Sandy Hook, Aurora, and 9/11: Fake Mourners and False Witnesses

     In the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, it’s time to revisit the curious phenomenon of smiling witnesses to mass murders.  The smiling witnesses are obviously actors—and poor actors at that; but why do government officials and the corporate media need actors to play the part of witnesses to tragedy when there are plenty of real witnesses available?

     You've probably already read a few of the many anomalies surrounding the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School.  To give a particularly ludicrous example, the official story tells us that Adam Lanza used a Bushmaster .223 caliber AR-14 to kill all his victims and himself, after which the murder weapon was retrieved from the trunk of his mother’s car.

     (I watched that video several times and compared the image I saw with other weapons known to have been owned by the late (he supposedly killed her too) Mrs. Lanza.  The silhouette and the shell ejection port matched only one of the Lanza guns: the Bushmaster .223 caliber AR-15.)

     Of all the unbelievable aspects of the official story, the most bizarre is the smiling, grinning, jovial young man who suddenly transforms himself—on camera—into the grieving father of a slain six-year-old girl.

     Here is a timeline from the time the so-called “Robbie Parker” appears on the screen:   

8.5 seconds: He first appears on camera.  His head is tilted back as he displays a broad, teeth-baring smiling at the others on camera.  At this point, he looks as if he’s laughing.

9 seconds: He is still smiling as he swaggers toward the microphone.

10 seconds: He makes a smirking comment to someone off camera, obviously please with himself.

11 seconds: He finishes his witticism and looks down, flashing a grin that even Cameron Diaz would envy.

12 seconds: He steps up to the microphone.  His smile begins to fade.

13 seconds: His smile has faded.

14 seconds: He exhales and steps into the role of a grieving parent.

14-24 seconds: Acts as if he is choking back sobs.

24 seconds: He announces, “My name is Robbie Parker.”  Whitepages.com doesn't list that name, or anything like it for anyone of his age group in or near Newtown, Connecticut.  Whitepages.com does list a Newtown resident named Robert Parker, but he is 78 years old—more than twice as old as the actor in this scene.

     The on-line Huffington Post features that same video, but they repeat the line that “Robbie Parker” was choking back tears and “struggling to catch his breath.  The Huffington shills had to have seen the same laughing and grinning that you and I saw, but their story clearly claims that “Robbie Parker’s” sobs were real.  Anyone who seriously believes that the “news” media would not lie to us should take note of Huffington’s hypocrisy in this episode. 

     Take a look at the photo and decide for yourself: Does this man look as though he’s fighting back tears and struggling to catch his breath?

     In Chinese culture, there is such a thing as a paid mourner.  Because Chinese are expected to control their feelings, even at funerals, professional mourners are hired to wail, cry, and otherwise loudly express grief.  In America, however, we have no need to pay people to grieve on our behalf.  Even in Chinese culture, the paid mourner isn't paid to masquerade as a family member of the deceased.

     Why, then, do mass murders in the United States produce fake “mourners” and false witnesses?

     Even Barack Obama could not resist the urge to act the part of a mourner.  Take a look at the following video clip and notice where Mr. Obama puts his finger, supposedly to wipe away tears.

     Before watching this video, turn the volume level to mute.  Observe only his actions.  Does he look as though he is saddened by the recent murder of 20 children?  Then turn up the volume and listen only to his tone of voice, ignoring his spoken words.  Does he sound sad?  Mr. Obama’s body language and tone of voice don’t match the speechwriter’s words.

     The “crying” was obviously fake.  Even when Obama’s critics mimicked his false crying, the critics placed their fingers where people normally would place them when wiping away tears.  Is Mr. Obama so unfamiliar with normal human emotions that he can’t do a convincing job of wiping away fake tears?

     For other examples of false (and often smiling) witnesses to mass murders, see “Why would Reporters Lie about 9/11 if the Truth is Worth a Pulitzer Prize?”  
As far as I know, the only false witnesses to the recent Aurora, Colorado, shooting were government officials and the corporate-owned media—but take a look at the sort of thing a real witness might say about a shooting that was supposedly done by a "lone nut."

     And the following is what can happen to a credible witness who is "too credible" and who "knows too much."  Jenny Gallagher was the emergency room nurse who, according to her husband, "saw everything."

     As a rule of thumb, when government officials and the corporate-owned media collude to provide false witnesses, you can be sure of three things: 1.) their testimony will also be false, 2.) their testimony will support the official story with no deviation from it whatsoever, and 3.) at least that part of the official story will be false.

     Anyone who has been intimately involved in politics from the inside knows the following adages and knows that they are true:

1. Politics is theater,
2. Politics, by its very nature, is conspiratorial, and
3. In politics, nothing happens by coincidence.  If it happens, it was planned.

     It’s no coincidence that both the “Batman” shooting and the Sandy Hook shooting took place just as Congress was set to debate the issue of gun control.  (In the case of the Aurora shooting, Congress was debating a United Nations resolution on gun control.)  Nor is it a coincidence that the 9/11 mass murder provided a rationale for wars and other measures that had been planned as early as 1997.  All three incidents—and others—were staged events.

     (Note: Of all the anomalies mentioned in all the blogs I've read, no one seems to have noticed the one about the mask.  One can argue that the Batman shooter was wearing a mask because it was part of a costume; but why was “Adam Lanza” (if it were really he) wearing a mask?  I've never heard of a suicide shooter wearing a mask.  Suicide shooters know they’ll be identified after they’re dead, so they have no need to conceal their identities.  More likely, the shooters (there were more than one) and Adam Lanza’s body wore similar masks, and the real shooters got away.)

     We are left with the question, “With so many real witnesses and real families of victims, what need do the government and broadcast media have of false witnesses and fake families?”  The answer is simple: Spinmeisters have no way of knowing what a truthful witness or a real family member will say.  Fake witnesses and family members can be relied upon to follow the script.

     Take the "Harley shirt guy," who supposedly witnesses both crashes into the WTC twin towers and their collapse—apparently the only person on Earth who witnesses all four events, though he somehow missed seeing the collapse of Building #7.  He enunciated the “official story” of 9/11 before anyone had even investigated the crime.  Ask yourself, "Does anyone who has just seen more than 2,000 people die talk like the man in this video?"

     The same goes for the actor calling himself Robbie Parker.  If a real family member stood before the camera without being coached, there was too much chance that he would lash out at the fact that, by federal law, not one teacher at Sandy Hook was armed.  Since Congress was debating a ban on assault-style weapons that very week, the words of a real parent could have been a disaster for the spinmeisters.

     Take a look at the following video of the family of an apparently real victim at Sandy Hook Elementary School.  The family has obviously been maneuvered into appearing on camera, apparently thinking that they were honoring their slain relative by doing so.  Meanwhile, the ghoulish interviewer Piers Morgan was clearly putting words into their mouths.  The father of the family would clearly rather be somewhere else; and, throughout the interview, he showed contempt for the entire charade.

     That’s be best the spinmeisters could do for a grieving family.  Even when the family is tricked into being cooperative, they’re not as dependable in following the script as an actor would be.