Sandy Hook Principal ALIVE, NOT DEAD! Gave statement on Shooting, now removed from site.

This is some heavy, sick, nauzea anxiety attack stuff. I'm not sure if I wanna spend my Christmass reading ATS. I know ATS community can't just ignore such event or have only threads like "Merry Christmas, Condolence to family victims!" but still. I wasn't able to read more than 6 pages of another thread on this. Another introspection type of Christmass instead of beer-TV-medieval blowout one...
At first I was like: "If I won't see a video interview with living principal, I'm done with it now!" but then I saw this medical examiner's scary giggling vid and it was again like watching horror movie on pot. Hell, this is not a movie but world is worse place than Holywood can let us ever imagine.
The fact that associated Youtube accounts are not suspended is weird too btw.
Vids like this are pushing you to imagine a satanists community or some doomsday cult knowing each other - the whole part of the city, with their children in one school, making 2012 sacrifice (of their own kids) with a sick guy as a tool etc or playing psyop game whatever.
It is indeed highly speculative. I'm not a noob and I'd say I'm desensitized enouhg but I feel I don't need to have that kind of stuff in my head now. At least until some locals start singing another version or at least someone who have personaly been there, spoke with locals etc. If there is such high level agenda we will never know anything for sure and it will become a mem just like 9/11 ritual. You can even have evidence and it doesn't really matter anymore.
People are sticking to another- or non-event scenario because it's easier to digest than the official version. No real pain, sadness, need for prayers. It could be just the first stage of tragedy - denial. It's all been probably said already. I just can't read through it all today,
Time out for me.

Originally posted by magickmaster
I think someone should screenshot the Google cache page and post it here, in case Google removes it somehow.

I did just that, and now have it stashed for any future need.

Originally posted by otherpotato
reply to post by Aisling

 

You claimed that it was inconceivable that a reporter from a newspaper that was around for so long could have been mistaken in reporting who they had spoken with in an article. I am simply pointing out that it is entirely conceivable that news can be misreported by any newspaper, no matter how long they've been around.

I would also add "scrubbing" the article is an entirely reasonable response to discovering a gross error. Reporting you spoke to someone you clearly could not have, especially when that person was killed in a horrible manner, is certainly not something you want people to find out. Would a retraction have been better? Sure if you want to call attention to your shoddy reporting. Of course attention was called to it anyway so now they're doubly embarrassed.

No different than people who delete asinine posts rather than owning up to them. Is it the right response? Depends on your perspective. But it doesn't make it proof of anything other than ineptitude.

Your whole post is based on your opinions, not facts.
Unfortunately you are forgetting it is ILLEGAL for any news outlet to just "SCRUB" a news story because they are stupid. It boils down to monetary liability and slander.

If a news outlet does not want to be sued for billions, a retraction is a MUST.

Think of this:

Suppose some crazy person read that story and decided he wanted to take things further than posting thoeries on a forum. Perhaps this person wants answers in person and shows up to the house of that principal for answers.
Suppose the principal IS dead and this guy comes across her family, and tells them at gunpoint to either spill the beans or die? Who is liable for that besides the person committing the crime.....the journalistic entity who printed the lie in the first place is. Maybe not criminally responsible, but for sure civilly responsible.

While I agree ignorance is bliss, ignorance of how the real world reality operates compared to the television reality we are fed is inexcusable really.

To further my point, all one needs to do is read journalistic by-laws and seek news stories related to libelous suits granted to people because of non-retractions of lies.

Not trying to bring anyone to my way of thinking and dont wanna argue the points or symantics. Seems many of you are tripping over the truth, yet picking yourself up and continuing on oblivious. Almost as if you are going out of your way to believe the crap being shoveled which is more scary than anything else really.

Hello ATS, this would absolutly colaborate with what i am trying to tell everyone. This is all fake. Not one kid was harmed, everyone down to the cops and first responders are all actors, PLEASE visit th elink below and tell me what you think. Its a company that trains and hires actors to fake mall, and school shootings and emergancy events to "practice" everyone is litraly a an actor. The teachers, kids, cops, fire , ambulance. Just go to the link and see for your selvs please !!

crisisactors.org...

Originally posted by bknapple32

Originally posted by Aisling

Originally posted by bknapple32
Some ancient wise person once said...

If you search for a conspiracy everywhere you look; you will find one every time.

Not really.

no, not really, but you get my point.

I'm not here to play word games. I've seen enough of your posts to understand where you stand in all of this. No need to continue harassing people over their opinions.

Originally posted by OleemIshere
Hello ATS, this would absolutly colaborate with what i am trying to tell everyone. This is all fake. Not one kid was harmed, everyone down to the cops and first responders are all actors, PLEASE visit th elink below and tell me what you think. Its a company that trains and hires actors to fake mall, and school shootings and emergancy events to "practice" everyone is litraly a an actor. The teachers, kids, cops, fire , ambulance. Just go to the link and see for your selvs please !!

crisisactors.org...

