Actors in Sandy Hook

[IamRAMBO24]

That is the biggest problem with these uncontrolled internet conspiracy theories. Any decent evidence or theories get weighed down by bad evidence and unwarranted theories.

Agreed. I don't believe in 95% of conspiracies myself but some are extremely questionable, like the cover up of ufos, and since I do have a valid background in acting, I already had questions regarding the interviews of the kids, Robbie Parker, and the parents in videos. It is easy to fake an emotional response in a picture; anybody can do this, but to really actually reveal true emotions is something hard to do, and I have yet to see a video that displays these kind of emotions. It's not like columbine, 9/11 or anything, these interviews of Sandy Hook victims look like drones reading off script lines.

And that is far as I will go. I'm not saying it didn't happen nor is everybody faking it, I'm just saying they seem like actors, and this lady (along with the bus driver) who did it as a profession is only strengthening my observation.

Trust me, if it's anything, I truly do want to believe everything being reported, but as is, the court putting a gag order on the investigation of multiple suspects along with this only makes people question things more.

The conspiracy I believe is being created by bad news reporting and a lack of transparency. I don't think the theorists are delusional or anything, I think they are only questioning because there are too many potholes in the overall scheme of things.

[MMM]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aX6XMIldkRU

[KevinNYC]

Not that I agree with the OP (although the gov has used actors in the past), but he wasn't on stage, and this was a behind the scenes clip before he went live on air.

An actor playing the part of a fake grieving father as part of a hoax to cover up a government conspiracy would know exactly what his "stage" was. He would be "on stage" for a very long time before he even stepped up to the microphone.

There would be no "behind the scenes" for him within two miles of that press conference.

[bagelred]

Although I don't see any evidence of "these are all actors part", I got to say....that interview with the father (Robbie Parker) is EXTREMELY suspicious. Not necessarily because he's chuckling before the interview (even in horrible circumstances, you can have a moment of levity) but it's the way he.....well.....for lack of a better term...."got into character". He went from a relaxed smile and smirk, levelheaded and relaxed....to completely hyperventilating, distraught, and devastated in a blink of an eye.

Now, what does that mean? I don't know....but it's clear AT THAT MOMENT he is acting...no doubt about it....for what purpose, who knows.....

If you haven't seen it, check it out:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKWgCRBR5qE

There's nothing to say here....he's clearly acting.....that doesn't mean he didn't actually lose his daughter. But in this interview, and this moment, that was fake. Suspicious.

[RaininThrees]

It's not like columbine, 9/11 or anything, these interviews of Sandy Hook victims look like drones reading off

Agreed! It's almost like they're in a state of shock or something!

[n00bie]

Agreed! It's almost like they're in a state of shock or something!

and the parents from the shooting at columbine weren't?

[n00bie]

Although I don't see any evidence of "these are all actors part", I got to say....that interview with the father (Robbie Parker) is EXTREMELY suspicious. Not necessarily because he's chuckling before the interview (even in horrible circumstances, you can have a moment of levity) but it's the way he.....well.....for lack of a better term...."got into character". He went from a relaxed smile and smirk, levelheaded and relaxed....to completely hyperventilating, distraught, and devastated in a blink of an eye.

Now, what does that mean? I don't know....but it's clear AT THAT MOMENT he is acting...no doubt about it....for what purpose, who knows.....

If you haven't seen it, check it out:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKWgCRBR5qE

There's nothing to say here....he's clearly acting.....that doesn't mean he didn't actually lose his daughter. But in this interview, and this moment, that was fake. Suspicious.

I believe the event really happened, but it's the media that fueled all these conspiracies. It's a competition of who can get the news out there first, not who can get the correct information first.

CNN first reported there were 2 shooters, than they spent an hour chasing nothing in the woods, and then CNN says they actually arrested a 2nd person.

CNN also reported that Nancy Lanza was a teacher at the school... and then they said she was the school nurse... and now they're saying she wasn't connected to the school at all.

Then they said Ryan was the shooter, but then it turned out to be Adam.

All this false info released to the public gives the impression of "covering up" something. They should just get the facts straight before reporting it.

Have to admit though, this Gene Rosen guy is creepy as hell.

[Jackass18]

Why are you bringing up old shit and acting like it's new?

Taken from Snopes.com: "The notion that Homeland Security is employing "crisis actors" to portray grieving parents and others connected with the Sandy Hook shooting (such as Laura and Nick Phelps) is based on nothing more than some superficial physical similarities between persons connected to the Sandy Hooks shootings and completely unrelated persons. It appears to have originated with material gleaned from WellAware1, a web site whose stock in trade is claiming that politicians, government officials, celebrities, and other people featured in media-covered events are actually imposters portrayed by actors, many of whom are supposedly members of the Greenberg/Sexton family. (Among other articles, the site maintains that Adolph Hitler and Walt Disney were both pseudo-persons portrayed by Kermit Roosevelt, son of U.S. president Theodore Roosevelt.)"

No emotions? There's plenty of places where you can see emotion. Contradictions in stories? You act like that isn't common. Do you know anything about memory?

we also have the bus driver who happens to be a professional actor as well.

More BS that has already been debunked...

[bagelred]

I believe the event really happened, but it's the media that fueled all these conspiracies. It's a competition of who can get the news out there first, not who can get the correct information first.

