35 votes

Adam Lanza Dead One Day BEFORE Shooting?

SSDI Death Index: Sandy Hook ‘Shooter’ Adam Lanza Died One Day Before School Massacre
Note: In no way is the author of this article claiming that there were no victims shot at Sandy Hook Elementary School on December 14, 2012, rather the article points out a complex false flag operation with very real victims. It is also important to note that this matter is still currently under open investigation by theintelhub.com, please send any tips or information to: tips@theintelhub.com
This is an ongoing investigation and there are many details still left to unravel.

Adam Lanza
By Shepard Ambellas
theintelhub.com
January 21, 2013
NEWTOWN — New information has come to light regarding the Sandy Hook School shooting, as the “official story” given to the American public is riddled with inconsistencies. According to and confirmed by GenealogyBank.com, the alleged lone shooter Adam Lanza that left 26 people dead on December 14, 2012 was documented to be deceased one day prior to the mass shooting that took place at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown Connecticut.
The following data is available at GenealogyBank.com;

The SSDI database shows Adam Lanza to be expired on December 13, 2012, one day prior to the school shooting. Confirmation Status is listed as “Proven”. However the state of issue is New Hampshire.
The implications of this are unfathomable.
Could this be why John Blawie, a Connecticut State Superior Court Judge has put a halt on search warrant affidavits?
An excerpt from the local CT Post reads;
DANBURY — A state Superior Court judge said Thursday that search warrant affidavits for the cars and home of Sandy Hook Elementary School shooter Adam Lanza and his mother would stay sealed for another 90 days.
Judge John Blawie granted motions filed Wednesday by Danbury State’s Attorney Stephen Sedensky to extend the statutory sealing period for the five warrants, including three for the Yogonanda Street home where the 20-year-old Lanza fatally shot his mother, Nancy, four times in the face on the morning of Dec. 14, before embarking on the rampage that left 20 first-graders and six educators dead.
We are still conducting a full scale investigation into this matter. Please send any tips or information to tips@theintelhub.com
Source Links:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZzWIDC79Oo&list=PLD15C8WwgQHnYj1EeA6Px1SM…
http://www.genealogybank.com/gbnk/ssdi/doc/ssdi/v1:143EB37C7...
http://www.genealogybank.com/gbnk/ssdi/doc/ssdi/v1:143A17716...
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/12/14/police-respond-to-report-of-school-sho…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_sh...
http://hosting-24974.tributes.com/condolences/view_memories/...
*****




Comment viewing options

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

So are we going have

So are we going have "deathers" now?

Court fights for death certificates and stuff?

I agree that fateful day does have some funky smell to it but the simplest answer is usually the correct one: he went off his meds, killed his parents, stole the guns, and killed the kids.

"The simplest answer is usually

"The simplest answer is usually the correct one"

Yes, for the simplest of minds

Nah...

'Deathers' don't believe Obama killed Osama.

They'll need to find another Saul 'Alinskyism' for this one.

How about 'Hookers' lol...

I'm sorry you feel the need to squelch truth-seeking, especially when the consequences may/will deprive the entire nation of natural rights, such as we've seen in the decade since 9/11.

When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign: that the dunces are all in confederacy against him. ~J. Swift

Hookers

Good one.

"Its easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled."
Mark Twain

Exactly!

Thank you for taking a break from sitting in front of your TV with your mouth hanging open to straighten out all the crazies around here.

i think they should be called

i think they should be called trubirdeathers.... to sound like kinda like treubedour. hehe

How about you allow the investigation to continue?

If people are chasing phantoms, they will discover they were wrong.

But discrepancy is not a phantom, though they might prove meaningless.

A pattern of discrepancies may be a clue.

Time will tell. In the end a Grand Jury will decide if a crime was likely.

Free includes debt-free!

First, I can't stop it or

First, I can't stop it or allow it to continue. Second, it's a glorified google search, not an investigation. A grand jury isn't going to decide anything because the accused is dead. No one is going to prosecute anyone based on your clue that the media can't get a story straight.

Can a society accept a wrongful death and prosper?

How much effort should one expend seeking justice?

Depends on the person.

Free includes debt-free!

How just is it to continue to

How just is it to continue to accuse all these people? You guys are so far gone that you now even accuse people who simply ask questions about your 'evidence'. This isn't an investigation. It's a witch hunt performed on Google. Even the reporters are going on location.... what are you all doing to seek truth? Googling. That's it. Have any of you even been to Sandy Hook? I doubt it. A bunch of investigators who've probably never been to the crime scene. It's a ludicrous thought.

