The Sandy Hook Massacre: Unanswered Questions and Missing Information

Often quoted yet seldom read, this article was written ten days after the December 14 Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre.-JT, 4-12-13.

“[My staff] and I hope the people of Newtown don’t have it crash on their head later.” –Connecticut Medical Examiner D. Wayne Carver II, MD, December 15, 2012

Inconsistencies and anomalies abound when one turns an analytical eye to news of the Newtown school massacre. The public’s general acceptance of the event’s validity and faith in its resolution suggest a deepened credulousness borne from a world where almost all news and information is electronically mediated and controlled. The condition is reinforced through the corporate media’s unwillingness to push hard questions vis-à-vis Connecticut and federal authorities who together bottlenecked information while invoking prior restraint through threats of prosecutorial action against journalists and the broader citizenry seeking to interpret the event on social media.

Along these lines on December 19 the Connecticut State Police assigned individual personnel to each of the 26 families who lost a loved one at Sandy Hook Elementary. “The families have requested no press interviews,” State Police assert on their behalf, “and we are asking that this request be honored.[1] The de facto gag order will be in effect until the investigation concludes—now forecast to be “several months away” even though lone gunman Adam Lanza has been confirmed as the sole culprit.[2]

With the exception of an unusual and apparently contrived appearance by Emilie Parker’s alleged father, victims’ family members have been almost wholly absent from public scrutiny.[3] What can be gleaned from this and similar coverage raises many more questions and glaring inconsistencies than answers. While it sounds like an outrageous claim, one is left to inquire whether the Sandy Hook shooting ever took place—at least in the way law enforcement authorities and the nation’s news media have described.

The Accidental Medical Examiner

An especially important yet greatly underreported feature of the Sandy Hook affair is the wholly bizarre performance of Connecticut’s top medical examiner H. Wayne Carver II at a December 15 press conference. Carver’s unusual remarks and behavior warrant close consideration because in light of his professional notoriety they appear remarkably amateurish and out of character.

H. Wayne Carver II has an extremely self-assured, almost swaggering presence in Connecticut state administration. In early 2012 Carver threatened to vacate his position because of state budget cuts and streamlining measures that threatened his professional autonomy over the projects and personnel he oversaw.

Along these lines the pathologist has gone to excessive lengths to demonstrate his findings and expert opinion in court proceedings. For example, in a famous criminal case Carver “put a euthanized pig through a wood chipper so jurors could match striations on the bone fragments with the few ounces of evidence that prosecutors said were on the remains of the victim.”[4] One would therefore expect Carver to be in his element while identifying and verifying the exact ways in which Sandy Hook’s children and teachers met their violent demise.

Yet the H. Wayne Carver who showed up to the December 15 press conference is an almost entirely different man, appearing apprehensive and uncertain, as if he is at a significant remove from the postmortem operation he had overseen. The multiple gaffes, discrepancies, and hedges in response to reporters’ astute questions suggest that he is either under coercion or an imposter. While the latter sounds untenable it would go a long way in explaining his sub-pedestrian grasp of medical procedures and terminology.

With this in mind extended excerpts from this exchange are worthy of recounting here in print.  Carver is accompanied by Connecticut State Police Lieutenant H. Paul Vance and additional Connecticut State Police personnel. The reporters are off-screen and thus unidentified so I have assigned them simple numerical identification based on what can be discerned of their voices.

Reporter #1: So the rifle was the primary weapon?

H. Wayne Carver: Yes.

Reporter #1: [Inaudible]

Carver: Uh (pause). Question was what caliber were these bullets. And I know—I probably know more about firearms than most pathologists but if I say it in court they yell at me and don’t make me answer [sic]—so [nervous laughter]. I’ll let the police do that for you.

Reporter #2: Doctor can you tell us about the nature of the wounds. Were they at very close range? Were the children shot at from across the room?

Carver: Uhm, I only did seven of the autopsies. The victims I had ranged from three to eleven wounds apiece and I only saw two of them with close range shooting. Uh, but that’s, uh y’know, a sample. Uh, I really don’t have detailed information on the rest of the injuries.

[Given that Carver is Connecticut’s top coroner and in charge of the entire postmortem this is a startling admission.-JT]

Reporter #3: But you said that the long rifle was used?

Carver: Yes.

Reporter #3: But the long rifle was discovered in the car.

State Police Lieutenant Vance: That’s not correct, sir.

Unidentified reporter #4: How many bullets or bullet fragments did you find in the autopsy. Can you tell us that?

Carver: Oh. I’m lucky I can tell you how many I found. I don’t know. There were lots of them, OK? This type of weapon is not, uh … the bullets are designed in such a fashion that the energy—this is very clinical. I shouldn’t be saying this. But the energy is deposited in the tissue so the bullet stays in [the tissue].

[In fact, the Bushmaster .223 Connecticut police finally claimed was used in the shooting is designed for long range field use and utilizes high velocity bullets averaging 3,000 feet-per-second, the energy of which even at considerable distance would penetrate several bodies before finally coming to rest in tissue.]

Reporter #5: How close were the injuries?

Carver: Uh, all the ones (pause). I believe say, yes [sic].

Reporter #6: In what shape were the bodies when the families were brought to check [inaudible].

Carver: Uh, we did not bring the bodies and the families into contact. We took pictures of them, uhm, of their facial features. We have, uh, uh—it’s easier on the families when you do that. Un, there is, uh, a time and place for the up close and personal in the grieving process, but to accomplish this we thought it would be best to do it this way and, uh, you can sort of, uh … You can control a situation depending on the photographer, and I have very good photographers. Uh, but uh—

Reporter #7: Do you know the difference of the time of death between the mother in the house and the bodies recovered [in the school].

Carver: Uh, no, I don’t. Sorry [shakes head excitedly] I don’t! [embarrassed laugh]

Reporter #8: Did the gunman kill himself with the rifle?

Carver: No. I—I don’t know yet. I’ll-I’ll examine him tomorrow morning. But, but I don’t think so.

[Why has Carver left arguably the most important specimen for last? And why doesn’t he think Lanza didn’t commit suicide with the rifle?]

Reporter #9: In terms of the children, were they all found in one classroom or—

Carver: Uhm … [inaudible] [Turns to Lieutenant Vance] Paul and company will deal with that.

Reporter #9: What?

Carver: Paul and company will deal with that. Lieutenant Vance is going to handle that one.

Reporter #10: Was there any evidence of a struggle? Any bruises?

Carver: No.

Reporter #11: The nature of the shooting; is there any sense that there was a lot of care taken with precision [inaudible] or randomly?

Carver: [Exhales while glancing upward, as if frustrated] Both. It’s a very difficult question to answer … You’d think after thousands of people I’ve seen shot but I … It’s … If I attempted to answer it in court there’d be an objection and then they’d win—[nervous laughter].

[Who would win? Why does an expert whose routine job as a public employee is to provide impartial medical opinion concerned with winning and losing in court? Further, Carver is not in court but rather at a press conference.]

Reporter #12: Doctor, can you discuss the fatal injuries to the adults?

Carver: Ah, they were similar to those of the children.

Reporter #13: Doctor, the children you had autopsied, where in the bodies were they hit?

Carver: Uhm [pause]. All over. All over.

Reporter #14: Were [the students] sitting at their desks or were they running away when this happened?

Carver: I’ll let the guys who—the scene guys talk—address that issue. I, uh, obviously I was at the scene. Obviously I’m very experienced in that. But there are people who are, uh, the number one professionals in that. I’ll let them—let that [voice trails off].

Reporter [#15]: How many boys and how many girls [were killed]?

Carver: [Slowly shaking his head] I don’t know.

More Unanswered Questions and Inconsistencies

In addition to Carver’s remarks several additional chronological and evidentiary contradictions in the official version of the Sandy Hook shooting are cause for serious consideration and leave doubt in terms of how the event transpired vis-à-vis the way authorities and major media outlets have presented it. It is now well known that early on journalists reported that Adam Lanza’s brother Ryan Lanza was reported to be the gunman, and that pistols were used in the shooting rather than a rifle. Yet these are merely the tip of the iceberg.

  • When Did the Gunman Arrive?

After Adam Lanza fatally shot and killed his mother at his residence, he drove himself to the elementary school campus, arriving one half hour after classes had commenced. Dressed in black, Lanza proceeds completely unnoticed through an oddly vacant parking lot with a military style rifle and shoots his way through double glass doors and a brand new yet apparently poorly engineered security system.

Further, initial press accounts suggest how no school personnel or students heard gunshots and no 911 calls are made until after Lanza begins firing inside the facility. “It was a lovely day,” Sandy Hook fourth grade teacher Theodore Varga said. And then, suddenly and unfathomably, gunshots rang out. “I can’t even remember how many,” Varga said.[5]

The recollection contrasts sharply with an updated version of Lanza’s arrival where at 9:30AM  he

walked up to the front entrance and fired at least a half dozen rounds into the glass doors. The thunderous sound of Lanza blowing an opening big enough to walk through the locked school door caused Principal Dawn Hochsprung and school psychologist Mary Scherlach to bolt from a nearby meeting room to investigate. He shot and killed them both as they ran toward him.

Breaching the school’s security system in such a way would have likely triggered some automatic alert of school personnel. Further, why would the school’s administrators run toward an armed man who has just noisily blasted his way into the building?

Two other staff members attending the meeting with Hochsprung and Scherlach sustained injuries “in the hail of bullets” but returned to the aforementioned meeting room and managed a call to 911.[6] This contrasted with earlier reports where the first 911 call claimed students “were trapped in a classroom with the adult shooter who had two guns.”[7] Recordings of the first police dispatch following the 911 call at 9:35:50 indicate that someone “thinks there’s someone shooting in the building.”[8] There is a clear distinction between potentially hearing shots somewhere in the building and being almost mortally caught in a “hail of bullets.”

  • How did the gunman fire so many shots in such little time?

According to Dr. Carver and State Police, Lanza shot each victim between 3 and 11 times during a 5 to 7 minute span. If one is to average this out to 7 bullets per individual—excluding misses—Lanza shot 182 times, or once every two seconds. Yet according to the official story Lanza was the sole assassin and armed with only one weapon. Thus if misses and changing the gun’s 30-shot magazine at least 6 times are added to the equation Lanza must have been averaging about one shot per second—extremely skilled use of a single firearm for a young man with absolutely no military training and who was on the verge of being institutionalized.  Still, an accurate rendering of the event is even more difficult to arrive at because the chief medical examiner admittedly has no idea exactly how the children were shot or whether a struggle ensued.

  • Where is the Photo and Video Evidence?

Photographic and video evidence is at once profuse yet lacking in terms of its capacity to demonstrate that a mass shooting took place on the scale described by authorities. For example, in an era of ubiquitous video surveillance of public buildings especially no visual evidence of Lanza’s violent entry has emerged. And while studio snapshots of the Sandy Hook victims abound there is little if any eyewitness testimony of anyone who’s observed the corpses except for Carver and his staff, and they appear almost as confused about the conditions of the deceased as any layperson watching televised coverage of the event. Nor are there any routine eyewitness, photo or video evidence of the  crime scene’s aftermath—broken glass, blasted security locks and doors, bullet casings and holes, bloodied walls and floors—all of which are common in such investigations and reportage.

  • Why Were Medical Personnel Turned Away From the Crime Scene?