CNN first reported there were 2 shooters, than they spent an hour chasing nothing in the woods, and then CNN says they actually arrested a 2nd person.

CNN also reported that Nancy Lanza was a teacher at the school... and then they said she was the school nurse... and now they're saying she wasn't connected to the school at all.

Then they said Ryan was the shooter, but then it turned out to be Adam.

All this false info released to the public gives the impression of "covering up" something. They should just get the facts straight before reporting it.

I know it's hard to believe but it's usually the OPPOSITE. What happens is the "truth" of what happens, or the real evidence, you get when it first happens. It's when the Feds and the officials take over the scene, do they "release" the official story that they want told, and then all that initial evidence of something being different is ignored.

If you want "truth", you get it immediately, as the event is happening....later, it will be scrubbed away.

[Jackass18]

All this false info released to the public gives the impression of "covering up" something. They should just get the facts straight before reporting it.

It gives the impression that they rush to get information out without checking facts beforehand. It's the media's fault for reporting misinformation, but it's not really their fault when people take things out of context to fuel some conspiracy theory. How does the "covering up" something line of thinking work anyways? The media is "covering up" something? Why would they report something just to cover it up later? The gov't? Why wouldn't they just tell them beforehand what to report, and not wait 'til they reported something they didn't want and then tell them to 'cover it up'?

[Jackass18]

I know it's hard to believe but it's usually the OPPOSITE. What happens is the "truth" of what happens, or the real evidence, you get when it first happens. It's when the Feds and the officials take over the scene, do they "release" the official story that they want told, and then all that initial evidence of something being different is ignored.

If you want "truth", you get it immediately, as the event is happening....later, it will be scrubbed away.

Again, why wouldn't the "Feds and the officials" go about setting it up beforehand? Why would they wait until info they didn't want to get out got out to step in? Also, if you think the media doesn't rush and gets things wrong, then I don't know what to tell you.

[bagelred]

Again, why wouldn't the "Feds and the officials" go about setting it up beforehand? Why would they wait until info they didn't want to get out got out to step in? Also, if you think the media doesn't rush and gets things wrong, then I don't know what to tell you.

I mean, I'm not an expert at this, but it's because real people are involved. Real reporters trying to get answers. Eyewitnesses giving real information. Real local cops trying to do their job. It must be very hard to control a scene 100%.

I'm not saying media doesn't rush and get things wrong. I'm just saying don't ASSUME it's that. Look at what is initially reported, especially from eyewitness accounts and things that first happen...and then suddenly no one ever discusses it again or the story changes.

There were multiple people running away from Sandy Hook caught on helicopter. Caught by police. No one really talks about it.

The story of which guns were used at Sandy Hook completely changed from what first reported.

Most early reporters had multiple shooters, then strangely....later it was just one, Lanza.

And how did Lanza kill himself? When? What gun? Did anyone see it? Never reported.....

Anyway, there are dozens of strange things going on here.....most of it gets ignored.

[KevinNYC]

I mean, I'm not an expert at this, but it's because real people are involved. Real reporters trying to get answers. Eyewitnesses giving real information. Real local cops trying to do their job. It must be very hard to control a scene 100%.

I'm not saying media doesn't rush and get things wrong. I'm just saying don't ASSUME it's that. Look at what is initially reported, especially from eyewitness accounts and things that first happen...and then suddenly no one ever discusses it again or the story changes.

There were multiple people running away from Sandy Hook caught on helicopter. Caught by police. No one really talks about it.

The story of which guns were used at Sandy Hook completely changed from what first reported.

Most early reporters had multiple shooters, then strangely....later it was just one, Lanza.

And how did Lanza kill himself? When? What gun? Did anyone see it? Never reported.....

Anyway, there are dozens of strange things going on here.....most of it gets ignored.

You act like any of this is unusual on a big breaking story. Or that eyewitness reports can't be fragmentary or contradictory. Look up the most recent evidence on eyewitness testimony....they have done a lot experiments on this recently.....your brain doesn't record every detail like a camera, it fills in gaps with its' own narrative and it's quite easy to "change" a memory of even very recent events.
http://www.simplypsychology.org/loftus-palmer.html

They did report that Lanza killed himself and they did say what gun he used.

Did anyone see it? dunno. Why would that be unusual? Every person in the school was trying to hide from him. They did report he killed himself before police entered the school.

[niko]

It chaotic news situations there is tons of reporting that turns out to be wrong. Also, a lot is reported as WE THINK THIS IS HAPPENING, THIS MAY BE WHAT IT IS. Afterwards these conspiratorial analysis takes that all as "THIS IS WHAT WAS HAPPENING" and there the media lied.

On 9-11 i bought a little radio (and some water) for my walk home after i realized what was happening and had to escape Manhattan. Very little of what was reported was correct. Big absolutely wrong factual things, Ten planes, a plane hit the Sears Tower in Chicago, explosions uptown in NY to small things, which subways were working, where to walk and not walk, etc. And this was all over no matter what you listened to.

It's like twitter, everyone wants to be first. Correct and first is not as important as first, and when it's wrong and first, no one goes back and says OOPS I WAS WRONG.

[RaininThrees]

and the parents from the shooting at columbine weren't?

Gah! You're TOTALLY right!!!! How could I be so blind?

Everyone grieves in the exact same way!

All the time!