Columbine High School Massacre Discussion Forum

A place to discuss the Columbine High School Massacre along with other school shootings and crimes.
Anyone interested in researching, learning, discussing and debating with us, please come join our community!
 
HomeHome  PortalPortal  CalendarCalendar  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  MemberlistMemberlist  RegisterRegister  Log inLog in  
Share | 
 

 Sandy Hook- No Proof

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3
AuthorMessage
InsaneIntruder

avatar

Posts : 244
Join date : 2016-06-28
Age : 190
Location : The UK

PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:19 pm

[REDACTED]


Last edited by InsaneIntruder on Sat Sep 16, 2017 9:34 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : I regret some things that I said)
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Moonshadow
Top Contributor
avatar

Posts : 327
Join date : 2016-07-04

PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Sat Aug 27, 2016 7:22 am

You see, you have the right to form such an opinion, and I do understand your feelings, but couldn't you please express your thoughts without personal offenses?
I see that this topic is very heated, but I don't think it is a good idea to begin flaming.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sabratha

avatar

Posts : 1100
Join date : 2015-03-31
Location : Central Mazovian Plains

PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Fri Sep 23, 2016 9:57 am

InsaneIntruder wrote:
Adam Lanza had an account on a Columbine forum. And pictures of his posts. He also had a Wikipedia account. And a bedroom which was shown, games that were shown, the crime scene shown and more. It's sad that ignorant degenerates like you hear about these tragedies and come up with a half-baked theory just because you saw it on the news and thought "FAKE" so now you need to say that 20 parents sending their kids to school and becoming distraught because they received the news that their children's brains are full of fucking bullets, is fake. Not only is it fucking stupid, as you don't have evidence to prove that it didn't happen. But, you're also disrespecting the deaths of 20 children and 6 adults. So fuck you for that.

I disagree with the unnecessary profanity you used in the post (which I believe brings nothing to the debate, just causes tension), but I do agree with the core argument you are making. Lanza was real, he made posts, comments, had online profiles and personas and in the end he caused the violent death of 28 people.

I do think conspiracy nuts should makie a reality check, because this sort is not a cute harmless "tinfoil" idea like Nibiru or Roswell. This conspiracy nonsense is highly offensive to the ones who actually lost their loved ones. Not to mention more fodder for space monkeys.

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
essieyessie

avatar

Posts : 1
Join date : 2016-11-21

PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Mon Nov 21, 2016 2:36 pm

Are there crime scene photos of the Aurora shooting? That's a genuine not sarcastic question. My point being the entire basis for this users claim that Sandy Hook is a conspiracy is that there aren't graphic photos of dead children. He asked for evidence and plenty was laid out but none of it was actual dead bodies. That's the burden of proof? So any crime that takes place where crime scene photos aren't leaked to the press was fake? Okay.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Ldude

avatar

Posts : 17
Join date : 2015-10-29
Location : .

PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Mon Nov 21, 2016 3:34 pm

.


Last edited by Ldude on Tue Dec 06, 2016 11:14 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
InsaneIntruder

avatar

Posts : 244
Join date : 2016-06-28
Age : 190
Location : The UK

PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Fri Nov 25, 2016 11:14 pm

Sorry for my fowl language. This post really annoyed me and I swore because I was so angry. Sorry about that.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Tue Nov 29, 2016 12:51 pm

Just for my own curiosity's sake, has OP ever had to serve jury duty ?

Many times, in a homicide case, only the jury sees the worst of photos. It is not uncommon for photos to go unseen by the general public. If that were enough to claim a crime did not happen, many criminals would walk free.

Further, the photos given meet the legal definition of evidence. Whether or not you choose to believe what is before your eyes is on you.

evidence - Legal Definition. n. A thing, a document, or the testimony of a person that bears on the truth or falsity of an assertion made in litigation; the totality of such items introduced in a trial; the legal doctrines pertaining to the admission, use, and evaluation of such items.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Sat Dec 03, 2016 1:39 am

Pegger wrote:
I worked for the same institution as Jimmy Greene did when they lived in Winnipeg, Canada. Didn't really know him but my colleagues did some. I also have a friend that attended their church.
They had a daughter Ana. She is now deceased at the hands of Adam Lanza.

