By Prof. James H. Fetzer

[Note: For a detailed discussion of the Sun-Sentinel’s intense defamatory campaign to have James Tracy fired from his position, see “An Open Letter to the South Florida Sun-Sentinel” from June 20, 2013.-JFT]

Sun Sentinel Editors and Staff,

Does no one at the Sun Sentinel care about truth? Faculty never speak for their institutions; that is the role of the administration. Since Tracy is sun-sentinelfaculty, not administration, he cannot possibly be speaking for FAU. They know that.

Noah Pozner is an unusual young man, who reportedly has died twice: once at Sandy Hook (on 14 December 2012) and again in Pakistan (on 16 December 2014). You might want to ask Lenny Pozner how that could have happened.

We have no good reason to believe that Noah even died once. Lenny has circulated a falsified death certificate of his son. I included it in NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK (2015), which is my 31st book.

Like the other families of Sandy Hook, the Pozners have pocketed over $1,000,000 due to donations from the public which has been taken in by the official account. If the hoax were to become public, they might have to give it back.

The book has 13 contributors, including 6 Ph.D. (current or retired) college professors and other experts on the case. I am copying some of them here. It has been released to the public for free after having been banned by

We have a mountain of proof that the school was closed by 2008, which means there were no students there and thus none for Adam Lanza (who appears to be a creature of fiction) to have shot and none to evacuate.

It was a two-day drill, with the rehearsal on the 13th, going LIVE on the 14th. Some participants did not understand and put up donation sites on the 13th. Even Adam Lanza was originally reported to have died the day before.

We even have the FEMA manual, which I included in the book as Appendix A. We have presented the thorough and detailed results of our investigation, which anyone can now download from, for example, and read for free.

We have 50 photos of furnishing the Lanza home to serve as a prop and 50 more of them refurbishing the school to serve as the stage. One shows the SWAT team in place. The windows to Classroom 10 (seen over the vehicle) are undamaged.

Exhibit 26

​That means this photo was taken before the shooting. Crime scene tape is up for a crime that has yet to be committed. And Wayne Carver, Medical Examiner, is awaiting the arrival of his portable mortuary tent. It was an elaborately staged event.

Here are the windows of Classroom 10 before and after “the shooting” as well as photos of the perps drilling the holes in the window frame and the pink rods showing the presumptive trajectories, which would never occur with a real event:

Before and After (Classroom 10)

Here is a photo of the Nancy Lanza bedroom suite. Adam is supposed to have shot her four times in the head, but that is not real blood. And in their haste to finish arranging the room, they left a blue moving pad under the leg of the bed:

Nancy Lanza's bedroom

I am a former Marine Corps officer who spent 35 years offering course in logic critical thinking and scientific reasoning. Tracy is the only one on the FAU campus who has taken the time to study the case. No one else has done it.

He may be the most outstanding member of the faculty but is being railroaded by those who believe everything they hear from the mass media. I would like to think that you might be an exception. This is a gross miscarriage of justice.


James H. Fetzer, Ph.D.
McKnight Professor Emeritus
University of Minnesota Duluth

Leave a Reply

101 thought on “An Open Letter to the Sun-Sentinel”
      1. I do thank God you have nothing else to say! Your comments are rarely more than complaints. Why do you continue to come here and comment if you are unhappy with this site?

        1. The jughead is a shill, Maryaha. C’mon, what is more obvious that that? You are trying to reason with a lowlife.

      2. Gee, reprehensible, I was unaware you said anything at all. Could you repeat what you said before, perhaps your shillmaster will pay you overtime to act and talk stupid, eh?

    1. Hi, reprehensible. I see you took time on your busy Sunday to come here and show us, again and again, just how blatant, stupid, and obvious you really are. Do you make the expert rate or, more likely, the dope rate? Are you unionized?
      The secret of good shilling is to stay away from being so obvious, so boorish, so trite and hackneyed. I mean, you sound like a 12 IQ idiot, are you aware of this?

