Monday, July 17, 2017 and YouTube: Accessories After the Fact of Fraud and Theft by Deception and YouTube: Accessories After the Fact of Fraud and Theft by Deception

When bans books or YouTube takes down videos, there is the widespread perception that nothing can be done about it because they are private corporations. Because they are not “state actors”, they are generally believed to be entitled to take-downs of books and videos, even when those actions are capricious or arbitrary. But just as the Civil Rights Movement taught us, there are constraints on the actions of private entities when their actions violate state or federal laws. That is not permissible.

The pattern that has emerged from their recent practices of banning books and censoring YouTube videos about the purported Sandy Hook child shooting massacre of 14 December 2012, which the book, NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK (2015), and those YouTube videos demonstrate to have been a FEMA drill presented as a LIVE event, provides proof that and YouTube have become accessories after the fact to fraud and theft by deception and therefore both appear to be liable to criminal prosecution.

In order to establish that and YouTube are accessories after the fact, they have to be proven to have acted to assist parties (1) who have committed a felony, (2) after the party has committed the felony, (3) with knowledge that the party committed the felony, and (4) with the intent to help the party avoid arrest or punishment. An accessory after the fact may be held liable for, inter alia, obstruction of justice.

Felonies are crimes punishable by more than a year in prison or by death. In the case of Sandy Hook, participants assumed the roles of the survivors of victims of a shooting, which did not in fact take place. With the collusion of FEMA, the Connecticut State Police, the Medical Examiner and parties in the state and federal government, they ran a scam on the public and, by gaining their sympathy, received at least $28m in donations, $1.5m from the Lanza Estate and other items of value, including 65,000 Teddy Bears.

Assuming an equitable division between the surviving families of the twenty children and six adults who were alleged to have died at Sandy Hook, that is over $1m per family, which would be generally acknowledged to be quite a handsome take from feigning to have lost a child during a FEMA drill. And this does not take into account a $50m grant from the State of Connecticut to the Newtown School Board to build a new elementary school or other compensation to others who also participated in the elaborate charade.

The book banned by, NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK (2015), which can be downloaded for free as a pdf, includes chapters by thirteen (13) contributors, including six (6) current or retired Ph.D. college professors, demonstrates that the school had been closed by 2008 and was not compliant with state and federal laws under the Americans with Disabilities Act. It could not have been legally operating in CT in 2012.

The proof of fraud extends to the discovery of the FEMA manual for a 2-day event at Sandy Hook, with a rehearsal on the 13th, going LIVE on the 14th. Some of the participants became confused and put up donation sites a day early and Adam Lanza’s death was initially recorded in the Social Security Death Index as having occurred on the 13th, making his feat in shooting 20 kids and 6 adults the following day all the more impressive.

Even the back cover includes proof that the celebrated photograph taken by Shannon Hicks, a photographer/editor for The Newtown Bee, was not taken during an emergency evacuation but was staged, where an earlier photo (she has also admitted to having taken) shows a purported “police woman” rearranging the kids in the line “to get a better shot” while multiple parents casually look on with their hands in their pockets and arms folded.
The YouTube videos that have been taken down include “The Real Deal must see Sandy Hook Update” (uploaded 5 February 2017) now removed:

As Chance George had notified me, this has been one of my most popular videos about Sandy Hook, no doubt because it proves that nobody died:

Another video of mine, “The Real Deal: Sandy Hook 2017 A NewWitness”, removed from the web site, American Nightmare, ostensibly for violating “Community Guidelines”; but when you compare the content of the video with the guidelines, there does not appear to be any violation thereof but extensive and detailed proof that “the Sandy Hook shooting” was a hoax.

But when you consult YouTube’s stated policy on harassment and bullying,

none of it fits any of the content presented during this interview with a man, Jerry Lafreniere, a resident of Connecticut who knows the area well, who used to have lunch in the parking lot of the abandoned SHES school—unless exposing that Noah Pozner, for example, the most well-known of the alleged child victims, was created out of photographs of his purported older step-brother, Michael Vabner, as a child, constitutes a form of harassment:

No one who read the book, NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK (2015), or who watched the YouTube, “The Real Deal special MUST SEE Sandy Hook Update” or “The Real Deal: Sandy Hook 2017 A New Witness”, and understood their content could be unaware that the Sandy Hook shooting was an elaborate hoax. Indeed, the book includes the FBI Consolidated Statistics for Murder in 2012, which confirms that there were no murders in Newtown during 2012 and therefore none in Sandy Hook, a subdivision:

where this can be found on several pages of the book, including 166-167.

