Citizen Speaks Out on Sandy Hook at Connecticut State Committee Hearing

crowleyDr. Éowyn
Fellowship of the Minds

The State of Connecticut’s Public Safety and Security Committee (PSSC) is a joint standing committee of the Connecticut General Assembly and contains members of the Senate and the House. In the Connecticut Legislature, there are no separate chamber committees.

PSSC is charged with matters relating to homeland security, the Department of Public Safety, including state police, state organized task force on crime, municipal police training, fire marshals, the fire safety code and the state building code, civil preparedness and legalized gambling, and military and veterans’ affairs, except veterans’ pensions.

The Public Safety and Security Committee of 2015 has 15 Democratic members and 10 Republican members. The Chair of the committee is Sen. Timothy Larson, Democrat, who is also the General Assembly’s Majority Whip. For the names of the other 24 committee members, go here.

Connecticut Public Safety & Security Committee

On March 3, 2015, at a public hearing of the Public Safety and Security Committee on SB 1011: An Act Concerning the Training of Security Personnel, a private citizen named Maureen Crowley boldly spoke out on the Sandy Hook fraud.

Note: The hearing was held in Room 1C, Legislative Office Building, Hartford, CT.

Maureen Crowley

Below is the transcript I took of Crowley’s testimony:

Thank you, all, for allowing me to be here today.

My name is Maureen Crowley. I was born in New Britain, the city in which my great grandfather James Christopher Crowley founded the Crowley Brothers Paint Company in 1885. We then moved to Plainville when I was a toddler, moved back to New Britian when I was in the 6th grade. I attended St. Francis of Assisi Junior High where Sister Miriam Patrise taught me “When you’re not sure of the right thing to do, the right thing is usually the hard thing to do.”

It’s hard for me to speak here today, to speak — an aging baby boomer — would have been easier to sit home. But the truth never comes easily. It comes with dues for those who choose to speak it. The truth is often not palatable or pristine, but it is simple. Simple, but far from easy.

Security matters indeed, of course it does. Safety. Based on the events in Newtown, Connecticut, December 14, 2012 — not December 13, 2012, the day which was confirmed by [search engine] Bing itself, that the interview with principal Dawn Hochsprung was cached. Not December 13, the day that the September 2013 FBI Report says that the “shooting” occurred. This was before the other report, Uniform Crime Reporting of the FBI, infamously declared no murders in Newtown in 2012. Not December 13, the day that the Social Security Death Index proclaimed was the day that Mr. Fictional himself, “Adam Lanza,” left this world. There’s even a report from the committee on the psychiatric dimensions of disaster that not only has the date of this event wrong, they have the day of the week wrong. It was NOT on, December 12 was not a Tuesday. December 11 was a Tuesday. In fact, December 11 was the day when United Way started soliciting funds.

The list of pre-knowledge — confirmed, issued, and divulged — is long. How could this be if it were a real shooting, done by a 112-pound young man, standing a full 6 feet tall, wearing a size 8½ shoe, after he neatly made his bed and washed the New Hampshire trip dirt off his mom’s car, and shot 26 people?

No. [Crowley shakes her head]

I was, as some of you here are now, I believed every word out of [CNN anchor] Anderson Cooper’s mouth that day. But once the persecution of Wolfgang Halbig began, I wanted to ask why the Newtown Police would send law enforcement into his home in Florida if they did not have something to hide.

This is serious! This is a non-event that has turned the culture of the state of Connecticut and the culture of the United States of America upside down. Mental health vulturism. Drills in which 3rd-graders are forced to look down the barrel of a gun. And even state monitoring of Connecticut homeschooling, and even a president that wants to war on bullets.

I reject the official narrative of Sandy Hook. I reject the lies. I’m suspicious of the upwards of $500 million raised through a plethora of donation websites with zero ISUC scrutiny, zero money-laundering scrutiny, zero United Way …

At this point, Timothy Larson, the chairman of the Public Safety and Security Committee, interrupts Crowley and orders her to “wrap it up.”

Maureen Crowley continues:

We the people are not as stupid as the people in this room think we are.