"Have any of you even been to

"Have any of you even been to Sandy Hook?"

The majority of information/records can be found online now. Welcome to 2013

You can interview witnesses

You can interview witnesses and look at bullet holes and stuff online? Are you?

Plus, if you're getting your info from databases and websites, you're getting it second hand. Have you gone through the police reports and witness statements even?

The only way to get SSDI

The only way to get SSDI info, is from a database.

As for interviewing witnesses:

a) I'm not a reporter
b) I'm not spending a thousand dollars on a plane ticket, hotel, transportation and food
c) Why travel way over there when you can view videos of their interview... wait for it... online
d) The families are all guarded by local police, good luck getting near them

That's cool. I don't really

That's cool. I don't really expect you to do any of those things. But, let's be honest. You're a spectator, not an investigator.

Just his name?

So an Adam Lanza died according to a database. You guys need to start answering questions before making allegations that THE Adam Lanza died a day before.

1. Same Adam?
2. Correct data record?
3. Anyone check the obituaries for a funeral service for this dead Adam?
4. You all want to see bodies so bad.... what about this one?

name, age and state

You were downvoted for not even looking at the links before making you're comment.

This is the article that got my posting privileges revoked:
http://bklim.newsvine.com/_news/2013/05/12/18212165-dr-stan-...

I did look. name, age and

I did look. name, age and state is very little to get excited about. I was quoted in GQ not long ago if those are the standards that you use.

Plus, the db record can't verify itself. I don't care if the same record says that it's proven. The db record is what I'm asking if it's right, the whole record.

Look up some other people

You must know someone who has died. I checked several last night and it all seems accurate. You saw Nancy Lanza the next day also in New Hampshire, right?
The tv has told a big lie this time. I know it's very hard to imagine such a trusted friend doing such a thing but it did.

dude, i don't even own a TV

dude, i don't even own a TV and honestly, I know more about your guys strange ideas than whatever the TV is saying. I don't believe it because you haven't provided anything to believe in.... just speculations.

This db record is the one that needs to be verified, not the ones you checked.

I agree that it needs verification

I'm just adding it to the exceptionally long list of curious things associated with this case.
My tv comment was less personal than general.

The problem I'm having is,

The problem I'm having is, I'm willing to believe... I just don't. So far, everything I see is from people who want to believe. If you scrutinize any event with significant media coverage, you'll find thousands of these inconsistencies. I noticed your tag.... even the four gospels have these discrepancies in their accounts. Does it mean Jesus was an inside job?

Your

Cognitive Dissonance and Normalcy Bias are your problem.

Why would you try to dampen investigation into the truth, which may some day provide you with the irrefutable proof that you need to see? If presented with irrefutable proof, would you even believe it then?

When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign: that the dunces are all in confederacy against him. ~J. Swift

If you think questions about

If you think questions about things you've found in your extended google search is dampening your investigation, and at the same time you accuse me of two disorders, that's very sad for you.

It's not an accusation, it's

It's not an accusation, it's simply a statement of a fact that is clear to anyone looking at this conversation.

Freedom in our lifetime! - fiol.us

lol yeah. anyone reading this

lol yeah. anyone reading this would clearly be able to diagnose me with two disorders.

aren't you all the same crowd who doesn't believe in psychiatric disorders and pharma?

They aren't disorders, they

They aren't disorders, they are verbs.

Restless Leg Syndrome isn't a real disorder, does that mean you can't have restless legs? I think not.

Besides those two aren't "disorders" to begin with. I'm honestly not sure where you got that. They are just two phenomena, both of which you have demonstrated.

Freedom in our lifetime! - fiol.us

lol it's funny because you

lol it's funny because you have no idea what you're talking about.

haha who down voted

haha who down voted questions? This is the problem with the critical thinking skills of our generation.

I don't even see any downvotes.

I don't even see the post your talking about.

1. Same Rhysw?
2. Some bullshit directly underneath it?
3. A subsequent comment where you accuse others of having issues applying critical thinking while simultaneously discouraging others from seeking information, an integral part of critical thought?

Has anyone tried clicking around to expand the supposed post from this Rhysw?

You don't see it cause it got

You don't see it cause it got collapsed by so many people who hide from questions and shout accusations.

Also, how did you not see the post that you copied the format from? You're either Forrest Gump or Mitt Romney.