Oddly enough medical personnel are forced to set up their operation not at the school where the dead and injured lay, but rather at the fire station several hundred feet away. This flies in the face of standard medical operating procedure where personnel are situated as close to the scene as possible. There is no doubt that the school had ample room to accommodate such personnel. Yet medical responders who rushed to Sandy Hook Elementary upon receiving word of the tragedy were denied entry to the school and forced to set up primary and secondary triages off school grounds and wait for the injured to be brought to them.

Shortly after the shooting “as other ambulances from neighboring communities rolled up, sirens blaring, the first responders slowly realized that their training would be tragically underutilized on this horrible day. ‘You may not be able to save everybody, but you damn well try,’” 44 year old emergency medical technician James Wolff told NBC News. “’And when (we) didn’t have the opportunity to put our skills into action, it’s difficult.’”[9]

In light of this, who were the qualified medical practitioners that pronounced the 20 children and 7 adults dead? Who decided that none could be revived? Carver and his staff are apparently the only medical personnel to have attended to the victims—yet this was in the postmortem conducted several hours later. Such slipshod handling of the crime scene leaves the State of Connecticut open to a potential array of hefty civil claims by families of the slain.

  • Did a mass evacuation of the school take place?

Sandy Hook Elementary is attended by 600 students. Yet there is no photographic or video evidence of an evacuation on this scale. Instead, limited video and photographic imagery suggest that a limited evacuation of perhaps at most several dozen students occurred.

A highly circulated photo depicts students walking in a single file formation with their hands on each others’ shoulders and eyes shut. Yet this was the image of a drill that took place prior to the event itself.[10. See Correction] Most other photos are portraits of individual children. Despite aerial video footage of the event documenting law enforcement scouring the scene and apprehending one or more suspects in the wooded area nearby the school,[11] there is no such evidence that a mass exodus of children from the school transpired once law enforcement pronounced Sandy Hook secure. Nor are there videos or photos of several hundred students and their parents at the oft-referenced fire station nearby where students were routed for parent pick up.

Sound Bite Prism and the Will to Believe

Outside of a handful of citizen journalists and alternative media commentators Sandy Hook’s dramatically shifting factual and circumstantial terrain has escaped serious critique because it is presented through major media’s carefully constructed prism of select sound bites alongside a widespread and longstanding cultural impulse to accept the pronouncements of experts, be they bemused physicians, high ranking law enforcement officers, or political leaders demonstrating emotionally-grounded concern.

Political scientist W. Lance Bennett calls this the news media’s “authority-disorder bias.” “Whether the world is returned to a safe, normal place,” Bennett writes, “or whether the very idea of a normal world is called into question, the news is preoccupied with order, along with related questions of whether authorities are capable of establishing or restoring it.”[12]

Despite Carver’s bizarre performance and law enforcement authorities’ inability to settle on and relay simple facts, media management’s impulse to assure audiences and readerships of the Newtown community’s inevitable adjustment to its trauma and loss with the aid of the government’s protective oversight—however incompetent that may be—far surpasses a willingness to undermine this now almost universal news media narrative with messy questions and suggestions of intrigue. This well-worn script is one the public has been conditioned to accept. If few people relied on such media to develop their world view this would hardly be a concern. Yet this is regrettably not the case.

The Sandy Hook tragedy was on a far larger scale than the past year’s numerous slaughters, including the Wisconsin Sikh temple shooting and the Batman theater shooting in Colorado. It also included glaringly illogical exercises and pronouncements by authorities alongside remarkably unusual evidentiary fissures indistinguishable by an American political imagination cultivated to believe that the corporate, government and military’s sophisticated system of organized crime is largely confined to Hollywood-style storylines while really existing malfeasance and crises are without exception returned to normalcy.

If recent history is a prelude the likelihood of citizens collectively assessing and questioning Sandy Hook is limited even given the event’s overtly superficial trappings.  While the incident is ostensibly being handled by Connecticut law enforcement, early reports indicate how federal authorities were on the scene as the 911 call was received. Regardless of where one stands on the Second Amendment and gun control, it is not unreasonable to suggest the Obama administration’s complicity or direct oversight of an incident that has in very short order sparked a national debate on the very topic—and not coincidentally remains a key piece of Obama’s political platform.

The move to railroad this program through with the aid of major media and an irrefutable barrage of children’s portraits, “heartfelt” platitudes and ostensible tears neutralizes a quest for genuine evidence, reasoned observation and in the case of Newtown honest and responsible law enforcement. Moreover, to suggest that Obama is not capable of deploying such techniques to achieve political ends is to similarly place ones faith in image and interpretation above substance and established fact, the exact inclination that in sum has brought America to such an impasse.


[1] State of Connecticut Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection, ”State Police Investigate Newtown School Shooting” [Press Release] December 15, 2012.

[2] State of Connecticut Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection, “Update: Newtown School Shooting” [Press Release], December 19, 2012.

[3] CNN, “Family of 6 Year Old Victim,” December 14, 2012, “Sandy Hook School Shooting Hoax Fraud,” Youtube, December 17, 2012.

[4] Hartford Courant, “Finally ‘Enough’ For Chief Medical Examiner” [Editorial], January 30, 2012.

[5] John Christofferson and Jocelyn Noveck, “Sandy Hook School Shooting: Adam Lanza Kills 26 and Himself at Connecticut School,” Huffington Post, December 15, 2012.

[6] Edmund H. Mahoney, Dave Altmari, and Jon Lender, “Sandy Hook Shooter’s Pause May Have Aided Escape,” Hartford Courant, December 23, 2012.

[8] RadioMan911TV, “Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting Newtown Police / Fire and CT State Police,” Youtube, December 14, 2012. At several points in this recording audio is scrambled, particularly following apprehension of a second shooting suspect outside the school, suggesting a purposeful attempt to withhold vital information.

[9] Miranda Leitsinger, “You Feel Helpless: First Responders Rushed to School After Shooting, Only to Wait,” US News on NBC, December 20.

[10]×400.jpg. 12/25/12 Update/Correction: Note that this photo of approximately fifteen children allegedly being evacuated from Sandy Hook Elementary was reportedly produced on December 14. See Connor Simpson, Alexander Abad-Santos et al, “Newtown School Shooting: Live Updates,” The Atlantic Wire, December 19, 2012. Still, the paltry number of children confirms the claim that little photographic evidence exists of Sandy Hook’s 600 students being moved from the facility on December 14. This photo was  from a Tweet of a Sandy Hook drill published by the school’s slain principal Dawn Hochsprung titled, “Safety First.” See Julia La Rouche, “Principal Killed in Sandy Hook Tweeted Picture of Students Practicing an Evacuation Drill,” Business Insider, December 16, 2012.

[11] Rob Dew, “Evidence of 2nd and 3rd Shooter at Sandy Hook,” Infowars Nightly News, December 18, 2012, A more detailed yet less polished analysis was developed by citizen journalist Idahopicker, “Sandy Hook Elem: 3 Shooters,” December 16, 2012. See also James F. Tracy, “Analyzing the Newtown Narrative: Sandy Hook’s Disappearing Shooter Suspects,”, December 20, 2012.

[12] W. Lance Bennett, News: The Politics of Illusion 9th Edition, Boston: Longman, 2012, 47.

-James F. Tracy

Andrew Whooley provided suggestions and research for this article.

Republished at on December 25, 2012.

1,039 thoughts on “The Sandy Hook Massacre: Unanswered Questions and Missing Information”

  1. This is a very well written article and you like myself have taken the time to look beyond the when the Main Stream Media funneled people to that evening. When the funerals would begin, when school would reopen, but not the who what where why and how. Trying to explain the points you and others have made causes people to say you are always looking for a boogie man or conspiracy. Yet these same people would ask for a refund if this thing was a movie they paid for because they would say it didn’t make sense. People don’t want to take the media facts and do a fact check on them. Like how the story on weapons can keep changing? Or listen to the recorded police scanner that clearly details someone being chased, as soon as the first responders arrive. The little boy who says he saw a second man hancuffed is standing in front of a man working on a stone wall. He has a vest that says LRM and he appears to be Lee Manna the brother of Rob Manna Chief Engineer of Newtown Hook & Ladder.At 1:30 when all this drama is going he’s working on a wall. There are too many people who are talking in cameras but not exhibiting the real grief that one would expect with a disaster like this. My wife stopped her car and shed tears when she heard the news. I learned this lesson years ago at age 6 and 11 when President Kennedy and Dr. King and Bobby Kennedy were assassinated, as well as 911. Always follow closely the first reporters and hold on to that info because then you can match the stories and see where they try and make the evidence fit the initial reports. It’s obvious independent journalist and reporters are more welcome to go report in Syria, Lybia and Afghanistan but not in America.

    1. This is black ops, plain and simple, and excuse to begin disarming the USA. I saw interviews of parents who certainly didn’t look very upset. What about the family of the hero teacher who died? For a family who just lost a daughter and sister, they sure didn’t seem too sad about it. It’s all a bunch of crap. They want our guns so they can round us up and put is in concentration camps. It’s coming people…Once they have our guns and the US dollar collapses, there will be no food and looters will be at your door taking what they want. Better learn how to use a knife.

      1. They can take ANY of my guns from my COLD, DEAD hands. We have a 2nd Amendment right…that, by the way, was given to us by GOD, the Creator. Isnt that what the FFs wrote in our Constitution?

      2. Ii am correct,..just before 911 the president wanted money from social security,..and lost. Then after 911 did he not get whatever he wanted? Too many inconsistancies at Sandy Hook. My wife showed me a pic of dead child on Obamas lap 2 days after her death or 2 days before/ In any case,..why that child and why then. I do not know how to research such things. Any sugesstions will help and i truly beleive in your comment.

      3. You obviously suffer from some type of undiagnosed mental illness such as schizophrenia in which you believe the massacre of 20 innocent children was designed by the government. The fact that you actually wrote that the family members did not seem upset or grieved enough for you satisfaction to have lost YOUNG CHILDREN? Man oh man, maybe you should suffer from the lost of a young child of yours for no reason! I suggest you seek some psychological medications. It may help you disguisting filth of a man.

        1. You obviously suffer from some type of undiagnosed mental illness such as schizophrenia in which you believe the massacre of 20 innocent children was designed by the government.

          Perhaps you suffer from memory loss. In 1993 the GOVERNMENT massacred 77 innocent children in Janet Reno’s raid on the Branch Dividian compound in Waco, Texas. Ironically, the raid was executed to go in and seize guns……that were NOT THERE!

      4. You really like your guns that you probably will believe anything that does not fit your way of thinking? Have you ever lost a loved one in a shooting tragedy? They are there in a minute and then gone forever in a split second. There is no way of dealing with such loss, no simple way to define how people in such tragedies grieve. So please if you have a heart and common sense, then do not act as if you know everything about tragedies. Do you know anything about the human mind and grieving processes at all? Unlike your Florida conspirator professor who lives in his Eifel tower with no connection to the real world, except for his guns there is no way to deny the horrific event that happened in Sandy Hook unless you are live in a paranoia world of gun-hugging world.

      5. You are a complete idiot! Just because someone doesn’t grieve like you do, doesn’t mean they’re not grieving or they’re actors. Everyone grieves differently. Im sure they were in shock and disbelief. You cant say how you or anyone else would react unless you have been through an event like that. I love my gun rights but your claims are ridiculous. Banning assault weapons should be enacted. There’s no reason you need a weapon that fires multiple bullets within seconds unles you are going to war. You are a perfect example of what is wrong with our world and country. How dare you cause these families more pain! May you burn in hell! This message is for you too professor.

