CT Elementary School Shooting

[meta-agnostic]

Meta-agnostic, I think you can find answers to your questions, and more, if you read this whole thread and the excellent articles by Joe and others on SOTT. I must admit, I'm a bit surprised that you post the above after all that's been covered extensively about SH on this forum and related pages.

Wait a minute, of course I know that. Maybe I'm missing something here. I don't expect anyone here to gain any new information about SH directly from this video. I'm posting it because it's what millions of people are watching in relation to questioning Sandy Hook. There are not millions reading SotT to my knowledge. I'm taking the position that it's important to know what information people in general are getting and I didn't see this video posted anywhere yet. I hope I'm not being misunderstood.

 

[aragorn]

Meta-agnostic, I think you can find answers to your questions, and more, if you read this whole thread and the excellent articles by Joe and others on SOTT. I must admit, I'm a bit surprised that you post the above after all that's been covered extensively about SH on this forum and related pages.

Wait a minute, of course I know that. Maybe I'm missing something here. I don't expect anyone here to gain any new information about SH directly from this video. I'm posting it because it's what millions of people are watching in relation to questioning Sandy Hook. There are not millions reading SotT to my knowledge. I'm taking the position that it's important to know what information people in general are getting and I didn't see this video posted anywhere yet. I hope I'm not being misunderstood.

Sorry, my bad. There's just so many 'SH hoax' videos flying around right now, that I was wondering why the need to post yet another. But I see, after re-reading your post, that you're being critical about it. And, I admit, I bought the 'Parker being an actor' at first, so I'm in a weak position to criticize as I did.

 

[meta-agnostic]

Meta-agnostic, I think you can find answers to your questions, and more, if you read this whole thread and the excellent articles by Joe and others on SOTT. I must admit, I'm a bit surprised that you post the above after all that's been covered extensively about SH on this forum and related pages.

Wait a minute, of course I know that. Maybe I'm missing something here. I don't expect anyone here to gain any new information about SH directly from this video. I'm posting it because it's what millions of people are watching in relation to questioning Sandy Hook. There are not millions reading SotT to my knowledge. I'm taking the position that it's important to know what information people in general are getting and I didn't see this video posted anywhere yet. I hope I'm not being misunderstood.

Sorry, my bad. There's just so many 'SH hoax' videos flying around right now, that I was wondering why the need to post yet another. But I see, after re-reading your post, that you're being critical about it. And, I admit, I bought the 'Parker being an actor' at first, so I'm in a weak position to criticize as I did.

No problem. The whole thing is thoroughly confusing and I was asking some rhetorical questions trying to keep the perspective of a person just being exposed to the idea of false flag events. Parker being an actor based on a few seconds of him smiling seems like pretty weak sauce, and the thing about his dead daughter being in the picture with Obama just seems like confusion exploited to a maximum. But Gene Rosen does seem like a witness who can't keep his story straight. Certainly no one should be anonymously harassing these people because of this video (what good would it do anyway? maybe thoroughly questioning them would help) but it's barely been a month and there could be a lot left to be discovered. Looking forward to the sott discussion tomorrow.

 

[Niall]

CNN's Anderson Cooper gave major mainstream airtime to the 'Hoax' nonsense, specifically citing a "YouTube video that has over 200,000 views." I wonder if this was the video he was referring to? Claiming that he "wouldn't normally give attention to such conspiracy theories", Cooper went ahead and did precisely that. The result you see is 11,000,000 views and counting. Sure, some good points are made in the video but they're totally discredited by the inclusion of 'parents-as-actors', misunderstanding of what was going on in the emergency services audio recordings, fixation on webpages created or updated after the event displaying dates prior to December 14, etc.

 

[Gawan]

There must be someone who really likes to change something and that pretty fast. Either way, the society disintegrates at a much faster rate or these are likely manchurian candidates?! Cause imo it is like daily news now that someone shoots somebody.

_http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/23/us/shooting-reported-at-college-in-houston.html?_r=0

HOUSTON — At least three people were injured on Tuesday in a shooting at a college in Houston, the authorities said. At least one suspect was in custody.

Harris County Sheriff’s Department vehicles blocked access to the roads leading to the college on Tuesday afternoon. Students gathered in groups outside an off-campus bookstore near the college, located in northern Harris County about 30 minutes outside downtown Houston.

[...]

http://www.sott.net/article/256699-Teenager-kills-two-adults-three-children-in-New-Mexico

 

[Sol Logos]

An Australian guy, Max Igan did a presentation on Sandy Hook, which I believe brings some interesting things to the table, for me at least anyway. Basically I've been wondering about why these's events have a lot of visible signs that really point to it being something planned / staged, like what's the intention if we rule out incompetence being a factor. Max presents that's it's to do with rousing up agnst in the "truth movement" leading possibly to a justification of violence. So these loose ends are used as a platform to spread more disinformation and then vilify "truthers" as crazy nut bags and even terrorist threats to society's safety.