I invite you to at least watch the video, “We Need to Talk About Sandy Hook.” Again, the name of the video is “We Need to Talk About Sandy Hook.” You’ll find it well thought-out, fact based, zero speculation, and interesting.

I hope you’ll remember my words today, unlike the ten members of the Connecticut State Police who could not remember how they entered the non-commissioned, non-operating Sandy Hook Elementary School that day! You think broken glass would be memorable, at a school that boasted 34 classrooms when it was K through 5, but no mass evacuation captured on a single police dash cam.

Connecticut — the state which I volunteer to teach piano in the prison systems. The state that I graduated from with a Bachelor’s degree from Central Connecticut State University. Connecticut — the state that was nothing but good to me. And I seek to return the favor by speaking the truth. If they don’t like hearing the nickname “Corrupticut,” then neither should any of you.

Sredzinski: “Thank you for your testimony. Any further questions? Thank you very much.”

Watch Maureen Crowley’s testimony for yourself before Lenny Pozner, father of alleged Sandy Hook child victim Noah Pozner (who died a second time in Peshawar, Pakistan), prevails on YouTube to scrub this video:

Thank you, Maureen Crowley.

Thank you for speaking out.

And may God bless and keep you safe from all harm, brave lady. 

Here’s contact Info for Public Safety and Security Committee Chair Sen. Timothy Larson:

Legislative Office Building
Room 3600
Hartford, CT 06106-1591
To send an email:

H/t Barry Soetoro, Esq. and FOTM reader Matt L.

For all the posts FOTM has published on the Sandy Hook hoax, including every facet alluded to by Maureen Crowley — Adam Lanza’s curious 12/13/2012 date-of-death, pre-dated donation websites, Wolfgang Halbig, the long-abandoned Sandy Hook school, no dash cam video of students being evacuated — go here.


42 thoughts on “Citizen Speaks Out on Sandy Hook at Connecticut State Committee Hearing”

  1. Don’t you just love the way politicians use the law to break the law without batting an eye–well maybe a slight wink to other conspirators sworn also to secrecy.

    1. continuing: Maureen Crowley has more intestinal fortitude (in the vernacular “balls”) than the rest of the men combined who comprise this committee overseeing Connecticut’s march to state “public safety and security” They walk a yellow brick road–also known as fiction and the tale is an allegory of public servants’ malfeasance.

      All hail a true patriot and I love the quote from the Catholic nun: stark truth isn’t easy to come by, but the path is simple. We make it complicated because we choose to ignore the obvious.

  2. Thank you Maureen Crowley for your courageous concise eloquence in communicating what many of my friends and colleagues are thinking.

  3. Good job, this is where our efforts need to lie. When the law making starts to try and “cash in” on these events and propogate agendas, this is when we need like minded people in every state at every level, speaking out and speaking up.

  4. The Dunblane shooting began at 9:35 am. I think we can add plagerism to the list of FBI malfeasance, because they appear to have used the same script for Sandy Hook.

    Citizens, such as this fine person, are making a difference, and the Sandy Hook ‘players’ seem to be running for cover. Holder, Carver, and others have retired. Just this week, the event spokesman, Lt J. Paul Vance has been reassigned to the humble traffic division! One of the ‘parents’ moved to WA state, then moved to Utah, purchased a home from a close friend, then sold it two months later. The money laundering will be much more problematic for all those who benefitted because of the unrelenting scrutiny which will continue…

    Three Newtown residents have contacted WH with information about the decommissioned and closed status of the SHS building. A Florida judge heard WH out. Without hesitation, she issued subpoenas. This thing is headed for a Florida court – and hopefully Ms. Crowley, and everyone committed to seeing Connecticut come clean, will be vindicated. The event predates the two year old statute which has legalized government propaganda, a statute no citizen would support had they been aware and able to cast a vote. The statute may protect the government in regard to their admission of staged mall shootings over the past two years – but Sandy Hook is without any such protection.

