Kurt Nimmo, Sandy Hook and The Murder of the First Amendment

Kurt Nimmo

[Editor’s note: Kurt certainly has the right idea, especially as the mainstream media has reported it. I posted the below comment on this article.l

Let me begin by saying I have no idea what happened at Sandy Hook Elementary School on December 14, 2012. However, since 9/11, I have questioned the veracity of many news reports and claims issued by officialdom about terrorism and mass shootings. [See 33 unanswered questions about Sandy Hook here – Ed.] The government and its media have been caught hundreds of times lying about or twisting news stories, so I believe skepticism is entirely warranted.

That said, I am now convinced the First Amendment is a dead letter. I have felt that way for some time. Recent events put a capstone on my previous arguments that much of the Bill of Rights is dead. This was recently underscored by the persecution of activist and author Jim Fetzer for writing a book that claims the massacre at Sandy Hook never happened.

On Thursday, Rolling Stone reported:

A Wisconsin jury has ruled that James Fetzer, a retired professor from the University of Minnesota Duluth, must pay [Leonard] Pozner $450,000 for accusing him of forging his son Noah’s death certificate. Fetzer is the coauthor of Nobody Died at Sandy Hook, which alleges that Pozner faked his son’s birth certificate and that the Obama administration staged the shooting in an effort to pass legislation on gun control.

The ruling and “award” granted to the plaintiff will undoubtedly drive Fetzer to financial ruin if it is not overturned on appeal—and I predict it will stand. This court case is a pivotal moment for those who work to eradicate free speech, a right granted to those who make controversial statements or write books some people find objectionable.

From Digital Media Law:

“The right to speak guaranteed by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution includes the right to voice opinions, criticize others, and comment on matters of public interest. It also protects the use of hyperbole and extreme statements when it is clear these are rhetorical ploys. Accordingly, you can safely state your opinion that others are inept, stupid, jerks, failures, etc. even though these statements might hurt the subject’s feelings or diminish their reputations. Such terms represent what is called “pure opinions” because they can’t be proven true or false. As a result, they cannot form the basis for a defamation claim.”

It is Fetzer’s opinion Pozner lied about the death of his son and falsified his death certificate. The incident has a number of unanswered questions, including Facebook posts about the shooting that appeared the day before the event. The corporate media narrative on the shooting was changed several times. Military experts claimed it would have been impossible for a skinny 19-year old Adam Lanza to have shot so many people in such a short period of time.

If the government really wanted to put the entire case to rest and dispel what it calls malicious conspiracy theories, it would explain why, as Dr. Wayne Carver, the medical examiner overseeing the case, said during a news conference parents were not allowed to identify their murdered children. They were shown photographs instead. This is highly unusual and suspicious.

I’m not saying Lanza isn’t responsible. I’m saying there are numerous unanswered questions swept neatly into the memory hole by the government and its media. In short, the government is responsible for engendering conspiracy theories by not resolving key issues in this case and many others.

Getting to the bottom of Sandy Hook, however, is not the point here. The point is: as a citizen born with inalienable natural rights including speech, you will not be permitted to propose theories on certain topics the state has demarcated as off-limits and punishable if a “tinfoil hate conspiracy theorist” deviates from official narratives, many which are lies designed to emotionally manipulate people and gain consensus under false pretense to further degrade your right to speak and write on crucial issues.

The Fetzer trial is a big win for the ruling elite. For years now, it has worked tirelessly to characterize investigative journalism outside limits imposed by the government as criminal—and now, according to the FBI, as terrorism.

Jim Fetzer and Alex Jones are the first to be subjected to Soviet-like show trials for the crime of disagreeing with the state. More will follow in due course.


Thanks for this, Kurt. You are certainly accurate about the alleged offense as widely reported by the mainstream media. However, Mike Palecek and I did not author the book; we edited it. There are 13 contributors, including 6 current or retired Ph.D. professors, where we established that the school had been closed by 2008, that there were no students there, and that it was a FEMA drill presented as mass murder to promote gun control. We even found the manual for the exercise and included it as Appendix A.