        1. You are a perfect example of what is wrong with our world and country.

          It seems to me that your statement would be properly applied to YOU.
          Our constitutional rights are not subject to what somebody else determines we need or do not need.

        2. Marie, you’re showing your ignorance of what is currently being called an assault rifle. It is a semi-automatic,which means the chambering and ejection of the shells is automatically done. The firing mechanism is NOT automatic. You have to pull the trigger each time a bullet is fired. Why would anyone need a weapon like this? Because most people don’t hit their target with only one shot and by the time you could chamber another bullet, the target would be gone. When you say, “There’s no reason you need a weapon that fires multiple bullets within seconds unles you are going to war,” you are showing both your ignorance on how a so-called assault weapon works and on what the 2nd Amendment is all about. The reason the 2nd Amendment was included was not so we could go out and shoot game. It was so we could protect ourselves from a corrupt government that wants to impose its rights on the people without following the Constitution.

          As for how people grieve, one or two families I could understand, but at least two families laughed and smiled all through their interviews only a few days after losing their loved ones. That’s just not realistic. I lost my dog and I cried more than they did! Not even one family had real tears in their eyes. None of the women had smudged eye makeup. Nobody’s nose was running. None of their eyes were red. Nobody looked like they hadn’t slept in days, but they looked well-rested and ready to go.

          I won’t go so far as to say nobody died (because I just don’t know for sure), but I can tell you that some of those parents are actors playing a role, not grieving for a lost child. The ones who never appeared in interviews? Who knows? But I can tell you right now that some of them ARE actors. If I were you, I’d be more outraged that there have been actors inserted into this tragedy than that people are trying to find the real truth.

      1. I agree with you!!! Why tell people these things it was a devastating day for alot of people and why would parents fake the death of their children that is insane!!!! People need to get lives and worry about themselves!!! My heart is with all the families who lost their children i could never imagine and think its horrible that people in this world can be so sick to say its a fraud!!!

      2. learn to think critically, journalist stars are there to sell whatever their CEOS want them to sell. 911 awareness makes you not trust anything the media says unless you can personally verify it. Google USS Liberty and Gulf of Tompkin-both events that were intentionally lied about or kept hidden. That’s just two the list is very,very,long

      3. The truth can be far away, maybe lying in the middle. If you don’t search for the truth if you only think everything that you are thinking is right, you will never find the truth… but yeah… that’s the US. Good luck with open your eyes, whoever needs to do it..

      4. Ok, I’ve not seen this out much – but, what
        I think one of the more interesting aspects to this is the relation of the Iroquois gas line, the major squabble over it being put in through where Sandy Hook elementary is, and that also most all of the victims houses line up to where the gas line as put through. Coincidentally, many of the houses the victims were supposed to have lived in at the time of the shooting were all sold on 12/25/09, which is the same time Iroquois gas, Newtown, and the State of Connecticut can be found to have purchased most, if not almost all of the victims homes – which in another remarkable coincidence..all line up under where Iroquois Gas ran their new line.

        Here is some of the info, and Ill leave the link where you can see the maps of how the homes have been plotted via google ~ and they line up perfectly (along w Sandy Hook Ele.) w the gas line.

        While reviewing property appraisal records of the Sandy Hook victims, I noticed that there are many cases where “last sold date” is listed as 12/25/09 – too many to be a coincidence. I looked at the entries for these properties in more detail and none of them correlate with that date (12/25/09). They have various sale dates listed but nothing on 12/25/09.
        Here’s an example – 37 Yogananda St.
        While looking at areas near Sandy Hook school, I noticed that Treadwell Park is right behind it. Look closely at the sign at the park: (It says “Iroquois Gas Transmission System”, St. of Conn. etc) In the Region: Connecticut and Westchester; Making the Iroquois Pipeline Palatable
        May 24, 1992
        THE Iroquois Gas Transmission System may have found an aspirin for the headaches its highway and corporate construction projects cause communities they intrude upon.(…)..Embarked on a $10 million program to compensate 60 New York State and Connecticut towns disrupted by the installation of its 370-mile-long natural gas pipeline. The money will pay for the purchase of open space and the enhancement of environmental and recreational facilities. (cont.)
        Announcement in 1986 of the taking of private property under a Federal mandate created a firestorm of protest in the affected towns. In Connecticut, residential communities beginning with Sherman at the crossover point from New York State, then winding through New Milford, Brookfield, Newtown, (both articles @ link)
        Phase 1, a 1.6 mile pipeline loop in Newtown, CT, was placed into service November 14, 2008.
        From this newsletter, here are a couple of photos of the pipeline installations. Also note that the newsletter is from Winter ’09 which would be consistent with the “last sold date” of 12/25/09.
        ***I looked at all the properties of the child victim’s homes since they all live in and around Sandy Hook. I believe the adult victims are all from residing areas, outside of the Newtown area.
        I mapped the school and all of the victim’s properties and compared it to the gas line loop just to see if there was any commonality.
        (Posted Image)
        **As you can see, many of the homes are right near the gas line loop. The bottom marker is actually Fan Hill Rd in Monroe. I marked it just to see where it fell on the line since the new Sandy Hook school is supposedly there.
        Many of the victim’s properties show that at least some of the homes were purchased by Iroquois Gas, the state of Connecticut and the town of Newtown. This happens to be the street where the Pozner’s are supposed to live..**
        Another thing that’s very odd is that all of the streets in Sandy Hook appear to be privately owned. You are not able to see them with Google Street View. I can’t see any of the homes of victims and I looked around in the general area and none of the side streets can be viewed.
        I looked at my own street in my subdivision and I could see it with street view. The street behind me is private and sure enough, I couldn’t use Street view on it.
        If you look at the victim’s properties on Spokeo, the majority of them don’t show up as a residence. You can see a house but it isn’t highlighted as a residence with a list of names.
        I also found a couple of websites that list Newtown schools but do not include Sandy Hook school.
        To view the rest, maps most of all go to;

        I find this to be more than interesting (and yet another WILD coincidence)…that so many of the victims homes, and the school would line up right under recently acquired property of Iroquois Gas, St. of Conn. and Newtown Also remember how many ppl were relatively new to the area, even a neighbor of the Lanzas said that while most neighbors knew each other – they did not know the Lanzas.
        Just take a look at the maps on this link, and I think it will “click” for you – that here again..something just isnt right here.
        Also along w Adam Lanza being shown as having died a day before, he also does not show up as being an associated person w Peter and Nancy – only Ryan shows up. (and recall the first stories that were sourced to unnamed officials – about how there was a body found in Ryans Hoboken Apartment, and that his girlfriend and her friend were missing!? It was even in the first reports that Peter Lanza was dead –
        My point is – this isnt just confusion from trying to report quickly on an intense story – these were entirely different story lines!
        I hope someone here would lay this out, pictures that it is easier for the viewer to see what I tried to explain in words.

        Although this isnt direct evidence of anything – I think it is an important part of piecing this highly strange story together.

    2. Mr. Tracy and all who agree that this did not happen… i take a personal offense to this….. how dare you even try to promote that this did not occur to move ahead your personal agenda(s) ie:book sales…??? i am not saying the media doesn’t lie to the public (mis-inform?) but this tragedy did occur and it is my belief that “paranoid” folks such as yourself should be deemed unfit for gun ownership….
      RIP to all the victims of this shooting.

      1. Look who’s being judgemental now? Seriously? Freedom of speech is noe thing, sheer stupidity and ignorance is another. This article might as well have been written by anyone at westboro church. Fucking crazies! Yes, we have the right to bear arms, the FF meant muskets not military assault rifles. Keep your muskets, ban assault rifles.

        1. And the events at Sandy Hook back up your demand that we need to ban assault rifles………..even though there were no assault rifles at Sandy Hook until the feds showed up that afternoon.

      2. So tell us, given that you admit the media does lie to the public, what was the evidence that convinced you that this event happened exactly as it was reported?

      3. Dear “Truth,”
        FYI, In the days of the Founding Fathers, a musket was the assault weapon of the day. What a dork.

      4. Second Amendment rights DO NOT extend to other than the potential arming of civilian population so that “a well regulated militia” be available to the government in times of need. I am tired of those fools who believe that they are entitled to fortify their households so that the government can “round them up and place them in concentration camps”. Exactly why would the government want to do that? Some genius referenced the Branch Davidian disaster. This sad episode was captured live on camera and would be much easier to “fake” than Newtown. The fact that the entire nation was aware, as it was unfolding, of the misjudgement of “government representation on site, would seem to indicate that although the government screwed up big time, no effort was made to remove press coverage from the scene. The fact that the government has hidden facts from the public is nothing new – Pearl Harbor and its role in easing the US into WWII, the proposed “set-up” of the Luisitania to facilitate American entry into WWI, the fabrication of almost all Vietnam War information, weapons of mass destruction – not- in Iraq. But don’t stop there; corporations from GM to your local produce market stretch the truth (or lie outright) at times. Gee, I wonder if the NRA leadership has ever lied to its membership

        It is sad that someone would use his “right to free speech” to spew such unfounded, broad, specious allegations designed to make themselves more important than they are capable of being on their own. Gee, I would think the first thing that would happen to you is that the government (caught out by your insightful analysis) would arrange for you to have an “accident” and thus be silenced. Thank god for my right to free speech: you’re a moron.

        1. @Peter: Gee, I would think the first thing that would happen to you is that the government (caught out by your insightful analysis) would arrange for you to have an “accident” and thus be silenced

          Thank you for pointing out that obvious 800lb gorilla. Perhaps the theorists here believe the government can’t read their comments (but supposedly the feds watch everything we do)

        2. It’s almost laughable when someone like you, Peter, gets all huffy about something and yet your stance is easily proven wrong. In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled, “The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.” That would be found in the case, The Dictrict of Columbia et al. v. Heller, 2008.

          The reason is because DC had enacted a very strict gun law (which statistics show caused a sharp rise in firearm crimes because only criminals had easy access to guns), and a DC special policeman applied to register a handgun for his home and he was denied. He filed suit against the stringent DC law, claiming it went against his 2nd Amendment rights. The SCOTUS upheld his claim and DC had to get rid of the law (which immediately resulted in considerably lowering the firearm crimes rate from a high of over 400 to only 88 incidences in 2012).

          In fact, the CDC in Atlanta closely evaluated 51 studies on gun laws to see if any gun law helped reduce gun violence and they found absolutely zero laws that did that. In England, when they banned guns, although the gun deaths lowered, all other forms of violent crime skyrocketed because common people could no longer protect themselves. Talk to a few Australians and you’ll see how home invasions have risen significantly since their guns were taken from them.

          So, the person in this discussion who is spewing “such unfounded, broad, specious allegations designed to make themselves more important than they are capable of being on their own” is you. Do your research first.

        3. those fools who believe that they are entitled to fortify their households so that the government can “round them up and place them in concentration camps”. Exactly why would the government want to do that? Some genius referenced the Branch Davidian disaster.

          You are incerdulus that someone could believe that the government could invade their home, by force of arms, and kill them or haul them off. Then in the very next sentence you refer to the government raid on the Branch Davidians. Did you plan to totally contridict your own statement all along or was it just a happy accident?

      5. Jeffrey… et. al. whether it happened or not, or the way it is officially being presented as happened, you must not make emotive statements or baseless accusations. No one cares about your feelings (or Anderson Vanderbilt Cooper’s for that matter). What this site is about is asking rational questions that need to be answered in a dispassionate way. The ramifications of Sandy Hook will affect us all. It is being engineered for a political agenda. This is obvious. To be sure our hearts go out to the victims families, but one must never dismiss the mind and ability to think.
        Why are you on this site to begin with if you offer nothing of value at all ?

