Joel Skousen has provided an excellent analysis of the video on the Sandy Hook massacre. This appeared in his World Affairs Brief for January 18.
The re-posted video is here: http://bit.ly/UKaQHw
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
This video has gone viral on the net questioning if the Sandy Hook shooting actually happened:
which over 10 million people have watched. Google has branded it as offensive.
My problem with the video is that it fails to distinguish between the evidence that points to a government coverup (evidence of multiple participants and falsifying the weapons used), and allegations that the shooting never happened at all. All of the evidence gets lumped into the main allegation that the shooting was a hoax, not real. Some of the evidence they present is good investigative reporting, but they draw the wrong conclusions when they suggest the shooting never happened.
While I am convinced there is an ongoing cover-up by state police who refuse to allow the public to see what the school security cameras show inside the school, or discuss the other 3 persons arrested and hauled away, I don’t have any doubts the mass murder happened.
It is notable, by the way, that the first official excuse explaining away one of the other persons arrested has surfaced. The Newtown Bee newspaper inserted this little piece of police propaganda into a story about Police Union funding: “A man with a gun who was spotted in the woods near the school on the day of the incident was an off-duty tactical squad police officer from another town, according to the source.” That’s pure baloney. Notice that they say “spotted” when, in fact, he was taken down and arrested. If he really was police, he would have shown officers his credentials and the police would not have led him away in handcuffs. We can probably expect more lame excuses like this as the police concoct more false stories to cover for these arrests.
Let’s look at the main claims that the authors suggest points to a shooting hoax:
1. Video coverage showing no ambulances or children. Actually there was one ambulance, but it was not close enough to the school to be caring for anyone, they say. They also point to the lack of hundreds of children milling around after fleeing the school. The problem with both these allegations is that there is no time frame on the videos they show. To me they look like the crisis is already at the mature stage— none of the cars are moving, the children already gone, and the ambulances are gone because there was only one wounded survivor—an adult. The dead children had probably not been removed yet while investigators did their work (which later disappeared into a black hole).
2. The Parker Family: this is the linchpin of the entire claim. The oldest daughter presumably dies in the school shooting and yet is seen days later in the arms of Obama when he comes to visit the victim’s families wearing the same black and red dress she wore in prior family photos. How could she be alive days later?
This happens to be the only conflicting case that I had the ability to verify with near first-hand information. One of my best friends is an MD in a neighboring town to Newtown and he goes to the same church as the Parker family. He has confirmed that the oldest daughter is dead. He’s very aware of the evils of false flag operations by government and is no Pollyanna about these types of thing. He looked into it in detail and knows the claims are false.
How about the picture of the daughter with Obama? It wasn’t her. The picture was of the middle and younger daughters—not the oldest. They look very much alike so it is easy to make this mistake. The middle daughter is wearing one of the two red and black dresses the family has for the girls. She does look similar but it is not the oldest daughter.
How about the father joking with others before making his tearful statement to reporters? The video claims he and others may be actors. Not true. Mr. Parker is not an actor, but a typical soft Christian who makes the most of forgiveness, as evidenced by his remarks, and is capable of both smiling and being cordial to his ranking religious leader who was there with him, and breaking up in front of the camera.
3. The other couple who are smiling and talking with CNN host Anderson Cooper: What disturbed me about this depiction was that the sound was not on, so no one could tell what they were talking about, while the narrator wondered how they could possibly be laughing about a daughter being killed. Certainly if the couple were talking about the tragedy directly, laughing and smiling would have been inappropriate. But in fact, when you see the actual interview, they are reminiscing about how wonderful and happy their daughter was, with appropriate vignettes. It ceases to become suspicious when you actually hear what is going on. Besides, people are all different. You can’t draw such extreme conclusions about how people react differently in front of a camera.
4. The Sandy Hook Relief Fund being created two days before the tragedy: There was also a Facebook page created two days before the shooting in memory of one of the victims. The time-date stamps for page creation are done automatically by computer servers. This seems to be good evidence of something very unusual that cannot be easily explained away. While a programmer can intervene and change such a date, conspirators in this plot would have no reason to do so since it would only raise questions when the direction has always been towards cover-up. The next day a video appeared documenting how the creation date information was suddenly not found by a Google search. The same search suddenly failed to produce the page showing the creation date associated with this relief fund page, and that’s very good evidence of conspiracy—especially since the search result only returned one site showing the page creation data but with the date missing.
Rather than being a proof that the tragedy didn’t happen, these two instances are more likely evidence of foreknowledge by dark side agents who were preparing to make the most of this diabolical massacre before the event.
5. Other Actors: Much is made out of one neighbor who says he took children in who were outside with a bus driver. The video claims he is part of the local actor’s guild. While it does seem strange that a bus driver would let a strange neighbor take children into his home after this tragedy, I can’t confirm enough of the details of this story to make a judgment on it. Neither does it seem to point to any particular conclusion—it only raises unanswered questions.