Jim Fetzer, The Latest Pathetic (NYT) Sandy Hook Sob Story

Jim Fetzer

[Editor’s note: For background, those who are unfamiliar with the evidence related to the Sandy Hook event might want to watch two presentations from my False Flags & Conspiracies Conference 2020, which you can download to your own desktop: Kelley Watt, “Sandy Hook: A Mass Illusion”,  and Jim Fetzer, Ph.D., “What happened at Sandy Hook?”–perhaps better titled, “What Didn’t Happen at Sandy Hook?”, as the following explains.There must be over 100 proofs that suggest that Sandy Hook was staged; here I am going to review only a half-dozen as illustrations. While The Times treats these claims as facts, there is the tiniest chance that something more just might be involved here.]

As a long-time student of Sandy Hook, who has had his book banned, been sued and attacked, and been the target of innumerable smears (up to and including in The Chronicle of Higher Education), I find it offensive–extremely offensive–when rags like The New York Times publish disputable claims about Sandy Hook as though they were facts. I brought together thirteen experts (including six Ph.D.s), where we provided evidence strongly suggesting that the school had been closed by 2008, that there were no students or teachers there, and that it was a FEMA drill presented as mass murder to promote gun control (as officials in the Obama Department of Education confirmed to Paul Preston at the time).

So why was this piece published?

Let’s start with the overall character of this latest from The New York Times. As Ron Avery has observed, It could properly be called “a short story” about the experiences suffered by three CT State Police Crime Scene Investigators who say they were involved with the Sandy Hook Mass Shooting investigation. Virtually nothing in the story has to do with actual evidence related to the crime scene, notice, but rather what these parties–who claim to be crime scene investigators–have suffered emotionally as a result of working the Sandy Hook crime scene.

As Avery explains, the title explicitly asks: Should we see and be exposed to the same? Their  implied answer is: No, we should not, let it stop with these three!  The whole NYT‘s article is a pathetic, useless attempt to justify the concealment and redaction of conclusive photographic evidence that anyone was actually killed at Sandy Hook Elementary on 14 December 2012. The essence and core of the whole is summed up here:

“But even though the attorney general was convinced in this moment, reeling on the threshold of this tiny, obliterated bathroom, that if the American people only saw what he was seeing, Congress would be forced to do the right thing, nothing would change in the end. Tragedy in America would prevail. Some would say nothing has changed because we have not yet been made to see. After each new mass shooting, the question, the debate, returns. Would seeing the crime-scene photos have an effect on the gun crisis in the same way images of Emmett Till’s body in an open coffin had on the civil rights movement? The Sandy Hook photographs have been redacted by Connecticut state law since 2013. Even if the law were to change with the consent of the families of the victims, who pushed for the legal restriction, public viewing of the photographs would require one outlet or another to first make the decision to publicize the images. And in a culture where reality is no longer agreed on, many will not believe what they see unless it is funneled through their propaganda of choice. So until that unlikely moment arrives, the full truth of these images and those of shooting after shooting, for the decade after Sandy Hook and into the future, will live on only in the atrocity exhibition that exists in the memory of those who photograph, measure and collect the foul evidence.”

Crime scene photos, however, surely ought to be available to the public. The purpose of this paragraph appears to be to defend themselves from their own conscience and awareness that, as Avery observes, sealing crime scene evidence does not result in good individual reactions or good social policy. Sealing evidence of crimes makes crimes easier to conduct and conceal, whether we are investigating fake crimes or real ones. A case of this kind, which is immersed in controversy, especially deserves thorough and meticulous investigation, which cannot be properly conducted when evidence is suppressed.

In this instance, based upon the evidence I and my colleagues have amassed, the Obama administration appears to have conducted (let’s call it) an act of faux terrorism by faking a mass murder of children to instill fear into the hearts and minds of their target audience–American parents–to make them more amenable to political manipulation. It was an act of domestic terrorism. And that it was also fake can be considered in relation to the photographs they included here. What do they tell us about Sandy Hook? Do they help to resolve whether this event was reality or illusion? The answer (surprisingly) turns out to be “Yes!”