  1. Fetzer’s book is embarrassing. There is plenty of blatant falsehoods in his book that he just can’t seem to stop propagating even though these “facts” have been debunked…. For years.

    I am not quite sure why this site and commenters on it cannot see that Fetzer is a liability and should not be supported .

      1. Ray, you don’t have to say “please” to an idiot. Not quite sure why you are trying to reason with an obvious schnook who gets paid to sound stupid.

    1. Hello Juniperse,
      As one of many who is troubled with doubts as to the authenticity of events at Sandy Hook I sped through Fetzers on-line book looking to find some new discoveries.
      In particular the early morning photo’s showing the swat team and Carver pre-crisis are pretty disturbing. I was also dismayed by the effort made to withhold info requested by Wolfgang that that would have shed light on whether the school was operational at the time of the event.
      I would appreciate hearing what specifically has been “debunked” from your point of view. Can you offer specifics and explain your satisfaction in the face of the evidence to the contrary?

      1. Here’s one for ya that you can tell from the footage: The mystery of the open shed door.

        When the news showed St. Lima footage, they also showed the piggies busting open the shed door and entering with a canine to secure the shed.

        I argue that footage was shot the day before.

        On the morning of the incident, at “go” time, when they were chasing the “shooters” up the hillside, the shed door is already busted open! You can see from the helicopter!

        But the cops just got there! The shed door was busted open before the drill began!

    2. juniperse7en – you have made a serious accusation that would fundamentally alter how the material Fetzer is offering should be considered.

      Fair enough. Just as Tracy makes statements, you have made one. You had the time to come here and make the accusation so you must have time to post.

      Ergo, post the FACTS you can demonstrate to an objective third-party that discredits specific material Fetzer has offered. Since there are “plenty,” start with any five of them, the easiest to debunk and the ones that have been shot down “For years.”

      Or, alternately, STFU.

      1. I think that these trolls can be safely ignored, as their agenda is pretty obvious, I think, even to a casual reader seeking to know more information. I have mixed feelings about allowing them to post freely, because it is annoying, but I think that giving them enough rope to hang themselves might be a good way to deal with them.

  2. Tracy is an example of what will happen to any other academic who speaks up – this cannot be tolerated in a police state – questions are the most dangerous thing to authority.

    How come the Fetzer book lack references?

      1. I couldn’t understand most of the lyrics, so I took the liberty to look them up. Here they are for anyone else with a similar problem:

        Clash – Know Your Rights Lyrics
        This is a public service announcement
        With guitar
        Know your rights all three of them

        Number one
        You have the right not to be killed
        Murder is a crime!
        Unless it was done by a
        Policeman or aristocrat
        Know your rights

        And Number two
        You have the right to food money
        Providing of course you
        Don’t mind a little
        Investigation, humiliation
        And if you cross your fingers

        Know your rights
        These are your rights

        Know these rights

        Number three
        You have the right to free
        Speech as long as you’re not
        Dumb enough to actually try it.

        Know your rights
        These are your rights
        All three of ’em
        It has been suggested
        In some quarters that this is not enough!

        Get off the streets
        Get off the streets
        You don’t have a home to go to

        Finally then I will read you your rights

        You have the right to remain silent
        You are warned that anything you say
        Can and will be taken down
        And used as evidence against you

        Listen to this

  3. Jim Fetzer is a courageous person! I’ve been in an out of teaching for years, and you wouldn’t be able to tell whether you were in the Dark Ages or now. Around fellow academics. They also I might add aren’t very bright and horribly corrupt. (It’s no wonder this is going on.)

    1. I’d like add, though. That we already have strict mental-health criteria, and since they sell more guns after these events; and there are many more guns than people here.. That’s it’s the age old divide and conquer tactic, and mostly to do with big pharma. There is no blood test for metal illness, they have to sell this BS further, and now that corporate health-care passed, well. It’s just to call everyone crazy that isn’t pro-war.

  4. While I deeply respect Jim Fetzer’s efforts and qualifications, I’d like to see an article clarifying for the public exactly what the issues surrounding Dr. Tracy’s termination notice are.

