Another day, another fake attack – this time a “vehicular” terror attack perpetrated by one Sayfullo Saipov, a native of Tashkent, Uzbekistan, who supposedly mowed down bicyclists and pedestrians in a rented Home Depot truck on a bike path in lower Manhattan on October 31, 2017. This “Halloween massacre” is billed as “the deadliest terror attack on New York City since September 11, 2001.”
Sayfullo Habibullaevic Saipov. Image: New York Daily News.
The crack team of investigators from the NYPD and FBI figured the whole thing out in a matter of hours, helped by evidence provided by Sayfullo himself: his alleged cries of “Allahu Akbar,” a note found on the ground with language associated with ISIS (“It will endure”), and the 90 videos and 3,800 images on his cell phone, which of course the FBI recovered. Or, uh, we seem to have TWO cell phones left at the scene by Saipov, according to some reports.
The rented Home Depot truck that Saipov allegedly used to mow down cyclists and pedestrians in New York, although there is no trace of blood anywhere on the vehicle. Image: NPR.
The cell phone videos reportedly show ISIS fighters killing prisoners as well as instructions for making an “explosive device.” The images include shots of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the supposed leader of ISIS. Saipov is said to have been inspired by one video in which al-Baghdadi “questioned what Muslims in the United States and elsewhere were doing to respond to the killing of Muslims in Iraq.”
This from a criminal complaint filed just 24 hours after the (fake) attack occurred, drawing on an interview of Saipov allegedly conducted by the authorities in the hospital, where he was taken after being shot by NYPD officer Ryan Nash. Nash is said to have fired nine shots at Saipov, injuring him, uh, in the stomach, as was first reported, and then it was the leg, and, well, we’re not quite sure about his injuries. Saipov supposedly wanted an ISIS flag displayed in his hospital room.
Sayfullo Saipov in court on November 1, 2017, artist’s sketch. Image: New York Daily News.
Although shot at close range in the stomach or leg or both, Saipov was able to appear in court the very next day, hunched in a wheelchair, dressed in a gray shirt and pants, with his hair sticking up slightly in the back, according to a colorful description reported by the New York Times. His hands and feet were shackled. Lest one think that he was being treated inhumanely, considering he had just been shot (up to nine times) by a police officer, we are told that his court-appointed lawyer, David E. Patton, asked that he receive a daily change of dressing on his wounds. Officer Nash has been declared a hero.
Officer Ryan Nash, looking uncomfortable while speaking to the press. Image: New York Times.
Meanwhile, the photographic evidence of the attack itself consists of the bikes and bodies on the bike path, the Home Depot truck with its front end smashed (but no blood on the truck), and a school bus that Saipov reportedly rammed—although the damage to the bus was so high up that it could only have occurred if the truck had been airborne. The debris on the bike path was also problematic, looking like props hauled in for the press. The bikes were suspiciously “mangled” (as described by the media) in a way that would not have occurred if hit by a truck.
Mangled bicycle after supposedly being hit by Saipov’s truck. Image: NBC News.
YouTube investigator Anaconda Malt Liquor has provided some footage of bicycles being crushed by a machine and run over by a tank, which look great compared to those on the bike trail mangled by Saipov.
Bicycle being run over by a tank. Anaconda Malt Liquor 11.
Same bicycle after being run over. Anaconda Malt Liquor 11.
Then there’s the bent sign post on the bike path—but how did Saipov’s truck do this strange kind of damage?
Bent sign post. Image: NBC News.
As for the victims, the alleged dead bodies were covered with white sheets, with no blood in evidence—although it was claimed by “eye witnesses” (crisis actors) and reported in the press that there was blood everywhere, and even “visible tire marks on the bodies of at least two of the victims crushed by the truck.” As Hannity would say, “Really?”
An officer stands near an allegedly dead body covered with a sheet, with no EMTs on the scene, and no trace of blood anywhere. Image: New York Daily News.
The injured were transported with great fanfare for the cameras, with a multitude of participants, suggestive of the old light-bulb jokes.
How many emergency workers does it take to move a stretcher? Image: CBS News.
Five of the dead were reportedly friends from Rosario, Argentina, who had made the trip to New York for their 30th high school reunion. Of course they rented some bikes and hit the bike trail immediately once they were in the cultural capital of the western hemisphere—what else could they imagine doing? The group totaled eight men (three of whom survived), photographed in their LIBRE T-shirts—said to be a “joke” as they were traveling without their wives. Or perhaps I should say Photoshopped in their LIBRE T-shirts, since the image is a bizarre concoction of huge and small fellows, with odd-looking arms draped around each other in a way that could only be accomplished digitally.
Photoshopped composite of eight Argentine friends, five of whom supposedly died in the New York truck attack. Image: New York Times.
The other alleged dead included Ann-Laure Decadt, a tourist from Belgium; Darren Drake of New Milford, NJ; and Nicholas Cleves of Manhattan. So much easier to control the narrative when most of the dead are foreigners.
Meanwhile, ISIS has now claimed credit for the (fake) attack in its weekly Al-Naba newsletter, calling Saipov a “soldier of the Caliphate” who carried out the attack in response to their call to target “citizens of the Crusader countries involved in the alliance against the Islamic State.” Saipov is said to have been planning the attack for the past year, in response to the al-Baghdadi video. According to the New York Times, Saipov had followed instructions in the November 2016 issue of the Islamic State magazine, Rumiyah, which called for truck attacks on “the enemies of Allah.”
November 2016 edition of Rumiyah with instructions on vehicular attacks.
The Times cites the following details: (1) the driver should continue to keep driving as long as possible and not exit the vehicle during the attack, (2) continue crushing the remains of the victims until it is no longer possible to do so, (3) then jump out of the vehicle with a secondary weapon like a gun or a knife, (4) write a note, including the phrase “The Islamic State will remain,” and (5) throw it out the window of the vehicle as the attack is being carried out. Bingo! Saipov carried out these instructions to a tee—or the perps who orchestrated the attack made sure it would look that way.
Those following the Islamic State will know that ISIS was—and is—a creation of the Western military alliance, including Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar. The Islamic State was inserted into Syria and northern Iraq to give “us” an enemy to “fight,” with the primary goal of taking out Assad and taking over Syria. So either way—fake attack or ISIS operation—WE carried out the New York Halloween massacre.
But, as is patently obvious, the official story of the New York attack is absurd. This was terrorism but not “Islamic.” It was a hoax, like all the rest of the post-9/11 attacks—meant to terrorize the citizenry, impose higher levels of “security,” and take away our rights. This includes deleting accounts from YouTube, subverting searches on Google, censoring books on Amazon, and firing tenured professors, in the guise of protecting us from bullying, hate speech, etc., but actually to quash our research on these cruel hoaxes. How disturbing that so many people—intel agents, politicians, government and corporate employees, academics, the courts, police, firemen, EMTs, doctors and hospital workers, the mainstream and alternative media, and paid crisis actors—are involved in the perpetration.
VIVIAN LEE is the nom de plume of a tenured professor at an east coast university.
This article was published at JamesFetzer.org and MemoryHoleBlog.org.
 “It’s just……what’s the word I’m looking for?” Anaconda Malt Liquor 11. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjjvTajRUP4. The Anaconda Malt Liquor 11 YouTube channel was taken down, and this important video is no longer available.
Judge Affirms Prof. James Tracy’s First Amendment Rights
James Tracy was “exposed” on CNN in 2013 by Anderson Cooper, who branded him a “conspiracy theorist” for his investigation of anomalies surrounding the alleged Sandy Hook Newtown school shooting as portrayed in the media.
On February 21, 2017, a US federal judge ruled that former Florida Atlantic University (FAU) Professor James Tracy’s civil rights lawsuit can proceed to discovery. As this author has observed the case stands to set a precedent in matters of free speech and academic freedom throughout the nation. Defendants include FAU, its Board of Trustees, President, Dean, Associate Provost, the Florida Education Association, and the faculty union United Faculty of Florida (UFF), along with the union’s FAU Chapter President and Service Unit Director.
Tracy was terminated from his tenured professorship in January 2016, ostensibly for questioning university policy regarding the mandatory reporting of “outside activities,” and refusing to submit paperwork disclosing his personal blogging at his website, Memory Hole Blog. Tracy argued that his blogging involved the exercise of his right to free speech as a private US citizen. The popular website was hacked or otherwise sabotaged by unnamed parties after the November 2016 election and, as of this writing, is no longer in operation.
FAU and UFF engaged in conspiracy
Tracy received a spate of unfavorable publicity by CNN and other news outlets in 2013, shortly after the alleged shooting at Sandy Hook School in Newtown, CT. The university set out to discipline Tracy as a result, attempting to dissuade him from making any further statements about the Newtown incident. FAU’s faculty union, UFF, filed a grievance for Tracy on free speech grounds. In late 2015, however, union officials refused to defend the professor.
Tracy’s suit cites UFF as co-defendants, arguing that union officers conspired with university administrators to place an informal gag order on Tracy while allowing the university’s termination proceedings to go forward uncontested. At the same time, Tracy contends, union representatives discouraged him from filing a grievance or lawsuit, instead trying to intimidate him into resigning in lieu of termination. When Tracy refused to resign, the university fired him outright.
FAU’s “Conflict of Interest” policy and its chilling effect on free speech
Part of the case involves a challenge to FAU’s “Conflict of Interest” policy, which extends to all university faculty. FAU and many of Florida’s other public universities now compel faculty members to present all their “outside activities” for administrative approval, whether compensated or not. Tracy objected to the policy, which would have required him to submit an account of his personal blogging. His suit argues that this is a form of prior restraint forbidden by the First Amendment.
Tracy’s concerns were shared by other members of FAU’s faculty as well, including senior political science professor Timothy Lenz, who described a climate of “fear and uncertainty,” speaking at a faculty senate meeting on September 4, 2015. Lenz enjoined administrators to “please call off your dogs,” continuing at length:
The Administration has been sending faculty members who are engaged in outside activity nasty letters, letters of discipline or letters that threaten faculty members who are engaged in outside activity with discipline … there’s a great deal of suspicion that you can say, or write, or do something, but if you say, write, or do something that the Administration disagrees with you’re going to get one of these nasty letters put in your personnel file and that’s untenable.
Tracy’s suit names as defendants individual FAU administrators present at the September 4 faculty senate meeting, including FAU President John Kelly. Kelly and his co-defendants moved to dismiss the first complaint, which was granted in part, necessitating a Second Amended Complaint, filed on December 28, 2016. This second complaint has been upheld, with the defendants’ motion to dismiss denied in a February 21, 2017, decision by Judge Robin Rosenberg. The judge refers to John Kelly’s involvement in her analysis:
The inference from the allegations in the Second Amended Complaint is that Defendant Kelly was personally (and not vicariously) involved in a retaliatory violation of Plaintiff’s First Amendment rights. As a result, Defendant Kelly is sufficiently on notice of the claim against him such that he is able to answer that claim.