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLiMTFp5iNlb_IweqvR3bmLffyvYNr4-M4

I find Max pretty level headed with his assertions, so it was worth a watch for me. Another thing I find strange is the idea of "truthers" being presented as a weird bunch, if you think of the alternative (ie what a person is if they're not seeking to know truth in someway). So the opposite of that is essentially a person choosing to live a lie, which is clearly a much more crazy position.

 

[Niall]

An Australian guy, Max Igan did a presentation on Sandy Hook, which I believe brings some interesting things to the table, for me at least anyway. Basically I've been wondering about why these's events have a lot of visible signs that really point to it being something planned / staged, like what's the intention if we rule out incompetence being a factor. Max presents that's it's to do with rousing up agnst in the "truth movement" leading possibly to a justification of violence. So these loose ends are used as a platform to spread more disinformation and then vilify "truthers" as crazy nut bags and even terrorist threats to society's safety.

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLiMTFp5iNlb_IweqvR3bmLffyvYNr4-M4

I find Max pretty level headed with his assertions, so it was worth a watch for me. Another thing I find strange is the idea of "truthers" being presented as a weird bunch, if you think of the alternative (ie what a person is if they're not seeking to know truth in someway). So the opposite of that is essentially a person choosing to live a lie, which is clearly a much more crazy position.

He lost me at "Why is there footage of Gene Rosen rehearsing his lines?", showing right away that he doesn't see that that's part of the 'Sandy-Hook-Hoax-with-crisis-actors!' nonsense.

 

[Soluna]

I imagine with all of the different stories and 'evidence' that was discussed and produced at the time - along with the very obvious trauma the parents suffered - I would not be surprised if they had started to question their own memories, eyes and accounts of what happened (especially witnesses); resulting in some garbled retelling of accounts and what happened.

 

[meta-agnostic]

I imagine with all of the different stories and 'evidence' that was discussed and produced at the time - along with the very obvious trauma the parents suffered - I would not be surprised if they had started to question their own memories, eyes and accounts of what happened (especially witnesses); resulting in some garbled retelling of accounts and what happened.

Those families could end up being big allies of the truth if it's at all possible for things to develop this way. There are so many 9/11 families but only a few Sandy Hook families. Right now Anderson Cooper and the like are fanning the flames of outrage over family members being accused of being actors. But if those family members are in fact who they say they are and lost loved ones, and are cognizant of the inconsistencies in the official story, would they not have a solid platform to come forward and demand a real investigation or at least somehow raise hell? Does anyone see a reason why this shouldn't/won't ever take place?

 

[meta-agnostic]

From Jesse Ventura, FWIW:

_http://www.lewrockwell.com/ventura/sandy-hook-shooting.html

Beware of Conspiracy Theories About Sandy Hook

by Jesse Ventura

“I don’t see enough evidence to think Sandy Hook was a false flag operation. This is more of a tragic event turned into political opportunity than it is a staged event.

Was there investigative bungling and the sensationalist media reporting unverified stories? Yes.
Was there confusion and were facts lost and gained in that confusion? Yes.
Are there people, even witnesses, looking for their 30 seconds in the spotlight? Yes.
Are there individuals and institutions using and shaping this event for their own political agendas? Yes, and we must keep a very watchful eye on those institutions to keep them from twisting the facts of this event.

Sadly, everything I mentioned above can, when taken out of context, make one think manipulation is afoot.

Most chaotic events can come across that way. In examining the event, I don’t see government hands at work mainly because they would have covered their tracks better. We can’t expect them to pull off elaborately planned hoaxes while at the same time leaving behind so many easy “smoking guns” for us to find.

It took years for independent investigators to uncover JFK. It took years for us to begin scratching out the truth about 9/11. Those of us who study real history, not state sanctioned history, can very easily become just as close minded and biased for conspiracy as those who stand in our way and refuse to accept the truth about our government and the people running it.

It’s very easy to fall into that trap, especially when knowing how much of our history and world events are not what they appear to be. So please, do not immediately jump up and yell “Fire!” just because someone makes a Youtube video. Research, research, research. You only hurt our cause by promoting false conspiracies and crackpot agendas.

Much like the Birther conspiracy, I am starting to think that a lot of the so called “evidence” of conspiracy coming out about Sandy Hook is designed and fabricated to make us “conspiracy theorists”, us truth seekers, look foolish. Why? So that when good people argue against the destruction of our Second Amendment they can easily be painted with the “crackpot” brush.

January 22, 2013

 

[Niall]

Does anyone see a reason why this shouldn't/won't ever take place?

I think it's extremely unlikely to take place for the same reason that it's extremely unlikely that any other specific group of victims would 'wake up': those of us sincerely interested in Truth make up perhaps 0.000001% of civilization. We're a bunch of individuals spread out all over the globe. The odds of just one person directly affected by the Sandy Hook massacre (parent, teacher, relative, emergency responder, whatever) really wanting to know what happened, and being prepared to follow the rabbit-hole to the logical conclusions, are virtually nil.

