By QK Ultra

The words might be more fitting as a banner on the National Enquirer. Yet according to this brief (2:33) video, several of the first graders slain in Newtown Connecticut on December 14, 2012 are not only alive and well, but rather famously performing “America the Beautiful” at Super Bowl XLVII.

The unlikely performers stand alongside Grammy Award-winning vocalist Jennifer Hudson and … their own siblings? The clip draws on select photographic evidence to make its case.

In fact, none of the children actually booked to perform in New Orleans on the evening of February 3, 2013 were identified by the event’s organizers, the argument being that if they remained anonymous they might better represent “Newtown children,” a press report observes.

The video suggests that the children’s chorus includes Sandy Hook decedents Olivia Engel, Charlotte Bacon, Avielle Richman, Josephine Gay, Ben Wheeler, Emilie Parker, Caroline Previdi, and Grace McDonnell. Also present are surviving siblings Walker Previdi (Caroline), Jack McDonnell (Grace), Guy Bacon, Nate Wheeler (Ben), and Jake Hockley (Dylan). and Freddy Hubbard (Catherine). -JFT

Leave a Reply

113 thought on “Video: Sandy Hook Child Victims at 2013 Super Bowl”
    1. The students killed were then placed in the middle of Superbowl festivities on one of the the biggest international broadcasts in history ? Oh sure this is a really credible theory.

      This could only be done if the Reptilians that pulled of this whole incident have cloning replication technology which they do not. Consider this theory debunked.

        1. Carl has no logic! He was schooled in the Joseph Goebbels Academy of Propaganda. That’s where they teach you to methodically drive home whatever lie they are pedaling at the time by repeating the same story (the lie) over and over, no matter what evidence is presented to the contrary. Just keep repeating the lie until people believe it. Right Carl?

        2. You mean like the logic of putting the “victims” on the Superbowl half time show ? No I don’t see the logic in that- sorry I am not quite as bright as you guys

      1. Carl, good buddy, have you arrived in Newtown yet this morning? If so, have you knocked on Gene Rosen’s door yet (you DID ask for suggestions, and if I may, this was a most excellent suggestion)?

        Remember, film the interview, and post it here! Talking points: his FEMA job, his Sandy Hook assignment, do the kids he comforted stay in contact.


        1. I was wondering if Carl might be staying at Gene’s place while he’s visiting Newtown? The Rosen House B&B! It has a ring to it doesn’t it? Each guests shares a room with a plethora of tattered stuffed animals and if they are lucky, Gene’s cat! In the morning they get the honor of dining with Gene over pancakes and coffee that Gene prepared himself, with love, of course, because in Newtown, they “choose love”! Speaking of which…isn’t today the anniversary of the “shooting”? Carl, I don’t know if you got the message from the media but it was clear that they wanted us to STAY AWAY! Speaking of media, perhaps we will see you on the TV later today? Maybe an interview with Anderson Cooper? No wait, that’s impossible, Anderson prefers green screened interviews, not “live, on the scene” interviews. Duh! My bad. Well, enjoy your weekend, Carl! Whatever it is you are doing in Newtown on this anniversary weekend.

        2. Too much snow today to go to Newtown. I don’t know why you even think Gene Rosen is relevant- he is an obvious liar so what else do we need to know about him.

        3. By the way – I am completely on board that this was a false flag to garner support for gun confiscation and that Lanza is a patsy that was incapable of committing this act and had no motive. And at least I am getting out in the field interviewing residents to get to the bottom of this unlike some people on this forum that sit at their computers all day , do nothing and criticize. So what exactly is your concern about my opinions on things?

        4. Carl, dear friend, don’t dis me like dat.

          You know that he is the key to the story! You know this! Think of the kids! Where is yo’ compassion, my brothah! Those poor, wandering, tots! He comforted them! We saw it on TV, lots of times!

          That bunch of kids came to his front yard, crying “My teacher is DEAD! We can’t go back!” He comforted them.

          Now, you are calling him a liar? Yet you believe that the fake SWAT guy was real. You are not thinking clearly. I am here to help, Carl. Take my advice.

          Since you really don’t work for the entities who cooked up this whole charade (I’m working with a hypothetical, here), and are upright and honest as the day is long (all right, it’s a stretch), I’m guessing that you were not thinking when you said “I don’t know why you even think Gene Rosen is relevant- he is an obvious liar so what else do we need to know about him.” You are an honest fellow (gag), we all know that (raaaalph), so in your intrepid adventure “getting out in the field interviewing residents,” the very first one you should CONSIDER interviewing is the most prominent one: Gene Rosen. You are such a fine researcher (I feel confident about this, Carl, though we have not yet met–I can’t wait for our first date) you should know that the best thing to do with a liar is to get him on camera, confronting him with the lie. Payday!

          It’s called a “money shot” in the business. Alternately a “gotcha”.

          Get good ole’ Gene to flub it up on camera! Don’t you know how this stuff works?

          I hope this has been hepful

        5. Patrick anytime you want to leave your parent’s basement and get out in the Newtown neighborhoods I will be happy to show you around.

