Sandy Hook Massacre: Three Years of Subterfuge and Fraud

Fraud. An intentional perversion of truth for the purpose of inducing another in reliance upon it to part with some valuable thing belonging to him or to surrender a legal right; Anything calculated to deceive, whether by a single act or combination, or by suppression of truth, or suggestion of what is false, whether it be by direct falsehood or innuendo, by speech or silence, word of mouth, or look or gesture.-Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Edition

Three years ago the public learned of the most significant mass shooting in recent US history involving the deaths of 20 young school children and seven adults. As a father of three I immediately empathized with the parents, reminding myself there was no real way to fathom the sense of loss such an experience must involve.
Sandy_Hook_Lanza

After several days of reflection, however, my instincts as a media analyst took charge. In reviewing news coverage of the Sandy Hook School massacre I began to recognize very unusual features in the alleged forensics, the emergency response and the overall way the event was being reported.


Commonplace emergency protocols were abandoned. There was no surge of EMTs into the building, no proper triage protocol employed or Med-Evac helicopters called. Parents were not even allowed to view and hold the bodies of their deceased children, and law enforcement oddly admonished those who questioned the official narrative online with  criminal prosecution.

The following day Connecticut’s state coroner amazingly bumbled and guffawed through a fifteen minute press conference where it was anticipated he would provide an expert overview of the postmortem. His responses to reporters’ questions were so bizarre and incompetent I was awaiting an avalanche of lawsuits from victims families to be brought against the school district and State of Connecticut. On December 28 one was filed, then quickly withdrawn. The following October the Sandy Hook School—among the greatest crime scenes in US history—was demolished.

When I chose to publicly share my analyses and suggest that the event was being inaccurately reported and seized upon by politicians to implement long-sought agendas I was attacked and labelled a “conspiracy theorist.”

This media frenzy (here and here) developed into a campaign to embarrass my university employer into firing me. My continued research on this topic has developed into a scholarly project that the institution of tenure was intended to protect. But how could one ever dare propose such subject matter?

Beginning in the 1960s women and racial minorities who secured a toehold in the academy used their tenure to address controversial topics that drew fire from conservative administrators and trustees. Unfortunately this tradition of radical inquiry has evolved into a stultifying, almost Victorian ethos of political correctness that often precludes honest exchange, sees oppression where none exists, and makes tenure a charade. It also renders profane the idea of questioning the motives of America’s first black president and attorney general.

In the December 10, 2015 online edition of the South Florida Sun-Sentinel Leonid “Lenny” and Veronique Pozner mounted a vicious attack that sought to intimidate my employer into removing my tenure and depriving me of my livelihood because of the questions I’ve raised concerning the Sandy Hook event and confirmation of Mr. Pozner’s unusually tenacious and profuse copyright claims.

Normally an endeavor targeting an individual’s primary asset would take shape as a lawsuit where proper discovery and judicial procedures might be adhered to.

 The recent 425-page volume of research on the Sandy Hook event compiled by six professors (including myself) would constitute for the Pozners a tremendous burden of going forward. They have thus once again chosen the low road of playing upon the prejudices of decent, good-hearted yet often poorly-informed Americans.

Along these lines, in June 2014 I sent CNN’s Anderson Cooper, who similarly attacked me on national television for questioning the state-sanctioned Sandy Hook narrative, an open letter to join me in a trip to Newtown so that we could together reexamine the facts underlying the horrific tragedy he played a major part in covering. I emphasized that such a scoop could be tantamount to the next Watergate, and if he could satisfactorily put to rest my skepticism I would seriously consider resigning my academic post.

To this day my request has gone unanswered. Perhaps like me, Mr. Cooper knows that Newtown and Connecticut officials have failed to fulfill a multitude of public records requests which would readily confirm the nightmare Cooper and his media colleagues related as fact three years ago.

In a geographically vast country where imagery and emotion reign supreme, where fact is often replaced by unsubstantiated claims and hearsay, the eventual result will likely involve mass fraud leading to a severe loss of our freedoms, perhaps eventual tyranny, as de Tocqueville suggested following his tour of America almost two centuries ago.

Today more than ever citizens would be well served to recognize that much of what they are left to witness via mass media requires serious interrogation, possible only through a consistent regimen of intellectual self defense. This makes good reporters and worthwhile journalism. If that is an outmoded ideal and a skill that can no longer be practiced or taught to young adults I stand guilty as charged.

414 thoughts on “Sandy Hook Massacre: Three Years of Subterfuge and Fraud”

  1. Ex-super of Newtown is setting something up down in ole Fairfield county,Fall 2015.The agency needs better writers for the script in Ct.

  2. James, thanks so much for what you do. Being the cynical crowd that we are we don’t always acknowledge your courage and uncommon sense.

    It is more than telling that critical analysis is now considered heresy. Apparently, freedom of speech is now trumped by other’s “feelings”. Media is now authority.

    Unfortunately I suspect you are a bit of a test case. We’ve said before that the drill is not over. Evaluation of damage control efforts are still ongoing. I doubt we’ll be privy to the final report.

    People are being taught that it is better to be safe in their government-provided cocoons of manufactured “reality” than to be active participants in their lives.

    No matter how this ends you can be proud of your integrity and choice to stay to the high road. It would be reassuring to believe that there were some higher court that actually worked as advertised to hear complaints such as these.

    In the same manner that “media” has been made into mere mouthpieces for the corporate/government agenda, education is now to be transformed into acceptance training. We’ve seen historical examples of this in the past with fascist regimes.

    Those such as yourself who dedicate their lives to providing the tools our young need to set them free must endure the self-serving machinations of lesser men and women.

    We are here for you James. Don’t be afraid to ask.

    1. The media have been lapdogs ever since Watergate…in 1913, the scumbags actually hid from scrutiny; apparently, they’ve bought off anyone of influence, so no need to be so stealthy nowadays.

    1. These people that feign indignation at the suggestion that this was a hoax can be thwarted with this single page from Wolfgang’s web site.

      Law Enforcement personnel breaking out boxes of Doritos, Gatorade, bananas and groceries while laughing it up at a tailgate party smack in the middle of a crime scene. This being done while the secretary and nurse remain unaccounted for and after armed dangerous suspects in a purple van are at large-

      So when people say “Oh my God how can anyone even think that this was a hoax” I would simply send them to this page.

      http://sandyhookjusticereport.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Chapter-Four.pdf

      If they want additional reasons there is a never ending supply of fraud indicators here as well as elsewhere.

      http://lunaticoutpost.com/showthread.php?tid=458559

  3. James, its been a long road but your persistence for the truth has gained you much respect and a great deal of admiration for your courageous spirit.

