This is why the general public will never know what really happened to the SANDY HOOK children

page: 1
37
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 06:20 PM
link   
I just want to start off by saying I'm not implying in anyway that nothing tragic happened to these children just in the manner that we are being told it to have happened is slightly off to me.

I wanted to bring to light on ATS some new information that an independent researcher has recently discovered.

The Chief Medical Examiner of the Sandy Hook case, Dr. H. Wayne Carver, had a bill passed a year before the shooting took place which prevents the general public from obtaining any information on "pediatric homicides".


(How is this not suspicious?)
Here's a link to his vid with the bill approval document as well,
www.youtube.com...


This way he doesnt have to disclose any information at all in any form to the public in regards to "pediatric homicides", in other words, murdered children. He can give any cause of death he wants to the public. Like telling the reporters that all the victims where shot and killed by an assualt rifle yet it was in the trunk the whole time and not retrieved untill later that night.



I know some people are getting tired of the Sandy Hook Consiracy but it doesn't sit right with me or many of my family members for that matter since it first appeared on the news.Within 20 minutes of watching the story unfold I knew something was not right. I would learn the shooter was named Ryan Lanza and he used an assualt rifle to commit the murders only to change the channel during a commercial to another news station to find out it's appearantly Adam Lanza and he used two handguns but the police found a assualt rifle in the car. That was only the beginning of the inconsistencies.

As the evening progressed and the story unfolded I realized one thing...there was not a single victim shown, not even a drop of blood! No children anywhere to be seeing for that matter, just one still photo of 7 children or so walking in single file which was used by every station repeatedly.

Now, I know people are going to say it's because its children and its a sensitive subject but since when in the hell has the MSM ever not exposed and exploited the hell out of stories like this. Turn the news on right now and it wont take long to find some poor soul clutching his lost child in his arms from the war that constantly surrounds them. The MSM overexposure can be used against them however...

Columbine for example. The motives of Erik and Dylan are widely disputed from everything from mind control to influences like Marylin Manson (poor guy). One thing is for sure though, and the media made sure of it, is that this massacre actually happened and the evidence is indisputable. There's everything from bodies (god bless their souls) and terrifyed blood spattered survivors right down to actual video footage of them in the school shooting! One thing was for sure, when I was watching that unfold on the news I knew something terrible had actually happened and I felt sick to my stomach. I didn't get that feeling at all from Sandy Hook I can tell you.

There's so much new evidence coming out everyday it's hard to believe that people have such a hard time believing that there might be something very wrong here. I just wanted to thank everyone who has been researching this so far and continues to do so and hope more people will also.

Nuns with Guns

I wanted to add the nun aspect as well to my post. There is a very odd connection with people in nun outfits and the James Holmes shooting and Sandy Hook.

Google it and you will see that there are many reports of Holmes possibly wearing a nun outfit during the shooting. Strange, cause these odd looking nuns were seeing at Sandy Hook,


(Are those even women?)


And remember the purple van with the possible occupants wearing nun outfits at Sandy Hook?
Here's the dispatch which can be heard online,

On 14/12/12 11:03 AM Danbury Police reported over their scanners that they were on the lookout for a PURPLE or MAROON VAN in connection with the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

Radio dispatch further relayed, "Two occupants with possible ski masks that may be involved with this incident.Exit 8 heading down Stoney Hill towards the center".
At 11:10 dispatch continued, "They may be involved with this incident. Also we are getting reports one of them maybe wearing a Nun outfit, heading towards Danbury, Stoney Hill, purple van - unknown plate."

Here's a link to a very well put together video summary ragarding the Sandy Hook Conspiracy for those looking for a recap,

www.youtube.com...

edit on 3-2-2013 by ArchaicDesigns because: (no reason given)
edit on Mon Feb 4 2013 by DontTreadOnMe because: **ALL MEMBERS Please read: Sandy Hook**




posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 06:28 PM
link   
I have nothing against your post other than to correct the last name of the accused individuals who's "Lanza" not Danza
edit on 3-2-2013 by twohawks because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArchaicDesigns
I just want to start off by saying I'm not implying in anyway that nothing tragic happened to these children just in the manner that we are being told it to have happened is slightly off to me.