      1. This site should not be titled “Memory Hole”:

        Asshole would be a better fit!

        Unfriggin believable!

    3. Has any one tried googling Communist Goals – 1963 Congressional Record. Im not a crazy radical but do raise questions.

    4. Well, at least there are two of you who pose “serious” questions about specific action, or inaction taken at the scene by responders, children, teachers, parents and law enforcement. I could comment on many of your “insights” but to conclude that there must be a cover up because the Chief Medical Examiner was not a smooth presenter and/or question answerer is foolish. His hesitancy to answer questions he is not qualified to answer (number of shots, caliber of bullet, sequence of events during the shooting (if there was one) (sic) point me in a different direction: here is a man who has been up all night performing autopsy after autopsy, getting whatever information he has from a variety of sources, none of whom have had the benefit of a full investigation and you think he should have a slick powerpoint presentation, complete with animated slides.

      The answers to many of your questions are currently being fabricated (sic) by the FBI at the President’s behest. Since the scenario was staged, let’s hope we can find the script (they are probably storing it in the TV Studio where they shot the footage of the Walk on the Moon – another government plot to deceive the people) Knowing your type (I’ll bet $100 you are also a Creationist) you will be able to continue asking questions that are unanswered only because they are dumb ass questions that no one thought to address.

      I wish their was an Amendment that spared all of us from paranoid, foolish and harmful vitriol. I cannot imagine parents of students, students, faculty and administration at your University are welcoming your valuable insight into their community. You should state: “My opinions and viewpoint are those of a citizen and the fact I am a Professor at a University does not add credence to my words.”

      It’s a sad commentary when ignorance borrows credibility and access to media to further a viewpoint whose argument is so weak and disorganized. I live 15 minutes from Sandy Hook and have spoken with individuals attending the funerals of the adults killed – believe it or not those were real dead people in those caskets. If this is a government conspiracy they surely did a very poor job. Maybe you can give them some pointers on where they went wrong – that is if the government doesn’t manufacture an “accident” for you.

      It’s easy for you and for me to type out whatever words we wish and to feel that because they are written they are true. I’ll tell you what, come on up to CT and we can get a copy of the autopsy photos for you.

      “Beware the man who loudly shouts the truth, one who substitutes volume for reason convinces only himself.”

      1. yes, best suggestion I’ve seen: “come on up to CT and we can get a copy of the autopsy photos for you.” If any of you who think this didn’t happen don’t bite on this excellent suggestion, then please tell us why. Someone must be close enough to CT to make this affordable. If not, then we can conclude that you’d rather sit here and spew your cruel disregard for the victim’s families than find out what is true, or not true. Step up, and settle this once and for all, the most extreme of the questions here being: “did this even happen? Did anyone even die?”

      2. “…but to conclude that there must be a cover up because the Chief Medical Examiner was not a smooth presenter and/or question answerer is foolish. ”

        Wykehamrd, you evidently haven’t researched H. Wayne Carver like the rest of us have. This man is a veteran ME. He was the Chief ME for several years and had to speak in court many times so speaking in public about autopsies is what the man does for a living. In his court appearances, it’s said that he was well-spoken and decisive in his comments. Speaking in court, he would not read a prepared document. The reason he’s there in person is to answer questions put to him. This means he’s doing pretty much the same thing as a press conference, answering whatever questions they throw at him about the scene he’s supposed to be an expert on. You don’t get those questions ahead of time, just like you don’t get press conference questions ahead of time. You anticipate what will be asked and prepare answers for those and then use your knowledge of the situation to respond to the other questions. There’s really much more pressure on you in a court room than in a press conference (have you ever testified in court?), and in either case, a man who is the Chief ME for the entire state of Connecticut should know that his words will be scrutinized carefully. Anyone in a high government position knows that. It comes with the job.

        “His hesitancy to answer questions he is not qualified to answer (number of shots, caliber of bullet, sequence of events during the shooting (if there was one) (sic) point me in a different direction: ”

        It’s apparent you don’t know what an ME is qualified to do. He knows what caliber bullets are. He knows the sequence of events during a shooting. He’s the one who tells the police that. He’s the one who counts each bullet and each fragment of a bullet as it is pulled from the body he’s working on. ME’s have to be EXTREMELY detailed. They weigh carefully, measure carefully, record all their data carefully, especially in a crime scene situation. Your statement excuses him from exactly what the man is qualified to do. He’s exactly the person who should have known the answers to those questions. That’s why they asked him.

        “here is a man who has been up all night performing autopsy after autopsy, getting whatever information he has from a variety of sources, none of whom have had the benefit of a full investigation and you think he should have a slick powerpoint presentation, complete with animated slides.”

        No, he was not up all night performing autopsies. He said the bodies were back at their main headquarters by 1:30 am. They didn’t start the post-mortems until the next morning. As the Chief ME, his job was to OVERSEE the autopsies because he was responsible for the final reports on all of the bodies. That’s what the Chief ME does. If he didn’t feel like he had enough time to prepare for a press conference that he knew was going to happen, he easily could have delegated several autopsies to his colleagues (I believe he said there were 10 of them, it’s late, I don’t remember and I’m too tired to go back and listen yet again to it). If you look at Carver’s face, it is immaculately shaven, not the scruff of someone who worked all night long and barely had time to breathe, as you imply. His eyes do not have huge bags under them. In fact, over all he looks fairly well rested. (Another oddity considering the circumstances.)

        Once again, you’re excusing the man from precisely what his job entails. His job was to take the results of the autopsies his staff had performed and pass that information on to the press. He didn’t get information from “a variety of sources.” (Unless it was the government telling him what to say, is that what you’re implying?) He got information from the bodies. Again, that’s what an autopsy is for. They look at the body to see what happened. He’d already spent 12 hours at the crime scene to observe the location of the bodies in regards to the shooting. Yet you expect us to believe he couldn’t answer a simple question like, “Were the kids sitting at desks or running or what?” His job was to give the information to the press so saying he didn’t know how many boys and how many girls is inexcusable. That’s what he was there to do, disseminate information. The only thing he made sure to include was the lie he was told to say, about the wounds being inflicted by a long rifle. The first officers on the scene said there were two handguns, period. No rifle. They’re trained to know the difference between handguns and long rifles, btw. :p The inclusion of a long rifle, soon to be identified as a Bushmaster AR-15, was purely a lie added into the storyline. (After all, the rifle was not removed from the trunk of the car until after dark. Did Adam Lanza put it back in there after he was dead?)

        And yes, we’d like to see the crime scene photos. I’d like to talk to a person who actually saw a dead body (not someone who knew someone who knew someone who said they did). We’d like to see Adam Lanza’s name in the Social Security Death Index. It’s not there, you know. All the rest are, but not his. We’d like to see video footage from the security cameras. We’d like to see police evidence markers next to pools of blood. We’d like to see some actual physical evidence that proves the story we’ve been fed. You see, you’re going on heresay. If the parents didn’t see the bodies of their children, they are going on heresay. Why don’t you check on that and report back? Did any parent actually see the body of their child? The ME said they didn’t get to see them for identification purposes. Did they afterwards? Or do you just assume they did because that’s what happens at a viewing?

        The problem with events like this is that our brains tend to fill in blanks from the information we’ve been given. We are told 20 children died and we assume the police or media wouldn’t lie to us about that so our brain fills in the blanks and makes it all true. But it’s no different than me saying I saw a spaceship fall from the sky and land on my house. How do you know I didn’t? Well, you would be skeptical because you had no proof it was true, no pictures, no tangible evidence that I really saw it. Sure, spaceships exist and we’ve shot a few up there that could possibly fall from the sky onto our house. Until you saw proof, though, proof of my house with a hole in the roof or proof of a picture of the spaceship on my house, you wouldn’t believe what I said. Why would you believe the media or some unknown person if they had no proof they could show you? Right now, it’s just the word of a handful of people who were in those classrooms and who know for sure what happened. Until they bring us evidence, we have the right, and the responsibility, to be skeptical of their claim. We see flaws in their story, things that just aren’t logical. Why would we believe them until they give us something substantial to prove what they’re saying is true? If we see nothing tangible, then we shouldn’t trust them any more than you would trust me and my story about the spaceship falling on my house.

        Btw, I want you to know that I’m not saying it didn’t happen. I’m not saying it did. I’m not saying nobody died and I’m not saying they all died just like they said. I’m saying that I need a LOT more evidence to make an informed opinion on this subject because I have a list of 130 things so far that are incongruities or contradictions. Something is extremely fishy and until we see real evidence, it’s destined to bring out the skepticism in people. And it should. There’s no reason in the world they should hide evidence from us and there’s every reason in the world we should suspect they are covering something up (because it’s been done many times before and, in recent memory, Benghazi and the YouTube video lie).

        1. Once again, you’re excusing the man from precisely what his job entails

          Has anybody bothered to count all the lame excuses these people who deny something fishy is going on at Sandy Hook have piled up here? It occurs to me that all the absurd auguments AGAINST a conspiracy are demonstrating how obvious the conspiracy really is.
          When you have to deny locic and reason over and over again, it makes it obvious you are defending a faulty assumption.

        2. Oh yes, you like Chalkbrd are the authorities. Why don’t you count the ‘lame’ excuses and let us know. Because of course no one else here has any idea what we’re talking about. Why the hell don’t you experts get a job as investigators, obviuosly you could solve all of the worlds mysteries and be rich beyond your wildest imagination. You are all so figgin smart and intuitive that from you extreme powers of observation nothing, nothing at all gets by you. Please, give me your list of lame – look forward to it -ha, it’ll never happen.
          Oh, and it’s amazing all you experts can’t find the time to come here or as some have done, dissappeared from this blog, when i made the offer. Who the hell are you calling lame.
          I’ll have my answers for you Monday, I’m sitting down with the detective this weekend and I”m going over with him all of the brilliant observations here.
          I have to get back to work, I can’t believe the time and money I wasted here talking to lamp posts. You have my emai, if you want to know how my initial meeting goes contact me.
          As for my offer to come here it stands – if no takers by early next week I’m donating the $500 to this person she understands better what this means to us here in Connecticut. If you want to do something meaningful in your life start there

        3. “When you have to deny locic and reason over and over again, it makes it obvious you are defending a faulty assumption.”

          RickA, they will excuse anything, no matter how outrageous, rather than consider something that contradicts what they want to believe.

