Newtown 911 Calls Released

Updated 12/6/13, 6:15PM with Full Transcript

Associated Press / Newsday

HARTFORD, Conn. – As gunfire boomed over and over in the background, a janitor begged a 911 dispatcher to send help, saying, “There’s still shooting going on, please!” A woman breathlessly reported seeing a gunman run down a hall. And a teacher said she was holed up in her classroom with her children but hadn’t yet locked the door.

Recordings of 911 calls from last year’s Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting were released Wednesday, and they not only paint a picture of anguish and tension inside the building, they also show town dispatchers mobilizing help, reassuring callers and urging them to take cover.

“Keep everybody calm. Keep everybody down. Get everybody away from windows, OK?” one dispatcher told the frightened teacher who reported hearing shots in the hall.

Recordings of 911 calls from the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting that were released Wednesday December 4 show town dispatchers urged panicked callers to take cover, mobilized help and asked about the welfare of the children as gunshots could be heard.

The calls were made public under a court order after a lengthy effort by The Associated Press to have them released for review. Prosecutors had argued that making the recordings public would only cause more anguish for the victims’ families.


The following is a transcript of the landline calls made from Sandy Hook Elementary School on Dec. 14 to the Newtown Police Department. 

CALL 1, 9:35:39, 24 seconds

OPERATOR: Newtown 911. What’s the location of your emergency?

CALLER: Hi, Sandy Hook School. I think there is somebody shooting in here, in Sandy Hook School.

OPERATOR: O.K. What makes you think that?

CALLER: Because somebody’s got a gun. I caught a glimpse of someone, they’re running down the hallway.


CALLER: They are still running. They’re still shooting.

CALLER: Sandy Hook School, please.

CALL 2 released on the recording is a duplicate of Call 1.

CALL 3, 9:36:13 a.m., Rick Thorne, acting head custodian, 3 minutes & 52 seconds

OPERATOR 1: You’ve dialed 911. What’s the location of your  emergency?

CALLER: Sandy Hook Elementary School, 12 Dickenson Drive.

OPERATOR: O.K. I’ve got that. What’s going on down there?

CALLER: Inside. I believe they are shooting at the front, at the front glass.


CALLER: Something’s going on.

OPERATOR 1: Alright.

OPERATOR 1: I’ve got all, I want you to stay on the line with me. Where are you in the school?

CALLER: I’m down the corridor.

OPERATOR 1: Alright. I want you to take cover.. . . Jen, get the sergeant. Alright. Get everybody you can going down there. Alright. Let me get some information. What makes you think that?

CALLER: The front glass is all shot out. It kept, it kept going on.


(Voice OFF PHONE: I’m on the line with a 911 caller, there’s a shooting at the Sandy Hook Elementary School)

CALLER: It’s still happening.

OPERATOR 1: Alright, what about the students in the front of the building.

CALLER: Everything is locked up, as far as I know. I’m right in front.

OPERATOR :1 Alright. You’re in lock down?

CALLER: Yeah. They’re in lock down.

OPERATOR 1: Did you see anything out the window?

CALLER: No it’s still going on. I can’t get over there.

OPERATOR 1: Ok. I don’t want you to go over there. I want to know what’s happening with the students though along the front corridor. This is in the front parking lot?

CALLER: Yes. I’m not, I’m not in the front. I’m actually down the other part. But I’m close.

OPERATOR 1: O.K. Do you see anything or hear anything more?

CALLER: I keep hearing shooting. I keep. . .


CALLER: I keep hearing popping.

(Voice OFF PHONE: Guys, we’ve got a shooting at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, that’s what 911 is ringing off the hook  for)

OPERATOR 1: All right Jen, let’s get one, let’s get one caller, I’ll take my caller, you . . .

OPERATOR 2 background: Calling all cars Calling all cars. Be advised . . .

OPERATOR 1: All right. Now who am I talking with right now?

CALLER: Unintelligible

OPERATOR 1: Pardon Me? What’s your name?

CALLER: Rick Thorne.

OPERATOR 1: Rick Storm. Alright. Rick, what is your position with the school?

CALLER: I’m the . . .I’m acting head custodian today.


OPERATOR 2: Newtown. What’s the address of the school?

CALLER: 12 Dickenson Drive


CALLER: Something’s happening.

OPERATOR 1: O.K. . . .

Jen, hang up. I need you to get off that phone. Alright Rick? . . . Rick?


OPERATOR 1: Hi, what are you hearing now ?

CALLER It’s, now it’s silent.

Operator 1: O.K.

(Voice Phone: Riverside Road)

OPERATOR 1 : Alright. Now, when you say the school is in lockdown…

CALLER: All the doors are locked. Kids are in classrooms.

OPERATOR 1: O.K. So at this time you are defending in place.

CALLER: Excuse me?

OPERATOR 1: O.K., So at this time all the rooms are locked?


OPERATOR 1: O.K., Did you see anything out front before this started?

CALLER: No. And I was out all morning.

OPERATOR 1: Where are you in the¦

CALLER O.K. The gym teacher is telling me they saw (unintelligible) going past the gym.

OPERATOR 1: Just now?


OPERATOR 1: Alright. Now are they running on the outside or the inside?

CALLER: I would say that was the outside. (Pause) There is still shooting going on. Please.

OPERATOR 1: Alright. What about injuries at this time?

CALLER: Excuse me?

OPERATOR 1: What about injuries at this time?

CALLER: I don’t know of any injuries right now.


(man screaming in background — “. . . coming at me . . .” unintelligible)

OPERATOR 1: John, I need you to call the state police. Just,..

OPERATOR 3: The state police is there.

CALLER: It’s still. It’s still going on.

CALL 4, 9:37:06, 42 seconds

OPERATOR: Newtown 911. What’s the location of your emergency?

CALLER: It’s 10 Dickenson Drive in Sandy Hook, Newtown, Connecticut.

OPERATOR: Okay. What’s going on at 10 Dickinson Drive?

CALLER: It sounds like there are gunshots in the hallway. I’m a teacher in the school.

OPERATOR: Okay, where are you? Are you in the school right now?

CALLER: I am in the school. I’m in a classroom.

OPERATOR: Okay, do you have everyone in the classroom and the door locked?

CALLER: All of my students. The door is not locked yet. I have to go . . .

OPERATOR: Okay, lock the door.

CALLER: I have to go lock the door.

OPERATOR: Keep everybody calm. Keep everybody down. Get everybody away from the windows, okay?

CALLER: Yes, okay.

OPERATOR: Where are you in the school?

CALLER: I’m in the hallway when you walk in the front entrance, if you take a left.

OPERATOR: Okay, try to lock down the school, okay?

CALLER: We’re trying. Okay.

OPERATOR: All right. ye-bye.


CALL 5, 9:40:02 a.m., 5 minutes & 22 seconds

OPERATOR NEWTOWN: Newtown 911? What’s the address of the emergency?

OPERATOR STATE POLICE: This is the state police. I got a victim of the shooter here.


OPERATOR STATE POLICE: She’s been shot once in the foot.

OPERATOR NEWTOWN: She’s been shot once in the foot?

OPERATOR STATE POLICE: She’s in playground — playground — Room number 1.



OPERATOR NEWTOWN: One shot in room number one.

OPERATOR STATE POLICE: How close are you guys to arriving on scene?


OPERATOR STATE POLICE: How close are you guys to . . .?

OPERATOR NEWTOWN: A female shot, uh, in the foot. You got a female party shot in the foot.

OPERATOR STATE POLICE: Yep. She’s been uh . . .

OPERATOR NEWTOWN: Advise ambulance.

CALLER: Right by the playground, room number one.

OPERATOR: Oh, I know that.

OPERATOR: O.K. Where are, where are you, are you O.K. right now?


OPERATOR: O.K. Where, where, where’s Room 1 in the school?

CALLER: Facing the playground.

OPERATOR: Where are you?

CALLER: Facing the playground.

OPERATOR: On the playground?

CALLER: Facing toward — facing toward the playground.

OPERATOR: OK. Are you safe right now?

CALLER: I think so. My classroom door is not locked.

OPERATOR: OK. Is there anybody that can lock the classroom door with out — being safe?


OPERATOR: Is it safe to do so? O.K.


OPERATOR: All right, just try stay where you are. O.K.

CALLER: Yes. There’s children in this room, too.

OPERATOR: O.K., try to apply pressure, O.K.

CALLER: (Unintelligible)

OPERATOR: We have people coming, O.K.?

CALLER: Uh-huh

OPERATOR: All right.

OPERATOR: Is there any other teacher with you in there or is just students?

CALLER: No, there’s two other adults in the room with me.

OPERATOR: O.K. All right. Are they right next to you? Where are they in the room?

CALLER: No, they’re over on the other side of the bookshelf.

OPERATOR: O.K. All right. Are you O.K. right now?

CALLER: For now, hopefully.

OPERATOR: O.K. All right. Just keep an eye on it; try to keep pressure on it. O.K? We have people heading out there. O.K. Bye-bye.

OPERATOR: Newtown 911. What is the address of the emergency?

CALLER: Hi. My friend just texted me. She’s at the Sandy Hook Middle, Sandy Hook Elementary School. She says there’s a shooting.

OPERATOR: Yup, we’re aware.

CALLER: O.K. I just hope that’s she’s there. I hope she’s O.K.

OPERATOR: Yup. O.K. Bye-bye.


OPERATOR: Hello, hello, hello.


NEWTOWN OPERATOR: Hold on one second, hold on.

OPERATOR STATE POLICE: State police emergency.

NEWTOWN OPERATOR: Hey, it’s Brophy from Newtown 911, how are you?


NEWTOWN OPERATOR: Did you guys hear what’s going on in Newtown right now?

OPERATOR STATE POLICE: There’s an active shooting.

NEWTOWN OPERATOR: Yeah, you got it.



OPERATOR STATE POLICE: Yeah, help’s coming.

NEWTOWN OPERATOR: All right. Thanks.  Bye.

CALL 6, at 9:40:20, Rick Thorne, 3 minutes & 24 seconds

OPERATOR: Newtown police, Dispatcher Nute. O.K., I have that. We have officers on scene.

CALLER: Thank you.

OPERATOR: What’s your name?

CALLER: Rick Thorne


CALLER: I am in the building.

OPERATOR: All right, Rick, I’ve got you. I’m on the other line. All right. We have officers there.

Other OPERATORs talking in the background.

OPERATOR: Beeping sound. Newtown 911 what’s the location of your emergency? Newtown 911 what’s the location of your emergency? Newtown 911 . . . Newtown 911 what’s the location of your emergency? Hello?

CALLER: Are you talking to me?

OPERATOR: I am talking to you. Is this Rick?

CALLER: 12 Dickenson Drive, Sandy Hook.

OPERATOR: Rick is this you?


OPERATOR: O.K. We’re back on the line together. Is that by, is that by PD?

CALLER: It’s at the firehouse. It’s by the firehouse.

OPERATOR: Yeah, we know, we got…..

OPERATOR: I’m sorry. Well, I’m not sending them in there yet.

Other OPERATORs in background speaking.

OPERATOR: Where is she in the school? Don’t worry about where room one is. Where is she in the school?

Other OPERATOR talking.

OPERATOR: Yes ma’am. At this time it is unknown to me. We believe there is a shooting going on at that school. It is in lockdown. I don’t have any other information but unfortunately I am going to have to put you on hold for a moment because I have multiple calls going. All right.

OPERATOR: 911. Newtown 911. Rick?


OPERATOR: O.K., stay on the phone with me.


OPERATOR: Town police, OPERATOR Nute. Yes ma’am, I just spoke with Janet Robinson, I do believe there has been a shooting at the school, we are in the middle of, um, multiple calls. Yes ma’am.

OPERATOR: Hi Rick. You still with me?


OPERATOR: AlL right. What do you see now?

CALLER: I am standing in the corridor, just watching this corridor.

OPERATOR: You’re watching your corridor?


OPERATOR: O.K.  Uh. . . ?

OPERATOR: K, I have that, we have officers on scene.

CALLER: Thank you.

OPERATOR: What’s your name?

CALLER: Rick Thorne.


CALLER: I’m in the building

OPERATOR: All right, Rick, I gotcha, I’m on the other line. All right. We have officers there.

(background noise, dispatch noise — Newtown 911, what’s the location of your emergency, repeating)

CALLER: Are you talking to me?

OPERATOR: I am talking to you. Is this Rick?

CALLER: 12 Dickenson Drive, Sandy Hook.

OPERATOR: All right, Rick, is this you?


OPERATOR: OK. We’re going back on the line together. Is that by — is that by PD?

CALLER: The firehouse. It’s by the firehouse.

