The pros and cons of Sandy Hook as a special op

I should have known better. Both Jim Fetzer and Kevin Barrett claimed, on the Internet, that Sandy Hook was a false-flag op. Yet, out of some naive urge that Americans couldn’t be that cruel (mea culpa), I tried to give a more reasonable explanation of what Jeff Prager had questioned and written in an article posted on Barrett’s Truth Jihad Radio, mainly that Chief Medical Examiner D. Wayne Carver II, MD, of Connecticut, acted and answered strangely in a press conference flanked by Connecticut State Police.

Initially I had taken a pounding on Facebook from a number of people who already had read this article, which inspired me to scrutinize it. The fact is, the usually confident doctor was very nervous speaking to the press on December 15, 2012, captured on YouTube. At one point, he says “[My staff] and I hope the people of Newtown don’t have this [interview] crash on their head later.” What could he have meant by that?

Prager believes it’s a strange statement for a highly successful medical examiner to make. But then the stakes are very high for the police in this small town as well as the chief medical examiner while the whole world literally looks on. Especially when there are statements that don’t fit facts, you turn your eyes to more closely scrutinize the news of the Newtown school massacre. On this, I agree with Jeff Prager, that part of the problem is the public’s blind acceptance of the event’s validity and their faith in its resolution. But this is standard, given the blind belief system in a world where the lion’s share of news is electronically spun and controlled.

As Prager adds, the condition is strengthened by the corporate media’s reluctance to push hard questions at Connecticut and federal authorities who together seemed to have choked the information flow, while invoking prior restraint through threats of legal action against journalists and the broader citizenry seeking to interpret the event on social media.

Prager writes, “Along these lines on December 19th the Connecticut State Police assigned individual personnel to each of the 26 families who lost a loved one at Sandy Hook Elementary.” “The families have requested no press interviews,” State Police asserted on their behalf, “and we are asking that this request be honored.” [1] This de facto gag order was to be in effect until the investigation concluded. It’s now forecast to be “several months away” even though lone gunman Adam Lanza has been confirmed as the sole culprit. [2] Huh? You mean dead sole culprits who tell no tales.

Prager believes that, “with the exception of an unusual and apparently contrived appearance by Emilie Parker’s alleged father, victims’ family members have been nearly completely absent from public scrutiny [JM: I can’t blame them for that, given the amount of grief they must be carrying]. [3] What can be gleaned from this and similar coverage raises many more questions and glaring inconsistencies than answers. While it sounds like an outrageous claim, one is left to inquire whether the Sandy Hook shooting ever took place—at least in the way that law enforcement authorities and the nation’s news media have covered its events step by step.” Here Prager turns to Dr. Carver’s interview again.

The accidental medical examiner

“An especially important yet significantly underreported feature of the Sandy Hook affair is,” as mentioned, “the wholly strange performance of Connecticut’s top medical examiner H. Wayne Carver II at the December 15 press conference. Carver’s unusual remarks and behavior warrant closer consideration because in light of his professional notoriety they appear remarkably amateurish and out of character.” [JM: I happen not to agree on this whole point].

Prager comments that, “H. Wayne Carver II has an extremely self-assured, even swaggering manner in Connecticut state administration. In early 2012 Carver threatened to vacate his position because of state budget cuts and streamlining measures that threatened his professional autonomy over the projects and personnel he oversaw.” [JM: So? He’s a man of conviction].

Prager also writes that, “Along these lines the pathologist went to excessive lengths to demonstrate his findings and expert opinion in court proceedings. For example, in a famous criminal case Carver ‘put a euthanized pig through a wood chipper so jurors could match striations on the bone fragments with the few ounces of evidence that prosecutors said were on the remains of the victim.’ [4]

“One would then expect Carver to be in his element while identifying and verifying the exact ways in which Sandy Hook’s children and teachers met their violent and deadly demise.” [JM: This also means that Carver was media savvy enough to know that a wrongly worded statement or misspoken error could be a career breaker. Additionally, this was no average death but a massacre of children that boggled the mind and the whole world. I ask you to click on the link below to see how Carver, for better or worse, handles the press questions. By the way, Prager edited the questions and answers].

