On June 3 James Tracy sent a letter to Sun-Sentinel editor-in-chief Howard Saltz citing the paper’s repeated attacks on Tracy for publicly questioning government pronouncements and overall news coverage of the Sandy Hook massacre and Boston Marathon bombing. In a June 17 response to the letter Saltz maintains that the Sun-Sentinel‘s coverage is defensible given its newsworthiness and under the tenets of free speech.

“Our news coverage has not judged the merits of your arguments,” Saltz contends. “It never will. We will report them, and let the chips fall where they may.”

Tracy’s article, “The Sandy Hook School Massacre: Unanswered Questions and Missing Information,” received wide circulation in alternative media outlets in late December, immediately prior to the Sentinel‘s string of stories and commentaries highlighting Tracy.

The letter is reprinted in its entirety below followed by excerpts from Saltz’s response.


James F. Tracy, PhD
Boca Raton, FL

June 3, 2013

Howard Saltz
Editor in Chief
South Florida Sun-Sentinel
500 East Broward Boulevard
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33394

Sent Certified Mail: Return Receipt Requested

Dear Howard Saltz,

I am writing in reference to the numerous articles and opinion pieces published by the Sun-Sentinel regarding my public commentaries on the December 14, 201[2] Newtown massacre and the April 15, 2013 Boston Marathon bombing. Without seriously assessing what I have actually sought to argue, each of these pieces have almost without exception vigorously assailed my character and overall assessment of these public events while advocating for dismissal from my faculty post at Florida Atlantic University, implying or explicitly calling attention to my alleged moral or even mental incapacity to hold such a position. Taken as a whole, the uniformly negative nature of such articles and commentaries can be considered as nothing less than a concerted campaign against me and is arguably libelous.

The following are quotes from some of the news and opinion articles published by your newspaper since January 7, 2013:

“A communication professor known for conspiracy theories has stirred controversy at Florida Atlantic University … “ Mike Clary, “FAU Prof Stirs Controversy By Disputing Newtown Massacre,” January 7, 2013.*

“A tenured professor has to spout a lot of craziness before you can oust one … I find conspiracy theorists fascinating. They view the world through a permanent prism of distrust and paranoia. Maybe they were dropped on their head when they were babies, or it’s something in the genes.” Chan Lowe, “FAU Prof’s Sandy Hook Conspiracy Theory,” January 11, 2013.

“James Tracy still has a job at Florida Atlantic University, FAU media relations director Lisa Metcalf said Wednesday. But beyond that, she didn’t say much about Tracy, a tenured associate professor of communication who has brought much embarrassment to the university with his comments questioning the Sandy Hook Elementary massacre … I’m all for academic freedom, but there’s a not-so-fine line between critical thinking and crackpot lunacy. I sure am glad I’m not FAU president Mary Jane Saunders. I don’t know if I’d fire Tracy. Perhaps the best we can do is ignore him.” Michael Mayo, “FAU Takes Heat for Professor James Tracy’s Sandy Hook Comments,” January 24, 2013.*

“So score another one in the weird column for FAU … After taking a public relations hit last month with the wacky Internet musings of tenured communications professor James Tracy about the Sandy Hook Elementary massacre …” Michael Mayo, “FAU Stadium Deal with Prison Company is Odd Way to Feather Nest,” February 20, 2013.

“So far, 2013 has been a controversial year for the university. In January, associate professor James Tracy questioned on his personal blog whether the Sandy Hook massacre happened.” Scott Travis, “FAU Apologizes After Jesus Assignment Sparks Outrage,” March 25, 2013.*

“In January, after professor James Tracy made national news by suggesting the Sandy Hook Elementary massacre may have been staged, it took Saunders two days to release a statement saying his views were not shared by the university.” Sun-Sentinel Editorial Board, “More Missteps at FAU,” March 27, 2013.*

“Earlier this year, you had the public relations fiasco involving professor James Tracy, a tenured professor of communication who claimed that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings may not have happened, or didn’t happen as reported. The claim got national publicity, and not the good kind.” Gary Stein, “Does Stomp Jesus Show FAU Needs an Image Makeover?” March 27, 2013.*

“Unveil latest course offerings at school’s ‘edgy’ communications department: ‘Muhammad Cartoon Drawing 101,’ ‘Advanced Holocaust Denial,’ and ‘Professor James Tracy’s Lies, Damn Lies and Conspiracies.’” Michael Mayo, “How Low Can FAU Go?” March 27, 2013.

“ … professor James Tracy’s blog musings about the Sandy Hook massacre … “ Michael Mayo, “FAU President Says She’s ‘Totally Secure’ in Job,” April 3, 2013.

“ … FAU’s conspiracy theorist.” Scott Travis, “Controversial FAU Professor Questions Boston Bombing,” April 23, 2013.

“‘Our own FAU handbook says an employee may be terminated for questionable conduct, professional or personal,’ [FAU] trustee Robert Rubin said. ‘And what Professor Tracy said wasn’t?’ But making comments that are embarrassing to a university is not grounds to fire a tenured professor … “ Scott Travis, “Controversial FAU Professor Questions Boston Bombing,” April 23, 2013.

“Tracy’s Sandy Hook postings received nationwide attention and prompted FAU to issue him a formal reprimand.” Scott Travis, “Controversial FAU Professor Questions Boston Bombing,” April 23, 2013.*

“Florida Atlantic University professor James Tracy … obviously needs a hobby so he can stop coming up with crackpot theories.” Gary Stein, “Should the FAU Professor be Fired for Off-the-Wall Theories?” April 25, 2013.

