BREAKING: Hartford Consensus: "Majority of Sandy Hook injuries were survivable."

a reply to: lightedhype

You are very kind. I in turn have been made to think by the wonderful people of ATS and other forums that actually promote free speech. Frighteningly and increasingly rare.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: verylowfrequency

Except Columbine was the very genesis for a complete revamping of law enforcement tactics in an active shooter response. So trying to correlate that shooting to SH isn't going to work.

The response was botched. The tactics weren't remotely the same.

It's also worth noting the stark difference between the Columbine and Sandy Hook reports. Columbine victim families and friends have worked tirelessly for years to make thousands of pages on their own tragedy public; this includes over 7000 pages of witness testimony, mostly from juveniles, unredacted.

A cautionary note on the Hartford Consensus: it is operating largely on the mistaken believe that medical resources at Sandy Hook were available, but not allowed in for EMTs' own safety. It is far from that simple. For half an hour, adequate medical resources were not summoned in the first place, on top of which the only ambulance route was swiftly blocked.

Personnel aboard Newtown ambulance A3 (the very earliest arriving ambulance, along with A2) asked about responding directly to the school stated simply: "There wasn't room."

a reply to: Kali74

I understand you perfectly. You don't think this is any of the publics' business - I would heartily disagree.
The public and larger government need to know especially when there may be criminal negligence, lying and other less-than-savory behaviors from our public services.

a reply to: Asktheanimals

What are the less than savory behaviors?

originally posted by: Chickensalad
This revelation would somewhat explain how the shooter managed to kill so many.

I remember that quite a few people were questioning his precision aim and how he was so efficient.

Maybe he wasn't such a great shot after all eh....

Exactly.

originally posted by: Chickensalad
This revelation would somewhat explain how the shooter managed to kill so many.

I remember that quite a few people were questioning his precision aim and how he was so efficient.

Maybe he wasn't such a great shot after all eh....

Not pleasant to contemplate but necessary to understanding what actually happened was the specifics of the shootings themselves. The first thing that struck me as a statistical impossibility; namely to kill every single person he shot at.

I thought there was no way one could shoot 26 people with 5.56 (not .223 as often reported by the media) and have not one survivor. Only 1 victim was shot in the head per the coroner's report (aside from Adam Lanza).
From there they just kept piling the questions on every time they changed the story line, which was just about every day for several months.

originally posted by: Asktheanimals

originally posted by: Chickensalad
This revelation would somewhat explain how the shooter managed to kill so many.

I remember that quite a few people were questioning his precision aim and how he was so efficient.

Maybe he wasn't such a great shot after all eh....

Not pleasant to contemplate but necessary to understanding what actually happening was the specifics of the shootings themselves. The first thing that struck me as a statistical impossibility; namely to kill every single person he shot at.

I thought there was no way one could shoot 26 people with 5.56 (not .223 as often reported by the media) and have not one survivor. Only 1 victim was shot in the head per the coroner's report (aside from Adam Lanza).
From there they just kept piling the questions on every time they changed the story line, which was just about every day for several months.

I gotta agree with the poster on page 1. To police officer safety and policing civilians are there only priorities. Not making America a safer place or society better as a whole. Police have 0 responsibility to put themselves in danger for anyone. Which has been fought out in court cases where a police officer watched someone be assaulted but didn't interfere for fear they might be hurt.


By design the police have become no more then tax collectors. If you want proof of that look at traffic and narcotic work. With traffic stuff you can do anything as long as your willing to pay them after and with narcotics. Look at what percentage of police are assigned to narcotics compared to the violent crimes. 70% of your specialized positions (murder, rape, exc) are alotted to narcotics. So we spend 70% of our police force to stop people from getting high and 30% on all the violent crimes and burglaries.



BECAUSE SOLVING VIOLENT CRIMES ARNT PROFITABLE!!!!

originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: alienjuggalo

No, it's safety for the other first responders and casualties.

It's a very terrible situation to be in for everyone involved, but if you have a bunch of first responders treating the injured before the area is secure, someone could double back and take them all out or detonate a bomb.

There need to be changes, but they shouldn't have been expected to function perfectly in a situation they'd probably never even imagined before.

I would like to see a contingent of better trained EMS and essentially body guards for them follow in SWAT in the future. Seems like that's the best way to deal with it.

This is just heartbreaking news to read. I can't even imagine the fear those children went through, or the pain their loved ones will learning about this. Freaking horrifying.

This reinforces my beliefs that SWAT and the like are trained robots, I could never take orders as these mechanized warriors do, I would be trying to save the lives, and take my chances.

"TRAINING" is no excuse, the scene in my mind is like when the cops take 3 hours to clear a car accident because they need to follow some unknown retarded protocol that never accomplishes a dam thing.