OPERATOR: Yeah we got, we got, I’m sorry ¦ (background noise, discussions with dispatchers) Well I’m not let – sending them in there yet. Where is she in the school? Don’t worry about where room 1 is. Where is she in the school? – Yes ma’am. At this time it’s unknown to me. We believe there is a shooting going on at that school. It is in lockdown. I don’t have any other information but unfortunately I’m going to have to put you on hold for a moment because I have multiple calls going. All right?



OPERATOR: O.K. Stay on the phone with me.


OPERATOR: 10-4, it’s dispatcher (?) — yes ma’am, I just spoke with Janet Robinson, I do believe there has been a shooting at the school, we’re in the middle of multiple calls. Yes ma’am.

OPERATOR: Hi, Rick, are you still with me?


OPERATOR: All right. What do you see now?

CALLER: I’m standing in the corridor, just watching the corridor.

OPERATOR: All right, you’re watching your corridor.



CALL 7, 9:43:55 a.m., Rick Thorne, 4 minutes & 10 seconds

OPERATOR: We’ve got a shooting at Sandy Hook School. You are going to have to talk to the first selectman. I’ve already talked to Janet Robinson and…

OPERATOR: Newtown police, OPERATOR Nute. Yeah, very. At this point, I would maintain your post at your school. All right, thank you.

NEWTOWN POLICE: Myself and 92 have checked the perimeter of the school. There’s a party in custody. 49-01 continuing to check.

OPERATOR: All right. Do you hear any police officers at this time, Rick?

CALLER: I’m hearing talking. I’m not seeing anybody but I’m hearing talking.


CALLER: Like I said, I’m standing in the middle of this corridor.

POLICE: Entering the southeast of the school

CALLER: Custodian! Custodian!

POLICE: Who are you?

CALLER: Custodian!

OPERATOR: All right. Tell them you’re on the phone with me.

CALLER: I’m on the phone with dispatch. Victims in the building

OPERATOR: How many?

CALLER: How many?

POLICE: Two down.

CALLER: Two down.

OPERATOR: Is it safe?

POLICE: Did you see anybody or not?

CALLER: I saw nobody

POLICE: Did you check the entire inside of the school, as well? Standby. I need units in the front of the school, I’ve got bodies here

CALLER: I didn’t see anybody go in there.

OPERATOR: All right. Rick, I’m going to let you go. You go with them.

CALLER: Call the state police

OPERATOR: They have been notified.

CALLER: They’ve been notified.

OPERATOR: Rick, I’m actually going to keep you with me.

CALLER: O.K. I heard shooting. Not now.

Officer: How long ago?

CALLER: Five minutes ago.

OPERATOR: speaking in background. Dial tone.

OPERATOR: Newtown 911 what is the location of your emergency?

CALLER: 12 Dickenson Drive.

OPERATOR: O.K. Rick, I’m still with you.


OPERATOR: Ken, you’re going to have to get 19 Crab Apple. Rick I’m going to put you on hold for a minute. Dial Newtown 911, what is the location of your emergency?

CALLER: Sandy Hook School.


CALLER: My wife just texted me and said there are shooters.

OPERATOR: O.K. We have officers on the scene at this time. They are clearing the school at this time.


OPERATOR: All right.

Full Transcript of the Sandy Hook 911 Calls,”, December 4, 2013.

263 thoughts on “Newtown 911 Calls Released”


    As one commenter noted, at 2:38 you hear in the background: “theres a rumor its fake”

    And why did not this custodian notice Hochsprungs body, wasn’t she shot in the corridor? Also there are no screams of children. MSM bs story tells us that AL had a few get away as he was reloading towards the end of his spree (even though he had two loaded guns on his body).

    1. Wow you can clearly hear “there’s a rumor it’s fake” – that is a great pick up. Then Nute admonishes her quite purposefully.

      1. Carl,
        I know that rumors start fast, but not that fast. If that is what she said then it is more evidence that the tape was created at a later date.

        I have not heard any mention of silencers? I own an AR and I can assure you that if I fired it in a school like that you would hear it on the telephone.

        One of the more compelling bits I ran across while researching this was a tape by a guy who claimed to be local. He said he was “playing hooky” from work and went out to a convenience store to get a soda. He drove past the firehouse before any of this began and was surprised by how many cop cars and unmarked government vehicles were parked in front. He thought it was another drill as there had been previous drills staged there. He called his wife who worked at the high school to see if something was going on and she hadn’t heard anything. It sounded believable.

        Many others and myself spent a great amount of time researching this. Virtually anywhere you turn you will find evidence of fraud. I wouldn’t put any stock at all in the tapes. In fact, the tapes don’t follow the storyline.

        Remember all the helicopters and shots of people swarming through the woods? Where did those come from? How come we don’t hear those? That must be some insulated old school they had there. This is a test. They are “culling the chumps”. Those who believe this will make model obedient citizens in their new A-21 World Order. Those who smile and chuckle at adversity are their kind of citizen.

    2. At 2:17 the operator asks “Who am I talking with right now?” and the caller replies “Rick Thorn” (heard by the operator as “Storm”) … and then when the caller is asked “What is your position with the school?” the answer is “I’m acting head custodian” (2:28). Very interesting … Now this could mean “I’m filling in as the head custodian who is not here today” or it could mean … I’m acting the part of head custodian. Hmmm.

      1. If you are Sophia of the video presentation on Sandy Hook I want to chime in how well done and compelling I found it – it helped answer some of the remaining questions I had about the incident. Thanks.

        1. You are welcome; thanks for thanking me. There’s more that surfaces all the time. It takes a while to put thoughts together, as you know. I was able to create a picture from what I was learning (with the help of other researchers) and what I was able to see myself. At some point that picture finds itself in need of refinements and additions … I have to figure out how to do that … maybe here on JT’s blog?

        1. If Rick Thorne had been a custodian in Mass. and was unemployed on Dec. 2 (the day of this article), how did he get hired in Connecticut? To work in a public school, you need to be fingerprinted in the new county in which you are working, which takes weeks to clear.

        2. Is Rick Thorne on the 911 tape the same Rick Thorne named in the article? I bet it is. Casting consistent with that of Carlos Arredondo, the cowboy hat hero who saved Jeff Bauman. Carlos was an outspoken critic of the US military. When the Marine’s came to his home to inform him of his enlisted son’s death, Carlos set their van on fire and then toured the country towing a coffin draped with an American flag. One way to shut people up is to offer them a gig that pays really well.

      2. correct, Rick Thorne was filling in for his boss who was on vacation. Thorne was later “hailed as a hero” that day for running through the halls alerting everyone there was a shooter in the school. The audio now proves he was hiding in a room in an adjacent corridor.

      3. In addition to the Hegelian Dialectic let’s also consider Occams razor.

        Occam’s razor (also written as Ockham’s razor from William of Ockham (c. 1287 – 1347), and in Latin lex parsimoniae) is a principle of parsimony, economy, or succinctness used in logic and problem-solving. It states that among competing hypotheses, the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions should be selected.

        1. Interesting idea, the wikipedia article gave some further insight on this. Your explanation is a bit too simple I think.

          “The application of the principle often shifts the burden of proof in a discussion.[a] The razor states that one should proceed to simpler theories until simplicity can be traded for greater explanatory power. The simplest available theory need not be most accurate. Philosophers also point out that the exact meaning of simplest may be nuanced.

          “In science, Occam’s razor is used as a heuristic (general guiding rule or an observation) to guide scientists in the development of theoretical models rather than as an arbiter between published models.[8][9] In the scientific method, Occam’s razor is not considered an irrefutable principle of logic or a scientific result.[1][10][11]”

        2. This is true, but there is another element not mentioned: the problem of conspiracies. If, as is the case with Sandy Hook (Boston, too), you wish to convince the world that a non-event actually took place, if you plant lots of wild, irrelevant “evidence” you can “refute” those who see through the ruse by telling them that sensible people apply Occam’s razor to the situation. They can claim that it’s too complicated to be a scam; the simplest explanation, they will say, is that the event actually happened, pretty much as reported.

          So by throwing in ridiculous buffoons like Gene Rosen, with his nonsense story about a group of kids showing up at his house (“we can’t go back–our teacher’s dead!” he says they told him); and helicopter footage from a different time of day purporting to show assassins running away through the woods; and get a handful of actors to exit the fire station, walk around the building, reentering through the back, over and over and over to make it look like there were more people than rurally were there, etc., you can pretty much invalidate Occam’s razor.

          Throw in a couple of goons in nun costumes, a supposed SWAT guy standing around, incomprehensible press conferences, and lots of complicated foolishness about the imaginary perpetrator, and you’re pretty much good to go. All you need to do then is hire people to come to web sites like this, who’s job it is to keep insisting that we focus on the fake evidence, apply Occam’s razor and rejoin the Borg.

        3. So if we have an armed SWAT from another town guy caught in the woods, A kindergarten teacher’s son identified as the shooter, and other suspects but we do not see blood or bodies and the report is that there are victims in the school we should posit what as our postulate on the circumstances ?

        4. “…we should posit what as our postulate on the circumstances ?”

          Given the insane ridiculousness of the rest of the official narrative, we should posit that these are items of fake evidence planted to force the conversation to veer away from the obvious falseness of the whole story.

          No one should pay any attention to these silly, extraneous, fake clues.

        5. As I understand Patrick’s point, once you see the hoax in its totality, these later-appearing “clues” are meaningless to discuss – except for the malicious pleasure they afford to anyone who understands they were produced by writers who never got past the stage of “It was a dark and stormy night.” I remember well Gore Vidal’s skewering of the stewardess’s call from one of the planes which slammed into the WTC (need I write “Not!”?) where this person who regularly flew from Boston to NYC cries out “Oh! I see bridges, I see buildings” and Vidal points out that a real person in the circumstances might yell “Holy shit, we’re going to hit Manhattan!”

          “I had a glimpse of a gunman in the hall” on a 911 tape is of that order of quality below schlock, that brain-dead prose which can only be found in cultural centers where the sun never shines and it is always five minutes until the dirty bomb goes off in Times Square.

          It is what the eleven o’clock news bimbo calls “Chilling.”

          I’m not applying to work for the government. They could never pay me enough to create one of their civil defense skits. But just think – somebody thinks he is finally achieving the recognition his work deserves. David Mamet killed off a guy like that in a movie. He’d better watch his back.

        6. Caller number one who “caught a glimpse of someone with a gun” and *thinks* she hears shooting has excellent manners. She starts her call with a greeting, “Hi” and ends with a polite, “Please”. Those people of Newtown sure are calm and composed and ever so polite when faced with fear or tragedy.

        7. So true, Violeta. It applies to “plausible” theories. The wild leaps of logic one must make to buy into the official tale are outside the realm of logic.

      4. I probably go to theater more than most people who read this blog and I would characterize the part of the acting head custodian and Carlee as above as terrible acting. The same with the so called police response. The dialog is stiff and poorly written, too. Can’t the drill planners hire better actors and writers or is their amateur quality something that doesn’t matter because the press treats whatever they do as truth?

        1. I think the key is that such actors and writers must be so bad they are entirely without ego, and they will never try and claim any attention for themselves afterwards (“Or else we’ll send someone to your house and kill you” — Robert deNiro’ character in “Wag the Dog”)

        2. Marzi, yes….precisely. It was terrible ACTING. I think it was deliberately terrible acting. Part of the point of the whole thing was whether they could convince an audience of TEE VEE addicts that this farce was true (utilizing bad acting), and ridiculous plot elements.

          If I produced a novel based on this I’d owe the publisher. We all know that “news media” isn’t. It is an arm of the powers that be to manipulate the populace. You would be foolish to believe ANYTHING that they say. That is especially true when they are particularly insistent that we take away a message.

          There have been a series of these operations. They didn’t begin with 9-11, although that was certainly a “seminal event”. We’ve been looking at the JFK conspiracy for fifty years. Of course, he was killed. In some of these people are killed.

          I personally don’t think that the killing bothers them one bit. It is either expedient to do that or not, depending on the purpose and the circumstances. One constant is that they are planned. One easy way to spot them is the reaction from “the media”.

          When real events happen there is genuine confusion. I think that is more in evidence now than it was earlier. The “media” is so accustomed to having their talking points hand delivered that they have problems when uncontrolled events happen and they have to report on them in order to keep their “credibility”.

          When one of these operations happen they arrive “fully formed”. They miraculously know “details” that would be impossible to know. They have a predisposition to the conclusion the viewer is supposed to have. Little vignettes arrive early. They are repeated continuously with an authoritative monologue accompanying them.

          So, as one who visits the theater, you should feel right at home in the production. Thankfully, most theater groups have more pride in their work than the authors of these things. They are constantly lowering the bar and screaming “foul” when people question their version of events. Ask yourself, why would a “news” outfit care if you believed them or not? What’s to believe?

          There has been bad acting on the others too. This one, however, is notable by the bad acting. That has to be on purpose. I can see them screening this and chuckling “if they swallow that we’re home free”.