“FAU Professor James Tracy offered his opinion on the recent events that occurred in Boston in the Sun Sentinel on April 24 … While the vast majority of our university professors tend to be to the left of the political spectrum, most of them try to minimize mixing their ideological views with their professional responsibilities. There are others however, who use their title and position to intimidate and coerce students who do not subscribe to their way of thinking.” Caren Besner, “Some Professors Trying to Force Views on Students,” May 7, 2013.

“Forget the Clowns, Send in the headlines! … James Tracy’s musings …” Michael Mayo, “More Questions at FAU,” May 8, 2013.

“And everyone got mad when tenured communications professor James Tracy started spouting conspiracy theories about the Sandy Hook Elementary massacre and Boston Marathon bombings on his personal blog.” Michael Mayo, “FAU President’s Resignation No Surprise,” May 15, 2013.

“It didn’t help that Saunders had to deal with a wacko professor who twice made national news for doubting the veracity of the massacres at Sandy Hook Elementary School and later, the Boston Marathon.” Sun-Sentinel Editorial Staff, “What’s Next for FAU, Given It’s President’s Resignation,” May 16, 2013.

“As president, [Mary Jane Saunders] could not be blamed for the antics of some of her faculty (conspiracy theories …), Chan Lowe, “FAU’s Saunders Resigns,” May 16, 2013.

*Note: The memoryholeblog.com site had existed since March 2012. The blog and I were thrust into the national news only after the Sun-Sentinel published its January 7, 2013 story, “FAU Prof Stirs Controversy by Disputing Newtown Massacre.” Thereafter the Sun-Sentinel repeatedly refers to the “controversy,” suggesting its spontaneity, even though the paper played a major role in initiating and perpetuating it.

Published Letters to the Editor

“But I was also dismayed because the Sun Sentinel chose to put the article on the front page, needlessly giving more attention to this nut-case than he deserves.” Richard Mangan, “Give FAU a Break,” April 28, 2013.

“FAU professor James Tracy certainly has to have his First Amendment rights protected. However, if the students are as rankled by his blogs as many of us are, just don’t register for any of his classes.” Mike Marcus, “Don’t Attend James Tracy’s Classes,” April 28, 2013.

“When will this insanity stop? FAU associate professor James Tracy should be fired immediately. A person with his kind of thoughts has no place teaching young adults. Who knows what a mentally disturbed person like Tracy could do in the future. Let us stop hiding behind tenure.” David Hofield, “Why Should Tracy’s Tenure Matter,” April 28, 2013.

As the above examples clearly indicate, the Sun-Sentinel has repeatedly attacked my person and character. Your paper and staff have on numerous occasions published material suggesting that I be relieved of my position. At no time, however, has your paper sought to seriously dispute what I have said or written concerning Sandy Hook or Boston, instead choosing to ride the tide of poorly informed public outrage it has played a major role in fomenting. Such conduct is not so much journalistic as it is political.

As noted above, the entire controversy regarding my analysis of Sandy Hook massacre news coverage can be traced to a January 7 story written by Sun-Sentinel senior reporter Mike Clary. Clary expressed his delight that the story was picked up nationally in a January 8, 2013 telephone conversation with me. He again drew attention to this a few days later in a follow-up piece. “A Monday story in the Sun Sentinel in which Tracy discussed his views went viral and touched off a firestorm of controversy,” Clary wrote. “While many callers and emailers defended or even applauded Tracy’s remarks, others, including current and former FAU students, said they found his theories outrageous and offensive.” Mike Clary, “FAU Prof Should Be Fired, Newtown Official Says,” January 10, 2013.

Thus much of the “controversy” the Sun-Sentinel repeatedly points to with the underlying suggestion that it is spontaneous can be traced to its initial story—a story that your staff clearly sought to make as sensationalistic as possible. On the evening of January 7 in a telephone discussion with Mr. Clary, your reporter forcefully and repeatedly pushed me to assert that the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre was staged. He seemed irritated when I responded to his queries by remarking, “It’s a possibility,” or “The coverage suggests that it may have been.” My responses mirror the commentaries on my blog.

Further, in our initial telephone interview on the afternoon of January 7 Clary sought to question me under a false pretense—stating that he had been informed that the FAU administration was potentially initiating disciplinary action against me because of my blog. I have been told by one reliable party working within the FAU administration at the time that administrators knew nothing of my blog until Clary’s January 7 article was published and thereafter became a national story. Indeed, I was never spoken to by administrators about my blogging until January [18], [two] weeks after Clary’s initial story ran.

I have done a considerable degree of research on both the Newtown massacre and the Boston Marathon bombing. With the above in mind, and since the Sun-Sentinel is a newspaper with a skilled staff and a significant regional and national influence, I formally challenge you or any member of your editorial or reportorial staff to a public debate on the veracity of either Sandy Hook or the Boston Marathon events as related by government and law enforcement agencies, as well as in your newspaper and by the US press more broadly, versus the arguments that I have put forth.

I am sure you will agree that such a dialogue will be of special value since it will move us beyond tactless name calling and toward consideration of substantive evidence and analysis of events with major import. If you are confident enough in your particulars of how each of the events transpired, as suggested by the paper’s continued publication of such such serious and continual denunciations of my being and character, I am confident that you or your staff will be pleased to engage me in such an exchange.

If you agree to my challenge, arrangements for a suitable public forum and accommodations will be negotiated between your staff and me. If the Sun-Sentinel prevails in such a debate the public will be reassured of the paper’s devotion to truth, journalistic integrity, and the censures of me will be wholly justified. I will thereafter devote myself to further contemplating and learning from the flurry of disparaging coverage and remarks your staff and its regional broadcast peers have directed toward me and my person. If you are not successful in the exchange you will publicly apologize for the uniformly negative series of reports and commentaries your newspaper has published about me over the past five months.

