Sandy Hook – Scenario and Meaning
The only thing that is glaringly obvious about the Sandy Hook Elementary School event is that the perceptive television viewer and newspaper reader must conclude that media provide prepared disinformation. Everyone must subjectively separate what they decide are illusions from factual news prior to speculating on the nature of reality presented by television.
This separation extends not only to reported events but also to dramatically presented individuals. For those viewed in motion, some are authentic and some are actors. It is virtually impossible to separate them with certainty. Digitally animated video, since the 102 minute fake movie that was broadcast as breaking news on 9/11, has become more technically sophisticated and increasingly difficult to identify. With respect to photographs of persons not viewed in motion, one must never wholly abandon skepticism given the ease today of creating digital fake identities or datafakes. The latter, when representing victims, were perceptively labelled “vicsim” by Mr. Simon Shack and his fellow 9/11 researcher, Hoi Polloi.
In the case of Sandy Hook we must investigate to “flesh out” possible datafakes such as Vicky Soto. There is no reason to coin new terms such as “perpsim” for Adam Lanza, “perpkinsim” for his mother. The encompassing term “datafake(s)” is useful. For those conditioned to uncritically accept everything authoritatively presented today by our country’s mainline media this line of thinking receives a priori rejection followed by hostility, both being psychological reaction-formations that accompany fear and denial. These relatively new concepts initially strike most persons as preposterous. Valuable investigators are pegged as “conspiracy nuts” harboring psychopathology bordering on clinical paranoia. Overwhelming evidence, however, increasingly supports such analysis. Not all is fake. How then, are we to separate what is real from what is illusion? It is difficult. Until media reform, we must try.
Were children and adults murdered on Dec. 14th inside the Sandy Hook Elementary School? If so, by whom? If such a slaughter occurred, or something like it, was it done by “Adam Lanza”, a mysterious troubled lad, or was it executed by a hit team? Did media and a hit-team design and execute a narrative in which to cast “Adam Lanza” as a patsy? In either event, “Why was it done?” is the next question. We have enough difficulty, given what we are shown and told today, determining what did or didn’t happen, and by whom. The fact is that we may never find definite answers. Until honest investigations, legal remedies and political reforms, we must try.
At the very start of the Sandy Hook narrative there are mutually supportive indications that what we are being told happened is simply untrue. Bearing in mind that all speculation is necessarily dependent upon media information, the very act of subjectively separating real news from fake news carries with it subsequent conclusions. I admit to personal selection, opting to consider the radio transmission from police hearing gunfire when arriving at the school at 0936. I was impressed by the eye-witness video report of police on the scene prior to sounds of gun shots. That eye-witness video has mysteriously vanished from online. CNN stated that first responders arrived 20 minutes after the first reports of gunshots. If shots, or sounds of shots, were generated by men, apparently police, having access to the police radio band the entire Adam Lanza narrative is eliminated. In addition, it renders other police radio transcripts during the event problematical.
This speculative scenario clears up the question of admission to the school and its monitored security system. A short phone call to the school office, followed by the appearance of police would grant the hit team immediate access. The first item of business would be to destroy the security system’s record. Those in the school office who witnessed this entry would need to be killed. A media narrative of heroics of office staff is appropriate, similar to 9/11’s “Flight 93″. Such is the tangled web of deception. Whatever few minutes of horror and mayhem needed was then easily accomplished. Has the Connecticut police force been infiltrated by professionals trained and employed by some government’s security apparatus? Check out Lt. Vance’s outstanding presence in leading state employees along with professional crisis actors during numerous regional mock terrorist scenarios. Such are not uncommon in conjunction with reported terrorist events. Remember NORAD’s
“aerial attack drills” during 9/11 and the “terrorist response exercise” during London’s 7/7 Underground “terrorist attack”?
What of grieving parents and heart-breaking funerals in Connecticut? If any is fake, does that mean that no kids were killed? Not necessarily. Evil ones now have redirected our thoughts and skills to Sandy Hook. Many TV viewers are consumed by gun-control discussions and controversy. Others are focusing on big pharma’s financial racket of psychotropic drugs.
What evil ones can never permit is the increasing exposure of 9/11, their huge key hoax that set the stage for geopolitical havoc combined with domestic intimidation and control. Serial psy-op media and hit-squad events keep the pot boiling, as they say, frightening the masses, conditioning citizens to living with violence in order to persuade them to turn for protection to armed government-employed men. They also serve to upstage important 9/11 investigations and distract attention from that horrendous hoax.
What, if anything, can we do about this situation? Persons who are beginning to grasp this must overcome their own concerns about personal rejection and fear of being called names by others. We must express, loud and clear to everyone we know, our doubts, concerns, and questions about what we are being fed by television. Above all, law abiding persons must never surrender their own guns to criminals or to men who are paid by criminals.
Short URL: http://www.veteranstoday.com/?p=236286