EVIL is afoot ......

newest revelation from sandy hook .....
are u fucking kidding me?

Quote :

Sandy Hook Children Abducted?

The parents of the children that were allegedly killed in America's second deadliest mass shooting NEVER GOT TO SEE THEIR DEAD CHILDREN!? Why?

Because authorities claimed they wanted to spare them further agony. The parents were only allowed to identify their children from photographs.

PARENTS DENIED ACCESS

If one of your children was shot, would you want to identify them from a photograph that could have been "photoshopped"??? A photo is NOT proof! Are the children really dead?

The fact is - the parents were never allowed to see and identify their own children. They were forced to take the word of the so called "authorities" that their children were dead.

WHERE ARE THE 'ALLEGED' DEAD KIDS NOW?

The children were allegedly moved to a medical examiner's 64 km away so that autopsies could be performed. Why in hell did they need autopsies??? The children didn't die of a disease.

What will the so called "authorities" do with the children's bodies after the autopsies? Dispose of them? Cremate them? Will the parents be given dust in a jar?

THE AUTHORITIES

Dr H Wayne Carver, Connecticut's chief medical examiner, said the decision to use photos of facial features was made to make it "easier on the families".

Describing the injuries as "probably the worst" he has seen in more than 30 years, Dr Carver said, "we did not bring the bodies and families into contact", when identifying the victims. Some of the children had been hit by up to 11 bullets.

"There is a time and place for up-close-and-personal in the grieving process but to accomplish this we felt it would be best to do it this way," he said.

Dr Carver said Adam Lanza used a technique known to gun enthusiasts as "jungle-taping". This helps explain how the killer was able to wreak so much carnage in a shooting spree that may have lasted barely five minutes.

http://www.independent.ie/world-news/americas/connecticut-shooting-parents-identified-bodies-from-photos-3327563.html

WHO IS DR. H WAYNE CARVER?

What better name for a man who performs autopsies than "carver". What do we know about Carver?

Dr. H Wayne Carver has no group affiliations on record (like 33rd degree membership in Scottish-Rite Freemasonry). There are no licences information on record for him. There is no "about" information about him on record either.

http://www.healthcare.com/profile/h-wayne-carver/

THINKING THE UNTHINKABLE

Sandy Hook is only 60 miles from New York city where another elitist pedophile ring has recently been exposed. Anna Gristina has been charged with running a New York child prostitution ring that relied on police protection to provide wealthy clients with minors for sexual encounters.

More here: http://www.helpfreetheearth.com/news680_abduction.html

sourced from: RMN, here - http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=263658

Word out there is that this is all another hoax.

These children were only involved in a 'drill'. If they were really in any real danger, they would be running out of a building in all directions, through any and all doors, not with the hands neatly on the shoulders of the one in front. Note the photographer very handily in place to take the perfect picture.



The teachers named on the day were not on the roll of the school. 6 of the 7 were stand-in's and the 7th can't be named!!

Why was Sandy Hook named in the Batman movie?



Smell any rats yet? This is mis-direction of the highest form.

Quote :

McConnell claims the late Adam Lanza had threatened to expose his mother and her pedophile doomsday preppers at the school and that the Sandy Hook crime scene was staged with planted evidence so blame would be attributed to a prospective whistleblower and attention decoyed from the Candyman’s agenda for a transnational government of British Bankers and pedophile elites.

http://www.abeldanger.net/2012/12/marine-links-hsbcs-illinois-candyman-to.html

ok, and this bit hit me, weird, i mean, what are the odds?????? (the bold is mine):

Quote :

“Huffington Post Nancy Lanza, Mother Of Adam Lanza, Taught Son To Shoot: Reports Posted: 12/16/2012 11:54 am EST | Updated: 12/16/2012 11:54 am EST Adam Lanza, the 20-year-old who murdered 7 adults and 20 young children in Newtown, Conn. Before turning the gun on himself learned to shoot from his mother, a family acquaintance said.] Dan Holmes worked as a landscaper for the Lanza family, he told the New York Daily News. Holmes recounted that Adam Lanza's mother, Nancy Lanza, collected guns and enjoyed taking her children target shooting.

