Sandy Hook - some photo analysis

When you stay down the rabbit hole for to long they will start setting up furniture for you






and now for some more


The girls look especially pasted in, if not all of them. The ELA shows a rectangular Police badge.




Interesting 'twin' images of Giffords visiting Sandy Hoax...

IMAGE 1: (exif data says this one is by "JEFF FOSS, Fox CT. Date/Time: 2013:01:06 - 16:00:25)


IMAGE 2: (exif data says this one is by "MICHELLE MC LOUGHLIN, Reuters. Date/Time: 2013:01:06 - 16:00:35)


Once again, we are asked to believe that:
- Two photographers, standing feet apart, snapped a pic at the exact same instant in time (NOT 10secs apart as of exif data).
- Both these 'twin' images were chosen for publication (out of the many photos all pros habitually snap away in such occasions). The odds of such things occuring in real life are, rationally speaking, pretty astronomical.

Furthermore: yes, the perspectives suggest that the two photoreporters were standing relatively close to each other (JIM more to the right, MICHELLE more to the left) - but NOT close enough to show a virtually identical angle of Giffords face: 

On the strength of all the above considerations, I personally find this conclusion a lot more plausible:

What we have here, are two digitally-crafted images, slightly rotated in a less-than-perfect "3D" imaging software program (similar to what was used on 9/11 to simulate multiple shots of near-identical sceneries). 

Besides, was Gabby Gifford's coat BROWN - or BLACK?

Apparently, the silver-haired lady with the fucsia scarf is faster than she looks.
How did she escape the other photographer's lens in a tenth of a second?



In both pictures, the shadow cast by Agent RedTie upon Gifford doesn't appear to change in height by more than a tiny amount, yet there's a big difference in the spacing between these depicted individuals. And look at the difference in the ray-trace angle. Can this be explained by a perspective difference from 'two' shots, or not??

open above pic in a new tab or window or note below

Notice how her hair is blowing in the wind but the strings on her scarf are leaning the opposite way o.O
/ Also the hair that comes from no where on her right boob




So here goes: I have drawn two vector lines (A1 and B1) on the JEFF FOSS image - using that guy in the background as an 'eyesight/vantage point' reference:

Here - on the MICHELLE MC LOUGHLIN image, I have drawn the two vector lines A2 and B2:

Now, if you measure the two distances marked D1 and D2, you will see that D2 is actually TWICE as long as D1. That is a pretty significant perspective change, is it not?

So, does this almost imperceptible perspective change of Gabby Giffords' face make any sense?
Yes, she is the most centred object in both images - but is this really enough to explain all of this?

But hey: once again, let me ask this fundamental question - lest it gets lost in our logical reasoning process, as so often happens when focusing on lesser details: HOW LIKELY is it that two professional photoreporters of FOX and REUTERS both snapped this very same instant in time (well ok, the lady in yellow dress actually blinks in one of the two shots) - and that BOTH of these photoreporters' unique shots were selected for publication? Is it not far more likely that these two shots were created digitally? Think about it - please.



I want to address some issues I have with these photos posted to an ABC News website:



Now, is it just me, or are some of these shadows inconsistent? For one, if you just look at the image as a whole, do the shadows not look like they don't even belong? Secondly, look at the uppermost ambulance in the first image. The shadows of the two men are joined by the shadow of, I suppose, the side-mirror of the vehicle (???). It's in the second image as well. 

Does that make sense from that angle? Is it something else entirely? 

full link:

This is Helicopter footage before the chase in the woods. There are supposed to be 27 dead people inside at this moment. There are: No visible children No ambulances. No medical staff. No parents.


One thing I'm wondering about is why all the cars, firetrucks, ambulances and everyone else were located at the Firehouse and not the school itself. Here is one example. Why is this sign at the firehouse?


Another thing worth noting, is the woman in the photo. 

Former professional tennis player and nun Andrea Jaeger




Just so people don't have to keep looking through the vid.

I guess ive seen kids with there fingers in there mouth before like this - but the sigil keeps popping


Emili looks added in after wards to me not part of the group

The source for the following image is in the video at 1:40 on this page. I took a screengrab from it. If someone could find the actual image, I'm sure it would expose more details to pick apart.


1) Emilie (pronounced I'm A Lie) is again off to the right side, in the same strange way as the first Parker family photo. She looks out of place and pasted into the scenery?

2) Her head is too small in relation to those of her sisters. Since she is the oldest, it would stand to assume that her head should be the largest?

