10 votes

Hard Proof of Photoshopping, RE: the New Adam Lanza pics - PBS & Frontline Implicated

Hard Proof of Photoshopping of New Adam Lanza Pictures: PBS & Frontline Implicated

Note: the the newly released Adam Lanza 'Deviant' photos proven a sham. The evidence is hard and undeniable. Now, it is time to take strong action against this criminal cabal for high crimes against humanity, including the murder of Adam Lanza and his mother.

In their desperation to maintain the authoritative nature of their globalist regime Zionist operatives are doing all in their power to hide the trail of evidence for their botched criminal act, the Sandy Hook black ops debacle. Through the efforts of a wide range of independent investigators it has been completely revealed that the entire event is a deliberate hoax. Key perpetrators are elements within the Zionist criminal cabal, who seek to emasculate any remaining power in the American people. This is through orchestrating a gun grab.

Newly released photos of Adam Lanza demonstrate the degree of desperation of these arch-culprits in their attempt to maintain their power base, which isn't apparently so much based upon financial and military power as it is the absolute control of the people's' consciousness. If they cannot control the minds of the people, then, their entire system of high corruption is at risk for collapsing. Islamophobia is one of the predominant tactics, and so is false--and real--terror, all of it orchestrated by the same criminal elements.

The direct perpetrators of this latest attempted act of deception are Hearst Publications, through operatives in its local entity, Connecticut's Hartford Courant, and PBS, along with its cohort in crime, Frontline. The Courant has good, decent reporters combined with other individuals, actual operatives, working for Zionist hegemony. It is Frontline which takes full responsibility for the fabricated photos, revealing them on the PBS 'special' called "Raising Adam Lanza" in concert with "Newtown Divided" as well as "After Newtown: A Weeklong Conversation about Guns in America," which first aired on February 19, 2013.

A call to the Courant revealed that the news journal is only directly aware of a traceable source for one of the photos, which is the one showing Adam waving his hand. The main ones, they said, of Adam Lanza against the bright blue wall are exclusively "from Frontline."

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.

That web site is the work of

That web site is the work of an obsessive compulsive. The fact of the matter is, without access to the original photos all of the author's creative claims are unprovable. There are enough compression artifacts in those images that literally any portion of them may or may not have been altered or edited. The rambling on and on about proven tampering cannot be supported. I have personally used Photoshop professionally for more than twenty years, and with recent releases of the software, If a photo has been professionally altered, it is completely undetectable. The issues regarding color fringing and grain matching have been solved. As I say, this author knows just enough to draw conclusions without solid proof... not to mention, his whole issue is a hang up over "crazy eyes". I suggest he get a new hobby.

"A nation can survive its

"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious, but it can not survive treason from within." Cicero

If Sandy Hook can be exposed to the American populace, we may have a chance. It seems there is such a force out there preventing questions being asked that it almost makes a case in itself.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4SKmL79CVc at 1:45

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrXPHwl11io at 4:53

While we're on PICTURES...

why is it we NEVER saw ONE SOLITARY PHOTO of Adam Lanza together with his mom, or duh, ONE SOLITARY PHOTO of Adam Lanza & Peter Lanza, his dad?

This whole thing is weird beyond weird. I agree, however, with all the comments.

However, there are many, many things to be suspicious of in the Sandy Hook baloney...

Why wasn't the public informed of the 2 men detained and handcuffed behind the school, and 1 who was seen in the "front seat" of the patrol car?

Why hasn't Peter Lanza said a word? In fact, why didn't Peter Lanza his dad claim Adam's body??

Why didn't the Medical Examiner ever make public the autopsies of BOTH Adam & Nancy Lanza? That is VERY strange! Where was Adam's gunshot wound(s)? Where did they enter/exit?? Was he shot in the back? Is that why an administrative assistant showed her husband Adam's body? So that she could show him there was none? Or worse, he was shot in the back? Or, whatever? And, why would the Medical Examiner be so nonchalant about examining Adam & his mother's bodies and taking his time about that! Brother...

Why in the world did Eric Holder fly into Sandy Hook and speak in private to the 1st responders? What was SO important he had to do that??

Who is that man who lied and changed his story about helping the kindergartners & saying he heard the school bus man yell at them at the end of his driveway? Why would anybody bring traumatized children into his house without calling the police first? And, WHERE the h--ll is the bus driver?? NOWHERE, that's where!! Why would a bus driver stop at that man's house? I don't know about you, but I'd be driving FAR, FAR AWAY from any shoot out.

Why didn't any of the people in the neighborhood call 911?

And, finally, why didn't BIG MEDIA interview a part-time Connecticut cop who cast many questions about this whole crazy incident, who suggested it would have been IMPOSSIBLE for a whiff of a boy Adam Lanza's size to carry all the weapons and hundreds of amnunition he was supposed to have used? WHY...

Indeed, WHY, WHY, WHY....is the question!


Ok daily paulers here it is :

Just from first glance at this website

If you click on the archives over to the right you will see that there is only jan 2013 and feb 2013.

hmm strange ,

so if you look at all of the articles on the site there are some listed at the bottom , they all appear to be sandy hook related ONLY.


also just from browsing through and reading this article it talks about photos this and photos that from frontline and ap.

what is the point that photos of him are made to look menacing and have been altered , because i dont see proof of anything at all on this entire page.

its kind of like that dallasgoldbug guy that thinks all of the actors in the world are actually playing real peoples parts, just very strange.

also where are the advertisements , this website NODISINFO.COM looks very cookie cutterish when compared to http://www.ratfacedjews.com which Gordon Duff exposed as an ADL front website which is now totally suspended for some reason hmm and when compared to http://www.totalfascism.com/, you will notice total lack of advertisements on there as well.

I guess someone has set these up as a service to the commmunity ,

would that be a disservice?