Count I – Retaliation in Violation of Right to Free Speech, against Defendant FAU and Defendants President John Kelly, Associate Provost Diane Alperin, and College of Arts and Letters Dean Heather Coltman.
Count II – Conspiracy to Interfere with Plaintiff’s Civil Rights, against Defendants Alperin, Coltman, Kelly, UFF President Robert Zoeller, Jr., UFF Service Unit Director Michael Moats, UFF, Florida Education Association, and FAU.
Count III – Facial Challenge to FAU’s Conflict of Interest Policy, against Defendant FAU.
Count IV – As-Applied Challenge to Plaintiff’s Right to Free Speech, against Defendant FAU.
Count V – Declaratory Judgment and Injunction, against Defendant FAU.
Count VI – State Law Breach of Contract, against Defendant FAU.
Case proceeds to discovery
After Tracy initiated his lawsuit in April 2016, FAU’s attorneys began filing repeated court motions, arguing that Tracy’s suit was “frivolous,” that no conspiracy existed, and that Tracy’s termination was due to his alleged misconduct and failure to disclose his blogging activities in a timely fashion. By this means, the defendants succeeded in precluding discovery for over six months.
These delaying tactics have been brought to an end with Rosenberg’s February 21 decision, in which “the court concludes that Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint satisfies federal pleading standards and does not amount to mere ‘labels and conclusions or a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action,’” as FAU and UFF attorneys have argued.
Tracy’s legal team has now forced FAU to release thousands of internal emails between administrators, trustees, and non-university parties under Florida’s Sunshine Law. Many of the documents tend to confirm the suit’s conspiracy allegations, including notes from a meeting between FAU counsel and administrators strategizing on how to discipline Tracy, and emails between Kelly and FAU’s chief trustee on Tracy’s pending termination.
Two excerpts from defendant Heather Coltman’s notes of January 2013, cautioning conspirators against email communications and acknowledging a First Amendment issue.
Fake News and media blackout on the status of Tracy’s lawsuit
After Rosenberg dismissed part of the First Amended Complaint, the Florida Sun Sentinel—which has published a multitude of defamatory articles targeting Tracy—falsely reported that the entire lawsuit had been thrown out. This erroneous report was then picked up by the Associated Press and broadcast nationally (e.g. here, here and here). Only after Tracy’s attorney contacted the management of the Sun Sentinel to complain was the story revised. The Sun Sentinel has neglected to report on the court order allowing the suit to proceed. Nor has the mainstream media taken notice, with only a few exceptions.
In contrast to the media frenzy over Tracy’s research on the Newtown incident, in which he was viciously attacked in op-eds, letters to the editor, and news stories in print and on television, there is a conspicuous silence now that the case will proceed to trial. A legal victory for Professor Tracy would set a major precedent for free speech and academic freedom jurisprudence, and would decisively bolster safeguards for university employees—and indeed all employees—to comment freely on matters of public importance without fear of losing their jobs.
As an alternative to the mainstream press, Memory Hole Blog was used by Tracy and other contributors to draw attention to anomalous news coverage and analyze media reporting on controversial events. Many of these observations were deemed “controversial” or “conspiracy theories” by the very news outlets that came under scrutiny—including CNN and the New York Times—organizations now in the hot seat for disseminating “Fake News” themselves. This battle is currently raging over unsubstantiated allegations in the mainstream media against President Trump, who is called a “conspiracy theorist” himself by the press.
Should Tracy lose his case, the outcome would be disastrous for free speech rights. A decision favoring FAU’s defense could be used by almost any employer, academic or otherwise, to further unconstitutionally monitor and restrict employee expression. This would likely intensify in the current US academic environment, rife with campaigns targeting “politically incorrect” speech and behavior. “The way it stands, [FAU] could start firing people for not disclosing their Facebook pages,” Tracy’s attorney Louis Leo IV said following a December court appearance.
The case moves forward
On February 28th the faculty union and FAU submitted separate responses to Tracy’s Second Amended Complaint, maintaining there was no conspiracy to fire Tracy and reasserting that the cause was his failure to follow FAU’s “outside activities” policy. In its response, FAU characterized Tracy’s repeated attempts to obtain clarification on the unconstitutional policy as “belligerent” and “rebellious.” “While Plaintiff appeared to embrace his nonconformist behavior thinking it would publicize his interests in the light he deemed helpful,” FAU’s attorneys wrote, “the Defendant University’s policy and intent were unrelated to such interests and were intended to provide Defendant University with necessary information for various legitimate and proper reasons.”
FAU is also using the 11th Amendment’s notion of the “sovereign immunity” of state governments and agencies as part of its defense. However, the 11th Amendment does not give the states the right to violate federal law or the US Constitution. According to Alden v. Maine, “A State’s constitutional privilege to assert its sovereign immunity in its own courts does not confer upon the State a concomitant right to disregard the Constitution.”
With the discovery process now proceeding, FAU’s defense looks increasingly weak. A flood of internal documents obtained under Florida’s open records law indicates that university officials met repeatedly to strategize on how they would discipline Tracy without appearing to violate his First Amendment right to free speech. As these meeting notes and emails reveal, there was as much obsession in quelling the controversy surrounding Tracy’s blog as there was in the publicity his firing generated.
Based on the Rosenberg denial to dismiss, the case will now proceed to trial. Tracy is seeking declaratory relief upholding his right to free speech, injunctive relief with reinstatement to tenured employment and full restoration of benefits and lost wages, relief from the requirement to report “outside activities” for Tracy and his colleagues, compensatory damages, punitive damages, and attorneys’ fees as permitted by law.
VIVIAN LEE is the nom de plume of a tenured professor at an east coast university.
This article was published at GlobalResearch.ca and also at MemoryHoleBlog.com (now MemoryHoleBlog.org).
I don’t do it for the money. I’ve got enough, much more than I’ll ever need. I do it to do it. Deals are my art form. Other people paint beautifully on canvas or write wonderful poetry. I like making deals, preferably big deals. That’s how I get my kicks.
-Donald Trump, The Art of the Deal
Donald Trump with his book, The Art of the Deal. Image: The Guardian.
The stunning win by Donald J. Trump in the November 8th U.S. presidential election took many by surprise, since Hillary Clinton was the chosen candidate. Everyone seemed to think that Clinton would win – either legitimately or in a rigged election. News coverage favored Clinton by a wide margin, and the only major network to give Trump a break was Fox News. Most polls predicted that Clinton would win the presidency, with her odds of winning put as high as 85% and Trump’s as low as 35%. The pundits are now asking how they all got it wrong.
Blame is being placed on “the e-mail scandal,” with James Comey’s letter of October 28 to the U.S. Congress refocusing attention on Clinton’s private e-mails just 11 days before the election. FBI Director Comey reopened the investigation after another 650,000 e-mails were found, this time on the laptop of Anthony Weiner, husband of top Clinton aide Huma Abedin. The laptop was confiscated by the New York Police Department (NYPD) and turned over to the FBI. On November 6, Comey caved to pressure, announcing that no charges were warranted, but some said the damage had been done.
Election night was a long, drawn-out affair, with final results not in until 2:40 am on Wednesday. The television networks “called” the electoral vote in the states, a notoriously undemocratic way of deciding U.S. elections before all the votes have actually been counted. Fox News ran consistently high vote counts for Trump, as opposed to the lower numbers predicted at CNN. Dramatic coverage continued into the wee hours, with a number of states said to be “too close to call” – including Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Arizona, all of which eventually went to Trump, who won by a landslide.
Megyn Kelly going to find out why Fox can’t call any more states for Trump. Image Fox News.
Although many states were “called” earlier in the evening based on partial results and exit polls, the last few states were agonized over by the networks, with Fox anchor Megyn Kelly walking back to the desk of experts twice to ask them why they could not call these key states – and when they might be able to do so. According to Kelly, she thought Fox would be able to call the election around 11 pm. She said she expected Clinton to win, until there was an abrupt shift, when “the real vote” started to come in. She ascribed the dramatic turnaround to “a hidden Trump vote…It was a resounding victory. I have never seen anything like this. You will never have a result this shocking where people got it shockingly this wrong.”
A return to Anthony Weiner’s laptop may provide an explanation.
Anthony Weiner. Image Washington Times.
Unnamed but highly-placed sources, including NYPD detectives and prosecutors, revealed that the laptop contained “enough evidence to put Hillary (Clinton) and her crew away for life.” Also reportedly involved were Huma Abedin, Bill Clinton, Jeffrey Epstein – convicted pedophile, as well as members of the U.S. Congress, the Saudis, and other interests in the Middle East. Epstein and his “Lolita Express” have been associated with numerous well-known people, such as Alan Dershowitz, Prince Andrew, and Bill Clinton. The NYPD reportedly said that if the FBI and Department of Justice did not issue indictments against “Clinton and co-conspirators,” they would go public with the e-mails. According to an NYPD chief:
What’s in the emails is staggering and as a father, it turned my stomach…There is not going to be any Houdini-like escape from what we found. We have copies of everything. We will ship them to WikiLeaks or I will personally hold my own press conference if it comes to that…People are going to prison.
This being the case, what better way to stanch the blood than to give Trump the presidency?
Although Comey let Clinton off the hook, it seems clear that forces within the government had decided she was a liability. Should she be elected, the emails would come out, and she would be indicted along with many others. And Trump had vowed to investigate “crooked Hillary” with chants from supporters to “lock her up.” Inconveniently, as it now turned out, the election had been fixed in favor of Clinton. Clearly it was time to make a deal with Trump.
Donald Trump in 1985, shortly before the publication of The Art of the Deal. Image Los Angeles Times.
The best thing you can do is deal from strength, and leverage is the biggest strength you can have. Leverage is having something the other guy wants. Or better yet, needs. Or best of all, simply can’t do without.
-Donald Trump, The Art of the Deal
Let’s say that Trump was approached by government insiders and told he could be president – if he agreed to certain terms. Let’s say that the deal was this: Trump gets a win on November 8th and becomes the nation’s 45th president; he lets all allegations against Clinton and her foundation drop; he respects Obama’s “legacy”; and he agrees to partner with Israel. This deal was struck after Comey’s letter of October 28. Clinton was given notice as Election Day approached (although she may have held out hope that she could win). And the news teams were informed during the course of the election.
When the counter-fix went live, the networks experienced the turnaround – the “hidden Trump vote” referred to by Megyn Kelly. Around 10 or 11 pm, the anchors began to refer to Trump as the winner, frequently correcting themselves or qualifying their statements: “I mean, IF he wins,” or “that is, presuming he is elected.” This included Anderson Cooper and his cronies at CNN, who suddenly turned conciliatory toward Trump after months of abuse and slander. The consolation prize went to Clinton: winning the popular vote. Even this was predicted by the networks, with no surprise or consternation.
It’s strange how things can turn around.