"The whole family would go together," Holmes told the paper.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/16/nancy-lanza-adam-lanza-taught-to-shoot_n_2311539.html

I have been reserving any comments until I did my own investigating into this.

I have to admit that there are some very strange things going on.

What's up with this "grieving" father.

all i know is, if my child had been killed, i would not care what he looked like, i would DEMAND to see him - no ifs, ands or buts - period, end of story

my opinion is not needed so i am removing it
you guys have already made up your minds

Whatever my gullibility or sources or whatever, I saw Mic's video on zorgon's site and it raises a hell of a lot of questions in my mind.

If my 6 year old daughter had been gunned down at school there is no way in the multi-universe that I would be filmed pulling this shit.

I know for a fact that I would be dosed out on valium and incoherent.

Quote :

I saw Mic's video on zorgon's site

... looking for link...
Gullible?
Hmm, since when is questioning the status quo being gullible?
Throwing out ideas that won't be asked by the MSM... right or wrong, I don't think that's gullible, I think it's like what scientists do, brainstorming to find answers.

How do you qualify a source that speaks to you telepathically? Like the one that told me that our quantum reality is far more complex than I've been previously led to believe by "qualified sources"

I don't believe qualified sources, they're just repeaters and they're only qualified by other repeaters.

sky otter wrote:

you folks have totally disillusioned me as to your level of intelligence and gullibility

qualify your sources before you get your exercise jumping to conclusions

i'm done here

jeeze, i am still gathering info .... i have not come to any conclusions ... YET
i suppose i could just ignore it all and not think about it ...
sure would be more comfortable and a lot easier .... hmmmmmmmmm
intelligence? i am above average ... gullible? yes, admittedly, but not
as much as i used to be ... your comment sounds a bit insulting, otter,
but i will take no offense - perhaps you can contribute facts from qualified
sources to set this right?

when i saw the clip mic posted, first thing i thought
was that it looked a lot like one a them channelers gettin ready
to to his thing

see previous post


sorry to intrude

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion sky that is a given.

But I will say it again if my 6 year old daughter was gunned down, doped up or not, this guy is fuckin unbelievable in the extreme.

Put it this way, oz msm 6.00 news showed the story on this tragedy. Imagine what people would think if msm news showed that clip above of the father, not that they would, but if they did.

It would be what in the F. He made a mockery of the whole thing.

Huffington Post. Now there's a trusted source.
I didn't read anyone joking around about this...[? checking to see if I said LOL anywhere]
I personally did not feel pissed off, or sorry, or any of your other adjectives.
My thought was that this forum is for just this,
expressing opinions in a friendly environment... freedom dialog about stuff.

How sure are you that they are actually burying those children?
Personally, I'm not really sure of much, even when I actually see it.
I'm a skeptic.
I am pretty sure that they do NOT want Americans armed. You watch, big O is going to try to outlaw guns so that only the outlaws will have them.

9/11 so they could begin legislating away any basic rights we had left.
I'm pretty sure of that too, it just makes more sense.
And if the theatre and the school weren't enough to make everyone DEMAND that guns be outlawed, they'll stage something even bigger. They don't care about children, me or you.

Wasn't it some Japanese General that said, "You can't invade America, there's a gun behind every blade of grass."

Guns don't kill people, bullets do.

You can get an idea of the agenda by reading the headlines:

i do not know what to think .....

i do scan RMN, but they are mostly an aggregator, taking from other sources ....
if i find something which interests me, for whatever reason, i dig further

these things i know:
* i cannot trust the MSM to give me the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth
* the truth may only be known by piecing together the puzzle, connecting the gathered dots
* often, i must read "between the lines"
* often, there is truth mixed in with untruth
* for some reason i want to know the truth
* i resent my mind and my emotions being manipulated

here is an article which i find myself, mostly, in agreement with - and i absolutely do not think this whole thing is a joke or funny in any way:

Quote :

How the Newtown massacre became a Mind-Control television event

by Jon Rappoport
December 18, 2012
www.nomorefakenews.com

Mind control. Mass hypnosis. Operant conditioning. Brain entrainment. That's what we're talking about here.

