7 votes

Proof the Sandy Hook Children are a Hoax: Barden's Fake Pictures

Fake Children, Letters, Posters, and More

Barden himself provides absolute proof that Sandy Hook is a hoax of unbridled proportions:

Article:

While the media tells wicked lies, here, every attempt is made to uncover the truth. This isn't easy, because this means attempting to prove lies as well as frauds. One of the biggest phonies of all in the Sandy Hook Hoax is Mark Barden. Himself a stage performer, he has been in show business for decades. Sandy Hook was his biggest show ever, although he did a miserable job. Few people found him compelling, and as a result even the media stayed clear of him. Even so, he is perpetrating these lies to get at the American people emotionally,using his son’s purported death as a launching point for gun control--if he has such a son at all.

He couldn't even get the family pictures right: they were graphically altered.

If he can't even provide real pictures of his son to the media, notably the UK's DailyMail, how can anything he says be trusted, including the supposed claim of losing a son? He's a liar-in-chief, make no mistake about it.

We are being lied to, and the majority of people believe the lie. Poor, vulnerable human race. It is sad to think that we can be so easily fooled.

Here are the kinds of lies Barden fed the world in the aftermath of Sandy Hook:

Daniel had got up early that morning because he wanted to give his brother, who left earlier, a kiss goodbye.

'He ran down the driveway so he could do it and it was 22 degrees out,' Mark said. 'He was exceptional.'

Who finds any such drivel believable? A perfect story-book tale of a loving brother: leave the world in tears.

Read more:
http://nodisinfo.com/Home/2013/01/25/sandy-hooks-mark-barden...
Read more:



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

Wow...

One of the photos looked a little odd from my photo-editing experienced eye... but then the out-on-the-town photo just stood out as being an obvious photo-edit.

This is just my own personal opinion, but spend a few years working with photo-editing software then look at these pics again to get the perspective I have.

My verdict: Heavily edited.

What does this mean though? Does this fall on just a family or two? Or much bigger?

If you can fake 1 victim, why not fake 2?

There must be at least 1000 photos of every real 7 year old kid, and why would they have to fake anything at all if they had the real thing? You understand how much photoshopping you can do without getting busted - that is a lot! And if busted, you must have much more that isn't discovered.

Here is the fake victim Victoria Soto obviously Photoshopped: http://tinyurl.com/aa7rjwa

And in this Parkers Christmas card photo, one or two of the kids are without legs, etc. It is a lot.

And we have all the missing tears, IE, no credible victims parent or family members at all. Obviously, all the victims are just made up, faked and REPORTED.

There's More

But the one thing that really caught my eye on the pic you linked me to was what appears to be a halo effect around the upper part of the body. That indicates someone tried to soften the area around it as to make it appear more natural in a new environment.

I don't think whoever is doing this has a lot of pictures of these people. They probably are working with a limited resource and are making the most they can of it. The people are probably much older now or not available for more photoshoots (or both).