It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


National School Safety Expert: Sandy Hook shooting was a fraud

page: 6
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 19 2014 @ 11:32 PM
I see no reason why we should wait for their "official story" in order to challenge the facts/fiction of the events that took place that day. As far as I am concerned, there are a lot of strange happenings linked to this tragedy.

What boggles my mind is, if these children were not actually killed then, where are they?

posted on Feb, 19 2014 @ 11:36 PM


reply to post by Xcathdra

And on one of those phone 911 phone calls you hear the operator talk about how it is fake because they know a drill is going on that day... Kinda wierd

That exchange is what got me thinking that their might be more to this incident than was reported.

On the flip side, taking everything into account, I just find it difficult to accept that with all of the people involved, that they were all on the Feds payroll. The more people involved the more likely someone is going to speak.

This would be one of those areas where I would like to see background investigations done on every single person involved, from students, to teachers, to family, to emergency responders, to 911 etc etc etc.
Not everyone needs to be "in on it". Only a select few actually need to be. Everyone else heard "fire" yelled out in the theater. That's all they needed to "know" there was a fire in the theater even though they didn't see it.

I said a long time ago and someone else repeated the same thing here - there's a lot of people in the witness protection program, people who owe the government in one way or another or who need to disappear for one reason or another, who would go along with this because it gives them a new life. There are literally tens of thousands of people who fit into that category.

posted on Feb, 19 2014 @ 11:44 PM

I see no reason why we should wait for their "official story" in order to challenge the facts/fiction of the events that took place that day. As far as I am concerned, there are a lot of strange happenings linked to this tragedy.

What boggles my mind is, if these children were not actually killed then, where are they?
maybe the photos were old and the kids grew up but lanza has no trail for 3 years and that i find strange did he even exist some wonder

posted on Feb, 20 2014 @ 12:51 AM

reply to post by therealguyfawkes

Even so, the footage was released AFTER the investigation was finished was it not?

The SH investigation is still listed as OPEN.


Okay, AFTER the investigation's complete, got it.

Well in that case I'll be looking forward to December 26, 2013, then.

oh wait...


December 26, 2013


The Connecticut State Police report on the Dec. 14, 2012, shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School will be released on Friday, December 27, 2013, at 3:00 p.m.

The report will be available only at this website:

The report runs several thousand pages and has been redacted according to law.

The report does contain some text, photos and 911 calls received by the State Police on the day of the shootings.

The release of this document is indicative that this State Police criminal investigation is concluded.

LT. J. Paul Vance

posted on Feb, 20 2014 @ 01:12 AM
reply to post by 3mperorConstantinE

This was my issue to.. What investigation is still open that prevents the info from being released...
At least give us adam, if only at an attempt to satisfy our unquenchable thirst for pictures of dead people for our morbid crime voyeurism...
Couldn't be any other reason then that.... Not the search for the truth or anything like that.

posted on Feb, 20 2014 @ 03:55 AM

reply to post by therealguyfawkes

Doesn't mean someone with *credentials* is right. Prime example, most of our politicians currently holding office.

Credentials doesn't make one the expert on a horrible, sad event. Trying to use this person's background to float something that is not true, is grasping at straws, at best.


hey Des..

just wanted to make sure you re-read your statement
cuz' I'm a bit confused to your 'credentials' point..

crime investigators are called upon due to their creds they hold and are considered as experts in courts of law and the field they work in..horrible event or not !

Either he's a complete fraud and his creds can not be validated or he's the real deal. Comparing Crime Investigators with politicians is apples and oranges.

posted on Feb, 20 2014 @ 04:13 AM

I see no reason why we should wait for their "official story" in order to challenge the facts/fiction of the events that took place that day. As far as I am concerned, there are a lot of strange happenings linked to this tragedy.

What boggles my mind is, if these children were not actually killed then, where are they?

that's exactly...

what was and still is going though my mind. I don't listen to MSM hardly at all .. but, on major events like this I DO. I don't remember seeing or even hearing of funerals of these children.

Could the parents tell the MSM NOT to film them? Of course! But, ever to interview them after the event or even film the precession ? The poperazzi would have been ALL over it IMO...

Same thing with 9/11....a few were but...not even near that I thought their would be.

posted on Feb, 20 2014 @ 04:25 AM
Asperger_syndrome is NOT a motor interruptive disability!

it's purely a learning disability, unable to comprehend what is written or unable to see the function of how to put two and two together..