The CSI Van Parking Lot Photograph

Because my edited book, Nobody Died at Sandy Hook: It was a FEMA Drill Presented as Mass Murder to Promote Gun Control (2015; 2nd ed., 2016), has been taken (improperly, in my view, and under review), I shall not rely upon photos from that source. Most of them originated elsewhere. Even though they may also appear in the book, they are not derived from the book–and therefore using them does not violate the book’s contested copyright. Let’s begin with the first paragraph about the presence of a CSI van in the Parking lot following the event:

The crime-scene van was parked next to the black Honda Civic already identified as belonging to the shooter, the yellow tape marking its perimeter juddering in a helicopter gust. Earlier that morning, before the van was cleared to move closer to the school, Jeff Covello, the crime-scene-van supervisor, and his team were crowded around the dry-erase board. Art Walkley, the only one on the van who had so far been inside, sketched out what he said were the two main areas of impact. He arrived with the other first-response officers and stormed the school as children were running out, his gun drawn, ready to kill on sight, in fact quite eager to pull the trigger once he glimpsed Classrooms 10 and 8.

Here’s the photograph, which comes from the CT State Police archives on Sandy Hook, where you want to focus on the four windows of Classroom 10:

When you compare the four windows of Classroom 10 (discernible immediately above the roof of the SCI van), notice that they are intact, while they would subsequently be presented as shot out. Here you can see the difference (along with a photo of the perps studying the window frame and what they did to simulate shots):

In the book, we had suggested the SCI van photo was taken the morning of 14 December 2012, before the event had taken place. Brian Davidson, a licensed Private Investigator, however, has taken a closer look and discovered it was taken the evening of 14 December 2012—before they had completed staging the scene! In other words, even though officially the shooting has already taken place, this photo proves they had not quite completed its staging.

The Parking Lot Photograph

So we have proof the entire event was fake right off the bat implicitly (if you know the evidence in this case), which The Times anticipates you do not possess (by its irresponsible efforts to mislead and deceive you in its latest attempt to promote a hoax as though it were real). With similar intent, they include other photos:

You might not notice if you don’t think about it, but there are no handicapped parking spaces in this parking lot–nor any of the familiar blue-and-white signage required under the Americans with Disabilities Act, which means that this cannot have been an operating school at the time (under either federal or Connecticut law).

Moreover, if you look at other photographs of the entire parking lot, additional missing elements stand out. It was a 38*F ground temperature day, above freezing but cold enough that you could not conduct classes unless the rooms had been heated. Yet there is no heat or steam rising from the building, no doubt because the school had been closed for so many years that the boilers were dysfunctional. And notice the rows of cars in the middle of the lot, which are all facing the school. Following the driving instructions on the roadway, you would have come in and turned to the right, then curled around to the left and parked facing away from the building. So what’s going on?

So just as you thought you were being given information about the SCI van (but which turned out to be only partial and incomplete), you thought you were being given information about the parking lot (but it, too, was only partial and incomplete). The fallacy involved here is known as special pleading, like the case of a used-car salesman, who emphasizes the leather upholstery and the stereo system (but neglects to point out that the rings are shot and the car needs a new transmission)! That’s what you get today from our nation’s “newspaper of record”!

The Blown-Out Window

Notice here that, in spite of the blown-out window, none of the furniture appears to have moved even an inch! It’s all there exactly as you would expect had the window remained intact. What you don’t know about this photograph is that Wolfgang Halbig, a former FL State Trooper and US Customs Agent, who has been a school administrator and remains a nationally recognized school safety expert, has found 10 sworn affidavits by CT State Police who claim they entered the building through that blown-out window!