You're wrong.
2nd line.

reply to post by OleemIshere


crisisactors.org...

your link didnt work so put it in for you and just had a look at it. If what you claim is true, then wth is happening and why would they go to such lengths. Your claiming not one child was killed?

Originally posted by otherpotato
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

Exactly.
A mistake does not a conspiracy make.

But many inconsistencies, gaps, contradictions, lies, illogical conclusions, may.

Originally posted by otherpotato
reply to post by Aisling

 

You claimed that it was inconceivable that a reporter from a newspaper that was around for so long could have been mistaken in reporting who they had spoken with in an article. I am simply pointing out that it is entirely conceivable that news can be misreported by any newspaper, no matter how long they've been around.

I would also add "scrubbing" the article is an entirely reasonable response to discovering a gross error. Reporting you spoke to someone you clearly could not have, especially when that person was killed in a horrible manner, is certainly not something you want people to find out. Would a retraction have been better? Sure if you want to call attention to your shoddy reporting. Of course attention was called to it anyway so now they're doubly embarrassed.

No different than people who delete asinine posts rather than owning up to them. Is it the right response? Depends on your perspective. But it doesn't make it proof of anything other than ineptitude.

I did not say it was inconceivable, I said it was off. And yes, I find it amazing that they claim to have had a conversation with a dead person. How does one mistake that?

Let's get real. Your job is reporting the news. Your job is reporting the truth, right? How can you HAVE a job with that level of ineptitude, to go so far as to make up an entire story?

Now look..... I'm on the fence with this, and, I never said children didn't die. They died, but the entire story surrounding it is highly questionable and worth investigating. To what end, I don't know.

What I do know is, there are a LOT of people that are employed to flock to this forum and create a bunch of hostility and harass other posters. Every day I come to read here about this topic and that's all I see. A bunch of disrespectful people harassing others for simply discussing the conspiracy side of this story....... oh wait..... ON a CONSPIRACY site..... *gasp*

I have no more to say to people who just want to..... argue.

I'm all up for discussing things like adults, but I don't think many people can do that around here. Especially without personal attacks.

The players in this immediate part of the story, the Principal and the Superintendent seem to be too dissimilar as to confuse the two. That IMO, would leave the superintendent out of the equation..... Their stories in print were just too far apart in information and direction to be confused. So in my opinion, that leaves the principal as a singular entity, a singular segment and time frame not to be confused with either news event.

What I'm getting at, is if anyone thought their might be confusion between the two as they were within a paragraph of each other on the 'Cashed' story.

reply to post by Sly1one

Oddly enough I hope no one did die...and I hope all is well and its all an act or Shakespearean skit of epic proportions to garner support for gun control etc....because THAT angle...doesn't involve 20 children being slaughtered....I think I can handle being lied to far better than knowing 20 children are dead.

I understand where you're coming from, because it's "wishful" thinking on our part to "want" them to be alive rather than the horrendous tragedy that it (unfortunately) most suredly is! I believe "denial" is one of the emotions we are said to go through when a death(s) occur that affect us.

reply to post by magickmaster


The article does actually appear at a different address at the Newtown Bee. Here it is:

Newtown Bee Article

Almost as if you are going out of your way to believe the crap being shoveled which is more scary than anything else really.

What scares me are the folks who turn on cnn, fox, cbs, abc, etc and believe nearly anything that they are told by Anderson Cooper, Katie Couric, or Diane Sawyer.

Or the people who come to this forum to create hostility and hatred, totally negating the fact that this IS a conspiracy site to begin with.

There are other forums to go to where people believe the OS. Why not go there and congregate with those that think your way ? Why waste time coming here? Hmm.

The Ends Justify the Means.

This is liberal dogma. They honestly believe what they want ("leveling" the playing field in all areas of society) is so important, there is no line that cannot be crossed to get there. We know they believe America must be disarmed, they know they will never get where they want to be with a populace capable of fighting back.

This fact is why we must always question, everything. It is simple logic.

(also, police and prosecutors are well-known for taking the path of least resistance, being intensely lazy, and doing anything including planting of evidence to "close" a case in the manner they say it happened)

As Asling said QUOTE "I would also add "scrubbing" the article is an entirely reasonable response to discovering a gross error. Reporting you spoke to someone you clearly could not have, especially when that person was killed in a horrible manner, is certainly not something you want people to find out. Would a retraction have been better? Sure if you want to call attention to your shoddy reporting. Of course attention was called to it anyway so now they're doubly embarrassed."

*******************************************************
I can see where your going with it, BUT havn't most of us seen a news story be re-adressed by most News Broadcasts with a 'correction' by the Anchors. It seems that happens more often than not, and not a complete disappearance of the article. To 'scrub' would have it's problems, there are too many astute viewers that would not forget the newscast topic if it was simply erased.

Went to the above link provided (crisisactors.org).

I see nothing there that insinuates anything at all. Looks like a bunch of people who hire themselves out for training purposes. There is nothing nefarious on that site linked, at all.

