Sandy Hook - Questions From a Concerned Parent

page: 7
51
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 09:18 PM
link   
video.today.msnbc.msn.com...

now they're saying four handguns were found inside the school and the two long guns were in the trunk. so why are assault weapons the target here?




posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 09:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thunder heart woman
Today, the media finally admits that no AR-15 was used in the Sandy Hook shooting. This is why it is so important to keep pressing for truth.

NBC reports: video.today.msnbc.msn.com...

Never stop looking for truth. They know Americans are waking up and they cannot cover up the truth.



Not today. Aired on December 15, 2012

This is written at the page of your link. Scroll a little down.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edit: I see now that it was already mentioned by some other posters,
so I'll add here something else in order not to have an empty posting:

Some posters doubt if a certain girl was even "real".
I think this link can help to convince everybody that she really is "real":
parkerfour.blogspot.com
However, I did and still have problems with the one well known family photo
(which I will not link here because everybody knows this photo).
I have here some details of this photo and without hinting to what I mean,
I would like to ask the photo experts if you also find something strange here:
edit on 23-1-2013 by Marlow because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 10:33 PM
link   
We are wired to look for conspiracies. It is part of are makeup. We have to be sure to always apply
wisdom to the knowledge we gain. There are lots of people, wanting good answers, I believe it is good
that the investigations are taking this long. Hopefully this will lead to good answers.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 01:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by KnightFire

Originally posted by Darkphoenix77
A forum to discuss these topics is a good idea, but making it for select individuals and private is not so good in my opinion. Who is to say that someone new to the site would not have a valid point, or be a good contributor to discussion? Trolls, and people who try to intentionally derail threads are unfortunate and annoying, but are unavoidable as there will always be people that feel thier opinion is better than yours by the sheer virtue that it is thier opinion. The moderators are trying to walk a very fine line between allowing members to speak thier mind and keeping the forums out of a negative light, I don't envy thier position in the slightest. Not to mention, that when specific names of people that have not been charged with any wrongdoing get mentioned, it is a guarantee that the thread will be axed quicker than the Chevy Chase show. There is a fine line to be walked and people need to be aware of that and post accordingly.

That being said as far as the story goes, there are alot of things that make little to no sense. I'd love to discuss these things in one mega thread instead of 30 threads where 25 of them are axed before I even get to air my thoughts.
edit on 22-1-2013 by Darkphoenix77 because: clarification


I agree. ATS is and should always be an open forum for people to add their thoughts. I'm just making suggestions to help mitigate the disrepectful people that just want to troll and not add any value. In most cases, they are the ones that start running their mouths that sets off others adding value and then the thread gets 404'd.

I've been a member on ATS long enough to know there are very respectable members on this site and for that reason I enjoy participating.

Like I said before, I'm just throwing out ideas and asking for ideas on how we can keep ATS an open forum with minimal censorship. Hopefully, more people will throw out their ideas and one of the mods will chime in.



I've read ATS for years. By nature I am more of an observer than participant, but I had started making a few comments lately. I have to admit, I'm not trying to pick on the moderators, but they have me confused. I have read their Sandy Hook thread. After I was done, I had the impression they were saying not to start any Sandy Hook threads at all. I used to be smart, it must be my old age now, but I really am not sure what I can even say on this topic that won't get me removed. I feel sorry for a previous poster that said she/he had made a comment with appropriate MSM links, only to have her comment removed. It is confusing. Why would they do this, do you think? Are they under some sort of pressure?



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 01:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by loueber
I dont know if it was posted before from others, or if this statement needs its own thread, but i have direct feed from one of the investigators of Sandy Hook. He was on the investigation for 2 weeks. He confirmed that there were NO assault riffles ( AR 15s) used in the shooting. the Shooter was found only with 4 handguns. All large weapons were found in the trunk of his car and was not used. At all.



I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean when you say you have "direct feed" from one of the investigators. You mean he is talking to you personally, or is there something on the internet you can link to? What is his name, would it have been mentioned in the MSM?



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 01:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Thunder heart woman
Today, the media finally admits that no AR-15 was used in the Sandy Hook shooting. This is why it is so important to keep pressing for truth.

NBC reports: video.today.msnbc.msn.com...

Never stop looking for truth. They know Americans are waking up and they cannot cover up the truth.



On the page, below the video, it says the report is from 12/15/12. This is the first I have heard of it. It this was reported MSM over a month ago, why has most of the coverage, and all of the politicians went on with their assault weapon diatribe like it was never reported, I wonder? Has anyone heard if they changed the story again, after this report came out, to say that it wasn't accurate?
edit on 24-1-2013 by gidwa because: Whoops. never mind my post. Already answered by people who posted after this one. We need a delete button, moderators, so we can delete our posts if we need to.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 04:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Thunder heart woman
 


If I see this "news report" being touted as conclusive proof that x guns were used and y guns weren't, one more time, I swear I will go out and punch the first kitten or puppy I see.

