-FBI releases Sandy Hook files-

a reply to: dashen

either FBI or CIA agents — showed up at their door.

Very similar to Dzhokhar Tsarnaev

FBI faces questions over previous contact with Boston bombing suspect Agency admits it interviewed Tamerlan Tsarnaev in 2011 'at request of foreign government' but did not find 'terrorism activity'

www.theguardian.com...

a reply to: JBurns

i can absolutely confirm this from the other side. july 1999 my brother drowned in my parents in ground swimming pool...he was 13 years old. The time he was under the water was unknown. My dad pulled him out and started CPR..we lived next door and came over about 5 -10 minutes after my dad had gotten him out. I believe to this day that he was already too far gone..by the time the ambulances/fire rescue got there 10 more minutes had passed. We lived on a family farm about 10 minutes from closest ambulance service...the rescue workers worked on him by the pool for about 10 minutes before loading him for another 8 minute drive to the hospital. When we got to the hospital the doctors worked on him for at least 45-60 min before coming out and telling us that he had passed away and nothing more could be done.

Another note..my parents..MY whole family and the small community we lived in didn't have smiles for day's..weeks..even months after. I know my parents didn't..my mom and dad were in a constant crying stage for almost a week after..my dad couldn't even hold down food that was constantly being brought in my everyone..So I knew when I saw Robbie Parker and those other Ahole parents being interviewed with their smug smiley faces that they were either psychopaths or they in fact NEVER lost their child. I know different people will react differently..but all the parents showed little to no grief..NOT the kind of grief that one has when losing part of their hearts...so no matter what anyone thinks I do not believe those people lost children...I just cannot believe it.

a reply to: Asktheanimals

I'm thinking that if that's the case, it'd be because SWAT was still treating it as an active shooter scenario, and the first priority during an attack still in progress is ensuring the safety of first responder units. It's an unfortunate reality, but until the scene is verified to be safe, sending EMTs in is not an option.

a reply to: kosmicjack
Personally I think they want mass protests at the capital to justify martial law. Police State has alwas been their goal.



a reply to: YouSir
Sounds more like they know they're f#ed and are covering their asses.

originally posted by: Willtell
Why do you say this ?

Answered in the part you quoted. There have been conspiracies all over the MSM this past year. And I don't just mean political. I've been keeping track. Black triangles, 9/11, celebrity alien stories, pedo rings...

originally posted by: ShadeWolf
a reply to: Asktheanimals

I'm thinking that if that's the case, it'd be because SWAT was still treating it as an active shooter scenario, and the first priority during an attack still in progress is ensuring the safety of first responder units. It's an unfortunate reality, but until the scene is verified to be safe, sending EMTs in is not an option.

You would be correct about that. However, at 9:55 they say "shooter down" and have no reason to believe there were multiple attackers involved.

a reply to: JBurns

For those who remember the initial reports were " handguns and only handguns" were used in the attack according to multiple state and federal sources close to the case said NBC's Pete Williams.

Then there is the video you speak of which showed technicians unloading 2 guns in the trunk of the Honda, one is a Saiga 12 ga shotgun and other has an AR-type pull bolt mechanism to clear the chamber.

According to the NYT times Paddock shot around 900 rounds at concert goers, killing 58 and wounding over 500. Hitting his target more than half the time at a range of over 400 yards? The first thing that struck me about Sandy Hook was 26 dead and no survivors. Both of these figures exist in the world of Hollywood movies only. I honestly believe they have conflated casualty figures in every false flag event to increase the shock and awe value.

a reply to: Neopan100


Neo, I am terribly sorry to hear of your family's loss of your brother

I can only imagine how that felt for you and your family, and am thankful at least the doctors and emergency personnel made a true and concerted effort to save his life. Regardless of being a first responder or not, I always assumed/hoped that anyone with any kind of training or knowledge would at least attempt to help their fellow human being, especially when it's a child we're talking about.