Moreover, I only observed–while offering a dozen reasons for thinking so–that the death certificate for “Noah Pozner” that the Plaintiff has provided to my colleague, Kelley Watt, was a fabrication, not that he had been the one to fake it. The laws of defamation require defaming a person, not merely characterize a document. Two expert document examiners not only confirmed my conclusion but determined that 3 other death certificates for “Noah” that had surfaced during discovery were also fakes.

Summary Judgments require there be no “disputed facts”, where the authenticity of the death certificate remained in dispute. Nevertheless, the Court simply set the two experts reports to the side as “just opinions” and ruled in favor of the Plaintiff. Kevin Barrett, who was present most of the second day of the trial, has published a rather revealing account, which you can review at http://www.unz.com/kbarrett… with commentaries.

This was a classic SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit against Public Participation) to punish those who are exposing scams conducted by government authorities to instill fear into the American people to make us more amenable to political manipulation. So Kurt has it right. You can download the 1st edition of the book for free by putting its title, NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK PDF, in your browser and assess the evidence for yourself, which the Court, alas, would not allow me to present in my defense.

Please follow and like us:

14 thoughts on “Kurt Nimmo, Sandy Hook and The Murder of the First Amendment”

  1. Here is an important interview of E. Michael Jones by anti-zionism Protestant TruNews, Doc Burkhart.

    one hour video, last 20 minutes strong stand for First Amendment.


    The Deception Facing the Church by Christian Zionism
    •Oct 16, 2019
    E. Michael Jones
    47.1K subscribers
    Today on TruNews, Dr. E. Michael Jones joins us to talk about the influence of modern Christian Zionism upon the American Church, and how that has led to a dramatic radicalization of US foreign policy in favor of one nation, Israel. Airdate 10/15/19

    Dr. E. Michael Jones is a world renowned and best-selling Catholic author, lecturer, and editor of Culture Wars magazine. His books include:

  2. I believe this is what happens to ”lost” posts. If another person is posting, your post will be kicked out. Always keep a copy of your post in your files, so that you can repost it later.

    If you still have a problem posting send it to Jim Fetzer, he very fair about helping us stranded posters. jim@moonrockbooks.com

  3. It baffles me how any rational person can look at this lawsuit as a just ruling. It doesn’t matter if you believe in sandy hoax or not this is a clear violation of the first amendment. I feel so sorry for Jame Fetzer and I’m definitely going to donate to help you appeal this injustice.

  4. Another example of an outrageous injustice in the rancid British courts: (there’s nothing secret here…Assange has been tortured and if he lives, will be extradited to the US to face more sickening injustice)


    And the most recent comment that sums things up nicely:

    Am a human rights lawyer who has been educated and worked in multiple common law jurisdictions on both sides of the ocean, and can tell you there are no rights if you piss off the wrong state actor, 95% of the judges, and 98% of government lawyers, will absolutely pervert the law and facts to **** you. You have rights as long as the state lets you have them, but they can be taken away in a heartbeat, so you really do not have them. I have seen way worse than Assange, besides being wrongly locked up, more fun stuff like forced electroshocking, taking of your children, seizing of your property, planting of evidence, Police beatings and many other tools. And this is in two leading Western democracies. And the Judges give two shites.

    1. OK, if it’s true, Jim has no chance, right? Unless he has powerful politicians on his side, he’s toast? That being the case, how does one even mount a decent effort to deal with a festering court system that almost promises a “raw deal”, at best? To the man, we’ve agreed that Jim faced tough sledding on court proceedings.
      Jim, contact John Whitesides, he sounds like he’s fought many of these battles before.

  5. When the largest bookseller in the USA [Amazon.com ] banned Jim Fetzer’s book on Sandy Hook and other books, it sent a chill across centuries of free speech.

    The ramifications of this horrific act of banning books sits over the USA as a black cloud of official censorship that contravenes and destroys the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights upon which the USA was founded in 1776.