3) The transition/lighting/shadows between Robbie Parker's left arm and Emlie's right arm is unnatural and looks off?

Apparently Benjamin Wheeler liked lighthouses, and someone is good at photoshop. I find the original picture strange given that the background is in focus despite the subject taking up the majority of the frame.



WHATS UP DOC- to much time in the rabbit hole and they start setting up furniture for you

HERE'S a COuch

Image ... 25x429.jpg

Unfortunately this is the best quality available for this image.


Why is everyone in this photo wearing blue? Adam Lanza is supposedly the only face not blurred out.

The laziness / ineptness of those photoshloppers is staggering... :angry: 



Here is a pretty good video I just came across.most of the images were at the Firehouse.




Full credit to my better half.

 "Her bottom half appears to be completely fake"!

Can you see it? It's glaringly obvious. She fades just below the hips and the "legs" have been altered and stuck behind her, if they are even hers...I mean are they are supposed to be hers! She has been tipped and twisted and given the Hulk's shoulder and her nose is artificial.




Look at where my red arrow is pointing: WHAT is that dark, creasy cloth? A part of her skirt? Nah - come on now ! 
Then - if you still can't see what's wrong here - follow the partition of her legs. Not wishing to sound rude here - but is her crotch area placed under her right hip? Lastly - but not leastly - look at her left index: it is absurdly long! Damn -




does anyone in the photo not look photshopped in

Family members of Victoria Soto including her sisters Carlee Soto (L) and Jillian Soto (2ndL) and brother Matthew Soto leave after a funeral at Lordship Community Church


The above photo is a composite.

Notice the woman in yellow sweater and yellow scarf above supposedly emerging from the church just in front of the police man.

Below is the same woman actually emerging from the church:


As seen in this video at 0:23:
full link:

You can also see in the above video that there are steps going down as soon as one steps out through the door. So, the two guys in front (in the composite photo above) are either incredibly tall or they are floating above the steps (that is, they were obviously pasted into the photo).


There's a few things nagging me about this picture. ("Photograph" may not be the right word for it.)
First, which object is bigger? The immature background object, clumsily labelled No.1?
Or the fully grown wrestler of thugs and varmints standing in the foreground, labelled No. 2?

 I noticed this:

on closer,  inspection I realised that Daddy's pants were bunched up over his belt like that because he was resting his backside on the railing behind him.
But there is no railing, only the shadow of one on the pillar, and poor Daddy appears to be missing a leg:

The two actors shaking hands in the foreground are both watching as a simulated tear is about to be wiped away. It's very touching, can you see it? Or is it a real tear and am I just a heartless bastard?



This image is from the slide show of the 'official memorial'.
Once again, we're treated to truly banal host of messages from well-wishers. Aside from the obviously contrived colour pattern, there are multiple repeats and clear signs of a narrow authorship...

There are five instances of "Stay Strong" many "Always in our hearts" and, of course, the always poignant "We are thinking of you." The elongated heart (valentine) shape that appears not less than five times is clearly the work of one very sympathetic (and boring) copy editor.

However, for pure comedy, nothing beats the lower right, white panel, which reads cryptically "feel better"

Not only in the same hand, but using the same marker pen throughout!


OK SO much of this may or may no be debunked- we will just call this a coffee table

Two points I disagree with the videographer on, Heiwa, is that the media caught a scene of law enforcement chasing someone into the woods.

What it appeared to me to be is a staged scene caught by a hovering helicopter where the
people run into view from stage right. It looks like all the people running are LE chasing nobody.
If they were chasing someone and the scene were legit, then why no scene of someone being
apprehended and frog-marched out?

The person says Manfredonia was not wearing camo, but I saw a photo of him with a troopers arm around him and he is indeed wearing desert camo pants. Fredonia is employed of course with the school system and lives one street over from Yogananda.

In case anyone should recognize him playing a role here, the story was floated that he was just
there to teach the kids how to build gingerbread houses.
A completely plausible tale. :D

I guess they didn't consider that gingerbread houses aren't built in shop class, but home ec.
Just totally dumb, to me.



And here's the supposed boyfriend of the alleged 'Lauren Rousseau' victim. If you are short of time (and understandably tired of all this pathetic Sandy Hook shit) - just skip to 2:05 into the video and watch Tony's tragic attempt to weep for the camera. No Oscar in sight for Tony!

full link:







Christmas Card:

Stillshots from the slideshow on their Facebook page:

Inconsistent height difference between Emilie and her sister?