I bet they all stood around trying to follow a meaningless strategy, and in the meantime this ALLOWS those who know the system easy clear ways to use it, as they please.

Then the frameups, that must have taken quite awhile as well, including the amount of time it takes to make sure all SWAT guys follow the scripts cause at least a few of them must have wanted to tell the truth.

Even if this is the new excuse, new official story, I really resent all officials involved, every single one of them is so in fear of the system not a one of them has the gall to stand up and go against it.

Make me sick.

SWAT is taking the blame for this in some circles by saying they were in control of the crime scene.
Fact is they arrived long after any chance of survivors was gone.
They also searched the building at least twice while failing to find 2 women in a closet adjoining the main office.

a reply to: Zephyranth

So, all those guys running around, and no medical attention for the kids? That's beyond inexcusable. Parents wren't allowed in, either......how many could they have driven to a hospital?

It's true that active shooter protocol, at the time of the Sandy Hook shootings, was to stop the shooter before any medical attention is given. In large part because of Sandy Hook that is rapidly changing; but in December 2012, you were still supposed to completely suppress the threat first--literally running past wounded people if you had to. Police trained, and trained, and trained on that point (because it is in fact hard for police or any humans to ignore an injured person, much less a kid, and stop the shooter first). That was protocol because statistically, you'd save more people (well, more savable people) by ignoring the wounded and preventing any further wounded.

But at the rate at which people were dying and bleeding out--culminating in the odd and unacceptable statistic at Sandy Hook of 20 deceased children and 0 wounded children--the protocol is being changed.

Now the hitch at Sandy Hook is this: A shooter was already dead. Does searching endlessly and fruitlessly for a nonexistent second shooter really take precedence over hemorrhage control for the wounded? If you have Amy Taylor's class walking calmly out the front door into the open air at 10:02 a.m., then you need to have ambulances lining up at that front door at 10:02 a.m.

It turns out that the reason ambulances weren't at the front door at 10:02 a.m. had more to do with 1) there being almost no ambulances and 2) the road being blocked. A3 said it wanted to go down Dickenson but couldn't because there was "no room." That's in their own words.

By 10:08, A2 was gone; it's actually not clear when A3 transported, if ever. There's an ambulance photographed on Dickenson for some time and it seems to stay there.

a reply to: Zephyranth

The Police being first on scene had responsibility and the manpower to control the access road even if Dickinson drive was not the only way to the school. They could easily have driven up behind the school on Crestwood. The chain on the gate had been recently cut anyway and there was a glove found along with the chain.

The blocked road holds no water as an excuse if there's an easy alternate.

a reply to: Asktheanimals

Some may question if anyone was even killed at all... Perhaps the names of victims were falsified. Actors set in place to promote the official story. All a clever ruse to push for stricter gun legislation. Or at least that's what they'd have you believe.

Is it a coincidence that firearm purchases actually INCREASE when threatened with confiscation?

Well...as usual the truth may have finally come out. A bunch of screw ups and the decision was made to lie, hide the truth and bury the facts and then, make up distractions. Just like Benghazi, just like everything else our "leaders" are involved with. Big freakin surprise. Unless of course, the goal was to let everyone die? But I really doubt that.

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
a reply to: Zephyranth

The Police being first on scene had responsibility and the manpower to control the access road even if Dickinson drive was not the only way to the school. They could easily have driven up behind the school on Crestwood. The chain on the gate had been recently cut anyway and there was a glove found along with the chain.

The blocked road holds no water as an excuse if there's an easy alternate.

The thing is that for almost an hour, there were no additional ambulances to send to Crestwood.

This is the first post that made me a member. Im sorry, but i thought all the real conspiracy theorist knew this was a false flag hoax. The first page of posters sound like the govt. Trying reaffirm that ir happened to strike fear and disgust....just observing...carry on.

a reply to: spameater

I have come to believe that the hoax meme was started by Connecticut state defense lawyers (via their PR firm) as a way of forcing a false dichotomy: "You either believe the official story, or believe it was all a hoax!"

This is a ridiculously (and purposely) limited set of choices, and Occam's Razor alone would find neither of them true.

As I've been harping on for four years, fruitlessly I thought, it looks like officials are opening up a bit about the blocked ambulance route.

Per CSP Lt. David DelVecchia, Director, Western District Major Crime, Connecticut State Police, lead investigator on the Sandy Hook case:

"After the incident occurred, chaos continued; there was limited parking space as well as limited driving space. This proved to be very problematic; ambulances and patrol cars could not exit or enter the school grounds. People traffic was also an issue. Every agency that could respond, did. A lot of time was lost to identification and verification of people (parents, fire departments, police, police dressed in civilian clothing with weapons) arriving to the scene." (Sandy Hook, Lessons Learned, June 16, 2014)

The system was obviously seriously overwhelmed

so sad