          Gene Rosen is a buffoon who lied through his teeth. Yes his agenda is the same as the perpetrators as he made quite obvious at the end of an interview when he said “I hope the children are the basis for our solution”

          Now since you believe the perpetrators have the “victims” in the Superbowl and gene Rosen is the mastermind it is quite obvious that you do not benefit from any factual allusions.

          I never made any assertions about the SWAT guy that was caught but I sure have alot of questions that remain unanswered.

          I am now putting you on the ignore button, until you physically arrive in Newtown, because you obviously have no interest in identifying and reporting what really transpired.

        6. Carl, once again you hurt my feelings. Didn’t I tell you that I’m a paraplegic, black, lesbian suffering from leprosy?

        7. Patrick, “Leprosy”, wow……that’s a bummer! If it were merely paraplegia the Baha’i’s could help with that. I know a guy in Boston.

      2. Its obvious that Carl is a shill. He claims in a later post that he believes that SH was a false flag. Sounds like a wolf in sheep skin to me. Any real ‘truther’ does not bring up reptilians. Second, most SH truthers are willing to consider the possibility that the kids were not killed that day. The 3rd and final piece of evidence that Carl is a shill is that he claims SH was about gun control. Only shills stand this ground firmly – and without anyone even bringing it previously.

        After a lot of thought and reflection, I believe the events of Sandy Hook, and the other recent false flags, are directly related to 9/11, the aftermath, coverup, and the unpaid debts from the dreadful day. Yes, we all have our eye on the possibility of a ‘New World Order’ but I think there is a lot of inner turmoil between these powerful groups – and MSM won’t touch it. CFR, Committee of 300, Bohemian Grove, Illuminati, Zionist Jews – right down the list – I believe there are disagreements and the dust still has not settled from 9/11. Something is still lingering from 9/11 but I have only my gut telling me this, and no evidence.

  1. Not to nitpick but that is Jennifer Hudson, not Alicia Keys. Since this post is about matching names to faces, I think that it’s important to make sure that the most obvious matches are correct.

  2. Mmm…I’m always very very cautious about these attempts at identifying decedents or participants, but unless Nate Wheeler was Ben’s identical twin then that DOES look like a curiously close match. As does Jake Hockley. The problem is this kind of thing is so subjective it can never be employed usefully as any kind of proof. More helpful, IMO, is the clear evidence of photoshopping in some of the family photos. Anyone who is a graphic designer, or who simply uses Photoshop for fun, can see the artefacts and anomalies which basically prove tampering. Have you ever featured the best of these? if not, then maybe consider doing so?

    1. I agree with you. The Boston Globe sometimes runs a fun little online game where a person sends in his own photo saying, for instance, “People say I look just like Brad Pitt”, and then the public votes on how close he comes to looking like him. It can be “identical twins separated at birth” to “no way”, with an “in-between”. The problem is that both age advancing photos and identifying photos when hairstyle and other factors are changed is a fine art best left to experts. You can see something, and indeed the public is constantly being “tested” if you will with wanted posters and the old milk carton pictures, etc., but the yields on such is not necessarily good. That might give the authorities the idea that they can easily put something over on us, when they use the childhood photos of a known participant in one of these drills or photoshop them in. There is also a whole science of spotting someone in a crowd (a kind of Where’s Waldo for cops), and also my husband uses a program to sort family photos which also identifies people as family members (but not so accurately).

      This kind of evidence is interesting, and I really think that some of the adult actors recycle themselves, but ultimately it does not prove enough. They know how to cover their tracks usually with photos.

      Which is why their cheesy choices of moldy oldie classroom group shots and the old family photo which makes Officer Sean Collier’s childhood a decade earlier, making him at least 36 and not 26 a disconcerting factor in this. I would assume it is a red herring to take our minds off much more obvious impossibilities. Two big ones come to mind: the impossibility of upper middle class Ct. kids having no network of relatives in the area and going to a run-down school with ancient play equipment.

    2. “The problem is this kind of thing is so subjective it can never be employed usefully as any kind of proof. ”

      In this case, identifying the kids at the Super Bowl by name would be all it would take.

  3. The last mass reported school shooting, if you can call it that, was yesterday in Colorado. The last real mass shooting, that had real deaths (3) and real injuries (5) where the gunman survived unscathed, occurred in Chardon High School, Cleveland, OH back in February, 2012. He used a small .22 caliber target pistol to create all of that carnage, compared to the wide reported stories that happened yesterday where the shooter is dead and used a scary shotgun, and Sandy Hoax Elementary School, where the shooter used a whole assortment of assault weapons. The real shooting at Chardon High School used a well concealed, small caliber yet extremely deadly weapon and has received very little reporting. You would think that the media would have used that one to push their agenda, yet nothing is ever mentioned of it. Eight plus families went through hell, yet not a word from anyone on any side of the issue. Here is one link for that story…

    These students were real, the situation was real, the motive was never clearly stated anywhere, and not much more mention of this shooting occurs in anyone’s agenda. I find it curious as to why this story is never mentioned again?

    1. If they could have gotten away with falsely asserting the weapon was an AR-15 there would have been more reporting. That is their primary target is to ban semi auto rifles particularly AR-15s.