Lenny Pozner, who claims to be the father of Noah, has been aggressive in attacking web sites and students of Sandy Hook who have been doing their best to inform the public that Sandy Hook was an elaborate charade. Some such as James Tracy, formerly Associate Professor of Media and Mass Communications at Florida Atlantic University, have even paid for it with their positions because of baseless attacks appealing to popular beliefs about Sandy Hook, which may be sincerely held but are provably false.

And some of the nation’s leading institutions, such as The New York Times, The Washington Post, and even The Chronicle of Higher Education, have published articles about James Tracy based upon information they know to be false but publish anyway in reckless disregard of the truth to perpetuate this massive fraud on the American people, as I have demonstrated again and again and again. And this elaborate charade appears to be driven by the desire to advance the Barack Obama/Eric Holder gun-control agenda.

As the book explains, Eric Holder visited with Gov. Dannel Malloy on 27 November 2012, during which he appears to have informed him that they were going to take an abandoned school, conduct a drill and present it as a LIVE event to promote gun control. On 16 January 2013, Obama signed 23 executive orders to limit access to weapons under the 2nd Amendment. Joe Biden seems to have confided in the Mayor of Boston, Thomas Menino, that, “by January 2013, gun control in the US would be a done deal”:

where additional stunning confirmations have emerged since its publication that provide additional details about Sandy Hook, including an appearance by a “Sandy Hook father”, Neil Heslin, who contradicted the official story during the televised discussion between Megyn Kelly and Alex Jones and discovering a report by a planning expert to the Newtown School Board in 2010 that the falling birth rate in the community dictated that they did not have enough students to sustain all of the public schools in the community.

The pattern of suppression of information that would expose the fraud and theft by deception (of which and YouTube cannot possibly be unaware) extends to other students of Sandy Hook, including those using the handles “PeeKay Truth”, “Barry Soetero” and “RedSilver J”, as Harold Saive informed me when YouTube’s crack down on research on Sandy Hook began to take a virulent form. While I was wrong to suggest this is a “clear violation of the First Amendement”, which applies to government actions in relation to the people, I had not yet come to the realization that they are accessories after the fact to crimes of fraud and theft by deception:

As one example of the brilliant work they have performed, Barry Soetero discovered that one of the alleged “Sandy Hook parents”, David Wheeler,
was playing two roles at Sandy Hook, one as a grieving father, the other as a SWAT team member, walking up and down Dickinson Drive carrying his rifle upside down by the magazine. This was such blatant incompetence that it had to be taken down. Obama would fly him and his wife, Francine, to Washington to make an emotional address from the Oval Office, no less:

Since it is a federal crime to fly lobbyists on Air Force One, Barack Obama was violating the law flying David, Francine and other Sandy Hook parents to the District of Columbia. James Tracy has discovered that Francine was personal assistant to DNC Finance Chair, Maureen White, which provides further proof that this was a political event that was contrived to promote the Democratic Party’s gun control agenda, where the path was paved by nullifying the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948, which precluded using the same techniques of propaganda within the United States the CIA uses abroad.

For and YouTube to be accessories after the fact to crimes of fraud and of theft by deception, those crimes must have been committed by the Sandy Hook players, including the parents, especially, who benefitted financially from generous donations by sympathetic but gullible Americans.
Consider the legal definition of “fraud”. Here is one for the crime of “fraud”:

Fraud. A false representation of a matter of fact—whether by words or by conduct, by false or misleading allegations, or by concealment of what should have been disclosed—that deceives and is intended to deceive another so that the individual will act upon it to her or his legal injury.

Can there be any doubt that the Sandy Hook players, including the CT State Police, the Medical Examiner, and the parents, among others, were engaged in an elaborate fraud, which appears to have been planned by the Obama administration, even to the extent of nullifying the Smith-Mundt Act to make the use of propaganda and disinformation against the American people legal in the United States? Here is another for “theft by deception”:

Theft by deception generally means the use of deception to obtain control over the property or services of another. The following is an example of a state statute governing theft by deceptionTheft by deception. A person commits theft if he obtains property of another by deception.

We know that the book, NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK (2015), proves this was a two-day FEMA drill presented to the public as a live event. We know that no children or adults died there and that it was done to promote gun control. It was even confirmed by the Obama administration itself. As Ch. 6 explains, Paul Preston, who had conducted drills of this kind before, reached out to his contacts in the Obama Department of Education, who confirmed that it had been a drill, that no children had died and that it had been done to promote gun control. That leaves no doubt this was a fraud. 