We're so conditioned to how television covers life that we rarely step back and take notice.

In the case of massive disasters and crimes, network news rules the roost.

First, the premiere anchors, who are managing editors of their own broadcasts, give themselves the go signal. They will leave their comfortable chairs and travel to the scene of crime. "It's that big."

The anchors lend gravitas. Their mere presence lets the audience know this story trumps all other news of the moment. That's the first hypnotic cue and suggestion.

Of course, the anchors were not in Newtown, Connecticut, as reporters. They weren't there to dig up facts. Their physical presence at the Sandy Hook School and in the town was utterly irrelevant.

They could have been doing their newscasts from their studios in New York. Or from a broom closet.

But much better to be standing somewhere in Newtown. It imparts the sense of crisis to the viewing millions.

At the same time, the anchors are also there to give assurance. The subliminal message they transmit is: whatever has happened here is controllable.

The audience knows the anchors will provide the meaning and the official voice of the tragedy. The anchors are, in a way, priests, intoning their benediction to the suffering and their elegies to the dead.

This is what the audience expects, and this is what they get.

This expectation, in fact, is so deep that anything else would be considered an insult, a moral crime.

For example, suppose a network suddenly shifted gears and began interviewing police and residents and asking tough questions about contradictions in the official scenario. Suppose that became the primary focus. Suppose the tone became argumentative, in the interest of, God forbid, the truth.

In other words, in a jarring shift of perspective, the anchors began asking questions to seek answers. What a concept.

No, a priest doesn't browbeat a parishioner. He takes confession and then offers a route to redemption.

But if, by some miracle, these anchors launched a quest for truth, the whole scene would devolve into uncertainty and even chaos.

"First, there was a man in the woods. You people chased him. You pinned him down and brought him back into town. Who is he? What's his name? Where is he? Is he under questioning? What are you asking him? What gave you a clue that he might be a second shooter? Come on. Talk to us. People want to know. We aren't going anywhere. We want some answers."

This is called reporting, a foreign enterprise to these blown-dried kings and queens of media news.

"Sir, I know ABC definitively reported there was a second shooter. They said you gave them that information. Where did you get it?...No, I'm sorry, that's not an answer, that's a non-sequitur."

Those of us reporting online declare there is something amiss when the second-shooter story is dropped like a hot potato...and we are called conspiracy theorists.

Get it? Trying to ask relevant questions becomes conspiracy only because the major media didn't do their job in the first place.

"Sir, was it one gun found in trunk of the car or three? Show me the car. Yes. Let's see it. I want to get the license plate. Excuse me? The car is what, some kind of state secret? I don't think so. There are twenty dead children in that school over there, and we want to get to the bottom of this. Take me to the car."

It's called an investigation. Reporters do that.

"Sir, your newspaper ran a story about a man's body being found in Adam's brother's apartment. Then that became Adam's mother found dead in her own house here in Newtown. What exactly happened there? A mistake? Wouldn't you say that was a pretty big mistake? How did it happen? What's that? Typical confusion in the early reporting of a crime? I don't think so. Thinking a woman was a man and thinking he or she was found in New Jersey instead of Connecticut, that's not typical at all. Did police find a man's body. Speak up."

Your typical American television viewer would cringe at such demanding questions. You know why? Because he has been entrained and conditioned by news anchors to refrain from digging below the surface. In other words, that viewer is hypnotized.

"Dr. Smith and Officer Jones, we understand that this boy, who was autistic, extremely shy, who had some sort of personality disorder, went into that school and methodically carried out the slaughter of twenty-seven people. In order for him to do that, he had to reload clips at least twice after the first clip ran out. Does that make sense? We're not just talking about a violent outburst here, we're talking about a methodical massacre. How do you explain that?"

If these anchors kept on asking questions like this, do you know what would happen? The viewing audience would begin to stir, would begin to break through their hypnotic programming and wake up.

"You know, he's right. That doesn't make sense. Maybe there really was a second shooter."