For Prager, the followings comments of “Dr. H. Wayne Carver, who shows up in this December 15 press conference come from an almost entirely different man. He is apprehensive and uncertain as if he’s at a significant remove from the postmortem operation he had overseen and would like to be someplace else. The multiple gaffes, discrepancies and hedges in response to reporters’ astute questions suggest he is either under coercion or an imposter. While the latter sounds untenable it would go a long way in explaining his pedestrian grasp of medical procedures and terminology.” So, let’s look together at this link. [JM: again, I don’t agree with the whole of Prager’s assessment].

“With this in mind extended excerpts from this exchange are worthy of repeating [JM: even though Prager has edited them] here in print. Carver is accompanied by Connecticut State Police Lieutenant H. Paul Vance and additional Connecticut State Police personnel.” [JM: The reporters are off-screen and thus unidentified, so Prager assigned them simple numerical identification based on what can be discerned of their voices.]

My primary reaction is that Dr. Carver for all of his years of experience, even on the most gruesome cases, is in a state of shock, or PTSD. He is a big strong man but he is wrestling with his own personal grief, which is why his answers are staccato and seem disjointed. Also, it is also only his second press conference in 30 years at this job, which speaks volumes. First question . . .

Reporter #1: So the rifle was the primary weapon?

H. Wayne Carver: Yes. [JM: It had been said earlier that the guns were the primary weapons].

Reporter #1: [Inaudible]

Carver: repeats, Uh (pause). The question was what caliber were these bullets. And I know—I probably know more about firearms than most pathologists but if I say it in court they yell at me and don’t make me answer [sic]—so [nervous laughter]. I’ll let the police do that for you. [JM: this is a man who has been around the track on the delicate ins and outs of forensic law and trying to stay in its strict boundaries].

Reporter #2: Doctor, can you tell us about the nature of the wounds. Were they at very close range? Were the children shot at from across the room? [JM: Imagine being shotgunned questions like these if you were Carver.]

Carver: Uhm, I only did seven of the autopsies [JM: only seven that morning]. The victims I had ranged from three to eleven wounds apiece and I only saw two of them with close range shooting. Uh, but that’s, uh y’know, a sample. Uh, I really don’t have detailed information on the rest of the injuries. [JM: The process was not complete at that point. His entire staff was working on various victims.]

Prager interjects: [Given that Carver is Connecticut’s top coroner and in charge of the entire postmortem this is a mind-bending admission.-JP]. [JM: At one point, Carver says that given one third of a century of experience at his job, this case is the worst that he or his colleagues have ever seen. Obviously, the doctor is visibly upset but Prager calls that incompetence].

Reporter #3: But you said that the long rifle was used?

Carver: Yes.

Reporter #3: But the long rifle was discovered in the car.

State Police Lieutenant Vance: That’s not correct, sir.

Unidentified reporter #4: How many bullets or bullet fragments did you find in the autopsy? Can you tell us that?

Carver: Oh. I’m lucky I can tell you how many I found. I don’t know. There were lots of them, OK? This type of weapon is not, uh . . . the bullets are designed in such a fashion that the energy—this is very clinical. I shouldn’t be saying this. But the energy is deposited in the tissue so the bullet stays in [the tissue]. [JM: you can feel this man is struggling with what he’s seen. That morning he’d witnessed these dead children deformed by bullets and after he was asked to describe them. He comments that they were wearing “cute kid stuff.” I expect him to break out in tears any second.].

[JM: When asked about the rifle in the children’s shooting, he says:] “In fact, the Bushmaster .223 Connecticut police finally claimed was used in the shooting is designed for long range field use and utilizes high velocity bullets averaging 3,000 feet-per-second, the energy of which even at considerable distance would penetrate several bodies before finally coming to rest in tissue.]”

