World Class Schools
[Editor’s note: During a presentation about Sandy Hook with students of Mike Cunningham, World Class Schools, questions arose about the weapons that were allegedly used by Adam Lanza, the alleged perp of the mass shooting. Using a CNN report by Steve Almasy, CNN as their point of departure, they made several rather telling observations as follow.]
That is what we were told
Now Let Us 10 Years Later Look at the Pictures to Obtain Questions from the Evidence
Looking at the evidence, one can normally figure out what took place. However, why does this not always happen? Today, we want you to look at the evidence. On Dec. 14, 2012, something happened at Sandy Hook what was it?
If you look at this evidence and ask yourself these question will come up with the same narrative that you have been told by the media for the past ten years? Forget what you have been told and do the investigation yourself.
These are four weapons that were brought to Sandy Hook on 14 December. 2012 according to the “official narrative”. Three are shown here:
[Editor’s note: My colleague, Scott Bennett, a former Army intel and psyops officer, immediately noticed the corrosion of the barrel on the weapon found at the scene (featured image), which appears to be a Vietnam-Era rifle.
This observation (by itself) raises serious questions re: the entire narrative.]
The other was a Saiga 12 K, 70mm Tactical Shotgun (“Russian”):
[Editor’s note: Brian Davidson, P.I., who has been doing extensive research in the CT State Police Archives and who authored Appendix E to my Petition for Rehearing before the US Supreme Court, has notified me that it was actually an old shotgun. See both his note below and the link from the author.]
Used by Russian Special Forces. This is what the police said was found in his trunk. This was the weapon that is supposed to have been used to blow out the window of the front office:
However, the Saiga 12 K Tactical Shotgun was found in the trunk of his car. This would mean that, after Adam Lanza shot out the window, he went back to his car to put the weapon in the trunk.
The police also claim to have found a 70mm 12 gauge tactical shell (which was intact and had not been fired) inside one of the classrooms. Here is a photo from the CT State Police Archives:
Saiga 12 70 MM Tactical 12 Gauge Shell
Does The Narrative Still Stand After 10 Years When You Look At This Evidence?
Questions raised by comparing the photograph evidence with the official police narrative::
If the Saiga 12 blew out the window in the front of the school, where did this weapon end up? How could he have gotten there and back so quickly?
If he did take the Saiga 12 into school, as the shell suggests, then why wasn’t blood, splatter and damage found?
If the Saiga 12 had been taken to this classroom, why is this a live shell rather than a spent shell? What happened to the spent shells?
Was this shell placed in this classroom as a plant? Why was the shell found in the classroom with the Saiga 12 was found in the car’s trunk?
This weapon is used by Russian Special Forces and would cause much more damage than appears to be shown had it been used inside of the school.
If the weapon was used at the front of the school and then taken back to the car, why was this done considering he had three other weapons and hundreds of rounds of ammunition?
If the shooter had come into the school (as the general narrative would have you believe), these weapons and ammo would have been about 40-50 pounds of additional weight.
The ATF Agent reported finding no evidence that he or his mother had any training in marksmanship. So how was he able to carry all of this without proper training, back pack, and still be able to shoot properly?
The recoil from a Saige 12 would have been too much to handle if he had no training with this Russian weapon. Where would he have he got this training?
On July 6, 2014, the USFG under President Obama banned the sales of all Russian weapons here in the US including Saiga 12. Was this just a coincidence?
Using just the pictures of the evidence supplied by the police, one can question the general narrative of what took place. Does questioning this narrative change your opinion on this event?
Ten years after the event, why is it more important than ever to begin to question what we are told and how we are told it?
Ladies and Gentlemen, you have seen the evidence, you have heard the narrative, they cannot both be true in the real world-now it is your turn to make up your mind, question what you have heard, look at the pictures, and then make your own mind, draw your own conclusions.