging. Look at this, and you will see a circle. There are no people entering or exiting the circle. It is a circle, not a randomly structured crowd. Walking people form a circle. What on Earth is that about? Pause at 2:41.

I don't know how many times I have to point this out but just because people happen to be vaguely going in the same direction and then some other people happen to be vaguely going in another direction, doesn't mean people are walking in a circle. To prove someone is walking in a circle you would have to show a video of a person leaving the door, walking around the building and entering the other door, which does not happen. The video does not show anyone walking in a circle. No one in that video is walking in a circle like you claim. Your claim is a lie and totally false.

The people at the top of the screen and the bottom of the screen are different people. If person A walks left at the bottom of the screen and person B walks right at the top of the screen, that does not mean person A and B are walking in a circle. It means there is two people who just happen to be walking in opposite directions. I will repeat it again, since you don't seem to understand it. No one is walking in a circle, those are separate groups of people.

Let me try another approach. You say you are an expert in human behavior and well studied in that area. Let me ask you then, when a human comes to a decision and they believe something, what happens when you confront them and tell them that they are wrong?

Originally Posted by Alric

What do you want? Me to go dig up his body then drive it over to your house so you can see it? His body was found at the scene, and the police confirmed his identity. Your claim is in fact, that he wasn't alive, so where is your proof? Where is there anything at all that suggests he was dead? If there is nothing to suggest he was dead prior to the event, then there is no hole. There is just you saying you don't want to believe the official story for no reason other than it doesn't fit your theory. That is just a bizarre thing you pulled out of your ass, saying he died 3 years ago. You have nothing at all to support that. What happened three years ago that you think killed him?

Jesus Fucking Christ, why are you still saying that I am claiming Lanza wasn't alive? I have been extremely clear about this. You are just being straight up dishonest. If you do that one more damn time, I'm done discussing this with you. Read what I write if you are going to comment on it. All we have is the word of some cops and the medical examiner that Lanza was alive. Isn't it odd that there is no photograph of Lanza at the school although the school had a high quality surveillance system? Well, isn't it???? Nobody verifies that he was alive in the three years before Sandy Hook. He stopped showing up at his barber shop, kids were telling their parents that he was no longer around, he had no computer accounts, neighbors never saw him any more. He was not seen by anybody who was alive after Sandy Hook. That means shit doesn't add up. It doesn't mean I am completely convinced Adam was not alive. Don't miss this point again.

Go to my last post and start the documentary, Sandy Hoaxed 2nd Edition - The Sandy Hook Gun Control False Flag, and watch it starting at 36:35. You will get the picture of why there his an enormous hole in the Adam Lanza claim. I have another challenge for you. Find a picture of Adam and Ryan Lanza together. Can you do that? I am not convinced that they aren't the same person. There is good evidence suggesting that they very well may be. Watch the documentary clip. The facts are astounding.

Originally Posted by Alric

You are the one that implied that if a person was a musician and their child is reported dead, there is a chance they don't really have the child and it was just an act. That is what you are implying when you say stuff like that, and yea it doesn't make any sense when you say it out loud does it? So why are you saying it? First off why would a musician be hired as an actor? Being a musician doesn't make you an actor. Secondly there are a lot of them, a huge chunk of adults were in bands at some point. Also if they were actors who didn't have children, and didn't live in the state, why don't you show us evidence of that? Where is your evidence? Oh that is right, you have none. You just jump to the conclusion that if a person played a musical instrument they must be a lying scumbag who would make up having a child and claim that child die. If you had evidence that they didn't have any children, that would be a hole, someone happening to be a musician isn't a hole.

You're being ridiculous because you are stumped. Many of the people who really seem like crisis actors... ARE actors! Get it? This isn't rocket science.

Originally Posted by Alric

I don't know what to say, your eyes are just bad. There is clear differences between the two pictures I posted. If you think all blond girls look the same then I am not sure how to argue it, you are just wrong, and maybe consider getting glasses.

Uh, I'm saying they don't look the same. Madeline and Emilie do not look the same. Got it? Madeline and Emilie do not look the same. Okay? They don't look the same. So why are you saying that the girl who looks identical to Emilie in the Obama photo is Madeline? It's very obviously Emilie. There should be no confusion. Madeline and Emilie do not look the same! Get it?

