Man who helped Sandy Hook kids is harassed by conspiracy theorists

Unfortunately in this case Yahoo is a more reliable source of information than much of the "alternative" news. What is circulating on the CTs sites is full of distortion, fabrication and the outright ridiculous.

Isn't opa Dutch for Grandfather? Your hacking on someone's Grandfather? Jeeze chill man.

This is one of the big problems in any situation or crisis.

People don't understand the "fog of War" phenomenon in real terms, so when they here conflicting data they can't put it into perspective. Ergo, it must be a lie.

What they don't understand is that the modern press changes what people say, for a host of reasons (not all of them sinister at all, most just having to do with the best sound bite and time constraints) which can totally change the apparent meaning of what was said.

A man takes in some kids during an emergency and recounts his story.

In one place he talks about the six kids (the total) and in another mentions five. He could have misspoken, or it could be the remainder of the children or an account of what only five of them did, but lacking thew whole story people at home can't see it.

So obviously the man is not telling the truth, right? You can check the tape! Six in one place, five in another... Sinister!

And we know what lies mean right? In a case like this, it has to mean the worst thing possible. Always.

Except of course, that it doesn't really.

Sometimes the press just reports the wrong thing. Sometimes they make stuff up for a better story and often witnesses say things that make sense to them, but not to the people at home, that weren't there.

Oh hey 6508. Here to earn your bread money?

Nope, sorry. The Rosen thing stinks to high heaven.

Who was the guy "talking harshly" to the children when Rosen came along?

Another good samaritan, no doubt.

You can tell by how you insult people that do not agree with you. You follow the mainstream propaganda that if you think differently you're stupid or insane. You do that.

Parents that have their children slaughtered by a "crazy gunman" should be acting like it.

None of the people interview cried.

How did the principal give a statement to the newspaper when she was supposedly killed by the "gunman?"

Did he kill her in the office since they let him in or did he shoot his way into the building?

Obvious hack job of a flase-flag event.

The story originated on Salon.com [link to www.salon.com]

You could probably contact the author.

Unfortunately in this case Yahoo is a more reliable source of information than much of the "alternative" news. What is circulating on the CTs sites is full of distortion, fabrication and the outright ridiculous.

]

Oh hey 6508. Here to earn your bread money?

...


The story originated on Salon.com [link to www.salon.com]

You could probably contact the author.

The quotes probably came from a Youtube video or forums such as this one. I'm amazed how people even on a site like this one, just blindly believe...Gene says he's being harassed....well it must be true, Yahoo said so. On this site?

Well, if all you have is behavior which you find suspicious....I guess this convo is over. I want FACTS. I need FACTS to be convinced.

Your thoughts on how people should act, are not facts. Sorry, but that is a fact.

Sorry man, I had to leave the office for a bit, didn't see your responses.

Anyway, I just don't believe that this is a hoax. For many reasons.

I do fully believe the government will and is taking full advantage of the tragedy to push through their anti gun agenda. They have openly admitted that they will not let a good crisis go to waste.

It doesn't add up to me being a hoax. The amount of people who would be in on it would be quite large. It would be a huge risk to stage such an event. When it's sooo simple for "them" to wait for a nut to pull something off, and then put 24/7 media coverage on it. Have talking heads start calling for gun control, etc etc

As for the first reports changing after some time passed, the way the news works now a days, every media outlet wants to be the first one on the scene, wants to be the first to report new info. So they start reporting rumors before facts come out, then must go back and cover their tracks from reporting rumors.

That is how the media has operated the past few yrs. It increasingly gets worse.

Also I cannot and will not believe it's a hoax based on interviewees not crying, or acting strange. Anyone who has been through a tragedy understands there is no "norm" to how people react. There's a wide range of strange behavior people express when going through something like this.

9-11 is quite different. There are many material facts about that case that just don't make sense.

Also, it's not like I have slammed shut the story, and no longer am willing to hear/see new evidence. But to this point my thoughts are that it is not a hoax, but being used.

Listen, I could be wrong. I am not soo arrogant as to claim I am all knowing, I just have my own ways of discerning truth from fiction, and this case doesn't hit as a hoax to me.

There are some diehards out there who maintain the entire thing was a hoax, soup to nuts. Nobody died, everybody in on it, John Goodman as the M.E., or Paul Vance.

This is all easily debunked. I live in Ct. I know Vance and Carver to be real, actual officials.

That being said, this has all the trademarks of a false flag. I've spent untold hours looking in to this. I consider myself a person of discernment. Take a look at my threads, if you like, and judge for yourself.

You seem to hint at 9/11 being a false flag. Yet in the case of Sandy Hook, you consider the government to be merely opportunistic, capitalizing on a disaster that was not of their making.

So why didn't the government just wait for terrorists w/ box cutters to crash planes into nat'l landmarks?

I'm not here to say "the government did it to enact gun control." I don't know who did it, or why.

I just doubt key elements of the official story.

If my doubts are correct, that would, by definition, indicate a conspiracy.

Not everybody down to the kids' aunts and uncles had to be in on it.

This is one of the big problems in any situation or crisis.

People don't understand the "fog of War" phenomenon in real terms, so when they here conflicting data they can't put it into perspective. Ergo, it must be a lie.

What they don't understand is that the modern press changes what people say, for a host of reasons (not all of them sinister at all, most just having to do with the best sound bite and time constraints) which can totally change the apparent meaning of what was said.

A man takes in some kids during an emergency and recounts his story.

In one place he talks about the six kids (the total) and in another mentions five. He could have misspoken, or it could be the remainder of the children or an account of what only five of them did, but lacking thew whole story people at home can't see it.

So obviously the man is not telling the truth, right? You can check the tape! Six in one place, five in another... Sinister!

And we know what lies mean right? In a case like this, it has to mean the worst thing possible. Always.

Except of course, that it doesn't really.

Sometimes the press just reports the wrong thing. Sometimes they make stuff up for a better story and often witnesses say things that make sense to them, but not to the people at home, that weren't there.

Very well said!

^^THIS^^^

And those freaks that are harassing him are just asswipes.

Yea, I saw this. You seem nice, not a moron who just screams shill,

Yea, I saw this. You seem nice, not a moron who just screams shill,