      Do you remember when Pete Williams, NBC Chief Justice Correspondent reported on Sandy Hook? He said 4 handguns were recovered and ONLY handguns. I believe there were multiple shooters that used small caliber hand guns for the attack and then the media and perpetrators falsely inserted the AR-15 in the narrative. Nancy Lanza supposedly bought that gun from a store 70 miles away from her house – is that believable? no likely. Also someone with her money would have bought the Colt AR-15 not the Bushmaster.

      1. No, I disagree. I looked into that one. Watching video of the trial. It seems real. The emotions seem real. It was never given saturation coverage. A kid had been bullied and he took revenge on specific people. He didn’t go on a crazy kamikaze kill ’em all style of attack. It was revenge. Not saying it was justified, I’m just saying there was a motive. And those things do happen. In fact it interested me because you can compare and contrast it with Sandy Hook and Aurora to show how fake the latter two are in comparison.

  4. Problem, Reaction, Solution. Like any crime committed , one of the questions asked. Who benefits? Another, motive? Why would you as a parent, family physician, counselor, child psychologist, teacher, want to continually remind the children with events like this of the professed mass shooting of their playmates? The only benefit I have seen so far is donations of money. Like combat personal that suffer from PTS from images that keep replaying in the cortex of the brain resulting in tragic, physical, psychological trauma to both the subject and his or her family. This is why the US Military personal have eight suicides a day now. So, ask yourself a very simple question. Would you allow your child to be constantly reminded of the event or would you be more inclined after the morning period to do everything in your power to allow your child to heal and move on in their life?
    We have to ask and question events in life or we do not advance as a race on this planet. There are professional computer, graphic artists, photo experts that deal with images all the time that can show you how a missing child will look, 5, 10, 15 years later. These are the best in what would be required to give us the answer to the question, ” Is it possible any of these children could be portrayed as being shot and killed at Sandy Hook ” ? If you know someone that has talent in this area I suggest, you, ask to have a look. We must get answers to be able to move on.

    1. The video shows Emilie Parker on Obama’s lap, but that doesn’t mean the picture was taken after the hoax. It could have been taken years ago. Also, I do believe it’s possible that the picture of Emilie with her family could be a photoshop product, Emilie at a different age being added in.

    2. This picture makes me ask the questions who took it, why was it taken, and why has it been put on the web? And PS: The dad in the first picture looks like a different Robbie than the one laughing/crying in the video.

      1. This picture was posted on the Emily Parker fundraising page for the purpose of raising money. Do believe Robbie Parker has taken to wearing a toupee for his movie role, he was looking too old. The actual video was posted last December.

        1. Kathy, are you saying the picture of Emilie with Obama was posted on the fundraising page? You mean someone “whoops” posted a picture of Emilie alive after the hoax on a page specifically for fund raising in her name? That doesn’t sound suspicious to you?

        2. Thought you were inquiring on the Parker family portrait posted on their fundraising website. We have heard the press recently complain they are not allowed to photograph the President, maybe this big whoops could be the reason why.

    3. Thanks for posting this Kathy.
      It shocks me that this kind of anomaly can go 100% unquestioned by the MSM! Where would we be without the freedom to share this kind of evidence on the net? How long can the perpetrators allow us to expose their errors without reprisal &/or shut down?
      Keep telling everyone……………………………… while we still can!

  5. There is no chance we will get any insight to who these kids are. The criminals have all the deniability they need (by design). Why would any investigation be done: “they are not the right age”! And you can bet it has been arranged so that “none of them are adopted”. Nothing suspicious will show in their records. And they will remain anonymous “to protect them from conspiracy theorists”.

    Just talking about this will be reason enough to public shunning in MSM, this is a gaslighting op after all!

    1. Most of the kids in the Superbowl choir can be found photographs of their sibling’s funerals, and back issues of the Newtown Bee. Some, like Brendan (standing next to James Mattioli’s sister) were interviewed on TV that day (he’s the one talking about seeing the guy handcuffed). These guys are way too old to be 1st graders.

    2. Colonel, just a “wild” theory. These “Up With People” cultists kept showing up throughout this. I’m sure some of them have kids or their relatives have kids that age. What fun it would be to get together with the old gang from the last UWP production!

      Hey, what do you need? Kids right? Get the pictures, Mom and Dad, or Grandma and Grandpa could give them some stage tips. Ah, the smell of greasepaint……..(sigh!).

  6. Newtown victims at 2013 Super Bowl
    Sandy Hook donors demanding refunds
    Special Master Joseph Lieberman
    Adam Lanza? Connecticut?

  7. Interesting, and the kind of observations required to investigate this hoax. No way to really say for sure, though.

    * * *

    I disagree that Lanza (not real name) was a patsy. I say he was all in for this hoax and compensated and that his real brother (or cousin, not sure – who we’ll call Ryan) was also all in and duly compensated.
    * * *

    On another note, has anyone found the photographs released by the media – and I’m talking here about photographs of JAMES MATIOLLI and GRACE MCDONALD – which have the logo of “CATERS NEWS AGENCY”? (Forgot to remove the logo?) Look quick because once this is posted those photos may be scrubbed.

