Sandy Hook Inconsistencies - Unanswered Questions and Missing Information

What I conclude from the Global Research article is that there had to be a second shooter, who got away. If the surveillance tapes are not released, we can rightly claim foul.

Will post this in the Rodia thread which is currently under review, but it fits in this one too.

A possible explanation for the "End the life of Adam" radio chatter...

It really does sound like he said "Adam" doesn't it?

Most emergency services and military organisations use what is known as a phonetic alphabet which is useful for clarity during times of dodgy radio transmission and reception. You've all heard the current military/NATO one which substitutes "A,B and C" for their phonetic equivalents "Alpha, Bravo, Charlie".

Turns out there are a couple of different versions of phonetic alphabets. There's a pre-1957 military one which is still used by police and emergency services in the US. It substitutes "A,B and C" for "Able, Baker and Charlie".

There is another police phonetic alphabet which was developed by the LAPD and has been adopted by many other state and local law enforcement agencies around the US. The entire LAPD phonetic alphabet is as follows:

A Adam
B Boy
C Charles
D David
E Edward
F Frank
G George
H Henry
I Ida
J John
K King
L Lincoln
M Mary
N Nora
O Ocean
P Paul
Q Queen
R Robert
S Sam
T Tom
U Union
V Victor
W William
X X-ray
Y Young
Z Zebra
0 Zero
1 One
2 Two
3 Three
4 Four
5 Five
6 Six
7 Seven
8 Eight
9 Nine

Notice the word which substitutes for the letter "A" - "Adam".

It's possible that the person on the radio was running a vehicle tag or using some police or emergency services code number as follows: "825IA" Which would be pronounced "Eight Two Fife Ida Adam" ("fife" is an accepted pronunciation of "five" for clarity). Add in the distortion from dodgy comms and it's quite possible to mis-hear the above as "end the life of Adam".

I think we could probably put the "end the life of Adam" theories to bed.

You ask about video evidence? Video evidence is why I am here on this thread. I was aware of the original thread and checked it to see what was up.

3 shot in elementary school. This was not an issue until I saw that the number kept going up. Unusual that in a situation that is under control and static, not fluid as this one, should not have had it's facts so in flux.

This caused me shortly before noon on Friday to go to a local news org to see how they were reporting this story.
Fortunately, WJXT had a live link where I could watch in real time channel 12 Connecticut sister sation in a helicopter.
In this video evidence I was shocked to see there was nothing like the scene I had imagined must be going on.

Apparently, the reporter and pilot felt the same and you could tell they were not sure what to hold the camera on.
The video of the school and parking lot revealed one fire truck with pylons surrounding it and about 4 or 5 SUV
LE vehicles on scene less than 3 hours later and with the building, I would find out later, not even cleared yet.

No ambulances or emergency vehicles and no local squad cars, at all. Then the cameraman happened to pan to all the beehive of activity at the top of Dickenson to reveal THERE were the emergency vehicles and people.
THERE was the scene I had wrongly expected would be at the school.

The parking lot is what first gave me the impression something was wrong. Also the actions of this helicopter cameraman. After panning the scene at the school, he looked away again and focused on other helicopters and back to the bland scene at the school again with about 6 assumed officers in SWAT gear ambling about.
After about 15 more dull minutes of this, he switched back to the scene going on up the street again at the what I later found was the Fire Dept. "staging " area. At which point his live feed was summarily cut.

I have been searching for answers to some very suspicious circumstances ever since.

If I may take another moment to interject a little logic as I'd see it from my own life experiences here....

Some are suggesting a second shooter....or even more to read other threads. Some suggest that the mistakes about which type and how many weapons were deliberate or an act of deception and not simply the confusion of a horror filled event.

The logic I'd submit we consider here is the psyche of the average Cop. I've never been one...just raised by one and grown up around the mindset, humor, logic and worldview of cops and/or law enforcement for all my "formative" years. It does leave some impressions that later experiences only confirmed.

#1. Most cops are family men. Not all...and not all remain married (or can keep count just how many times perhaps) However, that doesn't change what comes from a proper and healthy marriage. Children. Cops aren't softies about the Ex-. Oh heck no... But I've literally seen bad ass cops assigned to bad ass units cry like they'd lost their mothers. I saw this a couple times growing up.

There is something about kids...It doesn't just hit society like a drop kick to the private regions ...but it tears the heart right out of seasoned cops who could otherwise work a multi-fatal accident then go have Sloppy Joe's for lunch and never see a thing to be concerned with in being able to. Kids....do more to give Psych's business out of Police Departments than any other factor in my view......and even Cops have limits like the rest of us. In some ways, a lot of the facade and superman act is to cover how aware they are themselves of those lines existing and how close the come regularly.