    As John Ralston Saul stated in his book The Unconscious Civilization, ‘The engaged citizen risks her/his reputation in public, needs a thick skin, must listen to others at great length, must learn how to make beliefs and causes fit in with those of others.’

    (I added his because Saul used her as generalization to all as far as I could tell)

    Saul evoked that statement in his worry and concern that the new structure being built into society, a structure that preferred the group over the individual was going to lessen individual/citizen responsibility to the good of society and it was going to swallow away what has always been known as the ‘engaged citizen.’

    He wrote those words way back in 1947 in his explanation of what was going to happen to Universities, places of education and Professors. His warnings were many and were stark.

    You and many other Professors’ lives now embody what Saul laid out as the great struggle to escape enforced echo chambers in this new society and find the way back to the good citizen. So enough with the public accusations of conspiracy theories and theorists, this struggle was written into literary history before any of you ever took up the battle.

    God bless you and family James. You have my utmost respect because I admire perseverance and as a media analyst you stand tall and cast a big shadow. Your intellectual integrity shines forth for all to see. Keep the wind at your back my friend.

    1. Surely those hoping to lay suit against Dr. Tracy won’t follow through. Why? Up against the truth, such a suit with court adjudication would expose, say, EXPOSE, those who played parts in this “event”. Does anybody think Governor Malloy would be “glad to go to court” over this incident when there are great questions with his involvement in various aspects of the brouhaha? Just sayin’….
      Do you think Robbie Parker would relish the chance to give his side of the story in court?

      Court stuff is threatening, no doubt about it. Of course, when truth is on your side, kinda evens the score, eh?

      1. good point, Gil. In the Marathon bombings, the guy who supposedly got his legs blown off who fingered the younger brother didn’t testify in the trial.

    2. I agree wholeheartedly with Possum’s comments, especially the first and last paragraphs.

      Thanks James for standing up to a tremendous amount of pressure. I’m certain they assumed you would run away and hide or get fired, but you held your ground and kept your composure. Well done.

      Instead of putting you out they fueled the fire. I can relate.

      Keep on keeping on!

    3. I can only amplify and echo Possum’s sentiments, Dr. Tracy. I began as a Huffington Post addict, and when news hit that site of a group of inquirists who doubted that any lives at all were lost in Sandy Hook, I was contemptuous of such a notion, in my ignorance.
      Frankly, I’m not a firearms fan, and formerly supported laws to scale back their ownership because I had never seen into the long game of the ‘powers that be’. I certainly see it clearly now – once seen, it cannot be unseen.
      In a sense, this isn’t about gun laws for me, but about the now-rampant deceptions of a government who commits fraud at every turn to take what it wants. To stop THAT, I am now willing to speak up in my community. That will be a BIG surprise to a number of folks around here…
      The net sum of this government game is that there will be many NEW gun owners like me now able to protect our families and nation against any threat, foreign or domestic. The country belongs to the people, not the corporations.

  4. .

    Further examples of the allegorical script references in the “Adam Lanza” narrative, were provided, somewhat belatedly, by the NY Daily News article linked below.

    In this instance, a strange sounding caller to a radio show, named “Greg” waxes lyrical about the Travis chimpanzee attack on 16 February 2009.

    The inferences / parallels between the “savage behaviour” of our near primate cousins on Xanax and “teenage mall shooters”, presumbaly on Celexa / Citalopram, are made by the caller Greg …

    The narrative avers that “Adam Lanza” was prescribed Celexa by the Yale Child Study Centre …

    Follow the link and you can listen to the voice which is claimed to that of the probably non-existent “Adam Lanza” …

    NY Daily News

    16 January 2014

    Adam Lanza calls in radio station a year before Sandy Hook shooting and gives bizarre interview — LISTEN TO THE TAPE

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/exclusive-lanza-twisted-call-radio-station-article-1.1580984

    MG

  5. As usual I find it interesting when people use the US Constitution’s guaranteed protections to SUBVERT THOSE VERY PROTECTIONS. I also find it interesting when comments like “the burden of proof falls squarely on the professor” originate from Rockefeller-created NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION, an organization designed to essentially institutionalize political correctness in academia to begin with. IMO this is a neo-communist attack on most of the 10 amendments & it’s NO coincidence that the Gun-Grabbers are simultaneously attacking both the 2nd & 1st amendments, as well as the principle of American Jurisprudence that says that you’re innocent until proven guilty. It’s obvious that when they can’t overcome facts & logic, they employ LOGICAL FALLACIES, and these psychopaths HAVE NO SHAME since facts won’t be allowed to get in the way of “the agenda”.

    On another note: I attempted to write a comment of support to The Florida Sentinel but I was blocked…after reading some of the comments, its looking not too pleasant for the THOUGHT POLICE, as the Professor is receiving more support than they anticipated. A betting man would investigate the funding sources and the behind the scenes influence being exercised…perhaps possible connections to Former NYC Mayor MICHAEL R. BLOOMBERG? Hmmm….hang in there Prof. Tracy.

    1. Thank you.

      I have also received one recent report from a trusted party of Sun-Sentinel editors, tech support, or whomever has clearance on their site, delete supportive, detailed and entirely civil comments from the Dec. 10 article.

    2. My feeling is that the American public is on automatic pilot. I participate in a daily coffee soiree’ with a group of friends, all veterans, all locked and loaded. To a man, me excluded, all of these rough customers insist the 6 pm newscasters would never, ever, ever lie to the American public. I try to reason with them. I try to create doubt in their ironclad minds, I try to expose pieces of information that would germinate a legitimate doubt in their minds. If I score a point today, I lose a point tomorrow on the same issue. True believers sayeth Hoffer are true believers, they are not skin deep in their adherences to putative truths aka sneaky lies. Why?