Thank you for your consideration of the above. I look forward to your reply.


James F. Tracy, PhD

On June 17 Mr. Saltz replied to the above correspondence via email, making the following points quoted verbatim here:

  • There is no concerted effort. Reporters and columnists are looking for stories, as they always do. And they’re finding stories in this situation.

  • Are the stories you cite legitimately newsworthy? I say yes. You’re a high-profile member of the community, in a position to influence others, espousing viewpoints that are unusual and perhaps inflammatory. That’s newsworthy, almost by definition.

  • You suggest in your letter that you may have been libeled. I am quite comfortable in my belief that the SunSentinel has not libeled you. We will therefore act accordingly.

  • The facts provided in the articles are, to the best of my knowledge, correct and true. If you believe there is an error of fact in our coverage, please feel free to tell me. You have not cited any in your letter.

  • The opinions expressed are within the bounds of fair comment. You advocate unusual theories; people will always challenge unusual theories and, perhaps unfortunately, some will be offensive in doing so. The people expressing these opinions are using the same free-speech right with which you espouse your views.

  • We would not engage in debate. That’s not what newspapers do. Your suggestion confuses our reporting of positions contrary to yours with taking positions contrary to yours. They are not the same thing.  If you engage in a public debate with someone else, we would report that. You could also express your views on the Newtown and Boston Marathon situations in an op-ed article; I would be happy to publish it.

Our news coverage has not judged the merits of your arguments. It never will. We will report them, and let the chips fall where they may.

[polldaddy poll=7185550]

Leave a Reply

62 thought on “An Open Letter to the South Florida Sun-Sentinel”
  1. You can’t win in a situation like this. The concept of journalistic “objectivity” has been so twisted and blinding that those who cling to it can’t see reality. It’s kind of like white privilege, in which white people think of themselves as “normal,” and everyone else has to answer for why they are “different.”

    1. Dick……”white privilege”? Just what is ‘white privilege’? Your analogy makes no sense. Why would you even attempt to make an issue out of white privilege. WP doesn’t exist in reality. Only fiction. My father was a poor child during the depression. He worked therefore extra hard to build wealth that he later passed down to his children. I am an heir to his hard work. Is this so called ‘white privilege’ that I should feel ashamed? Why would you even try to suggest white privilege is something real. It is a term concocted by the cultural Marxists who, ironically, control today’s academia. Which is why Prof Tracy is being railroaded. Men like Tracy challenge cultural Marxism and the New World Order.

        1. Marilyn (12:49PM), I used to think the best response to the questionnaire question “Race?” was “human.” It took quite a bit of increased understanding for me to realize that that is exactly the point of white privilege — to be white is to be human — i.e., default — to fail to acknowledge the myriad ways in which being white colors one’s reality and relationship to the world. The fact that someone who has never seen me or known me can be told I’m “black” or “white” and understand a LOT about me (not everything, for sure, but a lot more than almost anything except male/female) says that “human” is a poor descriptor.

          To “move beyond the [racial] paradigm” is to ignore institutional racism — the huge racial imbalance in incarceration and sentencing rates, the “equality” argument that affirmative action should be ended, etc. etc. Truth is NOT color blind — truth recognizes reality, and in this society (and others) you can’t understand the reality of society without understanding the myriad ways in which color affects life. Truth will only be color blind when society is color blind — otherwise what you propose is the most dangerous form of “truth” — we think we KNOW something, but it is incomplete or (worse) simply false.

      1. I bet you are white. And it sure was easier growing up with a hard working white father especially during the 50’s and 60’s huh, with all of that equality going around…I am not trying to disparage your fathers hard work ( I know it wasn’t an easy life) But this is exactly what Dick is speaking of, you know nothing of this kind of life, as you were an heir to your fathers hard work. Therefore you have an under-appreciation for REAL life or death what am I going to eat tonight or where am I going to find work, decisions. And again do not read this as I am making assumptions about you , but trying to pull you back for some perspective on your comment..

        1. Looks like LeeKinanus is just one of those who can’t move beyond the white/brown paradigm. Another Cultural Marxist. Being white or so called WP has nothing to do with this Post. And dick knows it.

          I won’t infect this Post with this discussion which is irrelevant.

          LeeKinanus — I wish we could debate elsewhere. Expose you for who you are.

        2. This is a difficult area for all. I appreciate the depth of the racial issue. But my point, perhaps too quickly summarized, is that abstract ideas such as truth and justice rise above differences–ethnic, racial, religious, et al.– and stand on their own. If they aren’t applied fairly and universally, it is indeed a curse on the social compact. When they are, it erases the energy of those culturally-engendered biases.

          Can the human species ever evolve to that utopian level? Highly unlikely, but it is something to reach for, “to dream the impossible dream.” As long as people snipe and demand all, distain compromise, the battles continue; nothing is gained. Tyrants know the power of divide and conquer. It has been a tool wielded through the ages.


      2. I think probably there’s a misunderstanding of what “white privilege” is. It has nothing to do with inheritance or hard work or “privilege” as I think you’re thinking of it. It is simply the assumption on the part of those of us who are white that everyone is essentially the same –and that that sameness is the experience of a white person (poor or rich) as the default state.

        Peggy MacIntosh, who first introduced the idea, had thought about what she took for granted as a result of simply being white (regardless of any other aspect of her life — male/female, poor/rich, what have you). On the web, you can easily find a copy of that list (e.g., crc-global.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/white-privilege.pdf‎), as well as her original fascinating paper “Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack.” For example: being able to walk down the street in a city without the slightest thought — which virtually every black male has — of being stopped by the police with an uncertain outcome (though that obviously is going to change if things keep going the way we see them going.)

        I once sat in on a college course in which this was analyzed, and was initrigued by how electrified the students were who finally “got” it. Changed their whole word-view.