      5. Man you need to look this up… I went to look for the official transcript… and guess what on page 3 right at the place where you’re supposed to be reading what we’ve all heard in the audio file: THERE’S A RUMOR IT’S FAKE, they did NOT transcript it, they just skipped that part !!!!!!


        OPERATOR 2: O.K.

        CALLER: Something’s happening.

        OPERATOR 1: O.K. . . .

        Jen, hang up. I need you to get off that phone. Alright Rick? . . . Rick?

        They will not get away with this, we need to keep EXPOSING these freaks.

        God bless you

        1. Good pickup on the “it’s fake” Pascale I noticed that as well- the media is all on board with the cover up and official story. When you point this out in the local Patch the article is immediately censored.

          I am amazed that they included the last caller’s comments that said there were “shooters”.

    3. Man you need to look this up… I went to look for the official transcript… and guess what on page 3 right at the place where you’re supposed to be reading what we’ve all heard in the audio file: THERE’S A RUMOR IT’S FAKE, they did NOT transcript it, they just skipped that part !!!!!!


      OPERATOR 2: O.K.

      CALLER: Something’s happening.

      OPERATOR 1: O.K. . . .

      Jen, hang up. I need you to get off that phone. Alright Rick? . . . Rick?

      They will not get away with this, we need to keep EXPOSING these freaks.

      God bless you

    4. I am now seeing suggestions that what is being said is “is there a room where it’s safe” or “ARE YOU IN A ROOM?? ARE YOU SAFE??” for what it’s worth

      1. These transcripts, along with all of the evidence presented so far, would never even make it to a functioning court of law.

        1. It is becoming clear that Carl is just another of the plants we have had to endure on other threads. He keeps insisting we focus on the fake, planted evidence, for one thing. And he completely ignores substantive replies to his supposedly honest questions, for another. He just moves on.

          I’m betting it is only one person, who keeps changing names (and computers). By the time he started calling himself “Carl,” though, he’d learned enough to trick us into taking him seriously enough to extend the benefit of the doubt. How desperately does he need the paycheck? (Or is it a “she”?) How desperate are the entities behind the hoax to disrupt the genuine exploration of what is being done to us that they hire “Carls” to come here, where we see right through him/her? Weird.

        2. I find it interesting the things that the shills choose to focus in. It lets me know where not to focus.

  2. “Delaying the release of the audio recordings, particularly where the legal justification to keep them confidential is lacking, only serves to fuel speculation about and undermine confidence in our law enforcement officials.”

    Thank You, Judge! AMEN!

    Now, if only we could get the same level of transparency into things like 9/11, Waco, Ruby Ridge, Fast & Furious, and a dozen other ‘odd’ events where there seems to have been government involvement.

  3. They only released a small portion of the 911 tapes. I think there were 6 calls, not 7, since two of the 7 were of the same exact call and I think 3 of the calls were all from the “acting custodian”, Rick Thorne. Many 911 calls were not released. Why?

    I also see that some news outlets are trying to shame people for listening to the calls.,0,7822840.column

    In a nutshell these articles tell us that we are morally corrupt, bad people for listening to the calls.

  4. Also of note, the call that I belive came from the teacher, Kaitlin Roig gives the address of the firehouse, not the school, to 911 dispatch. Wouldn’t a teacher know the address of her workplace? According to an article in “Glamour Magazine”, she had been a teacher at the school for over 5 years.

    1. Even more curious is to why the police in this fairly small community would even need to ask the address of the school. But they consistently ask for the address, which is highly abnormal.

    2. I have what is perhaps a silly question. Why do you call 911 from the school when there is a fire department next door? The people at the fire department would hear the shots too. All hell would break loose. Why the dumb phone calls running on and on? Because the public has already forgotten the structure of the place, and the new hit of psychological warfare is being injected – those “chilling” calls to reinforce the message. In a real world situation, this would be like a war zone, with probable helicopters swarming in…but instead the lame conversation drones on.

      1. AL allegedly fired 8 rounds to get through the window. The staff at the adjacent fire station may or may not have heard that. Most work in a forestation is indoors (washing hoses and the like). Gunshot is not really something people in general pick up on as danger when they hear it in the distant. And I say that as someone who lives under similar circumstances as the folks in Newtown. The only thing that would speak agains that is the fact the 8 rounds were fired by a school this time, and that is something someone might investigate after hearing. But it was in December and few people are out in the gardens, and most (adults) travel by car (with radio on). So very few or none might have heard it. These are facts that poachers take advantage of (not that I know any).

        1. Take a look at the Google Map. The Fire station is right next to the school. I heard a single gunshot in a neighborhood in Connecticut on Thanksgiving. It echoed through the woods (a lot of deer in the area and it’s hunting season). I heard the gun shot two doors down when a guy shot his brother-in-law indoors. In both cases, I totally got what I was hearing. Even if the firemen are inside their shed or something, they are close enough to pick up on it. It’s a hoax. That’s why they didn’t hear it.

        2. Yeah Colonel, I suspect eight rounds of .223 ammo would make you gag on your morning donut. Miraculously, not a piece of furniture or any wall or floor was damaged. That speaks highly for the new bullet-proof glass, I suppose.

          I guess they sleep pretty sound down there at the firehouse. Of course one local observer stated that they were already pretty busy at the firehouse that morning, what with all the cop cars and unmarked government vehicles in front. That was supposedly well before “Adam” made his last stand.

          I’m getting old and hard of hearing. I can still hear my own AR however. Even from a distance. I think “poachers” would be pretty unlikely to be out blasting away like that. They’d have hamburger on the hoof.

  5. That banging was not gunfire. Sure was a lot of phone ringing and no answering going on, no talking at all. What was all those dial tones – someone who doesn’t know how to use a multi-line phone? Bye bye!

    1. Kathy, did you hear any “beeps”, you know, the kind that every other 9-11 recordings have? That is the signal that shows they are being recorded. Maybe they left that detail out in the studio.

  6. I find myself wondering how this scenario compares to the drill that was going on 15 miles away for the exact same scenario.
    Would love to hear the drill audio to compare!

  7. Oh my ..the 911 call to police and the reply ‘. I’m not allowed to send them in yet.’.. why?.. and where are all the children..It is a School… isn’t it.?.. these recording just make the whole thing more questionable.. the teacher shot in the foot making a call, very strange.. if others were in the room with her.. why were they not helping her.. I am speechless.. keeping Rick on hold.. why? it really sounds staged. no wonder they didn’t release this.. they think now every one has forgotten.. but we haven’t…

  8. Obviously if they can stage much or most of the Sandy Hook homicide, they can stage some or most of the calls. Here is where commenters are most perceptive and useful, a multi-headed multi-sourcing truth coalition. We can add bits needed to help to connect the truths into a coherent whole. This allows the coordinating truthers, often honest professionals, to give reasonable holistic interpretations.

    However, it must be noted that this took a half century in the Kennedy assassination, and it is still not finished. Still, a journey of a thousand miles…… And Sandy Hook is particularly surreal and bizarre among the homicidal conspiracies because the central Event may not have actually occurred, and certainly didn’t occur in the way reported by the media.

  9. Call number 1 may be Barbara Halstead and she makes no mention of shooting out the glass windows- you hear at the tail end of the call “Barbara”.

    At the tail end of a call one guy said his wife texted that there were “shooters”.

    Call number 7 at the 2:59 mark on that call timeline sounds like a gunshot – this would be at approximately 9:46:50 am consistent with the officer reporting on the radio at 9:49 am “shots fired 3 minutes ago”. Police were in the lobby at about 9:45 am and found Rick Thorne in the West Hallway so how did they miss Lanza in the 2nd classroom only a few feet away from the lobby ? You can line up the 911 time line with the police radio audio “party in custody” at 9:44:33 am is at about 43 seconds into the 911 call – approximately 2 minutes 16 seconds after that (2:59 on call time line) is the “shot”.

    1. Hence the official story that the last shot was 9:40 am does not appear accurate and consistent with the evidence

        1. My estimate on the timeline is about 9:37:53 am so Jen received the rumor it was fake very early on in the process

  10. As someone who’s posted a dozen YouTube videos (at santabarbaradianne channel) I was ready to accept that the said shooting really happened but now I’m more convinced it didn’t – at least not the way it was reported.
    What I heard sounded like a MSEL script from an HSEEP full-scale exercise/drill. 911 calls are part of the exercise, even from ppl playing passerbys .

  11. Let us not forget about VisionBox which can supply citizens calling 911 & posting on social media during active shooter / disaster events.

    Why did it take so long to release these 911 tapes?

  12. What I don’t get is when TPTB arrange such an elaborate hoax, as it were, why they allow imperfections that could be edited afterwards. I get that some stuff they can’t totally control, but I’d think they could alter the 911 tape to make it ‘perfect.’

    1. I think that the imperfections and inconsistencies are intentional. They are conditioning the public to accept whatever bizarre story they are fed by the mainstream, no matter how unbelievable it may be and to swallow it hole. They are altering “reality” as we speak.

      1. Zem, I think you are absolutely right. Think about it. They’ve had almost an entire year. If they wanted to produce “evidence” in support of their operation they could easily have done that. They are in total control. They have not.

        These tapes could have been manufactured just like the sound track of a movie, in other words, to perfection. They are not. To me they sound just like you would expect the narrative of a drill to sound. People playing roles, knowing that it’s a drill and feeling a little silly. That’s how you separate actors from the amateurs. The actors know how to take somebody’s silly script and sound convincing.

        Then there’s “Jen”. How could she know there were “rumors” about something that hadn’t happened yet? Do you think that they reviewed these before they released them? I do.

        People take these things wherever they happen to be at. I had to work my way through it as well. I knew it was a hoax, I didn’t know to what extent. All of these operations are a little different. On the other hand, they are more alike than not. I think the particulars change as the demands of the script dictate.

        In order to have a desired outcome you have to control the action. If the desired outcome leaves no room for error you cannot allow any element to be “real”. In this one most of the action took place in the cutting room. You didn’t actually SEE anything. You HEARD what your eyes were not seeing.

        This is sort of a “test of faith”. You are supposed to “believe” in them. It is heresy to doubt. If the desired outcome were for you to believe they would simply manufacture evidence to suit the story. The outcome (in part) is for you to accept what you are told without question. More ominous is the “modeling”. You are to be “happy”, obedient citizens of the New World Order. Nobody likes an angry slave.

        1. “Nobody likes an angry slave.”

          I have long argued that the very best way to enslave a people is to convince them that they are free; to make them love their captivity, to be proud of it, in fact.

          1984 paints a grim, unpleasant picture of life both for the proles and those of the outer party. Yet most of both groups seem to be content.

          Americans, indeed all of the peoples of the West, have been convinced that this slavery we endure is in fact freedom. No matter how much of out former freedom has been stripped away from us, we keep on believing we are still the freest people, ever. Amazing. The state grows, and we diminish, yet we can’t detect it. As I say, amazing.

          The real mystery is, even the angry slaves amongst us are angry about the wrong things. Blacks cold-cocking whites in the Polar Bear Hunting phenomenon might be angry, but not because the state has made them into denizens of a zoo-like culture of dependence. Union would-be thugs who attempt to picket Walmart, and their compatriots who are outraged that Detroit will renege on the promises made to public pensioners, might be angry that we don’t live in the 50s anymore, but there is nothing they seem to have no idea that they are slaves rattling their cages.

        2. Oops! The last sentence should read:

          Union would-be thugs who attempt to picket Walmart, and their compatriots who are outraged that Detroit will renege on the promises made to public pensioners, might be angry that we don’t live in the 50s anymore, but there is nothing THEY CAN DO ABOUT IT; they seem to have no idea that they are slaves rattling their cages.

        3. Patrick, very well said. No matter what government people live with, throughout history the goal of the “elite”, has been to keep them right at the point of rebellion. Sometimes they “over-reach” and things get out of hand. If they don’t have the resources to put it back in the box they are overthrown and the system starts all over again.

          I think you could plot a relationship between the social outrages we’re seeing lately and the rise in Stasi power. Although they are supremely arrogant, they know there are limits to what people will endure. They feel confident that they can suppress any uppity eaters, at least in the short run.

          If there is anything “new” about this, besides the technology, it is the fact that it is global. They have found the way to tighten the screws on the whole western world. I deeply resent the term “your government”. They are not. They have a goal and it isn’t our well being. They are deeply into the realm of molding a “third world” standard for us all. The cops will, of course, be afforded a few more crumbs, pats on their heads, and the ability to menace the population as rewards for their “service”.

          You are very right that people do not really want very much. That is one of the ironies in advertising. They must convince people that they have to have something in order to get them to strive for it. Left alone they would rather not. Two of the missing pieces are that psychopaths MUST control, and the rich are not concerned with getting more. They just don’t want us to have ANY.