      3. Who did you quote “Beware the man who loudly shouts the truth, …” ? I like that. Again we have someone who has talked to someone who attended a funeral. Was it an open casket funeral? My sister was shot with a .357 and hers was open casket. You mean the photos they so kindly provided to the parents which I presume showed no wounds due to the skill of the photographer? I doubt you could ever get a single copy of any photo of any victim, which is not to say I doubt they exist. They may or may not. If it weren’t so sad, it would be funny, that you think “accidents” aren’t manufactured routinely. Usually as a suicide. For just one incident, this is what Wikipedia says
        “Allegations of mysterious or suspicious deaths of witnesses connected with the Kennedy assassination originated with Penn Jones, Jr.[30][31][32] and were brought to national attention by the 1973 film Executive Action.[30][31] Jim Marrs later presented a list of 103 people he believed died “convenient deaths” under suspect circumstances. He noted that the deaths were grouped around investigations conducted by the Warren Commission, New Orleans D.A. Jim Garrison, the Senate Intelligence Committee, and the House Select Committee on Assassinations.[33] Marrs pointed out that “these deaths certainly would have been convenient for anyone not wishing the truth of the JFK assassination to become public.”[34] Vincent Bugliosi has described the death of Dorothy Kilgallen—who claimed she was granted a private interview with Jack Ruby—as “perhaps the most prominent mysterious death” cited by assassination researchers.[35] According to author Jerome Kroth, Mafia figures Sam Giancana, John Roselli, Carlos Prio, Jimmy Hoffa, Charles Nicoletti, Leo Moceri, Richard Cain, Salvatore Granello, and Dave Yaras were likely murdered to prevent them from revealing their knowledge.[36] According to author Matthew Smith, others with some tie to the case who have died suspicious deaths include Lee Bowers, Gary Underhill, William Sullivan, David Ferrie, Clay Shaw, George de Mohrenschildt, four showgirls who worked for Jack Ruby, and Ruby himself.[37]

        Does the government arrange an accident for anyone and everyone that may say something they don’t like? Of course not. They gotta have someone left to pay the taxes.

    5. Just wanted to weigh in on JFK’s quote at the heading of your page. Could this be the same President who hid the facts of the Bay of Pigs and did not share the truth of the Cuban Missile Crisis. Some things are better left unshared with the general public – mainly because the average American is not capable of understanding why he is not being asked for his opinion on foreign policy.

      1. My dad was an officer in the US NAVY and he was on one of the ships that went to the bay of pigs – he says that the eeriest thing about it was the hull was full of crosses. He said it doesn’t make you very confident about your mission when your hull is full of crosses to mark the dead.

        1. Perhaps the crosses were for planting in the ground and then taking pictures of for a Photo Op … to tug at the heart strings of Americans.

    6. If the media would not put out so many untruths when they report these events then people wouldn’t be so suspicious. The media reported at least three different stories about whether or not the shooter’s mother worked at the school. The media cannot keep straight what guns were used. The media wrongly identified the shooter as his brother at one point, causing the brother to receive angry messages. The media reported that the school nurse saw the shooter’s face in one report but indicated she saw the shooter’s feet in another. There were many other inconsistencies in just this one news event. The media is supposed to be made up of professionals who care about the standard of their work. Reporting a mess of mistakes over and over again makes them less credible. Instead of acknowledging this and working to correct it, they attack ‘conspiracy theorists’ who have become very distrustful over the years after seeing misinformation given without correction. It is interesting that the talking heads criticized the professor for ‘giving information as fact that may not be the whole truth’ when they do it all the time with impunity and no shame. Until the media cleans up its act, they have no business making hypocritical attacks on others who do the same.

      1. “The media is supposed to be made up of professionals who care about the standard of their work. Reporting a mess of mistakes over and over again makes them less credible. Instead of acknowledging this and working to correct it, they attack ‘conspiracy theorists’ who have become very distrustful over the years after seeing misinformation given without correction.”

        Just remember, Benghazi happened because of a Youtube video. :oP lol

        “If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.” Adolf Hitler

  2. I appreciate your interesting work on this case but have one minor correction.

    You wrote:
    “[..the Bushmaster .223 Connecticut police finally claimed was used in the shooting is designed for long range field use and utilizes high velocity bullets averaging 3,000 feet-per-second, the energy of which even at considerable distance would penetrate several bodies before finally coming to rest in tissue.]

    The 5.56mm/.226” round is specifically designed to tumble and fragment upon impact. This behavior amplifies wounding because kinetic energy is deposited into the body rather than being wasted by exiting the body. Bullet fragmentation creates multiple small wound channels. This shreds tissue instead of merely puncturing it like an ice pick.

    To see examples, run a Google image search on the terms: 5.56 fragmentation x-ray

    I realize this is a minor technical point, but it may prove useful in your calculations.

    Please keep up your good work. The Mainstream Media is controlled. We depend on you to ask the hard questions they will not.

      1. The other possibility is that it was the .22 LR or long rifle version of the Bushmaster. That would be consistent with Mom Lanza using it for target shooting. It would also account for firing so many shots into the victims & why Carver was so coy about the caliber of the bullets and other issues. If it was a .22 instead of a .223 it would also destroy the anti gun crowd argument about assault rifles because then it would not under any definition be an assault rifle, although it would look like one. From the start the info on this case was suspect. Seems like the Mom Lanza working at the school and being shot at the school myth lasted a long time. That Carver interview was one of the strangest I have ever seen.

    1. To expand on Charlie Primero’s point, it needs to be mentioned that Charlie is talking specifically about US military M193 ammunition. There are numerous other types of ammunition which can be fired through an AR-15 which has been chambered for .223/5.56 NATO rounds. These include a number of military surplus rounds, e.g. the M855 as well as civilian rounds of various types. For example, jacketed soft point (JSP) rounds, ballistic tips, hollow points. As part of the Sandy Hook investigation, I think it is important to know what ammunition was used. As with other aspects of the case, this information has not been disclosed.

      1. Vietnam era 5.56 M16 was designed with a 1 twist in 12″ of barrel, commonly referred to as 1/12 twist. The bullet at that time was a weight of 55 grains, not much more than a .22 long rifle which is 36-40 grains. however the bullet velocity at the muzzle is much higher – about 2800-3000 feet per second depending on the manufacturer. Some lots were clocked at almost 3300 fps.
        The bullet was designed to be spin stabilized for accuracy. with 1/12 twist the bullet was supposed to start to ‘wobble’ at about 100 yards. as distance increased the wobble effect became more pronounced and as the distance increased the accuracy started to suffer. This was not a problem in Vietnam as the firefights were under 100 yards. the bullet sometimes ‘punched through’ the small Vietnamese bodies and sometimes tumbled on impact an produced some awful wounds. If it hit bone, the bullet combined with high velocity would shatter bones as well. There was no guarantee of this.
        Modern use of the M16 required more accuracy at longer ranges. the military bought M16’s with 1/7 twist and 62 grain bullets for accuracy out to several hundred yards. some special forces groups got 77 grain bullets for long range shooting. Surplus M16’s were not sold to the public as they are real assault weapons, meaning capable of fully automatic fire, ie, a machine gun. Police departments can, and do, often get surplus M16’s if they request them through the government.
        As for shooting this close, if the bullets were high velocity they cause terrible wounds from the blast channel of hitting with high velocity.
        even if they were .22 long rifle bullets, shooting someone 11 items would have an awful result.
        if the rifle were a .22 caliber long rifle I don’t see how many people would have bought that many .22 caliber magazines, they are expensive
        Next, the number of rounds supposedly fired by one kid without military training, with the magazine changes required seems pretty outside the realm of reason., but not impossible. For someone to complete an action of this type would seem to require some pretty extensive training AND practice.

      1. If they can “pull off” 9/11, they can do BOTH Colorado & Connecticut. I have relatives in Conn. They are saying the same thing & the local media is just PUSHING THE GUN CONTROL krap. The Professor is CORRECT…the average citizen has NO CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS…anymore. They justr swallow any old reguritation fed to them by the MSM.

      2. if you havehad any training in emergencu response, you would know confusion and differing stories are the norm for such events..even under completely safe training situations….. You are more than idiot….and these children deserve better…you are the one shaming the public to make a name for yourself.

        1. you would know confusion and differing stories are the norm for such events..even under completely safe training situations…

          So this was a training exercise after all?

    2. The information about what the 5.56 is designed to do but this is what they were designed to do after penetrating light body armor at a distance of at least 100 yards. At 20 feet, even hollow points would have passed straight through with limited to no tumbling.

  3. Appreciate the piece regarding this incident & issue. I’ve personally been encountering the conditioned responses of either “Gun Control” or “Second Amendment freedoms” without much investigation/analysis on the actual events. It also seems to me the citizenry finds such a proposition somehow incredulous, which amazes me given ’93 WTC bombing & FBI involvement, OK City & FBI involvement, and Operation Northwoods(a Defense Department False-Flag operation that didn’t get off the ground thanks to Jack Kennedy). That somehow the Power Structure would use what General Wesley Clark labeled “Mass Casualty Producing Events” to further long-standing plans for implementation of long standing legislation(see drug control legislation, the omnibus crime bill of the ’90s, The PATRIOT ACT….ALL co-authored by Joseph R. Biden, the current Vice President) can’t be possible, right?!!

    1. The historical record has information pointing to such techniques and events. However, these are not taught in formal school, or the continuing education imparted through mass media.

      1. Very true & illustrative of these phenomena is this PressTV story:…which not coincidentally happened yesterday. Certainly your most recent appearance in corbettreportradio, as well as his podcast Episode 249 – How to manufacture (or suppress) outrage applies here. Much of this “outrage” is being visibly coordinated (dare we say channelled) by Mass Media – also elements of “Alternate Media”, Alternet being chief among them.

        Incidents where more than 1 persons are killed are now automatically labeled “Mass Killings”, “Massacres”, thus allowing pressing issues like the so-called “Fiscal Cliff”, Syria, Iran to be shifted to the background.

        As an aside, it’s painfully apparent the killings in the “inner cities” and even in rural areas of the US don’t warrant that kind of attention; this necessarily points to Racism, Classism, both forms of Imperialism. It also points to what I’ve described above regarding Media Focus.

        1. Thank you for the observations, One is reminded of the contrasting coverage of the National Guard shootings at Kent State versus a similar event around the same time at Jackson State, a predominantly African American state university, the latter of which was largely ignored.

        2. Yes…it was I believe referred to as the Orangeburg Massacre. Coincidentally, I mentioned that parallel on a different site this weekend. I cited that & similar Mass Casualty Producing Events to make the point that The US in 1 form or another, has always been a Police State, and that all Imperial Powers are necessarily Police States. That’s probably a controversial claim to make, but one need look no further that the Guilded Age in America and its massacre: The Ludlow Massacre to justify that position.

      1. Professor-
        You forgot to mention that Elvis is alive and well on his personal Carribean Island, that JFK, Jackie and Aristotle are living happily in a menage a trois on one of Ari’s Yachts, that the “moon landing” was filmed in the Nevada desert, that there are extraterrestrials living in New Mexico and advising our government, and that Obama is simultaneously a fundamentalist Muslim and a godless Socialist who was somehow born in both Kenya and Indonesia.

  4. Police states assume that law is un-actionable.

    State by state the US devolves from the almost total absence to possible governance.

    Which judicially leads other nations to enquire :

    ‘the Democrats lost the 2000 and 2004 elections– on whose watch?’.

    ‘The Mathematics department’– usually elicits the most mirth –akin to limited nuclear war is ‘feasible’.

  5. Your article is an excellant summary of all the pieces from this mystery. I am speaking as someone who has shot various weapons in my lifetime and I completely doubted from the beginning that this young man could have fired so many kill shots in such a very short period of time. The fact that he had three kill zones, had a semi-automatic weapon capable of firing one shot at a time, effectively fired at moving targets where he had to point downwards, and where there weren’t ANY injured leans more towards a professional shooter(s) than a 20 year old civilian who was rumored to be mentally akward. There is really no way possible that Mr Lanza alone could have been so effective.I believe that all mass shootings have had at least a percentage of injured and certainly not a kill percentage of 100%. I was also very shocked to see the lack of emotion from parent’s who were interviewed on MSM news (CNN). The parents first of all didn’t see the body of their murdered daughter, and second of all had a closed casket, and third of all they did not cry once but were smiling and talking as if their child succomed to something entirely different than assasination. It seems that no one has been interviewed that actually saw Mr Lanza as the shooter. The Vice Principal of Sandy Hook hid while the shootings were going on and was interviewed on 60 minutes where she claimed to have seen the feet of the gunman but didn’t shed one tear for the children or colleagues killed or showed any signs of PTSD related to the severity of this slaughter. I am further confused by the lack of crime scene photography which didn’t necessarily have to be blood, but at least some evidence. Why were the bodies removed late at night? Why wasn’t there coverage of a bio-hazard cleaning crew? Why does it seem that every first responder or community member interviewed relates to third party information rather than first hand information? Why did the police investigator, Lt Vance, issue a gag-order and threaten legal action specifically to those outside the official narrative? Lastly, why did Nancy Lanza have a variety of tactical weapons especially since she is being portrayed as a socialite, and why did she make them accessible to a special needs adult? Why aren’t there updated photos of the alleged gunman and his slain mother?