-Donald Trump, The Art of the Deal
Was this the deal of a lifetime? Or did Trump really win the election?
VIVIAN LEE is the nom de plume of a tenured professor at an east coast university.
This article was also published at MemoryHoleBlog.org and JamesFetzer.org.
You don’t have to be a Trump supporter to be shocked by the anti-Trump rhetoric flooding the commercial media. Features range from gross political propaganda to pseudo-human-interest stories, economic prognostications, and pure psychobabble. The slander and libel are everywhere you look. What does Trump think about this? Is he “working for Hillary” as has long been suspected? And if so, what is he getting out of the deal? A kick in the butt? The short end of the stick? Just how Trump benefits is hard to fathom.
“Bury Trump in a Landslide,” The New York Daily News, 10/20/16.
On October 20, the day after the third presidential debate, TheNew York Daily News ran a gigantic article on Trump’s many faults and follies (nydailynews.com interactive). In the introduction, we learn that Trump is a “liar, thief, bully, hypocrite, sexual victimizer and unhinged, self-adoring demagogue.” We also learn that his defeat is “all but certain,” a recurring theme in the barrage of anti-Trump propaganda. To help us negotiate this epic article, the The News has divided it into 14 chapters: Trump the Demagogue, Trump the Fraudster, Trump the Head Case, Trump the Fake Philanthropist, Trump the Liar, etc. Oh yes – and Trump the Conspiracy Theorist. We have cute cartoons, one showing Trump with a Hitler mustache and another after having plastic surgery to make him look like Lincoln.
Then there’s The New Yorker, that bastion of neo-con fake liberalism, which has been anti-Trump from the outset. In the October 31 issue (The Talk of the Town), we read that Clinton will be elected, “an event that we will welcome for its immense historical importance, and greet with indescribable relief.” We learn that Trump is “a trash-talking, burn-it-to-the-ground demagogue,” “manifestly unqualified and unfit for office,” and “favors conspiracy theory and fantasy, deriving his knowledge from the darker recesses of the Internet.” Following this endorsement of future-President Clinton, we have “Presumptive: What Would a Fiction Writer Do with the Campaign of 2016?” and the creepy “Trolls for Trump: How the Alt-Right Spreads Fringe Ideas to the Mainstream,” by Andrew Marantz. Then “The Unconnected” (“The Democrats Lost the White Working Class. The Republicans Exploited Them. Can Hillary Clinton Win Them Back?”) by George Packer. Plus several online offerings and erudite cartoons.
“How Trump’s Brain Works,” cartoon by Roz Chast. The New Yorker, October 31, 2016.
Many other news/information outlets have followed suit. But nobody can match The New York Times, unrivaled in its prestige, intellectual power, and moral authority. Taking the situation in hand, The Times has set out to brainwash the public and play its part in the (s)election of Hillary. In an Op-Ed piece written by Charles M. Blow, “Trump, The Worst of America” (October 17), we hear about “the staggering magnitude of his social vulgarity and emotional ineptitude” and read that he has “embraced what seems to be most natural to him: acting like a pig.” According to Blow, “Trump is in fact the logical extension of toxic masculinity and ambient misogyny. He is the logical extension of rampant racism. He is the logical extension of wealth worship. He is the logical extension of pervasive anti-intellectualism. Trump is the logical extension of the worst of America.” Very logical. Yes, I see.
And this is just the tip of the iceberg (which is not melting due to man-made climate change, according to Trump). A survey of TheTimes coverage for the week following the third debate yields no fewer than 68 articles and editorials bashing Trump, some in egregiously libelous language. And these are just the obvious ones. Below is a list, taken from the print version – since those reading the online Times have only the vaguest idea of what appears in the daily paper. Links to the online articles (where available) are found at the page numbers following the titles.
Thursday – 10/20/16: 8 anti-Trump articles
“Trump Won’t Say If He Will Accept Election’s Results: ‘I Will Keep You in Suspense,’ He Says – Clinton Calls It Horrifying.” By Patrick Healy and Jonathan Martin (page A1)
“Interrupting, Mocking, and Taunting, Clinton Turns the Tormenter” (“News Analysis”). By Amy Chozick and Michael Barbaro (A1)
“Trump’s Foreign Policy Is Not Actually about Foreign Policy” (“The Interpreter”). By Max Fisher and Amanda Taub (A15)
“Sticking to Truth, and Sometimes Departing from It, on a Range of Topics” (“Fact Check”). By various authors (Twohey, Appelbaum, Gabriel, Pear, Liptak, Irwin, Eder, and Lichtblau) (A16)
“Donald Trump’s Contempt for Democracy” (Editorial)
“The Debate in One Scary Answer.” By Gail Collins (Op-Ed)
“How Tech Leaders Treat a Trump Backer.” By David Streitfeld and Mike Isaac [re Peter Thiel] (Business, B7)
“‘Trumpland’ Isn’t Really about Trump.” By Neil Genzlinger [film review] (Arts, C1)
Friday – 10/21/16: 10 anti-Trump articles
“In ‘Nasty’ Turn, Clinton Unites Generations: Host of Women’s Issues Coalesce for Liberals.” By Farah Stockman (A1)
“Trump Stays Firm on Having Option to Dispute Vote: Rallying Base, He Says He Would Accept a ‘Clear’ Result.” By Alan Rappeport and Alexander Burns (A1)
“Experts Dispute Trump in Mosul Attack Critique: Officers and Historians Assert Criticism by Candidate Demonstrates His Ignorance.” By Eric Schmitt (A14)
“Trump’s Defiance Is Seen As Threat to U.S. Image.” By Alexander Burns (A16)
“Was That a Presidential Debate or a Pitch for an Edgy Trump Channel?” (“Critic’s Notebook”). By James Poniewozik (A16)
“Videos Force Democrats On Defensive about Tricks.” By Steve Eder and Jonathan Martin (A17)
“‘Absurd’ Trump Errs on Abortion, Doctors Say.” By Pam Belluck (A18)
“In Night of Punchlines, Trump’s Routine Prompts New York’s Elite to Heckle.” By Matt Flegenheimer and Ashley Parker [re the Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner] (A19)
“Repairing Moral Capital.” By David Brooks (Op-Ed)
“Why Hillary Clinton Needs To Be Two-Faced: To Get Things Done in Politics, You Sometimes Have To Be a Hypocrite” (“Opinion”). By Jonathan Rauch (Op-Ed)
Monday – 10/24/16: 9 anti-Trump articles
“Victory in Sight, Clinton Presses beyond Trump – Appeals to Vote Early: With Lead in the Polls, She Turns To Backing Other Democrats.” By Alexander Burns and Amy Chozick (A1)
“Clash of Two Lives at Trump Rally Reveals Layers of Nation’s Divide.” By Farah Stockman (A1)
“All the People, Places, and Things Donald Trump Has Insulted on Twitter Since Declaring His Candidacy for President. To an Unprecedented Degree in American History, Mr. Trump Has Made Personal Insults and Attacks Part of His Campaign. This List Represents Our Best Effort To Identify and Characterize Them All.” By Jasmine C. Lee and Kevin Quealy (A10-A11, two-page spread)
“Money Spent on Clinton Ads Dwarfed That Spent on Trump Ads.” By Adam Pearce (A13)
“Obama Assails Senate Candidate and Others in G.O.P. for Links to Trump.” By Julie Hirschfeld Davis (A15)
“G.O.P. Hopefuls in State Congressional Races Walk Tightrope on Trump.” By William Neuman (A16)
“Clinton’s Specter of Illegitimacy.” By Charles Blow (Op-Ed)
But wait, you say, surely The Times prints articles critical of Hillary as well. No, not really. The very few that appear to find fault actually give her a pass for her lies and bad behavior. Pandering to Wall Street? Hey – no problem. Private e-mails for State Department business? Please. Incriminating campaign e-mails from WikiLeaks? A Russian hack. Serious health problems? A minor bout of pneumonia. And videos of DNC operatives admitting to instigating violence at Trump rallies, and actually conspiring to rig the election? Honestly, does anyone care? (See article 14 above.)
We do get cuddly features like “True or False? Hillary Clinton, a Native Chicagoan, Is a Cubs Fan.” Also a gauzy cover photo for a recent New York Times Magazine along with two admiring articles (“Her Way” and “How Hillary Became ‘Hillary’“). This charade masks her fealty to Israel, a word strangely absent from coverage on foreign powers conspiring to influence the (s)election.
Clinton and Netanyahu, September 14, 2010 (one of many such photos). Image CNN.
One of the biggest anti-Trump articles is the two-page spread of October 24 (see article 44 above). This catalogs Trump’s insults on Twitter since he declared his candidacy. In tiny but readable print, we see his opinions on people, corporations, the debates, and the electoral process.
“All the People, Places, and Things Donald Trump Has Insulted on Twitter Since Declaring His Candidacy for President.” The New York Times, October 24, 2016 (A10-A11).
The longest string of insults is reserved for Hillary, but we also have Trump’s comments on the media. On ABC News Politics: “LIE.” On Anderson Cooper 360: “a waste.” On The Wall Street Journal: “bad at math, nobody cares what they say in their editorials anymore…so dishonest…so wrong, so often.” On TheNew York Daily News: “failing, failing, dead, worthless, bleeding red ink, a total loser.” On The Washington Post: “dishonest reporting, bad, big tax shelter, loses a fortune.” On TheNew York Times: “Just write whatever they want to write, making up sources along the way! Really disgusting, a laughingstock rag! no longer a credible source…gets worse and worse by the day…newspaper of fiction…false, malicious, and libelous…a disgusting fraud…They knowingly write lies, truly one of the worst newspapers, failing, failing, allows dishonest writers to totally fabricate stories…should focus on fair and balanced reporting…” And as for Charles M. Blow: “dishonest reporting.”
You don’t have to be a Trump supporter to agree with his take on the press.
VIVIAN LEE is the nom de plume of a tenured professor at an east coast university.
This article was also published at MemoryHoleBlog.org.
The US news media is gearing up for the 15th anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks with a diverse and perverse set of offerings to bolster the official story. None is stranger than the release of “I Kinda Like It When A Lotta People Die,” which George Carlin recorded on September 9-10, 2001, for an HBO special that would have been aired in November but was shelved after the attacks – since it “seemed in bad taste after nearly 3,000 people were killed a day later,” according to a story in the New York Times this week.
Carlin, the brilliant comedian and brutally honest social critic, died at the age of 71 in 2008; he was posthumously awarded the Kennedy Center’s 2008 Mark Twain Prize for American Humor. Despite Carlin’s anti-establishment bent, you don’t get big awards without friends in high places.
George Carlin, 2003. Image New York Times.
