+- Survival UK Forums (http://forum.survivaluk.net)
+-- Forum: News (http://forum.survivaluk.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=89)
+--- Forum: News (http://forum.survivaluk.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=90)
+--- Thread: Sandy Hook Inconcistencies (/showthread.php?tid=3889)
Pages:
1
2
RE: Sandy Hook Inconcistencies - BDG - 16 January 2013
(16 January 2013, 16:16)Skean Dhude Wrote: Shows how much attention I have been paying but the conspiracy concerns took the spotlight off the gun ban so it did its job.
Yeah, that is the stitch up part - the agencies responsible should have come out and said that they were not doing their jobs properly and Hamilton was not fit to hold a FAC - if things there had been no human failings in those agencies, the likely hood is that those kids would not be dead.
RE: Sandy Hook Inconcistencies - cryingfreeman - 16 January 2013
Re the Batman Sandy Hook reference - and all the other laughably obvious staged interviews, etc. - one would have to surmise that these things are done specifically so that the switched-on people out there notice it and start commenting about it on the web. It means the powers that be who orchestrate false flags can instantly identify who the dissenters / possible future upstarts-cum-insurgents-cum thought criminals will be. Which means the lock-down and roundup can’t be too far off, perhaps. That certainly ties in with the flurry of preparations being made by the USG and other governments around the world.
RE: Sandy Hook Inconcistencies - Metroyeti - 16 January 2013
Not read/watched the links so no comment on them.
if they did ban guns what would be the point? We all know how well making drugs ilegal has worked