Reporter #5: How close were the injuries?

Carver: Uh, all the ones (pause). I believe say, yes [sic]. [JM: Again, the doctor is visibly distraught at answering these painful questions].

Reporter #6: In what shape were the bodies when the families were brought to check [inaudible].

Carver: Uh, we did not bring the bodies and the families into contact. We took pictures of them, uh, of their facial features. We have, uh, uh—it’s easier on the families when you do that. Uh, there is, uh, a time and place for the up close and personal in the grieving process, but to accomplish this we thought it would be best to do it this way and, uh, you can sort of, uh . . . You can control a situation depending on the photographer, and I have very good photographers. Uh, but uh—[JM: before he can answer this, another question is thrown at him] . . .

Reporter #7: Do you know the difference of the time of death between the mother in the house and the bodies recovered [in the school].

Carver: Uh, no, I don’t. Sorry [shakes head excitedly] I don’t! [Embarrassed laugh]

Reporter #8: Did the gunman kill himself with the rifle?

Carver: No. I—I don’t know yet. I’ll-I’ll examine him tomorrow morning. But, but I don’t think so. [JM: Adam Lanza and his mother’s forensic exams were due later in the day or the next morning. That info does not appear in this synopsis by Jeff Prager].

[Prager writes: Why has Carver left arguably the most important specimen for last? And why doesn't he think Lanza didn't commit suicide with the rifle? [JM: Why is Prager commenting on Carver’s protocols, when he’s in charge?].

Reporter #9: In terms of the children, were they all found in one classroom or—

Carver: Uhm . . . [inaudible] [Turns to Lieutenant Vance] Paul and company will deal with that.

Reporter #9: What?

Carver: Paul and company will deal with that. Lieutenant Vance is going to handle that one. [Carver is asking for Vance to cover that topic]

Reporter #10: Was there any evidence of a struggle? Any bruises?

Carver: No.

Reporter #11: The nature of the shooting; is there any sense that there was a lot of care taken with precision [inaudible] or randomly?

Carver: [Exhales while glancing upward, as if frustrated] Both! It’s a very difficult question to answer . . . You’d think after thousands of people I’ve seen shot but I . . . It’s . . . If I attempted to answer it in court there’d be an objection and then they’d win—[nervous laughter]. [JM: He’s aware of the judicial realities and makes an ironic comment].

[JP: Who would win? Why does an expert whose routine job as a public employee is to provide impartial medical opinion be concerned with winning and losing in court? Further, Carver is not in court but rather at a press conference.] [JM: He did so because lawsuits are another formidable reality of these cases. And being right does count].

Reporter #12: Doctor, can you discuss the fatal injuries to the adults?

Carver: Ah, they were similar to those of the children.

Reporter #13: Doctor, the children you had autopsied, where in the bodies were they hit?

Carver: Uhm [pause]. All over! All over! [JM: And it must have been awful even for an experienced doctor to see that].

Reporter #14: Were [the students] sitting at their desks or were they running away when this happened?

Carver: I’ll let the guys who—the scene guys talk—address that issue. I, uh, obviously I was at the scene. Obviously I’m very experienced in that. But there are people who are, uh, the number one professionals in that. I’ll let them—let that [voice trails off]. [JM: I think the voice trails off in sheer anguish under this barrage of questions. He’s up to his 15th question].

Reporter #15: How many boys and how many girls [were killed]?

Carver: [Slowly shaking his head] I don’t know. [JM: This man is in pain].

More unanswered questions and inconsistencies

“In addition to Carver’s remarks several additional chronological and evidentiary contradictions in the official version of the Sandy Hook shooting are cause for serious consideration and leave doubt in terms of how the event transpired vis-à-vis the way authorities and major media outlets have described them. It is now well known that early on journalists reported that Adam Lanza’s brother Ryan Lanza was reported to be the gunman, and that pistols were used in the shooting rather than a rifle. Yet these are merely the tip of the iceberg.” [JM: Ryan’s name disappeared from the news after the first day].