      A single rational person immersed in a crowd does not retain his belief structure, he gets the crowd induced fever and becomes irrational, emotional, often violent, more convinced than ever. Are we talking about the effects of pheromones that homogenize the group mind? What fuses the separate minds of the crowd into a homogeneous throng? Surely it is well known why this happens, read the book “The Crowd: A study of the Popular Mind” by Gustave Le Bon. Published in the late 1890’s. it is remarkably up to date in its analysis.
      We have not been mechanistically adequate in asking why people appear to refuse consideration of alternate ideas. People that I interface with can get hostile when new ideas are placed before them. Are they insulted because I am belittling them? Are they thin skinned? Lazy?
      I maintain that we don’t apply LeBon’s dead-on analysis of people to our situation at Sandy Hook. We are not reaching people, we don’t get to their core. We think we do, LeBon tells us different. Understand the crowd’s mentality and you will learn how to reach people. Study the crowd. Just because a member of the crowd is not surrounded by the crowd does not mean he is more likely to succumb to your convincing analysis, either.

      Read Gustave Le Bon. His book might be available on the Net as a freebie. Highly recommended, you’ll be infused with optimism, something we don’t have at present.

      We will save our nation, or else we will watch it writhe until we are serfs again.

      1. Thanks for the recommendation, sadly I’ve already read it months ago. Very apt in its description of the very phenomena we’re witnessing & in some cases, subjected to. Jacques Ellul’s “Mass Psychology” is another good one that goes with this.

      2. I tend to use Operation Northwoods on the “crowd”. It is shorter and it is the document that woke me up. Also available for download free on the gwu site.

    3. It’s always easier to try people in the court of innuendo. The Hartford Courant had what appears to be a whole new raft of shillers on their online version last evening, Monday. Their methodology mimicked the lead-in to the Salem witch trials. Harsh, vicious talk that implied the gallows were waiting for disbelievers. It was striking in it’s synchrony and timing. All of a sudden, Poof!, the club carrying mob went out in search of some putative wife and child beater and was going to lay some frontier justice on the non-adjudicated “offender”. This is how things are done today. While the court of public opinion has been around a long time, the post-911 version is more refined in its disdain for reason and justice. It reminds one of how Henry Morgenthau invoked jewish anger in his quest to have Germany destroyed as a nation, where courts were all kangaroo and given to judgments, not adjudications.
      Would-be sue-ers, no pun intended, talk very, very big but will they really be willing to lay their cards in-toto on the table for examination by neutral eyes? I rather doubt it. Connecticut’s fabled FOIA court barfed all over itself several times in the Wolf Halbig ruminations. It likely thinks we have forgotten about this travesty. We haven’t, and we won’t.
      Sooner or later, this intrigue will become the Thrilla in Manila. It’s going to get rough and vicious but I feel that in any fair court, the good guys are going to prevail.
      No dark sider that threatens suit wants to go on state and national TV and retch and belch on behalf of established lies. Mushrooms hate the light of day and so do these agents of our would-be demise.
      We’ve all got to hang tough.

  6. Under the hypothesis that SHE was “simply” a morbid act of street theater, the attacks directed at James are to be expected. If the mass media did not excoriate his and other researchers’ work, they would indirectly invite their viewers/readers to explore the possibility that SHE was a hoax and increase the risk of a popular backlash against disinformation. As such, the attacks increase the credibility of the hoax hypothesis over the official massacre hypothesis’.

    This situation raises the question of how scholars can expose institutionalized disinformation without exposing themselves to vicious personal attacks. One line of investigation would be a search for an instance of grand obfuscation that would be so blatant that the mass media would be afraid of defending it: finding a hoax much more obvious than SHE. Easier said than done!

    I’ll also add that the alleged SHE hoax and the subsequent personal attacks against James and others are not only the work of criminal government agents and dishonest reporters all around the world. Organizations that lose clout when an insane gunman allegedly massacres a group of people with no good excuse vitally contribute to the hoax’ success. In this case, gun rights advocacy institutions, like the U.S. Libertarian Party, are essential players, as they con their gullible members and supporters into swallowing the official myth line, hook and sinker. Their motives and means to question SHE dwarf James’, yet they toe the official narrative. Accordingly, they bear much responsibility for the hit pieces against James and other independent SHE researchers.

    Love,

    1. Daniel, I would add that there may not actually be a “mass” of angry zombies sharpening their pitchforks. I rather suspect that the drill is still in progress and reactions are being evaluated.

      I’m sure you’ve noticed that, beyond emotion, there is no “there” there. There is no real evidence to support their tale at all. There is weeping and indignation.

      Just like with so much else these days, we do not need permission to criticize. I actually think there interests are not so much to stifle criticism as to learn how to control it.

    2. MSM is not wont to allow use of their pages and airtime to show their turpitude. Wherein lies our problem. Somehow, falsely so, America pretends it is concerned about the little guy. Nothing is farther from the truth. The little guy is treated like a cow, milked and milked and milked. Our detractors use well known techniques of Alinsky, the screaming, insulting, denigration, abnegation. Some times I wonder if we should be using these same techniques.

      1. Gill, what happens is that they accuse us of being heartless and having some agenda. What they don’t do is answer our questions. No matter what they say about any of us it has absolutely nothing to do with the facts in this case.

        We say “where are the bodies”. They say “Gawd, what horrible people you are, you should be shot”. We say “show me the documents”. They say “how dare you ask for proof. What sort of people are you?”.

        This is an entirely mindless response. It is pure emotion. They would rather be angry at us than to find the truth. It is related to people’s need to be accepted by authority. That is related to their fear. If they are good little boys and girls daddy will protect them.

        You’re right to a degree I think. We should be saying “grow up and answer the question”. Or, “how dare you. This is a free country and I don’t need your permission to ask questions”. “What sort of ‘news’ outfit are you to accept ridiculous tales such as this with such flimsy evidence?”.

      1. Limited fact checking? You can either be the pot or the kettle since your “fact checking ” comes from YouTube

    1. I use Firefox, use Noscript and Ubock Origin (ad blocker). Noscript turns off all scripting by default So I go to the page. Read the article and have to click a button to read the comments. Click the button nothing. So I start turning on scripting to activate the button. I get stuck in a endless loop of it asking to register, and then it will no longer display the article, just immediately drops to asking to register and keeps dumping me back to front page. I eventually turn on every scripting option… no change.

      I was planning on making a comment. Apparently the Sun-Sentinel knows who I am… 😉

    2. Great to hear! Very Mark Twain of them to greatly exaggerate your demise. I was stunned that they actually published your piece, given the assault they’ve launched against you since SH.

      1. Now the Sun-Sentinel is redirecting the link back to the front page. Dr. Tracy, in an ironic twist, it appears your op-ed has been “memory holed.”

