Monday, February 4, 2013

Armed pilots provide roadmap for securing schools

When, in the wake of the Sandy Hook massacre, National Rifle Association President Wayne LaPierre called for armed security guards in schools, he faced widespread criticism from liberals who believe that fewer guns, not more, are the answer to the problem of mass killings. On the other side of the political spectrum, some conservatives argued that the cost of placing police officers in every school across the nation was too costly for a federal government that is already running trillion dollar deficits each year.

The concept of armed guards at schools was proven on Jan. 31, 2013 when an armed officer stopped a shooting at Price Middle School in Atlanta. A student had smuggled a gun past metal detectors and opened fire in the courtyard of the school, wounding a 14-year-old student in the neck before the officer was able to get the gun away from him according to CBS News.

Even though armed guards are effective, they are also prohibitively expensive for many school districts. According to Craig Steckler, president of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, as quoted in the Wall Street Journal, the average salary of a police officer is $55,000. There are 98,817 public schools in the United States. According to the Department of Education, about 25 percent of these already have armed security officers on campus at least once per week. The cost for providing officers for the remaining 74,113 schools would be more than $4 trillion. In spite of the recent high profile school shootings, fewer than two percent of all youth homicides occur at or on the way to school.

The school protection dilemma is analogous to the problem of protecting airline flights in the wake of the September 11 attacks. One proposal was to put Federal Air Marshals on all flights, but with tens of thousands of airline flights each day the plan was prohibitively expensive. Training enough air marshals to guard these flights would also have taken years.

An alternative solution was to create the Federal Flight Deck Officer program. This program took volunteer airline pilots and deputized them as federal agents to protect their airplanes. The volunteers were issued pistols and then trained to use them effectively. The volunteers received no federal salary or extra pay from their airlines. Instead they use vacation time to travel at their own expense to the federal training center where FFDO training is conducted. They even paid for the training themselves.

The number of FFDOs is secret, but since the program’s inception in 2003, there have been only two public incidents involving FFDOs who caused safety issues with their guns. In 2011, NBC News reported that a passenger mistakenly picked up a bag containing a JetBlue pilot’s gun. More seriously, in 2008, a US Airways pilot accidentally fired his gun in flight according to Reuters. The aircraft landed safely and no one was injured.

The FFDO program has been spectacularly successful in terms of safety, cost and fulfilling the mission of protecting airline flights. Federal Air Marshals, full time agents, are used as well, but are deployed on flights deemed to be at high risk for attack.

A similar approach could be used in schools to allow volunteer teachers and school employees to become “Federal Classroom Officers.” As with FFDOs, the teachers would be federal officers and would be exempt from local gun ordinances that prohibit gun ownership. As with other law enforcement officers, they would also be allowed to carry their guns in the “gun free” school zones.

Teachers would not be forced to carry a weapon. The program would be for volunteers only. Teachers who do not like guns would be free to choose to remain defenseless. Those who prefer to be able to defend themselves and their students would be issued a weapon and trained to use it safely. They would be required to demonstrate competency with their gun at regular intervals to maintain proficiency.

Teachers who choose not to take part in the program would still benefit from it. First, they would be the direct recipient of protection from the Federal Classroom Officers in the event of a school shooting or terrorist attack. Second, the mere presence of Federal Classroom Officers might well deter many prospective murderers from attacking the school. In the past, many mass murders have taken in place in areas that were deemed to be “gun free.”

There is no doubt that many will oppose the idea of bringing guns into schools. Many of the same arguments that will arise were presented against the idea of arming pilots 10 years ago and have been refuted by the success of the FFDO program.

In reality, guns are already present in our schools. Thousands of schools are already patrolled by armed officers. Federal Classroom Officers would have the same training in firearms that these school security officers receive. All too often others, people like Adam Lanza, bring other guns to school when police officers are not present. In the end, that is why teachers should be given the option to arm themselves. There is no foolproof way to keep bad guys with guns out schools, but we can give our teachers and students a fighting chance.

 

Originally published on Examiner:

http://www.examiner.com/article/experience-with-armed-pilots-can-help-secure-schools

Friday, February 1, 2013

Fear of ban prompts run on AR-15s

President Obama’s proposed gun ban has not yet become law, but it has already made some guns almost impossible to buy. The fear that “assault rifles” may soon be banned once again has led many gun owners to snap up guns that may be on the government’s list. In particular, AR-15s, the model of rifle used in the Sandy Hook and Aurora, Co. mass murders, have been flying off gun store shelves.

It is extremely difficult to find a gun store that has AR-15s in stock. Wal-Mart’s website lists several different models of AR-15, but notes that the guns are only available in its stores. A search of stores in the Atlanta area and elsewhere reveals that the guns are out of stock everywhere. Even models of the gun that are chambered in .22 Long Rifle, a smaller and less powerful cartridge than the normal .223, are sold out.