Originally Posted by Alric

I don't know how many times I have to point this out but just because people happen to be vaguely going in the same direction and then some other people happen to be vaguely going in another direction, doesn't mean people are walking in a circle. To prove someone is walking in a circle you would have to show a video of a person leaving the door, walking around the building and entering the other door, which does not happen. The video does not show anyone walking in a circle. No one in that video is walking in a circle like you claim. Your claim is a lie and totally false.

Did you pause the video and SEE THE CIRCLE?????

Originally Posted by Alric

The people at the top of the screen and the bottom of the screen are different people. If person A walks left at the bottom of the screen and person B walks right at the top of the screen, that does not mean person A and B are walking in a circle. It means there is two people who just happen to be walking in opposite directions. I will repeat it again, since you don't seem to understand it. No one is walking in a circle, those are separate groups of people.

It is a circle of people. Perhaps you should consider getting glasses.

Originally Posted by Alric

Let me try another approach. You say you are an expert in human behavior and well studied in that area. Let me ask you then, when a human comes to a decision and they believe something, what happens when you confront them and tell them that they are wrong?

An intelligent person challenges you to prove it and does not agree with you until you actually have proven it. Pressure is worthless on a critical thinker.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Jesus Fucking Christ, why are you still saying that I am claiming Lanza wasn't alive? I have been extremely clear about this. You are just being straight up dishonest. If you do that one more damn time, I'm done discussing this with you. Read what I write if you are going to comment on it. All we have is the word of some cops and the medical examiner that Lanza was alive. Isn't it odd that there is no photograph of Lanza at the school although the school had a high quality surveillance system? Well, isn't it???? Nobody verifies that he was alive in the three years before Sandy Hook. He stopped showing up at his barber shop, kids were telling their parents that he was no longer around, he had no computer accounts, neighbors never saw him any more. He was not seen by anybody who was alive after Sandy Hook. That means shit doesn't add up. It doesn't mean I am completely convinced Adam was not alive. Don't miss this point again.

Go to my last post and start the documentary, Sandy Hoaxed 2nd Edition - The Sandy Hook Gun Control False Flag, and watch it starting at 36:35. You will get the picture of why there his an enormous hole in the Adam Lanza claim. I have another challenge for you. Find a picture of Adam and Ryan Lanza together. Can you do that? I am not convinced that they aren't the same person. There is good evidence suggesting that they very well may be. Watch the documentary clip. The facts are astounding.

You are the one being dishonest here. You basically claimed that you believe he was either dead or is a made up person that never existed, yet you wont provide any evidence for that. In fact, you already mentioned he had a social security number. So if Adam never existed and is really Ryan, why does he have a social security number? Does the conspiracy go all the way back to when he was born? Not to mention that Ryan doesn't really look that much like him.


You can't just say that the shooter is probably either dead or never even existed, then say, "Well I didn't make any claim" and I am just throwing out ideas. Why would you suggest just silly and far out things, unless you thought they were serious ideas that were true?

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

You're being ridiculous because you are stumped. Many of the people who really seem like crisis actors... ARE actors! Get it? This isn't rocket science.

No what I said makes perfect sense, your claims are the ridiculous one. First off musicians are not actors. Musicians play music, they are not actors, by the very definition of the words they are not the same. If someone wants to film a movie they hire actors, not musicians. If someone is putting on a play, they hire actors not musicians. Why would musicians be actors? Secondly, how can you claim they are professional actors, when you also claimed they sucked at acting?

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Uh, I'm saying they don't look the same. Madeline and Emilie do not look the same. Got it? Madeline and Emilie do not look the same. Okay? They don't look the same. So why are you saying that the girl who looks identical to Emilie in the Obama photo is Madeline? It's very obviously Emilie. There should be no confusion. Madeline and Emilie do not look the same! Get it?

The girl in the photo with obama is clearly Madeline. When you compare close up of their faces, it is extremely obvious that Madeline in the picture with obama is in fact Madeline and not Emilie. She only looks similar to Emilie when view from further away because she wore a hand me down dress.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Did you pause the video and SEE THE CIRCLE?????

