National School Safety Expert: Sandy Hook shooting was a fraud

alien ninja training

reply to post by ExNihiloRed

It seems ignorant to say all we have is baseless conjecture when we are basing our conjecture off a lot of things.

Your statement is absolutely, unequivocally, false. To claim hoax, then to try and back it up with questions and not fact, is baseless conjecture.

Its one thing to question the O.S. Its a whole other to accuse parents that just lost children of being in on it.

As Ive already said, a quest for "truth" that disregards all evidence that doesnt fit into its narrative is not a quest for truth at all. It is a fetish.

Unless you saw the shooting yourself or the bodies or the crime scene, everything you say other people said is hearsay.

You guys are so focused on me that you are missing the forest from the trees. Its not about me. Its about the eye witnesses. Whose statements are widely available in interviews.
A little help for you:

hear·say noun \ˈhir-ˌsā\ : something heard from another person : something that you have been told

www.merriam-webster.com...

eye·wit·ness [n. ahy-wit-nis, ahy-wit-nis; v. ahy-wit-nis] Show IPA noun 1. a person who actually sees some act, occurrence, or thing and can give a firsthand account of it: There were two eyewitnesses to the murder.

dictionary.reference.com...

If it were a matter of me saying "i heard this from the eye witness", it would be hearsay. But again, I am inconsequential in this. The ACTUAL eye witness statements are out there for anyone to see.

Get it?

Have you personally spoke to victims or family of victims?

Ive spoken to people who live in the town and knew the victims. But thats a fairly moot point. Its not about me. Its about the ACTUAL EVIDENCE.

Is any information more than he said she said? How can you say that is any more reliable than what we are pointing to as indicators of uncertainty?

Because no one, let me repeat, NO ONE, has shown me any decent evidence of a hoax. At best they have questions about the way this person acted or the way that group responded. There has yet to be presented ONE SINGLE THING that does more than make one raise his eyebrow. It all deadends. And to make a claim of conspiracy, I believe there has to be something to back it. And I believe that is the EXACT reason it is so easy to discredit the Con. theory community. So many people jump to so many conclusions and cling to so many fanastical things as truth but never meet the burden of proof.

Perhaps they are nothing more than oddities, but they are worth vetting.

I have advocated that all along. I have done more research on this topic than, i would guess, most people. Where I draw the line is making definitive claims without backing them.

You started all this by fretting about how close minded us SH skeptics are, but you've expressed the most close minded positioning of anyone.

Funny, the small group of SH "truthers" out there always throw this around. And then they turn around and pick and choose which evidence they believe is relevant, while disregarding ANYTHING that doesnt fit their "theory".

If thats open minded, Ill take the former.

reply to post by notquitesure


Oh they know who I am all right and I feel comfortable because while it's not in the report, it's not a secret either . Every one of our local news stations ALSO mentioned it in their news stories of the day, maybe not as a headlining statement but in anecdotal form because of the fact that people were just killed and it seemed silly for the whole bit of this "CF" calling in and being asses about it. Anecdotal relay is just that anecdotal relay.. it's not overly important to the whole narrative, but it provides interesting aside information we may not normally get to see. Since Malloy himself mentioned the incident, it's free and clear to be published.

As for your quibbling with me, just because I think there were more than one person involved does not a liar them make. At worst it's guilt of withholding investigation information, and as I stated, if there were such an ongoing investigation (I again have no idea if there is or isn't and even if I did, I would still have no idea) The report contains what they feel they can tell the State Legislature (remember the report isn't for you and me, it's for the lawmakers to read, we just get to by default) and they leave out stuff they feel is either important to keep for the time being OR is not relevant to the situation. Lifestar being in New Haven and Springfield (there are 2 choppers) is not relevant information, the fact that a drill was taking place in the OPPOSITE CORNER of CT that day was not relevant information to the investigation, although I think they mentioned it somewhere.

What I am saying is I do not believe this is ALL of the information, and rightfully so if they are continuing the investigation. I am not calling them liars though, and it's not semantics, I would love to find out I was right and they are continuing to look into this AND they are continuing to pursue another suspect, I could be very wrong though, this is just my opinion, it is not FACT.