When did the gunman arrive?

Prager states, “After Adam Lanza fatally shot and killed his mother at their residence, he could have driven himself to the elementary school campus, arriving one half hour after classes had commenced. Dressed in black [JM: which could be anyone], Lanza proceeds completely unnoticed through an oddly vacant parking lot with a military style rifle and shoots his way through double glass doors and a brand new yet apparently poorly engineered security system. There was no mention of a violent entry like that. [JM: Maybe this is a cover-up of an ineffective system].

“Further, initial press accounts suggest how no school personnel or students heard gunshots and no 911 calls are made until after Lanza begins firing inside the facility. ‘It was a lovely day,’ Sandy Hook fourth grade teacher Theodore Varga said. And then, suddenly and unfathomably, gunshots rang out. ‘I can’t even remember how many,’ Varga said.” [5] [JM: Why is that even an issue. In the middle of explosive melees, people don’t remember details like that].

Prager comments that, “The recollection contrasts sharply with an updated version of Lanza’s arrival at the school at 9:30AM. He walked up to the front entrance and fired at least a half dozen rounds into the glass doors. The thunderous sound of Lanza blowing an opening big enough to walk through the locked school door caused Principal Dawn Hochsprung and school psychologist Mary Scherlach to bolt from a nearby meeting room to investigate. He shot and killed them both as they ran toward him.

“Breaching the school’s security system in such a way would have likely triggered some automatic alert of school personnel. But there were none. Further, why would the school’s administrators run toward an armed man who has just noisily blasted his way into the building?” [JM: Perhaps those two people were the only school personnel available. And they gave their lives doing so].

“Two other staff members attending the meeting with Hocksprung and Scherlach sustained injuries ‘in the hail of bullets’ but returned to the aforementioned meeting room and managed a call to 911.[6] This contrasted with earlier reports in which the first 911 call claimed students ‘were trapped in a classroom with the adult shooter who had two guns.’” [JM: There is an obvious conflict as to whether the shooter had the rifle or two automatic pistols. Point taken].

”[7] Recordings of the first police dispatch following the 911 call at 9:35:50 indicate that someone ‘thinks there’s someone shooting in the building.’ [8] There is a clear distinction between potentially hearing shots somewhere in the building and being almost mortally caught in a ‘hail of bullets.’ So is this just small town dispatching [JM: yes] or something larger.” [JM: perhaps].

How did the gunman fire so many shots in such little time?

Prager writes, “According to Dr. Carver and State Police, Lanza shot each victim between 3 and 11 times during a 5 to 7 minute span. If one is to average this out to 7 bullets per individual—excluding misses—Lanza shot 182 times, or once every two seconds. Yet according to the official story Lanza was the sole assassin and armed with only one weapon. Thus if misses and changing the gun’s 30-shot magazine at least 6 times are added to the equation, Lanza must have been averaging about one shot per second—extremely skilled use of a single firearm for a young man with absolutely no military training and who was on the verge of being institutionalized.

“Still, an accurate rendering of the event is even more difficult to arrive at because the chief medical examiner admittedly has no idea exactly how the children were shot or whether a struggle ensued.” [JM: Adam did have extensive training by his mother in the shooting ranges around town.]

Where is the photo and video evidence?

Prager states, “Photographic and video evidence is at once profuse yet lacking in terms of its capacity to demonstrate that a mass shooting took place on the scale described by authorities. For example, in an era of ubiquitous video surveillance of public buildings especially, no visual evidence of Lanza’s violent entry has emerged.” [JM: Perhaps the school didn’t have a video surveillance system].

“And while studio snapshots of the Sandy Hook victims abound there is little if any eyewitness testimony of anyone who has observed the corpses except for Carver and his staff, and they appear almost as confused about the conditions of the deceased as any layperson watching televised coverage of the event. Nor are there any routine eyewitness, photo or video evidence of the crime scene’s aftermath—broken glass, blasted security locks and doors, bullet casings and holes, bloodied walls and floors—all of which are common in such investigations and reportage.” [JM: We can’t logically condemn anyone for what isn’t there].