      1. And, why has no one in the news interviewed the ex-husband? Someone got a phone conversation with the Grandmother who lives in Florida, but I never heard anything from the Dad. And, where has the older son gone to live?

      2. While your post is well written and obviously carefully thought out to support your theory, my questions to you is: Did you go to Newtown, CT to do your reasearch or did you simply get your info off the internet. I would encourage you to travel to Newtown and do actual “boots on the ground” investigation. I would be curious to see if you theory changes.

        “The main thing that I learned about conspiracy theory, is that conspiracy theorists believe in a conspiracy because that is more comforting. The truth of the world is that it is actually chaotic. The truth is that it is not The Iluminati, or The Jewish Banking Conspiracy, or the Gray Alien Theory.

        The truth is far more frightening – Nobody is in control.

        The world is rudderless.”
        ― Alan Moore

    1. did you watch the interview with emilies parents her mom was sooo drugged up and upset that you could tell something happened mentally with her what is it with you people!!!!

      1. @Mark Viniello
        I suggest you read the article again with a little less prejudice. It’s clearly clouding your perception. The article I read mainly highlighted anomalies and lack of rigour in media coverage. So why would he he need to go to Newtown in order to write such an article? And as for your quoted smear, I’d say it’s far more comforting to believe the world we live in as chaotic, than being subject to widespread manipulation and deceit to further agendas.

      2. Something DID happen “mentally with her”. Her…daughter….was….killed!
        I know it’s a crazy notion, but do you think that might have something to do with her state of mind?

    2. “The teacher and students were huddled in the middle the room screaming in fear as Lanza unloaded at least one 30 round clip into the mass of bodies.” You sir, know nothing about firearms. I own an M-4 rifle. The bullets are designed for maximum power and maximum damage. The .223 round will often fragment. If you weren’t already informed there was ONE survivor that watched her entire class get massacred. Why don’t you ask her how it was possible?

      1. Actually, that many kill shots even of people roughly in a “pile” (which would begin to struggle, move, etc. is NOT reasonable; the Bushmaster (often reported as the gun IN the car not the other way around anyway) requires many yards to be between it and the target for the easiest shots and fewer ricocheting bullets. Then Lanza was “no longer” reported in body armour. The case stinks.

        1. Wow, that’s amazing, your expert ‘opinion’ has cracked the case wide open. Not! What we have here is a blog of make believe experts. Every last one of the supporters of the idea this was a hoax talks about the ‘facts’ as if they were credentialed experts. Providing expert testimony ranging from psychological analysis, expert behavior analysts, weapons experts, the ability to analize crime scenes without ever going to the scene plus a host of other top notch, investigative reporting skills.
          But really, the reality is you are all not experts, you are not psychiatrists, forensic experts, profilers, weapons experts nor do you have real investigative skillls. To be taken seriously – do the work, then you when you finally uncover the truth the rest of already know, you can apologiize.

      1. What in the world are you saying? “the complete lack of injuries….” duh, are you an absolute tool?

  6. You make some good points and there are indeed some troubling inconsistencies. But to me your essay is cluttered with serious problems I have read Lance Bennett and appreciate his work. But he is quite careful, as with Neil Postman in his work, to characterize these types of things as tendencies, not conspiracies. You do him a disservice by quoting him in the same article in which you espouse a conspiracy theory directly implicating Obama as being behind the incident in order to “railroad” his gun control agenda. While there are many inconsistencies to be found, there is absolutely no evidence at all to even hypothesise about such a thing. And that doesn’t mean that Obama won’t capitalize on the tragedy to push his agenda, but that is a far cry from crafting a plot to kill 20 kids. You seem to be suffering from a bad case of confirmation bias and it is leading you to make credulous reports and jump to conclusions. For example:

    unusual and apparently contrived appearance by Emilie Parker’s alleged father

    Your only reference to support this statement is a youtube video in which the person who posted it suggests the father’s behavior in the first five seconds before he started his speech contrasted so strongly with his evident grief in the following moments that he must be acting. I am surprised how easily you accept the youtuber’s conclusion, without any concern for context. I can only quote from a commenter on the video:
    “Easy for everyone to sit back and critique how someone should act after losing a child in a mass murder, isn’t it? Anyone ever smile nervously before doing something they’ve never done before? Like going on TV and telling everyone what you’re going through hours after your CHILD WAS MURDERED?”

    de facto gag order…wholly absent from public scrutiny.

    You seem to find it ominous that the police have requested the press to honor the families’ privacy, but why is that so strange? In fact there were lots of people in town who implored the media to leave them alone for obvious reasons:

    Medical Personnel Turned Away
    medical personnel are forced to set up their operation not at the school where the dead and injured lay, but rather at the fire station several hundred feet away
    medical responders who rushed to Sandy Hook Elementary upon receiving word of the tragedy were denied entry to the school

    I don’t see any direct statements to that effect in the article you referenced.
    The fire station is clearly mentioned as the secondary triage area in the parking lot of the nearby fire station, where unharmed schoolchildren who were evacuated waited to be picked up by their parents.
    You quote the article saying the first responders were tragically under-utilized. It seems obvious to me that it was not because they were not allowed to do their work, but because the first ones on the scene found many victims already dead.

    he is either under coercion or an imposter.

    That is a remarkable suggestion to make, considering your only source as to the character of this man is a brief newspaper editorial. I understand his behavior may be evidence of incompetence, but who are you to evaluate what is a normal way for this man to behave after having had to be part of a situation that was certainly more horrible and sad than anything he had ever experienced?

    1. Dear Ben Sherman,

      Thank you for your remarks. I maintain that my argument and observations are soundly reasoned and documented.

      One must admit that 26 families having been almost uniformly rendered mute by law enforcement is highly unusual. So too is the sole live press statement by Parker.

      With regard to “first responders,” a review of press reports and interviews with those involved in the operation reveals at least to my knowledge that no witness to the interior scenes of the school has been quoted in the press. Even the local Sand Hook Village Fire Chief involved in setting up first triage outside the school asserted how even his staff only got to care for two individuals.

      Concerning your critique of my using W. Lance Bennett’s work, a close reading of this passage will reveal that I am not using his concept to interpret the event itself as conspiratorial, but rather to illustrate a now well-established dynamic of the press contributing to very poor coverage of the event through reporters and their editors failing to report the facts and vigorously question what they’re being told. I have argued elsewhere that this more or less makes major news media complicit in any coverup or conspiracy if any such maneuvers exist. The historical record points to many such episodes. You may wish to review my closing remarks in this regard.

      1. Thanks for replying. If you think a Youtube video and a newspaper editorial are examples of sound documentation. good luck to you. And your response to me shows you are still operating under the cloud of confirmation bias. In the article you linked to, you again make it sound like the first responders were prohibited from entering the scene or from doing their job. But no one is saying that, and if it were really the case, someone most certainly would have said something. If you don’t believe that than you have never met a paramedic or EMT. Really, isn’t it clear enough they were simply expressing their profound sadness that so many were already dead, there was almost nothing they could do. Why is that so hard for you, and why do you still feel the need to read a coverup into a perfectly understandable report? Regarding your citing Lance Bennett, I am not saying you did not describe his concepts correctly, but you are most definitely jumping to conspiratorial conclusions in advance of having any credible evidence to do so.

    2. Thank you, Ben!! This site is the work of a seriously unhinged individual. Furthermore, as for the “accomplices” who were handcuffed: in the first moments of responding, police and other responders had NO IDEA what they were dealing with. As a matter of practice anyone in the area of the school would have been detained and/or handcuffed to secure the scene. Secondly – you make reference to the security system. I work in a secured building but short of bullet proof glass – anyone with a gun can disable the security system by simply shooting it off. Yes and administrator would RUN toward the shots… I can’t say for certain they had a whole lot of experience listening to gunshots but it could have been any number of things… heck they could have thought it was a student who broght firecrackers and was lighting them off. As for the doctor’s press conference, if you had to preside over the autopsies of 20 first graders (6 YEAR OLDS) THE WEEK BEFORE CHRISTMAS – and you don’t come out of that completely screwed up – you’re just not human. The only ones who know for certain what happened that day are no longer here to tell the story. Stop spitting on the families by spewing this crap. Then, go get some help. You desperately need it.

    3. Ben, While espousing criticism of the article, YOU posit that 20 children are dead. The author, like myself, employs Occam’s Razor as the litmus (the simple answer is usually the correct one 61% of the time). Open your eyes and put aside conditioning; just because the media says so does not make it true. This author was brutalized by Fox News, for example:

      This article is in no way impartial. What’s not logical is to NOT question the media. Your further defense of Emille Parker’s “father” as he conducts his phony interview requires you to cast aside common sense in the pursuit of your paradigm, your comfort zone. I’M a parent, don’t tell me that was sincere. You insult my intelligence. Since when are we required to shift our common sense into neutral when the obvious slams into view? Who do I owe that too? Obama? Last time I heard he’s supposed to answer to US. I owe Obama what…? You accuse the author of “accepting” you-tube’s description. That’s insulting. How do you know that? I’ve seen any number of those videos over and over. Do you think you-tube is controlling our minds, when we are freer thinkers than YOU are?

      I lost a grandchild and I’ve lost others. My son is my life. I’ll say it without hesitation: This Parker guy is either a phony or a cold and calculating psychopath of a father.

      As to the Fire Dept. staging area, you assume the author is relying on written statements. There are aerial photographs that totally back him up! He asks who made the determination of death (which you did not address). Sooo, you have all the (half-) answers. Who was it that ordered all first responders to station at the Fire House?

      Finally, any lame excuse for the “medical examiner” only makes the excuser look lame. This goes beyond incompetence and I suggest you take a look at every single “family” interview. They are preposterous.

      Maybe you’re an actor too, I don’t know. But the consequences of Sandy Hook (trashing the 2nd amendment) are much bigger than the alleged crime itself. There is evidence not listed here. The “Sextons” are phonies who live in Florida. The wife is pictured sitting next to James Holmes if you want to see her, in court. I’m not making this up. I’m just trying to accept it.
      Or they can prove us wrong. In the meantime, like Fox News, don’t put my liberty at stake without examining the facts.


