It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Secrecy still shrouds Sandy Hook investigation!

page: 7
55
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 01:27 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Do you guys think that if you keep saying dead kids that the thread is going to get closed down? The mods are smarter than that, and they recognize your attempts to derail.




posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 01:28 PM
link   

therealguyfawkes
but not a single frame of footage showing Lanza anywhere near Sandy Hoax.


"Sandy Hoax", nice! Because of Oklahoma City, 9/11 etc., I figured they just went in and the killed the kids, why not?, murder is fun for the globalists. However the more information that comes, the more likely it seems that the event wasn't even a false flag, it didn't even happen. People can believe the OS if they want, but many of us are no longer naive, gullible and stupid enough to believe the obvious BS propaganda they spew, especially when there is zero evidence to support their fairytale, and every motive for them to invent it.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by OMsk3ptic
 


If I could star your comment more than once I would...straight to the point summing up of the report...cheers.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 01:40 PM
link   



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 02:00 PM
link   

edit on 26-11-2013 by parad0x122 because: Wrong topic. Accidental post.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by jaws1975
 


Now watch , because the alternate community is not swallowing this , like good little sheeple , they will release pictures , just like they did with the poor children of the Syrian False Flag photo shoot.

The people that put this together are experts by now at stagging the image for peoples consumption.

You may even get some other poor patsy , rear of head shot only walking up to the school.

All shot and organised after the shooting and before the building was taken down.

If this was a real incident there would not have been questions and inconsistencies.

They haven't quite got that part right yet , the variables in this sort of staged event are a little difficult to predict.

But they are learning as they are going along. This time they made sure anyone who was not in on it was kept at a very safe distance from the event , so none of those irritating photo's got lose this time.

You know the ones that show back packs being different colours and the like.

They will close all scenes down like a movie set from now on and you won't even get up in the air space around it , unless your suppose to.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 02:12 PM
link   
I'm surprised no one is suggesting that his motive might be pedophilia related. He had pro-pedophile documents on his computer and he goes and shoots up a school he once went to. My guess is that he was molested there, which led to him becoming a pedophile himself, he ended up hating himself and blamed the school for what happened to him.

That being said, the photos of his house all look staged. His room looks like no one actually lived there, and what happened to the security camera that should of been on the front of school?
edit on 26-11-2013 by kotu44 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 02:20 PM
link   

jaws1975
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Do you guys think that if you keep saying dead kids that the thread is going to get closed down? The mods are smarter than that, and they recognize your attempts to derail.


No, I keep saying "dead kids" becuase there were dead kids at Sandy Hook. If I had said "dead puppies" noone would know what the heck I was talking about.

Now how about answering the question; why is it that murder is apparently such an incredulous thing all of a sudden that people are having difficulty believing it can happen? That IS the core assumption behind the conspiracy beliefs, is it not?



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 




No, actually, what is actually a joke is the insistance that there has to be a conspiracy here somewhere based upon absolutely nothing but reading into the report looking for inconsistancies the conspiracy mongors are "so sure" have to be there somewhere.


Oh, there is a conspiracy here all right. The conspiracy to withhold evidence despite the laws (and common sense) dictating otherwise.

Why do you think that is?

If they don't want people to speculate they should produce the *evidence*. The report is not evidence. It talks about evidence while producing none. They are simply reaping what they have sown.

If the case is as strong as they say it is *and* the evidence supports that, then most doubts will disappear.

I live there (less than 10 minutes away). I want this to be finalized in an accurate, open and truthful way. So do most of my neighbors. It's been handled abysmally so far. They need to do better or they need to be held accountable by the laws and by the people those laws protect.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


You continue to avoid the inconsistencies of the case , and try to re-direct the threads intended focus.

It is the inconsistencies that make this event suspect.
Not that murder occurred, it is the way information has been stifled that draws attention.

If this is as you imply just an everyday mass murder by a lone gunman , why the cover up of information as stated several times in this thread?

Why do you push so hard for information and knowledge not to be available to all?



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 02:48 PM
link   
It is vitally important to KNOW that Lanza actually did this alone. Witness stories mentioned more than one shooter. News photos showed what looked like an ar in the trunk of his car. There was a drill going in the immediate area. There are way too many inconsistancies and no one trusts any branch of government since Obama was elected. This is supposedly a smoking gun crime so there is no need to hide info until the trial. We have not even been given any info to prove he killed his mother, just their word and to be frank I would not take their word on whether it was day or night.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 03:21 PM
link   
Soooo, no criminal trial since we have a lone dead gunman, but surely there will be a mountain of civil litigation, right?

Suits against the gun manufacturers. Suits against the school. Suits against the surviving members of the Lanza family.

In a case this high profile, even a book and movie deal for the brother could be worth millions. Surely the family's will move to sue to be sure that any such profits remain in the hands of victims' relatives. Even if the families aren't thinking clearly, certainly they've received extensive advice to lawyer up.

All of this evidence will have to come out in Civil court, correct? Or are the good citizens and lawyers of Newtown, CT above such trivial concerns?



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 03:26 PM
link   

FlyersFan
reply to post by olaru12
 

It's not 'disinformation' to state that the school nurse was on TV and she identified LANZA. He walked into her office and walked out again. She was hiding in the room. She saw him ... less than a foot from her.


Check your facts. This is what one of the first on scene reporters(brunette in red jacket reporter) said the nurse said. The whole "they locked eyes" thing never happened.