I wanted to bring to light on ATS some new information that an independent researcher has recently discovered.

The Chief Medical Examiner of the Sandy Hook case, Dr. H. Wayne Carver, had a bill passed a year before the shooting took place which prevents the general public from obtaining any information on "pediatric homicides".


(How is this not suspicious?)


Reading this close it says that the bill is redundant and that he has never given out reports to the public due to already standing laws and regulations ect. However it is noted that an effort for no reason that we know of was being made to pile more law upon standing law.
edit on 3-2-2013 by Logarock because: n



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 06:36 PM
link   
reply to post by twohawks
 


Good call, I don't know what I was thinking..I don't remember watching Who's the boss recently. lol



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 06:39 PM
link   
reply to post by ArchaicDesigns
 

Yes, initial reports tagged the shooter as Ryan Lanza... then it was reported that it was Adam Lanza. The mistake was attributed to the fact(? ) that Adam was carrying Ryan's ID.

When Ryan was questioned, he stated that he had no contact with his estranged brother Adam for two years! How did he have his ID?

Was this issue ever resolved?



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 06:45 PM
link   
And then had the video maker done the research that should have been done, this bill was first put together and talked about after the Cheshire home invasions, and the fact that people wanted to see the naked and burned body of 11 year old Michalea Petit...

Old news in Connecticut and I for one am firmly behind this bill...



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 06:53 PM
link   
edit on 3-2-2013 by haven123 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 07:49 PM
link   
reply to post by ArchaicDesigns
 


Excellent find!

I suppose we'll have to wait to see what's stated in the official report. If the ME's statements and findings are redacted, we'll know why.

I do believe that this is another infringement on our rights. Not only are they taking our guns with this incident as well as our free speech, but now they're attacking the Freedom of Information Act.

Regarding the video of them removing the gun from the trunk, why is it dark? I can't imagine why there wouldn't be any sunlight while they were investigating the trunk. Not to mention the guy isn't wearing gloves.
edit on 3-2-2013 by Afterthought because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 07:52 PM
link   
reply to post by vkey08
 


I don't believe that they are talking about just photographs. This bill would eliminate any information whatsoever. I think it's fair to release the written reports to the public as well as the drawn diagrams indicating where the bullets entered and exited. This is all very important information that wouldn't tickle gore seekers like photos would.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by vkey08
 


Holee cow! I had never heard of this crime, so just googled it. How in the h-e-double L anyone in Connecticut or anywhere could consider being disarmed in light of that in their own (proverbial) backyard is beyond me.
Aw man...



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 07:54 PM
link   
I'm wondering how many children die from homocides in CT that this bill would even be a thought in the ME's mind. It's not like we're talking about LA or Camden, NJ.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by DogsDogsDogs
reply to post by vkey08
 


Holee cow! I had never heard of this crime, so just googled it. How in the h-e-double L anyone in Connecticut or anywhere could consider being disarmed in light of that in their own (proverbial) backyard is beyond me.
Aw man...


The general population of the state, myself included are against any bills that disarm us because that crime happened. We feel that to prevent something like that happening again, we need to be able to defend ourselves.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Afterthought
I'm wondering how many children die from homocides in CT that this bill would even be a thought in the ME's mind. It's not like we're talking about LA or Camden, NJ.


Many... and Connecticut has very strict laws about information regarding minor children in any situation. Henry Lee was actually the first to put forth the original draft that became that bill, it was NOT because of Newtown, it was already slated to be voted upon in this session prior to Newtown happening.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 08:10 PM
link   
reply to post by vkey08
 


Trying to find statistics for homicides involving children, I found this link, which is extremely informative.
www.ncjrs.gov...
I'm still reading through it, but this part caught my eye:

Homicides of teenagers, most of which
involve male victims killed by male offenders
using firearms, rose dramatically
in the late 1980s and early 1990s but
have declined sharply since 1993.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 08:11 PM
link   
I can totally understand why a law like this would be implimented... At least ouy of respect for grieving parents, however;

This does leave a wide open advantage to agent provocateurs that want to stage fictitious events to sway public opinion.
Cant do anything about that. Not without exposing personal events of grieving parents.