  7. This tripe from “Noah’s” supposed Grandmother was in my Chicago Tribune today…..

    I’m copying it here because you have to sign-up to read.

    My eyes hurt from rolling so much.

    Motives do not matter to the dead. They don’t matter much to survivors, either. When my 6-year-old grandson, Noah, was gunned down three years ago at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., along with 19 other first-graders and six educators, we were engulfed in a grief so brutal and so profound that an explanation was the last thing we sought. We just wanted life the way it had been. We wanted Noah back. We still do. Badly.

    Only a month earlier, while visiting from the West Coast, I had gone to the school book fair with the kids. We sat by the big window that the killer would later blow open to force his way in. Noah, his twin sister, his 7-year-old older sister and I read aloud from the books we had bought while waiting for their mom to be done with her three parent-teacher conferences. The kids made jokes, they laughed, they jostled each other. I treasure the picture I took of them on that small wooden bench. There was such love among these three, such complicity. The strongest of bonds.

    Noah was an adorable little rascal, full of passion, full of love. He was fun, he was witty, he was fresh, he was everything a kid should be. I miss him terribly. I miss the boy I knew, and I miss the man he would have become. A whole life stolen. From him, from us.

    Gun control inaction makes mass shootings a way of life

    He was killed minutes after drop-off. He had been happy and excited. He was invited to a pool birthday party the following day, and he couldn’t wait for Saturday to arrive. Only he never lived another Saturday. The next time any of us saw him, he was lying in a casket at a funeral home, his face untouched, still perfect, as though he were sleeping. He looked like he might wake up. But of course he didn’t.

    A couple of months ago, Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson, a neurosurgeon, wrote that he had never seen a body with bullet holes that was more devastating “than taking the right to arm ourselves away.” Presumably Carson never saw one of his kids or grandkids bullet-ridden and forever stilled.

    The Sandy Hook murderer was possibly insane, or a psychopath, certainly a terrorist. I don’t know, and I don’t care. The only common denominator among mass shooters is that, one way or another, by means legal or illegal, they manage to get their hands on weapons, often military-style weapons, and use them to inflict maximum harm on unsuspecting civilians.

    Guns don’t kill; people do. Yes, that’s true. An open society can never protect itself completely from evil or insanity. But it can start by preventing the distribution of the powerful weapons and ammunition that have been used to kill our grandson and so many other innocents.

    Kids have the right to grow up. Parents and grandparents have the right to see them do it. We don’t need another reason.

    Washington Post

    Marie-Claude Duytschaever is a member of the Everytown for Gun Safety Survivor Network

    1. Let’s see: appeal go emotion, appeal to fear, begging the question, ad hominem, where do we stop? And all scribed by a representative of a BLOOMBERG-backed gun-grabber front group that has no problem using PR to terrorize the American population & indoctrinate the youth to make the American people defenseless, as if that’s somehow the solution to terror.

      Now, assuming this were real(it isn’t), no one among these ideologues seems to recognize these shootings as taking place in GUN-FREE ZONES in gun-restricted municipalities, which is precisely WHY these places are targeted(by the government planners), nor notice all the “drills” playing out these exact scenarios that always seem to come to fruition…while somehow the “authorities” just can’t seem to stop the very scenario they planned for. Golly gee wiz…no matter what we do, we can’t stop terror!!!! Aaaahhhhh?!!! The PR, the psychological bombardment, the Media, that’s the REAL TERROR, not the event itself.

    2. This “grandmother” is all over the place today. The attributions credited to her are written by able bodies at Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety Survivor Network.

      This is from Tulsa, very telling. The comments are from a clueless bunch, representing the majority out there. Sad.

      http://www.tulsaworld.com/opinion/othervoices/marie-claude-duytschaever-the-gun-that-killed-my-grandson/article_a5495e27-88d4-5da1-a35f-498079044f59.html

      Also, the grandparents of “Noah” may be very wealthy by their own merits, by they did move into some real fancy digs outside Seattle not long after SH.

      1. Anne B, I’m of the opinion that this whole thing is a massive op, staged-managed all the way down to the comments section & editing in the newspaper blogs, to give the illusion of massive support for an agenda the VAST MAJORITY of Americans don’t support…which is the very reason PR campaigns like this have to be launched, and why MAINSTREAM MEDIA are in lock step. Just like the anthropogenic climate change op, appeals to emotion, fear, terror, begging the question, ad hominem attacks, appeal to the children…every logical fallacy not nailed down will be employed because FACTS DONT MATTER, only THE AGENDA!! We can’t expect scoundrels to play fair, especially since NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK(interestingly the 1 month anniversary since Fetzer’s book was banned by Amazon…the one world book company & therefore not a coincidence). This is a massive PSYOP all around & from top to bottom.

        1. Rico, slap me with a wet noodle. You are right. I sat there wondering why so many people in Tulsa would care so much about SH. Even after all this time it did not dawn on me that absolutely everything is controlled, even down to lowly comment sections everywhere – if they let us comment at all.

          Clicking on the link Ric just posted I got Error 552. Another proof that they only let us see what they decide on. I marvel at this all encompassing control industry that is in its final stages. Fait accompli.

    3. .

      A classic example of the method …

      Paramahansa Yogananda died 7 March 1952

      Noah Pozner birth date reported as 20 November 2006

      INTerval =

      = 666 + 666 + 666 weeks

      666 + 666 + 666
      666 + 666 + 666
      666 + 666 + 666 days >

      666 x 6+6

      and / or :

      = 666 + 666 + 666 + 666 weeks

      666 + 666 days >

      666 x6

      It is also :

      = 444 + 444 + 444

      444 + 444 + 444 weeks
      444 + 444 + 444 days >

      444 x3 x3

      MG

    4. I wonder what this “grandmother” thought when she saw her grandson turned up also shot dead in Pakistan. Was it like losing him twice? Or did she think it moved the agenda forward in Pakistan so that children could attend school without fear? I mean, she’s a woman who thinks in agendas, in movements, and so even a mistaken posting of his picture would gladden her — I hesitate to call it “heart”.

      Meanwhile, in Southern California, the University of Redlands has posted a radio interview program about the shooting. The chief of police of San Bernardino is interviewed. It turns out he is an alumnus of Redlands. And of course the home of the shooters was a beeline from the campus, straight shot. If you do redlands.edu, I think you can listen too.

  8. .

    I’m working my way through the book, Nobody Died at Sandy Hook.

