Author Topic: More Sandy Hook inconsistencies, Katie Couric interview  (Read 22705 times)

JLawson

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 587
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: More Sandy Hook inconsistencies, Katie Couric interview
« Reply #10 on: January 20, 2013, 10:18:18 AM »
Say some group needs a 'mass killing' incident to happen on cue.

They might locate a person who is borderline and will look psycho.

They might snatch that person, killing any witness..like a mother or other relative that happened to be around.

They might then take that person to the place where the crime is to be committed and have their 'team' do the deed...killing any witnesses they can without complicating things.

Then they snuff the person who is to be blamed for the tragedy.

Clean up and leave. 

Do you believe this is what happened?


tombogan03884

  • Guest
Re: More Sandy Hook inconsistencies, Katie Couric interview
« Reply #11 on: January 20, 2013, 10:42:07 AM »
Do you believe this is what happened?

I don't know what to think .
The fact that it happened where NSSF is headquartered just makes me more suspicious.

The lady in that Video tells of a black Hatchback with Hooded sweat shirted people. Why is no one asking her more about that? That is a HUGE red flag? Who are these people? Where did they come from? the school I am sure has cameras around the outside of the building most schools do. This is actually really big to me. Maybe people think she is making this story up and she well maybe. but then again she might be telling part of the real story.

At the time of RFK's assassination there was at least one woman who claimed to have seen a woman in a polka dot dress running from the scene saying "We did it !" Research has shown that the fatal shot hit Kennedy from behind at close range, Sirhan was in front of him, the only one behind RFK was a SF cop .
Tyler has posted stuff that sent me to links that strongly indicate that we don't know the truth about a lot of incidents that have occurred .

http://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php?topic=21592.0

http://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php?topic=21384.msg267895#msg267895

http://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php?topic=21363.msg267713#msg267713

http://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php?topic=21298.msg266998#msg266998

Solus

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8666
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 43
Re: More Sandy Hook inconsistencies, Katie Couric interview
« Reply #12 on: January 20, 2013, 02:18:16 PM »
Do you believe this is what happened?



No, I don't believe it happened.  I have no proof of it and no access to the information needed to make that decision.

But, I do believe it is a possibility that explains some of the 'strange' events around this incident.

There just seems to be a lot more loose ends and contradictions in this tragedy than in previous events.

Do I believe this administration is capable of authorizing such acts?  Yes.

Do I believe it is the only administration in recent years capable of authorizing such acts?  No.

Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"
—Patrick Henry

"Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
— Daniel Webster

Tyler Durden

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: More Sandy Hook inconsistencies, Katie Couric interview
« Reply #13 on: January 20, 2013, 03:28:39 PM »
Granted, this is just some blog site, but it appears that everything is backed up with pics or links:

http://www.insanemedia.net/weapon-inconsistencies-multiple-shooters-ct-cop/283

Jrlobo

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 628
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: More Sandy Hook inconsistencies, Katie Couric interview
« Reply #14 on: January 20, 2013, 03:41:29 PM »
I am trying to apply a little common sense to all of this, and that is all I have, a little. If this were some federal government bred conspiracy, then just how many people and organizations need to be in on it to cover tracks? Lots. We're talking federal, state, county, municipal police departments and fire departments. I don't believe the federal government is either that good or that smart to get away with it. I don't believe that all those first responders who got there in minutes would give any conspirators enough time to lay all the right evidence and recover or cover up their own. Then there are the families, whose genuineness can be so easily verified or refuted by other locals who were not part of any conspiracy. Do we pretend that a whole town is implicated in the conspiracy?

What I do believe is this: It really happened along the lines thus far reported. The government and some other authorities (state and local) have only released data that conforms to their vested interests in the event. If we want to investigate such collusion, then follow the money. Some of the local and state authorities can collude with the feds and sudden, unexplained money and equipment transfers will have taken place to support local police, fire and school authorities.

I don't believe that Fast and Furious was as advertised by the government, because it basically involved only them and a few nefarious characters they thought they could control. There they had near total control until the fatal mistake (killing of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry). And that is something to think about when you suspect a total, contrived federal government conspiracy. The feds have hamartia! A fatal flaw that always gives them up in the end. To me, Sandy Hook doesn't smell that way. It was just a convenient excuse to pounce on for something they have always wanted: gun control. So they control the story to their own benefit, but that won't last long either. Remember hamartia; it's the only friend we have.

None of my comments are meant to discourage Tyler from digging up inconsistencies in the government's story. For, it will be those inconsistencies that will make the government's story unravel. Like any liar, they will start telling lies to cover up the lies they have already told.
Lobo

"Often in error, never in doubt!"