    Now look up You should be sitting down for this.
    They’ve significantly changed their website since earlier this year, but look under “about caters” (top right).

    Here’s a sample: “…guaranteed to get the world talking…”

  8. I am struck by how chubby these kids are (at the football game.) They have not yet hit puberty, yet many of them have the bellies of middle aged office workers.

    To me this indicates that the kids are under stress. They know that something is not right. They may not know what it is, but overeating in children is almost always a sign of stress. Happy kids are not fat. None of the “victims” were fat.

    I think they’re the same kids. However a video is not the best way to demonstrate this, I’d like to see photos of each kid side by side, ie, kid as victim, kid as singer.

    That’s how I figured out that Paul McCartney really was switched in 1966. The dimensions of his face, specifically, the ratio between facial width and facial height, changed by more than 10 percent. Not possible with an adult.

    In fact, it looks like they tried out a few different Fauls before settling on the one who married Linda, formed Wings, etc.

    After looking at hundreds of photos of “Paul McCartney,” I can now tell almost instantly which one I’m looking at. The original Paul had a boyish sex appeal, the second one, in my opinion, has none and projects a slimey aura.

    There are two videos clips of note. 1) Faul is interviewed just after (within hours of) John Lennon’s murder and his demeanor could not have been more indifferent. 2) Faul takes questions from an audience outdoors somewhere and someone asks “What is the most outrageous rumor that has ever circulated about you?” and Faul just says “I can’t think…”

    Really? If rumors had circulated about my death, I’d have no hesitation about bringing it up and making a joke about it. It’s a comedic goldmine!
    That Faul avoids mentioning it shows fear, and that fear gives him away.

    Sorry I don’t have links, I did this research over 2 years ago.

    In an article in the August 2009 Italian issue of WIRED magazine, two forensic scientists conducted a bio-metric analysis of Paul pre and post 1966. They set out to prove PID was a hoax, but they actually ended up proving Paul was replaced.

    In 2009, two Italians, Francesco Gavazzeni (IT analyst) and Carlesi Gabriella (medico-legal), studied images of Paul McCartney taken before and after the alleged death, and claimed there is high probability that it is not the same person, based on analysis of the shape of the skull and jaw, the curve of the jaw, the ear, palate and teeth.[17].

    Wired Italia, “Chiedi chi era quel «Beatle»”, July-August 2009

      1. Glad that my comment didn’t elicit a storm of mockery here.

        It’s funny that even folks who are hip to the truth about 9/11, JFK, and numerous other lies, can’t seem to see the obvious differences between the two Pauls: pre and post 1966. To me it is abundantly clear that they are not the same person. That others can’t see that makes about as much sense as looking at the WTC being blown up and saying that we’re looking at a building “collapsing.” Uh, no. Collapsing buildings do not send debris UP and hundreds of yards AWAY and from the building, they do what gravity tells them to do: go down.

        Alas, such is the power of the Mighty Wurlitzer than millions believe what they hear rather than their own eyes.

        1. I can’t remember how I found the link that I gave you, to prove your point. It probably started with an article from the Daily Bell arguing that the Beatles were an MI5 (MI6?) thin end of the wedge. The article mentioned Dave McGowan. I had never heard of him. He became one of my favorites; if you don’t know about his Inside the LC series ( you are too late, in a sense, because he’s blocked access to most of the articles. The good news is the reason why: it will soon be a book.

          The series would be right up your ally. The entire Hippy Generation, and all the bands that embodied it, are part of the military/intelligence complex. Weird, but altogether true.

          If you google it, lots of web sites reproduced the articles Dave now blocks as they were coming out, so if you are really thirsty I’ll bet you can get most of it before the publication date, if you try.

          However I came to that website proving the story of Faul, I turned a friend of mine, a professional photographer, onto it. He’s a guy who rarely listens to facts about conspiracies. This one convinced him. There was no photoshop in those days, he told me.

        2. Yes, I’m familiar with Dave McGowan and I love his stuff. His “wagging the moon doggie” woke me up to the faked Apollo missions. Well, the missions took place, but they didn’t go to the moon.

          For the uninitiated, check out this image from Nasa’s own website. It’s supposedly the lunar lander, but it’s made out of curtain rods, HVAC ductwork, and roofing paper.

  9. It is interesting that very few comments here address QKUltra’s discovery: that it is possible, or even probable, that eight of the children/young people singing at the Super Bowl are indeed eight of the SH (supposed) victims. Not to mention the additional six brothers.

    This is perhaps because the idea is so massively counterintuitive. Yes, we can realize that the SH event is a huge hoax. We can see the gaping holes in the official narrative. We can imagine (and hope) that no one died. We can wonder where the children went. Etc./and other such thoughts based on normal deductive reasoning.

    But what do we make of these girls and boys showing up in plain sight singing at the Super Bowl? Comment off topic so we don’t have to think about it?

    I am not sure myself but would welcome the thoughts of those who have watched the video–carefully, critically, and more than once. Friends–just what are the ramifications?