So I don't have proof for you as you have never met the family.

But the child did exist and is no longer with the family. Not sure what the conspiracy nuts think these people did to make these kids suddenly disappear from their lives. Hundreds of people at work, church, school, neighbourhood interacted with this family. The child is no longer living with them. If this was a conspiracy what did they do with their child?


Really? And why should anyone believe that? How do we know you're not just another shill, like all those other 'friends of a victim' that have suddenly been showing up wherever people discuss these faked events?

There's no reason to believe you unless you can provide some proof that you at least know this person, which you should be able to do if you know them that well. Otherwise, I have to wonder why you're saying anything? Who do you think are going to believe you?
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Sat Dec 03, 2016 2:23 am

ThoughtBox wrote:
I have had the unfortunate luck to personally know a serious conspiracy theorist (he believed Columbine, of course, was also a conspiracy for gun-control). All I can say, is that as a mental health professional who has looked into the psychology of conspiracy theorists, their reaction is something formed in their minds to deal with (viz., explain) the inherent randomness and senselessness of often violent and inexplicable human behavior. And if that isn't a description of Sandy Hook and Columbine as well, then nothing is.

Well, I'm a serious conspiracy theorist, but I don't really think such a blanket statement fits me at all, and it doesn't seem to fit most others that I've come across. It's not anything about violent human behaviour that's the attraction to these events, but rather the inherent conspiratorial nature of certain governments and organizations, and the knowledge or suspicion that they're orchestrating these events for ulterior motives. That's about as blanket as I'll go in speaking for the majority of serious conspiracy theorists, from my POV. The violence (or lack of it) just comes with the territory. That can't be avoided.

But now I have to wonder, what brings you here to this particular site? This particular forum? Why are you interested in Columbine and Sandy Hook? Is it about the violent human behaviour? Or something else?


Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Sat Dec 03, 2016 3:28 am

InsaneIntruder wrote:
Adam Lanza had an account on a Columbine forum. And pictures of his posts. He also had a Wikipedia account. And a bedroom which was shown, games that were shown, the crime scene shown and more. It's sad that ignorant degenerates like you hear about these tragedies and come up with a half-baked theory just because you saw it on the news and thought "FAKE" so now you need to say that 20 parents sending their kids to school and becoming distraught because they received the news that their children's brains are full of fucking bullets, is fake. Not only is it fucking stupid, as you don't have evidence to prove that it didn't happen. But, you're also disrespecting the deaths of 20 children and 6 adults. So fuck you for that.

Did you ever consider the fact that government agents and their informants and shills have been online for many years, and now more than ever, and that they routinely create dummy accounts for later operations? Offline, they create and use fake identities all the time, with fake birth certificates and passports, fake background histories, fake families, fake occupations, and whatever else they might need to create the semblance of a real person, even fake death certificates when they terminate a fake identity, so it really isn't too hard to understand how a few accounts under the name of Adam Lanza might not be for a real person. Unless you're an idiot, of course.

But let me ask you... What do these online accounts consist of, really? What I mean is, how do you really know they were his? Can you answer that, by at least showing me whatever convinced you that they were his?

No, of course you can't. All you could ever do is tell me that because your information came from a certain source that you trust, it must be true.

Do you really expect to be convincing with that emotional outburst and name-calling? No, I don't really think you do. It's just a tactic, isn't it? You already know pretty much all that I'm telling you.
Back to top Go down
sscc
Top Contributor


Posts : 497
Join date : 2016-02-27

PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Sat Dec 03, 2016 4:19 am

Anthony Forwood wrote:

But let me ask you... What do these online accounts consist of, really? What I mean is, how do you really know they were his? Can you answer that, by at least showing me whatever convinced you that they were his?

