11 votes

Your daily "WHAT?!" from Sandy Hook


From what I consider the most reliable source I have seen, listen to the boy at 30 seconds in.
Saw smoke, smelled smoke, then bullets.
Who had the smoke grenade? Have you heard a word about smoke grenades? Google hasn't.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

mike lawson= thread winner

mike lawson= thread winner below, end of story. I swear dp is turning into the ny daily but worse.

Ron Paul 2016

Let's over-analyze the syntax used by a child in a 5 second clip

who can barely construct a sentence to begin with.

The cops, doctors, parents, teachers, and journalists are all lying, right? The children are the only source of truth, right?

Fishyculture, I mean this dead seriously- I think you should seek psychological help. You have made your hatred of psychiatry and medication very clear, but there are alternatives. You are, in my opinion, delusional, paranoid, and obsessive about this Sandy Hook tragedy.


might be consistent with newspaper report that one of the parents who was actually handcuffed/detained for "running around the building" stated he smelled sulfer smoke.

not to mention parent mentioning "masked shooter"


Sooo than the monster under his bed

is also real?

If shots had already been fired there would be smoke

A smoke grenade would probably have been pretty memorable because they spin around and make strange noises. I'm inclined to think the kid smelled gun smoke.

The words of the witness transcribed directly are:

"Another friend of mine said that...there was a man, a masked man, came in and just started shooting."

The child, young boy, added:

"I heard something like a person was kicking down a door, then I turned and I saw smoke and I smelled smoke...

then bullets whized by, then a teacher pulled me into her room."

Clearly, he could be giving a clue of the use of smoke bombs, also definitively used in Aurora. Keep searching, everyone.

The masked man, bullet-proof vest, surgical killing: all points to a murderous plot that goes beyond the official story.

BEFORE the shots were fired?

Watch again, the kid says first he saw smoke and smelled it, THEN bullets flew.

Love or fear? Choose again with every breath.

First he heard the kicking sound (shots being fired)

Then he turned around and saw smoke and smelled smoke and bullets whizzed by. It all adds up. This one, unlike several of the other "what"s, is a "oh, thaat".

kicking doors sound like bullets to you?

They do not to the little boy, he distinguishes between the two quite clearly. He displays some uncertainty about the kicking noise, but not the bullets and he never equates them.

Love or fear? Choose again with every breath.

When bullets are fired they make a loud bang

"Something that sounded like a door being kicked in" almost perfectly describes loud bangs.
Keep in mind that your witness is 5 or 6 years old and is not likely to know how to describe quite everything.
Have you looked into the license plate of the shooter's mom's car? Much more fruitful. This one is grasping when there's so much else that's not.

I don't think the kid is

I don't think the kid is telling some fairy tale about seeing smoke first, and then hearing bullets, "whiz by," after.

The smoke bomb would be used to make everyone blind to what was really going on. I trust what this child said, you could tell it was still fresh in his mind talking about what happened.

Never be afraid to ask simple questions.

Who threw the smoke bomb?

There is no mention of any kind of smoke bomb or tear gas anywhere else.

Love or fear? Choose again with every breath.

Maybe it was the thermite...


Get a new hobby.

A bump for the late risers

I am not accusing anyone of anything, I am asking someone to reconcile at least SOME of the huge inconsistencies. (And I am asking the Medical Examiner to assure me that he is looking into a possible antidepressant connection.)

Love or fear? Choose again with every breath.

Unlikely that this

"medical examiner" is going to speak against his big pharma masters.