Why were medical personnel turned away from the crime scene?

Prager writes, “Oddly enough medical personnel were forced to set up their operation not at the school where the dead and injured lay, but rather at the fire station several hundred feet away. This flies in the face of standard medical operating procedure where personnel are situated as close to the scene as possible. There is no doubt that the school had ample room to accommodate such personnel.” [JM: The traffic near the school was very heavy. It is possible they needed the space.]

“Yet medical responders who rushed to Sandy Hook Elementary upon receiving word of the tragedy were denied entry to the school and forced to set up primary and secondary triages off school grounds and wait for the injured to be brought to them.” [JM: Prager is playing Monday morning quarterback on this chaotic event. I grant him success in raising some questions, but some are unanswerable with the current cast of known characters to question].

Prager comments that shortly after the shooting, “As other ambulances from neighboring communities rolled up, sirens blaring, the first responders slowly realized that their training would be tragically underutilized on this horrible day. ‘You may not be able to save everybody, but you damn well try,’ 44 year old emergency medical technician James Wolff told NBC News.’And when (we) didn’t have the opportunity to put our skills into action, it’s difficult.’”[9] [JM: perfectly understandable statement].

“In light of this, who were the qualified medical practitioners that pronounced the 20 children and 7 adults dead? Who decided that none could be revived?” [JM: Anyone who could feel a pulse, I imagine]. “Carver and his staff are apparently the only medical personnel to have attended to the victims—yet this was in the postmortem conducted several hours later. Such slipshod handling of the crime scene leaves the State of Connecticut open to a potential array of hefty civil claims by families of the slain.” [JM: Is that what this is all about? Fear of litigation?].

Did a mass evacuation of the school take place?

Sandy Hook Elementary is attended by 600 students. Yet there is no photographic or video evidence of an evacuation on this scale, which is truly remarkable.” [JM: Who is to blame for that? The media? Or were they denied photographing?]. “Instead, limited video and photographic imagery suggest that a limited evacuation of perhaps at most several dozen students occurred.” [JM: Who would take it upon themselves to order an evacuation after a mass murder had taken place? The best thing for the rest of the children would be to stay put until additional protective forces arrived and announced the event was or was not over].

Prager claims, “A highly circulated photo depicts students walking in a single file formation with their hands on each others’ shoulders and eyes shut.” [JM: I believe that was after the event, to spare the kids from seeing the dead]. Prager, “Yet this was the image of a drill that took place prior to the event itself. Most other photos are portraits of individual children.”

Prager comments, “Despite aerial video footage of the event documenting law enforcement scouring the scene and apprehending one or more suspects in the wooded area nearby the school, [10] there is no such evidence that a mass exodus of children from the school transpired once law enforcement pronounced Sandy Hook secure. Nor are there videos or photos of several hundred students and their parents at the oft-referenced fire station nearby where students were routed for parent pick up.” [JM: Perhaps there are photographs that never were released and should be].

Sound bite prism and the will to believe

Prager, “Outside of a handful of citizen journalists and alternative media commentators Sandy Hook’s dramatically shifting factual and circumstantial terrain has escaped serious critique because it is presented through major media’s carefully constructed prism of select sound bites alongside a widespread and longstanding cultural impulse to accept the pronouncements of experts, be they bemused physicians, high ranking law enforcement officers, or political leaders demonstrating emotionally-grounded concern.