      1. Dan, what I find amazing is how you can attribute everything to the corrupt media and the inability of anybody to see the truth that you see. Instead of directly taking on rebuffs, you sidestep them, engage in emotional banter of the one who questions the reasoning put forth here, It is a double standard you are playing, don’t believe what you are told BUT BELIEVE what we tell you because we know these media guys are wrong. You are a conspiracy theorist. YOu use emotions to twist logic, make assumptions basede entirely on supposition, and finally, you use emotional talking points, and rhetoric that agrees with your ANGER as evidence for the truth of your point of view. A very very weak and circumstantial basis to defend a position of debate. Your counter argument is only convincing yourself that people who do not agree with you are only nuts, they make you angry and are therefore wrong So, you never have to disprove any opposing argument, all you have to do is get angry, therefore they are nuts and let your anger speak for you and wallah, they are wrong you are right while not having to disprove a thing. When in doubt, character assassinate,then deny it. When cornered with statistics, question the source and character assassinate. When someone doesn’t see what you see, call them blind, ignorant, a tool, brainwashed. All these tricks don’t prove any point except for you to be convinced emotionally of your truth. You don’t even understand what I am saying right now. You probably just think I’m writing nonsense. Yep, ignore anything that gets in the way of your passive agressive means to to assume everything is a conspiracy. It takes less understanding to see everything as a conspiracy, that all the bad in the world comes from an easy to understand good guy bad guy motif. You disproved absolutely noting in your rebuttall and you only made yourself look like an angry male who is fighting to hang on to some control in his life. All of your responses to proposed questions took about 3 seconds to think of and it showed. You are emotional and angry and are seeing red lights and warnings in everything in front of you. No matter what it is, it part of the great conspiracy in your mind. There is a term for when we see conspiracy in every tea leaf and newspaper article, and every media outlet, it is called paranoia. And your only response is to think im an idiot and a tool and blind and brainwashed and clueless. It saves you the time of having to spend more than 3 seconds disproving anything you already don’t agree with. Funny how predictable this is and its coming from the idiot. Have fun with your ignorance in the tiny world you live in Mr. Cognitive Dissonance.

        1. don’t believe what you are told BUT BELIEVE what we tell you because we know these media guys are wrong

          Actually we are talking about the diverging stories the media have told us in this bizarre story.
          Originally the first cops on the scene viewed the crime scene and found 2 handguns. They announced the shooting had been done entirely with the Glock and the Sig. Hours later the Feds arrived and suddenly somebody pulled a Bushmaster (which looked more like a shotgun) out of the trunk of some car. Then the story suddenly changed to all victims were killed by the assault rifle.
          All of the guns mentioned are semiautos which means they eject the spent shell casing on the floor when they are fired. The casing for the handguns are about 1/2″ long. The casings for the rifle are about 2 1/2″ long. There is NO WAY anybody could confuse these vastly different shell casings. Now the “official” story is that the cops entered the school and found .223 brass all over the floor and mistakenly thought it had been shot through a 9mm pistol??? That of course is impossible. If the first cops on the scene said only handguns had been used, they ABSOLUTELY found handgun brass all over the floor . The story had to be CHANGED after the fact to fit the Assault rifle ban mantra.
          Brought to you by the same administration that blamed a terrorist attack on a youtube video for 2 weeks. And an obedient media that gladly went along the whole way.

  7. I find it interesting that you would blame President Obama directly for constructing such an event. When George W. Bush was president it was assumed by most Americans that he was incapable of such acts and that they were the constructs of members of his admin. or rogue elements close to his admin.

    It is odd that W. was, like Gerald Ford before him, perceived as some bumbling fool who lacked the mental agility to get out of his won way, let alone lead a country. Yet, as we found with the JFK assassination, president-to-be Gerald Ford was – self-confessed – responsible for altering the back wound JFK received during his ride through Dealey Plaza; throwing off the public and some JFK assassination researchers for years – proving the bumbling fool is not so bumbling, after all.

    Ford was typological foreshadowing for W. – and W. like Ford largely eludes blame for the foibles of his administration.

    Now, with Obama, we have a man whose collegiate records are unknown to the general public, while the pervasive attitude toward him is that of an intellectual elitist! I do hope the illogic of that statement is plain.

    And so… it is baldly (and sadly) obvious that you, as an alleged media critic, are easy for the same ruses put forth by the media as are the people you wish to inform.

    From the vantage point of reader it is plain to see your “isms” climbing to your throat, clutched there, awaiting expulsion as an overreaching socio-political statement as a coda to this investigative writing.

    You should, by now, be well aware that power does not rest in the hands of the man in the Oval Office, but in the hands of those placed around him. you should, by now, know that the wheels of government turn quite well on their own, regardless of whether or not there is a person in “that” seat in the Oval Office.

    You should, by now, as a professor and therefore a person who is imbued with and informed by scientific methodologies, be able to set aside personal dislikes or political distastes, and provide readers with an insightful closing argument that elucidates power. Instead you chose to inflame readers one way or another with a base and frankly, ridiculous on its face, personal statement, using the very hackneyed media constructs you eloquently exposed and thoughtfully demolished beforehand.

    1. Contrary to your impression, I do not blame or implicate President Obama and his cult of personality for the shootings. I recognize him as the factotem of a broader power elite and am careful to emphasize this. At the same time certain individuals in his cabinet, such as the Vice President and Attorney General, have a history of being directly involved or instrumental in setting the legal basis for the criminalization of certain segments of the American public. Thus an event such as Sandy Hook and the extent to which it is being used for certain legislative designs fits this pattern of behavior.

      1. Not only is your statement historically accurate, but at the very least Vice President Biden’s legislative record alone is more than enough to support it. The Controlled Substances Act(CSA) was apparently a response to the “Crack Epidemic”(which has its origins in US State Dept/Tresury Dept policy); The Biden Crime Law signed under The Clinton Administration was allegedly a response to Ruby Ridge( Bush Administration), WTC Bombing on 2/26/93 & Waco(both under Clinton) – which started just TWO(2) days after WTC(which itself had FBI, MOSSAD, Eguptian Intelligence involvement); it created several new CAPITAL OFFENSES which “coincidentally” were used in the 2 cases above, as well as Oklahoma City Bombing(2 year anniversary of WACO).
        Whether a viewpoint regarding “Mass Casualty Producing” and/or Shocking events, such as the succession of ASSASSINATIONS(along with the subsequent Government Cover-ups), shouldn’t be labeled pejoratively; it’s how Imperial Power works. Criminal Intent/Action isn’t necessarily a key component of conspiracies; they only need be secret, and generally socially/politically unacceptable to the majority(celebratory events are the exception). Examples may be: The Closed Door Session in Congress, Cabinet Level Meetings in White House, Bilderberg Group/Trilateral Commission Events, Obama’s National Security Meetings deciding who to “Extrajudicially Assassinate”(Terror Tuesday), etc.

      2. “Moreover, to suggest that Obama is not capable of deploying such techniques to achieve political ends is to similarly place ones faith in image and interpretation above substance and established fact, the exact inclination that in sum has brought America to such an impasse.”

        The above statement – yours – is a direct accusation and is certainly not using Obama as a “factotem of a broader power elite.”

        Additionally, in the preceding paragraph you wrote of, “Obama’s political platform.” When did puppets, which all U.S. were/are since JFK, derive political platforms ( unless they “go off the rails” as did Nixon and Carter, and even then they get slapped back into place)?

        It is at least as important, if not more, to identify the true authors of political direction as it is to perceive and chronicle political direction. We know Obama, like W. before him, spouts rhetoric formed by the minds of minions who work for the psychopaths who so desperately clutch to their present power.

      3. The second amendment was written as is to allow the slave states from losing the authority to keep their state slave revolt militias. The Second amendement was re-worded in the manner it reads today so the southern delegates like Patrick Henry and George Mason would vote for ratification of the Constitution.

  8. Ben
    Every allusion made by you has been about process and your comments suggest that there is none which can satisfy the deep penetration this ‘intellect’ ‘machine’ requires.
    To suggest by whatever means that it is all on the up and up belies the facts that numerous shooters were seen, one even responded to a witness is now superfluous.
    The persistence you suspect we may have acquired in the belief that to few tears are being shed by a parent thrust in front of the camera doesn’t confuse but affirms our prejudice.
    You disgust me.
    I’ll go with the axiom Who to believe – you or my lying eyes

  9. I also have problems with the conspiracy narrative, though this is one of the best pieces attempting to hold the authorities feet to the fire as I am a nutmegger. No one wants to consider any alternatives to the official narrative. Those wanting real evidence here feel isolated.

      1. Such an entry can be continually updated. It would be helpful to obtain a screenshot of the entry’s content immediately upon its December 14 start. This is very specific re the official account and Lanza’s guilt even though the investigation has not concluded and items obtained under warrant have been sealed until March. Not unlike the Facebook “RIP” pages for some victims days or even months before the incident.

  10. During the past couple of weeks, it’s been vaguely bugging me that there’s never really been any in-depth coverage of this incident. There hasn’t been the usual media dissection that occurs with giant tragic events — as you mentioned, no photos of the broken glass or any sign of chaos, no photos of mass evacuation of the school, no photos of small tragic body bags – for which unfortunately the media usually would be foaming at the mouth – no in-depth profiles of the shooter. None of the usual discussion about whether he was on medication. No mention of his autopsy or toxicology reports (unless I’ve missed something). His computer was conveniently destroyed. Etc.

    I was just mentioning to someone the other day that the media has shown almost unprecedented respect for the victims’ families by keeping this whole incident at what seems like arm’s length . . . but now I’m starting to think it’s just weird. I also naively thought the media was laying off coverage a little because of the holidays – as in, no one wants to hear about something so horrific at Christmastime. But now it honestly feels like coverage has just come to a screeching halt. I don’t know if I’m all-in on the whole conspiracy theory thing, but I do think this story got everyone spinning about gun control and then faded away, like the media purposely isn’t exploring any other contributing factors to this tragedy.

    And then there’s the zombified state of spoon-fed America: This morning I was reading a small story about the shooter’s body being claimed and laid to rest – I believe it was in the N.Y. Daily News – and more than one commenter wrote, “Why are you still reporting this? We don’t care about this story anymore.” It terrified me a little, how quickly many people will just blindly accept what’s handed to them and then move on.

    Anyway, I did a search for “lack of coverage of Sandy Hook shootings” to see if I was the only one who felt like it was strange. This is the first thoughtful, well-written site I’ve come across. I’ll admit that I have a hard time believing this incident was an elaborately staged hoax, but I do think there’s something really off about it. Thank you for voicing many doubts I’ve been feeling, and for doing it in a manner that doesn’t make you sound like an absolute wacko. 🙂

    Have a great 2013.

    1. Thanks for your comments, and rest assured that you’re not alone. Also, note how the very term “conspiracy theory” was developed in the 1960s and utilized especially by the CIA to suppress criticism of the shadow government’s machinations, including the notable political assassinations of that era. This argument is developed by political science professor Lance deHaven Smith in a book on conspiracy theories due out this month on U of Texas Press. Not surprisingly, to date there are too few honest treatments of the concept.

      1. “Conscience of a Conspiracy Theorist” by Robert Mills is a recent excellent book that takes a similar reasoned approach as James Tracy in examining documented conspiracies through the decades, and explains the unfortunate cultural belief that the phrase “conspiracy theorist” is taboo. Mills (as now do I) prefers the less-assailable phrase, “government skeptic.” A highly recommend read.

      2. Was this blog around when George W. Bush was president and I was getting Deployed out to secure the Bush financial gains in the middle east? Or is this another attack on a Black president and discredit him in any way possible? Maybe you can answer that. No disrespect intended, just tired of people pointing the finger at our president while Bush sits very cushy in his multi-million dollar home and laughs. Just syaing.

      3. vick the obama apologist said:

        “Was this blog around when George W. Bush was president and I was getting Deployed out to secure the Bush financial gains in the middle east?”