    1. As many have commented before, they are blatant with their failures to produce a believable picture show, it is hard to believe they could be that incompetent. Why? Maybe to divide our nation once again as it is well known those who question the event are called repugnant and despicable by the cast. Maybe to create a new group of citizens that can be identified as the remaining thinkers who somehow slipped through the brainwashing machine. Some say the evil doers must warn before they attack. If you download the school pictures and enlarge, it is clear to see most of the children have beards, as in the heads were placed on the bodies. The clothing is clearly outdated, in the sixties I pleaded with my mother as ankle socks were no longer cool! Here’s an analysis of what is wrong with the picture:

    2. I think the QKultra video might explain some of the earlier photoshopping we noticed in the Parker family pictures. For example, the pictures where it looks very much like Emily was pasted in, could be because Emily is quite a bit older than the two younger girls, pictures of her younger self were shopped in. Does that make sense? Hidden in plain sight, dazzle camouflage, call it what you will. It is horrific that children are being used in this way. If those indeed are the “victims” of the shooting singing at the super bowl, what it says to me is that there are people who will do heinous things for $$. This is not news though, is it?? Maybe someone involved will break ranks some time in the future, when it is no longer dangerous to do so.

      1. Sue, yeah, it’s like a Beatles Album cover. “Clues” in plain sight. Instead of “Paul” out of step, we have “Emily” with no legs. What does it all mean?

  10. The kids in the superbowl choir are siblings of the listed victims, as well as several children who were prominently photographed and/or interviewed 12/14. The odd thing is not that these are the victims (they’re not) but that Newtown schools superintendent Robinson said they were chosen at random to sing at the superbowl. There were 458 children enrolled as of 12/14; this selection of older siblings, and media-prominent students, can’t be accidental. It’s the latter that most

    1. Can it get any more bizarre? The parents are upset that she cannot finish out the year and produce the play said Kevin Braun. “I’m blind to that issue. I’m very strong to the point that the children should have their day. The seniors have had their time with their comrades robbed from them.” Hear the DA saying, look we have this gig in a future superbowl and we will let you off the hook if you volunteer for that. Poor lady, they did not explain she was not allowed to branch out from that gig! cancelled!

      1. Thanks for posting this interesting side note to this sordid story. If you check further on Sabrina Post, it only gets worse. She was allegedly running a lucrative scam where she charged students for music lessons to be in her productions and also charged to be in the productions. See this site for details:

        This whole thing gets weirder and doubt we’ve even scratched the surface. Found some connections to another choral group that sang at the Superbowl on many occasions; Up With People. Many condolences sent to parents by alumni of this group, which was founded by extreme right wing evangelicals and funded by Haliburton, GE, and other unsavory corporations.

        1. Here’s an Up with People connection. I recall that Greenwich, Ct. native Glenn Close used to mention in interviews that she spent a part of her youthful career in the chorus of “Up with People.” She is one of the older members of the Boomer generation (as am I) and I believe the whole thing of Up with People was to be an alternative to the hippie sort of approach to young people seen in the musical “Hair” (which gave Diane Keaton her start). Obviously in an enclave like Greenwich, which is so proud of its wealth and cleanliness, the hippie lifestyle was seen as threatening and, perhaps, too New York Jewish, so they had to come up with another outlet for their progeny so they didn’t jump ship on their version of the American dream. Or on the other hand, perhaps it was a kind of Moonie-type experience, American-style (although so are the Moonies – which also probably got right wing money).

        2. Hah! Musings, you beat me to it. “Up With People (UWP)”, played quite a role in this. If may have even been some of the seed material for our brave new response meme to “tragedy”. It isn’t easy to assemble such a gaggle of New Age optimism There were a string of emails from former cast members of various productions from this outfit.

  11. This is a very interesting story. Parents saying the kids are not from Newtown in the chorus and that the director is a fraudster. Well, how interesting. I hope she does not meet with some mishap. But this is an older story from last year. It apparently did not result in changing the picture – and everything went ahead with the Boston Marathon hoax.

    1. I rather suspect that some of these “stage parents” are affiliated with the “Up With People” cult. It was at least somewhat government funded. Those who were in various productions keep in touch with each other and use the “number” of their production as an identifier.

      If you wanted to bring a lot of “acting talent” that was already predisposed to this A-21 lifestyle, what better fodder could you have? It would be like a reunion.