“I Kinda Like It” is set for release on September 16, 2016, and can be pre-ordered at amazon or GeorgeCarlin.com (download, CD, or vinyl). But for those who can’t wait, it has been available on SiriusXM, Channel 400 (Carlin’s Corner) since September 1. Mocking the public’s fascination with disaster scenarios, Carlin says he enjoys mass destructions where lots of people die – such as tornadoes, hurricanes, earthquakes, tidal waves, volcanoes, monsoons, forest fires, avalanches, heat waves, famines, and, his favorite disaster, “an asteroid.”
“I’m always rootin’ for a really high death toll,” he says. “That’s why I like the natural disasters … that no one can control.” According to Carlin, “the world is one big theatrical production.” In the face of mass tragedy, “folks, you gotta have fun.”
Not only that, but he includes a joke about “a fart so potent it blew up an airplane,” according to the Times. “You know who gets blamed? Osama bin Laden,” he says. “The FBI is looking for explosives. They should be looking for minute traces of rice and bok choy.” A preview/trailer is available on YouTube, which does not, however, include the bit about bin Laden.
“I Kinda Like It When a Lotta People Die,” album preview.
Not too many people were riffing on Osama bin Laden on the eve of 9/11, although the media jumped on board the next morning with reports of terrorist attacks – and Ehud Barak, former Prime Minister of Israel, pinned it on Osama the same day in a BBC interview. One can see why Barak would speak up, since Israel was one of the perpetrators. Neocon L. Paul Bremer also named bin Laden that day on NBC, but he too was in on the scam, as the future “proconsul” of Iraq after the 2003 invasion. But why was George Carlin thinking about bin Laden – in the context of mass casualties – on September 9-10? It seems he knew what was going to happen.
The “lost special” was reworked and replaced after two months with a new HBO special, “Complaints and Grievances.” The new version was nominated for a Grammy in 2003. Was Carlin brought around after his indiscretion?
“I Kinda Like It” was deemed suitable for release by Carlin’s daughter Kelly, after it was located in the Carlin archives. But why now? Perhaps because we can handle it, 15 years later, as the Times explains:
Today, we have a more accelerated news coverage and politicized comedy scene. No one canceled a late-night show after the June attack on a nightclub in Orlando, Fla., and the sober way talk-show hosts speak after national tragedies has hardened into something like ritual, a part of the job.
That’s funny. No one canceled a talk-show after the Orlando attack, because everyone knew it was fake.
Or is the Carlin special being pulled out to ramp up the level of cognitive dissonance already plaguing our society, in order to tamp down the fact that a good portion of the world’s populace now knows that 9/11 was a false-flag enterprise?
Unfortunately Carlin is not alive to comment on the coverage, although he may be turning over in his grave. According to the Times’ cynical interpretation of his “operatic yarn”:
One way to see it, though, is as a sendup of the terrorist mind-set that led to the attack on the World Trade Center and other sites that day, a biting take on an extremist view that imagines that a twisted form of deliverance will come from violence and hate. Seen from a certain angle, a story once too provocative to release might be the perfect example of comedy in the post-Sept. 11 world.
Yes – 9/11 is quite a laugh.
Other anniversary coverage is more typical fare, straight propaganda calculated to support the official version, such as the moving story of Robert Franz, a guide at the Flight 93 National Memorial near Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
Robert Franz, Flight 93 National Memorial, Shanksville, PA. Image New York Times.
Franz, according to the Times, is an “interpretive park ranger,” whose job is “to tell the story of what happened in that color-dappled field behind him, again and again and again.”
Helping some to remember what we already know. Helping others, especially those who were not yet born, to envision a beautiful, calamitous day now nearly 15 years in the past.
He tells the visitors the official story of United Airlines Flight 93, with all the requisite components, ending with the plane crashing “at 563 miles an hour into the soft, strip-mined earth, killing all.” Despite the complete lack of evidence for a plane crash in Shanksville, Franz must know what he is talking about – he was a military pilot who spent “the better part of two decades flying Army Hueys and Black Hawks.” He takes questions as well, “and keeps his counsel as conspiracy theorists question whether such a crash even occurred.” Luckily there are people out there like Robert Franz to reassure us.
So for this year’s anniversary, we have comedy, we have pathos, and we also have museum-quality documentation. The National September 11 Memorial Museum has issued a new commemorative volume, No Day Shall Erase You: The Story of 9/11 As Told at the National September 11 Memorial Museum. It will not be lost on the reader that the word “story” is the operative term in all these, well, stories.
No Day Shall Erase You, 2016. Image National September 11 Memorial Museum.
Edited by Alice M. Greenwald, the director of the museum, the book “is both a memorial and a celebration of survival, courage, endurance and resilience, made all the more poignant because, unlike so many other museums, it is site specific.”
Like visitors to Pearl Harbor, where sailors are still entombed and where oil still bubbles to the surface from the submerged battleship that is part of the USS Arizona Memorial, people at the museum can stand at ground zero, where the terrorist attack took place. Even readers, while paging through this book, can feel themselves inescapably transplanted there.
How appropriate to compare the attack on Pearl Harbor to the 9/11 attacks, since they were the “new Pearl Harbor” called for by the Project for the New American Century in their 2000 report, Rebuilding America’s Defenses.
All this coverage includes prominent nods to the 9/11 “conspiracy theorists” and those in the know about what did and did not occur on that day. One might take this to be a good sign – that the “truthers” are now so numerous, and the amount of viable information available in print and online is so vast, that the opposition to the official “story” must be acknowledged by mainstream sources. One recent book, America Nuked on 9/11: Compliments of the CIA, the Neocons in the DoD & the Mossad, gives an up-to-date account.
Yet the propaganda continues in ever more devious and creative forms, and far too many people are taken in. One wonders what George Carlin would say in 2016 about the 9/11 theatrical event – and the mass destructions that have followed.
Vivian Lee is the nom de plume of a tenured professor at an east coast university.
“It is an old maxim of mine that when you have excluded the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.” –Sherlock Holmes (“The Adventure of the Beryl Coronet”)
Figure 1. Gene Rosen Fox News live interview of December 18, 2012, now known to have been filmed in front of a green screen, withthe “everyone must check in” sign inserted in the background.
This article was first published in January 2014 at Veterans Today, a little over one year after the alleged Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting of December 14, 2012. Much research on Sandy Hook has been done since the time of its publication, but the original “top ten reasons” that discredit the official story are still as valid as ever. They form the basis for all further research and, as such, are offered here in a revised and updated version for publication in Nobody Died at Sandy Hook, second edition. Means of accessing the videos and other evidence cited are given in the notes, although many important videos have since been taken down by YouTube.
As the article was being written, The New York Times, our nation’s newspaper of record, published a story on Connecticut’s “final report” on the Newtown shooting (December 27, 2013). In this article we are told that although the report contained “hundreds of photographs, hours of video, and voluminous crime scene reports… care was taken to conceal the most graphic crime scene images.” Not only that—the final report does not even include the names, ages, or sex of the alleged shooting victims (Figure 2). There was no actual identification of any of the dead. Even the News–Times of Danbury, CT, found it unsatisfying.
Figure 2. Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting Reports, Redaction Index (2013 final report).
The New York Times was not worried, however, proceeding once again to retail the official story, seemingly satisfied that in place of the redacted pages are “detailed descriptions,” “eyewitness accounts,” and “snapshots” of emergency workers dashing around and supposedly interacting with the school’s teachers. According to The Times, the report “did not appear to alter the broader understanding of the shooting”—the official version, that is, which the paper has promoted relentlessly despite massive evidence to the contrary. This pattern of deceit extended to the Newtown Clerk’s secret arrangements with the state legislature to avoid releasing death certificates to the public, attempts to withhold the 911 calls, and gag orders that were imposed on those responsible for tearing down the school building itself.
In a letter accompanying the “final report,” Reuben F. Bradford, the Commissioner of Connecticut’s Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection, stated that “the names and contextually identifying information of involved children” were removed, including descriptions and images of the children, their clothing, and their belongings. “All visual images depicting the deceased have been withheld,” he added, “as well as written descriptions whose disclosure would be highly offensive to a reasonable person and would violate the constitutional rights of the families.”
According to Bradford, the investigation was “unparalleled in the one hundred and ten year history of the Connecticut State Police. Tens of thousands of hours were spent by investigators from all over the country tracking down leads, processing evidence, and doing everything within their collective ability to provide answers for the questions that remained in the wake of the terror that morning.” With the issuing of the “final report,” the investigation “has been closed for administrative purposes.” However, this so-called investigation did nothing to reveal the truth of the matter but rather was part of the conspiracy to conceal the reality of the event from the public.
The basic principle that applies here is inference to the best explanation. Consider the totality of the evidence in this case. Is the evidence more probable on the hypothesis that Sandy Hook was a real event or that it was instead an exercise (a “drill”), which was presented as a real shooting? The hypothesis that confers the highest degree of probability based on the evidence is preferable. Despite the exhaustive investigation allegedly carried out by the Connecticut State Police, the official scenario is not feasible in terms of the evidence. Here are the “top ten” reasons that support the conclusion that the Sandy Hook shooting was staged and not real, where no children or adults appear to have died.
1. Proof of death has been suppressed
Twenty-eight people allegedly died: 27 children and adults, including Adam Lanza, at the school, and his mother, Nancy Lanza, in her home at 36 Yogananda Street, Newtown. However, there is no direct proof of anyone’s death: no photographic evidence or video footage was released to confirm the official story that these 28 persons actually died. In fact, no video surveillance footage shows anything—not even Adam shooting out the front
plate-glass window or walking through the halls like Rambo, even though the school had supposedly updated its security system at the start of the 2012–2013 academic year.
Figure 3. Sandy Hook Elementary, alleged bullet hole (2013 final report, Walkley scene photos).
The best the authorities could come up with was a heavily redacted “final report” (December 2013) that includes numerous photos of the inside of the school, with a few dings identified as bullet holes, several bullets and casings on the floor, and hundreds of black (redacted) images with white numbers, which we are supposed to associate with dead people (Figures 3–4).
Compounding the situation, the parents were not allowed to view their children’s bodies to identify them. Instead, they were reportedly shown photographs of the deceased. This was done, according to the Medical Examiner, Wayne Carver, in order to “control” the situation (Figure 5). But what was there about the situation that required “control”? No normal parent would have agreed to accept the death of a child without viewing the body. James Tracy has published a discussion of the medical examiner’s performance. According to Carver:
Uh, we did not bring the bodies and the families into contact. We took pictures of them, uhm, of their facial features. We have, uh, uh—it’s easier on the families when you do that. Uh, there is, uh, a time and place for the up close and personal in the grieving process, but to accomplish this we felt it would be best to do it this way and, uh, you can sort of, uh … You can control a situation depending on the photographer, and I have very good photographers. Uh, but uh—
Figure 5. Medical Examiner Wayne Carver’s press conference of December 15, 2012.