Older Shots

So, the first picture is the only one that is OBVIOUSLY a fake. Thoughts?

n nearly every shot, two of the three daughters are staring right at the camera, while a third is almost always looking away at some crazy angle. The mom's got a bad case of the hairy eyeball, too, in more than one shot. They're almost looking right through you. I'm getting a Children of the Corn vibe from this.

besides the fact these all look like advertising portfolio shots

but some parents do go to these lengths in pix of thier kids



I extracted the GIF below from the video above.
The Youtube user, saesch1 wonders whether it is a drone or a real plane. I wonder if it is yet another digital illusion. It is too small to be a real, full size plane and none of the drones I've seen pictures of look like that. Could it be an RC plane buzzing around over the scene of much bloodshed and tragedy?




Dear All,

Here is what I stumbled across the internet while searching on our topic:

Crisis Actors Trained Players and Actors Making It Real
Helping schools and first responders create realistic drills, full-scale exercises, high-fidelity simulations, and interactive 3D films.

Statement from Crisis Actors

January 9, 2013
We are outraged by Florida Atlantic University Professor James Tracy's deliberate promotion of rumor and innuendo to link Crisis Actors to the Sandy Hook shootings of December 14, 2012. We do not engage our actors in any real-world crisis events, and none of our performances may be presented at any time as a real-world event. James Tracy's so-called research is copied almost verbatim from a tightly-connected group of hate blogs and YouTube channels that use only one another as sources. From the thousands of comments of these sites' devoted followers, one thing is clear. They are nothing but thrill-seekers using any pretext to vent their irrational hate against the Sandy Hook community and a nation of mourners.

Crisis Actors is a professional group of actors trained at Visionbox to develop and portray characters in emergency training scenarios. The intensity at which they work recreates real life pressures that first responders going through the training must cope with.

Crisis Actors, at this time, consists of two teams.

The first team is the same group that makes up our professional acting ensemble and is the initial group to work on this project. Our actors with the guidance of filmmaker John Simmons, school safety expert Steve Hoban, and Executive Artistic Director Jennifer McCray Rincon, have developed scenarios aimed at training first responders (teachers, administrators, custodians, etc) how to effectively manage an emergency with quick and powerful decisions. This special group has sessions with police officers, 911 operators, school administrators, mall security, radio experts, and school safety training professionals. There is an endless amount of scenarios this group can tackle, which range anywhere from weather issues, to a missing child, to an unknown intruder.

The second team is a group of highly talented actors that have been working on their acting craft by training with Master Acting Teacher Jennifer McCray Rincon on classic material written by Anton Chekhov, Tennessee Williams, Shakespeare, Brecht, and other influential playwrights. Eventually, the second team will go through the same training the first team went through. This intense work will eventually be applied to portraying characters in a Crisis Actor training scenario.



Conspicuous in Their Absence

Conspicuous in their absence are, to be crass, the money shots. One can understand not showing shots of dead children both in order to be sensitive and also to not compromise their futures* but to not have an Eric Harris and Dylan Kleboldesque dead man shot is quite puzzling. In a country that is obsessed with 10 variants and iterations, or however many there are, of CSI how can we be so squeamish as to not demand some kind of forensic proof? Bag it and tag it goes the hackneyed TV phrase but then what of the baggies? Can't we see at least a shell casing or a pristine bullet whose lack of deformations and striations would be presentable enough to even the most delicate of constitutions, lacking as it were any kind of direct evidence of any violence; you know, like in the Kennedy case?

''The Oriental doesn't put the same high price on life as does a Westerner. Life is plentiful. Life is cheap in the Orient," said General Westmoreland of his Vietnamese targets. I know that he said this because I saw a film of it interspersed with a shot of a Vietnamese mother trying to claw her way into a loved ones grave, so deep was her grief. Are we to believe that someone would be chuckling so shortly after the death of a child as Robbie Parker did? Is life cheap to him like ole Victor Charlie? Moreover, is life in the U.S. so precious that we can't even consider death and its macabre maw so that we have to remember these angels, and they seem that diaphanous, as they were in all their sweet rectitude and even one drop of evidence in the form of corporeality would erase that vision?

It doesn't need to be said that, sometimes, when bodies are hidden it is not at all about being sensitive but about being devious; like hiding flagged draped coffins from the press. Google: dead Iraqi children, they are not too hidden or hidden deep enough to protect the sensitive. Again, Google: Sharon Tate Dead, just like that, that is all you need to get a hit. When John Wayne Gayce was executed, the crowd outside the prison chanted in unison: "throw out the body, throw out the body, throw out the body!" And God knows what they would have done with it, but we weren't "spared" the spectacle of that crowd and their vulgar lamentations. And remember the VC who was shot on television, over and over and over; or the monk self-immolation? So this is the greatest photo fakery of them all: no fake photos.