So the state can keep whatever secret they want, and we should just accept that they have a good reason? They have our best interests at heart? Kind of like passing laws that we don't have to worry about since they don't intend to prosecute. Or perpetually being in a state of war, because terror is everywhere.

I didn't say that either, but if there is an ongoing investigation, yes they can withhold parts of the investigation that may damage an ongoing one. It's called normal investigative operations, remember they were forced into releasing the report by people like you that wanted to see it yesterday and were just itching to rip it to shreds.. I have no problem with them withholding portions if it means they are still investigating. If they aren't then it means they're not withholding anything other than the sensitive information as it refers to minor children and that also is ok in my book, as it means that's all they could come up with.

As far as sharing information, there's been a lot of Federal investigators that have gone on record saying Connecticut was stonewalling them, CT wanted to handle it themselves without any outside interference. That was a stupid move, but they did it.

Now if you can't understand any of THAT i'm sorry...

vkey08
reply to post by notquitesure

 

Oh they know who I am all right and I feel comfortable because while it's not in the report, it's not a secret either . Every one of our local news stations ALSO mentioned it in their news stories of the day, maybe not as a headlining statement but in anecdotal form because of the fact that people were just killed and it seemed silly for the whole bit of this "CF" calling in and being asses about it. Anecdotal relay is just that anecdotal relay.. it's not overly important to the whole narrative, but it provides interesting aside information we may not normally get to see. Since Malloy himself mentioned the incident, it's free and clear to be published.

Are you talking about rumors of this being a hoax? Are you saying this was being widely reported by your local news on 12/15/2012? I would love to see a link to that.

This is only important to the story because you brought it up as an excuse for Carver. You said he was uncomfortable in front of the camera, and he was only trotted out in an effort to dispel conspiracy theories. I contend that this is bunk, because on 12/15/2012 there were no significant conspiracy theories to dispel. With everything else going on, I have a tremendous amount of trouble believing that the CT governor was concerned with dispelling conspiracy theories. Unless of course he knew he had something to cover up. Now there's something...

vkey08
As for your quibbling with me, just because I think there were more than one person involved does not a liar them make. At worst it's guilt of withholding investigation information, and as I stated, if there were such an ongoing investigation (I again have no idea if there is or isn't and even if I did, I would still have no idea) The report contains what they feel they can tell the State Legislature (remember the report isn't for you and me, it's for the lawmakers to read, we just get to by default) and they leave out stuff they feel is either important to keep for the time being OR is not relevant to the situation. Lifestar being in New Haven and Springfield (there are 2 choppers) is not relevant information, the fact that a drill was taking place in the OPPOSITE CORNER of CT that day was not relevant information to the investigation, although I think they mentioned it somewhere.

You and I have different ideas about what is OK for the government to do. Under the scenario you painted, they can keep anything they want a secret for as long as they want, under the guise of a hidden ongoing investigation. I seek transparency.

A closed case is supposed to be just that. If you were accused of this crime, then the state would have an obligation to release all details and, you know, make their case. The fact that the state claims that the lone gunman is dead does not absolve them of their burden to publicly make their case. It is anti-American to simply take their word for it.

There isn't supposed to be some secret club here where we say pretty please and hope to be able to sneak a peak over their shoulder. We have as much right to view the evidence here as anyone else. One might say that we have an obligation.

vkey08

I didn't say that either, but if there is an ongoing investigation, yes they can withhold parts of the investigation that may damage an ongoing one. It's called normal investigative operations, remember they were forced into releasing the report by people like you that wanted to see it yesterday and were just itching to rip it to shreds.. I have no problem with them withholding portions if it means they are still investigating. If they aren't then it means they're not withholding anything other than the sensitive information as it refers to minor children and that also is ok in my book, as it means that's all they could come up with.

You make a leap here for sure. "If there is an ongoing investigation." They say it's closed. You have already made it clear that you are OK with secret investigations. We should just all live in fear, right?

Clearly, they are withholding more than sensitive info about children. At minimum, they are withholding photographic evidence of the demise of Lanza, his mother, and other adults. This type of evidence would contribute greatly toward making their case.

"Forced into releasing the report by people like you..."