So, there is a very important bottom line here I think. *EVERY COP* who worked that scene ...the scores of them..ALL....would have had to either know the deception or at least wink at enough to know some sort of deception was happening. People may see cops as dumb as a box of rocks ,,, and that may even be true in some areas. One thing Cops DO know is crime and criminals tho.....and they LIVE to know when something doesn't "feel" right. There is NO WAY this could be staged without the cops knowing or suspecting.

....and we're back to how I started. Cops are family men. Some might drive two states OUT of their way to shove an Ex-Wife off a cliff when no one is looking ........but EVERY Cop I've known since I was old enough to form an opinion ....who had kids....would DIE for them. They'd also KILL for them ...in most cases ...

So we have to account for how all those family men in Uniforms have made right with themselves ....letting the truth here die with the victims. See? For there to be a conspiracy worth the name, that MUST BE TRUE...for all I said above. I see no other way this could unfold .....and I see NO WAY it could actually unfold that way, in the cold light of reason.

I find the 2 nuns to be interesting.

www.chicagotribune.com...

Big feet on the left, and the one on the right looks like cheney, quite alot.

But anyway, there are other photos supposedly, but yet to find, where the one on the left changes her coat and had a big bag before.

There are photos that others have blown up that show what looks like something under the skirt and coat. Something under the other one, to the right's skirt. And something in the one on the left's hand.

i45.tinypic.com...

i.huffpost.com...

Have they identified them? And why there is a long ridge under the left ones skirt ending just above the knee?

The one on the left is always holding her tummy.

I'd like to remain focused on the alleged crime scene. Or what we were allowed to see of it.
The flyovers as mentioned in the OP's article, showed at one point a "chase scene".

From my perspective, the camera work did not include who was chasing whom, really.
It merely started midstream of the event. The camera was held stationary looking in a particular direction
and it just so "happened" to catch this. To my eyes alone perhaps it appeared staged.
There was no way from the vantage point above I would think that the person being persued would not have been
clear from whence he came. Then we are given a sketchy peek at the "arrest" scene. I guess I'll take their word for that because of how incurious the cameraman who caught this was to follow it to it's natural conclusion.
I did not see the person frog-marched away in cuffs, personally.

As long as there were eyes in the sky as demonstrated, it is remarkably odd that they were not remotely interested in covering the evacuation of some 600 students from the school.
If a lone still shot of 17 students hand on shoulder (from a previous drill perhaps), could be shown and not disturb viewer sensibilities, one wonders why the sight of seeing almost 600 leaving safely was not newsworthy.
Is it any wonder that without proof, and impossible logistics that this mass exodus may not have occured?

I asked on previous threads...where is the video evidence documenting the pandemonium of more than 1500 people converged on the staging area of this small fire department?

It occured to me seeing this area on ground level reporting that there was a conscious effort on the part of media to make the viewer at home believe that what they were seeing at the fire department was actually the school.
This was accomplished by the strategic placing of the camera with the sign across Dickenson from the firhouse that reads "Sandy Hook School". I found this also very suspect and a blatant attempt to mislead.

The official report hasn't been released yet....and personally I hope they take their time and look at ALL the evidence before they do.
If we the people and the media could learn to patently wait long enough for investigators to even grasp what exactly they saw, maybe we wouldn't get as many major reporting mistakes.

Is it established one week later exactly what time and duration the school was evacuated?
Has it also been established exactly what time that a robo-phone message went out to Sandy Hook parents to
report to the staging area Fire Department to identify and collect their children?

What was the method used to sort and release these students to parental custody?
What was the time of the escape of the 6 students reportedly of Ms. Soto's?
I was watching the live feed for approximately 45 minutes before it was cut.
Although the camera did not stay focused on the school the entire time as stated in a previous post,
at no time when it was did I see anyone enter or leave the building.
Yet somewhere around that time, the nurse Sally Cox and the school clerk or secretary Barb (last name unknown to me), should have been finally discovered and escorted from the building.

Where were the news helicopters then? Who ordered them to leave and why? Or why was this not shown if the
alleged gunman was dead and the building secured and "cleared" and no danger remained?

Originally posted by litterbaux
When there are children involved it is inappropriate to use anything other than emotions to base your decisions.

Your use of logic in this case is inhumane and you very well could be a sociopathic monster. The cool thing to do, which you should be doing, is accept the facts as they are presented to you. Do not ask questions. Do it for the children. [/quo

edit on 25-12-2012 by ajay59 because: (no reason given)

Were any religious clergy permitted into the scene after the alleged shooting? Who was permitted into the scene and who was turned away, and if so, why were they turned away?

To the OP: I stand by my previous retorts to you and ask if you will hand over the anonymity of your avatar and Internet handle to express your passionate disbelief in the Newtown massacre in person — your face and real name behind all the flakey conjecture you project?