Remarkably, the state has done its best to avoid releasing the death certificates and even recordings of the 911 calls. Death certificates were eventually “released” but not to the public or those who might want to investigate the case further; only a short, general summary was available. On June 5, 2013, Connecticut passed legislation (Public Act 13–311) blocking disclosure of photos or video images of (all) homicide victims, along with other records. According to Gov. Dannel Malloy, who signed the bill hours after it was passed, “all families have a right to grieve in private.” The final version did not cover the 911 recordings, which were ordered released in late 2013, after Judge Eliot Prescott ascertained that “no children are identified by name, no callers indicate that they can see a child being shot, and the only injury described is that of an educator’s being shot in the foot.”
Moreover, the victims’ funerals were all “closed casket,” although the funeral of Noah Pozner allegedly included a private viewing before the public ceremony. As recounted in interviews with the families, the circumstances of their last encounters with their children (or with their caskets) are strange to say the least. The “love fest” at the white coffin of Grace McDonnell was detailed on CNN for Anderson Cooper (Figure 6).
Figure 6. Chris and Lynn McDonnell interviewed by Anderson Cooper, December 18, 2012.
Veronique Pozner gave her account of her last look at her son Noah to the The Forward on December 26, 2013 (Figure 7):
Veronique asked the medical examiners not to autopsy her son; she felt that his body had suffered too many indignities. At his funeral, Noah was dressed in a suit and tie. A Jewish friend of Veronique’s at work enjoined Rabbi Praver to allow him to be wrapped in a blue tallis, even though he had not yet had a bar mitzvah.
The family placed stuffed animals, a blanket and letters to Noah into the casket. Lastly, Veronique put a clear plastic rock with a white angel inside—an “angel stone”—in his right hand. She asked the funeral director to place an identical one in his left, which was badly mangled.
Just before the ceremony, Connecticut Governor Dannel Malloy came to the funeral home to pay his respects. Veronique took him by the arm and brought him to the casket. Noah’s famously long eyelashes—which she spoke about in her eulogy—rested lightly on his cheeks and a cloth covered the place where the lower half of his face had been. “I just needed it to be real for [the governor],” she says. “This was a live, warm, energetic little boy whose life was snuffed out in a fraction of a second because our schools are so defenseless.”
Figure 7. Veronique Pozner interview of December 26, 2012, The Forward.
2. Emergency protocols were not followed
There is no evidence of any frantic effort to save lives or remove bodies to hospitals. Instead the scene outside the school looked calm and largely bloodless—with police and other personnel milling around casually and a severe shortage of dead or injured victims. One Sandy Hook researcher decided to call Lt. Paul Vance to ask who cleaned up the blood, which would have been considered a bio-hazard, and got the reply, “What blood?” “Kelley from Tulsa” discusses this with James Fetzer on the “The Real Deal” on December 9, 2013. Kelley was onto a real issue: under the EPS’ Medical Waste Tracking Act of 1988, a paper trail must be kept by all parties involved in the cleanup and must be tracked all the way to the incinerator with names and dates.
In a Mass Casualty Incident (MCI) like Sandy Hook, the proper protocol is START triage (Simple Triage and Rapid Treatment) using tarps of different colors with the aim being to save lives and get the injured to the hospital for treatment (Figure 8). Red tarps indicate that “immediate” treatment is needed, yellow that treatment may be “delayed,” green that the injuries are “minor,” and black tarps signify “deceased.”
Figure 8. START triage set up after a train crash in Los Angeles.
Outside Sandy Hook Elementary, tarps were laid out, but not even the black tarps for the dead were used, much less the red ones for those who needed immediate treatment (Figure 9). As Sofia Smallstorm has documented, nothing at all like this occurred at Sandy Hook: the appropriate protocols were not followed.
Figure 9. START tarps outside Sandy Hook Elementary with no victims.
Sandy Hook Fire Chief Bill Halstead was ready to help the victims but could recall only two wounded people (Figure 10). A few survivors were reportedly taken to the hospital, but, oddly, these people were never interviewed. There were no first-hand accounts that proved anyone was killed or injured. Nonetheless, by the afternoon of December 14, Lt. Vance had confirmed that 18 children were pronounced dead at the scene, two children were removed to an area hospital and died at the hospital, and seven adults were pronounced dead at the scene, including the shooter.
Figure 10. Sandy Hook Fire Chief Bill Halstead, in an interview on December 18, 2012, says he got word that “no one else would be coming out of the building.”
No emergency vehicles were present at the school or even lined up in the fire lane for a rescue attempt—the parking lot was filled with parked cars, police cars, and possibly media vehicles. Such rescue activity as occurred was centered, not on the school premises, but at the nearby Firehouse. Emergency vehicles at the Firehouse were jammed together impeding access to the school, in case anyone might have thought about attempting a rescue.
Figure 11. Crowds circling around and through the Sandy Hook Firehouse.
The scene at the Firehouse was quite peculiar, with people milling around and circling through the building, walking out one door and into another, to give the impression of lots of people and lots of action (Figure 11). But all activity in the area was in accordance with FEMA manuals for drills.
3. Drill protocols were followed instead
We are now living in a security state, and the school system is among its beneficiaries. While we used to have occasional “fire drills,” we now have “lockdown drills” implemented by school districts, with some states requiring a set number of drills by law. Private security firms, which operate for profit, now conduct “crisis preparedness assessments” at the taxpayer’s expense. Larger scenarios are also developed as active-shooter drills, in which local law enforcement can take part in storming a school in pursuit of an active-actor-shooter.
Figure 12. Lt. Paul Vance discussing an active shooter drill he wassupervising at
Oxford High School, Oxford, CT, in August 2007.
One such plan available on the web is “Operation Closed Campus,” developed in Iowa following guidance set forth by the Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP) of the US Department of Homeland Security. According to protocol, everyone at the drill must check in, identification badges are issued to personnel and observers, and drinking water and restrooms are available. Personnel include the director, staff, controllers, evaluators, actors, media personnel and “players” (agency employees) both in uniform and civilian clothing.
Figure 13. “Gunshot wound victim” being made up for an active-shooter drillthat took place in 2014 in Contra Costa County, CA.
This protocol appears to have been followed at Sandy Hook, where many participants wore ID/identification badges on lanyards, a huge check-in sign is visible in one Gene Rosen interview, water is available in quantity at the Firehouse (Figure 14), and even Porta-Potties are at the ready. The check-in sign was inserted via green screen, however, and was shown in an interview held days after the event, so its presence is controversial (see Figure 1 above).
Figure 14. Sandy Hook Firehouse on December 14, 2012, withdrinking water for the participants, according to drill protocol.
An emergency preparedness drill took place on December 14, 2012 (9:00 am – 4:00 pm ET), in Bridgeport, CT, which is a 20 minute drive from Sandy Hook. The course, “Planning for the Needs of Children in Disasters,” was run by the Connecticut Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection/Emergency Management and Homeland Security. And a FEMA Mass Casualty Drill, “Emergency Response for Mass Casualties Involving Children,” was scheduled to take place on December 13 or 14, 2012 (location unspecified). The exercise was to target the following capabilities: Mass Prophylaxis, Mass Death of Children at a School by Firearms, Suicide or Apprehension of Unknown Shooter, Use of Media for Evaluation, and Use of Media for Information Distribution. This may have been the script for the Sandy Hook “shooting.”
The Sandy Hook “massacre” appears to have been an Integrated Capstone Event (ICE), an exercise run by FEMA to coordinate federal, state, and local emergency response teams in the case of a mass-casualty event. As such, it would have utilized actors and media partners to simulate a tragedy in order to train participants, and also to observe the reaction of the citizenry.
4. There was foreknowledge of the event
The Connecticut state emergency system was taken over long before the “massacre” occurred, with a frequency change implemented five hours in advance of the “shooting.” Normal police and EMS dispatch protocol, using the Alpha Phonetic System for communications between officers and dispatchers, was replaced with staged transmissions by non-trained personnel.
In addition, tweets about the shooting began before it occurred, a tribute was apparently uploaded one month before the event, and web pages honoring the victims, including a Facebook page R.I.P. Victoria Soto, were established before they had “officially” died (Figure 15).
Figure 15. R.I.P. Victoria Soto Facebook page, with “Joined Facebook December 10” at bottom.
And photos of the “evacuation” and “shooting” scene by Newtown Bee photographer Shannon Hicks were taken before December 14, 2012 (see below). A Sandy Hook timeline has been reconstructed at MemoryHoleBlog.org, detailing major developments and highlighting the numerous inconsistencies in reports by the media.
5. There were contradictory reports about the weapons
According to initial reports, weapons used in the shooting included four handguns recovered at the scene, the only guns taken into the school (NBC). Then an AR–15 was said to have been found in the trunk of Lanza’s car (NBC). Then it was reported that Lanza may have carried only two handguns and that a rifle was also found in the school (NBC).
Wayne Carver, the Medical Examiner, said that all the victims were shot with the “long weapon.” Lt. Paul Vance then said that a Bushmaster AR–15 assault weapon with high capacity magazines was used “most of the time” and that Lanza was carrying “many high-capacity clips” for the weapon (Huffington Post).
In January 2013, Connecticut state police released a statement indicating that they had found three guns inside the school: a Bushmaster .223 caliber XM 15–E2S semi-automatic rifle with high capacity 30 round clips, a Glock 10mm handgun, and a Sig Sauer P226 9mm handgun (Figures 16–18).
Figure 16. Bushmaster allegedly found inside the school (2013 final report, Walkley scene photos).
Figure 17. Glock and clip allegedly found inside the school (2013 final report, Walkley scene photos).
Figure 18. Sig Sauer and clip allegedly found inside the school (2013 final report, Walkley scene photos).
The police said they also found an Izhmash Saiga–12 12-gauge shotgun in Lanza’s car (NBC). This is presumably the gun shown in a video aired on the night of December 14, 2012, by NBC (Figure 19). An evidence collection team and a policeman are shown finding the shotgun in the trunk of Lanza’s Honda Civic—the policeman picks up the gun and ejects the ammunition on the spot, destroying important evidence in the process. Some have seen two long guns in the trunk in the NBC video: the 12-gauge shotgun and the Bushmaster rifle.
Figure 19. NBC News video showing policeman ejecting ammunition from a long gun foundin the trunk of Adam Lanza’s car on December 14, 2012.
Lt. Vance then asserted that Lanza had killed all his victims with the .223-caliber semi-automatic rifle (ctpost.com). Regarding the confusion, Vance told reporters, “It’s all these conspiracy theorists that are trying to mucky up the waters.” Perhaps “The Top Prize for Fantastical Reporting” goes to Fox News, however, which announced that a 12-gauge shotgun along with two magazines containing 70 rounds of Winchester 12-gauge shotgun rounds had been found in the glove compartment of Adam Lanza’s Honda Civic—that’s right, in the glove compartment.