  5. Bravo! Bravo!…You go girl. I am shocked they did not silence you with security dragging you away. The last person I tried to wake up reacted with such a savage attack on my character, it came close to violence at the top of a ski lift. This man was so furious I dared to question the Sandy Hook scam that the only way he could deal with my information was flogging the messenger. I wish I had video of the encounter, it was a snapshot of what plagues America like a new cancer. I got a similar reaction from trying to wake someone up about the 911 attacks. The information is so disturbing, the only way to deal with it is killing the messenger. By killing the messenger, the unbearable message can be refused entry into their cocoon of self image as America the righteous; an America that would never kill thousands of our own people to further political ends. Once you come to grips with the truth about 911, Sandy Hook being a scam is no surprise at all and neither is the Boston Marathon Bombing, Waco and Oklahoma City. It is part of a pattern of psych warfare on the American people… to make them believe there is evil waiting around every corner and they are in constant danger. The only way to deal with the danger is more wars abroad and more security at home. That will cost money and require relinquishing your rights and freedom because you don’t want another 911 or Sandy Hook to happen. Did you notice all of the victims were first graders?
    What is likely to emotionally affect you more, a 9 year old dog getting hit by a car or a crate full of puppies thrown under a bus?

    1. What I’ve gotten when I’ve tried to raise questions with friends about all of the false flags (and other issues) is condescension, a kind of “there-there-little-girl” attitude (and I’m far, far from girlhood, 🙂 ) and a “you believe all that conspiracy stuff?; I thought you were smarter than that” frame of (controlled media) mind.

      One friend who I thought would be one of the first to question all of this, and who considers himself “aware and smart,” falls in line with whatever the media spews out, especially on network news. I’ve warned him repeatedly to resist and stop watching, but whenever something in the corporate-controlled media pops up, he repeats what he’s heard as if it’s the truth of the matter – and not the propaganda that it is. So I’m left with giving him little “hints” here and there and encouraging him to do some searching online for more info. But he’d rather have the TV do his thinking for him. Easier that way. It’s the mind-set the majority of Americans are most comfortable with as long as it does not directly impact their lives (which is profoundly sad since but of course, it does).

      1. Ramona, I understand where you are coming from here. Unless someone has the curiosity to pursue the inconsistencies in these stories, then they don’t know that they are accepting lies which really do impact their lives.

        I know the shutdown of six towns around Boston to pursue Tsarnaev certainly affected mine, because it meant one of my nephew would never choose to go to school at Boston College. He just shut the door on it, not because of fear, but because of the fact that even though he had an interview at the school, they accepted the whole BMB and locked their gates that day, refusing to let someone in who had flown across the country for the interview. They lost a student that day. He did not come back after he flew back home.

        Now it is true that in those hours and days nobody knew that they were reacting to what we have discovered was a big lie. But that means that this “drill” was not without consequences.

        Nor will the present conduct of the federal court, in the sham trial, go unremarked by other courts where it will become permissible for an attorney to violate the most basic standards in defending a client, where an attorney will punt from the very start and not be ashamed. She’s an actress, apparently, but others are not who will follow in her footsteps and not get disbarred for doing so. There was an old phrase in Anglo-American legal tradition: “A defense attorney shall know only his client.” This is not true in continental, inquisitorial systems. But it has been one shred of hope for those in our tradition, which is being crushed into the mud. Shall we let it go? Shall we let the presumption of innocence be lost forever?

        Apparently the drill-meisters have no problem with that. But then they have so much to hide.

        Sometimes, with men, they feel it is better not to know too much, because if they did, they would have to put their lives on the line changing the state of affairs. I suspect there are those who are quite aware of the situation, but they aren’t talking like we are. I wonder what they will do when the opportunity presents itself. There are probably not many such people, but once the leak is sprung, it cracks the whole dam.

        1. Oh, and one more thing. The last minutes of this are so poignant, because it explains where this drama may have come from – a sort of utopian idealism which regards all tradition, the past in which we have developed, as an obstacle to a shining future. Lies told to get to that future, people sacrificed for it, are not of consequence. It is nothing short of a new religion with some adherents who are indeed talented, but who are amoral.

