Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I would like for Anderson to explain the use of green screens in regards to Sandy Hook. In more than one video which can viewed on You Tube he(or the people he is interviewing) are supposed to be outside in Newtown.
Now these interviews are taking place at night on cold nights, yet there is no breath visible.
He does one interview where he is standing with Veronique Pozner in front of the Newtown Town Hall at night, again no breath, at one point it is windy as balloons left as part of a memorial begin to move yet Ms. Pozner's hair doesn't move.
And at one point Cooper's nose disappears into the green screen.
Why are they pretending to outside at Newtown when they're in a studio????
You used the right term ... "pretending" and "studio" or staged
While people shouldn't be harassing Gene Rosen, this man has changed his story several times.
And many of things he said don't make sense. First it was a man talking harshly to these 6 kids, then there was a female bus driver who dropped them off and said there was an "incident"(his words) at the school.
Why would a bus driver not get those kids as far away as possible from the school? Why would she leave children with a strange man? And no one is going to say an "incident" and be so vague when a shooting occured, you would say that a shooting has/is taking place.
It doesn't add up, and as much as he forces himself to cry there are no tears.
Has anyone in the MSM verified his story? Where is this mysterious female bus driver and the man originally reported with these kids?
They have never been heard from or seen.
Maybe you believe everything you see on the news, I don't.
And reporters these days don't investigate. A woman who claimed to in jail with James Holmes(the Colorado movie theater) was a fake. Yet Fox News in Denver interviewed her and took her word as if it were gospel.
Facebook of alll things busted her as a phony.
Than you have the woman who faked being in the WTC, her story didn't add up but due to the horrific events no one wanted to question her.
Finally(years later) a REAL reporter with the NY Times started to question her story and it fell apart.
If you think about all these anomalies and the fact that all this information showing lies and deception are readily available on the internet ... one must conclude that information is made available for a purpose. The government can and does remove information from the internet when it's in their best interest so making discrediting information available must also be in their best interest.
I'm sure if you googled well you could find it, but I won't share it. I absolutely refuse to open the floodgates to a victim's family to prove their existence. Ask your buddies who've been harassing Gene Rosen. I'm sure they could help you.
I raised, and you folded, and just as I suspected ... it's a secret blogger who's identity cannot be revealed, because of the unscrupulous conspiracy theorists who might ask a question, or even casually inspect the source's credibility from afar ... we just have to trust you that the source actually exists, and is credible too! And all I can say is ... incredible!
As for Gene Rosen ... he ought to be watched closely, and his every movement followed with the utmost scrutiny, because as blatant frauds go, he could serve as the poster boy.
If you think about all these anomalies and the fact that all this information showing lies and deception are readily available on the internet ... one must conclude that information is made available for a purpose. The government can and does remove information from the internet when it's in their best interest so making discrediting information available must also be in their best interest.
You have a valid point. It also helps cause confusion and conflict. Perhaps that is the purpose.
Look at how Columbine was handled by the media compared to Sandy Hook. Big difference on many levels.
And while some of it is still available on You Tube, Anderson Cooper's disappearing nose is no longer available on the CNN website.
You have a valid point. It also helps cause confusion and conflict. Perhaps that is the purpose.
Look at how Columbine was handled by the media compared to Sandy Hook. Big difference on many levels.
And while some of it is still available on You Tube, Anderson Cooper's disappearing nose is no longer available on the CNN website.
I think the purpose is much more sinister than just causing confusion and conflict. I think they want to push people past the tipping point. This is what they have been preparing for.
While people shouldn't be harassing Gene Rosen, this man has changed his story several times.
And many of things he said don't make sense. First it was a man talking harshly to these 6 kids, then there was a female bus driver who dropped them off and said there was an "incident"(his words) at the school.
Why would a bus driver not get those kids as far away as possible from the school? Why would she leave children with a strange man? And no one is going to say an "incident" and be so vague when a shooting occured, you would say that a shooting has/is taking place.
It doesn't add up, and as much as he forces himself to cry there are no tears.
Has anyone in the MSM verified his story? Where is this mysterious female bus driver and the man originally reported with these kids?
They have never been heard from or seen.
Maybe you believe everything you see on the news, I don't.
And reporters these days don't investigate. A woman who claimed to in jail with James Holmes(the Colorado movie theater) was a fake. Yet Fox News in Denver interviewed her and took her word as if it were gospel.
Facebook of alll things busted her as a phony.
Than you have the woman who faked being in the WTC, her story didn't add up but due to the horrific events no one wanted to question her.
Finally(years later) a REAL reporter with the NY Times started to question her story and it fell apart.
I don't believe everything I read. I don't know if Gene Rosen is lying or not. But he is not the only one being harassed by conspiracy theorists which is why I refuse to give the name of the blog I am referring to. I won't be party to that kind of twisted nonsense.
I raised, and you folded, and just as I suspected ... it's a secret blogger who's identity cannot be revealed, because of the unscrupulous conspiracy theorists who might ask a question, or even casually inspect the source's credibility from afar ... we just have to trust you that the source actually exists, and is credible too! And all I can say is ... incredible!
As for Gene Rosen ... he ought to be watched closely, and his every movement followed with the utmost scrutiny, because as blatant frauds go, he could serve as the poster boy.
You call it folding, I call it having integrity. As I said, it's not a secret blog. I just won't say which one it is.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