"Or that Lanza kid...maybe he didn't kill anybody at all."

"What? You mean he was...set up?"

"Maybe he was a patsy."

Yes. Instead of this kind of talk being consigned to "conspiracy nuts," it actually becomes part of the evening news experience. Because reporters suddenly ask tough questions.

But no. We have to go with grief and shock. We have to lead with it and stay with it.

But that is an artificial construct. Yes, of course people in Newtown feel great shock and pain and loss and grief and horror, but the news producers are consciously moving minutes and hours of it through the tube and filtering out everything else.

They do this every time one of these events occurs, and so the audience expects it and soaks it in and, in that state of entrainment and hypnosis, the audience doesn't want anything else...because anything else would BREAK THE FLOW and the spell, and the grief would no longer have the same impact.

Newtown is presented as a television event. From the outset, the mood is funereal. It has that tinge and coloration. The audience absorbs it and wants no intrusion on it.

This is Matrix programming.

The anchor is not only the priest, but also the teacher. He/she shows the audience how to experience the event and what to feel and what to think and how to act.

One of the great skills of an anchor is the ability to present the news seamlessly. This is what those big paychecks are for: the blends and segueways and the underlying tone of sincerity that bleeds into every detail of what is being reported.

That is also hypnotic. It sets up a frequency that moves into the brains of the audience. In those brains, it's an Acceptance-frequency. It's the mark of a great news anchor, to be able to transmit that and achieve it.

Scott Pelley (CBS) has only some of that. Diane Sawyer (ABC) is decidedly inconsistent in her ability to deploy it. Brian Williams (NBC) is the contemporary master. That's why he's been called the Walter Cronkite of the 21st century.

"Sir, we have a report that police pinned a second man on the ground just outside the school. What is his name? What did you do with him? Where is he now."

No, no, no, no, no. That would crack the Acceptance-frequency like an egg and send the evening news to hell in a handbasket.

"Sir, I'm glad we finally located you. We understand you were getting ready to go to Bermuda. Now, you were Adam Lanza's doctor. What drugs did you prescribe him? Not just recently, but going all the way back to the beginning. You see, we've compiled a list of possible drugs for Asperger's and autism and depression, and of course we see that they do, in fact, induce violent behavior. Suicide, homicide. Speak up, Doctor."

The egg not only cracks in that case, the news anchor is suspended the next day, and the network releases a statement that his "breakdown" on camera was brought on by stress.

Pharmaceutical companies put him on their "to-do" list.

Yet, the questions about the drugs are exactly what a real reporter would ask. Not a "conspiracy theorist." A reporter, on the scene in Newtown.

Anyone who thinks that is absurd and out of bounds is hypnotized, programmed. That's all there is to it.

Traditional media are dying in this country. Their money is drying up. They could revitalize themselves in a New York minute if they really started COVERING stories and waking up their audience, but that's not on their agenda. They would rather die.

They are the hired hands of the elites that own this country. They are the whores sent out every day by their pimps, and they know what their job is and what it isn't.

The direction of elite television news is squeezed down the path of consciously constructing artificial events, for mass consumption experienced in a state of emotional, mental, physical, and spiritual mind-control. Those reporters who venture outside that framework are labeled fringe figures on the margins.

"Lieutenant, excuse me. Hello. Brian Williams, NBC News. I was wondering: if there had been armed employees inside the school, what are the chances the killer could have been stopped before he shot all those children? You know, people who have been trained to shoot and have concealed carry permits. Strong people who could confront a murderer."

Oh, people say, that is not a reasonable question. That's a nutcase question. That question shouldn't be asked. Why not? You want the real answer? Because it destroys the hypnotic frequency that is being delivered by the television networks. That's the real answer.

The viewer: "Don't bother me, I'm hypnotized. Don't interrupt the frequency my brain is absorbing while I'm watching the news."

And of course, under those conditions, the very last person who should interrupt the hypnotic flow is the anchor himself. He's the one who's inducing the hypnosis in the first place.

That tells you the the anchor is quite definitely NOT there to dig up new facts or perspectives himself.