I dont know people , I would suggest anyone taking this information in from this nodisinfo.com to take it with a grain of salt as you should most all sites out there nowadays.

thanks for reading

"He's this eccentric Ghandi-Like figure that you cant touch with the normal bribes that people respond to."
the man Doug Wead on DR. RON PAUL

Very fishy...

Notice the 911 link goes to a cheesy page of No-plane disinfo.

This blog and the new commenters trying to talk it up are likely all part of the scam. This is all to make those of us who question the crazy madmen running this country look stupid.

Never trust anyone who says they have absolute proof and ALL of the answers. Only trust those searching honestly.

Wow, thanks for polluting the

Wow, thanks for polluting the DP with bullshit like this. Lol @ implicated. i canz teel bi luukyn at the pixulz

To me this is glaringly faked


The outline of the eyes are totally manipulated from one to the other, although they were supposedly taken at the same location and time. The shapes of the tear duct alone are so different from each other.

"society could go in a thousand directions as to how it would exist and how it would be, but the public mustn't know that. The generations must believe that the one that they're born into is naturally evolved."-Lenin/Alan Watt/cuttingthroughthematrix.com

When someone legitmately questions something....

...they do just that. They question...they do not assert.

Why do you assert?

Have you not ever retaken like 5 pictures "at the same location and time" where in one picture you look good, but in all the others, you look funky?!

In one picture, the pupil is focused towards the side, in the other, straight ahead.

Do you really question this?

Those aren't they type of mistakes to key on when looking for doctored images. I'd look for repeating patterns, difference in resolution, appearance of layers or selection marks, etc. I don't see these things in the images.

So your evidence is that because two different pictures are different, they must be "glaringly faked"?

I'm a serial entrepreneur and liberty activist from Texas!


I was referring to the specific images linked.

If you think taking 5 shots of the eyes wide open as Lanza's will result in different profile of the tear duct, please let me know.

"society could go in a thousand directions as to how it would exist and how it would be, but the public mustn't know that. The generations must believe that the one that they're born into is naturally evolved."-Lenin/Alan Watt/cuttingthroughthematrix.com

Of course the tear duct will look differently...

...if in one picture the pupil is focusing straight forward, while the other is shifted to the side! The one that is shifted to the side of the tear duct compresses the with of said tear duct.

The one where the pupil is centered, looking straight forward, does NOT compress the tear duct which means it appears wider than the other.

This is what we would expect to see. A narrowing and widening of the tear duct as the pupil shifts from center toward the nose.

I'm a serial entrepreneur and liberty activist from Texas!


This poor kid

I know he does not care any more, he is exploring mysteries beyond my comprehension. But what they are doing to his memory, it is not right.

Love or fear? Choose again with every breath.

Cyril's picture



"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.


"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

Cyril's picture




P S Y - O P


No doubts about it, now.


Goebbels would be proud of what's going on - in some U.S. East Coast states today.

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.


"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

Seems like disinfo....

...trying to muddy the water. But that's just my unfounded opinion, though I am a Photoshop pro! Literally, I get paid to play on Photoshop! I didn't read the entire article, but the first part seems too overly aggressive and sure of themselves. I didn't see anything alarming about the images. Just my honest two cents...I didn't look too deep into it after not really see much in the images. I could be wrong...

I'm a serial entrepreneur and liberty activist from Texas!


check out

the "AP’s original image disseminated on the 17th", the one that makes him look like a monster. Look at the whites of the eyes and tell me that's not the typical white circles of the brush, individual clicks of white around the iris of the eye. It's so bad, the circle brush individual clicks mask parts of the iris and you can see the edge of the white brush tool.

There's a closer shot of the eyes of that pic just above the AP's original. Heck, they didn't even blur to blend the white individual brush circles or use a fade.

I only skimmed the article, but checked out the remarks for each pic. I agree the points made do show amateur use of PS.

You'll have to link to what you're referring to...

I don't see any alterations to the whites of any eyes. The pixelation is from compressing a jpeg.

I'm a serial entrepreneur and liberty activist from Texas!


See above.

quite a bit of what's pointed out in the pics looks

correct for the eyes and the chin. Easy to do for yourself to check, just R click on the pics to save to desk top and throw them in PS or Gimp and invert the colors. To compare the AP monster pic with the other front view pic, just adjust the opaque (make one pic see through) and slide it over the other matching the eyes and nose placement, the long chin is a give away of misplacement.

let me take a look

yeah there are a lot of weird areas in some of those photos. I didn't study it for very long so I am not fully seeing what he is pointing out about the eyes. However in the bottom section, there is no doubt that these had been altered. The oldest picture of him is very sloppy and the child Halloween picture makes no normal photographic sense. The shadowing around his head and the lighting are dead giveaways. There is no possible way that Shadow could have been cast on the woman's shirt when she is supposed to be so far away from him. She in fact as a red shirt boy between her and Adam. I'm too tired to fully analyze this now but this guy seems to have done a pretty good job.

That is just simply not true...


I took that picture myself with a basic Nikon D40 with a kit lens and the basic built in flash. Shadows can most definitely go even further than this. This is at a friends wedding! The bride's father getting down!

I'm a serial entrepreneur and liberty activist from Texas!


You make a good point, and the post has been adjusted

accordingly. There are other issues with the shadows that bear investigation, such as the lack of softness, as in your picture, and how the hair surrounds or caps a part of that shadow; the curling form around the side raises the question of whether this was cloned, after the Lanza image was potentially added to the photo.

There is strong evidence of the use of paint brush for whites in the eyes, both of the AP photo and one of the Frontline photos, the one of Mr. Lanza staring straight ahead.

The triplicate pattern of bubbles is not a function of camera angle and is anomalous, it is not a tear duct component.