by Joe Quinn, Editor SOTT.net
Many of the most notable events in modern (and even ancient) history have provoked some form of ‘conspiracy theory’. That is to say, ordinary people were not satisfied with the official story about how the event unfolded because all or some aspects of that story simply did not objectively make sense. Despite what the mainstream media would like us to believe about ‘conspiracy theories’, most conspiracy theories are based on objective problems with the official narrative. But note that I said ‘based on’. The problem with conspiracy theories is that, while they usually reflect a more accurate overview of a major event, they are forced to rely on theory (due to deliberate with-holding of data by official sources) rather than hard evidence (which would disqualify them as theories) and are therefore open to abuse by people who tend to use their imaginations to complete the picture rather than the more critical functions of the human mind.
Compared to other similar events where many people found the official story implausible, the Sandy Hook massacre has provoked a veritable flood of conspiracy theories, and many of them are not based on any hard evidence.
A large majority of the alternative news pundits that have attempted to independently investigate the Sandy Hook massacre have engaged in some seriously irresponsible and shoddy journalism. Among the more outlandish and baseless theories, we find the claim that “actors” took the place of the parents and siblings of the Sandy Hook victims, and that no children were murdered at all because, the theory goes, if they were, “why haven’t we seen any bodies?” I’ve already exposed the logical fallacies in a few of these theories elsewhere, but there is one theory that still refuses to go away, perhaps because it is slightly less obviously bogus, and many people are still touting it as the single fact that “busts open” the official story as a “hoax”.
The theory in question is that a man named Christopher Rodia was the REAL owner of the black Honda Civic, which has been identified as the car of Adam Lanza’s mother that was found outside the Sandy Hook elementary school. The basis for this erroneous belief, still held by many, is police scanner audio that was picked up from the morning of Dec. 14th and which details Connecticut State Police response to the massacre.
I obtained the original audio files from the Radioreference.com website and had to pay a small sum for the full files. I have listened to them, and the evidence they contain can only lead to one plausible conclusion: that it is unlikely that the aforementioned Christopher Rodia had anything to do with the Sandy Hook massacre, even if his name and DOB are mentioned in the audio.
What so many of those who are searching for evidence of conspiracy at Sandy Hook have apparently missed is the fact that the audio files clearly contain police communications about MORE than just the Sandy Hook event.
In the audio streams there are several communications from Connecticut State police who are clearly not involved in the response to Sandy Hook and are just out there doing their ‘normal’ jobs of stopping people for no reason and catching speeding drivers.
The Connecticut State police scanner audio from the morning of Dec. 14th 2012, as provided by Radioreference.com, begins at 9.34am and lasts for one hour until 10.34am, i.e. it begins at about the time Lanza is said to have entered the school and lasts for one hour.
Below I will provide all relevant excerpts from this hour of audio, with my comments, which include the now infamous references to the license plate of Nancy Lanza’s car and to Christopher Rodia.
First audio segment: 9.34am – 10.04am
- At 00:15, an officer refers to an “apartment door” and says “he is not responding to me verbally”. (This probably has nothing to do with SH.)
- At 1:55, an officer seems to be reading out an license plate and refers to a ‘Camry’ which is likely a reference to a Toyota Camry car.
- At 4:28, a female officer says “we’re outside waiting for the ok to go in”. (This may be the first reference to SH.)
- At 5:15, the same female officer says “it’s now in lock-down”. (This is most likely a reference to SH.)
- At 6:15, a female officer says: “Dickenson Drive, 12 Dickenson Drive.” (This appears to be both the address of the fire-house at the entrance to the SH school driveway, which was the designated staging area, AND the address of SH school itself.)
- At 6:20, an officer says: “car is responding, the shooter is apparently still shooting in the officer area, 12 Dickenson Drive.”
- At 6:47, an officer says: “personnel take exit 10 then a left on 34 then continue on Riverside Road, Dickenson Drive, make sure you have your vest on.”
For the next few minutes there are various communications that seem to relate to officers arriving at SH school. At 8:39, for example, an officer asks for “directions again please”, another officer then gives the same directions to SH school for officers arriving from some distance away who are clearly NOT familiar with the area. That is to say, they are out of town CT. State Police.
- At 9:18 an officer says “I have Newtown on the line yet.”
- Another officer responds: “Get Newtown on the line so we are coordinating with them; they may just want us to establish a perimeter.”
- At 10:45, more instructions are given about which exit to take and how to get to SH school. These are clearly not the communications of police that are familiar with the area. That is, they are not Newtown police.
- At 11:49, an officer calls out a license plate “X-ray Libra Golf, 941.″
- Then at 12:15, we hear a female officer or dispatcher say: “We’ve got an injured person in room number 9 with numerous gunshot wounds.”