Entrainment means: the brain is being bathed in rhythms and frequencies that literally train it to accept the information that is being transmitted at the same time.

In the same way, a song can succeed because the melody (carrier frequency) makes the trite lyrics seem important.

Entrainment also makes the recipient feel he is part of something larger. This is a key component. The recipient senses he is a member of a collective that is sharing a moment, an experience.

"I feel this way, and everybody else does too."

This is what substitutes, in our society, for individual experience and self-sufficiency.

But this collective is not real community. It only appears and feels that way. It is mass hypnosis. You can find that in Gregorian chants and in sermons. You can find it in political speeches.

The brain is bathed in certain harmonies and responds by Accepting.

The Globalists' language is replete with entrainment. "We are all in this together." "We are healing the planet." "All of us must strive to make a better world for our children."

It sounds right, it seems right, but it is delivered to create a collective instead of a real community. Take a few minutes and read Monsanto's literature. Read it out loud. Listen to yourself. Try to impart convincing rhythms to the phrases. All of a sudden, you're in the flow. You're practicing entrainment.

This is what network television news does. And we aren't even talking about the hypnotic effects of the physical signals that deliver the picture to the audience.

In a previous article, I pointed out that, if we are to believe the network coverage of the Newtown massacre, there wasn't one angry outraged man or woman in the town. Because we didn't see them onscreen.

The networks made sure of that. This was a conscious choice on their part.

"My son died in that school and I want to know why. I want to know exactly how the killer got in there. Who let him in? How did he get in? I WANT TO KNOW."

Sorry, that isn't part of the coverage.

It would interrupt the entrainment.

"Sorry, sir, you'll have to back away. We're doing mass hypnosis and mind control here. You're breaking the rhythm."

Instead, that angry man will be funneled to a grief counselor, who will try to soothe his outrage.

"Sir, we all have to find a way to begin the healing."

Events like Newtown are extraordinary teaching moments for television. Network newscasts display a constellation of emotions that are deemed "acceptable and appropriate" for the audience to experience. And the audience is thereby trained to mirror those emotions, to feel them, to express them, to soak in them.

It's a closed system.

This is how, incidentally, gun control works so well. It's part of the overall message. The audience, existing inside that closed system, in that state of mass hypnosis, can be pointed to exactly the wrong remedy for the tragedy.

All the network anchor has to do is frown and shake his head a little, when the subject of guns arises. That's all it takes, and the brains of the audience suck it in:

"Yes, of course. Take away the guns. If no one had guns, no one could shoot guns. No one would die. No crimes would be committed. How obvious."

The capstone that makes this puerile grand solution seem reasonable is: the police are always the good guys; we can trust them; they can have all the guns and then everything will be all right.

That message is also imparted by the big-time network new anchors. These kings and queens don't ask police the tough questions. They refrain from doing that.

In fact, the anchors ARE surrogate police chiefs. They express what the police chiefs would, if they had the anchors' skills.

The anchors do stand-ups in Newtown and give us the absolute best of what the police would if they could. And in the process, they transmit:

Entrainment. Mass hypnosis. Mind control. Operant conditioning.

It's perfect, if you want to be an android.

Jon Rappoport

I can relate to EVERY word of that article. It is sortof satisfying to know that I was right, 40 years ago I knew that they weren't telling us the truth.

Now that piece definitely puts things into perspective as far as that video goes.

http://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/sandy-hook-elementary-school-shooting-is-a-false-flag-black-op-push-for-gun-confiscation/28290/

this article has some interesting points.

Really good article Mz Biggs. Kinda confirms what I've been saying all along, that this is yet another false flag event. All set to confuse the issue with the 'slaughter' of children. How do we know ANY children were hurt that day at Sandy Hook? We have 'so-called' names, faces etc. BUT how do we know these children were actually killed. Just because the media says they were, can we believe ANYTHING the media tells us.

I have some really good examples of this, but time is tight here with me now and I have to get my butt off this chair. I will post later today - watch this space!

Well I have to say that my feelings are that it really happened. The kids that witnessed it would not be lying.