    The two most important points to get out from my perspective, at this juncture, are: 1. Dr. Tracy didn’t ‘harass’ ‘Lenny Pozner;’ it was Pozner who submitted a false copyright infringement claim to WordPress that Tracy merely responded to (false not just in terms of its authenticity but because of the fair use clause) 2. Dr. Tracy wasn’t sent a termination notice due to these libelous claims of criminal harassment that never happened but due to a technical issue.

  5. Devastating and new commentary. I am astonished that somehow the preparations for this event were photographed and that Fetzer managed to snag them. It is as damning as the photos at Boston, where there are intact items of streetscape, seen in the photos of the smoke bomb, which in the evening after the alleged event were transformed into detritus. It took awhile to replace a perfectly intact tree – that one would have shown a total absence of shrapnel, as do the sidewalks and building facades of the architecturally-preserved district around the events.

    For hostile critics who will not see reason, this is insufficient to persuade. It was would also take away their right to attack either nations or groups or policies they want to change. It would make them unable to charge their favorite punching bags with being “conspiracy nuts” and thus detract from a sense of righteous fury. Just as those who benefitted from the financial contributions (see Boston One Fund and the BostonStrong movement as well), they have already spent too much of their capital – emotional in this case – on belonging to one side. No matter what they now know, it is expensive to have to change their positions. Some are in fact very likely paid shills, but many regard themselves as patriots (Boston) or protectors of small children.

    There is a broad spectrum of conformity right now in our society. A recent review at CNN by Laurie Garrett expresses concern that the Star Wars franchise continues to portray the imperial stormtroopers as bad guys. This, she states, would have been fine when opposing fascism was part of our ethos in this country (post Vietnam War), but now it is creating the impression that our farflung outposts, with soldiers attired in gear like the stormtroopers (or I might add, at events like Berdoo), are imperial and they are controlled by a fascist state. It is, she says, the wrong image for the movie to be showing all over the world. After all, we cannot have people identifying with the early Han Solo, can we? They might rebel.

    I thought I had seen just about everything about Sandy Hook, but never dreamt there was so much incriminating documentation of the prep for the event. No wonder it had to go from amazon – people might rebel once they grasped the full implications. It would throw into question most such events, as well it should.

  6. Just wanted to call attention to a problem with the link to “Lenny Pozner Stalking James Tracy” link in the Memory Hole News/Analysis Wire section. When I clicked on it, I got a “oops not found” message.

  7. for those people who are legitimate commenters & contributors who wish to know the template for identifying trolls, gang stalkers, etc. This was written by someone Prof. Tracy interviewed months ago…Jan Irvin. Very important IMO because I’m noticing this phenomenon increasing recently on any blog that doesn’t tow the line. Its especially happening to the author of this open letter, Prof. Jim Fetzer in a BIG way. Forewarned is forearmed.

  8. It appears that the US power system is going to take a stand on the Sandy Hook fantasy scenario, as they would more or less have to do. So much money has been collected under false pretenses, and so many officials have told so many lies, and Obama has put the state behind the media story, that they would have to uphold it. The fight around Sandy Hook would divert attention from the 9/11-anthrax atrocities that initiated the War on Terror.

    It will be a long fight. It has already begun with the censoring of the Sandy Hook book, the withdrawing of support by Infowars, and the attack on James. It will be an uphill fight that can, however, be won. Most Americans, it appears consider the Massacre as Fact, judging from the comments in Huff Post, and that the position that it is fantasy is insane. Most Americans also feel that guns should be taken away from the American people, which would justify US power lying about the scenario.

    So the initial strategic position is a bad one. But by no means hopeless. There are two different strategic approaches possible, but only one is viable. The greatest danger is trying to pursue both, mixing them to pollute them both. I hope this will not happen.

    1. Glad you linked 9/11 with the anthrax-origins hoax – often forgotten in its potency for getting us into Iraq. By itself, the anthrax and its supplying of a casus belli for invading Iraq would be the big story. It is often forgotten too about the crop-duster story associating the 9/11 hijackers with anthrax, so it would all fit together and terrify the American people that their next breath could contain the spores. They were set up with the falling towers, but the anthrax might come to their very doorstep in the mail (as it did for that old lady who died in – wait for it- Connecticut).

