Friday, January 15, 2016

The Washington Post joins the Sandy Hook propaganda game

by Jim Fetzer

The Washington Post has now joined forces with The New York Times in the publication of additional propaganda and disinformation about Sandy Hook. Even the title of the article reeks of begging the question by taking for granted that someone had actually died at Sandy Hook and by implying that "death threats" had been sent to his father by those who believe it was an elaborate hoax, where The Post is simply taking the word of a man who has fabricated a death certificate for his purported son:


















There can be no excuse for such conduct, when we have widely publicized the fact that Lenny Pozner, who claims to be the father of Noah Pozner, who has been listed among the children who are supposed to have been shot by Adam Lanza on 14 December 2012, not only was reported to have died again in Pakistan on 16 December 2014 but who, durning the course of around 100 hours of conversation with  Kelley Watt, sent her the following "death certificate" for Noah that turns out to be a crude fabrication:

























This document combines the lower half of (what appears to be) an authentic death certificate with the top half of a crude forgery, which does not have a file number and gives the wrong estimated time of death as 11:00 AM, when the shooting (at least officially) took place from 9:30-9:35 AM. That has not inhibited The Washington Post from treating this man as a source of truth and knowledge, in spite of the fact that he has demonstrated that he will go to any lengths to deceive the public about this event.

The Story from The Post

The reporter who authored the story, Susan Svrluga, appears to be uninformed about Sandy Hook, which may have made her a good choice to write about something whose complexity lies beyond her ken. She dutifully reports Lenny's claims (for which there appears to be no substantiation) that he has been sent "death threats" because of James Tracy's firing and Obama's new executive orders on gun control. Notice his denigration of the Ph.D., which is our highest degree for competence in research:














          In my initial comment, which The Post allowed to stand, I observed that we had published a 425-page book, NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK (2015), with thirteen contributors including six other Ph.D. (current or retired) college professors and six other experts on Sandy Hook, and that we had proven that the school had been closed by 2008 and there were no children there for Adam Lanza to have shot--including Noah Pozner! And I reviewed the unusual history of this remarkable youngster:















              I mentioned that The Post, like amazon.com, is owned by Jeff Bezos, who is a Bilderberger, and that, when it was banned, I immediately released it to the public for free as a pdf, where the evidence that we present includes a photo of the Nancy Lanza bedroom, where you can see some red stuff on the bed (but it is not blood), forms on the wooden chest (for keeping track of how they were arranging each of the rooms) and a blue moving pad beneath the leg (which in their haste they had forgotten to remove):





































The SWAT vehicle and Classroom 10

One of the great disadvantages of exchanges in newspapers is that they generally do not allow for the presentation of photographs and other images, which in this case, especially, make such a difference to understanding what took place. The photo of the SWAT team already in place, where the windows of Classroom 10 are undamaged, the flag is at full staff, with crime scene tape up for a crime that has yet to be committed, where Wayne Carver, M.E., is patiently awaiting the arrival of his tent is a classic:

















But it could not be presented in my comments on the article nor could I include other photographs that appear in Ch. 8, including the windows of Classroom 10 BEFORE and AFTER the alleged shooting, the image of the perps drilling holes in the window frame to simulate the effects of bullets, or the pink rods that demonstrate their trajectories, all of which are at exactly 90* angles with the window panes and exactly parallel with one another, which would have been impossible had this been a real shooting:


















A Sampler of the Exchanges

Here are some of the exchanges that have taken place, where more than 256 comments have been posted and allowed to stand. (I have been informed by several other parties that their comments were either blocked or removed, which suggests to the that a large number of additional comments should have also been published.) Some of them reflect an astounding failure to grasp even the most basic evidence in this case, where no one seems to have bothered to download, much less read, the book:



































Obama shedding fake tears over a fake event, which he promoted














































The David Wheeler Dual-Role Expose


The emergence of more and more proof that Sandy Hook was an elaborate hoax appears to bedriving the agenda in utilizing media assets as prominent as The New York Times and The Washington Post for the dissemination of disinformation and propaganda. Among the most striking is that David Wheeler has now been exposed playing two roles at Sandy Hook, that of a grieving parent and that of an armed military figure, walking back and forth on Dickinson Drive, not even knowing how to carry his rifle:


Indeed, the primary objective of the Sandy Hook event appears to have been to create a cadre of anti-gun lobbyists with seemingly impeccable credentials to fan out across the United States and work for the objective of subverting the 2nd Amendment, which, of course, as President, Barack Obama had taken an oath of office to preserve, protect and defend, from all enemies, foreign and domestic. But he has gone out of his way to fly them in Air Force One, which is a violation of the laws of the nation:


















But he has gone much further by featuring David Wheeler, who, like his wife, has a background as an actor in low grade film productions, and his wife, Francine, speaking from the White House in support of gun control, where there can be no doubt that Obama was profoundly involved in the planning and the execution of the Sandy Hook hoax through his Attorney General, Eric Holder, well-known as an anti-gun zealot. Here is a White House communication describing the event featuring the Wheelers:


















Banning the book and consuming assets

One of the reasons for banning the book, NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK (2015), I have no doubt, is that I included an appendix that demonstrates that, when guns are banned, crime goes up. No one ought to be surprised, since, when only criminals have guns, the disarmed public cannot defend itself from their wanton ways. It turns out the the average response time to an emergency 911 call is 20 minutes, but the mayhem occurs in the first 5. If you can't defend yourself, they won't arrive in time:

























Indeed, although Obama has been talking about "an epidemic of gun violence", where one "distraught father has called for him to "declare a state of national emergency" and impose martial law, there is no foundation for such claims, where the rate of homicides by gun violence has been cut more than half in the United States between 1993 and 2014 (from 7.0 per 100,000 to 3.4) and where even injuries from gun shots have dropped dramatically over the same span (from 725.3 to 174.8), as these graphs show:


At this point in time, I am increasingly convinced that the gun grab has become urgent because of the desire to pass the TPP, which has clauses that (to the best of my knowledge) remain secret to this day. It creates a board of super-corporation-lawyers whose decisions override the laws of the United States and its Constitution. I believe that Obama wants to disarm veterans, Constitutionalists, Ron Paul supporters, 9/11 Truthers and NRA members who might take a dim view of the implicit overthrow of the Constitution of the United States--and who might be strongly disposed to do something about it.