          Is it futile to resist the Borg? Weigh this story carefully. It shows what gifts are being proffered in exchange for belief in certain tenets. I do not believe for one second that this man lacked insight into what actually happened at the BMB hoax. Can you do good things while spreading ill will in the community and fooling people into thinking they have been under attack?

 (a film which culminated in a speech that basically said violence like the BMB attack had met its match, and you could live well and get your revenge by making these bionic limbs). The familiar “survivor” who went on Dancing with the Stars, Ms. Haslet, appears in a photo.

          One little suggestion for saving the limbs of young men and women: Stop starting wars, even humanitarian wars which aim at destroying primitive social systems. A dead body cannot use bionic limbs, and there have been a lot of those too.

        2. That TED video leaves me speechless, musings. Clearly, this technology is astonishing. I had no idea how advanced it has become. And I’m certain all those scientists really enjoy their job creating these devices.

          But anyone smart enough to do that work HAS to see through the obvious lies that saturate the BMB story–especially since MIT is right there. Since there were no injured, the hospitals obviously had no patients to work on, no one needing physical therapy. And the only people for these scientists to craft prosthetics for would therefor be long ago healed and recovered. This would be obvious to the technicians–both in the physical state of the stumps and the mental state of the person. Old injuries clearly would require different technical considerations than fresh ones, and newly traumatized people react quite differently, in terms of cooperation with their helpers than people who long ago made peace with their sad fate.

          That’s to say, this guy is a fantastic liar. Is that the price people like that have to pay to acquire the billions of dollars it takes to develop their craft? They have to sell the world on massive lies, when called upon? It’s one thing to try to hoodwink us, and fail miserably, as in the case of the buffoonish Wayne Carver. This fellow is another thing entirely. You can almost forgive Carver, feeling sorry for him, wondering how he feels about being roped into participating in such a sham. Not this guy.

        3. Patrick, it’s good that you provided a slightly different perspective to mine in this story. I took it in a very paranoid way, in which people who ignored the fact that the amputees were not recent ones, actually were in on the plot to deceive the public, perhaps from the start.

          But you probably have it right. They know their funding depends upon going along with the game.

          It may also be some of the funding comes from our oligarchs, who have peculiar notions about how to run public life, but clearly the inventors must toe the lie, not loose cannons who challenged you suddenly on the truth of the matter. You would probably have to tell him from the outset what really happened and make sure he did not spill the beans. Just the fact that he is working in this field would make him interested in contributing and experimenting, and so you would have to give him the unique privilege of helping a specific set of people designated as victims. He would thus be in a strong position which his competitors could only dream of.

          Finding somebody in this field without traditional values is not hard. Why would they care about what the public did or did not know? Why would they sense that lying is a sin?

          Another safeguard might be prior agreements to abide by government secrecy, regarding classified information. Was the FEMA-run “drill” actually classified? Once you are told about it, you cannot reveal the truth of it. You could tie it to the ability to work with military veterans.

          Here I speculate a lot. Again, I feel imaginative speculation is my contribution rather than special information to which I am privy. I really know factually nothing more than a member of the general public, no matter how many times I may have been in proximity to any of these scenes. To me, I simply must imagine plausible alternatives to the official story which explain the great holes in the story. But I must do so as someone drawing inferences that are obscured but demonstrably present.

          The trial in federal court going on right now will never closely examine the characteristics of a blast which would have behaved so efficiently to blast off only legs. But legs and gait are the problem in outfitting soldiers for a return to a productive civilian life. Arms and hands are another department, and thankfully that too is being worked on. Just not in association with the BMB, which places such an emphasis on mobility rather than dexterity.

          Examining the blast would be key to explaining whether someone could have placed a backpack that would do what they said it did, and what sort of explosives would have been required. If you fail to examine that, you lose out on important exculpatory evidence. Since the defendant is not really anything but a crisis actor, there is no problem.