“Political scientist W. Lance Bennett calls this the news media’s ‘authority-disorder bias.’ ‘Whether the world is returned to a safe, normal place,’ Bennett writes, ‘or whether the very idea of a normal world is called into question, the news is preoccupied with order, along with related questions of whether authorities are capable of establishing or restoring it.’”[11]

“Despite Carver’s bizarre [JM: I didn’t find it ‘bizarre’ but sad] performance and law enforcement authorities’ inability to settle on and relay simple facts, media management’s impulse to assure audiences and readerships of the Newtown community’s inevitable adjustment to its trauma and loss with the aid of the government’s protective oversight—however incompetent that may be—far surpasses a willingness to undermine this now almost universal news media narrative with messy questions and suggestions of intrigue. This well-worn script is one the public has been conditioned to accept. If few people relied on such media to develop their world view this would hardly be a concern. Yet this is regrettably not the case. [JM: If NORAD had gotten a fighter plane in the air in the two hours in which 9/11/2001 occurred, perhaps the towers would never have fallen. Now we are in the hypothetical realm of ‘what if.’]

Prager comments, “Nevertheless, the Sandy Hook tragedy was on a far larger scale than the past year’s numerous slaughters, including the Wisconsin Sikh temple shooting and the Dark Knight Rising movie theater shooting in Aurora, Colorado. It also included glaringly illogical exercises and pronouncements by authorities alongside remarkably unusual evidentiary fissures indistinguishable by an American political imagination cultivated to believe that the corporate, government and military’s sophisticated system of organized crime is largely confined to Hollywood-style storylines while really existing malfeasance and crises are without exception returned to normalcy.

“If recent history is a prelude, the likelihood of citizens collectively assessing and questioning Sandy Hook is limited, even given the event’s overtly superficial trappings. While the incident is ostensibly being handled by Connecticut law enforcement, early reports indicate how federal authorities were on the scene as the 911 call was received. Regardless of where one stands on the Second Amendment and gun control, it is not unreasonable to suggest Obama administration complicity through direct oversight of an incident that has in very short order sparked a national debate on the very topic—and not coincidentally remains a key piece of Obama’s political platform.”

[JM: I find this piece the most difficult to believe, though I do see another agenda throughout Prager’s reporting, including the next statement].

“The move to railroad this program through [assault weapon and ammo magazine control] with the aid of major media and an irrefutable barrage of children’s portraits, ‘heartfelt’ platitudes and ostensible tears neutralizes a quest for genuine evidence, reasoned observation, and in the case of Newtown [JM: which begs a second look] honest and responsible law enforcement. Moreover, to suggest that Obama is not capable of deploying such techniques to achieve political ends is to similarly place one’s faith in image and interpretation above substance and established fact, the exact inclination that in sum has brought America to such an impasse.”

[JM:] Obama is not the only one seeking to abolish assault weapons and large capacity magazines. Governor Cuomo of New York State proposed legislation to ban them in New York State, which has been passed. Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York City is trying to do the same thing. And frankly, I don’t think the rights granted by the 2nd Amendment are being trampled on by banning assault weapons designed for military use in war. What’s more, we have some 30,000 deaths a year due to gun wounds. The number has been climbing to the number of auto deaths, which is 40,000. Yet automobiles demand personal test-taking for licensing, plus fees, insurance, and maintenance checks throughout possession. Gun ownership could stand the same protections for the rest of us.

Thus, even after the battering of insults I took on Facebook for not agreeing with Prager, Fetzer or Barrett on Sandy Hook as a larger op, I believe their conclusion to be a knee-jerk reaction, despite Obama’s inglorious history.

That history includes putting in place “a No-Fly Zone” in Libya without congressional approval, which resulted in the deaths of some 65,000 Libyans and the destruction of the country’s political infrastructure.

Also, Obama’s approval of the NDAA’s provision for indefinite detention by the military for anyone suspected of terrorism, including Americans, and doing so without evidence, a lawyer, or trial, is totally unconstitutional and immoral.

Obama has taken responsibility for the killing of Osama bin Laden and having the body thrown into the sea, the classic corpus delicti, i.e., proof. Thus the proof, i.e., truth has been disappeared and in its place we have a Hollywood movie myth made of it, misinforming even more people.

Lastly, the fact that Obama is nursing a “kill list” is equally shocking, not to mention the excessive use of drone-bombing and killing thousands of people, most of them innocent, to catch one or two alleged terrorists. It seems we have here a newly inaugurated president, who is a family man, father of two teen-age girls, but on the flip side conceivably a possible murderer?