          Those two propositions are related. It is hard to control someone who has all they need/want, and the way to get what you need/want is to have wealth. Notice the push to control things like water and food production. That is not because “they want to make money from it”, it is because they want us totally dependent. That helps them control.

          we have a LOT of slaves in this nation- all who are willing to trade their souls for cash – lets hope they save the hottest place in hell for them all who are a part of this .

        5. Patrick, I’m glad you brought this up as it has been on my mind a lot lately. People are definitely angry but the things that they have chosen to be angry about are completely baffling to me. People get up in arms over all kinds of social issues but when they hear about very real issues that threaten our ability to lead free lives as autonomous human beings, they seem to care less.

          I’m also baffled how people who understand that this was a hoax, or at the very least, a false flag, and also know that 911 was a hoax or false flag can still get caught up in the whole left right paradigm, thinking that one side still has our best interest at heart. If they can see through Sandy Hook and Boston and 911, etc. How can they trust these politicians who were complicit? It makes no sense to me. Baffling.

    2. Do they need to? Would that make their story better or worse? If they have other bases covered, edits later would just introduce another layer of problems. A lot of other people that know truth is being covered up. They’re experts at this! And go by numbers. So what if a small percentage know the truth, or question the story. That can easily be kept quiet. The official story will remain intact with the help of media.

      1. Good point. Since I know nothing of how 911 tapes could be gathered or altered, it’s quite possible editing would add another inconvenient layer. Recently I was told an anecdote by a guy whose uncle was doing special ops in Viet Nam in the Marines. In the heat of battle, and drunkenness afterwards, a CIA ‘spook’ admitted that ‘we had to kill him,’ meaning JFK, while another CIA ‘spook’ dragged him bodily out of the bar and shushed him.

        I’d wondered since reading Astucia’s book about JFK how they keep everyone silent. Usually someone slips at some point.

        1. Right, back to the numbers game. If a few slip up with the truth, who is going to believe them? They are just called crazy, conspiracy theorists. It never makes it to mainstream where the real numbers are. Sadly, the masses have historically believed mainstream media. So the few with the truth are simply contained, one way or another. The first official story is the one believed by the masses. So that is the one that matters most, and the one that is heard by most. Updates and follow-ups are heard by few.

          Truth is contained. They have experts to deal with that in many ways.

    3. Also just wanted to add that they had nearly a full year to release this information. They only chose a small handful out of all of the supposed 911 calls from that day. We have to consider that anything that they released yesterday was released on purpose and carefully considered ahead of time. Everything that we heard on those tapes was meant for us to hear, including the address inconsistencies as well as the phrase, “there’s a rumor it’s fake”, and the information regarding the text from someone’s wife who noted “shooters” plural.

      1. Indeed there is no reason for them to make silly mistakes now when time is plentiful. We’re being “gaslighted”, we (the public) shall not know what to believe or disbelieve. Media has the last word on any subject, they tell us what is true, and what has happened. And If you do not buy that you are put to shame. Classic strategy of a sociopath ( I know them well).

        1. Let me ad that these sociopaths wants us to spend a lot of time on this. They are narcissists and crave attention!

        2. The Colonel is right, again! Psychopathy should be a required subject in school. There is no cure, just get away from them. It is hard for some to understand that, to a psychopath, control is a reward in itself. They get the only joy in their miserable little lives from controlling others. I’m sure they are delighted that we are paying so much attention to them. You can’t shame a psychopath.

        3. Yes, and I am thinking of a type of hoax vs. reality psychomanaging program that messes with everyone’s mind, even ours. And I think you’re right that they want us to spend a lot of time on this. And I still think they want us to know it’s a hoax.

        4. Convenient that media now has government people in their higher ranks now too. And BO’s right arm has a degree in fiction writing. Some things just make sense. Especially for those of us who understand sociopaths.

      2. A lot of us know this was a drill. They released the tapes for the drill. They can call them “the 9-11 tapes” all they like. There are tons of information on the frequency changes, etc., that happened that morning. That is because they were doing a drill.

        They grab a volunteer and say “you’re Rick”. “Er, this is Damien, I mean ‘Rick” Thorne, Custodian Extrordinaire. “I hear, er, popping, that’s right, popping, right here in the school”. “They shot out the window and now they’re ……..popping”.

        Anyone who touched this thing is up to their eyeballs in it. In for a penny, in for a pound. We tend to forget that when the Stasi and the courts are all involved, what do they have to worry about? Nothing.

  13. I think these were edited – some of the transmissions are cut off. The calls should have time markers – these have been omitted, probably since they would reveal editing.

    Rick Thorne is the main caller – they accidentally hung up on him twice, and left two other 911 calls to go unanswered. Pass out the awards! Awards were given to their heroic 911 operators who handled over 150 calls per hour. So, where do we get only seven?

    Rick is on the phone when he hears additional gunfire, but since it appears that police were already in the building, that gunfire was likely from the officers who shot out the rear entrance doors. He didn’t see anything, nor is there any first hand report from an eye-witness.

    One of the immediate fast actions by the responders, within moments of the first reports of shooting, and before ambulances were dispatched, was to contact the soon-to-be-ousted Superintendent Janet Robinson. Interesting choice of response. She doesn’t work in Newtown anymore. Carver is out of there too.

    The foot shot sounds like typical drill BS, and all foot victims are generally up and running within a couple of days. She calmly calls in her own shooting while two other adults are in the room with her. Seems odd. Most DHS drills begin between 8:30am and 9:30am, and this one was right on schedule.

    There is nothing chilling about these calls, just the opposite. No AR-15 shots. or any shots from the arsenal he was packing. The calls are placed and received by rather calm sounding individuals, except for the police who are rounding up mysterious suspects.

    1. Another oddity. Not one mention of a child being shot. No one saw any of that.
      And the only person we saw leaving the school that day was the one shot in the foot. EMS was not positioned to take victims away in the first place, the school was blocked off, vehicles blocked in. Like there was NO intention of bringing victims out.
      The drill was 15 miles away that day, per the official report at the time. Meanwhile Sandy Hook was scheduled for demolition for asbestos.

    2. Definitely edited. I noticed the same thing. Where is the rest of the audio? Did New Britain Superior Court Judge Eliot Prescott order the release of ALL the audio or just SOME of the audio to the Associated Press?

  14. To me, these people sound like they are acting out a drill, which “fits” the most likely conclusion.

  15. No sirens. No gunshots when they say there is shooting going on. Everyone sounds like they are on ludes. I really am starting to think this is pathetic on purpose. They want to pull one over or gaslight the awake using frustration.

  16. I haven’t seen an analytical examination of the S.H. Report on this site:

    A couple of things that I would like to get greater clarification on are why they said there were no more than one shooter:

    As noted above, on December 14, 2012, there was a concern that there may have been more than
    one shooter. This was based upon a number of factors:
    The initial police encounter with the unknown male outside SHES;
    Reports by school personnel during the shooting on a 911 call of seeing someone
    running outside the school
    while the shooting was ongoing;
    The location of two black zip up sweat jackets on the ground outside of the shooter’s
    The discovery of an Izhmash Saiga-12, 12 gauge shotgun and ammunition in the
    passenger c
    ompartment of the shooter’s car. A police officer moved this shotgun and
    ammunition to the car’s trunk
    r safety purposes;
    Shell casings that were located outside of the school; and
    The apparent sound of gunfire coming from outside of the school
    The subsequent investigation revealed there were no additional shooters based upon:
    Searches of the area and examinations of local business security surveillance videos;
    Persons detained revealed they were not connected to the shootings. In the case of the
    initial unknown male, he was identified as the parent of a student and had a cell
    telephone, rather than a weapon, in his hand;
    Witness interviews which indicated that no witness saw anyone other than the
    with a firearm;
    Witness interviews in which it was determined that a number of SHES staff had
    escaped from the school through a window and had been running outside the school
    building during the shootings;
    The shotgun located in the shooter’s car had been purchased by the shooter’s mother
    The two sweat jackets were both C-Sport brand black zip up hooded sweat jackets
    with no size listed and were located immediately outside the shooter’s car;
    Both are
    believed to have been brought there by the shooter;
    The live shotgun shells (other than the one found on the shooter and the ones found in
    the shooter’s car) that were located inside and outside of the school were in locations
    where first responders had been. Additionally, there were first responders who
    The man was later determined to be the parent of one of the school’s children and the item in his hand was a cell
    See the Appendix at page A174.
    A parent who arrived at SHES as the shooting was taking place saw the shooter’s car parked in front of the school
    with the passenger side door open and the two sweat jackets on the ground near the car. To the parent, the jackets
    looked like two black blankets on the ground.
    reported missing live shotgun rounds. Moreover, the shells were found in locations
    where there had not been reported sightings
    -law enforcement individuals;
    There were no expended shotgun shells found in the actual crime scene nor were any
    expended 12 gauge shotgun pellets or slugs recovered;
    The only expended casings located outside of the school building were 5.56 mm
    casings located just outside the school’s front entrance
    consistent with the shooter’s
    entry into the school; and
    The officer who heard what he believed to be outside gunfire was in a position to
    have heard the shooter’s gunfire coming from window openings in the classroom in
    which the shooter was firing.

    p17 Why was there no video feed??

    Main entranc
    The main entrance to the school was located next to the large glass window that the shooter shot
    out to enter the school. A patio area was just before the entrance doors. The entrance to the lobby
    consisted of two sets of locked full glass doors that opened outwardly using a pull handle. They
    were separated by a small vestibule. The doors were secured with an electronic locking
    mechanism. The doors could be opened from the inside with a horizontal push bar across the
    middle of the door.
    The broken area of the window that the shoot
    shot out measured approximately 35.33 inches
    wide and 42.5 inches high.
    The exterior of the main entrance door way had a call box, buzzer system with a video camera.
    The call box was installed in 2005. The video camera did not record, but the video could be
    viewed live on three monitoring systems on the secretaries’ desks in the main office, with no
    recording capabilities. The electronic unlocking of the front doors was done by using a “key
    button” on any of the three monitoring systems.


    Deceased victims were removed from the school building to a large military-style tent located in
    the north parking lot, near the front of the school. The Office of the Chief Medical Examiner
    sought to make positive identification of the victims through photos, school records and personal
    and clothing descriptions.
    On Saturday, December 15, 2012, all of the victims were transported to the OCME in
    Farmington for
    autopsies were performed the same day. The cause of death for all of
    the victims was determined to have been gunshot wounds; the manner of death was determined
    to have been homicide.
    Evidence collected during the autopsies was turned over to CDMC and forwarded to the Division
    of Scientific Services for examination. The Evidence Examination section of this report contains
    a summary of the results. p23

  17. This question relates to my above post regarding layers of ‘in the know.’ Does anyone wonder how they keep the actors quiet…like that short-haired blonde ‘mother’ who appeared (I think with her husband) on one of the morning talk shows. She was so unbelievable. Sophia Smallstorm featured a clip in her presentation. Is it possible some of the actors are somehow coached to believe they’re standing in for the actual parents? I just wonder at how many people were both involved and in a public way – don’t their families ask them? Or perhaps the key actors are more intentionally planted and are direct beneficiaries from the whole hoax. I just sensed total weirdness from the families – it was one of the things that made me progress from ‘this could have been prevented’ level of skepticism towards the government and media’s reaction to ‘this could be BS.’ In their drive to massage us from “Never Forget’ in 9/11 to ‘Always Forgive’ in Sandy Hook I sensed something deeper was amiss. That young teacher’s family ribboning everyone so preternaturally also freaked me out. They seem to really think they can deprive the average citizen from sensing and knowing authentic grief and the anger that for so many often attends it. Human beings will always have a variety of reactions to such profound stress, like in Aurora, where one father urges everyone to face that Homes is evil, not crazy.

  18. now that they have written the screen play , hired the actors , done the rehearsals & sent out the previews I wonder when the movie comes out

  19. Apparently the only calls that were released were LAND LINE calls. No cell calls were released (according to press releases). Does no one in Sandy Hook have a cell phone? Did Gene Rosen call 9/11?

      1. Zemblanity1,

        Recently retired, I taught in a public school high school located in lower Westchester County, NY, for 31 years and we never had landline phones in any of our classrooms or hallways. The only landline phone were installed in administrative and department offices.

        1. IF there was a phone it most likely had the capabilty to dial 9-1-1 no matter where it was installed. Phone systems are different now and don’t require operators to access 9-1-1 systems. I believe they aren’t releasing cell calls due to some esoteric interpretation of wiretapping rules? In any case, no one claimed all calls were released. I highly doubt it was just 7.