Even seeing someone else's child deceased for the first time was a life changing experience for me, and I don't think you ever truly get over it. I can't imagine simply forgiving an evil individual who heartlessly took someone else's life (especially 20 innocent children and 6 upstanding adults) but I suppose to each is their own.

When I saw the Parker video, I had to question how someone could even find the strength inside to muster a smile, let alone a laugh. The recording that appears to show him "psyching himself up" was also very curious, because it seems to me those tears would come very naturally/easily. I guess everyone grieves in their own way, which is why the "community" type response of forgiveness was a little out of place, to me anyhow.

My personal experience in dealing with distraught parents - people who's whole world was taken away from them in the blink of an eye - is that they do not ever get over that pain and sadness fully. For all ~40 parents to have similar reactions is definitely not the typical expected outcome. Perhaps after 20 years of treatment/grieving, but certainly not 20 days or 20 hours.

I don't want to use other people's tragedies to illustrate my point, but in the first SIDS case I ever worked the boy's mother couldn't even stand on her own. She was looking pretty bad, and hospital staff actually wanted to bring her into a room as a patient herself. However, she declined that in order to be with her child during an unimaginable and totally surreal time.

EDIT: Neo, you are probably right in your belief that he had already passed on at that point. Even after just a few minutes without oxygen (unless in freezing water for instance) the chances of resuscitating someone drops at roughly 10%/minute. I have no doubt that your dad, you and everyone else involved did absolutely everything humanly possible to save him. It sounds like you guys did everything right, and sadly sometimes it isn't enough. But for your own sake/sanity, you have to know you did the absolute best you could and I am certain you did.

The only arrests I have ever had survive were those we witnessed either on scene or in the back of the truck. Especially with cardiac arrest from ventricular fibrillation, which is usually very treatable and very survivable if the patient has access to early defibrillation (like within 2-3 minutes of the arrest). Sadly, for non-witnessed arrests, we were always "too little too late" with a ~10 minute response time. CPR does a great job at circulating oxygenated blood, keeping someone viable for ALS drugs and procedures, which have a minimal to moderate rate of success depending on the actual cause of the pulselessness/apnea.

You would have never guessed those people had a "0%" chance of survival by our actions, though. Our truck was completely tore up on the inside, with wrappers and random caps/items thrown in the door well area next to the bench seat. Despite "already being gone" we followed protocol to the letter, and established a patent airway with ET intubation, one of us started bagging and the other would start compressions or secure TWO IV lines (usually EJ sticks, sometimes used L/R AC space if nothing else available) to ensure we can give ALS drugs at the right time and that we don't blow any veins and lose our drug route.

It is mind blowing to me that EMS would have gotten a stand down order from the SRT medics on scene, instead of this:
"In accordance with our MCI protocol, all patients have been triaged and ambulances XXX, XXX and XXX can head to the scene from the staging area to pick up "Immediate/Critical" patients."

Mass casualty incident protocols are partially derived from NIMS (a national thing FEMA made all first responders do ~2009) and partially from local protocol. One thing they all have in common is a 60 second period to evaluate each patient, correct any airway positional issues and control major bleeding. During that 60 seconds, you follow a flow-chart that determines what "tag" status a patient in an MCI gets. We used Green: Walking wounded/minor injuries, Yellow: Delayed/injured but no immediate life or limb threat, Red: Immediate/critical, transport immediately and Black: deceased. Squads in the staging area would have been moved to the scene to transport/treat all Red tags first, then yellow tags. Green tags would walk out on their own, and self-ambulate to a hospital or wait at the "green area" until reds and yellows were taken care of and transported. Black tags would be transported in accordance with local policy on deceased patients.

All states and jurisdictions have some form of MCI mass casualty incident protocols. A stand-down order does not factor in to any of those. Once the triage was complete (hint: no one ever says They're all dead!), ambulances leave staging and transport. After transport, they go back in service (restock/cleaning) and report back to staging for further assignments from incident commander.