This is laughable. It took them more than a year to release a report with essentially no information for a crime that was supposed to be about as open and shut as they come. Hardly think they felt forced.

vkey08
As far as sharing information, there's been a lot of Federal investigators that have gone on record saying Connecticut was stonewalling them, CT wanted to handle it themselves without any outside interference. That was a stupid move, but they did it.

Now if you can't understand any of THAT i'm sorry...

Could you provide sourced quotes from Federal investigators who felt stonewalled? I personally believe that the Feds are thick in this case. Money and attention certainly continues to flow. But I can be persuaded with proper evidence.

By the way, I understand plenty. You never answered on one point and I would like to get this straight. Are you claiming that you were there that day at Sandy Hook? You seem to be making that claim without coming right out and saying it.

reply to post by notquitesure


I have stated before, so I'll state it again, that I contributed to the response team that day as almost all available trained people in the state did. Was not a fun day by any stretch of the imagination, and well, did nothing for my ability to do my job (which is why I got sent to bureaucratic hell for the remainder of my time) I do not regret helping, I would offer up help again, and honestly, it's none of anyone's business if I did or did not help on scene that day, was totally my decision to respond to the call I received, I was on a day off (read: me - personal time, but I felt this was an emergency crisis situation) and at ANOTHER elementary school in state dealing with a problem with my Daughter when the incident happened..

So Yes I have stated it before and I will state it again and again and again, did you miss the part of just about every thread I've been in where I mention I am a Federal Government Civil Rights Investigator? I'm a trained first responder, I am a trained CT Licensed EMT, I'm not going to sit by when there's a huge situation they don't quite know the extent of, any more than I sat around on my rear end after Irene, Alfred or Sandy and let anyone that needed help go without.. (although after Alfred I was more concerned with my roof being caved in by a tree but that's another mess in itself)

reply to post by vkey08


No, I've never seen you talk about what you do for a living.

So you were there?

Maybe you can shed some light on a few things...

What time did you enter the school?

What was the procedure for entering the school? Who gave the go ahead, etc.?

Did many of you enter the school all at once? A few at a time? How did you get in the building?


How many others were milling around the school, and in what capacity?

Did you witness anyone attempting to save a life?



I could probably ask a thousand questions, but what I would really like to hear is what you can share that will add some substance to the story.

Anything that you are willing to share. I know you say that you're suffering from PTSD, and imply that certain things are none of peoples' business. Then again, you are clearly willing to insert yourself in the conversation here up to a point. You don't seem to have any issue discussing the issues that you deem relevant.

Truthfully, I'd like to see something that helps me put this mystery to rest. I'm open to a wide range of possibilities.

reply to post by notquitesure


I got there at around 10:30 it took me about a half hour lights blazing to get from North of Hartford to the location. My group entered at around 10:45-10:50 as directed by the Newtown PD, I was totally unprepared for what was inside and I focused my efforts on the outside after that, sorry but reliving those 15 minutes are not my fav in the world.

There wasn't a real procedure in place, it was really chaos, in the purest sense of the word - Get in get as many kids as you can get out..do not asses damage, do not try to revive dead children or teachers, if someone was visibly alive and could be helped and moved, get them out or help there there but be quick. To be honest that day after that is a lot of blur and time not making sense as I look back on it, I'm either suppressing stuff or it really was just that chaotic.. I know for a fact I am in at least 2 photos taken that day LOL both I look horrid and exhausted, as I had just had a marathon night with my little autistic demon spawn, and had just gotten in to a huge fight at the school over her behavior.

Two things I remember vividly, the thought there was a second shooter, and that's why they didn't pull emergency crews in closer that quickly, they couldn't confirm or deny it, and that the news media wasn't doing a damn bit of anything to help.. (I am a huge believer in that you say screw it and help out when a disaster strikes, rather than sit and take pictures, esp if you live in the area affected)

Otherwise i followed this whole thing from my office up in Hartford or through various friends that I knew that were involved in the incident investigation early on..

reply to post by notquitesure


something I forgot to add: yes people tried to save lives. it was not needed unfortunately..

reply to post by vkey08


Here' s a link to an article written by another first responder.


First Responder tells his story


He tells of receiving a call at 10:03, and taking 8 minutes to arrive at the Sandy Hook. By my math, that got him there at 10:11, which is considerably earlier than you arrived.