- Between 13 and 14 minutes, more descriptions of how to get to SH are given.
- At 15:00, an officer says: “negative on description, ok, shots were fired about 3 mins ago, quiet at the time.”
- Then there are more descriptions of how to get to SH school.
- At 17:30, an officer says: “can you swing down here and get us a pink slip for his toll form please?” (This sounds like a communication that is NOT related to SH).
- At 18:18, an officer says: “do you have a case number on this”? (See above)
- A female responds: “number is 18264.″ (see above)
- At 18:38, an officer says: “no violation, just the same kind of complaint from yesterday that he forgot the…” (See above).
- At 19:15 an officer says: “Newtown’s reporting one suspect down, the building has now been cleared.” (Clearly a reference to SH)
- At 20:23 an officer says: “Dickenson 91 in the Liberty Way parking lot, reported no injuries but possible side airbag deployed.” (Clearly NOT a reference to SH, but keep ‘Liberty Way’ in mind.)
- At 20:45, another officer says: “… motor vehicle stop…” (Do I need to explain it?)
- At 21:58, another officer says: “same location, 544 Xray Charlie Lima Connecticut 40.″
- At 22:47, another officer says: “got a speed limit sign down.”
- At 25:13, more directions are given to police officers who are arriving to the scene of the SH shooting.
- At 26:24, an officer says: “33 headquarters, motor vehicle stop.” The same officer repeats “motor vehicle stop.”
- Immediately after this a female voice says: “12 Dickenson Drive, Dickenson Drive.”
- At 27:00, the same voice that said “33 headquarters, motor vehicle stop” at 26:24, says: “722 VHA, radar.” (Clearly NOT a reference to SH.)
- At 28:56, an officer says: “street, near a park, connected trailer V87 278, unsecured load.” (Clearly NOT a reference to SH)
- For the next few minutes there are intermittent police communications that appear to be about the SH response.
Segment ends at 30:32.
Second audio segment 10.04am – 10.34am
- At 1:20, a female (possibly a dispatcher) says: “please respond, Liberty Way” […] (See reference to ‘Liberty Way parking lot’ in first segment above).
- At 1:39, an officer says “Connecticut 872 Y Yankee, E Echo, O Oscar, 872 YEO possible suspect vehicle.” (This is the license plate of the car of Nancy Lanza, the mother of Adam Lanza).
- At 2:04, an officer with a deep voice, clearly NOT the officer that made the previous 872 YEO license plate report, says: “run the eh… operator, he’s a Florida license Connecticut as well, first name is Rodia, R-O-D-I-A, Christopher A. Date of birth is, eh… August 6th ’69.”
- For the next 8 minutes there are various communications, all of which appear to refer to SH: people being evacuated, staging areas and more directions for CT. State Troopers who are still arriving.
- Then at 10:15, an officer says: “665 YRG.” This could well be yet another call from a CT. State Trooper who is NOT at SH but is still out on normal patrol and is calling in a license plate.
- At 11:34 and for the next few minutes, we have yet more directions about how to get to SH school.
- At 15:34, an officer says: “we have big furret? Connecticut 258 Yankee Yankee Hotel, 258 YYH, Laser.”
- For the next 6 or 7 minutes the transmissions are all about SH; the staging areas, people coming out of the building, etc.
- At 22:02, an officer says: “763 Zula Rima Julliet, 763 TLJ Lucifer.”
- At 22:36, what sounds like the same officer says: “New Jersey plates, a couple of occupants, eh… not sure where exactly on Stoneway, I got cut off on the caller…”
- At 25:12, what sounds like the same officer says: “Fat van? near 55 Stoneway when you’re ready. Jersey, Charlie 6 6 Bravo SS, New Jersey, Charlie 66 Bravo Sierra Sierra, there’ll be a few males in the van…”
- At 27:10, an officer says: “Ford Econoline, eh registered to the Courier car rental out of Wayne, New Jersey.”
- Another officer responds: “the occupants are out of state they’re doing a documentary on owl(?)-hunting in Canaan(?)”
The rest of the audio refers mainly to the Sandy Hook police response.
The two communications in bold above are what have caused many independent Sandy Hook investigators to believe they had found evidence of a “hoax”. They claim that, together, the comments constitute ‘clear evidence’ that Christopher Rodia owned Nancy Lanza’s car. But, taken in context, i.e. that both communications are part of a continuum of Connecticut State police communications on the morning of the Sandy Hook shooting that include State Police responses to the shooting AND things like traffic stops by police who are NOT involved with the response to the SH shooting, and that both types of communications are naturally interspersed… well, the rational conclusion then is that Rodia was just one of the several people who were stopped in their cars by a CT. State police officer somewhere nowhere near Sandy Hook school, as evidenced by the scanner audio.