    2. I think that it is wrongheaded to consider the telling of truth, and the exposing of corruption as a “fight” or a “battle”. I think once you admit that mindset, you have already lost. Telling truth is a very simple act. It involves no weapons, no battles nor any fights, it is simply powerful in the telling. Persistence in telling truth is a natural human act. It is not fruitful in attributing to it the military words “strategy” or “tactic”. People throughout the ages have been telling truth to the public, and most have been vilified, impoverished or even killed. However, many have been proven correct, and accepted by the public as being correct after all, usually long after their deaths.

      I think it is the nature of this beast, civilization, a double-edged sword which makes people feel comfortable and secure, all the while enslaving them to a system. Nature itself is brutally honest, and civilization seeks to hold back Nature, and “protect” its people from that honesty. It is a choice between dying at an older age as a slave, or perhaps dying young at the mercy of a tiger or a bear. Civilization kills and tames tigers and bears. I guess people choose to roll the dice with civilization, rather than Nature, and by so doing, they choose their “lot”. It takes sincere work and understanding to become harmonious with Nature, it is much easier to play the Lotto.

  9. Sorry. Was going to re-watch this, anyway.. If you look behind Wheeler in uniform, that guy looks like Robbie Parker. And [was trained in studying this] Ms. Wheeler is about to laugh, right before she feigns crying on Lyndon Johnson’s crony’s – tv show.

    1. I beg to differ. In the first sentence these scholars seem to imply that the military exercise was held on the internet. They they go on to suggests that it is the ease of dissemination of information on the internet that leads to conspiracy theories. Then they say, “. . . we compare how users interact with proven (scientific) and unsubstantiated (conspiracy-like) information on Facebook in the US.”

      These “scholars” are making the assumption that all “scientific” information is true, and “conspiracy-like” information is false. “Scientific,” we know, means anything the mainstream media tells us is true. Like “all vaccines are good,” or President Kennedy was killed by a lone assassin, or the Vietnamese attacked us in the Gulf of Tonkin, and smoking is good for you and is not addictive.

      They then note that people who are involved in conspiracy-theory research rarely read the work of people debunking the said conspiracy theories, nor are they convinced by the debunkers when they do. And they find this deplorable.

      Jade Helm was unprecedented. I don’t ever remember massive military exercises across many states taking place on city streets. I don’t even remember ever seeing the military holding exercises off their own reservations. Anyone who heard about Jade Helm and didn’t think “What the @#$%?” or at least, “Hm,” is probably just too young to know that we don’t do that in this country.

      I hope you were kidding when you said this is what scholarship looks like.

      1. Ah, those $.50 words a troll posted about previously. Some people confuse fancy-talk with smart-talk.

        There is also a difference between a statistical analysis and an anthropological or ethnographic study…quantitative vs qualitative, if you will. (I can’t tell you the number of hours I spent absorbed in fascinating discussion on the finer points of each back in my husband’s doctoral days [go Huskies!].).

      2. Yes, the implication is that “scholars” must be “qualified” to criticize their betters in the media. No one said that they were preparing a thesis or defending one.

        This sounds more like Spingola’s attraction to officialdom. Ignore what’s said in favor of the form. That’s rather like an ancient Greek poetry competition.

  10. Just as a little “trip down memory lane”, here is a clip from the vote concerning the addition of a five-year sentence for “improperly” releasing information regarding SHES:

    I would ask that you note the extreme anxiety displayed by the General Counsel in her attempt to have the penalties stricken from the report. The question one might ask is “why is she so nervous and who and why were those provisions added”.

    Who could be damaged by a “leak” of such information? If the state is acting properly it is hard to conceive of what they are concerned about. If it is an alleged injury to an individual, that individual has other means of seeking redress.

    In this “star chamber” setting they simply trumped the rights of citizens to become aware of the alleged facts surrounding this incident. When a crime occurs is this a normal response? Does a crime become any more or less because of the alleged age of the victims?