No, of course you can't. All you could ever do is tell me that because your information came from a certain source that you trust, it must be true.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Even before Reed Coleman from the Sandy Hook Lighthouse blog broke the story about Smiggles being Lanza, back on January 1, 2014 Jenn posted in this thread about Sandy Hook
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Jenn wrote:
There was a member on RPG called "Smiggles". A friend of mine and I were just discussing the other day whether or not Lanza could have been a member on the old forum. Being that he had such an interest in Columbine? Anyone who was ever a researcher would know that anytime you tried to look something up about Columbine, it ALWAYS took you to a thread on RPG.

If you're suspicious of the sources of information on Adam Lanza and his online activities then you should probably be suspicious of this entire forum since the main admin here was one of the first people (and possibly the first person) to publicly suggest that Smiggles could be Lanza. Spooky, I know. affraid

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Sat Dec 03, 2016 7:08 am

sscc wrote:
Even before Reed Coleman from the Sandy Hook Lighthouse blog broke the story about Smiggles being Lanza, back on January 1, 2014 Jenn posted in this thread about Sandy Hook

I'll certainly look at these, but this sort of stuff doesn't usually convince me of much any more, based on what I've said in previous posts.

The problem for me is, I can conceive of a variety of possible scenarios to this event, so proving that Lanza existed as a real person wouldn't really be proving anything in and of itself. For instance, although he might be a real person, that doesn't immediately make him the real shooter. One possibility is that his identity was borrowed. Perhaps he died just prior to the shooting. Or maybe he didn't exist as a real person at all, and his persona was just a collection of photos and a few online posts, with a false history that was all created some time before, and a few other things to fill it all out to make it look more legitimate. There are other possible scenarios, but these should give an idea of what I mean.

Then there's the question of whether Lanza is the person in those pictures. And the question of whether the person named Nancy Lanza is really his mother, etc. None of these are necessarily legitimate.

It seems inconceivable that they'd be able to fake something like SH with all the people involved, but you have to understand that sometimes certain government agencies will infiltrate whole towns or communities and have their agents move in and pose as normal residents with normal lives. They're essentially sleeper cells. I'm not saying this was the case, but it's very possible.

....I just went through the links you posted to get to the original sources for the Smiggle posts, and the URLs don't exist.

Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Sat Dec 03, 2016 4:21 pm

Why are there no books or videos on chimpanzees among Lanza's possessions, if he was this Smiggles persona who had such a deep interest in them?





Back to top Go down
sscc
Top Contributor


Posts : 497
Join date : 2016-02-27

PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Sat Dec 03, 2016 4:48 pm

Anthony Forwood wrote:

....I just went through the links you posted to get to the original sources for the Smiggle posts, and the URLs don't exist.
That's true. The Super Columbine Massacre RPG forum that Lanza had posted on had already changed to Shocked Beyond Belief at the time that Coleman put those links together and I don't know the exact date but this forum eventually shut down too. At the time, he accessed the threads by doing Google searches and copying from the cached pages, which is what those links are. Eventually, the cached pages were purged completely.

They were copied by the researcher and later assembled in a document on another website
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

There are people in the Columbine research community (including the moderator of this very forum) who remembered that Smiggles was on the old forum. If you choose to believe they are lying and that the posts are fake, then there isn't anything that anyone can say to change your mind. If by some miracle I could convince you they were real, then as you said, you could choose to believe they were planted by the government in advance and there isn't anything I could say to change your mind. I was only answering your question about what these online accounts consisted of and why I believe they belonged to Lanza but if you're willing to believe that Newtown, CT was infiltrated years in advance by dozens of government agents to concoct this false story for the public then I'm sure that nothing anyone could show you would ever change your mind.

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
sscc
Top Contributor


Posts : 497
Join date : 2016-02-27

PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Sat Dec 03, 2016 4:50 pm

Anthony Forwood wrote:
Why are there no books or videos on chimpanzees among Lanza's possessions, if he was this Smiggles persona who had such a deep interest in them?