It is a circle of people. Perhaps you should consider getting glasses.

Again you keep ignoring my points. You can't see a circle when the video is paused. Any group of people will look like a circle if you pause it. That gives you no information on where they are going. Pausing it just shows you that at that given time there was people on all sides of the building, it doesn't prove they were walking in a circle. Like I said over and over and over, there is no one in the video who walks around in that circle. Which means it isn't a circle, it is just a group of people.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

An intelligent person challenges you to prove it and does not agree with you until you actually have proven it. Pressure is worthless on a critical thinker.

The answer I was looking for, was that they get extremely defensive, and make up excuses, like you are doing now. Here is an interesting article that I think you should read. You are basically doing what they describe in it. The more evidence we show that you are wrong, the more you dig your heels in, and the more excuses you make up to justify the position you have.

How facts backfire - The Boston Globe

Originally Posted by Alric

You are the one being dishonest here. You basically claimed that you believe he was either dead or is a made up person that never existed, yet you wont provide any evidence for that. In fact, you already mentioned he had a social security number. So if Adam never existed and is really Ryan, why does he have a social security number? Does the conspiracy go all the way back to when he was born? Not to mention that Ryan doesn't really look that much like him.

Quote where I supposedly said it, liar. Maybe this really is over your head. I don't have a theory about what happened except that it was a hoax because the official story doesn't add up. I have pointed out possibilities, and yes some of them contradict others. You are not taking in the fact that I am not claiming what happened. Do you understand what I am saying????????????? If not, tell me what you are not getting.

Originally Posted by Alric

No what I said makes perfect sense, your claims are the ridiculous one. First off musicians are not actors. Musicians play music, they are not actors, by the very definition of the words they are not the same. If someone wants to film a movie they hire actors, not musicians. If someone is putting on a play, they hire actors not musicians. Why would musicians be actors? Secondly, how can you claim they are professional actors, when you also claimed they sucked at acting?

Stage performance is acting. That is why every famous singer or rapper who has ever played a role in a movie did a great job with it. John Denver was awesome in Oh God, Ice Cube is a great actor, Mark Wahlberg is one of the best actors in the world, Dianna Ross kicks ass at acting, Dwight Yoakam was a total bad ass in Sling Blade, Ringo Starr is a good film actor, Queen Latifah is more famous for being an actress than she was as a rapper, Courtney Love is a really good actress, etc. Do you think that's all a bunch of really weird coincidence? Those people were already acting on stage on a regular basis. The Sandy Hoax actors suck at acting and were never in anything big. They were small time and not very good.

Originally Posted by Alric

The girl in the photo with obama is clearly Madeline. When you compare close up of their faces, it is extremely obvious that Madeline in the picture with obama is in fact Madeline and not Emilie. She only looks similar to Emilie when view from further away because she wore a hand me down dress.

It's not just the dress. It's the face, the smile, the hair, and even the way the hair is parted.



Now find me a picture from a different scene with Madeline looking like you claim she does in the Obama photo.

Originally Posted by Alric

Again you keep ignoring my points. You can't see a circle when the video is paused. Any group of people will look like a circle if you pause it. That gives you no information on where they are going. Pausing it just shows you that at that given time there was people on all sides of the building, it doesn't prove they were walking in a circle. Like I said over and over and over, there is no one in the video who walks around in that circle. Which means it isn't a circle, it is just a group of people.

They were in a circle. Not every crowd looks like a circle. That is so asinine.

Originally Posted by Alric

The answer I was looking for, was that they get extremely defensive, and make up excuses, like you are doing now. Here is an interesting article that I think you should read. You are basically doing what they describe in it. The more evidence we show that you are wrong, the more you dig your heels in, and the more excuses you make up to justify the position you have.

How facts backfire - The Boston Globe

No, that is what you are doing. You have not proven your argument, and I am not going to pretend like you have. You are at the point of making one asinine comment after another. Look up "self-projection hypothesis." You just posted an article about yourself, and that is self-projection. You said that all crowds look like circles. Come on. You're done.