*A "smart-ass" turn of phrase but juvenile delinquents are not photographed so that youthful indiscretions don't ruin what is hoped to be an otherwise promising future and these children may not have even had a past.


CT State Rep. John Frey

I've been scanning Twitter tweets from Dec 14 looking for interesting bits of information. I'm finding that this is providing a lot of strange inconsistencies as well as a plethora of little-seen photos. One thing that caught my eye as I was searching was a series of tweets from Connecticut State Representative John Frey:


You will notice that he happened to attend Sandy Hook Elementary's holiday concert only the night before the shootings... and even tweeted this completely un-interesting news. You see, his nieces go the school. Well, LITTLE DID HE KNOW that the next day their lives would be in grave danger! :rolleyes: He later tweeted about this coincidence and the "innocence lost".

What initially caught my eye was the tweet above that I bracketed which mentions his sister driving down the road and finding "1st graders" running for their lives. Now, perhaps I missed it, but this story didn't sound familiar to me. So, I looked it up, and sure enough:

Original: ... 121122.php

A couple things here--first, I thought the story was that the gingerbread houses were going to be made at school. Second, the kids ran for a mile?? Really? Last, but certainly not least, is the stunningly stupid last paragraph. They sat in a room (?) while she sang songs to the kids and tried to call their parents? She didn't worry about her OWN THREE CHILDREN WHO GO TO THE SCHOOL WHO COULD BE DEAD OR INJURED? She waited to get a text saying they were safe? :wacko: 

I started to wonder if there was anything I should know about this John Frey. I found that he snuck in some legislation on the coat tails of this event:

Original: ... uggestion/

And his Wikipedia page mentions that he has a connection to George W. Bush. Apparently Bush appointed Frey to "The President's Commission on White House Fellows":


I'd never heard of these "White House Fellows," so I took a gander at their Wikipedia (emphasis mine):

Here is a look at some other people who have served in this role:


Smalltown State Rep. Frey is among some pretty well-known names there. How did he end up with such a "prestigious" position, anyway? 


Here's something interesting. In the video below, at 2:20, when talking about Emilie Parker, her aunt says she was an example to her "big sisters" ?????

Also note at the end of the video where the reporter plants the idea in the viewer's mind that there will never be any photos of Emily as a teenager and the only pictures of her will be as a little girl ... which is just how her parents want her to be remembered. I bet they do. :D 

full link:




one tolet beday combo


Ok folks, here we go...Shame on us all ! :lol: 

If the primary underlying motive for these recurring "shooting" psyops was still a bit foggy until recently - I think it should now be much clearer - at least to all of us here at Cluesforum. The perps have been caught with their pants down faking "3000 victims" on 9/11. What we see unfolding now is their obligatory damage control in action - and we have seen how 9/11 is not OUR obsession - but rather THEIR obsession. The media goons MUST always stay 'a step ahead' of their opponents - and keep in high gear the discrediting-game of the same, year in and year out. 

Just read this 'SALON' article to see where this public Sandy Hook discourse is going - and was always meant to be going :

Meet the Sandy Hook truthers
Theorists think they've found “absolute proof” that Newtown was a hoax. Have they no shame?
By Alex Seitz-Wald

"There are dozens of websites, blog posts and YouTube videos extolling the Emilie Parker hoax theory. If you Google her name, the very first result is a post mocking her father for crying at a press conference after the shooting. One popular video, which already has 134,000 views, was made by the producers of a popular 9/11 Truther film.
 “Just as the movie ‘Operation Terror’ shows the 9/11 attacks were a made-for-TV event, so too were the mass shootings …There can be no doubt that Sandy Hook was a staged event,” the narrator intones. He goes on to say that the adults who participated in the media coverage of the shootings “should be prosecuted as accessories after the fact in a mass murder” — i.e., the parents whose children were murdered in the massacre should be thrown in prison. "


What we have here is nothing but the age-old tactics of 'discredit by association' at play. No matter how old and worn-out, the perps propaganda experts are using it once again to good effect. These shooting-psyops serve the primary purpose of counteracting the (slow yet relentlessly growing) realization that the NEWS MEDIA had a central role in pulling off 9/11 (and keep fooling the masses on a daily basis). As we now know, the TOP LIE of 9/11 is that "3000 people were KILLED that day". In fact, this crucial lie has turned out to act as a pretty efficient, emotional wall - behind which the perps hope to escape public scrutiny. "How dare you question our dead 9/11 heroes?" - is the standard reply you'll get from Joe Public today. But what about tomorrow? Is this protective wall somehow indestructible? Of course not : just like every other construction, the perps' wall needs maintenance from time to time - all the more so ever since its very foundations (the "3000 victims" lie) started crumbling under our Cluesforum findings. 

