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.


NBC Admitted: No ‘Assault Rifle’ Used in Newtown Shooting

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 07:58 PM
How many more lies will be exposed?

You're having your rights taken away bit by bit through the use of government lies.

When the president surrounds himself with children while giving his announcement that reasonable gun control measures are necessary, bear in mind that those ‘assault rifles‘ the government is sure to be going after were not even used in the Newton, Connecticut elementary shooting. As NBC admits in the video above, four handguns were used to carry out that despicable atrocity. This directly contradicts other reports.

Pete Williams, who is NBC’s chief Justice correspondent, reported the following in the video posted above:
edit on Fri Jan 18 2013 by DontTreadOnMe because: IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS

video is from December 15th
edit on Fri Jan 18 2013 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 08:09 PM
The Medical Examiner should "definitely" be fired ("The gun used in all of the killings was 'definitely' the long gun.")

posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 08:11 PM
I guess it's bull. I made this thread today and it got debunked.

posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 08:15 PM
This is all getting interesting now, so I'm gonna start paying more attention to these threads.
Now that alot of the more crazy theories have died down I mean.
I heard that the State Coroners report said the victims had assult rifle wounds.
But if only hand guns were used then he's in on it too.

posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 08:18 PM
If I were the parents, I'd be organizing to demand, as a group, there be TWO investigations here. One is the ongoing criminal investigation to plot every round fired and every event that occurred for weeks before this all started that day. That one's a given and what the court says we'll all hear about eventually. The reasons to keep that in the future seem to be less and less though, so maybe sooner than later for the official paperwork on the basics of what happened is a good idea.

The OTHER one though, I'd want to see a formal inquest into the conduct of all the officials involved that leaked to, directed, obstructed and otherwise manipulated the information and news on this event. It's so hopelessly screwed up at this point for who said what to who and EVER getting a % to believe anything that a full blown inquest into HOW this case got SO badly screwed is in order.

This isn't the first high profile case to be in a feeding frenzy. Think back to the D.C. Snipers and there was a rather gooberish Sheriff there too for trying to control information like a precious metal or something. it didn't lead to conflicting leaks against statements that don't even make sense at times here.

What is it with Connecticut Law Enforcement and Forensics?! I don't mean to say a thing against the men who WORKED THE SCENE....(with the exception of a medical examiner, perhaps...). The first responders? I dunno what happened there. It was above their pay grades babbling to the press very quickly after that though and ULTIMATELY that is where this all started. So.. How'd that be for NBC to do some good with? Suggest that.

posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 08:20 PM
"Never waste a good crisis." -Rahm Emanuel

Liberals are twice as frightened by firearms as the common American. The Liberals would never waste a good opportunity to bend the truth in their favor.

posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 08:22 PM
oh, so it's still to early to tell what happened or at least get a rough idea?
Guess I'll wait a bit longer and see what happens.
I will admit though, alot of whats going on is very familiar too Port Arthur, Tasmaina.
And the Australian Govenments response to it.

posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 08:30 PM
Just read a very long thread about SH, and I'm wondering how long it'll be before certain "members" arrive to debunk this thread too.
And!!! this thread debunks their methods of debunking the other thread




edit on 18-1-2013 by VoidHawk because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 08:40 PM
Of course no assault weapons were used. Lanza's mother owned perfectly legal firearms. None of which are assault weapons.

posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 08:52 PM
Lies: "The Ends Justifies the Means"
Civilian Disarmament Justifies..."Lies"
edit on 18-1-2013 by CosmicCitizen because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 09:04 PM
This is compelling for sure. There's a video out there that got 404ed within minutes that brought up a lot of good points. I would like to see that reposted at some point and allowed to be discussed. The whole thing reeks - not the shooting itself, but the media coverage and spin.

It should also be noted that ATS should still allow Sandy Hook threads as new information comes up rather than 404ing them like they have been doing, in my opinion. As long as people don't get too loony about it.

edit on 18-1-2013 by AwakeinNM because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 09:05 PM
Again, one clip, from the today show, from the day after the shooting, is hardly damning evidence. This video keeps being posted, but there is no corroborating reports whatsoever. So why is this one to be believed?

You all do know this is a clip that is over a month old, right?
edit on 18-1-2013 by captaintyinknots because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 10:12 PM
Posted earlier here:

Please add further comments to the ongoing discussion in the above linked thread.

**Thread Closed**

for future reference:

We Have A New Search Engine--Please Use It!

top topics


log in