    1. Don has it exactly right. I was on the air with John Stadtmiller last night discussing the Pozner v. Fetzer lawsuit:

      The National Intel Report with John Stadtmiller, October 24, 2019, Hour 1
      The National Intel Report with John Stadtmiller, October 24, 2019, Hour 2

      A new Legal Defense Fund has just been established at jamesfetzer.com, where none of the money raised will be used to offset the absurd $450,000 verdict but only to support the appeal that will set that award aside and the trial I have been denied to correct the record, expose Sandy Hook and, to the extent possible under these circumstances, restore respect for the 1st Amendment.

  6. Dear Mr. Nimmo,

    Beginning your article by stating you have no idea what happened at Sandy Hook tells me the following…..

    1. Either you are afraid to state the truth.
    2. You haven’t bothered to discover the truth.

    …… either one of which obviates the need for me to read further.

    Let’s assume you aren’t lazy. This leaves afraid.

    1. Good comment, Mr. Seymour.

      Dr. Fetzer is not only courageous and sincere. He is sincerely RIGHT.

      The overwhelming facts gathered by many skilled researchers over the years have shown the ENTIRE Sandy Hook event was an orchestrated HOAX. Everyone should KNOW THAT TRUTH.



      I posted a lengthy comment earlier today but it is not getting posted. I did not get the usual message that my comment was in moderation which was odd. Want that comment posted.

      1. “PS

        I posted a lengthy comment earlier today but it is not getting posted. I did not get the usual message that my comment was in moderation which was odd. Want that comment posted.”

        I just tried reposting that missing-in-action lengthy posting I did earlier today. It still is missing in action. It is as if I did not submit a posting at all. No in-moderation message. WordPress evil going on here. Moderator here needs to post that suppressed comment!!!!!

      2. Dachsie, I am moderating myself and the only posts I am not allowing are from shills and trolls. Send me the missing post to jim@moonrockbooks.com and I will post it on your behalf. No idea what happened to it. Sorry about that. Thanks.

      3. On behalf of Dachsie:

        “You have rights as long as the state lets you have them, but they can be taken away in a heartbeat, so you really do not have them.”

        This is exactly what the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights says

        Article 29, Section 3 of the Declaration says “These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.”

        So much for “unalienable” rights.

        I remember showing this to Dr. Fetzer around 2005 or 2006 – still have the email exchange-. Dr. Fetzer did not seem to understand what this was saying or the point I was making.

        Having Creator-endowed rights protected by the government at all costs

        is the crucial difference between a republic and and democracy.

        Democracy is a word that has been so abused in the USA. Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding on what’s for dinner.

        Headlines with a Voice narrator lady in a recent video said that President Trump referred to the USA as a democracy. Very bad sign.

        The fact that the Sandy Hook case has been brought to court is very important. A win for Dr. Fetzer is really a win for all the false events on US soil since the JFK assassination. IT would be the only legal proceeding that offers a glimmer of hope that we still have a functioning republic and a just rule of law.

        I personally believe that all focus in the defense should be the FACT that there exists NO legal document of Noah Pozner’s Death Certificate. ALL documents purporting to be that legal document, obtained by both sides of the case, are NOT legal documents. THAT is solid FACT and EVIDENCE which must be ruled upon. If and honest legal rule-of-law judgment verifies that Dr. Fetzer is correct and that there is NO LEGAL Noah Pozner death certificate, there is NO DEFAMATION and the case should be dismissed.

        HAVING that SOLID IRREFUATABLE EVIDENCE on his side, Dr. Fetzer, I do not believe, bring in the Lenny in court is a diferent or impersonation of another entitiy in the past who presented as Leonard Pozer. Dr. Fetzer should rest his case on the fabricated Noah Pozner death certificates.

        One thing I find sorely missing in all of our discussion is WHAT CAN WE LITTLE OPPRESSED PEOPLE DO to save our REPUBLIC.

        What can we DO?

        I say stop spending money at Amazon, and paypal and all the pay services that lock out Moon Rock Books.

        STop spending money at Whole Foods and any business that is owned by Jeff Bezos.