        2. I highly doubt it was one. I highly doubt that school had its landline anymore. I highly doubt people were in the building and using cellphones. I don’t believe they “hesitated” to disseminate the calls. We are being played them because this is a moment of reinforcement in time for the anniversary moment, the great memorial on Dec. 13 or 14, I forget which. See? This is a pre-show trailer! A tickler before the recapping of all of it, right through the Marathon bombing with Sandy Hook parents watching the carnage from the stands. These are some really sick ad men. Real mad men. What a sales campaign! What an exposure of what a weak, mindless society we have become, from top to bottom. It’s our nation’s report card. F-

  20. We have come full circle, there is no longer any doubt that this was a manufactured event with the purpose of a) distracting us, b) eliminating guns and making criminals of previously law abiding citizens, c) giving the gov a broad cloak to declare citizens mentally ill and thus in need of restraint, d) declaring all those who doubt the official story heartless and also insane and/or e) inciting citizens to revolt and thus declaring martial law. For sure there is plenty of evidence that there are violent crimes in the cities that the msm has neglected to report, black groups knocking out and murdering innocent white victims for no reason other than the thrill of it. What are we being distracted from? Believe it is the gov takeover of the healthcare system with the full intention of dismantling it and turning us into a socialist state. Can we really believe they have spent coming up to $1 billion on a website that does not work? It was never intended to work, they were hoping they could get through one more election before the truth be known. Millions have lost their plans with the individual market being hit this year, next year a huge population of employer paid health care plans will being canceled. When the speech was go on the site, see how good it is, I did and it said prices will not be available until after 10/1. Now that prices are available on other sites, as the gov thing is still a pos, there is a major scam going on. One of the cheapest plans with a $10,000 cost, has a $10k and $20k family deductible, and another line item that I have never seen before – Maximum out of pocket cost after the deductible is meant, $10k and $20k for family. That means, you spend $50k before your health plan kicks in and only pays a percentage of the cost, although you may get an annual physical at no cost and abortions are of course ‘free’. Praying for our country and all of us!

    1. I may agree with you partly, but isn’t it a bit gratuitous (and perhaps ignoring the evidence) to place an emphasis on blacks killing whites, when the reality is that the black on black victimization happens far more. In fact, if you think about this reality, considering places like Detroit, Chicago and Washington DC, I wonder what you might try and do about it if you were the first black President? You might come up with what you think would solve the problem, using your power to bring about some change there.

      I never think people who do wrong-headed things like Sandy Hook are necessarily pure evil. I think it can be misapplied zeal to do something which you think will have a good outcome.

      I don’t need to be defended from scary black people. My own experience with my world is that white people have hurt whites – that’s the kind of environment I have lived in for most of my life. When the man shoots his brother-in-law on my block, it’s white-on-white, etc.

      Whether impulse crimes and suicides with firearms can be prevented by registering all of them is dubious. You can provide a speed-bump, but you aren’t going to stop a determined speeder.

      1. I, too, question the mention of “black groups knocking out and murdering innocent white victims for no reason other than the thrill of it.”

        Seriously, do you really think those news stories are real? Perhaps, someone was indeed assaulted… then the fakenewsmedia slaps a sensational name and spin on it to get the public chattering about nonsense.

        Such BS. Seriously, with all the “inner city violence” and access to guns when has a “gang” ever shot-up an airport or a school?

        1. I live only about five miles from a place where incidents happen a lot. It would be nice if black people were not killing other black people there. I’d love it to be a myth. But I do know that when my neighbor shot his brother-in-law in the stomach and killed him over some debt it was as real as it probably is in the ghetto for often the same kind of thing.

        2. I think I may have misunderstood your reply to me the first time I read it. You actually seem in some agreement with my statement, and to give as an example the fact that black gangs do NOT terrorize collections of whites (Neiman Marcus stores seem relatively free of such attacks as do airport lounges or golf courses). This mythology of that kind of danger may have some validity in places where such acts would be political (some Caribbean island or Africa, where rich blacks would get killed too) – it would be primarily economic and political and not purely racial.

        3. Yes, my point was that the characterization of black-on-white crimes as being a “big problem” is simply not true. Violence exists everywhere and particularly where poverty leads to despair and the subsequent breakdown of family and individual functioning.

        4. Do you question dead bodies? Perhaps you need to start way back in the 70’s, and investigate the Zebra Murders, committed by the Nation of Islam as a method to exterminate white people. What’s most disturbing is how the jewish-funded ‘civil rights’ groups defended them. But start there…

          Black on white rape occurs anywhere from 50-100 times a day in the US according to the FBI. White on black happens maybe 10 times per year. In the last year black on white hate crime murders have taken place at least a few times a week. This epidemic of black on white violence has been going on for decades, with the imprimatur of our federal government, with special thanks to the jews.

          Dr. Tracy is not overly neutral on the race front, so you perceive a rigged playing field here, but try as you or any liberal might, dead bodies – real in the flesh bodies – are hard to fake. I’ve ignored the baiting on here for the most part but you and your racist ilk have crossed a line.

        5. Sue you have left out the most important statistic (if we care about “the general welfare”) : black on black murder and rape is the largest factor in all of this. I do not say this from racism, it’s a known fact of American life. That’s why I think the idea that it’s some kind of scourge of blacks on white people is kind of not the deeper source of the problem. For the record, any crimes that have directly happened to me (in the US) or which I witnessed ( a shooting ) were by fellow whites.

        6. musings, I heartily disagree. It’s precisely this blame whitey mentality which informs this black on black violence, which is not to say I care in the same way I do about black on white violence given that I happen to be white and a survivor of it.

          In these black run cities, black leaders and ‘concerned jews,’ and corporate interests (often comprised largely of ‘concerned jews’) run a racket. Monies get poured into these cities to allegedly combat poverty, but which are ultimately commandeered by the corrupt leaders and their minions. Black constituents are told their lack of resources are whitey’s fault. Black misbehavior is construed as a symptom of this faux ‘oppression,’ and the cycle continues, but it is one of corruption and anti-white hatred, not of ‘poverty.’

          Blacks are actually taught to hate whites and sometimes asians in these schools and communities. They blame them for everything even though the fault lies in their own depravity, as cultivated and carefully overseen by black and jewish ‘leaders.’ It is disgusting, and it then creates the black on black violence and black on white violence.

        7. ANYONE WHO PRACTICES specieism,racism- anyone who uses creed,color,religion,species as an excuse to do harm to another is a racist/speciest – non of this has any place in any of these arguments . if you practice any of these forms of hatred you need to look in the mirror and check yourself . animal eaters ,racists ,speciests,haters,killers of every kind need to check themselves as it is this kind of harm & hatred towards others that is the cause of all of this . what part of “DO NO HARM” do so many of you miss the point ? if people would actually practice DOING NO HARM – we could possibly live through all of this – but until each individual decides to DO NO HARM- we are doomed and all due to the harm we inflict onto others .its a dam shame that so many cant see what they are causing , which in return is causing all of this. rule #1 DO NO HARM, rule #2 DO GOOD – wake up people , your example will be followed

    2. The Danbury News Times transcription conveniently excludes an exchange within this conversation :

      CALLER: Something’s happening.

      OPERATOR 1: O.K. . . .

      Jen, hang up. I need you to get off that phone. Alright Rick? . . .

      Preceding OPERATOR 1’s comment to Jen telling her to hang up was this Operator 2- “There’s a rumor that it’s fake”

      1. Carl, obviously they are not going to transcribe something that someone is heard saying in the background. It really is a non-issue that the phrase does not appear in the transcript.

        1. And it would be ignored in a court of law. She can be commenting on anything really. Even though I do think it is interesting.

        2. I have to wonder why the 911 operators are on speakerphone in the first place. You normally don’t hear the whole center’s activity. The operator and caller normally use headsets, and the recording captures individual calls. Why the ‘hive of activity?’ If it was to jack up the crisis – then it has backfired. There were more than seven calls.

        3. I’ve been listening to 911 calls on YT to compare with, and you are right, that is a good observation!

    3. OK Kathy, let;s focus on the calls for a moment:

      1. Newtown gave awards to their “HEROIC” 911 operators for handling over 150 calls per hour. They only released 7 calls. When public outcry ensued, they claimed that they only released land line calls and don’t have authority to release cell calls. Huh?

      2. The main caller, acting Custodian Rick Thorn (the regular custodian was not at work that day) was speaking from a hallway, and moving into different corridors so he was obviously on a cell phone. Despite agreeing that he had completed a search, he did not see any bodies or a shooter.

      3. Two teachers call from inside their rooms. The individual rooms were not wired for landlines per a local of Sandy Hook.

      4. Main 911 dispatch operator (Brophy? Nute?) makes odd statements to co-worker Jen, as she is overheard working another 911 line. He shuts her down with the following exchange”

      Jen: (in background) “There’s a rumor that it’s fake.”


      We do not hear any of Jens 911 calls. Her boss also directs that they take one caller (representative call.) Odd.

      5. No callers saw any bodies. First caller didn’t hear shooting.

      Caller: “I think there is somebody in here shooting.” Wouldn’t you KNOW? She must not have heard the the front glass go, or reports any gunfire.

      6. Who says women don’t belong in combat? A teacher calls in and blandly reports that she was shot in the foot, but makes no comments regarding the who what why when and how. She is in a room with two other adults and children, but they aren’t too worried about her since they aren’t nearby. She should be hearing 150 blasts from a thundering assault rifle about 60 feet away, Operator asks if she is safe. Her reply: “I think so. My class room door is not locked.”

      7. One voice on one of the calls purporting to be a teacher is very recognizable as that of a crisis actor who has been touring the country making speeches on the need for a total gun ban. She does not work in the school.

      8. The police arrive within a couple of minutes, and show up in the corridor of the school – no preceding sirens are overheard. The caller only knows the are there from police radio chatter.

      9. The 911 operator who sounds like the boss does not appear to know how to use the phone system. At least four calls go unanswered. He accidentally hang up on Rick Thorn three times. Rick calls back repeatedly. Two callers are deliberately cut off with no questions asked by 911 as to the situation.

      10. No gunshots can be heard until after police are in the building and they do not correspond to the timeline. Police admit to shooting out the back doors and several windows to gain access to the building. Why was it necessary to shoot into a school full of children it the front was already blown wide open?

      11. Enhanced audio reveals clear evidence of layering (probably to cover Jen.) The first call is recorded and taped over itself. There is clear evidence of editing as well.

      12. How did Thorne miss seeing the bodies at the front?

      13. Love the niceties throughout. Here’s a favorite exchange to capture the harrowing nightmare:

      NEWTOWN OPERATOR: Hey, it’s Brophy from Newtown 911, how are you?


      NEWTOWN OPERATOR: Did you guys hear what’s going on in Newtown right now?

      OPERATOR STATE POLICE: There’s an active shooting.

      1. All good observations – maybe we should let the judge know who demanded they be released that his order was defied. Oh wait, he heard them first. A recording device does not care or even have the intelligence to know if an incoming call is from a cell phone or a land line. Come to think of it, these recordings are nothing like 911 calls we here all the time shortly after real events. Imagine Brophy(?) and company sitting around a table with a tape recorder in the center and they are all calling each other! Bye bye!

        1. Kathy, ha, ha, the “judge”. Here come da judge. This one’s all wrapped and “in the can”. We’re on our way to the “Grand Extravaganza” on the 14th. There will be Moonies, and Baha’i”s, and Satanists, and lions and tigers and bears, oh my. Bye Bye.

        2. Yes, it’s going to be a really sick anti-holiday. Boston of course has a lot of reciprocity with the whole Newtown thing, sponsored by the organized crime people in the charity collection business. I’m sure there will be Christmas decorations somewhere with names of victims on them – lest we forget.

      2. Really good observations, now we need to post them in the MSM where others can finally open their eyes and ears to these calls. What about real 911 operators? I’d love to hear from them. This must sound false to them as well.

        1. Did any operator ever ask a single time for the caller to describe or identify the shooter ? That is standard procedure normally

        2. I think it is also very telling that the 911 Operator doesn’t request the callers to identify themselves, including the woman who was shot in the foot. The first breathless thespian to call is left unidentified. Thorn seems to be the only one. The name of the caller is usually question one,and is absolutely fundamental standard 911 procedure.

          I followed Kath’s suggestion and was amazed to see another credible piece of key hoax evidence. Apparently, about five hours before the Active Shooter Drill, the frequencies for the entire Ct ER dispatch system were changed. The article includes screen shots from a Radio website. They hijacked the emergency response system that morning. Wow…

          Kath.. says:
          December 6, 2013 at 4:46 pm

          Considering that the Connecticut emergency dispatch system was shut down on Dec 14th, 2012- see link-

      3. On #7 – please state how you know this was a crisis actor?

        Since every person’s voice can be identified as unique, has there been that type of analysis on hers? It would seem to cry out for widespread publication if you know that much about it. Maybe some of the others can be traced to specific people.

        You’d imagine that if any other nation’s intelligence services doubted these internal events in the US and really wanted the goods on us, they’d be on this.

    4. Some additional time line anomalies that seem noteworthy:

      Police Report Detailed Time Line

      It appears at least 4 parents arrived at the time of the initial shooting.

      One parent arrived at 9:30 am and was buzzed in. What is interesting is that this parent was there for the entire event and only heard 15 shots ?