        I apologize if the analogy seems inappropriate or obscure in this case. It was intended in the sense that the editor of the newspaper is so embedded in the meme of the exceptional, noble U.S. — and an independent world of lone wolves and Muslim terrorists out to get us — that it is not possible for him to even entertain the possibility that something larger is going on that is totally inconsistent with that meme. He is being “objective” in the sense of staying true to what he unconsciously and — given his inputs — “reasonably” assumes is reality, unable to take the relatively small step of looking at some of the contrary evidence.

        If the analogy doesn’t seem to fit, by all means ignore it!

      3. Jeff I used to post on here frequently last winter regarding the Sandy Hook affair, but mostly lurk on here now, and I’d love to talk with you more about the myth, or lie for that is what it truly is…but discussing or debating race distracts from the concretes this blog seems to focus on. Please contact me at meghughes11@aol.com if you’re interested in further exploration of this topic from an explicitly populist pro-white angle. I and some friends are trying to build a blog and/or an advocacy group to defend the basic civil rights of white people, to address the revisionist history that has overtaken academia and even the legal studies world (look up Critical Race Theory). There is a very real concrete expression of this school of propaganda which takes its most dramatic form in an epidemic of violence against whites, particularly women, afflicting this country. Since the MSM represses the truth we whites who haven’t sold out or drunk the Kool Aid have to get it out.. White Privilege is pure propaganda and historical fiction.

  2. I say consider it a badge of honor, and keep doing what you’re doing. Heaven knows there are precious few enough willing to challenge the status quo. Sun Sentinal is taking the easy road.

    1. It’s interesting the way that only going into exile like Snowden, and talking to a muck-raking journalist like Greenwald, gives cover to the less intrepid media people to acknowledge what only “conspiracy theorists” and “tinfoil hat people” were saying – that the US government spies extensively on the American people. The newer notion, subject to debate in some quarters, is that, based on Snowden’s revelations, it may be used for stalking ex-spouses or looking for someone to stalk. But I should imagine that there is also a lucrative trade in insider business information. It’s the devil’s playground and that is why it was always unconstitutional.

      Now you don’t have to be a conspiracy theorist to say they do it – but you are still considered one if you think it could lead to bad stuff rather than all that catching the terrorists thing, which makes it downright patriotic, and helpful, and a sign of a great, healthy nation that it is going on. A conspiracy theorist’s work is never done.

      Those who are on the inside but just barely, like Michael Hastings, biting the hand that fed him as a true journalist should do – well they die young like Jesus Christ.

  3. Kudos once again to Dr. Tracy! I no longer feel enraged in defense of you……a brilliant strategy to stimulate interest in the “unawakened masses” to verifiable events unfolding. Even to discerning individuals, sometimes external stimulation is needed……you are doing a fine job of that !
    Back in the day when the internet was considered a “nerd niche” it was often overlooked. But now that it is in wider use & recognized as a potent source of information, fewer & fewer people are depending on MSM….be it tv or newspapers….for any REAL news.
    “Conspiracy theorist” ? I wear my tinfoil-hat with pride as I would prefer to allude to the possibility of anything & do my research rather than rely on the spoon-fed crap that is force fed to us by MSM.

    Once again, my (tinfoil) hat’s off to you for a brilliant maneuver !

  4. Newspapers like the Sun Sentinel should no longer be called newspapers but pulp fiction, and conspiracy theorists should be called official government mouthpieces, while those questioning them should be called sage and sane. People may not understand the poll above and vote for the wrong side.
    Perhaps the Sun Sentinel can suggest a candidate to take their position against you in a debate, one who is willing to destroy his or her reputation against your logical explanations.

  5. Agree with all of the above statements. I am sure that subscribers to the Sun Sentinel are dwindling just like most propaganda newspapers are in the many areas of this country. People are awake and they want the facts not the opinions of some lone reporter. I will support the challenge that you put forth to the Sun Sentinel. I think we should challenge all of the propaganda cohorts.

  6. Before I had even heard of Dr. Tracy, my own “gut” feeling regarding Sandy Hook was uneasy and troubling. My own common sense told me that something wasn’t right about this picture, and I began to see the red flags without realizing I was not alone in my thinking. Wake up America and use your brain. Start questioning what we are being fed (by our Feds). Don’t kill the messenger (Dr. Tracy) because you refuse to look at the facts. Shame on the Sun Sentinel along with all the others who refuse to use their common sense. The newspaper has a responsibility to do investigative reporting. How much longer will it be before we have a Berlin Wall in the U.S. and we are silenced if our thinking does not agree with the media. Kudos to Dr. Tracy for uncovering the culture of corruption. If Dr. Tracy was one of our Senators our country would not be in the sorry mess it is today.

  7. South Florida Sun-Sentinel

    nuclear power school Orlando
    Naval Flight Officer Pensacola

  8. I would certainly write the op-ed and issue a challenge to have a public debate with anyone of proper merit with questions coming from a representative of the paper, giving them exclusive coverage rights…I know you could easily handle anything thrown your way! Keep up the great work and don’t sleep them get you down, you’re on the right side of this sir.

  9. And they wonder why only a slim minority ever publicly question the official narrative or present an argument that may go against the grain. Look what they’re doing to Dr. Tracy! Publicly crucifying him and trying to get him removed from his job. The mainstream media stands guilty of trying to destroy people with opposing views . What Dr. Tracy is doing was once considered patriotic and the American way of doing things. What a shame what we’ve become. A bunch of mindless sheep afraid to stick our necks out, question anything or form an opinion of our own.