        Walmart seems better to me for online shopping but still is not a USA free enterprise individual owned patriotic company. Too much China crap for sale.

        I also find it useless to harp on how it is the “Jews” who cause ALL of USA’s problems. I know the facts and their main involvement in the money system and Fed Reserve and international banking and their history of the the “Jewish Revolutionary Spirit” but as one caller wisely said on a recent Revoltuionary Radio show of Dr. Fetzer’s – something like –

        Drop “the Jews” arguments, that will get you nowhere.

        To me things are such a state of utter deep corruption and there is to truth or justice anywhere for anyone, even if we deported every single Jew, whatever definition of Jew is by the ministry, that “Paul” would like to, we are still left with a rotten pot of oligarchs only concerned about their pocketbooks and establishing a one world death and slavery system for all.

        Sorry for long post and lots of capitalization but just needed to share this information.

        Here is an elaboration of the different kinds of government – and how U N and socialism and communism are radically and foundationally different from a REPUBLIC, no matter what rosy sounding words the UN and the Left in the USA try to make it sound.

        Sorry, did not save the link for this…

        Universal Declaration of Human Rights…” That, of course, is the United Nation’s Declaration of Human Rights that the IDU document is promoting as its guiding principle.
        two conflicting philosophies of governance in the world.

        1. American view, outlined in the Declaration of Independence, states that all people have rights they are born with and that government’s only job is to protect those rights at all costs.

        these rights are forever and unquestioned.

        It is the foundation of human freedom.

        It is what makes the United States a Republic, where the rights of minorities (even of one) are firmly defined and protected.

        2. Other philosophy says that government grants our rights, professing that all such rights give way to an undefined common good whenever it’s warranted – which is often. That means that all so called rights are subject to the whim of whatever gang is currently in power at the time, dictating the definitions of what constitutes the “common good.” Today that is commonly called a democracy, where the power of majority rule can and does obliterate the rights of minorities.

        As an example of how this second system works in practice, The Constitution of the old Soviet Union said that Soviet citizens had most of the same rights as Americans. Except that it also said individual rights were secondary to the common good. In the case of the Soviet Union, the common good was defined as creating a worldwide communist utopia where individual wants and needs simply didn’t count. We all know how that worked out for the Soviet citizens.

        While veiled in language designed to sound much like the Declaration of Independence, the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights actually takes this second approach, outlining specific rights it says we should all have. It says nothing of “unalienable” rights, instead referring to “rights under the law.” Who or what is the law, according to the Human Rights Declaration? It says, “the will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government.” Now, at first look, that sounds like America. Democracy. People voting – the opposite of dictatorship. But such a concept ignores the very root of American freedom – that our rights are guaranteed, no matter what the majority thinks or wants. Moreover,

        Article 29, Section 3 of the Declaration says “These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.” So much for “unalienable” rights.

        Suppose the majority of people vote to abolish your business (Wal-Mart?) or take your home (to protect bird habitat?)? The reason is always to protect the common good, or the children, or the environment, or whatever is the fad of the day. This is called majority rule, but it is still just another form of dictatorship. It’s what led to the ravages of the guillotine in revolutionary France. It’s rule by fear; fear of the wrong gang changing the rules; fear of standing against the crowd. Majority rule is simply a lynch mob – or more graphically, three wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for lunch.

        This is the root of the philosophy entrenched in the UN’s Declaration of Human Rights. It is the basis for the political policy behind Sustainable Development and the Supreme Court’s Kelo decision on eminent domain. It’s the philosophy that dictates a common good must be served, no matter the consequences. Personal liberty must give way to the whims of the crowd.

        Clarity is always good. Understanding exactly what is going on is never a bad thing. Helping people to easily see and comprehend the mess — always helpful.\

        John 8:32

        And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

        “and the light shines on in the darkness and darkness could not overcome it.”

        John 1:5

        See full size image

  7. It has now become absolutely apparent We the People no longer have any say, rights or any ability to participate in what was once a government of the People, by the People and for the People.

    What do we plan to do about it?

    Sadly, we all know the answer.


Leave a Reply