    I have many events already recorded for the Sandy Hook event so I’m very grateful for having a handy hardcopy reference to the myriad sources for the Sandy Hook script, especially James Tracy’s Timeline in Appendix C. Thank you one and all.

    Today, for example, the Hartford Courant article mentioned on page 324 has been deconstructed, very easily …

    Mass Murders Captivated Online User Believed To Be Adam Lanza

    http://articles.courant.com/2013-06-30/news/hc-adam-lanza-online-posts-20130630_1_wikipedia-poster-user

    That “piece” follows the script construction method seen so frequently in other psyops by including references to alleged events which are included in the narrative as allegorical references to other events, for the sole purpose of revealing the real perps and / or consolidation of the script.

    The article directs the user to the internet forum, http://www.thehighroad.org/ – “an online discussion board dedicated to the discussion and advancement of responsible firearms ownership.”

    By searching that forum for the texts mentioned by the Courant, the poster’s username, which the Courant does not reveal, but reports “who authorities believe was Newtown gunman Adam Lanza”, is revealed to be “Kaynbred”.

    Similarly, references in the Courant aticle to other shooting events are included for the same reasons.

    If someone who is familiar with Wikipedai would care to research the Courant claims about “Adam Lanza’s” alleged “Wikipedia editing” that would be a valubale contribution …

    Perhaps one day, media studies courses will include this method ?

    As an example, the Courant states:

    “He [ Adam Lanza ] would have been 17 years old at the time of the posts …”

    The mythical “Adam Lanza” entity has the “birth date attribute” set to 22 April 1992.

    The first post for user “Kaynbred” on thehighroad.org was made on 26 August 2009

    So, the “Adam Lanza” entity would have been precisely :

    = 17 years, 17 months, 7 days old

    http://www.timeanddate.com/date/dateadded.html?d1=22&m1=4&y1=1992&type=add&ay=17&am=&aw=17&ad=7&rec=

    Which is occult speak is :

    = P7 years, P7 months, 7 days > 777

    http://www.numberplanet.com/number/11/index.html

    *

    Similarly, the last post the user Kaynbred made was on 23 February 2010, which was the 1026th day before the “Sandy Hook” event on 14 December 2012.

    1026 yields the familiar 3×3 grid of 911 and / or 3119

    Just two of the many decoded references in the article.

    *

    I’ve said before, many times, that every so-called “shooting event” is an attack on the US Constitution & 2nd Amendment.

    14 December 2012 was precisely :

    = 1321 months, 1321 days + 1321 days

    from the 4th March 1789 when the Constitution CIF (Came Into Force )

    1321 = P216 = P( 6x6x6 )

    Thus:

    = P( 6x6x6 ) months

    P( 6x6x6 ) days
    P( 6x6x6 ) days >

    666 666 666

    It was also, the inclusive, 221st anniversary of the adoption of the first 10 Amendments on 15 December 1791

    which, in occult speak is:

    = 343 months + 2309 months

    = 7x7x7 months + P( 7x7x7 ) months > 777 777

    *

    There are also very strong indicators to :

    GHW Bush

    Hillary Clinton

    The British Mandate for Palestine

    Dick Cheney

    Barack Obama

    Adolf Hitler

    Paramahansa Yogananda

    et al

    numerous other shooting events etc

    Perhaps the simplest to understand for now, is the relationship to the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, which began on 13 September 1994

    ( the very same day that the OKC narrative alleges that “Timothy McVeigh” started his “plot” … )

    and expired on 13 September 2004

    The “psyocpaths that be”, referenced the interval from this expiry to the “Sandy Hook” punishment event on 14 December 2012 thus :

    = 9 x 11 months

    MG

  9. Got into a big FB fight just last night about Sandy Hook. Several people privately PMd me saying they knew someone who lost a child. There is no arguing with them because, well, they are stuck in their beliefs. When asked for the research they’d done all anyone uses is Snopes or Wikipedia. But they don’t care to examine my proof, this very blog, to open their heads. Anyway, thanks for all you do. Some of us really appreciate it.

    1. Social media is a funny thing.
      If you look at the hashtags and posts on different “events” like Sandy Hook and 9/11, there are so many grief vultures. People would rather hash tag and blindly be spponfed MSM trash an event than question it or listen (without name calling) someone else’s take on said event.
      I can’t tell you how many forums, message boards I’m on and more than one member knew a child from Sandy Hook or they were supposed to be on of the 9/11 flights.
      Those kids must have been the most socialized children in the world and A380’s must have been used on 9/11.
      So I take any claims with a grain of salt when they use them to try and shut down a conversation

      1. The approach I take is “what if the news are more propaganda than truth?” There are two responses, the ones who say “what do you mean?” and the ones whose eyes are about to pop out and say not a word. The former is approachable, the latter is not.

  10. Many commenters argue that Sandy Hook is believed by the American people based on deceit. This is not the case, their belief is mostly based on delusion, a different thing. Of course for American power this is a process of delusion management, a deceitful process, and Obama, amazingly, put the US state behind this fantasy scenario to quell authorized dissent. But it is different for the American people who are subjected to the delusion management by American power.

    Initially I thought that the notion that this mass murder did not occur was preposterous. Power lies all the time; indeed, American power is largely based on ideological delusion, but that it would concoct a staged operation like this has no historical basis. American power routinely lies about what occurs, but not that it DOES indeed occur.

    But more or less accidentally, since I seldom watch videos, I viewed Robbie Parker pretending to be a bereaved parent, raising money for the Bereaved families. Why? Why would they hire an actor to do that?
    So then I read prof Tracy’s revelations, and was astonished to find that he was right. But it must be understood that this subverted the delusive preconceptions that I had about what occurs, and does not occur, in history.

    It is worse for some other Americans. An intelligent guy who does some construction work for me was so affected and shocked by Sandy Hook that he had nightmares about the massacre. it was EMOTIONALLY very real to him. When I relayed Tracy’s argument to him, he simply COULDN’T accept them emotionally. Whether he does or not, as the emotion fades, is problematical, because power is on the side of untruth, and he is vulnerable to power.

    So Tracy must be defended, not only the basis that what he says is true, but that he giving his opinion on the basis of the evidence he has collected. That even if he is wrong (he is not) there are anomalies that it is the function of media specialists to expose. This would be less threatening to his defenders, and over time they would be more able to digest the unauthorized and unprofessional truth about power delusions.