  10. Yeah—what is news? It’s propaganda. I don’t mean that in some abstract sense either. I mean very literally it is nothing less than propaganda. To that extent, you can either use “news” to advocate things that make the world better or worse. That becomes very difficult, as we are embedded in counter intelligence. Yet we know what aim the South Florida Sun-Sentinel is working for. They’ve chosen to take the easy route and just help evil. (I’m not going to, but if I did) I would likely enter the web domain of this paper and find their “writers” supporting the heart eating cannibals and children’s head decapitators that have invaded Syria. Here’s a potential headline: “Howard Saltz cheers child’s head being cut off in Syria.” Imagine that. We know what the typical propagandist does—he aids evil. And the ones at the Florida “Sun-Sentinel”, suggests Howard Saltz, always will.

  11. They’re full of baloney, but I don’t see anything that rises to libel either.

    They’re also phony about not debating you. They write editorials, don’t they?

    But mostly you shouldn’t let these idiots bother you. Newspapers are dying, and this is just one of the reasons why.

    By the way, if you’re looking to debate someone, I’d be happy to be on other side. 🙂

    1. It must wear you down, constantly, publicly, being caricatured as a buffoon without the substance of what you are saying ever being addressed. I’m sure it would be hard to ignore, and almost certainly at some point demand a response. I think James handled it quite well.

      As for libel, James is a public figure, and the press falsely calling public figures crazy, if I’m not mistaken, has been an American pass time since colonial days. The press is being grossly unfair to him, certainly, and it must be painful to endure, month after month. But having your own well-visited blog is certainly the best revenge.

  12. A public relations friend of mine once told me that you’ll never win an argument with the one who owns the inkwell. So frustrating.

    I once had to deal with an editor in a small town newspaper who refused to deal with a story (would’ve been a year-long expose’) about corruption I uncovered in the local town government. It was only after I was able to get the state regulator (only after an appeal to the governor’s office) to blow the issue open that the paper gave it any attention (since it was forced to due to the regulator’s response to the issues uncovered).

    Obviously the newspaper was protecting the local politicians and others in the “good ol’ boy” network and that is particularly SHAMEFUL. But, in the end – It just took a feisty little blonde gal who wouldn’t give up – even after the county administrator threatened to have me arrested for something he could easily make up!

    So, it is people like our James here (and many of the readers of this blog) who have to make these slime balls accountable. We need to let them know that we’re not buying into their b.s.

    Some people are just beginning to understand that many of those in charge of the news/info. that is disseminated to the public decide what the public is going to see (truth or not) and not see. TRULY scary.

    1. “A public relations friend of mine once told me that you’ll never win an argument with the one who owns the inkwell. So frustrating.”

      With all due respect, Beth: May I suggest an alternative? While once this was true, it has never been more UNTRUE than today…and this column is the proof of it. Never before has someone been able to completely bypass the news gatekeepers and appeal directly to the public with such reach, consistency and effect.

      I take every opportunity to post to all and sundry blogs, online opinion columns and the like to provide a counterbalance to the propaganda. I urge you to understand the power than has been unleashed with modern communication tools and use them to support the truth and undermine the corruption.

      We are more powerful than we know…and that our opponents are willing to admit.

  13. Disingenuous reply from a institutional dinosaur that secretly dreads the fact they no longer control the narrative on issues like this. Americans are waking up, and you, Dr. Tracy, have been a lightning rod for a very dark side of the process: that of character assassination when those with the megaphone are unable to refute the facts with logic.

    The good news is that serious, prolonged and well-reasoned discussion of these anomalies will win over the more intelligent, thoughtful and informed first. Of course, the boob tube lovers will lap up the drivel, it’s to be expected. But the tide is turned at the margins and I am seeing more and more thinking people of all ages who are rejecting the corrupt institutions of government, media and corporatocracy each day.

    Each one here has no doubt been the person in their own circle of family and friends to question the scripted “news” that we’re bombarded with. The good news is, behavioral scientists know that the personal influence we wield to a large extent will overcome the impersonal propaganda machine. We just have to be willing to work, like sappers, to constantly undermine the falsity. When the herd turns, it is going to be a catalyzing event…we may be near there with the NSA and Obama scandals already.

    Take heart, Dr. Tracy. Anyone who is truly objective and a seeker of truth is getting on-board. The sheep will be along soon.

  14. Let’s make this easy and succinct: if editor Saltz and company were doing their job as members of the Fourth Estate (covered in the First Amendment for a reason), Dr.Tracy would not have to research the facts for them. He could go about his teaching duties and read Q’s & A’s in the Sun Sentinel’s columns and Op Ed page.

    But that is too rational a thought and does not compute with the mental mutants who clog up the media like a log jamb, denying free flow of information.

    The new ‘conspiracy theory’ regard TWA flight 800 (now being exposed)
    will add fodder to the long list of government coverups. Now what can our government be hiding with that storyline?

  15. I would like to see the newspaper put forth just ONE solid, tangible piece of evidence that suggest the official story of Sandy Hook is accurate. Just one. That’s not asking too much, is it? No reliance on hearsay or words may be used in that evidence.

  16. The criticisms of Dr. Tracy consist largely of ad hominem attacks, schoolyard taunts (“nut,” “crackpot,” etc.), and an absence of serious, critical thinking. The shallow character of this editorial content in the Sun-Sentinel indicates something of the paper’s editorial standards. If the paper doesn’t analyze the claims and counterclaims of Dr. Tracy and his critics, but just parrots what it is told, then the paper’s reporters are just repeaters.

