Sat Mar 23, 2024 11:33 pm by globalturbo
10 things the media don’t want to discover about Sandy Hook
truther
February 9, 2013
1
Jon Rappoport
Slashing through the bland authoritative
front the media have presented, people want to know more about the Sandy
Hook massacre. But the elite networks have no intention of answering
the most obvious questions.
Why? Because the follow-up agenda of gun
control is all important, and the official Sandy Hook scenario must
stand, in order to forward that agenda.
Any return to the scene of the crime will:
divert media coverage from its all-out push to make guns into taboo objects of scorn, ridicule, fear, and hatred;
focus attention on reasons for the massacre that have nothing to do with guns;
engender deep distrust of the Sandy Hook
police investigation and therefore, by association, throw into doubt the
notion that law-enforcement personnel should be the only people
carrying guns in America.
Here are 10 things the media doesn’t want
to know about and has no intention of investigating. These are only the
basics, amid a wider sea of unanswered questions:
Where is the video footage from inside the Sandy Hook Elementary School,
footage that surely exists and shows some part of the massacre? Who has
that video record? What does the video reveal? Where is the video (or
photo) evidence that Adam Lanza was the shooter?
How did the accused killer, Lanza, gain
entrance to the school? Having just installed a new security system that
required outside (and presumably heavy) doors to be locked, and with a
procedure for entry that demanded two-way video communication with the principal’s office—what exactly happened?
From available information, it seems
almost certain Lanza was seeing a doctor and was on medication. Who was
the doctor and what drugs did he prescribe? Did they include SSRI
antidepressants like Prozac, Zoloft, and Paxil, or Ritalin and Adderall—drugs known to cause violent behavior, including suicide and homicide. If so, then all the focus would shift to excoriating the drugs and eliminating them from our society.
What was the exact story on the two or three other suspects captured and detained by the police? Who are they? Why were they pursued? What did their questioning reveal? Why were they released? No vague generalities. Instead, all the details. And let’s have in-depth television interviews with these suspects.
Once and for all, let’s have a definitive
statement on what guns were used in the killings and what guns were
found in the trunk of the car.
So many lies and contradictions were floated, it’s a sea of confusion.
So let’s have the facts—and evidence to back them up. For starters,
let’s see photos of the killer and his weapons taken inside the school. Undoctored photos.
What is the detailed explanation for the
massive shift from Lanza’s father being killed in New Jersey to Lanza’s
mother being killed in Connecticut? No vague generalities. No nonsense
about “typical early confusion” in reporting. Let’s see the whole chain
of information and the people who forwarded it. Similarly, if the early
conclusion pointed to Adam’s brother Ryan as the killer, a conclusion
which was withdrawn because Adam was carrying his brother’s ID, explain
that. According to reports, Adam hadn’t seen his brother in more than
two years. Offer hard evidence that Adam was, in fact, carrying his
brother’s ID.
Where are complete statements and interviews with witnesses who were in the school at the time of the shooting? We have seen a few short interviews.
There must be more. Let’s have them or get them. Are we to believe (as
independent investigator Mike Powell has rightly doubted) that one
teacher stuffed all her children into classroom cabinets, which
ordinarily are filled with school supplies?
In the television interviews with parents of children murdered
in the Sandy Hook School, not one parent was angry, not one parent
demanded a deeper investigation. Obviously, this screening of
interviewees was purposeful. Where are the outraged parents? What do
they have to say? Do they know anything we don’t know? Have they been
told (as people were at Columbine) to keep quiet?
And now, as the gun-control agenda is being pursued, precisely how will new laws curb the majority of gun violence in America,
violence which is taking place in cities—much of it gang-related.
Explain why President Obama doesn’t vigorously and publicly target these
high-crime areas, if his objective is to reduce the gun violence,
rather than gun ownership.
The pending and often postponed Chicago
trial of Jesus Niebla, high-ranking member of the Mexican Sinaloa drug
cartel, experiences delay after delay. What vital facts are being kept
from the public? There are serious defense charges here; namely, that
Niebla and other Sinaloa members have received permanent immunity from
prosecution in a prior deal with the DEA and FBI, in return for
supplying information on rival cartels. In fact, the US federal government has obtained a suppression of defense-attorney documents in the trial, claiming their exposure would violate National Security.
Does Sinaloa have explicit US government
permission to deliver tons of cocaine and heroin into Chicago, and then
to cities all over America? This enterprise would certainly, as a side
effect, produce a significant amount of gun violence. Does the federal government really want to curb this violence, or is its arrangement with Sinaloa taking precedence?
Finally, in the wake of Sandy Hook, how
does President Obama’s declaration that mental-health services will be
expanded across America add up to reduction of gun violence? In fact,
this will lead to higher levels of prescribed dangerous psychiatric drugs, which in turn will cause a serious escalation in gun violence and mass shootings.
Major media don’t want to know anything about these points. And yet they’re betting
they will retain the public trust. But the fact that their ratings are
sinking, month after month, year after year, is a message from the
public.
The media refuse to hear it, though. They
glide through their rehearsed paces and pretend they are captains of
information. Their elite owners would prefer to let the media ship go
down, rather than tell the truth.
That’s understandable. After all, these
owners, and the owners who own them, are guilty of all sorts of crimes,
the reporting of which would make ratings soar but destroy their own
empires, reputations, and lives.