Im willing to entertain any thoery of any event....provided the thoery is logical or includes viable links....your post has neither. Please provide info off of that site you embedded as to what draws you to your overall conclusion, because as I see it, its a baseless claim until that is done.

The trend I'm seeing here is the conspiracy buffs are atleast providing links to actual stories and then basing thoeries off of those. Thats how it should be. However, the peeps who continue to say,"move along, nothing to see here" are providing zero links or ANYTHING to actually validate their points besides opinions.

Bring facts "proofers", atleast the "crazy folks" here are doing that much.

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by magickmaster

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by Komodo

 

She died.

There is more than one person on here with friends or family affected by this. Some just dont care to advertise it.

And no, those are not actors.

These theories are silly and disrespectful. There is more info that needs to be known about this, but there is not one shred of proof behind ANY of these claims that the event was faked.

Actually, there is plenty of evidence to suggest the incident was staged somehow. The girl Emilie is seen in both pictures with her family, and then at the memorial service, even though she is supposed to have died. And her sister, has had her legs chopped off, at least it appears that way in the PHOTOSHOPPED image.

Next, there were originally 2, then 3 shooters reported, then they disappeared,
and the examiner claimed the kids were shot by a rifle up close multiple times, and then it was claimed Adam Had handguns, and not rifles, and that was after it was originally claimed it was his brother and not Adam....so many inconsistencies so far, and you sit there like a sheep or a lemming. You should check yourself.

1)You do realize that Emilie Parker had two sisters, right? And that they look very similar to her, right? And as is proven by the very visual evidence people use to say she isnt dead, they had matching dresses, right?

2)There were 2-3 suspects reported, and possibly multiple shooters. Big difference. And that in NO WAY backs the idea that this is all faked.

3)Lanza had the rifle on him. Early reports were incorrect. Pretty simple. He had his brother's ID on him, which is why they originally id'd him wrong.

You are everything that is wrong with conspiracy theorists. As I have said, I do believe there is more to this. But I also know how to apply simple logic. You take one thing and cling to it, even if all logic dictates you are wrong.

You still have given absolutely NO logical rebuttal to my earlier claims. You come back with a rant about 9/11.

Throwing baseless theories out there and refusing to apply logic does not help get to the bottom of anything. All it does is give easy examples of why alternative theories should be disregarded.

Call me a 'sheep or a lemming' (could you be any more cliche) all you want, the facts do not support your assertion in any way.

edit on 21-12-2012 by captaintyinknots because: (no reason given)

bring

up some links and we might believe you .. if not.. then it's just hearsay on your part..

if you didn't READ or VIEW the YOU tube video .. I suggest you do .. because it's ALL right there ..

I actually read this linked article before it was taken down. The way I see it, there are only three reasonable options.

1) Someone at the newspaper spoke with the Principal immediately before she was killed. That would be quite impressive, and every news outlet in the country should be clamoring to interview this reporter.

2) Someone at the newspaper spoke to someone else, who they mistakenly thought was the Principal. Maybe the Assistant Principal? The reporter perhaps went to the school website to grab the name and mistakenly listed the Principal instead of someone else. Who knows...in all of the confusion maybe they THOUGHT they were speaking to the Principal but did not get the name.

If option number 2 is the truth, then a retraction would have been the proper course of action, no matter how painful. Obviously failure to do so is causing quite a stir.

3) Someone claiming to be the Principal spoke with a reporter early on, and somehow didn't get the memo that the Principal was supposed to be dead. (Unless such mass confusion and contradictory evidence was part of an over arching plan).

I suppose number 4 would be that the Principal is not dead at all.

reply to post by MisterMaster

Your whole post is based on your opinions, not facts.

And I'm different from you and everyone else on here how?

Unfortunately you are forgetting it is ILLEGAL for any news outlet to just "SCRUB" a news story because they are stupid. It boils down to monetary liability and slander.

A newspaper committing an illegal act does not then create proof of a conspiracy. It more likely proves that the newspaper is incompetent, or unethical, and can be sued. So facilitate a lawsuit out of it, not a conspiracy.

I'm not even sure how the rest of your post is relevant to the discussion...

You can choose to believe that all reporters are impeccable with their reporting and never get their facts wrong because they know they will be sued. I can choose to believe that reporters are human and make mistakes, sometimes on purpose, sometimes "accidentally on purpose," and don't always own up to those mistakes appropriately. Plenty of examples of that kind of behavior. Plenty of people committing illegal acts knowing they could get sued.

There is nothing here to convince me of a conspiracy on this particular point. People are looking for proof so they are finding it. And that is my OPINION.

reply to post by MisterMaster


As an attorney, I'm certain no court would remedy for libel in this situation. Just because you watch Franklin and Bash does not mean you're bar certified. Please stop talking out of your butt and empathize with a guy who was planning on covering the parade of homes but instead found himself first on the scene of America's story of the year.