The Bass Pro Shop in Atlanta and the Barnes Store in Carrollton, Ga. report that they cannot keep AR-15s in stock. Both stores say that they have the guns on order, but have no idea when or if they will be received.

Elsewhere the story is the same. At the Gander Mountain store in Wichita, Ks., clerks say that AR-15s sell out as soon as they are received. The store recently received a shipment of the guns, which retail for about $750 depending on the model, and sold them all in about 10 minutes. “The first 10 people that came in and looked at them bought them,” said one clerk who requested his name be withheld.

One store that did have AR-15s in stock was the Elite Pawn shop in Cartersville, Ga. The store had three of the guns to sell, but was charging a premium. The guns, all different models, ranged in price from $1,700 to $1,900, a thousand dollars higher than retail. Unlike the local stores, employees at chains like Bass Pro and Gander Mountain say that they have not increased prices as demand for the guns has increased.

Assault weapons were banned during the Clinton Administration in 1994. The ban lasted through 2004. As John Lott, author of “More Guns, Less Crime,” wrote in the Los Angeles Times, the ban was a failure. According to Lott, “there is not a single published academic study showing that these bans have reduced any type of violent crime.” He also noted that despite warnings that crime would increase after the ban expired, the crime rate actually declined. According to the Justice Department’s National Crime Victimization Survey detailed in USA Today, the decline in crime continued until 2011.

According to FBI Violent Crime statistics for 2011, there were a total of 12,664 murders in the U.S. Rifles of all types were used in only 206 of these murders, about 1.6 percent of the total. Because “assault weapon” is a political term, there are no separate statistics for these weapons.

Reports from around the country indicate that gun sales are booming, a trend that began even before the Sandy Hook massacre according to MSN. Reuters reports that the FBI’s National Instant Background Check System has had nine of its top 10 days for firearms checks since the Sandy Hook murders on Dec. 14. The trend is likely to continue either until a ban is in place or the Obama Administration relents in its efforts to impose one.

Originally published on Examiner:

http://www.examiner.com/article/fears-of-ban-prompt-run-on-guns?cid=db_articles

Thursday, January 31, 2013

Obama may use UN to bypass congress on gun control

Political pollster and strategist Dick Morris believes that President Obama may use the United Nations to bypass congress and enact new gun restrictions. In a video message released today, Morris pointed out that Obama’s gun control proposals are unlikely to pass the senate because a number of Democratic senators are opposed to gun control.

Currently, the Democrats control the senate with 55 senators (including two independents) to 45 Republicans. Many of the Democratic senators have been endorsed by the National Rifle Association and hail from red states. In particular, Morris cites Joe Manchin (D-W.V.), Mary Landrieu (D-La.), Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), Kay Hagan (D.-N.C.), Tim Caine (D-Va.), Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), and Bob Casey (D-Pa.). Even Harry Reid (D-Nev.), the senate majority leader, has been endorsed by the NRA in the past although the group stayed neutral in his 2010 election. So far no Republican senators have signed on to Democratic gun control proposals such as a new assault weapons ban.

Under senate rules, a simple majority, 50 votes, is needed to pass legislation. However, if Republican senators filibuster gun control bills, 60 votes will be needed to overcome the filibuster. If, as seems likely, at least five Democratic senators vote against Obama’s proposals, they will not pass. Even if no Democrats oppose the bills, there would not be enough votes to overcome a filibuster without Republican help.

Morris believes that Obama’s strategy will involve the UN Arms Trade Treaty. As Examiner reported last summer, many critics believe that the treaty would allow the United Nations to define what measures the United States would have to take to combat illegal arms trafficking.

As Morris noted then, the U.S. is a signatory to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Under this treaty, once the U.S. signs the Arms Trade Treaty, it would be bound by its terms until it is rejected by the senate. Under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, treaties are the “supreme law of the land,” equal in weight to the Constitution itself. President Obama could have Secretary of State Kerry sign the treaty and then refuse to submit it to the senate for ratification. Harry Reid could also simply not bring the treaty up for a vote as he has done on budgets and other legislation. Under this scenario, the U.S. would be bound by a treaty that could effectively repeal the Second Amendment without congress ever having voted on it.

Because of the vague language of the treaty, Senate Democrats might be more likely to vote for ratification of the treaty than to vote for a specific gun control measure. Morris notes that the treaty won’t immediately ban assault rifles or other guns, but it “empowers each country to adopt national means to stop these [illegal] exports from taking place. And that’s the key. It means that over the next three or four years this UN mandate, which is now sort of open ended, will increasingly close in on the Second Amendment.”

Under the Constitution, ratification of a treaty requires the approval of two-thirds of the senators present. If all senators are present that would mean 66 votes would be needed for ratification. Some Republican votes would be needed in order to ratify the treaty. The House of Representatives, which is controlled by Republicans, would not vote on the treaty.

After strong opposition from Second Amendment groups the administration declined to sign the treaty last summer, but Reuters reports that the day after Obama’s reelection victory the UN voted to reopen talks. The new round of negotiations will be held March 18-28, 2013.