        You were being deployed to further Zionist interests buddy boy. That’s the real story.

        “Or is this another attack on a Black president and discredit him in any way possible?”

        This so-called “Black” (mulatto in reality) man-in-lieu-of-president, is a doing a very fine job all by hisself in the discrediting dept. LOL.

        “Maybe you can answer that. No disrespect intended, just tired of people pointing the finger at our president”

        I’m “just tired” of people like you praising this very incompetent pro-homosexual (among other things) marxist interloper in the ‘White’ house.

        “while Bush sits very cushy in his multi-million dollar home and laughs.”

        Quit living in the past. Bush exited the White House almost five years ago.
        Your hero Hussein Obama ain’t exactly collecting welfare checks. He’s been amply rewarded and will be for many years to come so don’t give us your anti-Bush (whom I am no fan of I can assure you) rhetoric.

        “Just syaing.”

        Yeah, me too. Btw, what does syaing mean? Is that ebonics? LOL

      4. Vick, Excellent question. Ken’s answer is revealing in its racism and Obama bashing. Note too, he’s a Bush-Apologist. The owner (James?) of this blog hasn’t disagreed with him so i think we know full well what this is about.

    2. So you were reading a “small story” in the assrag New York Daily News about the so-called “shooter’s body” being laid to rest. I’m reminded of a line from Dylan’s “Idiot Wind”- “Someone’s got it in for me, they’re planting stories in the press…” which also reminds me of a very recent and somewhat longer “story” from the same impeccable source that you might have missed-
      Hang in there, Professor James.

      1. “Faith-based journalism” I say! Punch their little buttons and leave ’em twitchin’.
        Laura’s comment below agrees. Once its shelf-life expires they discard it. Off to a new drill!

    3. Speaking of lack of coverage all of a sudden, how about the Batman shooting? Gag orders? What? I think they expected it to have greater impact on getting Americans to demand an end to their 2nd Amendment rights, and when it didn’t, hmmm? Strange little tidbit that probably means nothing, but Sandy Hook being on the map in that Batman movie strikes me as something other than coincidence. Mostly I just get upset that most everyone accepts that story at face value too and holds out not the slightest doubt as to Holmes’ innocence (another right they would do away with, the right to innocent until proved guilty).

    1. obama will be justly compensated when his time as president is done, just like all former presidents before him.

      1. Obama brought with him an income from investments of at least $72,000 a month, having nothing to do with his salary. Where he got enough money for that is anyone’s guess. I didn’t know community organizers made so much. And yet his aunt lives in poverty in public housing (as an illegal alien last I heard).

      2. Laura, Webster Tarpley’s “Barack H. Obama: The Unauthorized Biography” will provide you more details about his sleazy past than you can imagine. Not to mention his creation and build-up by certain powers-that-be and the path they cut for him for his speedy rise to the top.

        You’ll learn how his ‘community organizer’ days were, as the CIA says, ‘sheep-dipping’ to give him street credibility. The actual organizers in those communities didn’t trust him and saw right through him.

        You’ll learn how wealthy friends can arrange big houses and other perks for you.

        Particularly revealing is the detailed chapter(s) on the Ford Foundation and McGeorge Bundy as starting in 1968 they created the concept of “multiculturalism” for the express purpose of dividing people and keeping them focused elsewhere than on the shenanigans of the elite.

    2. Another brilliant… well thought out reply. Your parents put a lot of thought in naming you. Maybe before you embarrass yourself you should check out Investigative Reporter Jon Rappoport’s Blog ” No More Fake News”. He is a legitimate reporter with numerous years of experience. Mr. F. Yu (or is it Ms.?) sometimes the truth is not found in the official narrative ( actually quite often).

      1. When you have absolutely no substance to your argument, call your opponent names!
        (It’s the give-away that they know they have lost)

  11. This article needed to be written and thank you for having the courage to write it. The day of the shooting I saw a screenshot of Adam Lanza’s deactivated Facebook page with a current photo of him with his hand in a fist and his political affliliation listed as Anarchist Communism. The media chose to use an 8 year old photo of Lanza converted from color to a high contrast black and white. Why? Lanza was reported to have a driver’s license. Where is that photo? Then there are the bizarre and conflicting personal acccounts of Lanza from former classmates, teachers and babysitters dating back years. But the media reports nothing about what his life was like the last couple of years. Why was there no contact with the father or older brother? Who was the 20 year old Adam Lanza? The truth of who he really was is critical to learning what happened at Sandy Hook.

  12. I found out about this blog while reading the Daily Mail online. Sir, you may get some flack but what I read was compelling. Great blog. Continue despite the slings and arrows you’ll have to bear.

  13. I cannot leave as eloquent of analysis as the others. However, this article is utterly fascinating. Thank you for your work. The truth will indeed set the world free…one way or the other.

    1. Chiz Dippler the deranged, drooling, dopey, dingbat mumbled:

      “You and your supporters are paranoid, cowardly pieces of shit.”

      What class!

      This is the type of response one gets from “cowardly pieces of shit” who want to (and do) believe everything the talking heads in the controlled mass media tell them. But what would he/she know about that (i.e., controlled media)? Question the official ‘story’ and right away these lemmings get very hostile because deep-down you’re questioning their belief system because they are naive and have so much faith in the system, i.e., media, politicians, etc. that constantly lies, misreports or doesn’t report the facts (or twist thems).

      “What a disgrace.”

      Yes, you most certainly are.

      1. Looks like Lt. Vance gained another fan. “Jizz Dribbler?”, did I get that right? Maybe this is what they mean with all that talk about the “zombie apocalypse”? Go back to sleep, once the absorption is complete you’ll be at peace.

      1. When they have no answers or arguments, they resort to name calling like they did as kids. It’s a sign they have nothing of substance to add to the discussion.

  14. Thanks for your work, research and public questioning especially since it may mean “career suicide”. I really salute you. We had a false flag black psychological operation “event” in Australia in 1996, THE PORT ARTHUR MASSACRE where 55 were shot, 32 dead, all blamed on a “lone gunman” {who it turned out had been in the hands of tavistock psychiatrists since age 11 ~ manchurian candidate}~ and after which, the Australian Government took 600,000 guns off the populace within weeks of the event. It took 10 years of detailed research before I spoke publicly about it. The poor patsy, Martin Bryant currently serving 35 life sentences, never had a trial, and very few people in australia are aware of the anomalies of the case

    1. Hmm. And did Australia then become less violent? Just curious, as I totally believe in the citizen’s right to keep and bear arms. Just wonder if the study has appeared and if it was accurate . . .

    2. “and after which, the Australian Government took 600,000 guns off the populace within weeks of the event.”

      Collective punishment because of the acts of one person in a statistically insignificant event. That’s really ‘wise,’ ‘fair’ and ‘just.’

      From what I know about the event, it had false flag written all over it, just like this Sandy Hook shooting which is nothing more than an Operation Fast and Furious II in order to push through more draconian anti-gun laws and agenda which only serves to punish those law-abiding firearms owners and brings us one step closer to total firearms ban. Or so they’d like.

  15. Why all the actors on TV News?

    It is not just Mr. Parkers performance, but also Gene Rosen and many many more of the victims families interviewes that are simply not credible at all. Why use some many actors in this story? Because they don’t have the real thing? Just serach YT for sandy hook actors

    1. I saw the couple talking about their daughter. Yeow. The thing with all the actors is that they must be following scripts. They could have improvised better. There isn’t any complaint about not being able to get to their kids, to view them, to say their last farewells. It’s as if they had missed out on a special at Wal-Mart and, coming up empty-handed, turned around and went home.

      And comments like “my heart goes out to all the people….” Come on! Pure scripting. Do people look at the “big picture” when they are going through their own personal grief? None of these people were at all truly focused on their own tragedy. And the “thank you”s as if you would thank anyone right after your child was murdered.

      1. It seems impossible that not one grieving family member did not try to force their way into the area where the remains were being held. If my child had been one of the victims I would have been detained or arrested trying to get to them. None of this makes sense.

  16. You might recall following official announcement of JFK’s death at Parkland Hospital a struggle ensued over who would perform an autopsy. Texas state law mandated the state perform it, whereas the Secret Service would have none of it, and the rest is, as they say, history. The reason I raise this will become clear shortly.

    Likewise, you might consider the idea that, extraordinary acts of violence typically serve more than one principle objective. Furthermore, what reasonable suspicion of intrigue might suggest could be its principle objective, itself, might be rather intended an effective diversion.

    To wit, your avenue of inquiry raises suspicion suggesting intrigue centering on the matter of gun control. Yet might this specific angle raising suspicion of intrigue likewise even be pondered a very effective diversion producing a thick smokescreen, and this, indeed, with help from Sen. Feinstein’s legislative initiative carried out in its wake? Could not one in fact expect a passionate political advocate for gun control act as she did, taking advantage of the public’s heightened awareness of the issue? It might be noted here, too, Sen Feinstein was a vocal critic of the Obama administration’s leaking of details surrounding espionage it had conducted against Iran’s nuclear program. Truth is these two might belong to the same political party, but this certainly does not connect them at the hip, even when sharing desire to accomplish a given policy objective.

    Something you have not yet considered is whether there might also have been some formidable contention between CT and federal political authorities, whereby the owners of Washington’s pols are acting to get a message across with this incident. To wit, was CT (or possibly a neighboring state) perhaps preparing to upset the apple cart propping up what in fact are hopelessly insolvent money center banks? There are a number of potentially upsetting courses upon which a state could embark whose effect might knock out the apple cart’s wheels–one wheel being the Federal Reserve, the other being the U.S. Treasury. Consider a state-wide mortgage foreclosure moratorium, for example. Or, say, an initiative positioning the state to cut in on private insurers set to benefit from Obama-care. Or, how about something seriously impinging on CT’s burgeoning hedge fund “industry?”

    To my knowledge no one has raised the issue that, in the drive to conduct an expansive war on terror following 9/11 the need to finance this war resulted in a massive expansion of U.S. Treasury liabilities. To my way of seeing it the extraordinarily positive reception U.S. Treasury securities have received in the market ever since 9/11 (and this notwithstanding a parabolic increase in the supply of these securities) probably is neither a coincidence, a stroke of good luck, nor financiers displaying an extraordinary penchant for patriotic conduct. Rather, these securities have been highly prized because they serve the bottom line of enterprises whose pervasively criminal conduct likewise has been obscured by the war on terror. So, there again, the focus of the world’s attention was moved well away from what might have been one of the main objectives of the intrigue (an objective, too, possibly putting a new spin on advice recommending one “follow the money”).

    Finally, if you’re going to pick on the pathetic, cannibal Obama, better his drone policy responsible for the slaughter of well over an order of magnitude more children than were murdered in Newtown, CT, thus making his but so many crocodile tears for the innocent lives lost. To be sure I for one am sick of Ivy Leaguers with PhD’s in hypocrisy.

  17. “[My staff] and I hope the people of Newtown don’t have it crash on their head later.” –Connecticut Medical Examiner D. Wayne Carver II, MD, December 15, 2012

    Maybe he is saying that he hpoes the people will not suffer from PSD.

    Possibly Carver is “goofy” speaker who often talks using idioms like this. Many people do this.

    Possibly it is a Freudian slip by someone who is withholding secrets.

  18. I doubt your claim that the Bushmaster was designed to blast through walls. It depends on the bullet uses. Notoriously, hollow pointed bullets shatter on impact, causing devastating damage and an exponentially larger hole. This is consistent with what Carver said.

Comments are closed.