    Is the job of the press to repeat what it hears passively, to take dictation? Are investigation and analysis beyond the scope? Whose job is it to challenge and test the veracity of viewpoints of high-profile members of the community when those viewpoints are deemed “unusual and perhaps inflammatory”? Whose job is it to hold their feet to the fire when high-profile people make controversial claims? (and are such claims limited to those that contradict official narratives?) I thought it was the job of the press to ferret out who’s telling the truth, or at least whose assessments jibe best with known facts, even to establish what the facts are. Apparently not at the offices of the Sun-Sentinel. Dr. Tracy has used the phrase “stenographers to power” to characterize the press, or at least much of it. The shoe would seem to fit here.

  17. With the inclusion of unnamed FAU members, all mysterious and unaccounted for, the SS (South Sentinel) has mounted a blitzkrieg attack on Mr. Tracy. The Fascistic pummeling of Dr. Tracy has it’s origins in the editor of said SS paper Mr. Saltz (an appropriate name should an open wound need further pain administered).
    With countless exclusions of reasoning or logic he’s made a great effort seem effortless. Any thinking man or woman would find his articles a reflection of the man, Mr. Salz.

  18. now that I am done vomiting over the whole white privilege thing I would like to offer $50 towards a libel lawsuit towards the paper. Heck I’ll commit $100. Who knows, maybe they will offer to settle out of court with a televised debate as requested

  19. Sandy Hook, Boston Marathon, Woolwich and Santa Monica events are all false flag terrors orchestrated by the same cabal to keep people in a constant state of fear in order to advance the police state, (to mainly go after the White males as well as minorities who refuse to go along with the program), take away the guns and continue the foreign wars against Muslim and Black nations.

    Terrorism has become a big business. There are degrees offered in Terrorism at Harvard!

    Take a note of all these people who are rendering judgements on those like Professor Tracy and assaulting their character for holding a different view than that from the media owned by the cabal. They are names like Bloomberg, Horowitz, Finestein who have a stake in this. They need to keep these lies going in order to continue the hoax called “the war on terror”.

    Ask the question “Who stands to benefit from these hoaxes? And people who make the most noise are those who cannot let people have freedom to think and act on their own because it threatens them.

    Professor Tracy is an honest man who could not tolerate these lies being perpetrated on unsuspecting people. Mr Saltz is part of the group that cannot allow freedom to reign in the minds of man. He and the members of his group are meddlers, war architects, social engineers, character assassins. They don’t like to debate on an issue because they know it gives the other side credibility.

    And most in his group are also tyrants who want everything for their group and nothing for others. They want you to shut up and go away giving them the chance to control everyone and take over everything.

    Professor Tracy on the other hand is a decent and respectable man who has done the entire world a favor by exposing the lies around Sandy Hook and Boston Marathon.

    Congratulations to Professor Tracy for a job well done!

    There is another great website: http://NoDisinfo.com

    1. You mention Harvard, and that brings to mind – there are smart students and professors at Harvard, and MIT. Why hasn’t anyone noodled around on the computer at this site or nodisinfo (which besides having great geek video analyses of Boston also unfortunately has irrational disinfo of an anti-Semitism nature embedded in them)? It would be nice if people from Boston and CT would write in here and say the newspapers and TV coverage of the event are complete nonsense.

      1. Yet does privilege and book smarts necessarily translate to discerning and articulating uniquely critical stances on politics and society? Or does it lend itself to a managerial mindset that silently appreciates (and thus assents to) the logic behind such “noble lies.” These are arguably among the most heavily indoctrinated with the mythos of how well “the system works”–evidenced very close to home in their own families’ wealth and superior status.

        1. Precisely. You don’t go to schools like that to learn to think outside the box, you go there to learn how the box is made and prepare to keep it structurally sound into the future. You go there because you want to be a part of the establishment, not question and humiliate it, and certainly not to call it a liar.

      2. Yes Marzi, I have never entertained “conspiracy theories” until Sandy Hook. I knew something was wrong there, sought out sites to investigate and was overwhelmed by the rabid anti-Semitism contained herein. At the same time, I was reading a biography of Herman Goering and the parallels were striking. The Jews and Zionists are everywhere, enriching themselves and conspiring for the downfall of civilization.
        I am not Jewish but can easily see History repeating itself again with this vile, discredited message. Completely stopped reading many sites as I found myself actually being desensitized. Unfortunate as a great deal of real info can be gleaned but I refuse to enter the modern NASDAP.

        1. Vlad, I agree the message is vile, but don’t be afraid to investigate it. That’s what this blog is all about from my perspective.

          I was already a follower of this blog when I saw Professor Tracy’s article with the graphic photos of Boston victims – I didn’t want to look, I didn’t want to read – I was afraid of being desensitized! I wanted to write a comment to Professor Tracy that this time he has gone too far. But I did look and I did read and I WAS DESENSITIZED!

          I don’t know if anyone was hurt that day but I’m no longer blinded by my empathy and human compassion which, if the victims were actors, was their intention. We do not want to believe our compassion, that which makes us most human, would be exploited by other humans. But sometimes it is.

        2. Peter, you won’t be desensitized when it is REAL! Exposing the truth is what is important. When you can view documents calling for “crisis actors” & an application….well, we just aren’t eating the pablum that’s been spoon-fed to us for yrs.!

        3. Marz and Vlad………I lost money from Bernie Madoff. I don’t like that man. He is a bad man and did bad things. Am I now anti-semitic?

          I also believe that Israel is primarily responsible for 9-11. The evidence is overwhelming. Does that also make me anti-semitic?

    2. Harriet, after researching 9/11 ad nauseum , and after reading and viewing everything on Sandy Hook, I fear you’re right.

      Here on this blog, however, we expose how the media coverage is lacking and how investigative reporting seems to be extinct. But we don’t go any further. Isn’t it natural now to say, “Ok, the gun control people tried to put one over on us.”