However mind control does enter into this I would have to think.


https://i.servimg.com/u/f16/17/80/30/86/holmes10.jpg



And from this, will gun control be pushed into law.. Have to think so.

ok I'm back...

This video shows 2 parents and their child (who attends Sandy Hook School). As you can see in the video, the questions asked seemed to me to be a little 'rehearsed' shall we say, with answers readily given as if they knew what to answer. (scripted).

Ask yourself this....if you were the parent of a child that had been at a school and some nutter was shooting a gun in his/her presence, would you be all happy and SMILING at the camera or would your hair be standing on end from the shock?

These parents seem like they are happy and relaxed enough to me, more like they are on a day out, rather than having spent a day with a potential killer. What do you think?



Next...

Further to the post that Mic put up. this video is an extension of that with Obama and his very fake tears. Note how the father comes to the microphone (again) all happy and smiling....then comes the fake heavy breathing as he gets to the microphone and also the crocodile tears



This medical examiner also seems to have a nice laugh at his own humour. There seems to be little of actual fact in what he says. What he does say is partly wrong too, he said "the gunman's death is classified as a suicide, not a homicide" then has a nice chuckle to himself. The police officers around him seem to be uncomfortable at best and appear to be looking around the whole time.

This whole scenario is a smoke-screen for the real agenda, in a word Libor.

The father of Connecticut school shooter Adam Lanza, is Peter Lanza. He was the tax director for General Electric, a corporation that paid -0- taxes on 14.2 billion dollars in profits last year. According to Fabian4Liberty, Peter Lanza was scheduled to testify in the ongoing global LIBOR scandal. In what could only be described an amazing coincidence, the father of Colorado Batman shooter James Holmes, Robert Holmes, was also a LIBOR witness in his position with FICO. According to the link at FICO, Robert Holmes was a ‘Fraud Scientist’.

From Fabain4Liberty:

The father of Newtown Connecticut school shooter Adam Lanza is Peter Lanza who is a VP and Tax Director at GE Financial. The father of Aurora Colorado movie theater shooter James Holmes is Robert Holmes, the lead scientist for the credit union.

The father of Aurora Colorado movie theater shooter James Holmes is Robert Holmes, the lead scientist for the credit score company FICO. Both men were to testify before the US Sentate in the ongoing LIBOR scandal.

The London Interbank Offered Rate, known as Libor, is the average interest rate at which banks can borrow from each other. 16 international banks have been implicated in this ongoing scandal, accused of rigging contracts worth trillions of dollars. HSBC has already been fined $1.9 billion and three of their low level traders arrested.

So you see...there is always a cover up to an agenda which more than meets the eye initially.

Never taken on face value ANYTHING that is reported on the main news or in the press, there will always be something else to be covered up that they don't want you to know about.

This is to divert your attention away from the money laundering that is going on, a bit like the day before 9/11 took place, Donald Rumsfeld was to announce that trillions of dollars had gone walkabouts. All the documentation was in the Pentagon and "just happened to be in the part that was destroyed" how convenient!

this narrator is a fast-talker, but he makes a good point nonetheless .....

Some good points WH...

Here are some other good points to ponder...

1) As yet, we have not seen any concrete evidence that any child died.

2) As yet, parents have not been allowed to see their children. (Photoshopped pictures do not count.)

3) As of now, I have seen only one unambiguous statement from a grieving parent (Robbie Parker).

4) According to the official story, Adam Lanza was found with his older brother's ID, and it was not stolen. However, older brother Ryan - who officials say is very cooperative - claims not to have even seen his brother since 2010. Where would Adam get this ID? And why does such use not qualify as a theft?

5) According to the official story, Adam Lanza was wearing a black outfit with a mask and bulletproof vest. Why would he want to hide his identity, and why would he wear a bulletproof vest, if he planned to kill himself?

6) The medical examiner asserts that all wounds were caused by a rifle or other long weapon, and police/FBI say that the school was littered with .223 (rifle) casings. But Adam Lanza was found dead in the school with only handguns - a rifle was found in the trunk of his car. But then he could not possibly have been firing the rifle, and could not have committed the murders. Who did?