6. Adam Lanza cannot have done the shooting
Adam Lanza, reportedly a frail young man weighing 112 pounds with Asperger’s Syndrome, is said to have carried massive weaponry on his person when he shot his way into the Sandy Hook school and proceeded to kill 26 people and then himself. This after he supposedly killed his mother before driving to the school. It should of course be noted that Adam Lanza was initially listed in the Social Security Death Index as having died on December 13, 2012, one day before the alleged shooting.
Figure 20. A young Adam Lanza, who supposedly “fell off the face of the earth”
around 2009, with no record of his activities since that time (CNN).
According to the report of Connecticut State’s Attorney Stephen Sedensky, Lanza killed his 26 victims with the Bushmaster .223-caliber rifle and then killed himself with his Glock 10mm handgun. Lanza was also allegedly carrying three 30-round magazines for the Bushmaster as well as a Sig Sauer 9mm handgun (see above). The victims were supposedly shot multiple times each in a fusillade of bullets from these military-style weapons. In order to wreak this havoc, he fired more than 150 rounds, and he carried more rounds in addition. Lanza was reportedly found dead wearing a bulletproof vest and military-style clothing (AP).
As Mike Powers, a professional military investigator and ballistics expert, has observed, this young man of slight build could not have carried all these heavy, bulky weapons and ammunition on his person. Furthermore, since first responders were supposedly inside the school within seven minutes, there was not enough time for Lanza to have carried out the shooting as reported. In an interview with Joyce Riley, Powers states that Lanza could not have fired so many times continuously without destabilizing himself from the intense noise from the Bushmaster. As a novice, he could not have shot an AR–15 with such speed and accuracy, supposedly changing magazines 4–5 times without a stoppage. For a real person shooting an AR–15 and what it entails, see Redsilverj’s “Sandy Hook Hoax Ultimate Case Closed” (Figure 21):
Figure 21. A skilled marksman shooting off 100 rounds from an AR–15.
According to Lt. Vance on the night of the shooting, one victim survived. So in less than seven minutes—or less than five minutes according to the media—Lanza killed 26 people and then himself, producing only one injured victim. This is a 96% kill ratio, which is unheard-of accuracy among the most experienced marksmen. Mike Powers thinks the whole scenario is a physical impossibility. He is not even convinced that Adam Lanza was a real person.
Oddly, considering the horrifying details of the alleged massacre, as well as Adam’s own suicide by shooting himself in the head with the Glock handgun, the 2013 final report photos show no obvious traces of blood or gore on Adam’s clothes, hat, gloves, or shoes (Figure 22).
(And, we might ask, since when is it correct protocol to strip the body of a dead murder suspect naked, lay out his clothing—right down to his black underwear—and photograph all these items on the floor at the crime scene?)
Figure 22. Some articles of Adam Lanza’s alleged clothing removed from his body for photography (2013 final report, Walkley scene photos).
The final travesty involves the weapons and other paraphernalia that were allegedly found in the Lanza house. The “arsenal” supposedly included guns, Samurai swords, knives, a bayonet, and more than 1,000 rounds of ammunition, according to search warrants released. Other items of interest were ear and eye protection, binoculars, holsters, manuals, paper targets, a military-style uniform, and Lanza’s NRA certificate (Fox). Lanza had reportedly compiled a spreadsheet 7 feet long and 4 feet wide in 9-point type detailing 500 victims of other mass murders (CBS). We are supposed to believe this, and, at the same time, that Adam Lanza was a shy, quiet kid who didn’t like noise and chaos, as promoted by the PBS Frontline special, “Raising Adam Lanza.”
There are many bizarre media reports and interviews of those associated with the “shooting.” Many of the participants seem to be actors (or intelligence operatives). Some examples:
Wayne Carver—Medical Examiner Wayne Carver’s surreal press conference is one of the most startling of all the media offerings. Widely available on YouTube, this event shows H. Wayne Carver II, a public official of some standing, clowning and acting outlandish—grinning strangely, making irrelevant comments, and basically appearing unknowledgeable and unprofessional (Figure 23).
Figure 23. Dr. H. Wayne Carver II, entertainer.
Robbie Parker—Perhaps the most infamous press conference is that of Robbie Parker, the alleged father of victim Emilie Parker, speaking on a CNN report of December 15, 2012. He chuckles as he walks up to the camera (Figure 24), then gets into character by hyperventilating, and finally feigns distress as he talks about his daughter—reading from a cue card—and about the fund set up to help raise money “for Emilie.”
Figure 24. Robbie Parker, walking up to the camera for his interview.
The families—In addition to Robbie and Alissa Parker, other parents and family members take their turn in the spotlight, including (but not limited to) Mark and Jackie Barden, Jimmy Greene and Nelba Marquez–Greene, Ian and Nicole Hockley, Neil Heslin (alleged father of Jesse Lewis), Chris and Lynn McDonnell, Veronique Pozner, Carlee Soto, and David and Francine Wheeler. David Wheeler actually played two roles, one as a grieving parent and a second as an FBI sniper. Anderson Cooper is the interviewer in two notable instances: his conversation with the McDonnells mentioned above, and an interview with Veronique Pozner, remarkable for its green-screen effects such as Anderson’s disappearing nose (Figure 25).
Figure 25. Anderson Cooper during a green-screen interview of Veronique Pozner.
The school nurse—Numerous reports offer detailed and totally fictitious information, some of which was later abandoned in favor of more tenable versions. On the evening of December 14, a USA Today reporter said she had spoken with the school nurse (not identified by name), whom she had met on the street (Figure 26). The nurse told her that the gunman had come into her office, “they met eyes, she jumped under her desk,” and he walked out. The nurse said that the gunman was the son of the kindergarten teacher, who was known to her and “an absolutely loving person.” It later developed that Nancy Lanza had not been a kindergarten teacher at all, and that neither Nancy nor Adam had any proven connection to Sandy Hook school whatsoever.
Figure 26. USA Today reporting a fabricated story about the school nurse, the gunman, and his mother the kindergarten teacher at Sandy Hook Elementary.
Dawn Hochsprung—In an embarrassing fiction, The Newtown Bee reported on December 14, 2012, that Dawn Hochsprung, the Sandy Hook school principal, told the paper that a masked man had entered the school with a rifle and started shooting multiple shots—more than she could count—that went “on and on.” Of course, Dawn Hochsprung was allegedly killed by Adam Lanza and so could not easily have provided this statement. In fact, Dawn was said to have acted heroically, dying while lunging at the gunman—although one wonders who witnessed and reported this act of heroism. On December 17, 2012, The Bee retracted the report and apologized:
An early online report from the scene at the December 14 shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School quoted a woman who identified herself to our reporter as the principal of the school. The woman was not the school’s principal, Dawn Hochsprung, who was killed in the Friday morning attack. The quote was removed from subsequent online versions of the story, but the original story did remain in our online archive for three days before being deleted. We apologize for whatever confusion this may have caused our readers and for any pain or anguish it may have cause [sic] the Hochsprung family.
Gene Rosen—Gene Rosen is one of the most prolific of the Sandy Hook media stars, giving animated and conflicting statements to a series of reporters (in English and Spanish). Considered a “good Samaritan” by the mainstream media, Gene supposedly harbored six children who ran away from the school, rode to his house on a school bus, sat down on his lawn and proceeded to cry and tell him that their teacher, Miss Soto, was dead. Strangely, Rosen took the children inside and gave them some toys to play with, instead of calling 911 like any normal person.
Figure 27. Gene Rosen signaling to a “reporter” that he wants to start over, after bungling his lines in a practice interview.
The Gene Rosen videos are important for the official narrative, in that they corroborate many of its details: the staccato gunfire (and thus a semi-automatic weapon) and hearsay evidence from the children (Lanza had a big gun and a little gun, Vicki Soto was killed, etc.). These incriminating videos are some of the best evidence that the Sandy Hook shooting was a hoax.
8. Photos at the scene and of victims look staged or fake
Many of the photos released to the public look staged or fake; here are some notable examples:
Shannon Hicks photo of children being evacuated from the school—The heavily publicized photo of children allegedly being evacuated from the school on December 14 was apparently taken earlier in the fall during a drill—no coats, smiling faces, leaves remaining on a few trees. Shannon Hicks of The Newtown Bee took the “iconic” photo (Figure 28) and claimed to have taken many others of the event—although no other children being evacuated were seen in those released to the media. Hicks reportedly took the famous photo “as an associate editor” and then, when another editor arrived, “changed into her firefighting gear and tried to help.” This heroic account was promoted by NPR on December 16.
Figure 28. Shannon Hicks’ photo for The Newtown Bee of children supposedly being evacuated from Sandy Hook Elementary on the morning of December 14, 2012.
Analysis of the Hicks “iconic” photo has shown that it was not taken around 10:00 am on the morning of December 14, 2012—the shadows are wrong for that time of day, no one’s breath has condensed into visible vapor (although the recorded temperature was 38 degrees F and frost appears on the ground in other photos), the markings on the parking lot are wrong, the positions of the vehicles and traffic cone do not match, etc. A recent sun-shadow analysis concludes that the photo was taken at around 11:10 am, not at 10:09 am as alleged by Hicks, and clearly not on the cold morning of December 14.
Indeed, another photo appeared (Figure 29), showing what looks like a preliminary staging for the “iconic” photo released worldwide. Here also is the line of students but in a somewhat different order. In addition, several onlookers stand in the foreground; the woman at center may have been snapping photographs, although there is certainly someone else taking pictures here: the photographer who captured this second image.
Figure 29. Staging of the “evacuation” photo, with children ina different
arrangement than in the final version.
Shannon Hicks was named Photographer of the Year by the New England Newspaper and Press Association (NENPA) in February 2014, as well as receiving a first place award for Spot News Photo “for her iconic image of young students being led from Sandy Hook School by law enforcement responders.” However, it has now emerged that Shannon Hicks uploaded a slideshow of 20 photographs to YouTube the day before the alleged shooting—including the staging shot (Figure 29) among others. This slideshow was available by the evening of December 13, 2012, but released on December 14 as photos taken on that date, as documented by QKultra (Figure 30).
Figure 30. “Newtown Bee Stinger.”
Photo of shattered plate glass window at entrance to Sandy Hook Elementary—Several photos from Connecticut’s December 2013 final report show the plate glass window that Adam Lanza allegedly shot out with his Bushmaster, and through which he entered the premises. But how did he get past the furniture, with all his weaponry, without moving anything out of position? Not only did Lanza squeeze through this hole and edge carefully through the narrow space between the couch and table, but so did ten policemen, all with their guns and gear, according to sworn affidavits. Yet nothing was pushed aside, and the magazine rack looks like it was moved carefully away from the window (Figure 31).
Figure 31. Window with shattered glass, supposedly blown out by “the shooter,” next to the front lobby doors of Sandy Hook Elementary (2013 final report, Walkley scene photos).
Many of the photos from the December 2013 final report look staged, such as those showing small numbers of bullets scattered over the school floor, or the unlikely shots of Adam Lanza’s clothing (see Figure 22 above).