Now you are just making shit up. Of course not every singer makes a good actor. You picked famous people because they are the exception not the rule. How the heck does playing the flute make you good at at acting out anger? How does juggling make you good at crying? How does singing make you good at playing the drums? Those are all totally different skills, and it is really insulting to say that playing music is basically the same thing as acting, they are not even remotely similar.

There is a few baseball players who played football and the other way around but that doesn't mean every baseball player can play football well, and a football couch doesn't go to a baseball game to recruit players. Don't be stupid. A musician isn't an actor and no one would hire a musician to be an actor, unless that musician happen to also have training as an actor. If someone does musicals in plays, then that would be an example of someone who might have actor skills and singing ability. But that is a person with two skills, they are not interchangeable skills. Kind of like how a person could speak both German and Japanese, but not all German people can speak Japanese.

Also you are totally blind. Here is a picture of Emilie and Madeline standing next to her. Emilie is on the right, Madeline is on the left. Now I dare you to tell me the picture with Obama looks exactly like the girl on the right, and nothing like the girl on the left. Clearly the picture on the left matches the photo with Obama, and that is Madeline.

Also since you don't seem to know what a circle is, I drew you a diagram. Here is a screen shot of the video with arrows pointing in the direction the people are walking. Might need to magnify it to see it, but that is nothing like a circle. People are walking all over the place.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

StephL, my biggest concern here is not even loss of gun rights.

It is having a government that is corrupt and controlling enough to pull something so evil.

The government has way, way too much power over the people. Taking away gun rights is just one of the things I am worried they might do. We need to drastically shrink the size of government, and this hoax is strong evidence of that.

If they were corrupt in this - who would have a reason to pay for it?
The anti-gun-lobby?
Who would that be?

Well - you deduct from "holes" in an official story - that the government has pulled something "so evil" off.
Is that really the most likely background?


No story, including the ones, you were involved in first hand - has no seeming "holes" when pondered.
So - yeah - you can step in front of us and keep coming up with seeming holes - so many - there is not a chance to get the facts at hand here and now.

You followed my thought-experiment and put a "maybe-label" on the hypothesis, that pro-gun+less-government-lobbyists might have spread "false facts" themselves.
In order to cushion the blow on "freedom" from the emotional fallout of the tragedy - make people doubt, the shooting was real.
Just sew some doubts, rip some seemingly not fixable holes in the official narrative.
So how do you know, who you are fooled here by?

And one major inconsistency in your argumentation is - if exactly these people you show us behaving strangely, would be the "actors" - why are they acting against their supposed goal?
Namely convince you?
Sorry - but if you were government - evil and mighty and influential as you believe - wouldn´t you take care to get at least 5 actresses crying their souls out and ripping their hair?
These I would order from the actors-guild, if I were your supposed Obama-knuckleheads.
These I would put everywhere, where a camera is.

This one seeming happy couple - maybe they have an unusual way of dealing with this grief?
So unusual that they are the ones going in front of a camera at all?
Delving into all their beautiful memories and believing their lovely girl in heaven, maybe?

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Why do you think it might be a conservative hoax if there was a hoax? I don't rule it out.
Maybe they made the hoax transparent so that people would wig out and stand against gun control. Maybe.

However, Dianne Feinstein introduced gun control legislation the next month. It failed in the Senate in April, but a very threatening and close call legislative process took place.

Okay - unfortunately you didn´t go into my points one by one like you did with Alric´s.
But you say "maybe" to my turning of the tables thought-experiment - that is something on my scale - a start maybe.

Maybe you will answer to my longer-back-posts a bit deeper later.
You know - the ratio of dead and hurt children claimed - supposedly no hurt ones.
That would make the whole eerily "peaceful" scenery and the position of the ambulances and the lack of completely real-life-rattled parents on camera into a perfectly "normal" scenario.

And also this "peace" would lead to suspicions - honest suspicions - about something being not in order there.
Don´t you agree on that?
And the connection to shooting-expertise, I made?

The sheer overwhelming amount of technical personnel put on the plan and gathered there - they all would have had to be paid off - that´s a lot of people not going public..

