Sandy Hook Smoking Gun, Did CNN Really show a drill at St. Rose Pre-School as live Sandy Hook?

page: 7
37
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 06:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by WeSbO
Didn't the St. Rose Lima Threat happen on the sunday (16th dec), a bomb hoax ? Well that's the only info I can find anyway. If that's the case the live footage in question here has nothing to do with that threat as it was aired live on the 14th.

Could someone help me with this ? Thanks.

The church threat did happen on Sunday, but the school threat happened on Friday.

The helicopter footage that CNN is using a clip of was first mentioned in the "Overlooked evidence in school shooting thread". Since it was filmed that same day as the SH shooting I checked the near by schools and matched it to St Rose. I then did a search for "St. Rose of Lima School" lockdown. And found the article.


Police swarmed St. Rose of Lima School on Church Hill Road in Newtown Friday afternoon, hours after the shooting at nearby Sandy Hook Elementary School.

Neil Curry, whose 11-year-old son Kevin is in fifth grade at the school, said the school was put in lock down three times during the day. Curry said a person was found “lurking” outside a kindergarten class room. Later, an “agitated” person was reported inside the St. Rose of Lima Church near the school.

At 3 p.m., a police officer in charge of the scene said everything was under control.

blog.ctnews.com

That post is here.

I also reposted the information yesterday when this topic came up in another thread. Click here for that post.




posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 06:33 AM
link   
Op, I've already said to BK that I work for the media. So I KNOW how things works in there.

I suggest a little checking: can anyone check how many people were fired at CNN because of this goofy and bizarre mistake? If non then something is definitelly wrong. People get fired where I work for a LOT less than that.
edit on 21-1-2013 by LordAdef because: (no reason given)
edit on 21-1-2013 by LordAdef because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 06:38 AM
link   
reply to post by OneisOne
 


Thanks alot, I was unable to find reports from the 14th. Must admit it does seem strange that the news would not say live "the police are also raiding st rose...etc..;"



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 06:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by DelMarvel

Originally posted by BrandonD
I actually work part-time in an elementary school, and it is very unlikely that a school staff member knows every single student and every single parent.



But how likely is it that NO school staff member would know a given parent or student?


That's not relevant as far as the parents are concerned.

If no school staff member knew one of the parents, how would they know that nobody knows him/her? Do you think they all checked with each other to see if all the parents that were interviewed are legit?

I just read an article about a group of the parents who got together urging 'real change'

link

It might be interesting to see if any of the parents who were acting suspiciously to many of us are participating in this group. I didn't see any mentioned in this article, or on the picture that goes with it. If they were indeed actors, then they certainly would have reason to avoid this group out of fear of being found out.

soulwaxer



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 06:40 AM
link   
reply to post by soulwaxer
 


Nice call soul.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 06:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by bknapple32
 

And I think he'd care about anyone claiming 26 women and children who were massacred, just faked it all.


But if people were attacking innocent civilians and posting personal private info.


It denounces the father of one of the many slain children because he smiled. Therefore insinuating he's an actor and then further insinuating the child is alive. Thus the theory is no one died.


Because that goes down the rabbit hole which ends with no victims.

Why you're the only one constantly implementing these phrases into your posts^^^ even though the topic is different, even though the members got the SO point?


If there are victims, then what is the point of actors. And which roles would they be playing?

Why you're the only one constantly asking these^^^ type of questions, even though the topic is different, even though the members got the SO's point?

Hint: something to do with number 404.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 06:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sek82
reply to post by Gltichy
 
Oh I certainly agree, I figured the "just a website" gets its data from somewhere...
It proves nothing, indeed.

But it's another piece of the puzzle.
Better add it to the building pile.


You can't do this. How many times does it have to be said that building a pile of flawed "evidence" does not make a compelling case? Searching the internet desperately for "clues", or "discrepencies", and then adding every minor thing into a pile and calling it a case is just nonsense.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, not a bunch of coincidences, media inaccuracies, and things conspiracy theorists who have already made their mind up find interesting.

There is a new kind of data mining occurring, that is a direct result of the amount of information available on the internet, and the vast number of conspiracy theorists networked together. A new type of mass delusion that did not exist 50 years ago.
edit on 21-1-2013 by humphreysjim because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Unity_99
Drills connected with 9/11, Aurora and Sandy Hook, not a coincidence, and we don't need their condenscending abuse by lying in such disgusting ways.

not mention the London subway/bus bombing also had drills before the actual attacks



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by WeSbO
reply to post by OneisOne
 


Thanks alot, I was unable to find reports from the 14th. Must admit it does seem strange that the news would not say live "the police are also raiding st rose...etc..;"


Well here's the thing about that. The CNN clip on the Intelhub page is a recap video during Anderson Cooper's segment. If you watch/listen to the you will see that it has clips from that day. The video is not a "happening now" sort of segment. It is, however, very deceitful of CNN to use the St. Rose clip as part of SH. As it is deceitful for Intelhub not to state that there was a threat at St. Rose that same day and just call it a drill.