          But imagine what power there is to keep up a sham of this type. This would be where most people would bail on our speculation, feeling it is one of those secrets which too many people are asked to keep. They would say this is why the whole thing must be real. But accepting that involves discarding too much evidence that it is fake. For the sake of their sanity (and their jobs) they simply decide to ignore the whole thing. Too much cognitive dissonance is disagreeably painful to most people.

        4. Corruption is a strange thing, musings. It’s like rust. Or in a Biblical allusion, yeast, which propagates its way through every bit of the lump of dough. The little compromises required at the beginning might seem trivial, but soon enough, it is clear that it is a massive trap we have entered, and escape is impossible.

          Sometimes it is money and lifestyle that constitutes the trap: the lifestyle the kids have grown up with, the colleges they are on track to attend, the neighborhood/cars/house. The respect in the community.

          Sometimes to attempt to back out means being framed for crimes that will put you in prison for life, and no one will believe you. They might use the psychiatry paradigm to take away your ability to think, or remember. Permanently.

          An example is the story arc in the penultimate season of Boardwalk Empire, where Nuckie’s nephew accidentally kills a fellow student in college. Because it was Uncle Nuckie’s booze at the center of the truth about what happened, the boy has to falsely accuse his roommate, ruining his life forever. If the nephew came clean, everyone in his family would be destroyed, and lots of associated families, too–which means that Nuckie would have to kill him. And the innocent kid would STILL spend the rest of his life in prison.

          One small prank-gone-bad meant that boy would have to live with a monstrous evil for the rest of his days.

          The system as it has developed is extremely skilled at compromising people. Silence is a person’s only choice.

      2. This is a very solid discussion of the realities behind being an iconoclast. This website has some clear headed thinkers and I’m very grateful to mingle with those folks.
        I, too, have had massive differences of opinion with my fellow coffee klatchers and when you are outnumbered 10 to 1, and all are fighting you tooth and nail, you can appreciate why the going is so tough in getting the word out.
        There are very tough topics to talk about, topics that arouse intense emotions. Too often, all it would take for one’s verbal antagonists to come around to clear thought is some reading in good books and blogs. Do they do this, do they wish to spend some time reading and in thought to clarify their questions? The answer is a decided “no”. What does this tell you?
        Why would otherwise rational people do this? How is is possible to actually lose friends over these issues? It’s called cognitive dissonance, beliefs held that cannot be given up cause people to resent peoples’ intentions to alter their bedrock of belief. Separate a person from their core underpinnings and you are looking for trouble. Truth is the ultimate victim and people don’t always appreciate truth. They’ll do anything to escape the claws of truth, better to be secure than hold onto truth in its stead. Truth is not everything, it’s malleable, it’s fungible, it’s evanescent, it’s expendable. You can live without it, you can give it different names. If a lie feels good, why seek out the truth?

  6. Agreed on the malfeasance angle, how about the evil angle? Just put yourself in the shoes of those who have chosen to “go along” with this nasty ruse. Are they but mere citizens with different outlooks or are they traitors? This Sandy Hook event is not going away, unlike the many other false flags that have withered and died. Why is that? What is the actual mechanism to have a town with people with friends and still nobody has chosen to break the bonds of silence and sing like a bird? Is this major mind control, have the outputs of Newtown cell towers been checked? Why are these citizens choosing to act like zombies straight out of the Night of the Living Dead?

  7. THE major talking point against considering the questions this woman raises, abusively employed by probably a battery of paid goons at Raw Story, is that anyone who would question such an event is harming the parents of these little victims. And the goons take it a step further (while stalking responders online and judging them as nuts): that anyone who defends the manifestly unpopular opinions that these events are hoaxes, are themselves harming “the victims” and deserving of prosecution and muzzling.

    Oddly, the goons supporting Sandy Hook and BMB are working for the Dems; while the goons supporting 9/11 were in the Republican pay (yet I do not remember such vehemence – after all the Republicans got their war, but the Dems have been less successful taking away guns and getting people to love the lock-downs).

    If you’ve seen one tyranny you’ve seen ’em all, actually.