    Said another way, how does the state’s desire to control information emanating from this event take precedence over the public’s right to know? If the public becomes aware, how is that a criminal offense?

  11. For the past three years, the media, including the Huffington Post and other “liberal bastions” have reflexively dismissed the claims that Sandy Hook was a drill without bothering to examine the facts presented. If the Sandy Hook “truthers” are raising spurious questions and arguments then it is the MEDIA’S JOB TO EXPOSE IT. The government, via the media, has been making an ad hominem attack on Dr. Tracy and other academics who are merely asking questions about about an event so large that every American should be entitled to an accurate and fully examined account of it. The First Amendment is not needed to protect popular speech, contrarily, the First Amendment exists to protect provocative and odious speech. The ACLU defended the rights of neo-Nazis to march in Skokie, where are they now that a tenured professor is being terminated, with the aid of widespread media coverage, for questioning the facts surrounding a highly politicized event with the potential of impacting mental health rights and gun rights of every single American?

    1. It appears you are not aware that the Skokie incident was just as much a false-flag event as SHE. Here is some information for you to get to know another burrow in the rabbit hole… (I had to edit certain words to get through the Memory Hole politically correct comment filter.)

      Frank Collin (born Francis Joseph Cohen November 3, 1944), was a J–ish pseudo-“N-zi” who formerly served as the leader of the Nat—– Soc—— Party of America, best known for a march in the J–ish suburb of Skokie, Illinois. He was defended in this legally by the ACLU at the U.S. Supreme Court, Cohen v. Skokie. The whole scheme was a hoax, meant to perpetuate a perception of J–ish victimhood, just as the Hollywood “Holoc–st” package was really picking up and the Isr–li state needed sympathisers in the Arab conflict. J–s actually have the gall to list this pantomine opera on Wikipedia under the “history of anti-s–itism in the United States.”

      They have also been caught painting sw–tikas on their own buildings to also curry sympathy from the public. This is one way in which power was obtained in Amerika, and how their current feeding frenzy began.

      1. Thanks for the information. It does seem that Skokie was a probable psyops, and Cohen was probably a useful idiot. The ACLU DID file an Amicus Brief on behalf of Professor Ward Churchill. I believe that this case is just as politically motivated. By injecting themselves into the Sandy Hook controversy the Pozners are public figures under settled federal law. This means that Tracy’s certified letter does not have the implications it would if it were sent to parents who, for example, made no public comment. I hope that the American Bar will step up to the plate on this one. This case is 100 percent about free speech.

    1. Paul – the age difference in the two women is obvious to me, Nancy Lanza being post-menopausal and thinner. These are not the same person. I don’t think it is a fruitful pursuit and may only cause actual harassment concerns to those who doubt the story. The person whose picture was used and said to be Nancy Lanza could complain and sue. In fact, it could be a second layer of deception, designed to entrap an investigator.

      If you have the full resources of government, you will never cast locals, because it will come back to haunt you. It’s more like a cast visiting a location for a film (including insiders who are non-local extras) – you only want additional local extras for scenes that bolster your story after the action has been shot or described through still pictures of people who may be long dead or have changed to unrecognizable through growing up.

      I find there are some scenes which are totally implausible in real life (like parents with a bunch of squirming small children who are sticking around after the shooting with armed police, not knowing what could happen next, before the bodies have been brought out or bloody children put into the ambulances – those are actors not locals).

    2. The URL for the Annie Haddad image is listed underneath the picture – The Nancy Lanza image can be found by doing an image search for “Nancy Lanza”

      @ Musings – I know for a FACT that they are the same person, so I would love it if she would try and sue me, because a lot would come out in “Discovery”.. Yes, there is an age difference, at least 3 years, but likely more like 6 or more years. I see no “menopausal difference” like you say you see- I do however, see the exact same skin type, laugh lines, (unique) teeth, (unique) nose, and very unique eyes! Those images of Annie on the boat- I mean Nancy, aka Anncy Laddad on the boat are of a younger, thinner Anncy.. But most definitely the same woman.

