Sandy Hook = False Flag?

"Robbie Parker" laughs before making a concerted effort to appear sad the day after his daughter was allegedly murdered.
“Robbie Parker” laughs before asking “are we ready?” and making a concerted effort to appear sad– the day after his daughter was allegedly gunned down at school. This is one of a multitude of anomalies in photos and video relating to the Sandy Hook event. A girl who looks identical to his daughter appears soon after in photos with Obama.

The other day I was asked if I thought that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting was a false flag operation. A false flag operation is when a government stages an attack against its own people while pretending to be an enemy. This can be used to justify going to war with that enemy, using military force, or furthering an agenda (usually one that limits the freedoms of the citizenry).

Literally just after this question came up, I learned that a Dr. Laurie Roth was devoting several hours of her radio show to that exact question. I’d heard of Laurie Roth and knew that she often talks crime, politics, and corruption, so she is likely a woman passionate about some of the same issues I am. But I’d never listened to her show or browsed her website,

Evidently Dr. Roth is a fellow Washingtonian who, like me, is interested in truth. It seems that she might have been a little hesitant to have an open conversation about Sandy Hook but I’m glad she did. On her April 22nd radio show she and guest Sher Zieve plunged in and waded through the growing number of anomalies surrounding the mass murders at Sandy Hook.

Roth and Zieve raised a number of questions that must be asked in an objective analysis of a mass shooting event. It troubles me that so many are quick to label those who want to drill down to the truth conspiracy theorists. It is incredibly naive to believe that the government is always good and should not be questioned. It is also naive to believe that the media broadcasts pure truth all of the time. You can’t truly analyze an event like Sandy Hook– or prevent similar future tragedies– without staring at it from all angles including the role of the government and media.

From what we know, a troubled young man named Adam Lanza walked into an elementary school with a cache of weapons and fired off 154 rounds in five minutes, killing 26 people and then ending his own life with a handgun. Can a Bushmaster .223 like he allegedly had fire that many rounds in that time? As far as I know it can (it’s semi-automatic and the media emphasized that it had a high capacity magazine). But like Dr. Roth said on her show, some people question if an amateur shooter could have actually done that. It’s possible, but seems highly improbable. Him using a rifle to kill others, then using a handgun to kill himself needles my “hinky” nerve.

Evidently there are questions about whether the people who were said to be murdered are still alive, whether the photos of the crime scene are of the Sandy Hook school at all, and if some of the photos are from other crime scenes. One of the most disturbing questions Roth discussed is whether Adam Lanza even existed. While I’d heard speculation about such a person being used as a scapegoat, I was unaware that supposedly people can’t find a birth certificate for him and other substantive information.

It’s up to each individual to decide what they believe about such events. Personally I’m willing to listen to all sides of the matter and make my own decision. I’ve been suspicious about what really happened at Sandy Hook since last December when it happened, especially because of how quickly the Obama administration jumped on the gun control issue afterwards. What I wish Americans of all political persuasions would realize is that if this administration is coming for Americans’ firearms, then they’ll likely come for other freedoms– even constitutionally protected ones– as well. This is not about guns; this is about control.

I’m not among those who nurture a seething hatred against the government and  jump on the pitchfork and torch bandwagon every time something I disagree with happens. My family has a long history of serving honorably in the military and in civilian government positions and as Americans we have the freedom to disagree. I am always going to question governmental actions that aim to limit Americans’ liberties. When millions of people around the world hold to extreme political ideologies that consider us an enemy worthy of extermination, the last thing our government should be doing is removing our citizens’ means to defend themselves.

Using a mass murder incident– that is said to have been committed by someone who clearly didn’t care about gun laws– to make more gun laws– is ludicrous. Millions of us gun owners have been painted as rough and tumble yahoo inbreds who are so paranoid we sleep with shotguns cradled in our armpits when we’re not the threat at all. And never mind those of us domestic violence and stalking survivors who own firearms for good reason. Focusing on regular American gun owners does a devilishly dangerous thing– it takes our eyes off of the real causes of such violence and of the real issues.