I'm not trying to be a jackass here.. but I gotta ask a serious question. After having read the article in the OP, I have to ask..

So? What does this prove?

This is the question I am left with. What does this prove?

This entire article is like.. So? What does what you are saying prove? Anything?

Am I alone here? Some, tell me.. what does this prove?

Is it anything? Is this article anything? It doesn't really seem like it is anything.

Help me out?

reply to post by DoYouEvenLift


It doesn't prove anything. The OP has been prolific with their committed desire to prove a Newtown conspiracy when there isn't one. They have even suggested Emilie Parker was a satanist.

Originally posted by LarryLove
reply to post by DoYouEvenLift

 

It doesn't prove anything. The OP has been prolific with their committed desire to prove a Newtown conspiracy when there isn't one. They have even suggested Emilie Parker was a satanist.

Oh, so this guy believes that their could be a conspiracy because he doesn't have all of the information? Like literally.. I-DONT-KNOW-IF-ALL-OF-THE-PEOPLE-HAD-DIFFERENT-COLOR-UNDERWEAR-ON.

reply to post by DoYouEvenLift


The preponderance of evidence here lies with the media and LE to prove that this event happened in the day, time and manner they have reported. The case is not up to me or anyone else here to prove or disprove.

All one need do is take a glance around the net to see that the above bodies have been an abject failure.
They have not made their case. We are just stating that this is so and citing the discrepancies and putting the onus on them that they must.
Since they are the ones making the claims here and not we.

A rather glaring bit of info on another thread regarding St.Rose of Lima Catholic Church having 10 of it's members killed has been belied in the article provided as "proof". www.abovetopsecret.com...
The faces of the clergy in question are not featured for positive identification, number one, Ergo they could be anybody and this could be from any event having nothing to do with Sandy Hook, at all.
The church bulletin does not name nor commemorate these people as would certainly be expected,
It is also reported if someone were to kindly provide the link that the monsignoir himself found this whole thing
rather amusing and laughable.

This does not help to give any credence to the event, I must say.

Originally posted by LarryLove
reply to post by DoYouEvenLift

 

It doesn't prove anything. The OP has been prolific with their committed desire to prove a Newtown conspiracy when there isn't one. They have even suggested Emilie Parker was a satanist.

How HORRIBLY disrespectful of you! ...and on Christmas yet! I hope you can live with yourself!
Shame Shame Shame on YOU!

Originally posted by magickmaster

Originally posted by LarryLove
reply to post by DoYouEvenLift

 

It doesn't prove anything. The OP has been prolific with their committed desire to prove a Newtown conspiracy when there isn't one. They have even suggested Emilie Parker was a satanist.

How HORRIBLY disrespectful of you!

I find it EXTREMELY accurate.

reply to post by Unity_99


Using the Hufpo pic link I was able to get the following result with a very simple, free graphics software suite called Photoscape.



The object in her hand is obviously a key, a keyless entry remote, and possibly a square ended key fob.

The "object" in her skirt is simply her skirt ( download the pic and simply zoom to verify ). Whoever created the tinyurl pic seems to have deliberately pixelated it to the point of being misleading.

FTR, using better software I was actually able to zoom in on the ID badge hanging around nun #2's neck well enough to read a name - so I would assume that the police have the same information as I was able to get. I am not an expert with graphics software.

~Heff

Originally posted by magickmaster

Originally posted by LarryLove
reply to post by DoYouEvenLift

 

It doesn't prove anything. The OP has been prolific with their committed desire to prove a Newtown conspiracy when there isn't one. They have even suggested Emilie Parker was a satanist.

How HORRIBLY disrespectful of you! ...and on Christmas yet! I hope you can live with yourself!

edit on 25-12-2012 by magickmaster because: (no reason given)

It was your original thread and still wonder if you have the balls to confront the family with your assertions?

reply to post by Hefficide


Don't know what she had in her hand. It was longish. But that line under her skirt, that protrudes and ends at roughly where her knee should be looks like its suspicious. One thing it could be is, the barrel of a gun. The shape under the other woman's skirt, the one with smaller feet who looks like cheney's sister, don't know what that is either, its more subtle, but my imagination could say, its something strapped on her.

I would like to see the photo others talk of where the one on the left was wearing a diff coat and had a big bag, because they're suspicious looking. And changing coats is kind of an alert to me. Why?

There are connections with the Church and some threat in the Church later that followed?? But this was previous.

The media wrote about them yet they were not identified. They remain mysterious. And the shape under the skirt is still there.

They also could be elderly women or men in drag, who knows.

My imagination runs with Jesuits, Cia, all sorts of things.

Wow, that is one big key!