      At 9:35 am a parent (man) arrives and sees the window shot out and 9 kids running.

      At 9:36 am a parent (man) arrives hears shooting and runs on sidewalk- called 911 but 911 call never registered. (This may likely be Manfredonia)- keep in mind Mandredonia lived right behind Lanza and there was a report that his daughter may have been in Roig’s class. Roig’s class was spared despite being unlocked and the very first classroom in the hall.

      9:36:38 Parent (woman likely Sibley) arrives – sees kids at stop sign- window shot out and hears gunfire.

      9:36:38 Parent (woman-unamed) sees kids at stop sign- window shot out and hears gunfire.- runs away, ostensible with Sibley, and seeks cover by dumpster.

      The picture that accompanies this article is apparently Sibley, another woman and kid running away with an officer (State Trooper?). However the first officers did not yet arrive for several more minutes ?

      9:39:34 am Officer McGowan apparently confronts at Manfredonia running toward Crestwood. Maybe another person was fleeing also because he said “they’re coming at me down Crestwood”- So it took Manfredonia 3 and a half minutes to start running after he heard gun fire at 9:36 am ?

      9:49:07 am Police Transmission “shots fired about 3 minutes ago quiet at the time”- this is completely excluded from the official report time line.

      9:58:25 police radio you hear what appears to be “take the life of Adam”- not on official time line.

      Also where is the Ryan ID they used to falsely identify Adam as Ryan?

      Also wasn’t there a body in Hoboken that was quickly forgotten too ? Whatever happened to that ?

      1. Also if in fact Manfredonia arrived at 9:36 am would he likely have run into the two women that arrived imminently thereafter ?

  21. I find strange that the operator keep on saying bye bye at the end of the calls…You kinda have a feeling that the operator is some how pretty new to this 911 call center situation (utrained kind of )…Out of hundreds of supposed calls, that guy Rick seems to have called often… I felt like I was listening to a Sears call center or something like that, not a 911 call center. I’ve never heard a 911 tape where the victims or witness acted as calm as this one. It’s not save to hear a 911call center that let the phone ring without answer. No screams…

    The one question I have about this whole Sandy Hook thing is, why did only allowed on casket to be opened at the funeral (Noah’s)?

    Why aren’t the people of SH talking?

    1. Since when does a person calling 911 say “I caught a glimpse of someone” running by with a gun? I mean I live in New England. That isn’t anyone’s dialect. “I saw the goddamned fucker with a fucking gun” is more like it. Anywhere. “Get the hell over here as fast as you fucking can.”

      1. I agree that was a very strange communication. “Why do you think there is shooting?” “Because I saw a guy with a gun and I caught a glimpse of him”? Ughhhhh….????? How about “He shot out the glass windows and shot the principal”?

        1. The communication is strange because it is unnatural.
          Imagine for a second there is an altercation in your own street, late at night, in a very quiet neighborhood. You decide to call 911. The altercation is so bad you are afraid one of the drunks is going to kill the other one. Even in a situation with strangers you are going to be more emotional than these actors.

          Now imagine you are an employee of a place where there are little children. Where is the urgency? Why are you on the line instead of trying to stop the gunman? Are you that much of a wuss? At least you should be screaming for back-up.

  22. Hi all.
    I am not sure this is the best place to post this but I guess it is as good as any other article.
    I have been reading this blog for close on a year now to see if I can be persuaded there is merit to the various theories put forward. My observations so far are:
    1) Some of the bloggers would appear to be very well educated and have spent considerable time reading and researching the topics. The quality are arguments put forward are impressive, although, to me personally, not persuasive.
    2) There is no consensus as to the events, for example 9/11 theories range from the “no-planers” to a Israeli / Jewish conspiracy or Sandy Hook was a hoax with no casualties to a government conspired gun control event with children sacrificed for the “cause”. I acknowledge that no community ever agrees on every detail but the diverse range does make me wonder.
    3) The lack of any real evidence is a common thread across the recent events, including the Boston bombing and now even the recent train derailment is question. No evidence does not mean guilty.
    4) Any evidence that provided, be it an eyewitness, associated party, photograph and now the Sandy Hook tapes are denounced as liars, photoshopped, actors, MSM conspiracy etc. Yet to back up many claims by the contributor’s links are provided to YouTube videos which are mostly, but not all, of questionable content and quality. Other links are to like-minded sites or writers which support the arguments put forward. Why would I believe the latter sources and not the former?
    5) With reference to my first point the following are some examples of comments which are very difficult to take seriously:
    • Look at the lady’s obviously photoshopped fingers clasped with the police officers – they are like two snakes wrapping around there! Bipsy 26/11/13
    • Well, a janitor simply moved nine black 3 foot high letters that spell out “SANDY HOOK” in the trunk of a small vehicle and replaced them with the nine letters that spell out “CHALK HILL”, leaving the words “ELEMENTARY SCHOOL” in both places the same. John Luv 15/11/2013
    • they dont have any 911 calls to release, that is pretty obvious. this was a TV SHOW just like all their other false flags ( san fran ‘plane crash’ -was also a TV SHOW- lax ‘shooting’- TV SHOW – boston ‘bombing’ TV SHOW held at a real event- washington navy yard ‘shootet’ TV SHOW – the list goes on of these made for TV FILMS .truthchase 13/11/2013.
    • I think they are having fun with the LAX episode. Video of someone pushing a dummy, name of suspect CIAnCIA: violeta 11/11/2013
    • Kathy, don’t forget that the Sandy Hook event took place in the morning hours. You can’t expect cops to answer phones while they are at the donut place, can you. Mary 4/12/2013.
    • black groups knocking out and murdering innocent white victims for no reason other than the thrill of it. Kathy 5/12/13
    6) I shall continue to read with some interest and curiosity further comments as events unfold. As an aside please define “schill” which appears to be the description of choice for those who disagree with the majority of contributors.

    Have a blessed Christmas one and all. Greetings from Australia.

      1. Rhoda, I will take you at your word and presume you to be authentic until otherwise implicated. I haven’t noted issues with Kathy’s comments . I have at times found it difficult to understand or relate to what seems like a determination to find ‘issues.’ Some posters fixate on details that seem easily explained away. Some see so deeply into the motives of the hoaxers that they lose me. Taking a step back to check my own a priori assumptions sometimes loosens my incredulity. Often these hyper vigilant skeptics become more believable, sometimes not. One problem is that the types of people who don’t go along with authority often exhibit what truly can be a hyper vigilance. It seems par for the course for at least some posters who are not disinformants.

        Last, I’d direct you to Colin Flaherty’s website, WhiteGirlBleedALot if you remain skeptical about the Knockout ‘Game.’ which is really a vicious criminal meme among blacks in the US. There is a wealth of evidence that proves the existence of this pattern.

        1. Thanks Sue, would not of known my name was mentioned in her comments as she lost me pretty quickly. Colin Flaherty has single handedly brought this black mob violence to the forefront and exposed the media’s clear agenda to stifle any news of it. 99% of the time, the violent criminals are black, 99% the victims are not. Reading the comments in the article I posted, you can clearly see the people are upset that race is not mentioned. When there is a bank robbery, don’t we get descriptions and video to assist the police in arresting the thieves? The media is actually calling these knockout crimes a hoax brought about by the media who is not reporting it! Considering how that fellow in FL was convicted by the media, the administration, the justice department and self promoting activists before trial, the double standard drives me crazy!

        2. First of all if the knockout is a vicious criminal meme among blacks in the U.S as you put then why 90% of the males they charge and arraign for this crime are white males ?Dont go by what the media wants to tell you go by what the docket say and look at the records of who they charged its too easy to get brainwashed by the media

        3. The problem has been the media has blatantly refused to cover these crimes for the most part until recently. Now that good old Al Sharpton has acknowledged this Polar Bear game is wrong, that has changed to some degree. Wonder why they call it that? Here’s a good article, read the comments and you will see real Americans acknowledge, mostly in urban areas with strict gun laws, it is not safe, it is a war zone.

    1. You are correct with the lack of evidence. Since the authorities have stonewalled and obfuscated the release of hard evidence in addition to threatening the public for disbelief, the public only has circumstantial press releases to go on. The corporate media within the five English-speaking countries of the world is now known for outright fabrication of a narrative in order to support unpopular political agendas. Many still see no hard evidence whatsoever of a crime occurring at SHES. All that’s left are anomalies within an event that authorities refuse to explain to the citizenry.

      This was done before:

      “Interviewed in 2006, Tony Rundle, Premier of Tasmania from 1996 to 1998, admitted that because there was no trial the evidence made public was possibly insufficient to support that Bryant had been the gunman” – wiki

      The biggest problem on the planet right now is not global warming. It’s global lying. Poverty and ignorance are intentionally created and managed for control over the herd.

      Social engineering and perception management have been an activity since the beginning of time for the ruling class. It pays quite well but always comes at the expense of massive human misery, death, and destruction. Individuals are either infused with the love of truth or they are not. And contention between the two sides is growing rapidly this very moment in time.

      1. Edit: Intentionally deceiving the public is neither savvy nor clever. It’s merely betrayal of trust. Marvel not at the blowback.

    2. Rhoda, you are delirious. Try to keep a thought together for more than two sentences. #2 don’t mix Sandy Hook with 9/11 please. You say that there is no consensus because you have trouble sifting fact from dis-information. Releasing bogus info is part of their strategy, and you surely are drinking the Kool-Aid.

      9/11 Consensus – A&E for 9/11, 3 buildings were demolished with explosives and incendiaries, Niels Harrit and thermite, where did the buildings go?, Israel, our federal government is completely corrupt and controlled by shadow groups, Richard Grove, John O’neill. Do you want more consensus than that?

      I’ll stop here because your level of research is quite shallow, and you need to go back to the books before posting ridiculous posts like this one.

      1. We all hit a nerve with Rhonda. There is no disinformation on this blog concerning Sandy Hook, all research is spot on. No one, and I mean no one, has been able to prove that this event happened at all, besides being a DHS drill

        1. If Rhonda’s still reading, here’s my 2 cents. I agree with John Luv, Sandy Hook was a DHS drill that was presented as a real event to the public in accordance with the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012, which allows the US Government to direct propaganda at the American Public.

          DHS is a tangle of contractors, many with ties to foreign countries which could best be described as frenemies to the US Government.

          If the perpetrators and participants in Sandy Hook believed they were acting on behalf of the “greater good,” they are dangerously wrong. To lie, especially on that scale and about the killing of children, is never the right thing to do.

        2. Wondering Aloud you have touched on something here which I think could be the strategy of this event and I believe like you that the participants thought they were acting ‘ for a good purpose’.. How wrong could they be..

      2. How does one “qualify” to doubt? The very idea! Who do we think we are, Anderson Cooper? I’m so ashamed. I’ll get back in my place now. Bye, bye!

    3. Rhoda, If you have truly been following this site for a year and are still unconvinced that there is something seriously wrong in these events then my guess is that you have some cognitive issues. I think that most people who post here are primarily asking for only one thing from the authorities; show us some evidence. In the commission of any crime, big or small, it is the evidence and only the evidence that matters in the final analysis. That is how juries decide guilt or innocence. If there is no evidence, as in the case of SH, then there is no crime. The pronouncements of highly suspect media figures do not constitute evidence. The burden of proof is always on the prosecution in a criminal case to convince us that a crime has been committed and who committed it. That is the way the justice system works here, as well as in your country. To date, the authorities have produced not a shred of hard evidence that any murders took place in that school.

      1. I would like to add to Joel’s comment, no one is obligated to believe or deny what the authorities tell them. I, like Joel, believe this is a total hoax. Like other hoaxes, different people key into different aspects of the operation. Some arguments are more compelling than others.

        All that said, finding fault with someone’s argument does not create a “default position” in favor of the media. In fact, those who would visit a site “for a year” and not like what people at that site were saying, strikes me as strange. There is no shortage of sites where one could go and “me too” to their heart’s content.

        Joel is quite correct in saying “to date, the authorities have produced not a shred of hard evidence…..”. “Me too”, I completely agree with that statement. If the “media” tell us that a school room full of nuns was trampled to death by a herd of purple giraffes, are we to believe that UNLESS we have “unassailable” evidence to the contrary? Just asking.

  23. Call 7, which begins at 9:44:00, has a clear, loud gunshot 2:59 minutes into it, followed by a distant rifle report at 3:00 (9:46:59 a.m. and 9:47:00 a.m. respectively). Yet Sedensky claims last shot fired at 9:40:03. NPD Officer Penna further states he personally heard a shot at the time he was running from Room 8 to Room 10; Sedensky himself places this time at exactly 9:51:31 a.m. which, incidentally, is also the precise time a shooter response team is entering Room 10 ahead of Penna. Penna hears a shot, and immediately turns around to get the child out of Room 8. The media are completely ignoring all three (likely four) of these shots. I say “likely four” because the officers storming Room 10 yelled, over the police radio, “CLEAR!” and “Suspect down!” two times in rapid succession.