7) According to the official story, the killing was tightly confined to two classrooms. But then why were so many children told to close their eyes while leaving the building?

8 ) Joanne Didonato, the principal's secretary, called in sick on Friday - something she rarely does. So presumably, she must have been awfully ill. Yet she then felt well enough to give an interview. "Of all days," she said, emphasizing the strange coincidence.

9) The hospital went into lockdown and cleared four trauma rooms, but received only three patients, two of them dead children (according to the official story) and one mildly wounded adult.

10) Why were there such persistent reports that Mrs. Lanza was a kindergarten teacher, and that she died at the school, when the new official story is that she was not connected to the school and was killed at home?

11) What happened to the report that Adam Lanza's girlfriend and another friend were missing in New Jersey?

12) What happened to the woodsman in a black jacket and camo pants who was arrested and handcuffed outside the school? He actually shouted to parents, "It wasn't me." Who was he and what was he doing there?

13) What happened to the dark van or SUV that the police surrounded in the parking lot, or the maroon sedan with a blown-out back window they were on the lookout for?

14) The official story is that Nancy Lanza was a gun collector who obeyed the law. But since 20-year-olds are not permitted to buy guns or ammo or carry guns in Connecticut, why would she give her "autistic" son access to both guns and ammo?

15) Why were parents told on Friday that "if you haven't been reunited with your child by now it's already over"? Does anyone imagine that real parents of real children would simply say, "Okay, the show's over, let's go home now"?

16) Would real parents of real children really be satisfied with (possibly photoshopped) pictures of their children? Wouldn't they demand to see their children one last time firsthand?

17) According to the official story, 28 people died but only 1 was wounded. The dead included 20 small, squirmy children - difficult targets even for professionals. How could Adam Lanza achieve such amazingly deadly accuracy, in such a short length of time?

18 ) A child asserts that he/she heard someone say, "Put your hands up," followed by the reply, "Don't shoot." This indicates that the police took a suspect into custody inside the school. But if that was Adam Lanza, how did he kill himself after that point?

19) Another child asserts that he/she saw a man pinned down to the ground with handcuffs on. Again, this indicates that the police took a suspect into custody. If that was Adam Lanza, how did he then kill himself?

20) When Ryan Lanza was falsely identified as the shooter, who deleted his Facebook profile and created many others in his name?

21) Is it reasonable for a geeky 20-year-old to carry two pistols and hundreds of rounds of ammunition while wearing a bulletproof vest and a mask?

22) Why did the police say on Friday that they were going to leave the bodies rotting in the school until Sunday, then Saturday morning announce that they had spirited the bodies away in the middle of the night? Perhaps to ensure that the transport, if any, would go unrecorded on photos or video?

23) Why won't police tell us where they found the Henry repeating rifle, the Enfield rifle, and the shotgun?

24) Did the school have one or more security cameras? What do they show?

25) Why did a police officer specifically mention, on radio, that "they're coming at me through this wood," followed by a fellow officer saying, "This is it"?

26) One officer in the school said, "We've got one suspect down." Who was that? Down in this situation generally means in custody(on the ground and cuffed), not dead.

27) Why didn't Adam's uncle see anything out of the ordinary in Adam when the two saw each other in June?

28 ) Why is Adam Lanza reported to be a loner when a teenager said (oxymoronically), "[Lanza and his friends] always gathered alone in a corner in school"?

29) Why did police assign an individual state trooper to every grieving family, whether the family wants such "protection" or not?

30) Why are Ryan Lanza and his roommates still in custody, and why are the police pretending that it's for their own benefit?

31) Is it a coincidence that Nancy Lanza's brother is Kingston Police Officer James Champion, who lives next door to the former Lanza home?

32) Since the alleged shooter's father is VP of GE Capital, and (like "Batman shooter" James Holmes's father) was scheduled to testify at the Senate Hearings on the LIBOR scandal, is there a LIBOR connection to this event?

skywatcher wrote:

Some good points WH...

Here are some other good points to ponder...

forgot the source again, can you provide, plz?