Most school shooters were on prescription drugs like antidepressants. Some recent mass murders were committed by people with liberal political beliefs rather than conservative. People who commit such crimes aren’t the ones submitting themselves to background checks and proper gun purchase paperwork. Many aren’t old enough to legally obtain the guns they murder others with. Some of the killers suffered from mental illness. Some shootings could have been prevented by proper school security or by others paying attention to the red flags that inevitably occur ahead of time. Some shootings have been acts of terrorism. How would more gun laws have prevented any of these incidents?

All Americans should be asking questions about Sandy Hook and it sounds like people on both sides of the political spectrum have been doing some digging. Remove your opinions on guns and politics from this situation and look at it like a crime scene investigator would– does the evidence support what we’ve been told? Who gains and who loses if the assertions that Sandy Hook was staged or not accurately reported are true? The answer– the truth– can have a tremendous impact on the freedoms you enjoy as an American regardless of whose side you think you’re on.


There are all kinds of videos on this topic on YouTube and information from various viewpoints all over the web. Some sites point out that memorial/fundraising pages for the Sandy Hook victims were set up a day or more before the shooting, discuss a FEMA drill held at the exact same time  nearby, research the backgrounds of parents and witnesses– noting that some are professional actors– and so on. There are also some strong efforts to debunk any conspiracy theories but then there are rebuttals to those which raise even more questions. Personally I have a very hard time with some of the witness interviews, particularly their nonverbal communication.


Update, 2/22/14: I received this link to an intensely interesting interview from a trusted source.

Please listen to the radio interview of this guy!  You will NEVER forget it!

 The interview is here

 “Mr. Halbig has worked in public education as a teacher, dean, assistant principal, principal of an alternative school and as the Director for School Safety and Security for the Seminole County Public Schools, a school district of approximately 65,000 students.

A former Florida State Trooper and United States Customs Inspector, Mr. Halbig was invited by the U.S. Department of Justice to train over 3,500 school police officers, school superintendents and school principals. He travels the country providing presentations and keynotes to a variety of school board associations and conferences and is a nationally-recognized school safety and security expert and consultant, who has provided safety training and school assessments for more than 4,000 school districts nationwide.”

More background on Halbig is available via an Internet search or


To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. –Teddy Roosevelt


©2013 H. Hiatt/ All articles/posts on this blog are copyrighted original material that may not be reproduced in part or whole in any electronic or printed medium without prior permission from H. Hiatt/

5 thoughts on “Sandy Hook = False Flag?

  1. There seem to be a ton of inconsistancies with the reporting of the massacre; the initial reports that it was Ryan Lanza, the man in the wooded lot by the school was reported to be Ryan Lanza (now the man in the woods has disappeared from record), the initial reports that the killings were done with semi-automatic pistols later changed to the Bushmaster, the teacher report of seeing two figures run passed the gymnasium before responders arrived, the conflicted reports on the initial assault of the school and murder of the principal, the newly installed video cameras not working and being reported as such over the police radio before the attack, the footage on CNN taken at another location at another time, the footage of people walking in circles around the fire department where the victims’ families were sequestered, Anderson Cooper’s blue screen fake location interview… Why?


    1. Thank you for the comment, and you’re right, this doesn’t all add up. But such events can throw people, including lawmakers, into a panic and serve someone’s agenda. Events with such shock value are powerful forces for change because people are often thinking with their emotions rather than reason in the aftermath and are more easily convinced to give up their personal freedoms.


  2. I’m sorry. I can’t buy that motive, that someone would devote three hours on radio to a nutty conspiracy theory because they are “interested in truth”. It’s an outrageous assertion, and it disrespects the murder victims and their families. There are always questions about the motives for murders, but applying a false flag hypothesis to this case is solely designed to provoke emotional response from highly-reactive listeners, nothing more. Dr. Roth (or her producers) picked the topic hoping to draw bigger ratings – period.


    1. Thanks for stopping by. Is it fair to assume that all listeners of such a program are highly emotionally reactive, especially when the hosts are women? As a woman, I often hear women’s opinions derided as emotional rather than logical.

      Given my experiences and education, I have to ask if the evidence adds up. I have to consider all motives. Without doing so, I can’t claim to be objective.


      1. I didn’t actually know you were female. I don’t assume women are automatically less logical / more emotional than men. Most of the “shock jocks” on radio that I know of are men. All those guys who yell and cry like Glen Beck, Alex Jones, Michael Savage etc. I still think the theory is intended for emotional appeal over logic.


Seriously, what do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s