  12. I think this fits in with my theory that this is meant to be discovered/giant mess with your mind operation. That is the main agenda of these recent hoaxes I believe. It’s not gun control. One day they might take guns, but it will likely be the overt ring wing fascist dictatorship that takes over in the wake of these revelations that takes your guns in the name of creating a thriving yet “responsible” gun culture. In other words, you’ll have to be a member of some Christian fascist paramilitary group to have guns.
    My theory is Obama was put in to be a scapegoat. His own backers put him in for this reason. He is meant to be associated with Muslims (hence his name sounding phonetically similar to Osama) as well as socialism/the Left (even though he is anything but). He was used to give faux-liberals hope after eight years of Bush the Lesser and used as a massive scapegoat so the country can lurch all the way into right wing la la land. It’s like it will create a situation where the masses can say, “Well we gave a black Muslim commie a chance to socialize us and look what we got.” Outright racism will be back in vogue. I believe things are being revealed on Obama now and they were always meant to be; like the birth certificate issue. If you don’t think they have a puppet with unimpeachable records or that they couldn’t do a better job of faking documents then I don’t know what to say to you.
    But also what is happening is that behind the scenes various factions are jockeying for power. I believe Obama is being told by his handlers to use these events for gun control. But these ops seem to be botched from the inside. Boston is a good example where the would be patsies got changed mid op. It was supposed to be the Tea Party looking mountain man. Obama was probably told we’ll run this harmless op and blame it on your domestic enemies. But signals got crossed on the inside. The media got told not to run with that story. Neocons like Glenn Beck tried to play the Saudi angle because I believe they always wanted to invade that country hence all the alleged Saudi hijackers on 9/11. You end up with a situation where no group is blamed and it looks to everyone like something is being covered up and couple that with the obvious fakery this just adds to the erosion of Obama’s credibility. So now we have the alleged victims (older than they were purported to be) being paraded at the Super Bowl. You have still current CIA asset Pieczenik saying Sandy Hook was fake. You have Seymour Hersh saying the Osama raid was fake in the New Yorker. Obama is going down but there seems to be haggling on the inside over who the right wing demagogue will be who will “save” us from the “tyranny of Obama”.
    Just my two cents anyway.

    1. By the way, what do people here think about the bizarre sign language incident in South Africa? Allegedly the bogus signer was someone who committed atrocities and he was signing behind Obama. This seems in keeping with what I was talking about above, these fiascos and mishaps around Obama. I look for his assassination to be the next big thing.

      1. I must have missed this interlude. Hah! Obongo reading from the teleprompter and a clown translating it in…., what, “Klingon” sign language? Perfect metaphor.

    2. I think your instinct about the competing factions is a good one. I think some of the bizarre flips and changes of direction we witness after these psy-ops can only be explained that way. I can imagine one faction implementing the “event”, another faction taken by surprise but hastening in to head off the first one’s agenda by throwing together their own “explanation.” the first one then coming back to try and re-state their original agenda. A third faction stepping in to try and opportunistically wring some advantage for itself out of the chaos. All feeding their competing stories to a spineless and complicit media that obediently tells the ever-changing narrative without questioning or even acknowledging the insane inconsistencies.

      1. Faction this and faction that … there is one “faction” ( = the federal reserve= a private bank) that has the power to PRINT MONEY. Hence they rule the world!

        Who this mysterious “faction” is is not rocket science!

        Obummer works for them, as does ever other US president. Left and Right is just theatre!

        1. Yes, of course, one group controls the world and every conflict is just an illusion to keep us down. You sound like such an expert. Why, I bet you’ve been reading John Birch publications since before it was cool. Newsflash Col., evil powerful people in-fight. They always have. But I know, if it weren’t for those darned Joos we would still be the pious God-fearing liberty loving culture we were at the founding of this great Christian nation, back when we enslaved Africans for their own good in order to Christianize them and to maintain the proper God-given order of the world.

        2. Chris, yes they in-fight. Make not mistake, the real controllers are invisible. We don’t see them at all. They gather all manner of psychopaths and opportunists to do their bidding. They allow them to run their scams. That’s their reward. If they muck up THE PLAN, however, they take them out.

          This little operation advances the plan. They may fight amongst themselves while the scramble for their turn at the host, but they know who the boss is. These creatures like Obongo, or Sparky Bush, or Slick Willie, are just window dressing. They are in it for themselves.

          Why would a guy with tens of millions of dollars need a job? Look at Congress (ha!). They are there because they OWE. They were ALLOWED to run their scams and steal the lucre. Now they must pay the piper. It’s a faustian bargain.

          I guarantee you that none of these mutts sets the agenda. They are assigned their duties. The planning department is way above them.

        3. One of my biggest fears with all of this is that when election time rolls around, many of the bright people who have been able to see through the Sandy Hook Hoax as well as other hoax style events will think that they can make a change if they just get the “right” person or people elected. It’s not so. Politicians are puppets and we are not the ones pulling the strings.

  13. I’m trying to figure it out. I’ve always assumed that the film-footage with the “deceased” Parker girl meeting O was a big oopsie on some fool’s part. But arranging this chorus HAD to be deliberate! Why would they put these kids out there in such a public forum, I ask myself? And I can only come up with two possible answers:

    (1) Their hubris is so massive, it’s simply indescribable. They’re taunting and mocking us as gullible fools, convinced that they’ll get away with it no matter what.
    (2) They’re trying to provoke us “conspiracy-theory nuts” into doing something rash, so as to provide them with a non-imaginary excuse to crack down on the populace, post-Boston-marathon style.


    1. I’m going with (1), but I’ll add a twist. They openly mock us to monitor our reaction. It is all about the shaping of the public mind. When the technocrats launched their project a century ago, they could not openly mock us; they had to pretend that they thought the rubes were worthy of respect. They could have been stopped at the earliest stages, so they had to be polite to us. They have all along thought that they are so much more intelligent and capable than everyone else that they should rightly rule and reign over everyone. But how to get us to volunteer for our own slavery? Social engineering.