      If it were just the “uncanny” physical similarities I would have been more careful claiming they are the same person- Obviously I understand I could get sued if I was wrong, however the more I looked into “Annie/Anne” the more I realized how they deceived a few of the people around Sandy Hook into believing they new “Nancy”- “Anncy” would drive out of her neighborhood using the same roads..

      Anne = nickname for Nancy
      Anne = Married to a Peter with 2 kids, one learning disabled

      Don’t you find it “convenient” that Anne is a nickname for Nancy Musings? What about the fact that Anne was married to a Peter, and has 2 kids, one with a “learning disability?” What about the fact that she has 7 aliases, is that not weird to you? Anne Haddad, Annie Haddad, Anne E Jiorno, Anne E Giorno, Anne Sweeny.. etc. etc.

      What about the “strange coincidence’ that Kaitlin Roig showed up in facebook images in a small bar right next to a residence Anny Haddad had listed at 1 Mill Street, Port Chester New York?

      Also, knowing what I know regarding St. Rose of Lima- and knowing that “his mother was a teacher at the school [Adam] – and finding out that Anne Haddad worked at St. Rose of Lima- that would “fit’ – Anne also happens to be a member of the Sandy Hook P.T.A. alongside such names as Beth Hegarty and Georganne Manfredonia…

      Just “for fun” I looked into what the St. Rose of Lima principal looked like, after I realized Anncy Laddad was brought over from St. Rose of Lima.. and guess what I found? an older looking “Dawn Hochsprung” with goofy clown makeup and hairstyle. Haha.. “coincidence” surely.

      If you see the video of “Annie” at the candle light vigil, you will see she was almost the exact same weight as “Nancy on the boat” and looks exactly like the same person- and isn’t as fat as she has become in the latest images. Teeth match, lips match, nose matches, eyes match, same color eyes.. Same wrinkles, same skin.. same woman.

      “Weird” how so many of the terrible comparisons of people are allowed to become viral regarding sandy hook who obviously are not the same people (the crying woman pictures come to mind) The only valid comparison presented in my opinion besides my work on Haddad and Maloney would be the David Wheeler being FBI comparisons.

      I know this is the same woman, and you should be able to see that just by looking at that image comparison.

      Have a great Christmas everybody! – Just a fun fact: a year ago today they took my YouTube account down for exposing Annie Haddad!

      I was banned from Vimeo, Daily Motion, and Live Leak as well for posting her image comparison, almost as soon as the video was uploaded, and in some instances as it was being uploaded.. Think all the video hosting sites aren’t run by the same perps. behind the scenes? Think again.

  12. I wonder what it is about the Sandy Hook Hoax that causes Lenny to be markedly more rabid about it than the other hoaxers. I mean they all participated in a deliberate fraud and have been paid handsomely for it, but Lenny appears to either have more to lose or he simply enjoys being as evil as possible to as many as possible.

    For instance, he is even uncivil to his own family members. A while back, someone pointed me to a RipOff Report that Lenny leveled against his own brother-in-law, Alexis Haller, in August 2013. It appears that Mr. Haller, an attorney, tried to come between Lenny and his cash cow in Sandy Hook, so he reported him and cited him for engaging in “conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation”. Definitely a case of the pot calling the kettle black, but something tells me that dear brother-in-law Alexis knew all about the hoax too.

  13. Just wanted to share the good news.. “Nancy Lanza” has been found alive, still living in Sandy Hook, just gained some weight.. Here’s the proof:

    Anne is a nickname for Nancy.
    Anne is married to a Peter.
    Annie/Anne has at least 7 aliases.
    Anne has a learning disabled child, and has 2 children.
    Anne worked at St. Rose of Lima, and was on the Sandy Hook ES P.T.A.
    Anne used the same streets to exit the neighborhood as “Nancy”
    Anne had listed 1 Mill Street #2, Port Chester New York as an address- Kaitlin Roig showed up in images from 1 Mill Street (It’s a bar called Sam’s)
    Anne attended “monthly mom’s night out meet ups” so did Nancy.
    Anne had a kid of diaper wearing age and diapers were seen @ Yogananda, “Nancy” did not.
    Anne looks exactly like Nancy

    1. Paul I admire your tenacity but I disagree with your conclusion.

      Nancy was reported to have had several boyfriends one of whom I believe would likely be this guy:

      If you want to take additional initiative perhaps you can ascertain who he is and see what he has to say ?