    1. As you mention in the story of the contractor who has nightmares over the event, no one can say what is roused in people by this, even perhaps depression, temptation to act it out themselves (in very immature people), the need to make a statement (attacks on mosques). At a certain level the government is right: whether or not it really happened hardly matters, if it can have such an emotional effect. That is why, in my opinion, they need never pull a Gladio killing: the public is so believing and trusting, it would not be necessary.

      But what are the objectives of the emotional impact? Historically, it is said that Rome needed to share with its mob the sensation of being in the places where it was spreading its conquests. We tend to believe in the reality of gladiatorial combat to the death, so that the public could really see a killing. But the circus had its tricks. The purpose was imperial, and that was to keep the mob occupied much like a television that was on half the year. How could fine thinkers and artists and generally classy Romans exist alongside this display? Well, they could until the internal problems of maintaining an empire caused collapse. You could look at the Colosseum as symptom. Unfortunately these hoaxes strike me pretty much the same way. It is desperation. Not even simple gun grabbing, I suppose, since there is as much rationale for arming yourself after hearing about this stuff as there is for taking away everyone’s guns. It just kind of balances out, but still the shows continue.

      I’ll be listening for signs of an underlying rationale in the San Bernardino event, if the chirping of all the other talking heads do not drown out what is coming from the San Berdoo chief cop.

    2. Folk, you’re quite right. I worked with a guy who virtually had a melt down over this. I’d never seen him that way before. In some deep psychological way this became “real” and “personal” for him.

      After a few days I was able to talk to him about it. He now understands that it was a hoax. He cannot explain his initial reaction.

      We all carry around baggage of one type or another. They apparently hit on a formula that triggers illogical emotions in many. I have no doubt that, just as they read our posts, they read those of the “true believers” as well.

      They keep altering the maze and measuring the lab rats.

      1. I am following an online course on fiction writing. One of the best lectures in it is about how we believe that a fictional character is real, and how our emotions are engaged by it. On a more mundane level, you have a soap opera, one of the most popular forms of vicarious living.
        You also have the image-making of candidates and of products which are sold by creating identifications. Direct tv and cable characters are contrasted – direct tv guys are smooth and savvy, while cable tv users are losers. The campaign against those who question MSM is a bit like that – the public is told that if they leave the MSM to examine “unvetted” material, they will be like the cable user and people will back away from them like they smell bad.

        But the creation of these Sandy Hook parents falls squarely into the tradition of how to make a fictional character – it is simple and intense, without a lot of boring continuity. We see the character mostly in some crisis – the primary crisis, then the secondary one of dealing with the first. The person is presented with a halo at sporting events, at memorial services, at places where they are receiving comfort and compassion. It’s a whole series of encounters to burnish the image, much as a political candidate would be presented. And so those who believe the story begin to feel that they know this person, or so they say. Real people do not generally move us this way. How many of the people who identify with the parents at Sandy Hook and defend them now against disbelief, would in their private lives spend half as much time with a real bereaved person? The ability to grieve with Sandy Hook does not involve middle of night phone calls – it is all so convenient and consumable.

        1. Precisely. They live vicariously through them. It’s “McGrief”. Just another product for consumption.

  11. I have mentioned here more than once that I discovered James Tracy through the reporting of the “nutty conspiracy professor,” and never went away.

    I have also repeatedly mentioned that what’s great about Tracy is his scrupulousness in sticking just to the facts, ma’am. He never cooks up a “theory” about what happens behind the stories the press promotes. He’s a media analyst, and he offers this world-wide graduate seminar the opportunity to flesh it out. That’s all.

    So if Lenny were to take him to court, there would be no evidence against him. He’s just presenting the media’s complete lack of genuine reporting. We, in the comment section, thrash out the theories about the motives and the techniques used to misdirect the public mind.

    So here, Lenny is trying another tack to destroy an honest man, by driving him into penury–but not using the courts (apparently, Lenny is suing Wolf, to destroy him financially, but that’s another story).

    Everyone who prays should be praying for James Tracy, and for his family. This is Christmas time, and the stress must be particularly burdensome for him. I’m glad he let us know about this. Pray for him and his family.

    Patrick

        1. When people realize we have a phony government that is full of “crisis actors”, if you will, then we can get down to business. The entire set up is frauds that put their family and friends in positions. Sandy Hook and the other BS events, including terrorism, simply expand bureaucracy and open more phony jobs for real money. We failed watchful eye and we are now, in fact, slaves.

    1. Pat, there is nothing wrong, per se, with coming up with theories. Science uses theories and subsequent research to elucidate the deep, dark unknowns. You make a hypothesis based on a null assumption, and then you try to destroy the null assumption.
      Why I say this is because the many engineers and scientists who attacked the unknowns behind 911 went through many steps prior to coming up with the current knowledge and this included making the null hypothesis first and foremost. Sure, if you are writing for a scholarly journal, you have to take a different tack, but people out in la-la land should be exposed to some ideas to keep their minds as flexible as possible. We are not winning the minds of enough Americans with all of our pomp and circumstance, so what is the solution to this? Yes, there are many variables that impede our progress but we’ve got to become as multivalent as possible so we can attract as many outliers as possible and bring them to the realm of analytical thought, not just TeeVee watching. We fail more than we succeed, agreed?

      1. I completely agree with you Gil.

        My point is to do with how James approaches his specialty. So-called “conspiracy theory” has been made into a “third rail,” almost certain to electrocute you on the spot if you touch it. James has made examining media pageants a subspecialty of his primary one, media criticism.

        So, rather than immediately, or even gradually, open himself to be labeled a kook, and be brushed aside as an unserious person, he has scrupulously held his tongue (and keyboard fingers) about what he believes about the various false flags and hoaxes. He presents the raw reporting of the press, and asks questions about their reporting, and why they ignore important evidence. When others speculate as to why the press is behaving as it is, James presents the theories as they develop.

        So if Lenny took Tracy to court, he could find no evidence of what he believes happened at Sandy Hook that morning. All he will find is Tracy’s willingness to encourage even the wildest speculation of the fevered minds of conspiracy-land. There is no evidence Tracy believes these things; his business is examining how the press does its business.

        This puts Lenny in a tight spot, if he wants to close James Tracy down. So he’s trying to get him fired from his position, with the assumption that no other University would hire him in the wake of the controversy that surrounds his work here at MHB.