I have a family member that has it; their motor skills using a rifle and handling knifes is quite impressive.

posted on Feb, 20 2014 @ 05:28 AM


I have had just about enough

You come here to this FREE site

You discuss and debate at no cost to you

You can even discuss this filthy lie all you want

But for some that is not enough, you have to crap all over ATS because we care about the victims families enough to put this thread where it belongs.


Anymore taking a dump on this site and I promise I'll see if I can't make your life easier by removing ATS from troubling you so much.

I sincerely hope this is understood



posted on Feb, 20 2014 @ 07:50 AM
Yeah, but that's the exact point.

It hasn't been proven this is a lie. The government hasn't proven their side of Sandy Hoax at all... the only thing they have is an "official story," and that story has more holes in it than a sieve. Anyone who can't see that is either putting their head pretty far in the sand or has ulterior motives for accepting and promulgating the government's story.

Presuming this is a lie is the exact opposite of denying ignorance. I'd like to get an official response from ATS on who the mods/admins consider qualified enough to put forth a reasoned argument that Sandy Hoax might have been a false flag. Because if it isn't a school safety training expert with thousands of schools in his CV, I don't know who would.

Do we need Obama to come out and say Sandy Hoax might have been shady?

Do we need the police/firemen from Newtown coming forward to reveal strange inconsistencies?

What will it take before we can all agree some hard-hitting questions need to be asked and answered?

Note this isn't an "attack" on the website; this is a plea for clarification on what seems to be an illogical stance. History will show that Sandy Hoax was a false flag (just like 9/11), and just like 9/11, those of us with enough courage should be stepping forward now to constantly and incessantly demand truth. Let the government get away with this, and who knows what it'll try and get away with next.

posted on Feb, 20 2014 @ 09:00 AM
I am going to go back and replay the 911 tapes..but I could swear that I heard multiple callers say they were in HALLWAY 1 which is the exact place that the office/kinder/1st grades were, and where lanza was found dead. If all of the action occurred in that exactly were people making calls from that area and saying they didn't see the shooter. Also, while the 911 op was talking to the janitor you hear popping..but not continual popping. The sounds were very far apart maybe 10 to 15 seconds how is someone randomly firing at those intervals and ending with so many dead. I mean the janitor was on the phone the longest...

The two other points that have always made me question this is robby parker laughing..I don't care what anyone says about how people handle grief..this is NOT behavior from a person that lost their small how.

The other is the parents never seeing their children's bodies. I don't care what condition my babies may be in I would want 1000% confirmation that they are in fact never going to be able to be held again. Even if it's their toes I see..or their wouldn't even have to be their face/head/chest..I know exactly what my daughters hand looks like..I know her toes..her knees..Im sorry but as a parent I would NEVER, EVER be able to have closure with positively identifying her as in fact deceased.

posted on Feb, 20 2014 @ 09:08 AM
I'd just like to take a second to thank all the rational, well-informed, skeptical, and inquisitive people posting in this thread. This hasn't turned into an exercise in mud-slinging or ad hominem arguments, but rather has unfolded into an incredibly well-mannered discussion where we continue to gouge new holes in the old swiss cheese of the government's official story.

It's people like all of you--people willing to challenge the official narrative; people who ask real, logical, and hard-hitting questions--that will help take this world back from the corrupt powers that have enslaved it. Thanks for not being mindless zombies who swallow the government's BS. Thanks for being informed, aware, and AWAKE.

Keep asking questions, keep refusing to back down, and together, we'll reclaim our world.

posted on Feb, 20 2014 @ 10:49 AM
I was highly skeptical of the SH hoax theory, but all these weird inconsistencies started to surface. What changed my mind was the video footage of people circling around the firehouse to look like a busy scene. Absolutely makes zero sense. There is aerial footage as well as ground based.

From the air you can see the path of travel. From the ground you can watch individuals reappear in the flow of traffic, moving in the same one-way direction.

Here's the air footage analyzed by someone, videotaping her TV or whatever. Don't shoot the messenger though, what she points out is real.

edit on 20-2-2014 by blamethegreys because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-2-2014 by blamethegreys because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 20 2014 @ 11:47 AM
This is all very peculiar the deeper I read into it (and the deeper this thread is getting) - # 36

posted on Feb, 20 2014 @ 12:26 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Feb, 20 2014 @ 01:36 PM

Why is this in the Ludicrous Online Lies?