There is a book called In The Shadow of Man by Jane Goodall that was found in his room and mentioned by him on the forum. The crime scene photo and the forum excerpt were in the first link I posted.

There is also information from a real life friend he spent time with between 2011-2012 who he had conversations with about primates and chimpanzees in particular. Excerpts from the police interview with this friend are shown on the same page.

Back in 2006, when Lanza was evaluated by a psychiatrist this exchange took place and was recorded in his medical files.
Quote :
AL’s mother told the Yale psychiatrist that he used to look at people but did not anymore. AL then asked rhetorically, “Why should I have to.” When the doctor explained all of the information that a person could learn by looking at a facial expression, such as a smile, AL stated that people could interpret smiles differently: “Some primates smile when they are frightened.”

Also noteworthy is the fact that all the information listed as coming from his hard drive supposedly came from an external hard drive. Lanza destroyed the hard drive of his computer before going to the school and that data was never recovered as far we know.

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Sat Dec 03, 2016 5:20 pm

sscc wrote:
That's true. The Super Columbine Massacre RPG forum that Lanza had posted on had already changed to Shocked Beyond Belief at the time that Coleman put those links together and I don't know the exact date but this forum eventually shut down too. At the time, he accessed the threads by doing Google searches and copying from the cached pages, which is what those links are. Eventually, the cached pages were purged completely.

Why would they have been purged from the cache site? That's not normal. It just leaves more reasons to question the official story, rather than clear things up.

sscc wrote:
If you choose to believe they are lying and that the posts are fake, then there isn't anything that anyone can say to change your mind. If by some miracle I could convince you they were real, then as you said, you could choose to believe they were planted by the government in advance and there isn't anything I could say to change your mind. I was only answering your question about what these online accounts consisted of and why I believe they belonged to Lanza but if you're willing to believe that Newtown, CT was infiltrated years in advance by dozens of government agents to concoct this false story for the public then I'm sure that nothing anyone could show you would ever change your mind.

Don't turn my reserved judgment into an accusation that the mod or anyone else is lying. That's just one more tactic that's commonly used to stop discussions. If you don't want to discuss with me, then don't. Quite simple.

Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Sat Dec 03, 2016 5:57 pm

sscc wrote:
Also noteworthy is the fact that all the information listed as coming from his hard drive supposedly came from an external hard drive. Lanza destroyed the hard drive of his computer before going to the school and that data was never recovered as far we know.

So if this was an external harddrive, then it could have easily been taken and used outside of the Lanza home at any time.

Was there anything in the report that would prove that those online posts were made from his computer? From that particular harddrive? Such as an IP adress that traces back to his home?

Back to top Go down
sscc
Top Contributor


Posts : 497
Join date : 2016-02-27

PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Sat Dec 03, 2016 6:01 pm

Anthony Forwood wrote:
sscc wrote:
That's true. The Super Columbine Massacre RPG forum that Lanza had posted on had already changed to Shocked Beyond Belief at the time that Coleman put those links together and I don't know the exact date but this forum eventually shut down too. At the time, he accessed the threads by doing Google searches and copying from the cached pages, which is what those links are. Eventually, the cached pages were purged completely.

Why would they have been purged from the cache site? That's not normal. It just leaves more reasons to question the official story, rather than clear things up.

sscc wrote:
If you choose to believe they are lying and that the posts are fake, then there isn't anything that anyone can say to change your mind. If by some miracle I could convince you they were real, then as you said, you could choose to believe they were planted by the government in advance and there isn't anything I could say to change your mind. I was only answering your question about what these online accounts consisted of and why I believe they belonged to Lanza but if you're willing to believe that Newtown, CT was infiltrated years in advance by dozens of government agents to concoct this false story for the public then I'm sure that nothing anyone could show you would ever change your mind.

Don't turn my reserved judgment into an accusation that the mod or anyone else is lying. That's just one more tactic that's commonly used to stop discussions. If you don't want to discuss with me, then don't. Quite simple.