Thanks to: http://www.pakalertpress.com
truther
February 9, 2013
1
Jon Rappoport
Slashing through the bland authoritative
front the media have presented, people want to know more about the Sandy
Hook massacre. But the elite networks have no intention of answering
the most obvious questions.
Why? Because the follow-up agenda of gun
control is all important, and the official Sandy Hook scenario must
stand, in order to forward that agenda.
Any return to the scene of the crime will:
divert media coverage from its all-out push to make guns into taboo objects of scorn, ridicule, fear, and hatred;
focus attention on reasons for the massacre that have nothing to do with guns;
engender deep distrust of the Sandy Hook
police investigation and therefore, by association, throw into doubt the
notion that law-enforcement personnel should be the only people
carrying guns in America.
Here are 10 things the media doesn’t want
to know about and has no intention of investigating. These are only the
basics, amid a wider sea of unanswered questions:
Where is the video footage from inside the Sandy Hook Elementary School,
footage that surely exists and shows some part of the massacre? Who has
that video record? What does the video reveal? Where is the video (or
photo) evidence that Adam Lanza was the shooter?
How did the accused killer, Lanza, gain
entrance to the school? Having just installed a new security system that
required outside (and presumably heavy) doors to be locked, and with a
procedure for entry that demanded two-way video communication with the principal’s office—what exactly happened?
From available information, it seems
almost certain Lanza was seeing a doctor and was on medication. Who was
the doctor and what drugs did he prescribe? Did they include SSRI
antidepressants like Prozac, Zoloft, and Paxil, or Ritalin and Adderall—drugs known to cause violent behavior, including suicide and homicide. If so, then all the focus would shift to excoriating the drugs and eliminating them from our society.
What was the exact story on the two or three other suspects captured and detained by the police? Who are they? Why were they pursued? What did their questioning reveal? Why were they released? No vague generalities. Instead, all the details. And let’s have in-depth television interviews with these suspects.
Once and for all, let’s have a definitive
statement on what guns were used in the killings and what guns were
found in the trunk of the car.
So many lies and contradictions were floated, it’s a sea of confusion.
So let’s have the facts—and evidence to back them up. For starters,
let’s see photos of the killer and his weapons taken inside the school. Undoctored photos.
What is the detailed explanation for the
massive shift from Lanza’s father being killed in New Jersey to Lanza’s
mother being killed in Connecticut? No vague generalities. No nonsense
about “typical early confusion” in reporting. Let’s see the whole chain
of information and the people who forwarded it. Similarly, if the early
conclusion pointed to Adam’s brother Ryan as the killer, a conclusion
which was withdrawn because Adam was carrying his brother’s ID, explain
that. According to reports, Adam hadn’t seen his brother in more than
two years. Offer hard evidence that Adam was, in fact, carrying his
brother’s ID.
Where are complete statements and interviews with witnesses who were in the school at the time of the shooting? We have seen a few short interviews.
There must be more. Let’s have them or get them. Are we to believe (as
independent investigator Mike Powell has rightly doubted) that one
teacher stuffed all her children into classroom cabinets, which
ordinarily are filled with school supplies?
In the television interviews with parents of children murdered
in the Sandy Hook School, not one parent was angry, not one parent
demanded a deeper investigation. Obviously, this screening of
interviewees was purposeful. Where are the outraged parents? What do
they have to say? Do they know anything we don’t know? Have they been
told (as people were at Columbine) to keep quiet?
And now, as the gun-control agenda is being pursued, precisely how will new laws curb the majority of gun violence in America,
violence which is taking place in cities—much of it gang-related.
Explain why President Obama doesn’t vigorously and publicly target these
high-crime areas, if his objective is to reduce the gun violence,
rather than gun ownership.
The pending and often postponed Chicago
trial of Jesus Niebla, high-ranking member of the Mexican Sinaloa drug
cartel, experiences delay after delay. What vital facts are being kept
from the public? There are serious defense charges here; namely, that
Niebla and other Sinaloa members have received permanent immunity from
prosecution in a prior deal with the DEA and FBI, in return for
supplying information on rival cartels. In fact, the US federal government has obtained a suppression of defense-attorney documents in the trial, claiming their exposure would violate National Security.
Does Sinaloa have explicit US government
permission to deliver tons of cocaine and heroin into Chicago, and then
to cities all over America? This enterprise would certainly, as a side
effect, produce a significant amount of gun violence. Does the federal government really want to curb this violence, or is its arrangement with Sinaloa taking precedence?
Finally, in the wake of Sandy Hook, how
does President Obama’s declaration that mental-health services will be
expanded across America add up to reduction of gun violence? In fact,
this will lead to higher levels of prescribed dangerous psychiatric drugs, which in turn will cause a serious escalation in gun violence and mass shootings.
Major media don’t want to know anything about these points. And yet they’re betting
they will retain the public trust. But the fact that their ratings are
sinking, month after month, year after year, is a message from the
public.
The media refuse to hear it, though. They
glide through their rehearsed paces and pretend they are captains of
information. Their elite owners would prefer to let the media ship go
down, rather than tell the truth.
That’s understandable. After all, these
owners, and the owners who own them, are guilty of all sorts of crimes,
the reporting of which would make ratings soar but destroy their own
empires, reputations, and lives.
Thanks to: http://www.pakalertpress.com
