10 things the media donâ€™t want to discover about Sandy Hook
No More Fake News
February 11th, 2013
Reader Views: 3,891
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 doesnâ€™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 principalâ€™s officeâ€”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 Adderallâ€”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 letâ€™s have in-depth television interviews with these suspects.
Once and for all, letâ€™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, itâ€™s a sea of confusion. So letâ€™s have the factsâ€”and evidence to back them up. For starters, letâ€™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 Lanzaâ€™s father being killed in New Jersey to Lanzaâ€™s mother being killed in Connecticut? No vague generalities. No nonsense about â€śtypical early confusionâ€ť in reporting. Letâ€™s see the whole chain of information and the people who forwarded it. Similarly, if the early conclusion pointed to Adamâ€™s brother Ryan as the killer, a conclusion which was withdrawn because Adam was carrying his brotherâ€™s ID, explain that. According to reports, Adam hadnâ€™t seen his brother in more than two years. Offer hard evidence that Adam was, in fact, carrying his brotherâ€™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. Letâ€™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 donâ€™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 citiesâ€”much of it gang-related. Explain why President Obama doesnâ€™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 Obamaâ€™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 donâ€™t want to know anything about these points. And yet theyâ€™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.
Thatâ€™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.
Delivered by The Daily Sheeple
Contributed by Jon Rappoport of No More Fake News.
The author of an explosive collection,Â THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29thÂ District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world.
Please share: Spread the word to sheeple far and wide
Leave A Comment...
The Daily Sheeple Home Page