Recent polling by Rasmussen shows that Americans are split on the issue of gun control. Fifty-three percent favor background checks for existing gun owners and 57 percent believe that enforcing current gun laws is more important than enacting new laws. Only 41 percent believe that the U.S. needs stricter gun laws. The strongest agreement came from those who believe that there is a constitutional right to own a gun (74 percent) and that background checks should be required for anyone who wants to buy a gun (86 percent).

Originally published on Examiner:

http://www.examiner.com/article/obama-may-use-un-to-bypass-congress-on-gun-control?cid=db_articles

Wednesday, January 30, 2013

My prophetic evolution


My understanding of Bible end-time prophecy has undergone an evolution over the years. I’ve always been interested in the Revelation and what might happen at the end of time. I suppose that this can be traced to a comic book.

When I was young, we had a number of issues of Spire Christian comics. Some of these comic books were adaptations of Christian classics that I read later in life. We had a comic version of “God’s Smuggler” by Brother Andrew, “the Hiding Place” by Corrie Ten Boom, “the Cross and the Switchblade” by David Wilkerson, and “Born Again” by Chuck Colson. There were stories of people like Dallas Cowboy coach Tom Landry, the appropriately named Nate Saint, a missionary bush pilot killed by South American natives, Mitsuo Fuchida, a pilot in the Japanese navy who led the attack on Pearl Harbor, and Johnny Cash. There were also adaptations of Bible stories set in modern (1970s) day. I would love to find some of these for my kids to read today.

The one that is most memorable was an adaptation of Hal Lindsey’s “There’s a New World Coming” (you can read the whole thing online here). For a child, this was an intriguing comic. It was also more than a little scary. Fortunately, I was certain that the end of the world was many years into the future.

I also remember reading a short book based on the Revelation at a young age. I think that it was called “Out of Time” or something similar. A brief Google search didn’t turn up this book, but it was a short prototype of “Tribulation Force.” Again, it was a bit scary for me at the time.

Fast forward about 20 years. Pat Robertson’s “the End of the Age” (1995) was more intriguing than scary. So were the “Left Behind” (1995-2007) novels by Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins. It was these books that probably really inspired me to start reading commentaries and guides to Revelation. It was around this time that I remember praying for enlightenment and understanding for these Bible prophecies.

It was slow in coming, but I think that God did lead me to more understanding. Years later, after watching the September 11 attacks and the Iraq War unfold, I began to realize that there were many similarities between radical Muslims and the forces of the Antichrist in the Revelation. I wrote my first blog, “Islam and Revelation,” and created captainkudzu.com on October 26, 2007.

About the same time, my brother told me about a book called “Epicenter” by Joel Rosenberg. Rosenberg made me realize that to understand what is to come, you have to look at other prophecies throughout the Bible. Rosenberg’s book, which centers on Ezekiel 38-39, was the subject of my second blog post.

As I looked through the Bible, I found many more passages that described the end of the world as we know it outside of Revelation. There were passages in Daniel, Joel, Thessalonians, Timothy, and Peter that also addressed eschatology, as the study of the end-times is formally known. Jesus himself talked about the end of the age in the Mount Olivet discourse that is described in three of the four Gospels. I took much of this information and put it into another early blog post, “Signs of the Times.”

Rosenberg’s book made me think about America. America is the best friend that Israel has in the world. Sometimes America seems to be Israel’s only friend. Ezekiel 38-39 describes a multinational coalition that is assembled against Israel and that is subsequently destroyed by divine intervention. The coalition is led by Gog of Magog, a figure that many speculate is Vladimir Putin.

I wondered how a coalition could be assembled against Israel under America’s watch. The U.S. typically vetoes anti-Israel resolutions in the United Nations and aids Israel in its wars. If a coalition were assembled against Israel, wouldn’t the U.S. intervene? There is no indication in the Bible that it does. That leaves two possibilities for the U.S. Either America becomes anti-Israel at some point or it ceases to be a player on the world stage.

About the same time, the authors of “Left Behind” released the nonfiction, “Are We Living in the End-times?” I recommend this book to anyone who is interested in prophecy. It is very readable and has good explanations and descriptions of figures and events in Biblical end-time prophecy. It does focus primarily on the events in The Revelation however.

As the Great Recession deepened and Barack Obama came into office, I began to wonder if the two events were not related to prophecy. Barack Obama is the most anti-Israel president that the U.S. has had since Israel was reborn as a country. Obama may have inherited the recession, but his policies prevented a recovery and, with his reelection, will lead to an economic lost decade. While he is in office, he is rolling back American power abroad. The Obama Administration seems to fit perfectly with the theory that America will cease to be Israel’s ally or will cease to a military and diplomatic power. A blog, “Why is this Happening?” on Feb. 28, 2009, describes this in more detail.

Along with the decline of America, the construction of a new Jewish temple in Israel is also required before the events of Revelation can be fulfilled. The aftermath of the War of Gog of Magog might pave the way for the rebuilding of the temple. The Temple Mount is now occupied by the Islamic Dome of the Rock mosque. The Israeli government protects the mosque from Jews who would like to clear the mountain and rebuild the temple. For the Jews to destroy the mosque would undoubtedly spark a major war. However, if the mosque were destroyed in the Magog war, it would be easy for the Jewish temple to be built on its site.

A chance meeting led to more understanding about the Jewish temple. In 2010, while traveling home from work on an airline, I met a Jewish woman in the Newark airport. We were eating lunch and I had been at a table by myself. There were no other open tables so she asked to sit at mine. I rarely strike up conversations in airports, but we started talking.

Somehow, the conversation turned to a blog that I had written a few weeks earlier, “the Khazar conspiracy.” This post was inspired by some Ron Paul supporters who espoused the theory that modern Israelis were not Jews. Instead, they claimed that they were Khazars, descendents of an ancient Eastern European nation that had converted to Judaism over a thousand years ago. This theory was easily disproved by modern genetic studies which verified that Jews who migrated to Europe remained genetically distinct from their host populations and that they had originated in the Middle East. Written two years ago, the Khazar article remains one of the most read articles on my blog.

The woman mentioned the Cohen gene, something that I had never of. Upon investigation, I learned that the Cohen gene was a genetic marker that identified the priestly line of Aaron. Not only had God kept his chosen people separate from the gentiles after a Diaspora lasting 2,500 years, he had kept the family of priests separate from Jewish laity. When the Jewish temple is rebuilt, it will be simple for the new priests to be identified from the Aaronic line.

In the years of the first Obama Administration, I saw many signs that my worldview was correct. There began a movement among the Russians and Chinese to replace the dollar with a new world currency. I became more aware of the apocalyptic nature of the Iranian government. In 2011, the Iranians even released a film that said that the arrival of the Mahdi, a Shia Islam version of the Messiah, was imminent. The Arab Spring uprisings swept radical Islamists into power in many Arab countries and destabilized others, a development that prominent Israeli rabbis said may signal the coming of the Messiah. In America, there was apostasy in the church and unprecedented attacks on freedom of religion and the freedom of speech of religious believers. For the first time, voters approved same-sex marriage laws and President Obama publicly pushed “marriage equality.”


As the 2012 election approached, I felt that President Obama would surely be turned out of office. Reelecting him would be like reelecting Jimmy Carter or Herbert Hoover (although Americans did elect Franklin Roosevelt, a similarly disastrous president, to an unprecedented three terms). I felt that if Obama won the election that it would almost have to represent God moving his plan for America’s judgment forward. In September 2012, I wrote “the Biblical prophecy case for Obama’s second term,” which described how Obama might have to remain in office in order for prophecies regarding Israel to be fulfilled.

In the weeks leading up to the election, I felt certain that Mitt Romney would win after his strong performance in the debates and President Obama’s obfuscations in the wake of the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. In the end, less than a week before the election, Hurricane Sandy ravaged the east coast from Washington, D.C. to New York City. Obama’s performance in the wake of the storm, particularly his bipartisan appearances with New Jersey governor Chris Christie, shifted the polls enough to allow Obama to eke out a victory. In any case, the reelection of Obama represented a rejection of Christian principles and teachings by a majority of Americans.

It seemed that the path of the storm may have represented divine intervention. In Parade magazine, Marilyn Vos Savant explained the unusual confluence of factors that steered Sandy toward New York: “On Sandy’s way north, it ran into a vast high-pressure system over Canada, which prevented it from continuing in that direction, as hurricanes normally do, and forced it to turn west. Then, because it traveled about 300 miles over open water before making landfall, it piled up an unusually large storm surge. An infrequent jet-stream reversal helped maintain and fuel the storm. As if all that weren’t bad enough, a full moon was occurring, so the moon, the earth, and the sun were in a straight line, increasing the moon’s and sun’s gravitational effects on the tides, thus lifting the high tide even higher. Add to this that the wind and water, though not quite at hurricane levels, struck an area rarely hit by storms of this magnitude so the structures were more vulnerable and a disaster occurred.”

While researching my article on Hurricane Sandy, “’Divine wind’ swept Obama to second term,” I was led to my most recent revelation. I discovered “the Harbinger” by Jonathan Cahn. I was honored to have Cahn respond to several questions that I had emailed him while working on a review of his book.

While I had suspected that America was on the verge of divine judgment, Cahn’s book pointed to specifics. Cahn found hidden but precise parallels between the fall of ancient Israel and the calamities that have befallen America since 2001. In addition to the removal of divine protection that led to the September 11 attacks, the U.S. underwent two financial crashes that occurred on the same day of the Hebrew calendar, a day that called for the cancellation of debts according to Jewish law. American politicians had uttered exactly the same words of defiance to God’s judgment that the ancient Israelites had proclaimed. The American response to the 9/11 attacks led directly to the financial crash, a relationship that even secular observers have noted.

I have come to realize that the Bible is more than life’s instruction book. It is the story of Israel, God’s chosen people. It contains their history and their future. The Bible is, among other things, the story of Israel’s rejection of God and ultimate restoration. It was not until Israel rejected the Messiah that God extended the offer of repentance and salvation to the gentile world.

For that story to be complete, the U.S. must undergo radical changes. It is likely that these changes will happen soon or are already occurring. The process began when Israel was reconstituted as a nation in 1948. In his Mount Olivet discourse, Jesus spoke of a blooming fig tree that is widely believed to refer to a reborn Israel. Jesus says that the generation that sees “these things” will “not pass away” until the end-time events he describes have happened. Obviously this means that the America must cease to be a powerful ally of Israel first.

America may cease to be an ally of Israel as pro-Muslim politicians like Barack Obama become increasingly powerful. It might cease to be powerful. The growth of government and the federal debt might strangle the economy to the point where the U.S. cannot support a standing army of sufficient size to protect its interests and allies around the world. This is already happening to many European nations.


A more catastrophic scenario, and one that I fear may come to pass, is that the U.S. might suffer a military defeat. A “nuclear 9/11” could destroy the American economy. A nuclear attack with an electromagnetic pulse weapon could wipe out the entire American electrical grid and cause mass starvation. Such an attack might be a prelude to a second wave of nuclear strikes or conventional attacks.

Interpretation of prophecy is not a certain thing. Often the realization that a prophecy has been fulfilled can only take place in hindsight. The prudent thing to do is to be prepared. Even if there is no large scale disaster from an EMP attack, we are still subject to local disasters from hurricanes, tornados, floods, riots or even a small scale terrorist attack. The experience of the L.A. riots, Hurricane Katrina, and Hurricane Sandy underscore the importance of preparedness and being able to fend for yourself for at least a little while.

No one can say exactly what lies ahead for America. What can be said with certainty is that if America continues down its current path it will not only face economic stagnation, but it is increasingly likely that there will be more examples of divine “shakings” and judgment. We should all be prepared for disasters and be ready to protect ourselves in an emergency. We should also be spiritually prepared. As Jonathan Cahn told me, “The time to repent, to be saved, and to get right with God . . . is now.


























Saturday, January 26, 2013

Myths, lies, and conspiracies about the Sandy Hook massacre

Often after a violent event that leads to a dramatic shift in public opinion or government policy, conspiracy theories abound. The Kennedy assassination, the moon landing, and the September 11 attacks all spawned numerous conspiracy theories. Now the Sandy Hook school massacre in Newtown, Ct. is becoming fodder for the purveyors of conspiracies.

Second shooters and the man in camouflage

One of the first conspiracies about Sandy Hook is that there was a second shooter. News coverage on the day of the murders showed a man in camouflage who had been arrested in the woods near the school. Bystanders reported that the man said, “I didn’t do it,” but no information on the man’s identity was forthcoming.

The mystery was quietly solved two weeks after the murders. On Dec. 27, the Newtown Bee reported, almost as an afterthought, that “a man with a gun who was spotted in the woods near the school on the day of the incident was an off-duty tactical squad police officer from another town.” The article does not explain what the officer was doing in the woods, but his identity was probably withheld because of his status as a SWAT officer. It is plausible to think that he might have been nearby and responded to the shootings. The Bee cites a “reliable law enforcement source.”

The SWAT officer was not the only person detained by police near Sandy Hook that day. Chris Manfredonia ran around the school trying to find his six-year-old daughter when he was handcuffed by police according to a Dec. 14 Los Angeles Times report. Manfredonia was released and found his daughter alive. Another unidentified man was detained according to Snopes, but was released when it became clear that he was not involved in the murders.

Chris Rodia was also accused of being the second shooter by some conspiracy theorists. In reality, the Connecticut Post reports that Rodia was being stopped for a traffic violation in Greenwich, Ct. at the time of the murders. Connecticut State Police spokesman Lt. J. Paul Vance told the Post that Adam Lanza was the only gunman and that the car belonged to his relative (Nancy Lanza, his mother, according to other reports), not to Rodia, whom Vance had never heard of. Apparently, the officer who stopped Rodia was using the same police frequency as units responding to Sandy Hook, causing bloggers monitoring scanners to become confused.

The Post tracked the Rodia conspiracy to several websites including one called “USA Hitman.” The administrator of the site admitted that “"I have a full-time job and don't have time to research the stories.”

Did Lanza use an assault rifle?
The weapon used by Lanza has also been the source of confusion. Paul Vance of the State Police confirmed to CNN that Lanza carried three guns in the attack. The primary weapon was a Bushmaster AR-15, but he also carried Glock 10 mm and Sig Sauer 9 mm pistols. The Newtown Bee’s law enforcement source confirms this information.

Early reports that the AR-15 was found in the trunk of Lanza’s (not Rodia’s) car were not correct. The weapon recovered from the trunk was actually a shotgun. CNN noted that authorities had not released details of the shotgun. A Youtube video shows police removing the gun, which does not appear to be an AR-15, from the trunk of the car.

There are reports that the gun in the trunk was a Saiga 12 gauge shotgun, but these could not be verified. The Saiga 12 gauge is a combat shotgun that can accept a large capacity magazine and could easily be mistaken for an “assault rifle.”

Ryan Lanza’s ID

Ryan Lanza’s role in the massacre has also been the source of confusion. Initial reports were that Ryan, Adam Lanza’s brother, was the killer. In reality, Ryan Lanza was at work in New York City when he heard about the shooting according to the Daily Mail. Lanza was picked up by police for questioning and was later released.

The confusion stems from the fact that Adam Lanza was reported to have carried Ryan’s identification. Precisely what sort of identification cannot be determined from the information that has been released. It is possible that the identification was old and out-of-date since the Lanza brothers did not live together.

Peter Lanza and LIBOR

There were also reports that Lanza’s father was scheduled to testify before Congress in the LIBOR scandal. The conspiracy theory claims that the father of James Holmes, the “Dark Knight” killer from Aurora, Co., was also scheduled to testify on LIBOR. The problem was that no such hearing was scheduled to take place according to Talking Points Memo. Holmes worked for FICO and Lanza worked for GE. Neither is connected to LIBOR scandal, which is not even an American scandal.

Victoria Soto

Another myth involves Victoria Soto, one of the teachers murdered by Lanza. Early reports indicated that Soto had hidden her students in a classroom closet and then told Lanza that they were not in the classroom. In reality, one of Soto’s students said that Soto lined her students up and put herself between them and Lanza. The student, Aidan Licata, told CNN that he had been taught to run if they saw someone with a gun. Aidan and several of the other students ran past Lanza and escaped. Aidan was picked up by a woman who took him to a police station, but some of the students from Miss Soto’s class ended up in Gene Rosen’s driveway.

The closet tactic was used by another first grade teacher, Kaitlin Roig, according to ABC News. Roig hid her class in a bathroom and wheeled a storage unit in front of the door. She piled some of her six- and seven-year-olds on top of the toilet to fit everyone inside while telling those “who believed in the power of the prayer, we need to pray and those who don't believe in prayer" to remain positive. When the police came, Roig refused to open the door, thinking that it might the murderer trying to trick her. She told them that if they were really the police they could find a key to open the door themselves. Roig and her students all survived.

Gene Rosen

Gene Rosen, who opened his home to several Sandy Hook survivors, has also been the target of the conspiracy buffs. Rosen’s home is slightly more than a tenth of mile from Sandy Hook, an easy walk for first graders. (Examiner is not publishing Rosen’s address to protect him from further harassment.) In spite of claims to the contrary, Connecticut’s News Times reported that Rosen did invite the bus driver who was with the six children into his home. The children eventually told Rosen what had happened. One of them even said that the killer had “a little gun and a big gun,” supporting the claim that Lanza carried the Bushmaster into the school. The original article does not specify whether the bus driver was male or female.

Much has been made of Rosen’s delay in contacting the police, but the News Times article indicates that he was initially somewhat skeptical about the children’s story. He did not realize that it was true until he watched the news that night.

It is not clear how much the bus driver knew about what had happened at the school. The driver may have even been in shock, since Rosen focuses mainly on the stories that the children told after they came inside. A Fox News report indicates that Rosen and the bus driver called the driver’s supervisor, who helped them to contact the children’s parents. It is reasonable to assume that the police would have been notified, either by Rosen or the supervisor, even though this is not specifically mentioned in the story. The bus driver’s name is apparently not mentioned in any news story. With the negative attention that Rosen has received, who can blame the driver for remaining anonymous?

According to the article, parents of four of the children were contacted and picked up their children at Rosen’s house and then the group went to the firehouse next door where other parents were gathering. Presumably, the other two children were either reunited with their parents or turned over to authorities there.

According to Snopes, Rosen was never a member of the Screen Actors Guild as some have claimed. This was a case of mistaken identity with another Eugene Rosen. The Eugene Rosen who lives near Sandy Hook has been a lifelong Connecticut resident. This is easily confirmed through online address searches and background checks.

Emilie Parker

Six-year-old Emilie Parker has also been the target of conspiracies thanks to a photo of President Obama surrounded by children. A girl in the picture bears a striking resemblance to Emilie and even wears the same dress that Emilie wore in a family portrait. The girl with the president is Emilie’s sister, Madeline, who is now four-years-old.

A collection of pictures posted on Metabunk helps clear up the confusion. The family portrait was taken in 2010 when Emilie was four and Madeline was two. Two years later, Madeline is at the same age that Emilie was in the family picture. She obviously wore a hand-me-down dress in the picture with the president.

Actors and smiling parents

Other conspiracies revolving around the massacre are more subjective. Conspiracy buffs claim that the parents interviewed on television are too happy to be grieving parents and that they are actually crisis actors employed by the government. There are many reasons that a parent might laugh after the death of child. There might be anxiety and nervousness about going on television, they might remember a happy moment with their baby, or they might even be in shock and not yet fully comprehending the loss.

An online conspiracy video states that Robbie Parker, Emilie’s father, is listed in an internet search as being 57-years-old. This is another obvious case of mistaken identity. An internet search performed by Examiner found no fewer than 12 Robert Parkers in Connecticut, including two in Sandy Hook. What the video fails to note is that the Robbie Parker interviewed on the news is the same man in the 2010 family portrait with Emilie and Madeline.

An Anderson Cooper podcast shows Veronique Pozner, another parent who is obviously distraught and says that she is still numb from the loss of her son. Lynn McDonnell, also cited on the conspiracy video with her words dubbed out, was on Anderson Cooper as well. A transcript of the interview shows that she was talking about her daughter’s sweet spirit, how she loved school, and how she would blow kisses as she got on the bus. These are memories that could easily make a grieving parent smile for a moment.

It is not reasonable to judge a parent to be an imposter based solely on their facial expression. People grieve in different ways. There likely were parents who fit the stereotype of grief in which they constantly cry and are totally inconsolable. It is reasonable to assume that these parents declined to do television interviews.

The claim that the parents are actors is easily debunked. Crisis Actors is a private business that provides actors for mock disaster drills. This is not a secret government organization. These are private citizens who work with government agencies to help them train for disasters, terrorist attacks and mass killings. The Crisis Actors website states, “We do not engage our actors in any real-world crisis events, and none of our performances may be presented at any time as a real-world event.”

Snopes believes that it has traced the origin of the actor conspiracy to Wellaware, another conspiracy site. This site apparently promotes the idea that many famous people have been replaced by actors. Among their theories are that Jerry Sandusky was replaced by Kevin Costner, that George Herbert Walker Bush was really Joseph Kennedy, Jr., that Queen Elizabeth is really Betty White, and that Kermit Roosevelt, son of President Theodore Roosevelt, portrayed both Adolf Hitler and Walt Disney.

The idea that actors are portraying the parents defies logic. If the parents on television are actors, then where are the real parents? If actors were being used, wouldn’t they be trained to portray stereotypical grief instead of laughing? If parents are not really grieving, where are the children? If the children and teachers were really killed in a “false flag” operation then why bother to hire actors? Wouldn’t the real parents be more convincing since they were really grief-stricken?

Ambulances, Lanza’s accuracy and controlling the crime scene

The conspiracy video also refers to news camera pictures showing the lack of activity around the school in the wake of the shooting. The answer here is simple: Most of the news crews arrived long after the action was over. The famous photo of a teacher leading a line of children was taken by the Newtown Bee, the local paper and apparently the first and only reporters on the scene for a time. The video says that there are “no ambulances” while simultaneously showing a video in which ambulances are clearly present. By the time video news crews reached the scene reached the scene, the children had already been removed from the school, to the fire station if they were uninjured or in ambulances if they were. NBC News reports that ambulances were even called in from neighboring towns, but most were unused. The majority of the victims were dead, not injured.

Adam Lanza’s accuracy has also been questioned due to reports that all victims had multiple wounds. The Hartford Courant reports that Lanza was a frequent player of first-person shooter video games and, according to MSNBC, he was familiar with guns and marksmanship. Children in the classrooms with one door had little room to escape. Many of the bullet wounds were probably inflicted after the victim was already dead or injured and unable to run.

Conspiracy buffs have keyed in on a comment about “controlling” the scene by Connecticut’s chief medical examiner, Dr. Wayne Carver. A full transcript of Carver’s comments indicate that he was talking about controlling access to the crime scene to spare the families more emotional distress.

Carver’s full comment was, “We did not bring the bodies and the families into contact. We took pictures of them of their facial features. It’s easier on the families when you do that. There is a time and a place for up close and personal in the grieving process. But to accomplish this, we felt it would be best to do it this way, and you can sort of – you can control the situation, depending on the photographer and I have very good photographers.” This explains why the parents were kept from the crime scene and not allowed to see the bodies as well as why any closed circuit camera images have not been released.

Bridgeport FEMA conference

Conspiracy sites have also pointed out that FEMA was holding a conference in Bridgeport, Ct. on the day of the massacre. The topic of this sinister conference? “Planning for the needs of Children in Disasters.”

The location of the conference was not on the same road as Sandy Hook as some sites claim, although Highway 25 does connect both towns. According to Yahoo Maps, the two locations were 20 miles and about half an hour apart. It should be remembered that Connecticut is a small state with an average length of 90 miles and width of 55 miles. This means that the conference in Bridgeport was halfway across the state from Sandy Hook.

None of this is in the least incriminating or suggestive of FEMA involvement in the shooting. In fact, the Connecticut Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection calendar reveals that the same course was offered a total of four times in December. On the days of three of the four classes, no mass murders occurred.

Dates on internet postings

One of the last conspiracy items is the claim that news stories and Facebook pages about the murders were posted to the internet before the shootings actually occurred. This is based on dates posted on Google search results.

To see the fallacy in this theory, go to Google.com and type in a search term, something along the lines of “Sandy Hook shooting.” Click “search tools” in the menu below the search field. Click the arrow beside “any time” to open up a time range menu and then select “custom range.” Select a date range before the Sandy Hook shooting to search, for example, you can search the dates between January 1 and December 1, 2012. The results show news stories about the Sandy Hook massacre from as early as Jan. 14, 2012, far beyond the day or so early claimed by the conspiracy buffs. When dates are expanded, search results dating back to 2007 and 2008 can be found. This should be too early for even the most ardent conspiracy believers to justify as secret operation.

A similar search on Bing does not yield similar results. Bing does not offer custom date range searches, but after scrolling through many pages of search results, nothing prior to Dec. 14, 2012, the day of the shooting was found. The same is true of other search engines including Ask and Yahoo. Obviously, there is a flaw in Google’s methodology.

Without a doubt, President Obama and the Democrats are using the tragic murders at Sandy Hook for their own political ends. There is no evidence that they actually carried out the shootings or orchestrated a hoax of any sort. They didn’t need to. Mass murders happen on occasion and this one, happening just after the election, came at an opportune time.

A hoax would have been much smoother. They would have hired actors who knew how to cry. They might have set up websites in advance, but they would not have activated them, much less more than one, before the shooting. Eyewitness testimony would have matched. In reality, conflicting testimony is not a sign of a hoax because people perceive things in different ways and remember things differently. Stories that match up perfectly are more likely to indicate that the testimony was planned in advance.

For Sandy Hook to be a hoax perpetrated by the government, the conspirators would have to be exceedingly incompetent. They would have had to execute the killings and plant Adam Lanza as a patsy, but forget to plant the AR-15 on his body. They would also have to inexplicably put one of the “dead” girls in a photo opportunity with the president and launch websites several days early. Actors portraying the parents would have to all be so incompetent as to forget their roles on camera.

In any unfolding news story, there is a lot of erroneous information at the beginning. The “fog of war,” conflicting information coming in from different sources and all presented as fact, means that some of the early information is not true. The news media are not intentionally lying; they are just reporting the story as they know it at the time. When this information is corrected later, it isn’t a hoax or a cover up; they are just setting the record straight.

As with any conspiracy theory, the best solution is to apply Hanlon’s razor to conspiracy claims about Adam Lanza and the mass murder at Sandy Hook. “Never accept for malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.”

Originally published on Examiner:

http://www.examiner.com/article/myths-lies-and-conspiracies-about-the-sandy-hook-massacre?cid=db_articles

Ga. senator to retire next term

The Atlanta Journal reported today that Georgia Republican Saxby Chambliss will not seek reelection to the U.S. Senate in 2014. The report cited Gov. Nathan Deal, who said he told the two-term senator to “make sure he served out his full term because I didn’t want to appoint someone.”

The report was confirmed by the Republican Security Council on a Facebook posting that noted that Chambliss was vulnerable to a primary challenge from Tea Party-backed candidates. The posting also noted that Chambliss had an “excellent record on defense, foreign policy and war on terror issues.”

The real battle for Chambliss’ senate seat is likely to occur in the primary. Georgia has become increasingly Republican and is likely to remain so during Obama’s tenure. The last Democratic senator from Georgia was Zell Miller who was appointed to the seat by Democratic governor Roy Barnes after the death of Republican Paul Coverdell. Miller served from 2000 through 2005. Even though Miller was a conservative Democrat who spoke at the 2004 Republican National Convention, he declined to seek reelection.

The AJC article notes that two members of the Republican house delegation, Paul Broun and Tom Price, have considered a primary challenge against Chambliss. Chambliss has been criticized by conservatives for his role in the “gang of six” discussions on the deficit with moderate Democrats in 2011.

Chambliss’ departure from the senate is the second confirmed retirement for 2014. Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.V.) is also retiring. New Jersey senator Frank Lautenberg, who will be 90, is also likely to retire.

A Republican Security Council preliminary estimate for 2014 shows six tossup senate races. These seats in South Dakota, Alaska, West Virginia, North Carolina, Arkansas and Louisiana are all held by Democrats in states with a strong Republican presence. Nothing is assured, however. Before the primary season, Republicans were favored to win the senate in 2012 with Democrats defending a number of vulnerable seats. Missteps by GOP candidates and a strong get-out-the-vote effort by Democrats ended those hopes.

Memories of Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock may spur Democrats to enter the race for Chambliss’ seat. Their best hope might be that the Republicans nominate a political novice with a propensity for putting his foot in his mouth.

 

Originally published on Examiner:

http://www.examiner.com/article/ga-senator-to-retire-2014?cid=db_articles