While like I see it - the potentially "realistic-looking" parents either left the scene with their intact children - or fled the place in grief and terror.
Not stood still - waiting for a camera and a person with questions.

After 9-11, I can never trust my government again. They are capable of anything.

Originally Posted by Alric

Now you are just making shit up. Of course not every singer makes a good actor. You picked famous people because they are the exception not the rule. How the heck does playing the flute make you good at at acting out anger? How does juggling make you good at crying? How does singing make you good at playing the drums? Those are all totally different skills, and it is really insulting to say that playing music is basically the same thing as acting, they are not even remotely similar.

Name one famous stage musician who has done a shitty acting job in a movie. I didn't say all good actors are good musicians. Like I said, stage performance is acting. That doesn't mean all acting is playing music on stage.

Originally Posted by Alric

There is a few baseball players who played football and the other way around but that doesn't mean every baseball player can play football well, and a football couch doesn't go to a baseball game to recruit players. Don't be stupid. A musician isn't an actor and no one would hire a musician to be an actor, unless that musician happen to also have training as an actor. If someone does musicals in plays, then that would be an example of someone who might have actor skills and singing ability. But that is a person with two skills, they are not interchangeable skills. Kind of like how a person could speak both German and Japanese, but not all German people can speak Japanese.

Do you want more examples? David Bowie, Mick Jagger, John Lennon, Flea, DMX, MC Eiht, Olivia Newton John, Barbara Streisand, Justin Timberlake, Roger Daltrey, others. Name a famous stage musician who did a bad acting job. Just give me a name. The Sandy Hoax high profile parents shown in the video are stage performers. They are therefore actors.

Originally Posted by Alric

Also you are totally blind. Here is a picture of Emilie and Madeline standing next to her. Emilie is on the right, Madeline is on the left. Now I dare you to tell me the picture with Obama looks exactly like the girl on the right, and nothing like the girl on the left. Clearly the picture on the left matches the photo with Obama, and that is Madeline.

Seriously? Madeline looks like the girl in the Obama picture in the other picture? Do you not notice the differences in height and hair? Don't give me this stuff about older picture. Find a picture of Madeline where she really does look like the girl in the Obama picture.

Originally Posted by Alric

Also since you don't seem to know what a circle is, I drew you a diagram. Here is a screen shot of the video with arrows pointing in the direction the people are walking. Might need to magnify it to see it, but that is nothing like a circle. People are walking all over the place.

You left a lot of people out, and there is no way to tell what direction they are walking in that picture, though you can tell in the video. The video looping brings attention to it. Your red marks are very random, and they distract from the human CIRCLE that is there.

Originally Posted by StephL

If they were corrupt in this - who would have a reason to pay for it?
The anti-gun-lobby?
Who would that be?

Control freaks. There is a saying: "Gun control is not about guns. It is about control." Power is the obsession of most politicians.

Originally Posted by StephL

No story, including the ones, you were involved in first hand - has no seeming "holes" when pondered.
So - yeah - you can step in front of us and keep coming up with seeming holes - so many - there is not a chance to get the facts at hand here and now.

These are major holes, and there are lots of them.

Originally Posted by StephL

And one major inconsistency in your argumentation is - if exactly these people you show us behaving strangely, would be the "actors" - why are they acting against their supposed goal?
Namely convince you?
Sorry - but if you were government - evil and mighty and influential as you believe - wouldn´t you take care to get at least 5 actresses crying their souls out and ripping their hair?
These I would order from the actors-guild, if I were your supposed Obama-knuckleheads.
These I would put everywhere, where a camera is.

I think it was a bad estimation. At least one of the actors, Gene Rosen, is a member of the actor's guild. The hoax obviously got botched. Apparently some incompetent people were behind it. They are probably used to making propaganda for a much dumber audience.

Originally Posted by StephL

This one seeming happy couple - maybe they have an unusual way of dealing with this grief?
So unusual that they are the ones going in front of a camera at all?
Delving into all their beautiful memories and believing their lovely girl in heaven, maybe?

Just one seemingly happy couple? Not even close.