      Now let’s take a look at who these gun control people are:

      Diane Feinstein, Michael Bloomberg, Richard Blumenthal, Charles Schumer, Barbara Boxer, Joseph Lieberman.

      Yep, we see where you’re going with this Harriet and some call it “The Ugly Truth” not to be discussed or written about in polite society.

      I read Harald Wallace Rosenthal and he wasn’t too polite either.

  20. It’s awesome how Saltz defends his paper’s First Amendment right, while libeling Professor Tracy in the most childish and amateurish way. The ongoing hissy fit of the Sentinel is more pathetically amusing than anything else — Professor Tracy has a national following and has stimulated the kind of dialogue that the Sentinel admits it never will be part of.

    Saltz arrogantly says, “We will not judge the merits of your agruments and we never will.” And thats why newspapers are dying. They are useless distractions, and bully pulpits for not so hidden agendas.

    Just a few days ago, Gallup’s annual poll came out on the state of how Americans perceive the trustworthiness of newspapers. More than 3/4 of Amercians were unable to say they trust newspapers, only 23 pct say they did. So yuk it up while you can, Saextra. Any day now they’ll be folding your third rate rag into the Miami Herald. http://m.upi.com/story/UPI-41151371477965/

  21. If the sentinel is simply reporting on someone elses opinion, who’s opinions are they reporting on? I posit that their staff is being biased and it is unlikely they would expose their so called ‘sources’. While I don’t agree with most of Mr. Tracy’s views, I do believe in his right to air them.

  22. Dear James

    You must really be over an important target, considering the flack you are taking. Keep it coming… In fact… pour it on Sir James! I highly value your work on SH and MBB. It took me about a hour to view the major actors in this play giving their performances. All I could think of in the end is I feel insulted that better actors were not used and a better script was not commissioned. I am offended that they would not try harder.

    They should hire Hollywood like NASA did to capture the public’s imagination. The gold colored foil for instance, was completely unnecessary to the spacecraft’s function. It was there for style only. That was pure Hollywood.

    I am no lawyer, but I think you do have a libel case. Have you had any lawyers contact you?

    After reading the newspaper’s comments, one conclusion I could draw is someone high above them is pushing them hard to attack you. It’s always the same strategy, attack the messenger when the message is unassailable. It does not look like even a cursory effort was made to examine the boat load of anomalies, let alone make apology for them.

    I had my roommate watch ME Carver’s “press conference”. He just did not get the same sense of stench coming from Carver’s story that seems so obvious to me. It’s almost like he has a blindfold over his bullshit detector. I can’t see how anyone would not question the whole story after Carver’s press conference, that of Lt. Vance’s and the governor’s own public admission of getting a attack warning. I think it’s the most frustrating part of getting people to notice what is happening all around them. My mother is so blind to any alternate theory of major events, I don’t even try. My sister, the brilliant electrical engineer, told me Snopes.com is what I need to cure me of alternative theory of major events.

    Have you seen the latest video from Architects and Engineers for 911 truth? It’s so powerful, it must have the establishment shaking in their boots. I think the people most likely to believe buildings can disintegrate into dust from plane crashes are people with no engineering or physics background and no background building high rise buildings. I have all three. When the first tower fell, all I could think of is why is that building disintegrating? I did not even consider that a plane crash made it happen.

    It’s almost like the movie “they live” where there’s an actual mind control beam traveling down “piggy backed” on the TV’s radio wave signal. Only people with the special sunglasses can jam the mind control’s signal and see the world as it actually is. If that’s not actually happening, it might as well be that way… the results are the same. If you have not seen John Carpenter’s “They Live” starring Keith David (of Platoon fame) and Rodney Piper… promise me you will sit down and watch it next chance you get? It’s on youtube. I can think of no other movie more deserving and worthy of a re-make then “They Live” with state of the art CGI special effects. It would blow people away.

    My roommate became an instant Wayne Carver apologist… “he said he never does public speaking, he was just nervous”. Mind blowing the difference between our perception of the same event. Maybe’s it’s directly related to how much total flouride and TV “programing” you have consumed cumulatively – during your lifetime.

    Best Wishes

  23. Here’s my letter to the editor, as the chances are slim it will be published, I will do it here!
    Thank you so for connecting me with Dr. Tracy. If it wasn’t for you and Drudge, I might now be resigned to the notion that there are no longer people capable of logical thinking left in this country. It is disappointing, but not unexpected, that those who choose to assassinate another’s character, refuse to debate facts. Here are just a few flags that were immediately obvious to those paying attention:
    -Why was there no emergency lane? There was no opportunity for rescue vehicles to approach. There is one picture of a victim being transported several hundred yards on a gurney to the awaiting ambulance. Where were the rescue helicopters?
    -Why were the first responders denied access to the scene? There is video on an EMT that was disappointed as they were not permitted to perform their jobs.
    -The coroner said many bizarre things, the most perplexing, “I hope this does not all come crashing down on the town of Newtown.” Why?
    In the Boston bombing, all the media blasted us with pictures of blood and gore. Since when has the protocol of not showing gruesome images gone out the window? Why weren’t they concerned of lawsuits from the traumatized family members of the victims?

    1. Kudos to you also, Kathy ! There ARE thinking people out here who DON’T rely on the “boob-tube” & “fish-wrappers” for any real news. Like I said in my post to Dr. Tracy…..the internet used to be thought of as a “nerd niche”, but now recognized as perhaps one of a handful of sources for REAL news. A brilliant strategy by Dr. Tracy to stimulate more into “waking up” & doing their own research….even if it’s just to satisfy their own curiosity.

