new sandyhook info

[spacemaverick]

This video just came out.

[Amaterasu]

It's the same four layers of bricks that we can see on the image from Google Earth, and we can even see the end of that small brick wall.

If it was "shopped in" you wouldn't notice it.

Huh???  We would notice it if They put it there, right?  Darlin', it looks like a pic of the building was dropped in - NOT the SAME pic of the building as above.  But SOME pic.  No way that wall would appear THAT high.  Period.

PS: why is it so important for some people that their own ideas (or what they think are their own ideas) to be considered right? What do they gain from that? Recognition from like minded people? Virtual pats on the back? Assurance (?) that they are not easily fooled?

No. When it's obvious that a wall is WRONG, then bringing it up is normal.  Might I point the question at You?  Same thing.  I look at the pic and the edge of the wall to Our right of the People and the edges don't look right.  It's WAY too tall.  So.  What?  Am I supposed to say nothing???

Darlin', sometimes I suspect You are willfully insistent on ensuring the universe behave as if there is no such thing as conspiracy.

This Sandy Hook case proved more interesting from a psychological point of view from the part of those discussing it than from the perpetrator's part.

PPS: I don't have any real theoretical knowledge of psychology, I just find it interesting.

Yes...  I get more glimpses into Yours.  [grin]  And I HAVE had a wee bit of training.

[Amaterasu]

This video just came out.

I liked this comment:

How silly is it to rip a padlock off a shed. Like someone could lock themselves in from the inside? This is all for show.

[spacemaverick]

Now this video picks out the discrepancies I was talking about earlier.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=3Lw59iK0lHg

Also in the previous video you would send in the K-9 first.  No matter if it is locked they must clear the building anyway.  Systematic clearing of all areas will be part of protocol.  We had a deputy killed where I live because they did not send in the K-9 to start with.

I am not saying it was a hoax but there are serious flaws in the whole incident.

[Amaterasu]

Nice vid.

And *I*'m going to say it was a hoax.  Flat out.  Hoax.  Drill.  Psyop.

[spacemaverick]

It sure does open up a whole lot of inconsistencies.  I have a couple more theories but I want to dig some more.  I'll be back.  Good night.

[ArMaP]

Huh???  We would notice it if They put it there, right?

Only if it was done by someone that didn't know what they were doing. Or do you think you have some special ability to distinguish the original pixels from the ones that are added later?

No way that wall would appear THAT high.

Why do you say that? The wall has the same apparent height in all images, it appears higher in relation to the people in front of them and lower in relation to the people behind it. That is what happens when you look at something from a higher point of view.

No. When it's obvious that a wall is WRONG, then bringing it up is normal.

Then explain why do you think it's wrong, just shouting "WRONG" doesn't prove or explain a thing.
Is it wrong because it appears higher? Is that it? Or because it looks different when seen in the video?

Might I point the question at You?  Same thing.  I look at the pic and the edge of the wall to Our right of the People and the edges don't look right.  It's WAY too tall.  So.  What?  Am I supposed to say nothing???

No, you're not supposed to say nothing, but I was expecting you to say something based on something more than "it looks wrong, so it's wrong".

Darlin', sometimes I suspect You are willfully insistent on ensuring the universe behave as if there is no such thing as conspiracy.

No, I'm sure there are many conspiracies, I just don't accept whatever someone says because they feel something is wrong. On the other hand, why do you act as if this must be a conspiracy? And not only that, it must be like you say?

Yes...  I get more glimpses into Yours.  [grin]  And I HAVE had a wee bit of training.

Or so you think, maybe your training was a conspiracy to make you think you have training. 

[Amaterasu]

ArMaP, the pic of the building shows that the wall is around mid-shin in height, yet there it is behind those People almost waist-high.  Something is WRONG.

[simon_alex0327]

ArMaP, the pic of the building shows that the wall is around mid-shin in height, yet there it is behind those People almost waist-high.  Something is WRONG.

I couldnt agree more!!
The people in the picture are either munchkins from Oz, or the photographer dug himself a hole in which to take the picture. 
The end of the wall on the right just does not look right to me either. Then theres the other issue with the plants in the bed.
Just strange the whole case, at first I thought it was just down to poor reporting by the media, now im scratching my head trying to work out how they ALL got it wrong, and still continue today.

[ArMaP]

ArMaP, the pic of the building shows that the wall is around mid-shin in height, yet there it is behind those People almost waist-high.  Something is WRONG.

OK, look at the image below. Is it wrong?

[ArMaP]

I couldnt agree more!!
The people in the picture are either munchkins from Oz, or the photographer dug himself a hole in which to take the picture. 

It's exactly the opposite, if the photographer/cameraman was in hole he would be photographing/filming the people from below, so, the wall, being farther away, would appear lower, not higher.

You really don't understand a thing about perspective. 

The end of the wall on the right just does not look right to me either. Then theres the other issue with the plants in the bed.

What's the problem with the end of the wall and with the plants?

[micjer]

OK, look at the image below. Is it wrong?

This proves the planter has all of the plants removed but the big shrubs.

I feel the telescopic lens is distorting the background's height behind the people after reviewing.

What I am having trouble with is how one angle we have the shrub and a slightly different angle we see out to the back storage shed.  (Which is a long way back) This photo is from 2012 so the shed way behind has to be the one in the video.



Trying to visualize where the people were standing on the road for the angles to match up  that both pics could be true. 

[Amaterasu]

VERY well put together film.  Covers so much.  And if You watch and STILL think there was nothing wrong here, You lack critical thinking skills:

[ArMaP]

I feel the telescopic lens is distorting the background's height behind the people after reviewing.

It's not just the height, as the lens affects the whole image, not just the height, so things may look closer to each other or farther apart.

What I am having trouble with is how one angle we have the shrub and a slightly different angle we see out to the back storage shed.  (Which is a long way back) This photo is from 2012 so the shed way behind has to be the one in the video.

I also think that's the same shed, at least the corner we can see looks the same

Trying to visualize where the people were standing on the road for the angles to match up  that both pics could be true.

That's the biggest problem. As you can see from the Google Maps image, that's more than a road, it's a road and the entrance to the parking area behind the building. From the other side of the road to the building it looks like some 20  metres, so there's enough space for a lot of parallax.

[micjer]

Frig me here's another one!  Different again!!!




And it gets worse....

Did these parents go home and change?  He is wearing a different jacket and where did her sunglasses go?







These are the same people that almost seemed happy that their child had passed on.   WTF?



Please take note of what Dr Carver says in his interview.....

You can control a situation by a photographer,  and I have some very good photographers.

This is the strangest behaviour I have ever seen from a couple who just lost their child.