These events may be traumatic, but they are far from total anarchy & chaos. These are trained and well rehearsed professionals. An MCI by definition is any incident that exceeds the resources immediately available to the incident commander. In my state, each ambulance required at least one tech and one driver certified to a minimum level. Since there were 27 victims, 54 personnel on 27 ambulances would be needed making this 100% an MCI

a reply to: dashen

Why now? Because they have sufficiently edited and massaged the data so that they finally have a coherent story?

To change the subject away from the Vegas hoax?

a reply to: Asktheanimals


That is a really great analysis ATA! You are absolutely right, the "mag fed" shotgun and definitely a rifle with a charging handle (something I've only personally seen on AR-15/M-4/M-16 E. Stoner design rifles)

It is certainly unusual that anyone (including highly trained special forces operators) would achieve a 100% kill rate. Like you said that is the stuff of Hollywood, and not something you'd expect in real life especially given the window of time and chaos of the situation (people literally scattering in a panic).

I found it unusual with Vegas too, because of his accuracy at that range but also because he supposedly chose a bumpstock. If he was going for lethality, he could have taken the military's recommendation and used semi-auto fire with those ~$1000.00 Trijcon optics on his rifles and been far more "effective" (aka deadly/murderous). On top of that, if he was so well versed with his "arsenal," why not simply purchase the M-16 fire control components online? They are entirely legal to purchase (unassembled and uninstalled). Furthermore, for the kind of money he spent, he could have easily dropped ~$20,000.00 on a true NFA transferable machinegun. I found it very strange he decided to use a bumpstock, which is the only one of those options that are civilian legal out of the gate (without paying $200.00 NFA stamp (bribe) to Uncle Sam).

It almost is like there are people standing at the ready to capitalize on tragedies in order to increase that shock and awe value. Whether the indescrepancies are caused by total negligence or criminal conspiracy, taking advantage of someone else's tragedy is probably one of the most heinous acts a person can commit.

Any time you see a mass casualty incident with no survivors, you really have to wonder who exactly "dropped the ball" during the most important part of the "game." (I use the metaphor/term very, very lightly)

This is a really good and thorough documentary on Sandy Hook. I am rewatching this now. There are so many bizarre things about this that I had forgotten about.

Re: purpose of redactions in this material.

Each redaction in the three batches of Sandy Hook documentation has the reason for the redaction annotated beside it. So if you're really interested to learn the general reason for a redaction, you can check the annotation against the exemptions listed in the FOI Act itself. By and large, this is a thankless task, and it's not one I've ever found worthwhile - but someone with more patience might manage to extract some significance from the justifications the FBI has provided.

Top tip: If you see a redaction listed as "B(5)" (or beginning with "B(5)"), save your time and move onto the next. B(5) is the "We don't need to give you no steenking reason!" exemption, and you will learn nothing by puzzling over its appearance.

a reply to: Neopan100

I know my parents didn't..my mom and dad were in a constant crying stage for almost a week after..my dad couldn't even hold down food that was constantly being brought in my everyone

Yes! this is grief and there are stages everyone goes through no matter how different you may be. People need to relearn to live after losing a close Family member and most need to be away from people for some time too. Unless of course, you have zero feelings for the person you lost.

a reply to: SeaWorthy

When my mother died....it took me 3yrs to be able to say her name without tears forming. Even now 7yrs later I can still cry at pictures. There are stages, everyone knows this, denial, anger, acceptance etc....I'm sorry to say but everything I've ever seen on these "parents" doesn't ring true at all.Hells bells most of them were speaking to reporters doing interviews within a day or so of losing their child!! That's just not right

a reply to: JBurns


Purely a semantic point--WE are not the government. In 1787 WE, by way of our colonial ancestors, the so-called Founding Fathers, created a new government to replace the older government found defective.

We The People created the government. Yes, it consists of human federal employees, elected and appointed, but we the people are not the government. The DOI makes it clear that "governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed".

WE are governed by it, the government.

a reply to: Salander


Nice interpretation, but we're a "government of the people, by the people, for the people."