      Now, they can openly laugh in our faces and we won’t feel insulted. They think of us like pets. I can mock my dog, and laugh in his face, and he loves me for it. He has no idea I am disrespecting him. That’s the technocrats and how they treat us rubes.

      1. Amen, Patrick. Us eaters just don’t get any respect. They’ve dropped all pretense of “caring” what we think. They laugh until they tire of you and you get “suicidal”.

        1. Do not fret; “Pride precedes destruction; an arrogant spirit appears before a fall.”

        2. Yes Colonel, hubris will be their downfall. Not that they won’t make quite a mess while they’re falling.

  14. There’s an overwhelming (let’s call it) overrepresentation of kids assumed to be victims (very probably) and their siblings (basically factual). There are only a few kids left. Does anyone find any connections on them? See them with some victim’s parent, see them with these years older versions of the victims in photos? Are they in any of the news interviews?

    1. I never accepted the official story and am convinced beyond doubt the official story is a lie. The details however as to how much was faked and how much is real is where many disagree.

      I must confess I scoffed at this theory originally but after a second viewing I do admit it warrants scrutiny. I have been somewhat neutral on the fake deaths theory with a bias toward believing these were real since so many people in the community were impacted and nobody has questioned that the deaths were faked. I still believe it’s more likely that the deaths were real than faked but I do acknowledge the cumulative evidence to raise doubt (lack of blood, emotion, triage, EMS protocol etc)

    2. There are too many for it to not be right, it’s also notable that Charlotte Bacon can be seen next to her mother on the sideline!

      Caroline Previdi can also be seen on the sideline with her mother!

      And the killer update… Noah Pozner is also alive and in the choir!

      These three updates can be seen in my video here, along with some of the predicitive programming:

      For a more comprehensive answer without those updates, check out this one:

  15. One of the problems here, even for those who strongly suspect deceit, is that it is difficult to get past “wanting to believe”. It took me a while. I still fall back into it if I’m not careful.

    Of course if no one was killed, it isn’t quite as “miraculous” to see them again. Further, what do we know of them other than the pictures and the stories? There’s pretty good evidence that some of these kids were “manufactured” from old photos. We know of at least one case where it appears that they “stole” the photo of someone else and invented a character around it.

    In order to believe what we’re told there has to be trust. Showing us a picture, giving it a name, and telling us that something happened to them, is not “proof” of anything. There are, of course, risks and problems with this. I suspect it isn’t as risky as having actual dead kids piled on floors for hours, etc.. I think that, as implausible as that was, it was probably easier than taking people to hospitals and having them play along.

    There are good reasons to think that the school wasn’t active, or was partially used. On the other hand you have the problem of someone that knows saying something about it. That is a bit mysterious to me.

    While it is true that psychopaths don’t relate well to others, some of this is too sloppy to be by accident. They may be evil but they’re not stupid.

    1. I don’t know, lophatt. They seem to be getting away with it pretty handily. I’m betting they did not think they were taking much risk.

      Part of it might be that Christmas was a few days away, everyone is preoccupied already, and the trauma of the fake event would crowd out whatever space for rational analysis of it.

      Now, its true that the ridiculous press conference (where Carver stated that they had left the slaughtered tots to bleed out for 18 hours or more, with no first responders allowed to see if any could be saved) happened later. Under normal circumstances it might be expected that at least SOME television viewers would think critically about it, and perhaps that’s the reason for the full court press to attack James Tracy and bombard us with the fake parents all over the media–to stop rational thought before it could start. All ramped-up emotion.

      The point is, it worked. The country didn’t listen to Carver and start picturing the bleeding tikes climbing out of the pile of dead and dying classmates, perhaps dragging themselves to the classroom door. If anyone thought about it, they’d join me in calling him Dr Frankenstein. No one is.

      1. Patrick, I totally agree. They ARE “getting away with it”. I have to keep reminding myself that there really isn’t any other possible outcome. If you are in charge of government, the courts, the cops, the political parasites, the “media”, etc., what do you have to worry about?

        I’m merely expressing my frustration with it. It is so “cheeky”. When I look around I notice that some people are at least “semi-awake”. Most of them are afraid to say anything. In fact, who would you say it to? The “press”?

        The attack on James Tracey, just like any others, are designed to establish “limits” and threaten conformity to the meme. You must “believe” what we tell you. The ultimate test of this conformity is to feed you a ridiculous story like this one and insist that you swear allegiance to it or we’ll call you names.

        I think that those who thought about Carver’s (as well as some other’s) performance are coming to blogs like this. Where else would they go?

        1. I am thinking that it’s becoming fairly obvious that they want us to realize these are hoaxes and that they want us to come to blogs like these.

          As someone said earlier, they’re not stupid. And for those who come to blogs like these thinking that they are way ahead of the game, keep your eyes wide open.

        2. Sue, I guess that’s possible, but I was thinking that they are going to try to guide us into some sort of fallacy. I would think they would want to try to control us the same way they are trying to control those who aren’t so aware of what’s going on. Just an opinion.

        3. If I had to guess, I’d say they like to make lists. They like to separate the “chumps” from the “dissidents”. Eventually, the game is to play the chumps off against the dissidents. This is a neat trick in that it reinforces the notion that one has an obligation to conform.