I do wonder how far we are away from "Nuclear War" that is in reality nothing more that a few
Super imposed images and dramatic interviews televised internationally. 1984 rings a bell...
edit on 3-2-2013 by FirstCasualty because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 09:12 PM
link   
I've made an attempt to stay out of this whole sandy hook thing. I don't know what to think, I don't know if there is, or isn't a conspiracy here. How ever I do glance at threads time to time, trying to take it all in with a grain of salt keeping my mouth shut.

I noticed this bill about the ban on publication of any murder related information with children...

I have this one thing to say. What about the adults that died that day?

Wasn't it six adults who also were murdered along with the children? Have those details been released at all? Couldn't you figure something out with that. I mean it's the law not to publish gruesome details related to children and homicide, but we do hear about them still. We heard all the gruesome details when a father hacked his kids to death with the social worker at the door and then set the house on fire. Media doesn't seem to follow the rule.

powell murder

How is this different???



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 10:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by ArchaicDesigns
 

Yes, initial reports tagged the shooter as Ryan Lanza... then it was reported that it was Adam Lanza. The mistake was attributed to the fact(? ) that Adam was carrying Ryan's ID.

When Ryan was questioned, he stated that he had no contact with his estranged brother Adam for two years! How did he have his ID?

Was this issue ever resolved?


Yes the issue was "resolved", Anderson Cooper said we are bunch of insensitive crazies for even questioning anything.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 11:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by vkey08

Originally posted by Afterthought
I'm wondering how many children die from homocides in CT that this bill would even be a thought in the ME's mind. It's not like we're talking about LA or Camden, NJ.


Many... and Connecticut has very strict laws about information regarding minor children in any situation. Henry Lee was actually the first to put forth the original draft that became that bill, it was NOT because of Newtown, it was already slated to be voted upon in this session prior to Newtown happening.




Laws against giving information regarding minor children is in the interest and for the purpose of protecting minor children, specifically. Both in terms of their safety, and for reasons of privacy. In the case where a minor child dies via homicide, this becomes irrelevant, as they no longer require such protection. I think it's in the interest of the public that information regarding homicides be made public.

I mean what next... no information regarding any homicide becomes publicly released, minor or not? Or any crime whatsoever? These facts can only be known by law enforcement professionals, a few lawyers, a judge, and a jury? And in some cases not even that many? I think that would leave even more room for corruption in the system. Things should only be kept from the public when it's 100% in the interest of justice to do so. For example, when certain details of a homicide are kept from the public, purposely, so that only involved parties would have this information. And something like that only applies to an open case where the person who committed the act is unknown. Like the plot device you see used in a lot of fiction-- where part of the M.O., or a "calling card" of a serial killer is kept from the public, and thus only known to involved parties. According to the cops and the media, we know exactly who did this, so that does not apply. Nor do the unfortunate victims of this tragedy need the protection of privacy.

And I agree the fact that this M.E. having pushed for tighter controls regarding info like this is a little conveniently coincidental.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 12:25 AM
link   
Thank you. Star, flag and a friend add. Thanks for the stellar thread! We need more members like you.




posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 01:05 AM
link   
I also wanted to share this bit of info I stumbled upon.
Appearantly FEMA was in town conducting training exercises "for planning for the needs of children in disasters" the day of the shooting!



Weird eh? Well it's about to get weirder...
While researching this further I found this very interesting video which explains how FEMA was not only in Connecticut at the time of the shooting but also in London during the 2005 Subway bombing conducting bomb drills and in the New York area during 911 while it happened!!!
FEMA sure has a fantastic ability to be in the right place at the Rright time before an amazing, well publicized, tragedy occurs.

This is a well researched little video that will leave you thinking,


Anyone else starting to see the bigger picture here?





new topics

top topics



 
37
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join