If the ariel footage did air live at the time of it happening, I have yet to find an archive of that. Just copies and clips of the footage all without audio.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by 1/2 Nephilim

I know those reporters are all about being "1st on the scene" & trying to keep us updated the very second things are happening but.. it that wasn't Sandy Hook then shouldn't there be some footage of the actual evacuation and 1st responders? Everyone has a camera on they're phone nowadays.. so now we got nothing?


You know what we also don't have? Hundreds of people who went to, lived near, or knew people at the school saying "Hey, I was there, and nothing happened!".

Why don't you ever question the obvious pieces of evidence that state quite clearly that a conspiracy of the type you are implying is completely and utterly impossible, and absurd? It is very possible no one decided to get their camera out and tape the event, this happens all the time, but for no one in the whole area to be able to expose this as a complete non-event? Impossible.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:17 AM
link   
reply to post by bknapple32
 





Id be equally mad at my self and would have to become some kind of activist for the whole thing. But I promise you. This one just doesnt happen to be a conspiracy.


Well if you promise then it must be true. Alright people conversation is over. bknapple32 promised that there is no conspiracy here.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:17 AM
link   
reply to post by humphreysjim
 





Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence


agreed, but do you require the same extraordinary evidence from the MSM?



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by LordAdef
Op, I've already said to BK that I work for the media. So I KNOW how things works in there.

I suggest a little checking: can anyone check how many people were fired at CNN because of this goofy and bizarre mistake? If non then something is definitelly wrong. People get fired where I work for a LOT less than that.
edit on 21-1-2013 by LordAdef because: (no reason given)
edit on 21-1-2013 by LordAdef because: (no reason given)


I'm sure you would be compartmentalized to a point where you would suffer from sort of a Stockholm Syndrome belief system. Being an isolated "insider" would lead you to believe you knew the real story when actually you are like one of Plato's people in the cave with their heads strapped forward seeing only what is provided by others who are creating your reality



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by soulwaxer

No it doesn't. There could be victims AND staged actors.

You really need to work on your reasoning skills...

soulwaxer


What would be the point of that? If you're going to be killing a bunch of kids, why put yourself at far greater risk by putting fake actors who could be exposed as such at any moment?

I think it is you who need to work on reasoning skills. Start with what actually makes sense, and go from there.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by humphreysjim

Originally posted by soulwaxer

No it doesn't. There could be victims AND staged actors.

You really need to work on your reasoning skills...

soulwaxer


What would be the point of that? If you're going to be killing a bunch of kids, why put yourself at far greater risk by putting fake actors who could be exposed as such at any moment?

I think it is you who need to work on reasoning skills. Start with what actually makes sense, and go from there.


you'd have to go all the way back to page 6 to get an answer to that question.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by sweord

agreed, but do you require the same extraordinary evidence from the MSM?


A lone nut shooting up a school is not extraordinary, unfortunately, faking it is.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gltichy

Originally posted by bknapple32
reply to post by Gltichy
 


It was not a drill. There was another threat at another school on the same day. Its as simple as that. AS stated MULTIPLE times on this thread and others


Well, who is stated this exactly? You? Captaintyinknots? Where is the information regarding said threat? Hook me up a link so we can settle this...I'm not simply just going to accept your word for it.

I didn't say that was part of any type of conspiracy...just thought it was weird...you took that as me implying something...I was not, my mistake for not making my statement more clear in my post.
edit on 21-1-2013 by Gltichy because: (no reason given)


I apologize if this matter has already been cleared up on a previous post but I didn't feel like going through all the pages.

The footage in question is not from a drill, it was from a report of an incident at the St. Rose of Lima preschool about 1 1/2 miles from Sandy Hook. This happened much later in the day and I guess one of the many news choppers caught what was going on. The issue is that Anderson Cooper and CNN chose to use this footage during their wrapup of events on the 14th without explaining what we were seeing. In a bit of (to my mind) media trickery, CNN used this footage of cops storming a different school to make its viewers assume this was happening at Sandy Hook.

There was a live drill going on at Putnam County, NY, but I have been told my another poster that people in the area knew about this in advance and that it wasn't even in the state of Connecticut. This drill was, however, happening only about 20 miles from Sandy Hook.

I hope this clears things up somewhat.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:24 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by sweord

you'd have to go all the way back to page 6 to get an answer to that question.


You are right, I jumped the gun and responded without reading the responses of others.

However, I find none of them convincing. The fact is, it is pretty clear actors were unnecessary. They may help with the control of the situation, but the risk involved is absolutely huge. Only idiots would use actors where real people would obviously do the job for you without problem.

Again, the risk in getting caught by using actors is literally off the scale.

It does make as much sense as the "no-plane" 9/1 theories. Why risk faking a plane when you can use a real plane? Same thing, really, same extreme risks of exposure involved.
edit on 21-1-2013 by humphreysjim because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by humphreysjim

Originally posted by sweord

agreed, but do you require the same extraordinary evidence from the MSM?


A lone nut shooting up a school is not extraordinary, unfortunately, faking it is.


yeh, its perfectly normal.

therfore instead of extraordianry evidence we require NO evidence.





new topics

top topics



 
37
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join