Just as insidious are photographs of the children who allegedly died at Sandy Hook, many of which were demonstrably altered via Photoshop. Most of the individual images of the children released to the media are peculiar—numerous images have a curiously similar background of green foliage, and several look outdated and may be old photos.
Parker family photos—Some of the most problematic involve the Parker family, several of which show evidence of tampering. In two notorious photos, Emilie’s red-and-black dress appears in both: once worn by Emilie in a Photoshopped family photo (Figure 32) and then supposedly worn by her younger sister Madeline for the photo-op with Barack Obama (Figure 33).
Figure 32. Photoshopped image of the Parker family,showing the two
youngest girls missing their legsand Emilie, at right, apparently added to the image.
Figure 33. President Obama with children from the Parker family (and others),in which Emilie’s sister Madeline is supposedly wearing her red-and-black dress.
Victoria Soto photos—Photos of Victoria Soto have emerged as Photoshopped creations: images of Soto were inserted into photographs in which she did not originally appear, and several shots of her face were created from a single photo. The well-known photograph of Soto’s class of first grade students is an elaborate composite, released in a small format, low quality image (Figure 34). Soto is wearing the exact same outfit seen in another photo with green foliage background, although there she faces the other direction; that image was merely flipped and inserted into the class picture. In doing so the creators had to reconstruct her right hand and did so poorly, cutting off her thumb with a vertical line. Ann Marie Murphy was also inserted, and her hand too is problematic. The children’s hands are blurry, their eyes are fuzzy, and square and rectangular defects appear on their faces—all unnoticeable in a small image but visible when enlarged (Figure 35).
Figure 34. Photograph of Victoria Soto’s first grade class,a Photoshopped composite.
Figure 35. Soto’s class photo with defects visible in enlarged images (Megatronics Media).
Allison Wyatt/Lily Gaubert—In a likely sloppy slip-up, a photo of a real child, Lily Gaubert (Figure 36, left), who is apparently alive and well, was promoted in the media as an image of Allison Wyatt (Figure 36, right), an alleged victim. Lily’s mother supposedly discovered the error and made it public via Flickr.
Figure 36. Lily Gaubert (left) and Allison Wyatt (right).
Adam Lanza—The ridiculously fraudulent photographs of Adam Lanza clearly do not depict a real person.
Figure 37. Adam Lanza, four fake photos.
9. The crime scene was completely destroyed
As with Ground Zero after 9/11, Sandy Hook Elementary and all the evidence have been completely obliterated; $50 million in CT state funds were allocated for the demolition and rebuilding of Sandy Hook school. This would never have been tolerated if an actual crime had been committed—at least one that was meant to be investigated. The demolition of Sandy Hook Elementary has been completed, and the school has been rebuilt.
Employees who worked on the demolition project were required to sign non-disclosure agreements. They were not only prohibited from removing anything from the site, but they were forbidden from discussing publicly anything they may have observed or not observed during the process (such as an absence of bullet marks on the walls or blood on the floor of the classrooms, for instance).
Researchers have speculated that the Sandy Hook Elementary School was not a working school in December 2012, and may have been closed for years. Photos indicate the deplorable physical condition of the school and its grounds, as well as loads of junk in rooms, halls, and closets, more appropriate for a storage facility—but with classrooms staged to look real. Sandy Hook Elementary was indeed dilapidated, nothing like the marvelous school that people say drew parents to the Newtown community.
The new Sandy Hook School has been designed (Figure 39) and built. The building was scheduled for completion in time for the 2016–2017 school year and is now open. In FAQ at the website, the question is asked, “Why was the decision made to build a new school and not just renovate?” The response:
Analysis of the renovate vs. build new by the Advisory Committee showed that costs to renovate this 56 year old building, bring it up to code, eliminate the portables, make it energy efficient, provide necessary safety features, and more, generated a cost almost at the same level of new building construction.
This is underscored by an article in The Newtown Bee, clear acknowledgment that Sandy Hook Elementary was old, unsafe, and not up to code at the time of the alleged shooting.
Figure 39. Design for the new Sandy Hook School, Svigals + Partners, LLP (design team) andConsigli Construction Co., Inc. (construction manager).
10. Deceased children sang at the Super Bowl
Research has resulted in a “Sandy Hoax Surprise,” a convincing YouTube video by QKultra identifying eight alleged Sandy Hook victims and six brothers of victims singing in the Newtown children’s choir at the 2013 Super Bowl, February 3, 2013.
Figure 40. “Sandy Hook Elementary School Chorus” sings “America the Beautiful” at Super Bowl XLVII, with Jennifer Hudson and Sabrina Post of Encore Productions.
Identified here are Charlotte Bacon, Olivia Engel, Josephine Gay, Grace McDonnell, Emilie Parker, Caroline Previdi, Avielle Richman, and Benjamin Wheeler, along with victims’ brothers Guy Bacon, Jake Hockley, Freddy Hubbard, Jack McDonnell, Walker Previdi, and Nate Wheeler.
Figure 41. Screen capture from “Sandy Hoax Surprise.”
One more victim has been identified since the original video, Noah Pozner, making a total of 15 out of the 26 children in the choir who were from the Sandy Hook “families.” The newly recognized victims are all older than they appear in the photos released at the time of the “shooting,” giving credence to the theory that the victims’ photos we were shown were outdated images.
The children in the Newtown choir, whoever they are, seem quite happy to be singing at the Super Bowl, smiling and running across the field after the event—giving no sign of the trauma they had suffered less than two months prior. So are the dead children actually alive? One can only hope.
The evidence thus demonstrates that (1) proof of death was suppressed, (2) emergency protocols were not followed, (3) drill protocols were followed instead, (4) there was foreknowledge of the event, (5) there was confusion over the weapons supposedly used, (6) Adam Lanza cannot possibly have carried out the shooting as claimed, (7) strange and inappropriate behavior was displayed by officials, witnesses, and relatives, (8) many odd photos of the participants and premises were released, (9) the crime scene was destroyed under conditions of secrecy, and (10) as many as nine of the children who were supposedly murdered appeared on television singing at the Super Bowl seven weeks later.
With the possible exception of (5) and (9), all these features yield a low probability that Sandy Hook was a massacre but a high probability that it was a staged psy-op tied to a drill. Some of them are decisive by themselves, such as (1), (2), (3), (4), and (6)—not to mention (10). And nothing else about this event supports the conclusion that it was real as reported. Although this may be hard to believe for some—“no one could have faked a massacre like this,” “those parents wouldn’t have lied,” “we watched the funerals on TV,” or “there were too many people involved and someone would have spilled the beans”—the evidence presented here is conclusive. To return to the maxim of Sherlock Holmes, “when you have excluded the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”
So who did it and why? The “shooter” Adam Lanza had no apparent motive, as even the 2013 final report acknowledged:
Why did the shooter murder twenty-seven people, including twenty children? Unfortunately, that question may never be answered conclusively… there is no clear indication why he did so, or why he targeted Sandy Hook Elementary School.
But all good detectives will look for a motive when investigating a crime. When considering cui bono (who benefits), a large amount of money is at stake–and much of it has already been distributed.
Follow the money
First of all, the construction industry got a boost, with the $50 million in Connecticut state funds allocated for the destruction of Sandy Hook School and rebuilding of a new school on the premises. And this from a state with a projected budget deficit of $1.1 billion for the 2015–2016 fiscal year.
The Sandy Hook School Support Fund raised approximately $12 million and distributed it to the Newtown–Sandy Hook Community Foundation, overseen by Ken Feinberg, “a victim compensation master with a national reputation,” according to United Way of Western Connecticut. And the Support Fund/United Way posted its condolences on December 11, 2013, which was three days before the actual event (Figure 24). The Sandy Hook School Support Fund paid $281,000 to each of the victims’ families, as well as $20,000 each to the families of 12 children who reportedly witnessed the shootings but survived, and $150,000 to two teachers who were injured.
Figure 42. Google search page listing the United Way
document date as December 11, 2012.
The families have also raised additional funds through private organizations with their own websites—some of which were apparently advertised on the web in advance of the shooting. Organizations include 26 Miles for Caroline (Previdi), the Musical Benefit for Catherine Hubbard Foundation, Ben’s Lighthouse (Benjamin Wheeler), and Noah’s Ark of Hope (Noah Pozner). All of the victims, both children and adults, have had memorial funds established in their names to collect money.
“Sandy Hook Promise,” which actively solicits money “to protect children and prevent gun violence by providing awareness, education, and programs in the areas of mental health, mental wellness, and gun safety,” currently boasts over 434,000 people who have made the “Sandy Hook Promise” to turn the “tragedy into a moment of transformation.” Nicole Hockley and Mark Barden are staff members. As part of their fund-raising efforts, the group sells car decals, wrist bands, T-shirts, and OPI Limited-Edition Sandy Hook Green Nail Polish (Figure 43). The latest estimate of funds available to Sandy Hook Promise is $3 million.
Figure 43. OPI’s Limited-Edition Sandy Hook Green Nail Polishfor a
donation of $26 to Sandy Hook Promise.
The federal government has also forked over a lot of taxpayer money, including a $150,000 federal grant to Newtown to pay for two “school resource officers” (aka police), $1.5 million from the US Department of Justice Office for Victims of Crime, and $2.5 million in federal funds from the DOJ to compensate the Connecticut State Police, the town of Newtown, the town of Monroe, and other partner agencies. In June 2014, the DOJ gave Newtown another $7.1 million for mental health counseling for families, law enforcement, and first responders. In December 2014, another $775,914 was donated by the DOJ Office for Victims of Crimes for Sandy Hook victims, their families, first responders, and members of the Newtown Community. In addition, the US Department of Education has awarded a total of $3.2 million to the Newtown Public School District under Project SERV (School Emergency Response to Violence) to help with ongoing recovery efforts following the shooting. This total of $15.2 million in hush money is sure to keep the lid on things for now.
The latest edition of the video, “We Need To Talk about Sandy Hook,” lists a total of $131,009,229 in grants and donations, including the $50 million for the new school, but this is only a partial accounting. Indeed, the total amount of money raised to date cannot easily be calculated. A 2014 Connecticut report on charitable donations lists organizations such as The Animal Center, Inc., Newtown Forest Association, Inc., Sandy Hook Arts Center for Kids, and Angels of Sandy Hook Bracelets, all raising funds in the name of Sandy Hook Elementary.
The issue of gun control gained ground after the Sandy Hook “shooting,” with widespread coverage in the mainstream press, expertly juxtaposed with maudlin stories about the fallen children to tug at the nation’s heartstrings. The families have been out in force, appearing on television and in print, lobbying for gun control in the states and the US capitol. By now, their stories are known to everyone in America.