I believe based on what I read that since there is a 404 error listed, this means that Google's webcrawler attempted to cache the page after the site had shut down and when it saw that the page no longer existed, it was unable to record a new cached version of it so it was deleted. When a site is taken down, the cached page eventually disappears. Here's one example of a webmaster saying that this happened to them when their site went offline. This is presumably a random website with no controversy surrounding it.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I have no problem discussing this if you have questions that I believe I can answer, but I have to ask, is there anything that would change your mind? Based on what you have said so far, it doesn't sound like that will happen so my point was that I don't understand the purpose of asking these questions to begin with. What would convince you if you believe the townspeople themselves could have been planted?

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Sat Dec 03, 2016 6:03 pm

I find it more than a little disconcerting to see people attacking conspiracy theorists and calling them stupid and all that, but then you expect us to just accept your word without question. Is that how you do research?

I don't like being accused of calling someone a liar just because I don't automatically accept their research. Never mind my own suspicions! That's not anything anyone should be attacking, and certainly not if you think you're a researcher yourself.

I ask questions and reserve judgment until I am satisfied, not you. If anyone takes offense to being asked questions about what they say, they shouldn't say it in the first place.
Back to top Go down
sscc
Top Contributor


Posts : 497
Join date : 2016-02-27

PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Sat Dec 03, 2016 6:16 pm

Anthony Forwood wrote:
sscc wrote:
Also noteworthy is the fact that all the information listed as coming from his hard drive supposedly came from an external hard drive. Lanza destroyed the hard drive of his computer before going to the school and that data was never recovered as far we know.

So if this was an external harddrive, then it could have easily been taken and used outside of the Lanza home at any time.  

Was there anything in the report that would prove that those online posts were made from his computer? From that particular harddrive? Such as an IP adress that traces back to his home?

These posts were not included in the official report. As I said, they were identified by internet researchers as belonging to Lanza. From what I have read, the police never confirmed Smiggles as being Lanza, although they did say that he posted on an internet blog focused on mass shootings, and Columbine in particular. If they went to the trouble of creating a fake account over two years before the shooting in order to convince people, then it doesn't make sense to for them to have held back the specifics of this information. I assume that they did identify his use of the forum through his internet provider's records and that they have his IP address accessing the website, but they never made this information public.

If you read through all of the posts by Smiggles, all of the data recovered and what is known about Lanza, it's hard to believe that they aren't from the same person.

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
sscc
Top Contributor


Posts : 497
Join date : 2016-02-27

PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Sat Dec 03, 2016 6:20 pm

Anthony Forwood wrote:
I find it more than a little disconcerting to see people attacking conspiracy theorists and calling them stupid and all that, but then you expect us to just accept your word without question. Is that how you do research?

I don't like being accused of calling someone a liar just because I don't automatically accept their research. Never mind my own suspicions! That's not anything anyone should be attacking, and certainly not if you think you're a researcher yourself.

I ask questions and reserve judgment until I am satisfied, not you. If anyone takes offense to being asked questions about what they say, they shouldn't say it in the first place.

I haven't attacked anyone and I don't take offense. You ignored my one question. What would satisfy you?

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Sat Dec 03, 2016 6:26 pm

sscc wrote:
I have no problem discussing this if you have questions that I believe I can answer, but I have to ask, is there anything that would change your mind? Based on what you have said so far, it doesn't sound like that will happen so my point was that I don't understand the purpose of asking these questions to begin with. What would convince you if you believe the townspeople themselves could have been planted?

Why do you want to change my mind? Is that your intention?

I'm simply researching this. Nothing I propose as a possibility is set in stone. I have reasons to believe that it was staged, and I'm trying to determine to my own satisfaction whether it might have been. I have every right to doubt the official story, or anyone else's, and I don't have to explain myself for doing so. I could ask the same sort of question of you or anyone else here. Why are YOU here? Who are you trying to convince of anything and why?


Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Sat Dec 03, 2016 6:39 pm

sscc wrote:
These posts were not included in the official report. As I said, they were identified by internet researchers as belonging to Lanza. From what I have read, the police never confirmed Smiggles as being Lanza, although they did say that he posted on an internet blog focused on mass shootings, and Columbine in particular. If they went to the trouble of creating a fake account over two years before the shooting in order to convince people, then it doesn't make sense to for them to have held back the specifics of this information. I assume that they did identify his use of the forum through his internet provider's records and that they have his IP address accessing the website, but they never made this information public.

If you read through all of the posts by Smiggles, all of the data recovered and what is known about Lanza, it's hard to believe that they aren't from the same person.

If the posts had been faked, it certainly DOES make sense for them not to have included them in the report. That's my point. A real investigation would have involved the things you assume they did. But that's just an assumption. A false investigation would have left loose ends like that.

I'm not necessarily saying that they're not the same person. The various personas might be coordinated to at least appear that way, and that would obviously be expected.

When was the information in the report that led to this find first released? How long after the shooting? It was quite a while after, wasn't it?


Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Sat Dec 03, 2016 6:45 pm

In those articles you linked me to, it said that Lanza often erased the content of his posts sometime after he made them. What is to say that the content that has been quoted from wasn't added after the fact? You'd still have the same name and date stamps, but the content could have been changed to reflect the Lanza persona at any time after, and you wouldn't be able to tell.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Sat Dec 03, 2016 6:53 pm

sscc wrote:
I haven't attacked anyone and I don't take offense. You ignored my one question. What would satisfy you?

No, you haven't, and that's why the post was to everyone. But I see from reading through the thread how quickly and rudely others do. I just wanted to put that out there.

I thought I did answer your question.
Back to top Go down
sscc
Top Contributor


Posts : 497
Join date : 2016-02-27

PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Sat Dec 03, 2016 7:44 pm

Assuming that they were lying anyway, they could have said exactly what they said in the official report without ever making a single post online. The posts were made, the activity was identified by police but it was not released to the public. The possibilities are that Lanza made the posts himself or that someone invested resources in creating an unnecessary online trail that they never revealed to the public.

The report was released about one year after the shooting.

Most of the posts were intact. The content could not have been posted or changed without a time stamp and we can see exactly when all of the replies were posted, edited or erased.

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Tue Dec 06, 2016 7:41 am

Conspiracy theories have aounded probably since the beginning of time. JFK? 9/11? Are you searching for pictures of massacred children? If so, it will never happen, thank god. Take a look at previous school shootings. Even dead body pictures were not released at Virginia Tech, although those folks were mostly adults, with the exception of Cho on the autopsy table, his writing on his arm as well as his bloody footprints. Same with Columbine, with the exception of the Eric and Dylan, which were leaked. T.J. Lane's victims' death photos were not released.

There are reports that accompany each incident which provide more than enough information about the actions of the mass murderers. No one needs photos.

I will never understand such rabid opinions of a hoax at Sandy Hook. And I will never know or comprehend the pain of the parents who deal with such ridiculous nonsense. Their grief must be magnified ten fold by the preposterous theories circulating, and I sincerely hope for your sake that you are not subject to the horrrific murder of your 5 year old and have to deal with such stupid nonsense.

Back to top Go down
sororityalpha

avatar

Posts : 3281
Join date : 2013-03-22
Location : Canada

PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Fri Dec 09, 2016 2:44 am

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Sandy Hook- No Proof   Fri Dec 09, 2016 6:32 am

sororityalpha wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/08/us/newtown-victim-parent-lenny-pozner-hoaxers/index.html

Bless his heart, that's so pitiful. It breaks my heart.
Back to top Go down
 
Sandy Hook- No Proof
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 3 of 3Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3
 Similar topics
-
» .45-70 at Two Miles: The Sandy Hook Tests of 1879
» Spongebob (pick and play)
» The Hero's are here to save you
» Hello! - Hook here - {CMM} ...
» Sean’s Proof of Mastery Dagger

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Columbine High School Massacre Discussion Forum :: Other Crimes :: Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting-
Jump to: