Why is The Blaze Ridiculing Those Questioning Sandy Hook?

Print This Article


by Sharon Rondeau

Has The Blaze adopted an agenda different from its stated goal of exposing the truth?

(Jan. 29, 2013) — Rather than asking questions himself, a writer at The Blaze is using ridicule to “debunk” the questions raised in the wake of a wide array of conflicting reports on the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting on December 14, 2012.

The purpose of a free press is to find and report the truth to the people, not to pursue an agenda or editorialize.  The Blaze is owned by Mercury Radio Arts, which produces Glenn Beck’s radio program and other endeavors.  Beck’s slogan is “Truth Lives Here,” and the stated purpose of The Blaze is to provide an alternative to the media’s “distorting facts to fit rigid agendas.”

A “point-by-point” “conspiracy theory debunk” attempts to convince the reader that each question raised by the inconsistent reportage on the part of the mainstream media regarding Sandy Hook is easily explained away.  However, author Billy Hallowell presents information in his piece that is itself a contradiction to that which became the official story line following the atrocity.

One of the photos Hallowell included in his piece to address the “conspiracy theories” formulated by people who have studied the numerous media responses to the event contains a caption which indicates that 18 children were killed on December 14.  However, although 18 children were reported dead directly after the attack, by the end of the day, all reports appeared to consistently say that 20 children and 6 adults had tragically lost their lives at the school.

Hallowell’s article also contains gives credence to the website Snopes.com, which purports to know that Obama’s short-form and long-form birth certificates are authentic when an ongoing law enforcement investigation has declared them forgeries.  Lead investigator Michael Zullo is so sure that the long-form image is a forgery that he has invited Gen. Colin Powell to view the evidence in the possession of the Cold Case Posse at no personal expense.  Zullo said in a recent interview that the information Powell would see would convince even the strongest skeptic of the forgery claim.

Snopes excuses the media’s inconsistencies about Sandy Hook by stating that there was “a great deal of confusion” immediately following the initial reports of a shooting at the school.  Snopes itself is attempting to influence its readers by stating that those who have expressed doubt that Adam Lanza could have targeted so many children in a short period of time “is mind-bogglingly inane.”

How does Snopes know?  By what authority does Snopes have clear and convincing evidence of what happened that day, or whether or not Obama’s documentation is valid?

Does Snopes have an agenda?  Does Hallowell?

A journalist’s job is to uncover the truth by investigating, not create a story.

Hallowell claims that in his own investigation of the Sandy Hook “Truthers,” he spoke with a website developer who described the questions about the attack as “nonsense.”  But did Hallowell happen to consult a second expert who might have had a different viewpoint?  How did it come about that the expert he consulted happened to believe that questions about Sandy Hook were “nonsense?”

Under the subheading “Other Theories,” Hallowell states, “TheBlaze already told you about James Tracy, a communications professor at Florida Atlantic University (FAU), and his controversial comments about the Sandy Hook massacre.”  The link referring to Tracy brings the reader to an article written by Jason Howerton which attempts to discredit Tracy’s assertion that “the public needs more information to assess what took place.”  Rather than analyzing Tracy’s claims, Howerton relates how Tracy’s employer, Florida Atlantic University, stated that Tracy “does not speak for the university.”

Howerton refers to Tracy’s statements as “rantings,” which is not an objective term used in news reports.  He quoted another university professor who doubts the accepted media narrative about Sandy Hook and believes that the occurrence is part of  “a massive civil war” waged by the Department of Homeland Security in an effort to confiscate firearms from the American people.

Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Darrell Issa believes that Obama’s failed gun-walking program, Fast & Furious, was intended to turn Americans away from firearms ownership.  Sen. Charles Grassley expressed similar sentiments during his investigation.  The people who could not keep track of guns sent to Mexico through straw buyers which ultimately killed at least one American and several hundred Mexicans now wish to impose stricter gun control on law-abiding citizens. Many people from Newtown appear to have supported that agenda.

Obama visited Newtown two days after the shootings.  His former Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, had advised him “never to let a serious crisis go to waste.” Emanuel, who is now mayor of Chicago, presides over a city which saw 500 murders and 40 murders so far this year, many of which were from guns.  Officials are seeking tighter gun restrictions in an attempt to curb the violence.

Connecticut, which is a “blue” state politically and 48th in size, contained two of the top 25 most dangerous cities at the beginning of 2012, according to the FBI.

A report supportive of Obama’s gun control agenda stated:

A Washington Post/ABC News poll released this week shows that more than 50 per cent of those polled said that the Sandy Hook shooting had made them “more supportive” of gun control legislation, while 58 per cent now say they support the reintroduction of the ban on assault weapons. Obama and Biden are betting that, while a majority of the Republican-controlled House of Representatives oppose the ban, they will be reluctant to be seen opposing it in the face of overwhelming national support. The President will have the support of the Democratic-controlled Senate, too.

County sheriffs and some state legislators are taking steps to nullify any federal mandates or laws which might be passed to limit Americans’ legal access to firearms for protection.

Writer Jack Cashill, author of Deconstructing Obama and other books, has questioned the Sandy Hook narrative, particularly the inconsistencies regarding the type of firearms brought into the school by the shooter.  Cashill believes that Fast & Furious, the Benghazi terrorist attack, and Sandy Hook were relegated to “non-reporting” by the U.S. media.

Cashill questioned the same NBC News report which The Post & Email did in regard to four handguns which were allegedly carried into the elementary school by the perpetrator and was “debunked” by Connecticut State Police spokesman J. Paul Vance on January 18, 2013.

At the end of his article on the two university professors, Howerton gave a hat tip to Gawker, a left-leaning website with adult content of questionable news value.

On Wednesday, January 16, Obama issued 23 “executive actions” which Eric Holder is reportedly already implementing without congressional approval.

Neither Howerton nor Hallowell reports that he has traveled to Sandy Hook to obtain first-hand information about what occurred there last month.  Why are they determined to argue against the theories which suspect that the dissemination of government propaganda by collusion on the part of major media without any real evidence proving their claims?

Commenters responding to Hallowell’s article did not appear to be convinced by his arguments.  One said, “You call this article investigative journalism?? All this story is is just a repeat of the official government. Just like a parrot you guys are only repeating what we are to believe. You guys didn’t investigate anything. You just used Snopes as your news source” and decried the lack of “investigative journalism.”

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Categories: National