Because its a ludicrous online lie.

That and pissing on the memories of dead children and the families who mourn them is the lowest of the low.

You asked. I answered.

posted on Feb, 20 2014 @ 01:39 PM
Just a quick detail amidst the chaos I noted, and will put out here as an anomaly; one which some of you may find rather interesting...

EXIF Metadata
(link to more info)

Briefly, EXIF metadata tags are a standard way to embed and store information inside of digital images.
This metadata is created and/or altered when

  • someone takes a photo using their digital camera or cell phone, EXIF metadata is created.
  • someone scans an analog image into a computer, thereby digitizing it, EXIF metadata is created.
  • someone creates or edits an image using software like Photoshop, and saves it, EXIF metadata is created.
  • a photo is uploaded onto a web-server, the EXIF metadata is either preserved or it is updated.

The information is preserved and organized using a tag-structure. The information includes:

  • Camera settings such as the camera model which took the picture.
  • Variational image specs such as orientation (rotation), aperture, shutter speed, focal length, metering mode, and ISO speed.
  • A thumbnail for previewing the picture in software and on a camera's LCD screen.
  • Descriptions
  • Copyright information.
  • Date and time information. Digital cameras will record the current date and time and save this in the metadata.

With that said, let's look at the media source for a widely circulated image, which is being stored on the Associated Press' Binary API servers.

This photo.

For the tech-savvy, note the creation date/time.
ImageMagick, exiftool, Adobe Bridge/Photoshop, will all do the trick.

For the non-technical members, look here.

Date/Time Original
2012:11:23 09:40:49+00:00


Because we are looking for truth here, and so must resist any and all urges to succumb to intellectual laziness or the promulgation of Ludicrous Online Lies, we must seek a reasonable explanation.
Well, one possibility would be that the photographer must have the date/time within their camera set incorrectly.
Do they? If the date time is correct, how can I prove it?

The other options are ...

  1. Somebody, somewhere, within the AP was somewhat prescient.
  2. The tip of the iceberg of foreknowledge is sticking out of the water.

    * In deference to the staff of ATS, I feel compelled to stress the point that this post is only about an image, not a person. It is important to be mindful of that difference.


posted on Feb, 20 2014 @ 01:56 PM
reply to post by 3mperorConstantinE

EXIF data can get altered in a lot of ways. Regardless, here is the original picture from her alma mater:


Original Date/Time = 2008:05:18 11:31:46

She did, in fact, graduate in '08.

posted on Feb, 20 2014 @ 03:18 PM

reply to post by 3mperorConstantinE

EXIF data can get altered in a lot of ways.

Yes it can. In addition to those enumerated in my posting above, I can add:

  • EXIF metadata can be edited manually. However, unless the editor knows how to do it manually via the command line, the alteration of any EXIF tag's data will itself be preserved due to the file having to be saved.

Regardless, here is the original picture from her alma mater:

Original Date/Time = 2008:05:18 11:31:46

Yes, I am well aware of this photo, and let's see what else is in there:
Create Date
2008:05:18 11:31:46.00

Date/Time Original
2008:05:18 11:31:46.00

Modify Date
2012:12:19 10:44:05.00


She did, in fact, graduate in '08.

The image, not the person please.
BTW more accurately, you mean "I heard", or "I was told".
Not "in fact".

Perhaps in the future there will be a day when you or I can use the sub-clause: "in fact", with regards to this story.

But that day isn't here... yet.


posted on Feb, 20 2014 @ 04:04 PM
reply to post by neformore

I also asked what kind of credentials one would need have before we can take seriously their professional opinion of Sandy Hook being a false flag. Could we get a definitive response on that?

If the opinion of a school safety expert with 4,000 schools on his CV isn't "good enough" to reopen this case for a reasonable debate, what would suffice? How many coincidences and oddities about this case must there be before we can talk openly about the reality behind the hoax?

Because, in all honesty, I haven't seen anyone here "pissing on the memories of dead children." I do, however, see a lot of intelligent people with logical questions--all in search of the truth.

So it seems like the only ludicrous online lie is taking the government's story at face value, because nothing about it adds up.

<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in