    The gunshot at 9:46:59 sounds exactly like the gunshots earlier in the call, making the media blackout on the later call even stranger. Some media “analyses” of the calls leave out Call 7 altogether.

    1. Makes me wonder what time they may have been saying “clear, suspect down” in their drill down the street that morning at the school shooter scenario.

      Didn’t Lanza shoot himself?

      1. Many possibilities, including that Lanza was never there, and/or that the person police likely shot at 9:51:31 (and another time immediately after that) was a different shooter, or was not a shooter at all. And we have no idea whether either or both of those shots struck children, which would also be an incredibly sensitive issue.

    2. Excellent analysis Zeph- I also noticed the shot at 2:59 but not at 3. When did Penna say he heard a shot though ? One officer reported at about 9:49 am that last shots were fired 3 minutes ago so I started searching the 911 call for a shot in that time frame and found the 2:59 shot. The official story and time line is a bold faced lie. Piecing together the truth from what is available is the challenge. If Police were in the lobby at 9:45 am and Lanza is just a few feet away in room 10 (dead?) who is shooting at 9:46 am ? It does not line up ?

      1. Shot at 3 is very faint; loud shot at 2:59 on call 7 sounds like pistol, close. Faint shot at 3:00 sounds like rifle, possibly outside. There are multiple other cases like this, earlier in the call. At any rate, Penna heard a shot at 9:51:31 (in reality, probably two shots; police audio indicates two based on officers yelling “CLEAR!” and “Suspect down!” twice in rapid succession).

  24. I don’t expect to convince anyone of anything by the comments that I will make. And I respect the viewpoints of everyone who has here posted on the issue of Sandy Hook. What I notice is that many of you have ‘already concluded’ that the shooting was a hoax. I’m not saying that there are not any good reasons for being suspicious of what is being claimed happened, or of the motives behind the manner in which that narrative is being spun, through ‘official’ channels.

    Here is what I think I know about Sandy Hook: it may or may not have been a hoax. I’ve yet to come across a piece of evidence or pieces of evidence that when taken together are compelling in one direction or the other. About Sandy Hook, I know that for the time being ‘I do not know.’

    My reasons for being suspicious of the official narrative being spun are roughly as follows: I know that the establishment is capable of anything, based upon a series of publicly admitted crimes that they have committed abroad and domestically, together with some not so publicly admitted but nevertheless historically ‘revealed and verified’ actions; it is also no secret that the establishment works very hard at manipulating public opinion in directions that best serve its interests, and the primary organs of that manipulation, apart from the educational system itself, are the MSM. In a nutshell, that summarizes my personal set of ‘contextualizing’ assumptions that pertain to my interpretation of what may or may not have happened in Sandy Hook. The story is in the first instance ‘dubious’ because it comes to me through channels that I know ‘exist’ for the express purpose, to paraphrase Edward L. Bernays, ‘of consciously and intelligently manipulating the organized habits and opinions of the masses,’ habits and opinions that inhabit ‘me’ no less than anyone else. In other words, I am suspicious of anything that comes to me out of the mouth of a known liar.

    But what if Sandy Hook is a hoax? What of it? What does that reveal about the ‘establishment,’ in terms of its odious, sinister, and psychopathic nature that I did not already know? Is that more revelatory, say, than the documentary record of ‘Operation Northwoods,’ or of something like the comments made by Madeleine Albright on 60 Minutes, there for the whole world to ‘hear and see.’ What more do I need to convince an otherwise ‘rational and morally sane person’ that the ‘establishment’ is corrupt to its very core?

    What I’m trying to say is, if ‘your’ purpose is to ‘wake people up’ to the ‘dark side’ of the establishment that rules over them, there are less controversial ‘proofs’ of that then the as yet ‘tenuous case that Sandy Hook is an ‘obvious’ hoax.’

    If my purpose is to demonstrate the ‘illegitimate’ nature of the system of government that now lords it over the entire world, I think I am best to go with better-established and less controversial ‘evidence,’ of which there is plenty. And if the more ‘obvious and less controversial’ evidence does not manage to persuade someone I know remains naively approbative of the current system of rule, I think it safe to say that I can be sure that at this moment in time the claim that Sandy Hook was a hoax, let alone a real possible false flag (which by far would be more ‘chilling’ than a ‘hoax’), will have even less of a chance of awaking that person to the reality of the extreme brutality and undemocratic nature of the reigning system of government.

    To recap the point I want to emphasize: there are currently, I believe, more damaging – because less controversially established – revelatory ‘facts’ about the establishment than the hoax that ‘might be’ Sandy Hook. On the other hand, Sandy Hook may indeed be a hoax, and a hoax well worth unmasking, and those who can should continue with their efforts to that end. No question. More work needs to be done, however. I don’t think that the matter is at this point in time quite ‘obvious’ or settled. ‘We’ need to be careful about what ‘we’ claim to ‘know’ in contrast to what we ‘believe’ or ‘suspect,’ however well-grounded that ‘belief’ or ‘suspicion’ might be. Otherwise, ‘we’ risk discrediting ‘ourselves’ in the minds of other equally ‘reasonable’ people if we rush to conclusions. It is better to take our time and come to a well measured and higher probability of certainty.

    And because I feel uncertain as to whether children died on that day, I wish that people would be a bit more mindful of what they ‘say’ or ‘write’ about the people who ‘may’ have experienced grievous losses on that day. Why take the chance of compounding the immeasurable loss that a ‘parent’ or ‘sibling’ may have actually experienced? I think that some comments go a bit too far given the uncertainties that still hang over this entire affair. Children may have died. That remains a possibility for all you in fact know. Let us hope that it was a hoax.

    1. You can count me in as someone who believes that this whole thing was a hoax. For awhile I thought it could be a false flag, with deaths, but I don’t see that as a possibility anymore. It took time and a lot of research to come to this conclusion. I certainly did not jump to it. There was never a single piece of evidence, or lack of, that caused me to come to the conclusions that I did but rather the culmination of many many pieces of evidence as well as lack of evidence that led me to my conclusions.

      It is beyond concerning how tptb are using this hoax to transform society. It goes far beyond gun control and the fleecing of innocent, kind hearted people’s pocketbooks who were moved by emotion, rather then logic and gave money to the perpetrators of this fraud. If you can believe that all of these parents lost their children and were unable to shed a single tear, then so be it. It defies human nature. As do so many other elements to this story.

      1. Hi zemblanity1,

        Your points are well taken. I’ve yet to come to terms with this whole thing, to think my way through the available evidence as carefully as you perhaps have.

        Given what I think I understand so far about Sandy Hook, it would be premature for me to conclude anything.

        I, and not anyone else, would be the one ‘jumping to conclusions,’ given the state of my current ‘comprehension’ over the matter.

        I’ll continue to listen to and mull over the ‘evidence’ as being discussed and analyzed, here and elsewhere.

        On the other hand, if it is already an ‘open and shut case,’ why does the discussion, the analysis, the collating of ‘evidence’ continue? If the conclusion is already ‘indubitable’ on the basis of what is already known, why continue the effort?

        1. I think that a lot of people have stopped talking and posting about Sandy Hook who were initially very interested. You can see a definite decrease in interest and discussion compared to 6 months ago. My interest has certainly waned. When the summary recently came out, I had very little interest in reading it because I believe it’s just more fake information coming from those responsible. I think that many who have come to the same conclusion as myself know that short of a smoking gun, most people will keep on believing that it was real.

          I really don’t talk about Sandy Hook to anyone in my real life because I realize it’s futile to try and convince others of something of this magnitude. I’m also not interested in convincing others on the internet. I am however interested in discussion People who are interested enough will weigh the evidence and come to conclusions at their own pace and based on what makes the most sense to them.

          This is not an open and shut case but I will say that when all of the evidence and lack of evidence is examined closely, all signs point to hoax, in my opinion. People have been convicted on far less. I will continue to discuss in forums such as this, on topics directly related to Sandy Hook because I find it interesting. You still see people taking about JFK and you still see people talking about 911. I don’t see this as being much different.

        2. “I think that a lot of people have stopped talking and posting about Sandy Hook who were initially very interested. You can see a definite decrease in interest and discussion compared to 6 months ago.”

          when I checked my inbox just now, in 10 hours there has been 37 entries on this article. This hoax is a very hot topic I would argue!

        3. Yes, Col Bat Guanao. It still is a hot topic but there has been a decrease from the initial interest from some who do believe it was a hoax. Read Sandy Hook Truth Blog lately? It used to be very active. Now, not so much.

        4. Zem, people have short attention spans. Especially when speaking the truth results in ridicule. I think it is important to say that nobody “wanted” to be an outlier and call it what it was, a hoax. Just like “The 9-11 Movie” it was easy to see it was a hoax early on. The particulars took much longer.

          The fact that these things tend to result in helping establish a mentality that basically says “you’re obligated to believe what the media tells you, without question”, is more alarming. Faith-based journalism.

          As I continue to say, these operations always have multiple goals. The gun confiscation is just the most obvious one. The more compelling one is the “modeling” aspect. The state-sanctioned “reaction” to adversity.

          I, for one, have not lost interest in this. It is not encouraging, however, to see that this will remain unexposed. I’ve said before that I believe that a large part of this drill involved convincing the “eaters” that this happened with no, or very suspect “evidence”. That was one of the primary purposes of the drill.

          The alleged tapes are a case in point. Of course they do not prove anything. They do not seem at all convincing. It sounds like a guy playing custodian to a girl playing dispatcher. That’s because it is.

          When analyzing the carefully-crafted emotion shots with the “voice of authority” narrative in the original drama, it is obvious that elements of the drill (or previous drills) were interspersed. I’m sure that these tapes were either part of that event (the drill) or created/adjusted later to fit the scenario.

          I’ll keep speaking out about this, as well as the others. At the end of the day it is insulting. None of us are under any obligation to swear fealty to a lie. None of us are obligated to “believe” anything. It all boils down to those of us who will be willingly manipulated and those who will resist.

        5. “As I continue to say, these operations always have multiple goals. The gun confiscation is just the most obvious one. The more compelling one is the “modeling” aspect. The state-sanctioned “reaction” to adversity.”

          Very well said, Lophatt. I do find this goal to be extremely concerning. Reality is being manipulated and our natural, human reactions are being hijacked and replaced with “new and improved” state sanctioned thoughts and reactions. It’s working.

          I’m also still very interested in Sandy Hook but I go through periods where I feel very discouraged and cynical. It’s disheartening to know that this will not likely ever be exposed. I still can’t seem to let it go though. It’s like a good book that I just can’t bring myself to close. I’ve already learned so much from this and there is still so much more.

      2. I can see from my vantage point two things which are being messed with by the BMB – 1) The federal court system, where Dzokhar Tsarnaev is going to be put through a show trial. Is it significant that kids who knew him at Rindge and Latin in Cambridge, and who showed up to watch his arraignment, noted that he talked with a funny accent, when the kid they knew (who arrived in the US at 8 or 9) had like all such pre-puberty immigrants developed a perfectly local accent. So the idea is they are going to try a hoaxer and make the whole legal thing a fake, based on fake evidence —- this is a coup of sorts, a major coup —- because it will mean that forever after, no one can believe there will be real trials in such a court; 2) MIT has had to go through the motions of Boston Strong Collier and raise a memorial to the cop, while (without the slightest evidence) bowing their heads in belief and saying his alleged death under suspicious circumstances is tied to the Marathon – what, they’re going to have admit they’ve been tricked?

        So as with 9/11, more institutions have been corrupted in a most foul and disgusting manner.

        1. Musings, that is very true. I believe that is another aspect of these operations like Sandy Hook. “Reality” is what is on TEE VEE. In truth we live in a time a place where “trials” are often not conducted. When they are, and given some significance, they are but another opportunity to further manipulate.

          We don’t even know for certain we are actually observing a “trial” when they put one of these things on TV. “Holmes”, for example, doesn’t even look like old pictures of him. His eyes are even of a different color. Where are his parents? Why isn’t anyone interviewing them?

          The reporter, Hastings (?), is extremely suspicious. The examples are legion. You cannot reconcile what we are seeing with living in a “free country” because we are not. Respect for the rule of law is non-existent with the politicians and it flows down to the rabble. The only difference is that the rabble get shot or go to jail.

          I’m afraid we’re not looking at some future, the future is here.

  25. Censored From the Newtown Patch Today:

    911 Sandy Hook Dispatcher Told Attack was Fake ?

    This needs to be seriously investigated who exactly told the 911 dispatcher (Jenn) the reports of the attack on the school were fake ?

    No wonder Sedensky did not want to release these calls.

    Another caller conformed that there were multiple shooters as well.

    Inserted youtube video quoting Jenn and Nute exchange “rumor it’s fake”

    1. “This needs to be seriously investigated”

      Not really. The calls are obviously themselves fake.