Formal proof of fraud for legal purposes requires demonstrating that the defendant's actions involved five separate elements:

(1) a false statement of a material fact;
(2) knowledge on the part of the defendant that the statement is untrue; 
(3) intent on the part of the defendant to deceive the alleged victim;
(4) justifiable reliance by the alleged victim on the statement; and 
(5) injury to the alleged victim as a result.

In the case of the purported Sandy Hook parents, that does not appear to pose a challenge. They all knew they were participating in a scam and that their children had not died in a school schooling massacre. The all knew they were participating with the intent to deceive the public. They all knew that the donations coming from the public were based on false information. They all knew that the public was being deceived to benefit themselves.

Lenny Pozner even sent Kelley Watt a “death certificate” for Noah, which turned out to be a fabrication combining the bottom half of a real certificate with the top half of fake, which has no file number and even gives a wrong ETD (“Estimated Time of Death”) as 11 AM, when the shooting ostensibly took place between 9:30-9:35 AM. Obviously, if Noah had actually died, he would have had a real death certificate and would not have had to fake it: and YouTube cannot have not known that the book and the videos they were banning and censoring provided proof that Sandy Hook was an elaborate charade. Read the book for yourself. Watch other videos that I have made about Sandy Hook, which leave no doubt about it. And if the question becomes of damages suffered, we not only have the public bamboozled out of at least $28,000,000 but NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK (2015) had sold nearly 500 copies from the date it was placed on sale (22 October 2015) to the date it was removed (19 November 2015).

Just two days earlier, I had been contacted by a woman claiming to speak for Inside Edition, which was interested in covering our research on Sandy Hook. But they wanted to do a pre-interview—and I found myself in (what I now take was) a basement operation at Langley, where I was grilled about the book. In retrospect, I have no doubt that was evaluating our evidence to decide if it had to be banned. This appears to be more proof of the tight relationship between Jeff Bezos and the CIA, where he received a $600m contract from the agency that allowed him to purchase The Washington Post.

NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK (2015) sold for $20 in black and white. (The 2nd edition is now available in color at for $30.) 500 copies per month x $20 per copy equals $10,000 per month. If calculations of some personal financial damages matters in carrying a case against, in particular, it would appear easy to satisfy at an estimated rate of $10,000 per month since November 2015, which as of today would equal about $200,000.

My motive for publishing these books has never been to make money, but without revenue, we cannot publish more. The public deserves to know the truth about these events, which are being conducted as acts of feigned terrorism to instill fear into the American people to make us amenable to manipulation to promote a political agenda. It must come to an end. Join me in putting an end to the abuse of media by publishing falsehoods and suppressing truths about Sandy Hook. The future of our nation is at stake.

Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, is McKnight Professor Emeritus on the Duluth Camps of the University of Minnesota. He edited NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK (2015) and its 2nd edition at

Note: There are other, more extensive and detailed, definitions of both kinds of offense, which make the offenses involved apparent, such as:

n. the intentional use of deceit, a trick or some dishonest means to deprive another of his/her/its money, property or a legal right. A party who has lost something due to fraud is entitled to file a lawsuit for damages against the party acting fraudulently, and the damages may include punitive damages as a punishment or public example due to the malicious nature of the fraud. Quite often there are several persons involved in a scheme to commit fraud and each and all may be liable for the total damages. Inherent in fraud is an unjust advantage over another which injures that person or entity. It includes failing to point out a known mistake in a contract or other writing (such as a deed), or not revealing a fact which he/she has a duty to communicate, such as a survey which shows there are only 10 acres of land being purchased and not 20 as originally understood. Constructive fraud can be proved by a showing of breach of legal duty (like using the trust funds held for another in an investment in one's own business) without direct proof of fraud or fraudulent intent. Extrinsic fraud occurs when deceit is employed to keep someone from exercising a right, such as a fair trial, by hiding evidence or misleading the opposing party in a lawsuit. Since fraud is intended to employ dishonesty to deprive another of money, property or a right, it can also be a crime for which the fraudulent person(s) can be charged, tried and convicted. Borderline overreaching or taking advantage of another's naiveté involving smaller amounts is often overlooked by law enforcement, which suggests the victim seek a "civil remedy" (i.e., sue). However, increasingly fraud, which has victimized a large segment of the public (even in individually small amounts), has become the target of consumer fraud divisions in the offices of district attorneys and attorneys general.