  24. Once again Prof. Tracy, you’ve exposed the truth! If a closed society is being implemented by the business communtiy and the Puppet Government, you’ve exposed a critical element. THE FEAR FACTOR!! How could the (So-Called) Parents of the children be able to group together as one voice, when the grief of a lost child should be overwhelming.!! Many Parents were able to do the talk show curcuit only two months after their (so-called) tragedy. What’s with that? All of them having the same message regarding Gun Control!!. I would be in a fetal position months after an event of that magnitude. Yet, they sold that lemon to many Americans, who trust their Government.

    1. Some very good points, from the start the lack of shock and grief and lack of persistance of the parents to find their children, see them or even shout out to anybody.. ‘ what can we do”… the lack of any holding the crowds back because they wanted to get into the school…( i would have fought my way in ) . it should have been pandamonium on that day.. and it wasn’t.. that’s what makes me beleive something was amiss.. The dumbing down of people, their thoughts their actions is not a healthy thing. I want to know if they saw anything on the video camara’s at all… and who did clean up the school afterwards.. The cleaning agencies should come and and say.. ‘ It wasn’t us’.. just to see who is left, come clean with the cleaning bill..

    1. This observation suggests that a handful of bloggers are capable of “smearing” figures presented and vigorously defended by mainstream outlets and government officials. It ranks up there with the Swiss army having the potential for world conquest, or Al Qaeda actually posing a serious threat to Western national security. Asserting such fallacies is not necessarily helpful or effective in this forum, but it might earn one a position on the Sun-Sentinel’s editorial board.

  25. James, you’re implying that innocent people who in the case of Bauman were severely injured and in the case of Parker suffered the worst thing a parent can ever suffer were not victims but actually a part of some conspiracy. They’re good people who did not ask to be put in the situations they were in. They do not deserve the kind of scrutiny people like you are giving them.
    And don’t ever take that smug tone with me again.

      1. Touche ! Good “outing”. Not to imply there were no real injuries as collateral damage, but w/ application forms online for “crisis actors”….my God, people,pull your head from your anal orface long enough to take a look around !

    1. Jeff Baumann clearly lost his legs in a previous incident and is playing a role. 1) There was barely any blood around him (2) If both of his femoral arteries were severed he would bleed out within minutes and be either unconscious or dead. (3) He would be very pale and in shock. (4) Everyone one around him would be covered in blood from his severed femoral arteries. These are the physical facts. But there are more suspicious discrepancies: (5) It is highly unlikely that he was in a condition to describe the perpetrators within 24 hours. (6) or that he was out of the hospital within three weeks. (7) It is not likely he would have laid on the ground without attention then removed in a wheelchair when barely injured people were taken out before him on stretchers. (8) He should exhibit pain at some point during his injury and the 8-10 minutes afterward and he did not appear to have pain. Just these observations alone are enough to arouse suspicion – there are many more problems with the Boston Marathon Bombing official narrative.

    2. Adding to Liss’:

      Orthopedic surgeon Dr. Stanley Monteith concludes Bauman’s story to be fraudulent.

      Dr. Monteith states Bauman’s surgical team would have saved his knees; injuries such as his dictated “a below-the-knee amputation.”

      Bauman is an “above-the-knee” amputee.

      It would have been major medical malpractice to amputate both knees.

    1. The business of what? Bullying people with aggressive retorts. Well done on that part, sir. If someone responded to your opinion in this tone: “And don’t ever take that smug tone with me again.”, would it be worthy of a reply? If you find Dr. Tracy’s opinions so abhorrent, why do you continue to troll his blog?

    2. Working for corporate media and parroting official narrative doesn’t get you any friends in these parts.

      Benjamin Franklin – “It is the first responsibility of every citizen to question authority.”

      I think Dr. Tracy is quite the patriot. And people like you wouldn’t dare ask the questions he does out of fear of your social status being tarnished. Thank God we still have a few men left in this country that haven’t been neutered. Sorry they snipped you buddy.

    3. Just a thought Steve from Gate House Media, would your handlers let you publicly debate James? He may even take that tone with you again and we would love to see what you would do about it. I’d pay $50 a ticket to see a good debate on Sandy Hoax and Boston Fake.

  26. I went to Clary’s article and isolated this bit:

    “On Monday, the website Global Research posted a timeline written by Tracy which purports to show how federal and local police agencies, abetted by “major media,” conspired early in the Sandy Hook investigation to constuct a scenario pointing to Lanza as ” the sole agent of the massacre” when others may have been involved.

    In one of his blog posts, “The Sandy Hook School Massacre: Unanswered Questions and Missing Information,” Tracy cites several sources for his skepticism, including lack of surveillance video or still images from the scene, the halting performance of the medical examiner at a news conference, timeline confusion, and how the accused shooter was able to fire so many shots in just minutes.”

    Were we not informed, at one point, that someone was captured running in the woods, who uttered, “I didn’t kill anyone”, or words to that effect, when he was apprehended? How did he know what happened to anyone if he hadn’t any knowledge of the situation?

    When does school start? Why drop your kids off two hours before school is to begin? When was 9:30 in the morning a realistic starting time for children?

    How was the determination made to paint Adam’s brother, and then Adam himself, as the perpetrator?

    Why, almost seven months later, have we not heard about any examination whatsoever of the surveillance video that should have captured some part of either the break-in or the perambulating of whoever entered the school?

    There are plenty of other questions, but my point is simply that Professor James Tracy shouldn’t have to have posited these questions (nor I and others); this should have been the purview of Mike Clary and his fellow reporters at the Sun-Sentinel. Instead of that, we get scurrilous attacks because of Tracy’s “unusual” comments.


    What’s “unusual” here is that YOU, Howard Saltz, haven’t the moral standing to say, yourself, that something’s rotten in Denmark, and it isn’t the herring.

    How long can you continue justifying your paycheck? Even yes-men wear out their welcome.

Leave a Reply