 (or - the 9/11 hoax maintenance)

Enter the "MAD-SHOOTER" psyops, in which mostly teens and children reportedly get slaughtered like cattle (be it in Norway, Italy or the USA). So what are these psyops' purpose? Gun control? Nah. With pink whale Alex Jones behind it - I'd now say that's a pretty fat red herring. Let us try this: could the seemingly 'sloppy' manner in which these "MAD-SHOOTER" psyops are staged be entirely intentional? Could the piss-poor actors, the clumsy backstories and the many 'conspiracy baits' be all part of a 'sophisticated' script? In this scenario, the media perps would be AIMING at generating a fresh new 'amateur-army of conspiracy theorists' - whom they can then play tricks with and, ultimately, easily ridicule wholesale on their globalized TV networks. As we have seen after this latest Sandy Hoax, a mini-tsunami of keen observers (aka "conspiracy theorists" in media speech) have been flooding the internet with questions about the very phony and contrived media coverage. Well, this 'mini-tsunami' would hardly scare or worry the perps - confident of the fact that they still have the masses on their side. Basically, these shooting psyops would serve to keep the TV-addicted masses outraged by "those crackpots who even dare question the tragic victims of smalltown events...And hey, now they're claiming that NO ONE DIED ON 9/11! Pfffuueyy! " 

In pure propaganda terms, these recurring "MAD-SHOOTER" psyops (peppered with blatant fakery clues) may be - in other words - just a way to lure out of their lairs the observant folks of this world, only to launch 'pre-emptive strikes' on their overall credibility within the so-called 'mainstream' population. At the end of the day, we may find solace in the fact that no one gets hurt in the staging of these shameless mass-murder simulations.



Laura Phelps, Actress
Something is very not right about Emilie's arms in this picture.  



ne Single Photo of One Single victim, apparently taken by an unauthorized person, from behind a fence.  No blood, no broken windows, apparent indifference to the body, rolling it over cables or hose???


Yet another "pre-tragedy" admission...

Link to PDF

This story is going to fuel debunkers because even though the website says Dec. 10th, the PDF shows a creation date of Dec. 14th. Planned plausible deniability? 

And why Red Devils of all mascots? A reference to rumors of ritual sacrifice that implies real victims?

The PDF comes from the Crisis Management Institute, run by Cheri Lovre.

Cherry Lover's LinkedIn Summary, "To provide cutting edge resources to help districts work smarter, not harder, when preventing, PLANNING and responding to crisis.". I think she meant to say, planning response to crisis.




Green Ribbons, Logos and a Parliament of Owls

I won't cut and paste the ribbon we have all seen it. Its purport I am sure is to
 romanticize the event. It is also to act as a logo. Every business worth their salt has some kind of logo. It is a symbol that can be recognized by the illiterate and the literate as well. The instant recognition, I think, is faster than words. On the highway you can spot one for miles. So that is the positive side of things. On the negative side the logo acts as a badge, a symbol of authority. CNN, CBS, BBC, NBC, and PBS all have logos. Often they are expensive to design and that design element is intended to evoke in the viewer certain assurances. "This company has their shit together, they have desks, chairs, a logo, pleasant people who seem to know what they are doing and a good product....I like this place," a customer might think.
My university spent $250,000 dollars on a new logo which I won't go into here because it is parochial and not really sinister, but they had a message. Some have begun to question certain ribbon-bearing organization's genuineness, but they are protected, they have a ribbon so they must be real and the ribbon
 conveys just that sense of authenticity, perhaps through the choice of colors and the emotions they evoke.

The Colors

I don't know when values were assigned to colors or if there is any consensus or if there is a master list somewhere. If I had to guess it would be a Victorian thing. They literally had boxes for every household item and had a tendency to categorize things as seen in the following sample list. A brood of hens, A murder of crows, An exaltation of starlings, A parliament of owls. Complete list of collective nouns: This list, while curious, doesn't, I don't think, advance in any way any type of taxonomy (at least in the Linnaean sense) and serves more as a romanticization of nature, much as does the color chart. 

We have all heard of
 The Blues or "I'm feeling blue." So we do have some kind of direct emotional correlation with colors. I found this in my literary studies but have never come accross it in real life: "he is in a brown study," which I take to mean a funk. Green, we all know has been associated with envy and purple, though I don't know why, with loneliness. "The silence of a fallen star, lights up a purple sky...." goes the Hank Williams lyric: and there are many others. Of interest on this list of colors, and I don't know if it is the list or a definitive list is the fact that the color green has been assigned to, of all things,creativity 


This list is different and associates green with terror, well that's fitting:


Important to remember despite any kind of nebulous constructs of assigning values to color is that the logo, the ribbon, is distinctly designed to
 romanticize these events and affix them in the mind sans thought or reason and that these two constructs, reason and romantic emotion are thouroughly in conflict with one another in the mind as portrayed in the following picture. This a'int dogs playing poker but Art, in its true metaphorical form, showing that reason will suffer when romanticism takes form. And, no, these aren't NWO owls: sometimes a cigar is just a smoke! Francisco Goya, 1746-1828 The Sleep of Reason Image


ome people believe these 'actors' may be under the influence of mind control, the most famous of which is the Monarch system. There are myriad pix/videos on the web of celebrities working beneath these forces... it could explain the banality and vapid/vacuous response of these 'victims' during interviews.

and then there's this... Hochsprung's daughter and another CNN interview ... index.html




SO how about a littel CGI goof

The wobbly backdrops are a trademark of these psyops. I have seen far too many such 'dancing' backgrounds in the various TV fakery 'footage' over the years - for it to be anything else than some proprietary greenscreen bug (or clumsy attempts to make these 'impromptu' interviews look 'realer'). I now suspect that most if not all of the open-air "witness interviews" are safely recorded in a studio, with some greenscreened scenery/backdrop inserted digitally at a later stage. In this case, the absurdly overexposed/washed-out aspect of this clip may have been a simple/lazy way of hiding any greenscreening imperfections (mask-edging/contour outlines around the girl). 
source video:



SO!!! why is the Newtown psy-op so overwhelmingly and spectacularly unconvincing? 

While the glaring inconsistencies and the both ludicrous and incomplete storyline are obviously part of 'conspiracy fodder' sideshow, I have been struggling to make sense of why the perps would include so much glaring and obvious fakery. The terrible performances of the 'witnesses' and ' surviving family members' as well as the shoddy photoshopping and green screens are puzzling.

Two possibilities that seem most viable:

1) General escalation of fear-based mind fuckery. Since many people simply cannot face the horror of that media fakery represents, the flagrant flaunting of fakery represents an more aggressive psychological attack of the mass media audience. To face the idea that sociopathic liars have near total control of the information stream produces a tremendous and overwhelming sense of despair in the average viewer. The TV-addicted masses would rather believe the lies that acknowledge that they know only the bullshit that the control freaks pump into their heads via the idiot box. liars. As the lies get more ridiculous, the more paralyzed and hypnotized the average viewer becomes. 

2) Discrediting real research into media fakery, especially with regards to 911. We all see the the awful acting on the part of the witnesses and family members, and shoddy photoshopping. The cut and paste clones of Victoria Soto onto different backgrounds, and the photos of Dawn Hochsprung, with impossibly identical expressions, angles and lighting, literally look like they could be left-overs from the 911 victim simulation. But does that prove that they were purely digital creations, like the overwhelming majority of the 911 victims? My fear is that the perps will make it seem as if all the victims were sims, only to reveal some solid evidence that some of victims were in fact actual people.

The atrocious performances of Wayne Carver and Robbie Parker are undeniably examples of bad acting in a psy-op drama, but these two, at least, are also REAL PEOPLE. The repulsive Carver really is the state medical examiner, and certainly a creep, and in on the scam. I was surpised to learn these last few weeks that I actually have friends that went to high school with Robbie Parker, and that the Parker family is well known in Ogden, Utah. While certainly in on the scam, Robbie "Smiley" Parker, like Carver, is NOT a SIM, or mere actor playing a part. These are well-established identities whose participation in the hoax make it very difficult to distinguish between reality and simulation.

Declaring that "these people are all actors," as many posters have done, is going to hurt our case, and make it harder for people to take seriously the actual actors, fakery, and simulation that has been exposed on this site.

This event does feature sloppy 911-esque photoshop techniques, wonky green screens, and piss-poor actors, and this is no accident. Why? In my opinion, it is to mix in these elements with a few 'real' participants, in order to discredit the key findings of cluesforum with regards to victim simulation, video fakery, and the use of actors in staged media events- particularly 911.



SO AS I CLOSE DOWN PART 3 of this investigation

I'm beginning to accept the fact that it really doesn't matter if none, some or all are real or linked to real people. A lie is a lie is a lie. There's a rumor-net piece on a woman who says they used a picture of her daughter off of flikr or whatever. Stories of real arabs names being used for hijacker names, a 59 year old guy in UT who may or may not be the same guy as the actor (probably not)... It doesn't matter, in fact it only deepens and tightens the gordian knot around any truth in the matter.

The convincing evidence that these news stories are movie shots and the people involved, actors, is piling up so high and so careless that it's getting ridiculous that anyone with the slightest opening of the mind can't see what's going on. It literally blows the mind. Stuff that is common talk here is like shitting on someones dining table to others. They can't take it. The mind isn't willing to confront the belief programming.

There's a reason major films emerge that pre-date the actuality of the film plot happening in reality. The "guild" as I call it (as opposed to illuminati, nwo, _____), is the latest secret society that is able to operate and flash their member signs, just like flipping the middle finger, at the masses not in the know. At one time, the masons had a secret to keep and they were able to recognize each other by secret means. Once the fraternity got diluted, the secrets spilled and become common knowledge.

What's interesting in this case is it goes way beyond pranks and schemes. It is a case study in the human computer logic & processing center that has been hijacked. They flash their signs because they are the programmers. They are programming the human computers who have allowed this virus to be inserted. They are the USB drive of anyone who watches TV complete with root access to your operating system. This system they operate is like pre-electricity. People are just now nearing the ability to look in the mirror. Most try but fail. Why? They program has code that makes it difficult. 

It used to be a guy had to retreat to a cave for 30 years to quiet the mind. But now the cat's out of the bag and folks can shortcut the way to opening the mind if only they have the yogic discipline to question their belief (programming) and have the balls to take ownership of the code-writing, delete the trojans and malware (programmed belief & behavior), and use the machine as a creation & exploration vehicle as intended.

It's getting so easy to spot the patterns because theirs is an ego game. It requires the most ego-driven of society to run it. They program code (tv shows, news, sports, weather, events...) and the uplink, long established and hardwired since birth, accepts a reality based on the filters or lack of them that they are able to discern.

It's fucking scary the depth of this global hijack of the machine. The programming is so good that the real victims support the hijack and worship it. Root access to the collective mind. It doesn't matter if the mass believes what is shown. That's what is brilliant. They only have to implant thoughts and pictures to STIR UP the emotional linkages and they will automatically accept the program as a reality. The fact that they react in anger, rage, or joy, acceptance indicates that the body-creation-machine accepts this as a potential reality that can be created. So if you're Joe Hick in the sticks and have racist wirings, but you're watching (or are aware of) tv and films that portray a brother in the white house, the programming is starting to do its job. It travels up and down the emotional circuits and start to build connections to the belief programming. Now the drama plays out in a war of beliefs. Left vs Right, Blue vs Red, Cowboys vs Bears.

We all simulate our realities. The guild has taken it to the god-like level of hacking a system and creating a cartel so mind-blowing that it's no wonder most choose to ignore and stay safe in their own structure. If it is merely a function of the human condition and they truly know not what they do, then we're screwed and need to stay nimble, and hopefully educate folks out of it. But it points to a planned, organized, funded, finger-flipping-secret-club, operation and that is why they protect it so hard. Denial of Service attacks on the mind in the form of a constant data stream of programmed, laugh-tracked, bullshit.




Let us never forget that the term "psy-op" means 'psychological operation'. My following thoughts may sound to some like 'stating the obvious' but I feel it is important, at this stage, to remind ourselves of what precisely is at stake in this whole affair - and what exactly the media strategists/psychologists are trying to achieve with these recurring, 'minor' (as compared to 9/11) terror psyops.

To illustrate my first point, let me use my own personal experience concerning the reactions/feedback I have registered within my immediate entourage which, of course, is well aware of my longstanding media fakery research. A typical reaction I got the other day came from an Italian friend who fully supports my 9/11 research, which went a bit like this : "Simon, I can understand the reasons for faking victims for a huge operation like 9/11, but why would they do so for these local shooting events? Besides, why would you even go there? If it turns out you are wrong about these minor events, wouldn't this undermine your 9/11 research and turn you into a callous monster who now even questions the death of poor innocent kids?" 

Well, yes - undoubtedly. And it could very well be part of the perps' long term strategy. Needless to say, I believe that all this is intimately related to 9/11 - and to the strong and mounting evidence exposing the 3000 digitally-fabricated victims of that day. It stands to reason that the media corporations would go to very great lenghts to try and wrestle back their dwindling credibility - and that major efforts are now deployed to patch up their formidable 9/11 blunders - which threaten to implode the entire, worldwide media establishment. So let's see, step by step, what tactics may have been 'expertly' (or shall we say, desperately) devised by the media propagandists to cover their exposed butts. I have called it... 


Step1: Stage a long string of 'terror shootings'(across the USA and abroad), gradually instilling in the public's consciousness the notion that we live in dangerous times - and that such shootings can occur anywhere and at any time these days ("so get used to it, people!").

 Insert progressively a number of 'baits' in the form of absurd inconsistencies/ fluctuating death tolls/ outlandish storylines/ crass acting by alleged family members and so on and so forth. This, in order to wilfully attract a growing number of doubters of these events' media coverage - the more the better. (Since most people get their news from TV, there's no chance the doubters would reach anything near what is known as 'critical mass'...) 

Step3: Once these increasingly publicized events have people (split into two belligerent factions of news-believers and news-doubters) arguing in their own homes about them, drop the NEWS-CLEAR BOMB into their TV sets! This 'bomb' can be defined as a news item so devastatingly powerful and convincing as to blow all the doubters' arguments to rest - covering the same with a dust cloud of ridicule and derision. And, most importantly, making anyone arguing that 9/11 featured fake victims sound like a complete fool. 

So, let's see: what may we imagine such a NEWS-CLEAR BOMB to be made up of? Well, perhaps it could come in the form suggested by our Cluesforum member 'Farcevalue' : "A tour de force release of an impeccable surveillance camera recording/documenting the "event" could have a pretty adverse effect on all the new fakery researchers that have come out of the woodwork to challenge this story." Indeed, imagine that. What if, sometime in the future, some graphic/gory CCTV imagery "from the Sandy Hook school" gets released (complete with childrens' guts getting splattered across the classrooms) including 100 clearly audible rounds of semi-automatic gunfire and blood-chilling screams? How many people will still have doubts that the event occured in reality?

Sadly, only the few of us who know perfectly well that absolutely ANYTHING can be faked / fabricated in a studio - with "Hollywood-grade" special fx imagery.



There are some very interesting photos and video on this page that might be worth checking out. One in particular (6th one down) shows a "dead body" on a stretcher at night. Also note that there are absolutely ZERO ambulances/police cars/teachers/students/parents anywhere in the Sandy Hook parking lot (they're all down the street at the firehouse which for some reason has a Sandy Hook School sign in front of it).

SAY CHEESE! (Also note the plastic cup in the woman's right hand. Refreshments are always provided for homeland security drill type events. ;)

Anyone know who this person is?

 that's "Alicia". There are a few pictures with her, shown from day one. Probably because of the trademark blue and white striped shirt (always featured among "witnesses" photos since 9/11), and maybe also for the fairytale sounding name.

From ... ice_g.html

From ... n-newtown/

From ... -hook.html

These and many more pictures are credited to Michelle McLoughlin, Reuters: ... McLoughlin


also a little bit of extyra research paths for phot forensics

Interesting exif data from RP photo:
Image ... arge.jpg?6

Unable to extract some or all of the EXIF data, which may have been removed from the image file.

Record Version = 1
Object Name = Connecticut School Shooting-Parent
Urgency = 5
Category = A
Date Created = 2012/12/15
Time Created = 17:38:17+00:00
By-line Title = HONS
Country/Primary Location Name = USA
Original Transmission Reference = NY113
Credit = AP
Source = Emilie Parker Fund
Caption/Abstract = This photo posted to the Emilie Parker Fund Facebook page shows Emilie Parker and her father Robbie Parker. Fighting back tears and struggling to catch his breath, Robbie Parker the father of 6-year-old Emile (somehow they managed to get the name spelled wrong and offered no correction) Parker who was gunned down in Friday's school shooting in Connecticut told the world about a little girl who loved to draw and was always smiling, and he also reserved surprising words of sympathy for the gunman. (AP Photo/Emilie Parker Fund)
Writer/Editor = MV**NY**

If, in fact, this photo was obtained by AP magically within 24 hours of the shooting, the 'dad' sounds awfully composed in the cutline.