If the federal or state officials who provided this news agency with their source on this conclusive evidence were reliable enough to be reported, at least one of them should have been named, rather than the news reader fobbing off the viewer with such vague authority as "a number of federal and state officials, blah, blah, blah..."

edit on 24-1-2013 by IvanAstikov because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 07:13 AM
link   
This is what Ive discovered..allison wyatt one of the girls that was supposedly killed that day is actually lily gaubert from louisiana. And apparently her picture was stolen off of her mothers flickr profile. So i had to see if this was true and i looked on facebook for this woman which she had taken down her default picture but i found her. and she had nothing on her page but i looked at her friends list to which i discovered dee dee gaubert which im assuming is her mother and in her mothers pictures is a picture of 3 of cathys daughters

www.facebook.com...

the middle one is lily(allison wyatt)

crazy huh



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 07:45 AM
link   
reply to post by yayitsmeashley
 


Old news.

I guess this is going to be just like Nibiru/PX. The same "evidence" recycling over and over again like a whack-a-mole game.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 11:27 AM
link   




Makes you wonder doesn't it?



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by DelMarvel

Originally posted by sweord
reply to post by DelMarvel
 



My point is that regardless of what sort of job they have or have not done, the traditional media are the only ones who have actually done any real investigating at all.


Do you really believe the MSM are the only ones doing any real investigating? Also, why would you take the investigation of the MSM serious? The MSM will research, not investigate, an incident, then spin their words to best benefit themselves or a political agenda.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by nuke_c
We are wired to look for conspiracies. It is part of are makeup. We have to be sure to always apply
wisdom to the knowledge we gain. There are lots of people, wanting good answers, I believe it is good
that the investigations are taking this long. Hopefully this will lead to good answers.


That's totally untrue. We are not "wired" to look for conspiracies.

Think a caveman looked for conspiracies?

People look for conspiracies BECAUSE THEY HAPPEN.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by yayitsmeashley
This is what Ive discovered..allison wyatt one of the girls that was supposedly killed that day is actually lily gaubert from louisiana. And apparently her picture was stolen off of her mothers flickr profile. So i had to see if this was true and i looked on facebook for this woman which she had taken down her default picture but i found her. and she had nothing on her page but i looked at her friends list to which i discovered dee dee gaubert which im assuming is her mother and in her mothers pictures is a picture of 3 of cathys daughters

www.facebook.com...

the middle one is lily(allison wyatt)

crazy huh


That is just too bizarre, there are apparently 2 Allison Wyatts presented as victims. One is in fact the girl you are mentioning, who was the initial Allison Wyatt, and then there is another who looks entirely different.

Not drawing any conclusions or inferences from this, just making the info available.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 02:18 PM
link   





Well what happened is after Cathy Gaubert realized that they had taken lilys picture and posted it everywhere on social media sites she asked for it to be removed. She even had her friends and family even strangers help her with it. I dont guess these people realized that she would find out that was HER kid on the news. I mean seriously? So then to cover up their tails they repost with a brand new picture of some other little girl which Im sure if you search long enough you can find the other one too.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 02:24 PM
link   




Watch this

www.youtube.com...

the proof of that one little girls existence not being in Newtown, CT, is definitely on Dee Dee Gauberts facebook page there's no way you can be mislead there.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 02:34 PM
link   
As per that Y-T link, it does seem odd that the area seems to have an awful lot of money for this time in life? The retro fitted new school, cost of getting the other one removed, armed guards and additional police presence cost an awful lot of money!

www.youtube.com...
edit on 24-1-2013 by CashStronomer because: To add link



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 03:54 PM
link   




This is truly bizarre. I don't even know how a media outlet could even make this "mistake". I am only speculating here, but I would guess that at the time The Daily Mail needed a picture of Alison Wyatt but none was publically available, so whomever was in charge of graphics just scoured the internet to find one that fits the bill? But why Gaubert's daughter? She has no connection at all to Newtown and, from what I recall, lives in Louisiana!



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 03:56 PM
link   




Can anyone come up with a more innocent or plausable explination?



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 10:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by KnightFire
Do you really believe the MSM are the only ones doing any real investigating?


Yes. And a very large percentage of the alternative "investigating" being done is second hand, totally internet based and relying solely on MSM content.

Much of this nonsense could be definitively falsified or verified by a few days of first hand work in Connecticut if anybody would bother to do that.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I ain't seeing that.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 02:54 AM
link   
another amazing coincidence about the Sandy Hook school shooting.


Is it only a coincidence that the man who many give credit for coining the term "assault rifle" also grew up in Newtown, Connecticut and has had a lifelong battle against guns and the National Rifle Association? Or is this another smoking gun that this entire 'situation' has been either state sponsored terror or a completely staged and ellaborate hoax to rid Americans of their guns? I have underlined (non-links) what I find to be strange 'coincidences' with Josh Sugarmann's Wikipedia profile and what politicians are now asking for in gun law. I certainly claim to have no answers; I am only presenting facts from Wikipedia. Judge the facts for yourself; I'd love to read your opinions.

According to Wikipedia, Newtown, Connecticut resident Josh Sugarmann is the executive director and founder of the Violence Policy Center (VPC). Prior to founding the VPC, Sugarmann was a press officer in the national office of Amnesty International USA and was the communications director for the National Coalition to Ban Handguns.


edit on 26-1-2013 by iceman22 because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
51
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join