As Wolfgang has observed, “No trained law enforcement officer would have entered that window without first breaking it out using his baton.” Moreover, to avoid the risk of cutting their uniforms on shards of glass, instead of all ten entering that way, one of them would have entered that way to open the door for the others! The Three Stooges would have done better: Curly would have come in and then opened the door for Joe and Moe. Just how dumb are we supposed to be? Apparently, they think, “dumb enough”!

The Hallway Photograph

Or consider the hallway photo they include and the picture of the broken window at the front of the building. At first, you might think you are being given important information (once again), but what’s most important is what they are not telling you. The hallway photo, for example, doesn’t explain what the “official narrative” maintains:

Brian Davidson, P.I., accessed the photographic files of the CT State Police and discovered (among others) that a hallway photo that should have included the body of the Sandy Hook Principal, Dawn Hochsprung, and of the School Psychologist, Mary Sherlock, included neither–which means this and similar photographs contradict the “official account”. But you would never know unless you had background knowledge The Times does not provide:

Again, The Times proffers a photo from inside Classroom 8. But while it gives the visual impression of a busy, active classroom, none of the photos in the CT State Police archive have their meta-data (identifying the place and the time each photograph was taken), which has been removed–clearly, not by accident! Absent that data, these photos would not normally be admissible in a court of law except, in this instance, as circumstantial proof that the CT State Police were involved in the scam (since what other reason could they have had to delete it)?

The Classroom Photograph

Once again, Brain Davidson found other photos of Classroom 8, where the furniture is shoved up against the wall and there are not only no student desks or chairs but no teacher desk or chair, either, which means he discovered proof not only that this was not the scene of a mass murder but that Sandy Hook was not an operating school:

Other evidence you are not going to learn about from The New York Times include that we located the FEMA Manual for a 2-day exercise–technically, a mass casualty drill involving children–and, more recently, found this exercise on the agenda of events to be conducted by the CT FEMA Office, which is located in Bridgeport, CT, complete with a map of how to reach the Sandy Hook school, which some may find rather persuasive as proof that it was a FEMA drill presented as mass murder to promote gun control, just as the banned book explains.

The Drill on CT FEMA’s Schedule

The CT FEMA schedule and the map from Bridgeport to Sandy Hook School, by the way, were in the Appendices to my US Supreme Court Petition for Reconsideration of the 7th and 14th Amendment issues, which I raised regarding my bizarre case in Wisconsin, where the Court was entitled to set aside any evidence it considered to be “unreasonable“, including the reports of two forensic document experts supporting me against the Plaintiff, who claimed to have been defamed by four assertions I had made that the death certificate for his son was not authentic.

Covering Up Sandy Hook

So how much more proof do you need that it was a drill presented as mass murder to promote gun control? And don’t expect to see photos of the alleged victims. As Wayne Carver, M.D., explained during his press conference, they did not allow the parents to make contract with their children but instead identified them on the basis of photographs, which made sense since most of them only existed in the form of photographs! Check out more of my work for additional proof, which they don’t want you to find. That, after all, is why they banned the book!

This article was clearly intended to “explain away” why you should not have access to Sandy Hook crime scene photographs. But even the few crime scene photographs they do include are damning evidence that this was a FEMA drill presented as mass murder to promote gun control. That Sandy Hook photographs have been redacted by Connecticut state law since 2013 tells you all you need to know about the state of the State of Connecticut. From then-Governor Dannel Malloy to the State Legislature to the CT State Police and beyond, they all played their roles.

Now they are playing the public for suckers and saps with the complicity of The New York Times!  Maybe it’s time to do something about it? At the very least, don’t let yourself be played. The photographs presented here are innocuous on their face. You probably thought that they supported the “official narrative” of mass murder at Sandy Hook–because you did not know enough about it. But the facts appear to show it was an illusion and not a reality, which has encouraged them to run this scam again and again and again. So, if you want to know why there are so many school shootings, now you have an explanation.