In late February 2013, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a relentless gun-control advocate, used his clout to meet separately with Vice President Biden and several senators. At the same time, Neil Heslin, father of alleged victim Jesse, testified tearfully at a Senate hearing on the banning of assault weapons. Publicity surged in late March, when authorities supposedly found a huge cache of guns, ammunition, and exotic weaponry in the Lanza home, publishing a detailed list and photos (see above, reason #6).
On April 2, 2013, the United Nations “Arms Trade Treaty” regulating the international trade in conventional arms was passed by the General Assembly. On April 8, 2013, 12 parents of the Sandy Hook “victims” flew with President Obama to Washington, D.C., aboard Air Force One to lobby congress on gun-control legislation put forward by the White House—which ultimately failed (Figure 44). The continuing media blitz has created an impression that the Sandy Hook hoax was all about gun control. Meanwhile, however, the gun industry has benefited immensely.
Figure 44. “The Newtown 12”: Sandy Hook parents
deplaningfrom Air Force One on April 8, 2013.
The New York Times reported in 2013 that around 1,500 state gun bills had been introduced in the year following the shooting, with 109 becoming law. However, nearly two-thirds of these laws ease legal restrictions and support the rights of gun owners. This may have been an unintended consequence of an intentional plan. Nonetheless, it is not clear that the Sandy Hook event was carried out solely with the aim of passing gun-control legislation. More plausibly it was a multi-faceted Gladio-type operation—implementing a “strategy of tension” in order to control and oppress the population.
Yet it is obvious that the government is out to disarm the American public, if not by legal means then ultimately by seizure. The efforts of “the families” at promoting gun-control legislation may merely be a pretext, a prelude to accustom us to the idea; the increasing number of false-flag shootings may eventually be used as grounds to round up weapons. This would involve a beefed-up security apparatus, which is already in progress, with state and local law enforcement supplied with military-style vehicles and weaponry courtesy of the US Department of Defense.
The security state
The already immense and rapidly growing “security industry” has also benefited from the Sandy Hook “massacre,” as we, the citizens of the United States, lose more of our Constitutional rights (see above, reason #3). Efforts to increase security in schools—and even arm teachers—are underway. This suggests an orchestrated charade in which more gun violence is partnered with more guns in society, but held only by the approved authorities.
The Sandy Hook families have pushed continually for increased security measures along with gun control legislation, starting right after the “shooting.” Some are now directly involved with security companies, such as the Gay, Parker, Mattioli, and Rekos families, which are affiliated with “Safe and Sound,” a non-profit started by Michele Gay and Alissa Parker, mothers of alleged victims Josephine Gay and Emilie Parker (who, by the way, were both identified in the children’s choir that sang at the 2013 Super Bowl). Safe and Sound is partnered with NaviGate Prepared (Figure 45), a for-profit “school safety emergency response system,” as well as with several other “sponsors.”
Figure 45. NaviGate Prepared, a “sponsor” of Safe and Sound,
affiliated withthe Gay, Parker, Mattioli, and Rekos families.
Mental health screening and treatment
In a 2015 TEDxTalk, Nicole Hockley relates gun violence to mental health issues, another pervasive concern of the Sandy Hook parents (Figure 46). After reciting the statistics on shooting deaths, she urges us to learn how to “identify children who may be troubled and get them help…to insure that those that are crying out for help on social media are properly investigated before they hurt themselves or someone else…” We can find out about all the actions that we can take, “focused on identification and intervention,” at the Sandy Hook Promise website.
Figure 46. Standing ovation for Nicole Hockley’s TEDx Talk at the University of Nevada, Reno.
This is part of a more subtle but insidious effort to promote mental health screening and the consequent treatment (medication) of the “mentally unstable” in our society, based upon an event that did not take place. We are asked to consider Adam Lanza’s “mental illness,” which was supposedly “completely untreated,” based on unverified information in a 114-page report of the State of Connecticut’s Office of the Child Advocate (November 2014).
In this report we read that Adam had Autism Spectrum Disorder, Anxiety, and Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, as well as possible undiagnosed Anorexia, and was deprived of recommended services and drugs. It is here that we learn Adam was 6 feet tall and weighed 112 pounds. The report resulted in numerous recommendations, based on the fictional medical and psychological evaluation of Adam Lanza, including universal mental-health screening for children “ages birth to 21,” and the evaluation of children by the school system. The report exposes one purpose of the Sandy Hook event: a “dramatically intensified bureaucratic and quasi-scientific control over the everyday lives of children alongside the continued erosion of the family itself.”
Trauma-based mind control and “The Revelation of the Method”
Beyond all these agendas, the Sandy Hook “massacre” was a huge psychodrama, an exercise in trauma-based mind control—employed with increasing frequency in the US (and throughout the world) since the mega-trauma of 9/11. As with 9/11, the official Sandy Hook narrative is nothing like what really happened, as proven again and again by an army of researchers. We were led through a monstrous rite of child sacrifice (albeit staged), intended to shock us (further) into a stupor. The official version is recounted in lurid detail at Wikipedia, the go-to source for the propaganda that the intelligence state wishes to disseminate.
This false and illogical account is transmitted through all forms of media—TV, radio, newspapers, websites, and magazines, many of which have been taken over in toto by the intelligence services since 9/11. The evolving account has become so confusing and distressing that most people find it easier to accept the official story and go about their business—resulting in a nation of individuals who can no longer think for themselves, even when confronted with the obvious.
On the most basic level, mass terror and tragedy are used to frighten the public into acquiescence, causing people to band together as a community and turn to their leaders for guidance. Thus the seemingly endless series of violent assaults in the form of alleged terrorist attacks, lone-wolf shootings, and white-on-black-on-white killings, which keep us fearful and focused on these ghastly acts instead of the illegal foreign wars or looting of the US Treasury. Perhaps the most significant achievement of the Sandy Hook “shooting” was the creation of a major crisis that did not actually occur—except as portrayed in the media—allowing the perpetrators both to achieve their objectives and to gauge the public’s response to this completely synthetic event.
Researchers are also manipulated, as the perpetrators allow details to emerge—The Revelation of the Method—and monitor our reaction. Thus Governor Malloy’s statement that “the Lieutenant Governor and I have been spoken to in an attempt that we might be prepared for something like this playing itself out in our state,” or Wayne Carver’s “I hope the people of Newtown don’t have it crash on their head later.” Likewise the “Everyone Must Check In” sign (Figure 1), Gene Rosen’s practice interview (Figure 27), and memorial websites posted before the date of the tragedy (Figures 15, 42). Analysis of such details is dismissed as “conspiracy theory” but also used to “process” the public mind in preparation for further discoveries and revelations.
Part of this ploy is the ridicule of the populace, a “macabre nose-thumbing at our complete indifference to our mental enslavement,” such as the smiling relatives and weird interviews, Noah Pozner shown among photos of the victims of a Taliban attack in Pakistan, the myriad police photos providing no evidence, and—the ultimate joke on all of us—the students alive and well and singing at the Super Bowl. Such stunts are intentional, and are not only fun for the perpetrators but are seen to enhance their power.
In response to the brutal violence, we are told to choose LOVE. This was expressed by the resigned and even cheerful parents and other participants in their interviews, even though their relatives and friends had died in a horrific bloodbath only one or two days earlier. This has also occurred with other manufactured acts of terror, such as the Boston Marathon Bombing and the recent Charleston church shooting. People choose love, resilient communities magically bond together, and everyone moves on to the healing process—immediately. Like these smiling actors, we should accept and embrace misfortune.
Such hoaxes involve government at the highest levels, as shown by Obama’s visit to Newtown (and Boston and Charleston), the use of Air Force One to fly the families to Washington, D.C., and Francine Wheeler’s White House Weekly Address (April 13, 2013). This should surprise no one, in light of Karl Rove’s disparagement of the “reality-based community”:
That’s not the way the world really works anymore…We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.
Rove trumps Sherlock Holmes. Solving the crime, and exposing the criminals, does not solve the problem. Barring some mass awakening, since the criminals are the state, they will not be brought to justice.
VIVIAN LEE is the nom de plume of a tenured professor at an east coast university.
This article was published in Nobody Died at Sandy Hook: It Was a FEMA Drill to Promote Gun Control, second edition (Moon Rock Books, 2016). Earlier versions were published in the first edition of Nobody Died at Sandy Hook and at MemoryHoleBlog.com (now MemoryHoleBlog.org) and VeteransToday.com.
 The original article was removed from VT in May 2015 and is no longer posted at the site: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/05/01/top-ten-reasons-sandy-hook-was-an-elaborate-hoax/. The article was also posted to Memory Hole Blog and is no longer available there: https://memoryholeblog.com/2014/01/10/top-ten-reasons-sandy-hook-was-an-elaborate-hoax/. I wish to acknowledge the co-authors of that article—James Fetzer, James Tracy, Sofia Smallstorm, and members of the Sandy Hook research group—as well as Kelley Watt, QKultra, Redsilverj, DITRH, Barry Soetoro, the participants in “We Need To Talk about Sandy Hook,” and many other researchers who have worked on the Sandy Hook event. A preliminary version of the current article appeared in the banned book, Nobody Died at Sandy Hook: It Was a FEMA Drill To Promote Gun Control, James Fetzer and Mike Palecek, eds. (Moon Rockl Books, 2015). The revised version was prepared for the second edition of the book (2016), which has now been withdrawn from circulation: http://moonrockbooks.com/nobody-died-sandy-hook-2nd/. It was posted again at MemoryHoleBlog.com (now MemoryHoleBlog.org).
 The alleged death certificates of Adam Lanza and Noah Pozner were released in 2014 by one Lenny Pozner. Adam Lanza was initially listed as dying on December 13, 2012, according to www.geneaologybank.com following the Social Security Death Index, and Noah Pozner was later pictured in a collage of the dead in a massacre in Peshawar, Pakistan, on December 16, 2014. For this interesting story, see James Tracy, “Sandy Hook Victim Photo Used to Memorialize Pakistani School Massacre.” http://www.globalresearch.ca/sandy-hook-victim-photo-used-to-memorialize-pakistani-school-massacre/5422691.
 “Sandy Hook Hoax—Walking in Circles around Sandy Hook Firehouse.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZRa5_DHgl4. This video can no longer be accessed at YouTube: “This video has been removed for violating YouTube’s policy on harassment and bullying.”
 “Sandy Hook School Shooting Hoax Fraud Robbie Parker Actor Exposed Smiling Laughing Then Fake Crying.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMINqFGNr-w. This video can no longer be accessed at YouTube: “This video is no longer available because the YouTube account associated with this video has been terminated.” For Robbie Parker’s press conference, see RedSilverJ’s “Sandy Hook Hoax – Case Closed” at BitChute. https://www.bitchute.com/video/UoqXUm8FIHSj/.
 “Anderson Cooper Disappearing Nose and Unedited Sound Clicks from Editing Mistake at CNN.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxAWy_bUuio. This video can no longer be accessed at YouTube: “This video is unavailable.”