Originally Posted by StephL

Maybe you will answer to my longer-back-posts a bit deeper later.
You know - the ratio of dead and hurt children claimed - supposedly no hurt ones.
That would make the whole eerily "peaceful" scenery and the position of the ambulances and the lack of completely real-life-rattled parents on camera into a perfectly "normal" scenario.

No, ambulances are supposed to show up for that kind of thing in case anybody is injured. They can't depend on school officials to make that assessment because injuries are not always obvious. Supposedly three people went to the hospital. How did they get there? Don't forget that there were supposedly 27 dead people in the building. That is not a peaceful scenario.

Originally Posted by StephL

And also this "peace" would lead to suspicions - honest suspicions - about something being not in order there.
Don´t you agree on that?
And the connection to shooting-expertise, I made?

It did lead to suspicions. Look at the conversation we are having now. Look at the zillions of videos that have been made about it. This situation is insane.

Originally Posted by StephL

The sheer overwhelming amount of technical personnel put on the plan and gathered there - they all would have had to be paid off - that´s a lot of people not going public..

I explained that. They wouldn't have to be paid off. They would have to be fooled. However, it is possible to pay off that many people. Have you ever heard of the NSA's PRISM program?

Originally Posted by StephL

While like I see it - the potentially "realistic-looking" parents either left the scene with their intact children - or fled the place in grief and terror.
Not stood still - waiting for a camera and a person with questions.

That's a lot of parents not experiencing grief or terror.

Originally Posted by juroara

After 9-11, I can never trust my government again. They are capable of anything.

I used to majorly doubt the 9/11 inside job perspective, but now I don't at all put it past the government to pull something like that. Most of the arguments about it concern engineering claims, and I am far from being an expert on that stuff. I do see a few holes in that official story too, though. I don't get how an airplane can fly into the Department of Defense building of the most powerful country in the world without there being a clear video of it. Some other things seem peculiar, like how a hijacker's driver's license was found intact at ground zero. It's a weird picture, and we definitely can identify a potential motive.

New Town Bee published an interview with Sandy Hook School principal who was dead already and then took down the article.

Sandy Hook massacre: Official story spins out of control

Niall Bradley
Sott.net Tue, 18 Dec 2012
The Newtown Bee
December 14, 2012

Sandy Hook School Principal Dawn Hochsprung told The Bee that a masked man entered the school with a rifle and started shooting multiple shots - more than she could count - that went "on and on."


How could the principal have survived to give this statement to local press describing what happened ... if she was one of the first to be killed? Incidentally, The Newtown Bee's article was taken down yesterday. Of course, a plausible explanation is that a reporter mistook another teacher for the principal.

Sandy Hook massacre: Official story spins out of control -- Puppet Masters -- Sott.net

Your blind, your biases are clearly blinding you, that or you are just a lair. There is no way the girl in the obama picture looks like the girl on the right more than the girl on the left in the picture I posted.

Singing is not acting, no matter how much you say they are identical. The vast majority of singers who tried to get into acting suck. As for picking one, there is so many I just decided to google the 10 worst. They list people like, Justin Timberlake, LL Cool J, Ludacris. What about Britney Spears or Vanilla Ice? I notice how you listed Justin Timberlake on your list as well though, apparently you think he is a great actor, which kind of proves how clueless you are. He was a horrible actor, and most of his early movies were total bombs. It is only after years and years of acting has he become competent.

It is obvious you are just talking out of your ass and you don't really have a clue about anything. How can anyone take you seriously when you say things like the almost all singers are also good actors? They are totally separate skills, and the vast majority of musicians who try to switch to acting never make it, and most who do are not very good and rely entirely on their star status and existing fans to make up for their lack of acting ability.

Also if you watch the video you will see the people I circled all move in the directions I showed. Why are you ignoring the fact that a ton of people are not walking in the circle? You claimed everyone was walking in a circle which was a bold face face. At least half the people there are walking entirely counter to the circle. That is half you can prove are not walking in a circle. The other half you could prove are not working in a circle if they showed the entire video but they cut it short so you can't tell where they are going.

As I pointed out several times, the video is on loop to manipulate the image so it looks like they are walking in a circle when they are not. You can't tell where people are going from two seconds looped over and over.