Sponsor

  • Guest
Re: More Sandy Hook inconsistencies, Katie Couric interview
« Reply #15 on: Today at 04:26:05 AM »

DGF

  • Very Active Forum Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 157
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: More Sandy Hook inconsistencies, Katie Couric interview
« Reply #15 on: January 20, 2013, 03:53:19 PM »
Tom

76 Branch Davidians were killed not 26. Janet Reno is responsible for the murder of 23 children in that attack.

Tyler Durden

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: More Sandy Hook inconsistencies, Katie Couric interview
« Reply #16 on: January 20, 2013, 05:47:40 PM »
I am trying to apply a little common sense to all of this, and that is all I have, a little. If this were some federal government bred conspiracy, then just how many people and organizations need to be in on it to cover tracks? Lots. We're talking federal, state, county, municipal police departments and fire departments. I don't believe the federal government is either that good or that smart to get away with it. I don't believe that all those first responders who got there in minutes would give any conspirators enough time to lay all the right evidence and recover or cover up their own. Then there are the families, whose genuineness can be so easily verified or refuted by other locals who were not part of any conspiracy. Do we pretend that a whole town is implicated in the conspiracy?

What I do believe is this: It really happened along the lines thus far reported. The government and some other authorities (state and local) have only released data that conforms to their vested interests in the event. If we want to investigate such collusion, then follow the money. Some of the local and state authorities can collude with the feds and sudden, unexplained money and equipment transfers will have taken place to support local police, fire and school authorities.

I don't believe that Fast and Furious was as advertised by the government, because it basically involved only them and a few nefarious characters they thought they could control. There they had near total control until the fatal mistake (killing of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry). And that is something to think about when you suspect a total, contrived federal government conspiracy. The feds have hamartia! A fatal flaw that always gives them up in the end. To me, Sandy Hook doesn't smell that way. It was just a convenient excuse to pounce on for something they have always wanted: gun control. So they control the story to their own benefit, but that won't last long either. Remember hamartia; it's the only friend we have.

None of my comments are meant to discourage Tyler from digging up inconsistencies in the government's story. For, it will be those inconsistencies that will make the government's story unravel. Like any liar, they will start telling lies to cover up the lies they have already told.

Jrlobo, I don't know where to begin.  Really, I don't.  I appreciate your post.  It is refreshing to be able to discuss these things in a civil manner and not resort to personal attacks.

All I can say is that it doesn't pass my sniff test.

False flag attacks have been used before to get the US to go to war, Gulf of Tonkin, the sinking of the Lusitania, the Maine.

The democrats have had anti-gun legislation drafts sitting on the shelf for years just ready to go for the perfect event that they could leverage to get it passed.

As far as how big the conspiracy would have to be, well, the allure of a promotion or for some political figurehead of say the CT state troopers for more power I am sure is intoxicating.  Maybe a state trooper gets hired on as the Assistant Under Vice Secretary of Homeland Security.  That is the carrot in the scheme of carrot and stick motivation.  The stick...well... you only have to google Terrence Yeakey's name to discover what happens to LEO's who don't go along to get along.

Go to this YouTube video, blow it up big screen, and fast forward to the 2:220 mark.  Pay special attention to the split screen on the right with the CSI looking guys in their white tyvek suits.  It appears to me that one CSI tech has a long gun in his hand, most likely the Saiga shotgun.  There is another CSI tech with something long-ish in his right hand as they walk away.  Is that another gun?   ???


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=R_ubdjO_dRY

tombogan03884

  • Guest
Re: More Sandy Hook inconsistencies, Katie Couric interview
« Reply #17 on: January 20, 2013, 06:00:38 PM »
JrLobo , what makes the whole conspiracy thing acceptable is that they have done it before .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO

alfsauve

  • Semper Vigilantes
  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7698
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 612
Re: More Sandy Hook inconsistencies, Katie Couric interview
« Reply #18 on: January 20, 2013, 06:16:09 PM »

And fueling all of this is that a judge put a 90 day gag order on all evidence and data relating to the event.  Since there is no criminal court case, and will never be one, I wondered under what authority he issued this.   Turns out the police got search warrants for even the obvious of sites, like the school, and that the judge can approve a gag order on the search warrants and the results of such to protect the investigation.   

No wonder conspiracy theories abound.  What are they protecting?  Why did they need 90 days.  Unless of course it isn't a slam dunk...  or...
Will work for ammo
USAF MAC 437th MAW 1968-1972

Tyler Durden

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: More Sandy Hook inconsistencies, Katie Couric interview
« Reply #19 on: January 20, 2013, 06:28:15 PM »
go here to this YouTube video:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBrq8QAAUuI

fast forward to the 2:00 minute mark where the TV reporter is interviewing an eye witness.  The eye witness describes him as wearing camo pants and a dark jacket.

Hmmn....Okay, so maybe those other pics of the dark "sweatshirts" near the Honda are actually jackets.   ???

If this guy in the dark jacket and camo pants was the same Chris Manfredonia....well, I find it odd for somebody to wear camo pants to build gingerbread houses with his daughter at her school.



 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk