I'm not sure what to think of all this. It seems offensive and outlandish, but having only taken a cursory look at the claims, I'm not going to make a decisive judgment yet.
Sandy Hook 'truthers' and the paranoid quest for meaning where there is none
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/oliver-bur...
The point is that when you freeze any moment of history, then analyse it in extreme detail, you'll always find numerous things that "don't add up". Every moment in history is full of them; it's just that most moments in history are mundane, and therefore go un-analysed. And "if you have any fact which you think is really sinister … hey, forget it, man," Tink Thompson, a private detective who investigated the case, tells Morris. "Because you can never, on your own, think up all the non-sinister, perfectly valid explanations for that fact."
In short: it's not that the alleged Sandy Hook "discrepancies" are necessarily fabrications in need of debunking. It's simply that any brief span of time, probed in sufficient detail, will be found to contain plenty of them: the changing witness reports and reports about the weapons involved; the quote in the newspaper, purportedly from the school principal who had, in fact, been killed; the seemingly strange lack of records concerning the recent life of Adam Lanza. And the overwhelming likelihood is that they signify nothing at all.