The article notes that he was told to stand down and never enters the school. Do you have any idea why first responders who arrived on scene much earlier than you never entered the building, while you showed up much later and did enter the building?

Also, he says he was told to stand down by the Newtown EMS Captain. You indicated that you were taking direction from the Police Department. Was the chain of command dealing with entering and exiting the school unclear?

One more question. You disparagingly mention the media present and their taking pictures instead of helping. I totally get that. Are you surprised that there weren't more pictures of groups of children fleeing the school with adults such as yourself? I only recall seeing one such image. In fact, that photo was released around 10:47, while you were present. Does it strike you at all as odd that their weren't many such pictures?

vkey08
reply to post by notquitesure

 

My group entered at around 10:45-10:50 as directed by the Newtown PD, I was totally unprepared for what was inside and I focused my efforts on the outside after that, sorry but reliving those 15 minutes are not my fav in the world.

There wasn't a real procedure in place, it was really chaos, in the purest sense of the word - Get in get as many kids as you can get out..do not asses damage, do not try to revive dead children or teachers, if someone was visibly alive and could be helped and moved, get them out or help there there but be quick. To be honest that day after that is a lot of blur and time not making sense as I look back on it, I'm either suppressing stuff or it really was just that chaotic..
———snip

I would like you to clarify this statement.

You had made allusions earlier of suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder as result of your involvement with the crime scene at Sandy Hook Elementary School on December 14, 2012; which I infer to mean that you (and others) entered the school.

You also seem to imply that you, the human-being behind the ATS avatar known as vkey08, had borne witness to the postmortem conditions of at least one or more victims of this alleged crime.

I would appreciate your honest answer, and I will ask no further questions.

Are both of the inferences stated above accurate?

Thank you,
~E.C.

reply to post by 3mperorConstantinE



That's a great question you've asked.
Looking forward to the answer........

I watched a video earlier asking if Annie Haddad was Nancy Lanza and I have to say .........they look like the same person.

vkey08
reply to post by notquitesure

 

I got there at around 10:30 it took me about a half hour lights blazing to get from North of Hartford to the location. My group entered at around 10:45-10:50 as directed by the Newtown PD, I was totally unprepared for what was inside and I focused my efforts on the outside after that, sorry but reliving those 15 minutes are not my fav in the world.

There wasn't a real procedure in place, it was really chaos, in the purest sense of the word - Get in get as many kids as you can get out..do not asses damage, do not try to revive dead children or teachers, if someone was visibly alive and could be helped and moved, get them out or help there there but be quick. To be honest that day after that is a lot of blur and time not making sense as I look back on it, I'm either suppressing stuff or it really was just that chaotic.. I know for a fact I am in at least 2 photos taken that day LOL both I look horrid and exhausted, as I had just had a marathon night with my little autistic demon spawn, and had just gotten in to a huge fight at the school over her behavior.

Two things I remember vividly, the thought there was a second shooter, and that's why they didn't pull emergency crews in closer that quickly, they couldn't confirm or deny it, and that the news media wasn't doing a damn bit of anything to help.. (I am a huge believer in that you say screw it and help out when a disaster strikes, rather than sit and take pictures, esp if you live in the area affected)

Otherwise i followed this whole thing from my office up in Hartford or through various friends that I knew that were involved in the incident investigation early on..

@vkey08

Odd you started threads such as those below, considering you claim to have been there in the thick of it. For some reason I don't see the two going together. You had plenty of opportunity to come out and state you were there. Why now?

What I also find odd is, links to your posts made to threads started by other members go back no farther than Feb '13 - at least that's the cutoff when I look at your profile page - yet you clearly posted prior to that time as threads you started go back to '09 if I remember correctly. I checked my post list and a few random others and didn't get the same results.

Have any type of explanation for these anomalies?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

vkey08
reply to post by notquitesure

 

something I forgot to add: yes people tried to save lives. it was not needed unfortunately..

Yo I asked you a few questions, but unfortunately they were linked to another poster. Maybe you can answer them? I read about your PTSD. Better now to discuss this stuff?

Having read the entire final report I'll throw out a couple of "facts" fwiw..