In addition, it seems clear from the audio that some of the State police communications were coming from pretty far afield and had nothing to do with Sandy Hook; the reference to “Liberty way parking lot” in the audio, for example, most likely refers to Liberty way parking lot in Greenwich CT, which is 45 miles from Sandy Hook. The word ‘Greenwich’ is also spoken by a dispatcher in the above audio, although I didn’t include it here. If you want to hear it you’ll just have to listen to the audio yourself. If you do, you’ll be among a select few individuals who have, it seems, bothered to actually listen to the audio in full.
By way of further evidence that Rodia is unlikely to be the owner of the Honda Civic, here is a copy of his consolidated property tax statement, showing that he does not own a Honda Civic. If he did, it would be on this statement:
Therefore, if someone could explain to me how a cop at Sandy Hook school could receive Rodia’s details from the car license plate 872 YEO when Rodia doesn’t own a car with that license plate, I’d be all ears.
And just for good measure, here’s the consolidated property tax record for Rodia’s wife (or maybe it’s his sister, I can’t remember now). She doesn’t own a Honda Civic either:
Anyone still in doubt? Ok then, here’s Nancy Lanza’s tax record, showing she owned a Honda Civic:1
The many internet news pundits and ‘researchers’ who have jumped on the “Sandy Hook hoax” bandwagon and relied on what has turned out to be spurious evidence that the parents were ‘actors’ or that Christopher Rodia owned the Honda Civic, are guilty of either neglecting to use their critical thinking abilities to engage in serious research, or are simply repeating these claims in an effort to get attention. Of course, we can’t discount the possibility that someone, somewhere, has been deliberately encouraging the spread of this information in an effort to make anyone who questions, in any way, the official story of the Sandy Hook massacre look like a raving lunatic.
The fact of the matter is that there are some serious unanswered questions about the official narrative of what happened at Sandy Hook on the morning of Dec. 14th 2012. In the absence of any clarification of these outstanding questions, and taking into consideration other similar massacres and the problems with the official narrative around those, not to mention the virtual certainty that an elite cabal has existed in the USA for several decades and has been involved in assassinations, it is entirely rational to conclude, on the balance of this collective evidence, that Adam Lanza was not yet another ‘lone gunman’.
I understand that people who are already well-versed in the clear evidence of duplicity of the ruling elite may have a wilful tendency to accept as fact any evidence of further elite treachery that comes their way. But in our modern era of the all-seeing eye of the national security state and tried and tested ‘counter-insurgency tactics that are practiced as much at ‘home’ as abroad, it is prudent to be suspicious not only of the elite but also of those who, at first glance, may appear to be our allies.
As a result of my own investigation into this massacre, which involved the discovery of a large amount of bogus ‘evidence’ of a “Sandy Hook hoax”, I have been left with a very clear understanding that the people who carried out this particular operation are very powerful indeed. Powerful beyond what most people can imagine could ever be possible. While I have little doubt (for the reasons noted above) that more than one person was involved, I also am forced to admit that the perpetrators of the Sandy Hook massacre left literally NO hard evidence of their monstrous crime. Consider the level of control that is required to leave so little evidence when carrying out a horrific massacre like Sandy Hook. In addition, the implication is that the mainstream media were in some way complicit, or at least controlled and duped. The end result is the sense of “a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that [men] had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.” 2
If we are to understand anything from the Sandy Hook massacre, let it be an understanding, born of careful thought and analysis, of the true nature of the forces that are reigned against us as we engage in the fight to ensure that Truth is heard in a world dominated by lies, a world where the wanton murder of innocent children becomes all too ‘normal’.
1. Thanks to reader ‘wdthepoet’ for this reference.
2. This is from a speech by Woodrow Wilson:
“Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men’s views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it. They know that America is not a place of which it can be said, as it used to be, that a man may choose his own calling and pursue it just as far as his abilities enable him to pursue it; because to-day, if he enters certain fields, there are organizations which will use means against him that will prevent his building up a business which they do not want to have built up; organizations that will see to it that the ground is cut from under him and the markets shut against him. For if he begins to sell to certain retail dealers, to any retail dealers, the monopoly will refuse to sell to those dealers, and those dealers, afraid, will not buy the new man’s wares.”
While it is clear that the “power” that Wilson was referring to was a business power that in this context was exerting control over “commerce and manufacture” and a “monopoly” preventing people from choosing their own business calling, it is also clear that he was referring to a power above and beyond the “biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture”. To me, that’s a lot of power.
This article was first published on SOTT.net on January 12, 2013.