    But the lame idea that you can never mention the holes in a story out of fear of hurting survivors is a pernicious belief. I imagine it started elsewhere than in the land of the First Amendment. In the US, whatever the falsity of your position, you do not go to jail for denial of some event or other. Not yet.

    1. Musings, it is simply more modeling. There are no “Dems” or “Repugs”, just tools. They all get their checks signed by the same boss.

      I’ve said many times that this country used to pride itself on defending the rights of others to say anything they liked. What all of these “gate keeper” sites do is reinforce the meme that there are “sides” and you are “fer us or agin us”.

      “Belief” is now an expected component of citizenship. To question the media is seditious. The various “fusion centers” have published tracts on identifying “dangerous extremists” by their mentioning The First Amendment or the Constitution in general.

      They are making lists (and checking them twice). Those websites are no better than the pap on Tee Vee. They want everyone focused on the parasites and their contrived “party battles”, while they secure the empire.

      I don’t go after people who disagree with me. They can believe whatever idiot thing they like. It isn’t your imagination. It’s in the toilet. It won’t be fixed by asking those responsible to do something about it. They are not waiting for our permission. They will not be announcing their “success”.

      We’ll wake up someday – just like today – and find we’re living in a bankster controlled oligarchy. The only real question is what each of us individually will do as a result. Arguing with “goons” is a waste of time (and dangerous). Let them throw themselves on the tender mercies of their masters. Their ultimate fate is to be reviled.

  8. Just calling your attention to a new site – – run by a disparate group who have been serially banned from the Guardian Comment is Free section for raising topic or opinions not desirable to the mainstream media.

    We’re trying to monitor and publicise some of the more egregious examples of censorship and bias in this alleged flagship “liberal” publication. Please share the link if you can!

    Thanks and sorry for the OT comment.

  9. I hope Maureen Crowley gets some answers as we here in UK are getting a massive push from MSM, they want the people in the UK to believe their story…”.of that fateful day in Sandy Hook”.
    I’ve Just finished watching a ‘ catch up ‘ programme on BBC called ”surviving Sandy Hook”… can’t believe what I heard.! . they were so convincing, but i saw flaws in it.. 3 families,The lewis family, Rousseau family and Barbara Sibley her husband and 3 boys..(she was the Mother who said she went to the school with the forgotten book.).. the husband denying he was an actor, displaying shock and astonishment that any one thought it was a hoax.. feeling mad at the calls he had from people ,proposing he was an actor…protesting this saying.. ” lies, lies”..
    Their oldest boy had a lot to say about the shooting said he heard it – he was in the school that day, and how it had affected him..The Mother felt guilty because she ran away from the door…leaving her son inside the school, with the shooter..

    The tears from Scarlett Lewis, promoting the park in his name. showing a video of Jessi playing in the house, ( it could have been an old video.. I noticed he had shoulder length hair that some children had in the 1980’s..).She Involved other son, moving the toys to the basement…….. ( softening your heart ) The Father didn’t make an appearance…She is fully fledged to helping criminals renew their lives with love. visiting a prison and talking to them… along with her son… ( taking place I wonder from his Father ).

    Lauren Rosseau’s Father Gilles, and her brothers had a lot to say, he even mentioned her car in the parking lot on that day having bullet holes.. ( in which I remember projected outwards rather than inwards, as if the bullets had been fired from within the car.. also rusted ?)..

    I am shocked to hear these people speak.. gun control was the theme.. The tears from the brother of Lauren Rosseau, crying every time he mentioned her.. it was so convincing. Anyone shed a light on this film?
    Is this mind control?

    Has it come out at this time because they know questions are being asked and more and more anomalies are being ‘ outed’….Unfortunatly This film would ” sell it” to any one who doesn’t know all the facts..

    1. Thank you, Poppy, for your report on the BBC program. As disappointing as it was to read, it is necessary that we all face the truth – that the “powers that be” are multinational. The web is our salvation. .

    2. I forced myself to watch the film on Youtube the other day. I don’t think it has anything to do with “them” being “outed.” It’s a continuing soap opera presented as reality to those who buy into and accept their daily brainwashing. I believe they have other plans for those who refuse to take the blue pill.