Fact #1: No child victim is listed by name in the final report.
Fact #2: No death certificates are available to either the public or the media.
Fact #3: No fired bullets can positively matched to the purported murder weapon - the Bushmaster AR15
Fact #4: Pronouncements of death were issued on site by members of Danbury Hospital Emergency medical team (tactical paramedics Bernie Meehan, John Reed and Matthew Cassavechia)
Fact #5: Families of children were not informed by the usual protocol of having State troopers tell them, Governor Malloy personally informed them as a group saying (paraphrased) "if you haven't been re-united with your loved ones yet you may presume they are deceased".

reply to post by Asktheanimals

Bravo, excellent job! It's good to see people reading this for themselves as there is MUCH info to be gleaned by these reports despite Sedensky's omnipresent black Sharpie.

Here are two more things from the report (both from Book 8 of the Final Investigative Report)

"Adam" Lanza is alleged to have briefly attended Western Connecticut State University, allegedly earning a B average over the year as he studied Philosophy, Macroeconomics, and History.

Police visit the professor of his History 101 class to subpoena "Adam's" records.
Professor has no record of ever having "Adam" Lanza in any class.

Police appear to be chasing a phantom, as they relate pursuing leads (i.e. trying to find people who even knew the Lanzas) — desperately reduced to contacting those who appeared in MSM reports providing info about Nancy and "Adam" Lanza.
Upon being interviewed, these people (who I will not name, despite the fact that it is public record, and they did nothing wrong) were merely relaying rumors which they themselves had heard being repeated around town, and had absolutely ZERO first-hand information.

One resident in particular, who was interviewed by Jana Winters for this Fox News piece, told police that while he did know of a Ryan Lanza, that was many years ago, but that he had, in fact, never even heard of Nancy or Adam.

vkey08 =>
Be it known that I still kindly await your response.
If you fear a protracted cross-examination, then please, I assure you:
a simple "yes" or "no"—or even a mere binary response of "0" or "1" to indicate the falsity or truth of my inferences, will suffice.

For your convenience, here are the clarifications of your own words which I am requesting:

1. Did you, acting either alone, or as part of a group, enter the Sandy Hook Elementary School at any time on December 14, 2012?
   —> Yes or No?
   
2. Were you a witness to the postmortem conditions of either one or more of the victims at the alleged crime-scene at 12 Dickinson Dr., Newtown, CT on December 14, 2012.
   —> Yes or No?
   
   
   Again, I am assuming good faith, and I thank you in advance for your forthrightness—
   --> in either clarifying your own words,
   --> or for demonstrating the integrity required to set the record straight, regarding potentially spurious statements given of one's involvement in one of the most notorious and controversial crimes in American history.
   
   ~E
   
   edit on 3-3-2014 by 3mperorConstantinE because: (no reason given)
   

I`ve been following this thread since the beginning and must say it`s one of the best at present on ATS,
Being dumped in this forum is an insult in my opinion to some really good ATS researchers.

Asktheanimals
Having read the entire final report I'll throw out a couple of "facts" fwiw..

Fact #1: No child victim is listed by name in the final report.
Fact #2: No death certificates are available to either the public or the media.
Fact #3: No fired bullets can positively matched to the purported murder weapon - the Bushmaster AR15
Fact #4: Pronouncements of death were issued on site by members of Danbury Hospital Emergency medical team (tactical paramedics Bernie Meehan, John Reed and Matthew Cassavechia)
Fact #5: Families of children were not informed by the usual protocol of having State troopers tell them, Governor Malloy personally informed them as a group saying (paraphrased) "if you haven't been re-united with your loved ones yet you may presume they are deceased".

edit on 3-3-2014 by Asktheanimals because: name corrected

Here's a link to a NY Daily news article where they claim to have obtained copies of the Death Certificates through FOIA requests. There is only a report about documents - no actual documents. To my knowledge, no one else claims to have access to the Death Certificates.

NY Daily News says they have Death Certificates

notquitesure

Asktheanimals
Having read the entire final report I'll throw out a couple of "facts" fwiw..