The Nurse in her own words later, never said she saw the shooters face. Only his legs from the knees down from a wire hole in her desk, as she was hiding behind it. So we are still without any eyewitness testimony or pictures of Adam Lanza at the scene. Only Carvers word, and some Newtown LE workers words. Not gonna cut it.

Also do you really call that Medical Examiner Carver a professional? The guy is clearly not right in the head.

Also, being a parent myself, trust me a photo of my dead child will not do, I would demand to see the body before holding any "funeral service".



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 03:35 PM
link   
i want to know is why not release calls between the police and who rung them to alert them of the situation? yet lots of people was killed in 9/11 and the plastered pictures and recordings all over the media be it tv , internet etc very similar situations people was killed families effected



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Riffrafter
Oh, there is a conspiracy here all right. The conspiracy to withhold evidence despite the laws (and common sense) dictating otherwise.

Why do you think that is?


Because of the sensitivity of the crime. Let's be honest here. You don't want to know esoteric details like how much the mother was earning in income or why she divorced her husband. You want to see the blood and guts photos of murdered little children for no real tangible reason that would assist the investigation, and the police aren't going to release crime scene photos like that any more than the police released the photos of Nicole Brown Simpson with her throat cut. You aren't claiming there's a conspiracy there too, are you?

If I might be so bold, who are you that your desire to see such material overrides the wishes of the victims' families to keep photos of their slain children private? If I were in their position I would certainly say "Go to Hell" to any of the internet ghouls demanding to see photos of my murdered child, and I daresay you would too.



I live there (less than 10 minutes away). I want this to be finalized in an accurate, open and truthful way. So do most of my neighbors. It's been handled abysmally so far. They need to do better or they need to be held accountable by the laws and by the people those laws protect.


I happen to live 30 minutes away, but that is neither here nor there. What do you consider to be "finalized"? To me being "finalized" is to come up with the actual reason why the shooter attacked the school, and the report specifically said the shooter left so few clues behind that they might never know. If they don't know then what do you want them to do, make something up just to put it in a report?



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


If I might be so bold. I dont want to see photographs of dead children...Like many here who know the gaping gaps in the report, we want to see evidence that the event took place as they say it did. There are no parts of the OS that fit together in any form. Inconsistencies abound at every corner, every statement or lack of statement, every picture and every comment made by the MSM are like pieces of 10 seperate jig-saws.

The penny will drop and those who play slight of hand will suddenly realise that we, those who are not stupid, are not going to go away...fact.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 03:51 PM
link   
interesting a lot of you are saying the don't publish fact about child murders well , adam collected them according to the guardian.



Adam Lanza, the 20-year-old who convulsed America when he shot dead 20 young children and six of their adult carers at Sandy Hook elementary school in Connecticut last December, was obsessed with mass murders in the run-up to his meticulously-planned attack and kept photocopies of newspaper articles on shootings of children dating back to 1891.



link



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Pinkorchid
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


You continue to avoid the inconsistencies of the case , and try to re-direct the threads intended focus.

It is the inconsistencies that make this event suspect.
Not that murder occurred, it is the way information has been stifled that draws attention.


I will admit I haven't read every single page in this thread to know what inconsistancies you're referring to, but the "inconsistancies" I have seen are hardly inconsistancies, but rather trivial things the Doubting Thomases here are deliberately reading into. One person I saw claimed how "suspicious" it was for a cop to tamper with evidence at a crime scene by removing the shotgun from the front seat to the trunk. If he was moving an object with fingerprints or a blood soaked glove that might be true, but this was a dangerous weapon that remained dangerous as long as it was lying out in the open. He made a judgement call to secure a dangerous weapon and it's a perfectly understandable one, seeing what was going on at the time.

Another "inconsistancy" someone else mentioned was the mysterious "second shooter" that was initially reported. It came out right in the report that the "second shooter" was determined to be a parent of a child attending the school and the "gun" he was carrying turned out to be a cell phone.

I will wager that the rest of the "inconsistancies" you're referring to are likewise simple misunderstandings that are being blown out of proportion to their actual importance..but I invite you to prove me wrong.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 03:54 PM
link   

GoodOlDave

Pinkorchid
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


You continue to avoid the inconsistencies of the case , and try to re-direct the threads intended focus.

It is the inconsistencies that make this event suspect.
Not that murder occurred, it is the way information has been stifled that draws attention.


I will admit I haven't read every single page in this thread to know what inconsistancies you're referring to, but the "inconsistancies" I have seen are hardly inconsistancies, but rather trivial things the Doubting Thomases here are deliberately reading into. One person I saw claimed how "suspicious" it was for a cop to tamper with evidence at a crime scene by removing the shotgun from the front seat to the trunk. If he was moving an object with fingerprints or a blood soaked glove that might be true, but this was a dangerous weapon that remained dangerous as long as it was lying out in the open. He made a judgement call to secure a dangerous weapon and it's a perfectly understandable one, seeing what was going on at the time.

Another "inconsistancy" someone else mentioned was the mysterious "second shooter" that was initially reported. It came out right in the report that the "second shooter" was determined to be a parent of a child attending the school and the "gun" he was carrying turned out to be a cell phone. This isn't even an inconsistancy. It's an incorrect report the media released during the initial feeding frenzy over reporting what was happening.

I will wager that the rest of the "inconsistancies" you're referring to are likewise simple misunderstandings that are being blown out of proportion to their actual importance..but I invite you to prove me wrong.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 03:59 PM
link   
hmm not got nothing on that one i guess?? what about all those other children who lost their lives? are theirs less important ok to be published in the media ? what makes the Sandy Hook so significant?



new topics

top topics



 
55
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join