          Those who refuse to conform become “the enemy”. They really don’t care that we know. They are actually quite proud. There is an element of induced helplessness that they get from this as well. “Abandon hope all ye’ dissidents”.

          So, if any of you remember the staffer during Sparky Bush’ regime who said, to paraphrase; “We will invent a reality, and while you’re trying to figure out that reality, we’ll invent another…..”. That’s what its about. Sparky or Obongo, it makes no difference. They all work for the same people.

          The message is: “I own this restaurant. I make the menu. You get one from Column “A” or one from “Column “b”, no substitutes”. If you let them define your reality and your possibilities, they will. I think the answer is “no thanks, go pee up a rope”.

  16. One of my first postings on MHB concerned the concentration on science in our modern world: robotics, computer overkill, GMO foods, new weapons for new wars, mind bending, et al. For some, science is the end-all and answers all questions of import. I tend to disagree seeing a balance of the intellectual, spiritual, emotional faculties essential to a healthy lifestyle. The vapid bareness of a future without the full spectrum of human interacation is not where I would want to live.

    “Scientism,” put into perspective, gives us food for thought and may explain our drift into fantasy and acceptance of technocracy as a savior of mankind. All things in moderation, as the Greeks instructed.

      1. has uncovered several more from the superbowl choir and within 15 minutes of a new post tonite. has been under a massive denial of service attack which has taken the site offline completely.

        They know we know, but they cant contain it.

  17. Respect all of your efforts, but these are not the victims. Well, they’re victims of something, probably, but not those listed as shooting victms 12/14. These kids are fourth graders for the most part; the Newtown Bee has all kinds of photos with them with their families over the years. The choir is a mix of siblings of victims, and other kids from SH. What’s odd is that that latter group seems to be made up of kids who were prominently photographed/filmed on 12/14 as witnesses or survivors. But “Engel,” for example, is really Annie Connors, who is in multiple other photographs, including with her dad and two brothers. She’s a fourth grader, not a 1st grader. “Josephine Gay” is really the girl who was photographed in the woods with a little brother, and later with the mom and little brother. There are multiple photos of her in the Bee–some of them with actual victims–and you can see clearly that she is older than the 1st grade victims. For example, there’s a photo of her that includes Catherine Hubbard, and you can see the age difference. I have no doubt weird things are happening with the SH investigation, but these are clearly not the victims (even though the combination of wanting to believe, and occasional resemblance, makes a potent cocktail for the researching brain).

  18. Zephyr ,,,

    You are correct however Annie Connors was loaned to the Engels to be photographed extensively to create the identity of Olivia Engels.

    Same thing with Josephine Gay & Avielle Richman … they are 4rth or 5th graders who were loaned out for photoops to create Josephine & Avielle.

    Daniel Barden & Dylan Hockey were created via photoshop/motion editing software from media of their brothers.

    Zephyr a word of warning I have a lot more damning evidence against the Sandy Hook perpetrators including emails from BEFORE the event.

    So you know that I know exactly what went on that day. It was all an illusion of fabricated identities.

  19. Notice that both Dylan & Jake Hockley both have the exact same hair style positions ? This is because Dylan is fabricated via photoshop by darking and editing Jake. They do this via photo sessions where they switch Jakes clothes & position to create Dylan and layer the pics to create 2 boys out of one.


          The guys laughing at humanity (or researchers in this case) are the derailers over at LetsRollForums who photoshopped that image in an attempt to create a huge straw-man to be used against “conspiracy theorists” regarding this event.

          You guys have to be a LOT MORE CAREFUL when looking into this stuff, here’s the original image where their hair is in fact NOT the same. That hair-job was done by someone on Phil Jayhan’s Honey-Pot, IP Storing and databasing, disinfo spreading forum LetsRollForums.

          Here’s the original haircut:

          and another of the original image before LRF edited it:


          Don’t fall into “straw man traps” being set up to derail this research.. by the likes of LetsRollForums. Did the kid die? No, but the hair was obviously Photoshopped, and not by the original perps- by the perps over at LetsRollForums (I have been banned there for a while after pointing out SimonShack and Phil Jayhan were likely the same people.. it’s a very long story).

  20. I have identified one of the children in the video (Avielle Richman). Interestingly, her actual family has major questions and connections themselves. It’s worth an investigation. Please refer to a posting I made a few days ago on . i dug up a ton of interesting stuff on this family. This is a MAJOR lead.

    1. It is likely that Avielle Richman was never born a Richman at all, but rather loaned to the Richmans to create Avielle through pictures a few years ago. The reason being is because the picture on the women with Avielle at the Superbowl on the sidelines looks a lot like Avielle but definately is NOT Mrs. Richman.

      The creation of the victims for this event appear to be one big illusion of creating identities through photoops and photoshop. Some using siblings and some using surrogates and photoshop.

  21. I really think people need to drop this angle. I think it hurts the investigation. To my eye, there are important differences between each of the pairs of children. Although they may look like siblings, they are not identical matches. With each face, you can analyze single features and find significant differences in the shapes of eyes, the size of chins, etc. This angle does not put the opposition in a good light.

Leave a Reply