      “No wonder Sedensky did not want to release these calls.”

      Silly man. There were no calls to release.

        1. I have a few. But who cares? My speculations are of no consequence.

          Whenever a spectacle of this nature is presented, there is a strict sequence of steps we must adhere to. We cannot allow ourselves to jump ahead.

          Step 1: Did anything actually happen? In the case of 911, the answer is YES. We know that because the buildings went away.

          In the case of Sandy Hook, the only real evidence we have indicates that nothing happened.

          Step 2: If something did in fact happen, WHAT happened? In the case of 911, I believe Judy Wood explains the evidence best, but many people have offered other interpretations of the evidence–but all agree that something happened. How did the buildings cease to exist? we are still at that stage of the investigation.

          In the case of Sandy Hook, since there is no evidence a massacre took place, we are stuck at this stage.

          The next steps involve who? how? and why? In the case of 911, there is still no good reason to jump to those stages of the investigation at this point. It is clear that the evidence indicates that the official story is completely false, but since the various factions have such different arguments as to what happened, the Who, How and Why questions remain dependent on the truth about the What Happened? question.

          So I am cautious at this point about Sandy Hook. We know, based on the evidence we have, and the fake evidence we have been given, that the story has to be a fabrication. We can all speculate as to who would do such a thing, why they would do it, and how they could get people to participate in the hoax. And I’m glad people do speculate that way. But I am not one of them.

          I like to stand outside the narrative, and observe. When I know the facts don’t fit the story, I don’t mind pointing it out.

          Sorry if that is not helpful for you, but I can only speak about what I am confident about.

        2. Patrick you can’t prove the towers came down. David Copperfield made the Statue of Liberty disappear so how hard would it be to do the same with the Towers? 911 was a complete hoax. No planes, no towers, no victims. One small issue though in the hoax theories – where did all the dead people go? Where did all the passengers on the planes go ? Where did all the victims at Sandy Hook go? So nobody was killed ? Great then it should be easy to get a current picture of Dawn Hochsprung or one of the other 27 people that died. Let me know how you make out with that. Keep up the great investigative work you are doing.

        3. carl, i think i smell a shill , cause either you are a shill or you have missed the boat completely and have done zero research on this subject at all. NON of these ‘sandy hook’ people even exsisted – actors carl , all actors , there is ZERO proof that ANY of these people actually exsisted , there is ZERO PROOF that sandy hook was even an operating school . Where are the 600 students that attended this ‘school’? where are the 1,200 parents of these children that attended this ‘school’? there is ZERO PROOF that this was anything other then a CFR ( counsel of foreign realtions) TV SHOW . You are aware Carl that there are only 5 media outlets in the united states and that CFR members control all 5 of these media outlets arnt you ? there is nothing on the TV that is not done for the agenda . there is no such thing as a journalist on the TV , the TV has ACTORS on it – it is fantasy land carl , same as sandy hook is fantasy land , a TV SHOW . there is no better MIND CONTROL DEVISE then the TV, the general population can be controlled by this boob tube sitting in the corner in almost every house hold in the world . its nothing more then a mind control box

        4. Here’s one “victim” that appears to have, or does, exist. What we do not have is evidence for is any deaths. Something did happen on that day, but we do not know what.

        5. Odd. I have never before hear it argued that the buildings are still there.

          How did they fit the new one in that space, if the old ones never went away? And how do people keep going to work in the old ones if they are kept on being made invisible?

        6. Carl said, “One small issue though in the hoax theories – where did all the dead people go? Where did all the passengers on the planes go ? Where did all the victims at Sandy Hook go? So nobody was killed ? Great then it should be easy to get a current picture of Dawn Hochsprung or one of the other 27 people that died.”

          Carl, you really are going to need put more thought into all of this if this is your biggest argument for this being a real shooting.

        7. As for Sandy Hook, I gather you’re kind of new around here. There has been a lot of discussion on each of the items you mention, much of it very illuminating. Perhaps you should take the time to read through the archives and catch up.

          Much of the material involves the seemingly inevitable conclusion that all of these people were actors, many of them moved to the town a couple of years ago; the idea is that this was VERY long in the planning and set-up phases. Once the trap was sprung, they proved to be very poor at simulating grief, but evidently they were admirably skilled at pretending to be normal transplants to a small town.

          Is this the best analysis? As I said, I am reluctant to speculate. I am not doing, as you say I am, investigative work. I await the results others produce.

          What we DO know, and I have stated it very clearly here many times, is that there is no physical evidence that anything happened; it seems very probable that there has never existed a person called Adam Lanza; it is almost certain that the building itself was not in use and had not been for some years; all of the activity seen in video footage outside the building is more than highly unusual–none of it indicates that a massacre had just taken place; no first responders were allowed into the building to hopefully save the lives of those who were merely injured; no photographic evidence of the inside of the building was produced (probably because the place had been mothballed for years, and perhaps never was used as a school).

          These things we know. I could list more, but you get the picture.

          We also know that a real weirdo who supposedly lived just down the street, Gene Rosen, told the most preposterous imaginable, over and over. This was so creepy, and so obviously false, that there had to be a reason for it. I don’t know what that reason is.

          We know that no purported member of the families shed any tears while being interviewed; some of them pretended to (badly), some were astonishingly cheerful in the immediate aftermath; one was both at the same time–Robbie Parker (I hope he was paid a bonus for that remarkable trick).

          If we had seen any photographic evidence–at all–that people died, it would be a different conversation. If all the stuff we DID see did not look so obviously fake, we would not be having this conversation.

          As I said, I do not know who produced this hoax, why they did it, or how they got so many people to participate in the charade, and I am loathe to speculate so soon in the investigative process.

          As I also said, we are still stuck at stage 2 of the investigation of 911, 12 years later.

          I don’t know why Judy Wood’s excellent research into the actual event of 911 is vilified and ignored (although I can speculate), but if she is correct (and I believe she is), it was a demonstration of weaponized Tesla technology. So the “who” would be the people who have that capability, i.e. the same secret government who has absconded with trillions of dollars and used them to build secret, deep underground military bases. The “why” is harder to guess, but it certainly has to do with what they have planned for our future. The “how did they get so many people to participate” question is even tougher, and I won’t even hint at a speculation.

          If the thermite/thermate crowd is correct about the “what happened” question, the “who,” “why” and “how” questions will be answered differently.

          Since Sandy Hook is so obviously fraudulent, and so poorly acted, its very shamelessness must be part of the point of the activity. As many people here have pointed out, it’s too stupid to believe, so there has to be a reason for the stupidity; they COULD have put on a better show if they had wanted to. And certainly Gene Rosen would have been cut at the casting call. But they hired Gene, and used him extensively. Why do you think that is? Maybe it was a test to see how gullible the country is, which is to say, how stupid we have become. Seems like a reasonable conjecture.

        8. Patrick,

          It’s a shame that more people aren’t familiar with Judy’s book, Where Did the Towers Go?, as I find it the most fascinating and carefully detailed 9/11 presentation currently available. Perhaps the $45 tab is more than most people want to invest in the subject… but, for anyone who really is serious about researching what happened on that day, I think it’s a must read.

        9. Truthchase I agree with almost everything you said. The media controls most of the idiots in this country.

          I don’t believe the official story. Where we go our separate ways is asserting that all deaths were faked and everything was staged. I do believe this event was planned and managed in great detail to recreate the Dunblane incident to garner support to confiscate firearms and destroy the 2A. I believe Lanza was a patsy.

          Yes there is a lack of blood, emotions, triage evidence, bodies etc. However a lack of evidence is not evidence. As I said if all deaths were faked it should be easy to photo a current “survivor”

          The reality is that some of you make your armchair quarterback comments with no basis but I am the only one that goes to Sandy Hook and the surrounding towns to interview the residents and assess what is really going on down in the trenches. The reality is there were real people involved as victims that are not around anymore. Did I see their dead bodies ? Did the hospital staff lie to their spouses and families when they told about how they treated the victims?

          I have serious doubts about the injuries to the survivors and their stories as well as the weapons allegedly used.

          If the script was a lone crazed gunman with NRA certificates then all of the “published evidence” would point to that and much of it does. But why would they muddy it up with a real SWAT guy caught in the woods? Or a kindergarten teacher’s son as the shooter? Or a nurse hiding in a closet for 4 hours? Or a time line that does not reconcile to the radio ?

          Would you like a theory ? Someone provided this postulate to which I concur :

          Motive – Garner public support for Gun confiscation. Punish embarrass, intimidate and ostracize the NRA and gun owners.

          Method- recreate Dunblane and the political results. Have a kindergarten teacher’s son familiar with school, escape routes and security procedure lead a team to perform the execution. (fake the deaths or make real deaths – you decide). Use local young adult with socialization and mental issues as a Patsy. This will justify a mental health assessment for all gun owners. Since 90 percent of the public is on Prozac, Zoloft or Paxil the government will be free to seize almost any household’s firearms on the pretense that the owners had mental issues.

          What does the available evidence suggest ?

          Someone suggested googling Sandy Hook + Kindergarten teacher’s son and I did that and found a great deal of material that integrates the available evidence, reports and circumstances.

        10. Carl, actually a disproportionate percentage actually “went up”, and away. I don’t think even David Copperfield can accomplish that. I’m afraid we are not allowed to suspend the laws of physics even when the PTB want to stage an event.

        11. Carl, The building was filled with asbestos and this scenario was an excellent way to get a new $50M school built for free and quickly demolish the building and make everyone working on that sign agreements to secrecy. Rather than get hit with a large lawsuit from the parents, the scene is set for a mass-student murder to tug at the American Sheeple’s heart-strings and demand gun control. And hundreds of millions of people bought this entire story without thinking twice….

        12. I think you could draw a logical inference here. Would that beat-up old school have been tolerated if (like others of its age) it was full of asbestos? In one of the richest parts of the US? With that crap play equipment? Would they even have been able to put it over on the parents? Would it have landed them in court? No to all of the above except the last. Therefore, the school was a shell.

  26. “Why take the chance of compounding the immeasurable loss that a ‘parent’ or ‘sibling’ may have actually experienced? I think that some comments go a bit too far given the uncertainties that still hang over this entire affair. ”

    Things are tough all over.

    Maybe the NFL should be put out of business, by this logic. Some people get hurt. Life, we call it.

    Look. The facts are completely screwy. The official story is completely, obviously, a lie. No first responders allowed into an obviously unused building. The medical examiner had apparently dropped acid before performing a theater of the absurd “press conference” that mystifies even today, a year later (the laughs are easier to enjoy now, which is a bonus). The slaughtered babes, unseen by their parents, absconded with, Dr. Frankenstein-style, in the wee hours of the next morning, was if that’s normal. It’s all nuts.

    If you want people like me to extend the benefit of the doubt, Norm, because there is one in a trillion trillion trillion possibility that the official story might be true, in deference to the hapless relatives of the unlikely victims, well, nuts to that.

  27. Kathy’s gratuitous linking of Sandy Hook with black gangs attacking innocent Whites for the thrill of it illustrates not only her own poisonous racism but, more important, the racist basis of the Republican right and the Teabaggers. The implication that Sandy Hook is a diversion for the media avoid reporting that Black gangs are attacking Whites is an example of the kind of comments by the viewers of Alex Jones that illustrate their gutter racism. It is the more sophisticated and subtler racism of the Dem leftish which leave these comments unopposed, and in effect legitimating them.

    The War on Terrorism is largely driven by this racism, the killing of hundreds of thousands of dark-skinned Muslims to steal their oil, homes and other property and power. The mass homicide is usually directed against non-White persons, and America as wellhas a tradition of racial lynching that was exemplified in the Trayvon Martin killing. The lynching is Whites murdering non-Whites for the thrill of it, Kathy’s inversion being typical of racist justifications. The lynch mentality indoctrinated in the American White people is most easily directed outward against Foreigners, in foreign policy, conflating racism and Patriotism.

    The homicidal racism historically has often had a religious ideological basis, the current cultural-ethnic racism against Muslims being instilled in both Jewish and Christian churches. It is engrained in the perverted moral values of the Old Testament. Not only is religion and Patriotism ideologically conflated, but now anti-government libertarianism is included as well, as illustrated by Kathy’s absurd and infantile comment that the government is destroying the medical system to establish socialism.

    These are all Faith-based assertions, since religion traditional promotes power delusions that is not based on evidence or reason, and are often grossly implausible.. And this kind of religious-political-economic intellectual drivel contaminates a fourth to a third of the American people, who believe it emotionally and are consequently not amenable to reason or fact. The only way to deal with it is to confront Patriotism, primitive religion, and anti-government economics, and this the leftish establishment does not do. So they legitimate these emotional truths by their learned and professional silence, creating a perverted American truth consensus that allows the multi-billionaire plutocracy to drive the American people into the ground.

Comments are closed.