        James’ scrupulousness in not showing his cards should block any effort to get him fired of course, but when God handed out spines he did not give any to University Administrators. They are the most craven louts known to man, and no doubt would LOVE to no longer have to deal with this particular controversy. Hence the effort within Tracy’s employer/institution to somehow be empowered to revoke tenure.

        I’ll bet that if James had systematically told everyone which theories he believes in no uncertain terms, his ability to withstand this storm would be considerably lessened.

    2. There is a part of me that thinks it would be nice to “get into court” and destroy them. That, however, is a fallacy. I suspect that “Lenny” is a construct. I could be wrong.

      There is nothing illegal about questioning a story. It is quite easy to avoid the trauma of someone’s writing by simply not reading it.

      “Mr. Smith goes to Washington” died a long time ago. In real life university presidents and provosts are subject to pressure. When the governor of a state and various federal officials are part of a fraud the ante gets pretty high.

      Is this right? Of course not. The reality is that “right” only wins in the realm of the Spirit, not in politics and skullduggery.

      In a textbook version we are perfectly within our rights to disbelieve anything. If someone wants us to believe a story the burden of proof is on them. If someone accuses you of murder it would be handy to have a corpse. Of course, quite improperly, some have been adjudged guilty of murder WITHOUT a corpse.

      TEE VEE is not “proof”. Just because the amazingly strange A.C. looks balefully into the lens and swears it to be true does not make it so. What sort of training do you think he got down at The Company?

      In my humble opinion it is them who need to be sued. We are not threatening anyone. We are asking for proof.

  12. One shooter, targets all over the place and a 100% kill ratio (precisely NO wounded-and-surviving victims)?

    The anticipated ratio – unless the victims were utterly compliant, utterly passive, standing or sitting or lying still to be murdered “execution style” – would’ve been about three (3) wounded for every one (1) person killed.

    This stank on ice – indeed, it REEKED – the moment this story hit the news.

    1. I’ve cited your statement/conclusion for years. I used to have the stats somewhere. All these hoaxes, no one dies in ambulance or in hospital. ZERO! They all die on the scene. Impossible. Proves one more leg of the staged events. And why is that, bc they’d have to talk to DRs and family members and hospital staff would be there for more questioning. They want to keep it simple and isolated. No one dies anywhere.

      1. Writes cp3:

        …no one dies in ambulance or in hospital. ZERO! They all die on the scene. Impossible.

        Quite so. Any physician with experience covering an Emergency Department is familiar with situations in which the ambulance crews “scoop-and-run” everything except the obvious dead-right-there cases in the hope that some resuscitative effort might be successful at the hospital (and this is true rather more often than most people might surmise). Most often, all you can do is pronounce death – and the moment at which the physician makes that pronouncement is recorded as the legal time of death – but there are situations in which the spark of life persists, and the treatment protocols can secure a rescue.

        26 fatal gunshot wound cases, 2 allegedly wounded and survived (Hammond and Pisani), “one injured child was taken to a hospital for treatment, but was later declared dead” (Wiki-bloody-pedia; one kid?) but no indication that any victim underwent implementation of Pre-Hospital Trauma Life Support (PHTLS) protocols on the scene or Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) procedures once they’re brought to the nearest hospital? Any such documentation? Any reports written or dictated? What the hell?

        1. Me too. More than any other element, the treatment of the “wounded” and “deceased” decided it for me. Simple empathy and procedure aside, imagine the lawsuits.

    2. Your comment catalyzed an insight that’s been roiling around my brain for these years. Various elements of Sandy Hook struck me as obviously fake, but one less highlighted one was not just the 100% kill ratio, it was the number of bullets supposedly fired into each victim. Besides the obvious problem of a 112 pound weakling managing to tote around the weaponry/ammunition necessary to support the tally, alongside of the time required to reload, there was this issue of an asperger’s/autist type committing such an act. Autism is similar in a way to psychosis; both are self referential and lock the sufferers of them in a certain myopia.

      It’s a mutually exclusive posture to want to murder all these people at the same time as being imprisoned by such emotional tunnel vision. The number of bullets really got to me, and now I realize why. It’s just not the nature of someone so incapable of getting out of that tunnel to lash out with such premeditation and controlled broad scale anger. True psychosis is rarely violent as it precludes the grasp on concretes that aggression requires, while autistics grasp the concrete details so obsessively it disables the kind of broad scale hateful ‘vision’ attributed to Adam Lanza.

    3. There was one woman supposedly shot in the foot, but of course, she was never interviewed by any of the accomplices in the press. You would think this woman could even make a few bucks giving her story to some tabloid show.

    1. Yes, just imagine a few years from now. They waddle out on the walkers; “Jesse could bench press 550lbs when he was in the cradle and once strangled a raccoon that was after the dog”.

      Gene will give a “twilight performance” of “she was…..frozen!”. They can finish up with a few honorary laps around the firehouse.

      1. I know, but it’s a way to keep in the loop with family and church members. I know everything I post goes into a database, so I don’t link to family members, have any of my social history on it, or post or comment anything too controversial; I mostly just post some unschooling quotes and “like” pictures of friends’ kids.

  13. If the Pozners, and others, really wanted to hurt you and make you look stupid, they would release all the information and documents they’ve been hiding from the public. But obviously, they can’t. The people who are behind Sandy Hook rely on the ignorance, apathy and misplaced emotions of the easily distracted public. And that’s a very difficult, if not impossible, thing to get around.

    However, I believe that at least subconsciously, many more people than we realize know there is something very wrong with this event. The people have forgotten this “atrocity” pretty quickly and that’s why the supposed family members/actors must try to keep it alive.

    I hope that in my lifetime I will be able to witness this fraud crumble and the people who participated suffer the legal consequences.

    1. I’ve asked myself and other confidants the question “do a lot of people know something is rotten in Denmark or not”? I’d like to agree with you on this issue, but cannot. People do not read newspapers cover to cover. A selective process is in play and their mind’s eye selects things to read below the level of their consciousness. First of all, reading a newspaper is like reading a journal of disinfo. The “news” is gathered and doctored before being printed.
      When a news reporter goes down on Main St. and interviews people by asking a question or two, very often the person being asked a very simple question cannot answer it. Like, is President Obama a Democrat or Republican, for instance. Loads of people cannot answer this question. LaLa Land is alive and well in America.
      People don’t know. They don’t know and hide their knowledge, they just don’t know, period. They never did because they were hit with the BS paddle right during the initial stages of the SH reporting period and this formed the template for their adoption of lies and disinfo. Once the initial DNA is laid down, the person uses this as his basis for evaluation of subsequent verbiage. After a period of, say, 6 months, people have been cluster bombed with lies and disinfo from every angle and they adopt this as their weltanschauung on the subject.