However, there's no saying what non-linear effects might take hold if clusters of people keep working away at it. Some day, indirectly, Sandy Hook victims might see what really happened. But the day that happens will be the day the veil falls for masses of humanity.

 

[Niall]

From Jesse Ventura, FWIW:

_http://www.lewrockwell.com/ventura/sandy-hook-shooting.html

Beware of Conspiracy Theories About Sandy Hook

by Jesse Ventura

“I don’t see enough evidence to think Sandy Hook was a false flag operation. This is more of a tragic event turned into political opportunity than it is a staged event. [...]"

Can't say I blame Jesse one bit.

 

[meta-agnostic]

Does anyone see a reason why this shouldn't/won't ever take place?

I think it's extremely unlikely to take place for the same reason that it's extremely unlikely that any other specific group of victims would 'wake up': those of us sincerely interested in Truth make up perhaps 0.000001% of civilization. We're a bunch of individuals spread out all over the globe. The odds of just one person directly affected by the Sandy Hook massacre (parent, teacher, relative, emergency responder, whatever) really wanting to know what happened, and being prepared to follow the rabbit-hole to the logical conclusions, are virtually nil.

However, there's no saying what non-linear effects might take hold if clusters of people keep working away at it. Some day, indirectly, Sandy Hook victims might see what really happened. But the day that happens will be the day the veil falls for masses of humanity.

I agree the odds are low but I don't think they are that low. We're not necessarily talking about waking up to hyperdimensional realities, etc. Somebody who is a more diligent "truther" might know more about this if the truther movement hadn't been so thoroughly decimated, but I'm pretty sure there are a good few dozen 9/11 families who are willing to go on record questioning the official account of 9/11. A famous 2005 poll was going around saying half of New Yorkers (49% I believe, referring to the five NYC boroughs if I'm not mistaken) doubted the official 9/11 story and Sandy Hook is not that far from New York. Now it probably took most of them more than a month to reach that conclusion. But being called an actor when you are grieving over the loss of a child kind of pushes the issue to the forefront.

It does appear that the official story of Sandy Hook is very unlikely if not impossible, and it also appears that the questions in the aftermath are part of a deliberate disinformation campaign, much of which was probably planned beforehand. If just one of those family members accused of being an actor (or even one that wasn't) was willing to come forward and say, "I am absolutely real, and my child really died, but I believe there was more than one gunman," it would change the game. I don't have kids and I have absolutely no idea what it's like to lose one, but I can imagine feeling like I wouldn't have much left to lose at that point.

My earlier response was sort of off-the-cuff and I'm not sure how much we can really do regarding this, but we seem to agree here that the truth matters. I can't help thinking that one of these incidents will be the one the C's referred to about TPTB slipping up and exposing themselves, if there is ever going to be such a time.

 

[Sol Logos]

He lost me at "Why is there footage of Gene Rosen rehearsing his lines?", showing right away that he doesn't see that that's part of the 'Sandy-Hook-Hoax-with-crisis-actors!' nonsense.

If you stopped at that point it makes sense you'd have that conclusion (don't know if you did for certain but appears that way). He's saying the actor stuff is a hoax, like you've said. And having read a few of your articles on this, Max doesn't (for me) steer too far from you generally on the subject. He's also been "exposed" as an actor in the _http://www.wellaware1.com site which BTW is a complete farce dedicated to this everyone being actors line. So the question "Why is there footage of Gene Rosen rehearsing his lines?" was leading to how these hoaxes, inconsistencies, visible holes in the story might be intentional:

1) To bait current "truth seekers" get them roused up and visibly angered (and get caught up in and contribute to the stream of disinformation dedicated to that). Basically playing into their hands.
2) Which makes a great deterrent from anyone else deciding to question the official lines, when they find all the nut bag conspiracy "truthers" who now looked like a threat to society with their violence and their bizarre theories.

On that perspective, the "questionable" Gene Rosen footage being released is part of that. Obviously it's just a theory too, I don't know if it's accurate or not, but it's makes sense that it's a real possibility among others.

 

[meta-agnostic]

Haven't had a chance to watch the Australian video yet, but there is now a Part 2 posted to the first Sandy Hook Fully Exposed video:

_http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nUOBSN03TU&bpctr=1358994162

This one was posted January 19, clocks in at 19 minutes with 112,000+ views so far. Lots of apologetic language about the first video and equivocation about "we are not saying the shooting did not take place" but more pointing out pre-dated web pages, audition footage and photo albums of actors really from Florida (Nick and Laura Phelps who are allegedly really Richard and Jennifer Sexton). Also a brief mention of the stuff about Lanza's mom's car really belonging to someone else which I believe has been pretty well debunked here.

I'm not taking any position on what the truth its, but I think the rest of the stuff besides the car could still use a good debunking. Either this is all an extremely elaborate psy-op which is certainly likely on some level, or there are more inconsistencies than just the stuff about extra guns and suspects. Rather than fanning the flames of yet another intra-truther war maybe it's better to take a step back to try and see just what the hell is going on here, if it's even possible to know.