Plus, a government can only govern with consent of the governed. Hence why the founders (through the declaration of independence no less) gave the people the right to abolish and install a new government should the existing government choose the path of tyrants.

If your theory was correct, it would mean the people of the United States are subjects as opposed to Citizens. And last I checked, we had unalienable god-given rights not derived from any government's authority. So provided that the duly elected representative government carries out the mandate of the people, it is clear who sits on which tier of the hierarchy. Should they ever choose to stop carrying out that mandate, we have the recognized right to replace them with a body that will.

To illustrate this, there are certain amendments (like 1A and 2A) that specifically protect the other rights specially enumerated (not granted by, simply laid out) in the Bill of Rights. The wording in the DOI and Constitution matters, as do the documents specifically explaining its intent.

People->Government

Thomas Jefferson’s concept “consent of the governed” states that citizens have a right to design and participate in government, either directly or through elected representatives, and demand that their government grant them civil liberties and equal treatment under the law. Jefferson developed his concept of “consent of the governed” from the works of English philosopher John Locke.

source: Reference.com

a reply to: JBurns


A legitimate government can govern only with the consent of the governed.

An illegitimate government which keenly and routinely usurps powers can govern as it pleases. Recall that by legislation signed by POTUS, both the 4th amendment and the so-called Great Writ of Habeas Corpus have both been effectively nullified in the last 16 years. Recall that by way of the sophistry of AUMF the government can and does send its military anywhere and anytime it wants, in secret, as we are seeing in Niger.

We are subjects sir. Corporations and industry write the legislation they need. We do not have democracy here, we have oligarchy and fascism.

Not pleasant to contemplate I agree, but true nonetheless. We are a democracy in name and propaganda only.

a reply to: slider1982>>>> Sometimes I am convinced the feds deliberately create conspiracy theories by acting so suspiciously that they're at least guilty of obscene misconduct. Other times you think that they actually are involved in cover ups and treasonous criminal activity. I saw the faked interviews and the crisis actors. I think the shooting did happen, but I also think Lanza was taken there to be the fall guy or at the very least he was programmed and helped to do it. What made me think that was just the fact that whole Pizzagate scandal. These people are evil and think nothing of killing children. They'd shoot a school of children to get what they want. They did the same in Vegas. We saw crisis actors in the Boston bombing. We have mass murderers running around in the deep state.

a reply to: Dutchowl

Quite
I've often thought that for supposedly damn clever people they don't half leave breadcrumb trails and at almost every event like this. To date, I can't imagine why they would do it

originally posted by: PhyllidaDavenport
a reply to: SeaWorthy

When my mother died....it took me 3yrs to be able to say her name without tears forming. Even now 7yrs later I can still cry at pictures. There are stages, everyone knows this, denial, anger, acceptance etc....I'm sorry to say but everything I've ever seen on these "parents" doesn't ring true at all.Hells bells most of them were speaking to reporters doing interviews within a day or so of losing their child!! That's just not right

And imagine playing it over & over in your mind...how terrified your child must have been in their last moments. How you weren't there to comfort them.

I think I would seriously die (or feel like I was dying) from anguish. I know that stage of grief would eventually pass, but not within a week!

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Quite and yet we are the monsters for even mentioning such things. I've watched all the interviews, in fact I've gone back through most of the SH stuff when this latest information was released, and I'm still of the same opinion I was when it all started, Adam never existed he was Ryan, it was probably some drill gone wrong, and Wayne Carver was terrified and said it all when he said "I hope the good people of Sandy Hook don't have this come crashing down on their heads" That clinched it for me but there were just so many anomalies. Why? either it was what it was and we and others are just hyper vigilant paranoid conspiracy theorists or this was a very badly organised false flag that didn't go as planned and left many gaping holes.

Someone watched and filmed Robbie Parker then released it for all to see, same with Gene Rosen practicing his lines so someone wanted people to know that there was something fishy going on