    2. Right now, the Pozners are posting at sympathetic sites, or their statement is being published at them (much like various pundits). The comments below their trashing of Tracy are interesting, because the commenters range from those who merely want to comfort the bereaved, those who realize that to go to certain places means you are not a nice person (because you really hate Obama, are a Holocaust denier, etc.), and those who think a rhetorical question is the same as a factual question, and that by posing it they have asked all that need be asked.

      Nobody who agrees with the Pozner’s seems to dispute about facts or sufficiency of evidence. It just does not compute for them. There are also those who think that to question such an event is tantamount to “hate speech” (which might explain some of Trump’s popularity – his tendency to say things which are unspeakable lately, whether true or useful or not). I also see that many seek a more European system here – no guns, and jailing for forbidden speech (two sides of the same coin, perhaps).

      Meanwhile, the Pozner’s seem content enough to keep up the griping about how hurt they are, threatening to sue, but never filing. They have no claim they can actually make, under our legal system. But there are those who believe that in questioning the event, those seemingly affected by it have been injured in some way. Thus free speech and free inquiry supposedly causes actual injury because there is suffering from hearing such disbelief. Anyone who would allow such a suit the time of day would be incapable of understanding the First Amendment.

      There are also those who think academic tenure is allowing Tracy to get away with too much freedom of thought. Some even seek to consider FSU as having been created by their own peoples’ money, therefore it should not be allowed to have people teaching there who, they project, belong to some enemy group, inimical to closed ranks of their own (around people like the Pozner’s). The underlying truth of the matter means less than nothing to them, and academic tenure is only for those who have passed their litmus tests.

  14. There is a blog called “sandyhookanalysis” where the owner of the blog has published a critique of the recent book “Nobody died at Sandy Hook”. The author of the post calls into question some of the evidence put forth in the book. I don’t know if this relates to the part of the book James Tracy is responsible for, but are you planning to publish an answer to this attempt to debunk the book?

    The author seems invested in the defense of Sandy Hook as a real event and is by no means an impartial “analyst”. He is seemingly an ally of the Pozner family and his critique is tainted by slander and sarcasm.

    1. Why do these criminals use staged hoaxes?

      The following video is an absolutely brilliant discussion from a clinician who explains why the staged or hoax model is used rather than real events. This is a must-listen for anybody interested in understanding this topic. Almost all criminals tend to start with the “Poor Me, I’m a Victim” meme as cover for their evil or criminality. Ownership of victim-hood is a powerful franchise to be used to attack and suppress targeted groups.

      Real people and real events “go off the tracks.” Real victims don’t follow scripts, can’t be controlled and get to be problems for the Crime Syndicate. The first truthers from 9/11 were real families of real victims.
      http://winteractionables.com/?p=28324

      1. Thanks for the link Russ. Another reason to not have real deaths. Real dead people have real family who want answers. An occasionally a few will not buy the official narrative and start asking uncomfortable questions.

  15. Hi James Tracy,

    I thought college was a place of critical thinking, higher learning, and higher inquiry. The subject matter aside, isn’t it part of education to have alternate views, and explore differences of opinions, those opinions based on substantial research and investigation?

    I was listening to John B Wells program, Caravan to Midnight, that interviewed Dr Hamamoto, from UC Davis, California, recently. He is finding himself in a similar position of intimidation for some of his insights into cultural manipulations of students, faculty, and all people, actually. In your situation, you have a name or head that is using intimidation and manipulation to attack you, personally, to damage control any inquiry regarding the perception of loss. It is becoming increasingly more insidious and visible that there is some serious power behind this censorship.

    Dr. Hamamoto, mentioned that he has obtained an attorney by the name of Mr. Segal to represent him in any actions taken against him by the institution. He mentioned that another notable facility member retained him due to similar suppression. I don’t recall his name.

    I am writing this because it may be helpful to you in the future to speak to Mr. Hamamoto, and also, Mr. Segal, in the event you need council to represent your rights. As I see it, this may be what is necessary to stop this kind of harassment. It seems to me that the ‘injured’ party is the victimizer. You may wish to contact John B to be interviewed, if you have not already.

    The best armor is knowledge, and truth will prevail.

    Sincerely,

    Karen G.


    1. This treatment of “heretics” is not new or unusual. In the science field, anyone who PROVES that Einstein was wrong is vilified beyond measure, for example. Same goes for other scientists’ theories, postulates, “laws”, and principles. When new evidence comes to light, the discoverer is variously ignored, vilified, or even killed (remember all those biologists killed a few years back? There were twenty-something of them.) In the medical field, the same thing happens. Anyone who discovers a fact which contravenes “accepted” medical “fact” is vilified by the same methods. Case in point, Dr. Cathcart who cured 60 cases of polio with nothing more than mega doses of Vitamin C. Or Professor Bechamp, who showed that Pasteur and the “Germ Theory” of disease was a sham. Same goes for economists who point out that the present money system was doomed to failure from the beginning. On and on and on. We have always lived at the mercy of a criminal organization.

      People who set themselves to beLIEving in the social media of the time (all throughout history), are doomed to be led by the nose, and to one extent or another, enslaved. That’s just the way it is.

  16. Truth cannot be compared to anything but itself.

    I do not agree with you on the general makeup of our citizenry (‘decent’, ‘good hearted’?). A person cannot be misinformed (not at the level of today’s average ‘citizen’) and still be decent and good hearted. Instead one is a tool, a replicate and a device of that (evil) which so blatantly misinforms.

    Additionally, but along the same lines: We already have both tyranny (in the form of technocracy) and enormous losses of freedom (again in the form of widespread technocracy). These are major gaffes and flaws in your prepared and otherwise, good statement.

    Nonetheless, I do continue to support and applaud this site. Quite simply because it is one of the best we have, at present. .

    Sandy Hook was a massacre all right, a massacre of the truth.

    Please continue.

    Thank you very much.

    Ned Lud

  17. Thank you for standing your ground and continuing to demand an open, honest, independent investigation into the Sandy Hook incident !
    We will not let it rest until they have been exposed for their lies.

Comments are closed.