  10. Many thanks to Maureen Crowley for her courage and intelligence. Connecticut is full of good people – we need to hear from more of them.

  11. Thank you all for your support. It has been very encouraging. The truth matters, and you, the people matter

    1. Maureen, I was so proud to hear you telling the truth right out loud and I don’t think they liked it one bit. (btw I love your name)

      Maureen (Reenie From CT)

  12. The Sandy Hook Commission came out with their final report on recommendations. Don’t be fooled – this is not just for Connecticut – they are trying to make this the national model for public schools. I read to about page 90 and here are some interesting recommendations:

    I read up until about page 90 and this is a manual to turn public schools into prisons where the schools determine if parents are allowed into the school. Here are a few of their recommendations:

    The Commission also reiterates its recommendation that all exterior doors in K-12 schools be equipped with hardware capable of implementing a full perimeter lockdown.

    Any parent or guardian serving as a member of a school security and safety committee shall not have access to any information reported to such committee, pursuant to subparagraph (c) of subdivision (2) of subsection (c) of section 10-222k of the general statutes, as amended by this act.

    This training shall include live exercises to test the efficacy of the training program and to provide a means to develop that program as informed by these exercises. The Commission recommends that each school identify specific individuals to serve as safety and security personnel.

    PRISONS! They want to limit parental contact as much as possible by setting up different areas i.e., public, private, limited, etc. Full surveillance inside and out. They are also going with a theme of prevention called ALL HAZARDS meaning they’re ready for anything – weather, terrorists and Adam Lanza types.

    They are also going after home-schoolers stating they will draw up an individual learning plan for home schooled kids.

    Sandy Hook is more than just a gun grab. They are redefining what mental conditions are and creating new ones, and the biggest thing is they are building prisons called schools and will monitor your kid’s every thought, blink, breath and movement. They are trying to re-educate kids on how to react the correct way to things – this is called RESILIENCY! They want to turn off our emotions and have us desensitized to the horrors to come.

    1. And what do you suppose they’ll get out of this? More children born to responsible parents? Or people opting never to have a child which might be put through such a meat-grinder?

      Freedom and spontaneity in childhood, including the freedom to ask questions and explore, are essential to self-governing societies. But that American model will not due for an empire in the making. We’ve seen examples of Asian models treated as superior, when in fact they involve very densely packed societies with scarce resources, where traditions are very old. Or perhaps some European model, where there is an elite set apart from the beginning of the whole educational experience, might allow a fraction of children to avoid a prison-like school system, so that later in life they would be fit to rule over the serfs.

      It’s an altogether disgusting picture. I know a little bit about inner city schools in LA, which so far are surprisingly unprison-like, even though it is absolutely without a doubt an area where gunshots are heard and prostitution and drug dealing, with attendant arrests, are carried on right outside the school. Maybe those kids are luckier than someone in a suburb where the zero tolerance of any child’s exposure to violence manifests itself in the need to shut out the taxpaying parents who make the school possible. No wonder why, in my community, people with money decide to withdraw from the public school system, at least by the time their kids are ready for junior high. The insults are seen for what they are: a naked power grab by the school authorities, conforming to some edicts from on high.

      1. What is amazing is there are actually citizens who take to these absurdities and accept whatever the government proposes. In my job, I attended to treatment on young people and what was boggling was the parents of said children. Clearly, these parents were not fit or qualified to raise children, they were actually insane. They were stupid, venal, and vicious. Children to them were inconveniences. I think most people today would rather text than breathe.
        Enfield, Connecticut voted in a program to provide armed guards at all schools in the town. Now, they are reconsidering if the expense is worth it. It has been extremely easy following Sandy Hook to implement even draconian stupidities that convey the absurd notion that extremism will guarantee safety. I’m saying that Americans are, indeed, the stupidest clots on this planet and they are simply too ignorant and inadequately sentient to see they are being had by evil forces. 911, Sandy Hook and the rest of the false flags, while crudely done, have been more than adequate to put another one over on the American public. It’s murder being aware of these things when we are so unable to call attention to these travesties.
        We must find ways to implement massive public awareness and we must also take the criticisms that go with our inabilities to effect awareness. We apparently have no Goebbels, no Bernays, no propagandists who can get the word out. This is our current state of affairs and we are flunking badly.