What we can extrapolate from this I am still not exactly sure. Is Obama the consumate actor? Does he have a dark side? Or does this have to do with yet-unearthed facts about the Lanza family, Newtown, or some copycat or copycats of James Holmes acting in tandem? Or was it USG Ops participants? Until there is an investigation conducted in less frenzy than the first one, and in which there can be more clarity and coordination and separation of facts from fiction, there will continue to be new YouTube videos, including one claiming the “Israelis did it,” another that Mrs. Lanza never took her son to a local shooting range (of course, none wanted the association), and so on. On balance, Prager has taken what exists at least to the level of reasonable doubt. But from there, without more questioning and investigation, it will linger like so many murder massacres, including JFK’s Assassination and 9/11, all without a final resolution. Till this occurs, my condolences remain with the victims’ families and friends.


[1] State of Connecticut Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection, “State Police Investigate Newtown School Shooting” [Press Release] December 15, 2012.

[2] State of Connecticut Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection, “Update: Newtown School Shooting” [Press Release], December 19, 2012.

[3] CNN, “Family of 6 Year Old Victim,” December 14, 2012, “Sandy Hook School Shooting Hoax Fraud,” Youtube, December 17, 2012.

[4] Hartford Courant,Finally ‘Enough’ For Chief Medical Examiner” [Editorial], January 30, 2012.

[5] John Christofferson and Jocelyn Noveck, “Sandy Hook School Shooting: Adam Lanza Kills 26 and Himself at Connecticut School,” Huffington Post, December 15, 2012.

[6] Edmund H. Mahoney, Dave Altmari, and Jon Lender, “Sandy Hook Shooter’s Pause May Have Aided Escape,” Hartford Courant, December 23, 2012.

[7] Jaweed Kaleem, “Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting: Newtown Connecticut Students, Administrators Among Victims, Reports Say,” Huffington Post, December 14, 2012.

[8] RadioMan911TV, “Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting Newtown Police / Fire and CT State Police,” Youtube, December 14, 2012. At several points in this recording audio is scrambled, particularly following apprehension of a second shooting suspect outside the school, suggesting a purposeful attempt to withhold vital information.

[9] Miranda Leitsinger, “You Feel Helpless: First Responders Rushed to School After Shooting, Only to Wait,” US News on NBC, December 20.

[10] Rob Dew, “Evidence of 2nd and 3rd Shooter at Sandy Hook,” Infowars Nightly News, December 18, 2012,

A more detailed yet less polished analysis was developed by citizen journalist Idahopicker, “Sandy Hook Elem: 3 Shooters,” December 16, 2012. See also James F. Tracy, “Analyzing the Newtown Narrative: Sandy Hook’s Disappearing Shooter Suspects,”, December 20, 2012.

[11] W. Lance Bennett, News: The Politics of Illusion 9th Edition, Boston: Longman, 2012, 47.

Andrew Whooley provided suggestions and research for this article.

Jerry Mazza is a freelance writer and life-long resident of New York City. An EBook version of his book of poems “State Of Shock,” on 9/11 and its after effects is now available at and He has also written hundreds of articles on politics and government as Associate Editor of Intrepid Report (formerly Online Journal). Reach him at

One Response to The pros and cons of Sandy Hook as a special op

  1. Tony Vodvarka

    I am particularly puzzled by the first statement to the press by a person who was introduced as one of the bereaved parents. Apparently unaware that a press camera was tracking and recording him as he was being led toward a podium to address the press, he could be seen jauntily walking along with the officials who were accompanying him, chuckling and joking. As he came into range of being able to record what he was saying, he aproximately said, “… and I just read from the card?” Before reaching the spot where he was to make the statement, he suddenly stopped and appeared to sort of shake himself down with his eyes closed, what I imagine a method actor might do to get into character, came out of this trance with the appearance of total bereavement and then gave his statement to the press. Very peculiar indeed.