Fact #1: No child victim is listed by name in the final report.
Fact #2: No death certificates are available to either the public or the media.
Fact #3: No fired bullets can positively matched to the purported murder weapon - the Bushmaster AR15
Fact #4: Pronouncements of death were issued on site by members of Danbury Hospital Emergency medical team (tactical paramedics Bernie Meehan, John Reed and Matthew Cassavechia)
Fact #5: Families of children were not informed by the usual protocol of having State troopers tell them, Governor Malloy personally informed them as a group saying (paraphrased) "if you haven't been re-united with your loved ones yet you may presume they are deceased".

edit on 3-3-2014 by Asktheanimals because: name corrected

Here's a link to a NY Daily news article where they claim to have obtained copies of the Death Certificates through FOIA requests. There is only a report about documents - no actual documents. To my knowledge, no one else claims to have access to the Death Certificates.

NY Daily News says they have Death Certificates

That's funny. I got the same information from reading the coroner's report included with the final report. A real death certificate would give the Physician's name along with time, date and place. I think they got an early copy of the redacted autopsy report and lied about the FOIA to make it look newsworthy.

deadcalm

2 children and 1 adult were taken to Danbury hospital

reply to post by Asktheanimals

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wren't those 2 kids transported to the hospital by the police? If so....why? With so many first responders standing around doing nothing....why wouldn't they have taken them?

They were transported to Danbury hospital by ambulance.
One was taken from the school to the ambulance by car.
The other carried by Newtown officer Chapman to the ambulance.
The media is awful about clarifying such details.

reply to post by Asktheanimals


But remember, as per the headline of a Boston.com article: “Newtown parents push to block access to shooting records” (<—with the word: "block" later changed to "protect"). The entire article has since been scrubbed, but here is a cached copy

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — Family members of the Newtown school shooting victims made a last-minute appearance at Connecticut’s state Capitol on Friday, urging legislators to block the public release of crime scene photos and other records from the massacre.

About 20 relatives of the 20 first graders and six educators killed Dec. 14 met with legislative leaders on Friday, days before the regular legislative session is set to adjourn on June 5. More than 30 family members signed a letter to lawmakers, urging them to pass legislation addressing their concerns.

Dean Pinto, whose 6-year-old son Jack was killed in the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School, said the families are especially worried about crime scene photos appearing on the Internet, posted by people with various political agendas and conspiracy theories about the crime. He acknowledged traditional media typically would not publish such graphic photos.

‘‘I'm fully supportive of an open and transparent government, but I can’t understand how distributing graphic photos of murdered teachers and children serves any purpose other than causing our families more pain,’’ said Pinto, adding that the only person who would learn from the photos would be another Adam Lanza, referring to the Newtown shooter.

Earlier this month, Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, the state’s top prosecutor and legislative leaders acknowledged they were working privately on a bill that would address the parents’ concerns. A working draft released by Malloy’s office required the written consent of the Sandy Hook victims’ family members before the public release of any photograph, videotape or digital recording related to the shooting. The draft also proposed releasing only written transcriptions of any 911 calls related to the shooting, not the audio, to the public.

‘‘To be honest, none of us here want to hear gunshots and the screams of our loved ones as they perished,’’ Pinto said. ‘‘And frankly, I'm not sure how you can make an argument that hearing that in any way advances public policy and the public’s right to know.’’

According to the working draft of the bill, the identities of minor witnesses may be redacted from any record and the Newtown town clerk could continue denying public access to the victims’ death certificates.

Both advocates for the media and open government laws have expressed concerns about the proposed legislation, arguing that public access to records such as 911 calls and investigative reports serve the public’s best interest by allowing the public to monitor the government’s performance.

Senate Minority Leader John McKinney, R-Fairfield, whose district includes Newtown, said lawmakers still need to decide whether to vote on the working draft this session. If they decide to push ahead with the bill, McKinney said they have to decide which items in the draft to include in the final legislation. McKinney believes the legislature needs to act now.

‘‘The urgency of this situation is that the criminal investigation will close and at that point certain information is available to the public,’’ he said. ‘‘The legislature won’t be in session at that point. And we know that people have made requests and have said they will get those pictures and display them on the Internet. And once they’re there, they’re there forever. And to be candid, that is what makes this different.’’

—> snip

Starting in January, mere weeks after 12/14, they began pressuring the CT Senate for this bill which effectively seals any and all of the records —those which are typically in the public domain post-investigation—relating to any victim, whether child or adult, of the Sandy Hook massacre.