        1. The problem is, Gil, people KNOW what’s going on; they choose to ignore it or rationalize it. We can talk until we’re blue in the face, but we’re just going to run out of breath.

          People, generally speaking, don’t care what’s happening, as long as their kid gets good grade and their job is secure.

        2. I would disagree that people allegedly “know” the issues, they just don’t buy into them. I deal with people of normal/acceptable intelligence and most or all do NOT follow alternate sites. They plop down on the sofa at 6pm and watch the 10 million dollar talking heads blather about “news” that is straight off the Associated Press wires. That is, they are receiving and processing and accepting this drivelous verbiage because it takes very little mental energy!! Do you know who owns Reuters? Do you know who owns 90% of virtually ALL news outlets? When you own it all, you get to steer the “news” as you see fit. You’d think people would be up on their JFK facts, they are not. How about Waco? Not!! What about the Weaver family at Ruby Ridge? Not!! Thanks to keen folks like Tracy, Fetzer, Halbig, etc, the truth is there but the inclination to pick the news up and digest it is NOT there for people to ponder….
          I maintain that people don’t know the realities behind many/most of these false flags. If they did, many more could be convinced of these truths. However, such is NOT the case, not by a long shot. This is the cross we truthers have to bear. Cognitive dissonance is alive and very well, thank you.

    2. What will a full perimeter lockdown do for them once the perp is inside?
      And wasn’t story that he blew out the glass in the front entrance? What would be the good of a lockdown in that situation?

  13. What is the procedure after this Newtown public safety and security meeting, do they have to address the questions?.. make a written reply or what, anyone know?

  14. Testimony today in court in the Tsarnaev trial is trying to set in stone the whole case, just as the monument to Officer Collier is doing, and it will turn on the shooting of officer Collier at MIT. The grad student who said he saw the pair (or what looked like them) is a math Ph. D. candidate. Like the TED talk guy who reinforced the notion of the victim of the attack (Ms. Haslet) by helping her with cutting edge prosthetics, it is hard to discount the testimony of such people because they do not seem to have some kind of criminal involvement and do not appear corrupt.

    The swirl of events around the alleged shooting are, however, far more problematic and were during the time in which the legend was being created. You had reports of a hold-up at a 7-11 that were rejected by the CEO of 7-11 as never having taken place. You had an original story about a carjacking which was supposed to take place nearby in East Cambridge, but did not work out. It was staged elsewhere. The carjacking was always kind of hinky. The second version of the story had the Tsarnaev’s leaving in a car, because somehow a carjacking in East Cambridge was not do-able. So why did they carjack? Remember the story about the car in the shop? Yet somehow they had to get away from MIT, and the latest version has them doing it by car.

    And now, repeatedly, there was the story of the motive for getting the policeman: to take his weapon, which then authorities said they could not do. Hey, how did they shoot him if they wanted a weapon? They must have had at least one. You really kill someone to get a second weapon? It seems extreme as a motive. But that’s all they have. I’ll bet a lot of people somehow overlook that they HAD a weapon on them which killed someone, in the eagerness to agree with authority as to the motive for killing Sean Collier. The mind boggles. You simply have to ignore logic to agree with the motive there.

    As you look at every detail, you see a comic strip, and not life. It will not stand up to deep focus, only to surface impressions. But nobody minds except a few who understand the maxim: “Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.” Or you can put lipstick on a pig, but it is still a pig. This is a particularly shape-shifting kind of story, but it does not matter since there is a pre-determined end.

    Nobody can agree to the facts of the case, and that is no accident, because it is meant to be something like the song “Old Shoe” in “Wag the Dog” – something you think you vaguely remember.

Comments are closed.

Reflections on Media and Politics | © Memory Hole Blog / James F. Tracy 2012-2016

%d bloggers like this: