Sandy Hook: an example of cognitive dissonance

[Adam Bomm]

I did question the internet thing...seemed a little weak to me. I think the logic of things should be focused elsewhere.

[Ross]

Which is why I'm removing it from my collected preponderance. Your collected preponderance in support of a genuine event should not contain this controversial item either, due to the inconsistency in the two reports.

Agreed, and I should of made that more clear. Neither can be absolutely reliable. Though I am leaning more towards a conflict of data collection across local, state and federal.

Well, Ross, I just perused that website. Mick West is an administrator there. You'll be unpleasantly surprised by his stance on 9/11/2001.

Yes I'm aware of MW. However the site, by it's members, offers some valid points and in fairness to MW, while admin, he allows free exposure of all the evidence presented. I cannot in all fairness place a bias on him due to his 911 account, inasfar as SH goes. As I said earlier, each FF event must be isolated from others, taking an objective position concerning each FF event.

He is a debunker, and I don't agree with plenty he offers. I myself am a debunker with certain events. 911 is not one of them.

So one has to wonder what his agenda is wrt Sandy Hook ... and whether his mission of debunking Sandy Hook is, indeed, fact-based

He and most members, have offered compelling evidence, along with other 'independent' sites and sources, regarding almost all of the claims made in favour of an FF event as a hoax. Some are absolute in debunking, some not so clear like the data collection discussed above.

I say again, if I was in a position, and hell bent on finding the truth with SH, I would visit the site, ground zero. No-one I have found, supporting the FF event, after the fact, has done so. I'm sure some have but I have not found any evidence to support such.

FWIW, it's good to see you and others, willing to re-visit this tragedy, for where ever the truth lays.

[Adam Bomm]

I say we ask the President-elect visit the site. With his clarity of insight and honesty, no one would question his assessment.

Adamm

forgot to add his inherent impartiality, sense of justice, and sensitivity to the need for political correctness regarding psychologically traumatic injuries.
If there should be any doubt, one should never forget his willingness to overlook the rule of law in favor of true goodness when weighed against true evil.

[Ross]

I say we ask the President-elect visit the site.

You'ed probably get closer to the truth with him than say...Hillary...who stood by her POTUS husband knowing full well he had his hand down another Woman undies...and his member down the same Woman's throat...ooh yeah, she was well aware of his infidelities way before Monica. She stood there in support as he said them there infamous words.

But I want to say one thing to the American people. I want you to listen to me. I'm going to say this again: I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.

[Adam Bomm]

But I want to say one thing to the American people. I want you to listen to me. I'm going to say this again: I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.

... yes, that's called lying to save one's ass. It is neither gratuitous as it has a explicit purpose not done because the one lying cannot help themselves or just plain crazy, nor is it an attempt to usurp democratic principles. That is what the right does.

[Adam Bomm]

I forgot...what was the reason for this false flag?

Adam

To clarify: there is at least a 'rational' motivation behind the '9/11' conspiracy theory.

[Zook_e_Pi]

Was Sandy Hook actually operational? The following video suggests it was not. Well-explained by the researcher.




Pax