      Additionally you may want to consider an independent expert make an assessment as had been done by Wolfgang’s investigation team on Avielle Richman.

      1. Yeah, I had seen this previously. I believe it is supposed to be the guy who was in charge of security at the high school and taught a computer club class or something. I can’t remember his name.

        I think he was supposed to have helped “Adam” and Ryan with a video project that was claimed to have won an award. At the time I researched it and could find no record of such an award.

        That was some time ago.

  14. Today, I received several emails saying please stop sending emails about Sandy Hook – you are delusional – from a friend who is a health expert, who will not have his children vaccinated and even helps others in their community fight government mandatory draconian measures related to vaccinations. They have a friend who attended a funeral in Sandy Hook for a “dead” child so they feel sympathetic to crocodile tears from their friend of a friend. They refuse to admit to themselves that the government could be just as corrupt in an area that is not health related.
    Part of the problem is that natural news and infowars contain no content about government drills including Sandy Hook. They’re totally fake on these issues. Basically, Tracy is leading the way on SH, Paris and SB, etc.
    To answer his critics,why doesn’t Tracy ask for an exhumation of Noah Posner’s logs in the casket? If the “kid” was embalmed then the DNA is still there to authenticate a match with the sawdust in Lenny Posner’s brain.

    1. My sister, who adheres to many alternative medicine principles and feels that drug companies operate against the best interest of humans, refuses to see that vaccines and even routine medical testing (never mind SH or BB) might be of the same ilk. I think she can’t imagine such evil exists; but then, she has had to work to not see it.

      I don’t bother with the email lists myself. I also limit my Facebook posts to particularly egregious examples, so when I do post it’s hopefully not ignored.

      1. Recynd, I have a old friend who insists that she knows and “has always known” that the gov’t is “bad” and does “bad things” and that there are many things “out there” that are harmful to us. And yet, if I bring up vaccinations or fluoride, she thinks I’m crazy. Every year she gets a flu vaccine like clockwork. She thinks she “eats right” and yet downs diet soft drinks and crappy junk food. I tell her to avoid mainstream media, yet she religiously watches the evening news and even mentions how she “respects” certain newscasters because, of course, “they wouldn’t lie to us.” To keep peace, I now say nothing but I also see less and less of her. Sad, really.

  15. It would seem that there would be an entry point where the Fetzer/Palecek book would be able to be interjected into an organized group of people.
    Are there any guesstimates on how many people would accept the alternate viewpoint on SH? I find it amazing that the Feds and state sayanims have, so far, been able to throw a shutout. There must be chinks in their armor and the truth is certainly not everything here. Have all Americans been taken to Tavistock and brainwashed? I don’t doubt that billions have been spent cross examining humanity for such a project as SH that has amply learned how to brainwash people. There is a way to reach this population and we’ve got to find it.

    1. One of the reasons I harp on the Murphy bills in Congress is because I personally believe that there is a limit in the average american’s mind regarding psy ops. Just a couple weeks ago I was waiting to pick up my take out order, standing at a bar watching the TV rail on about the San Bernardino shooters. Some guy was having a bottle of wine after work and invited me to sit down and try some while I waited (it was on sale and pretty good…)

      I looked up at the TV and started ‘going there…’ He made a comment about how he didn’t trust the government (I live in a pretty corrupt state) but when I started connecting the media oligopoly (in layman’s terms) he basically abruptly disinvited me from his little wine tasting, even I measured my words fairly carefully.

      I don’t think the american people can fully process that their media turned on them and operates in full cahoots with the government’s worst elements. There might be various reasons for this.

      I think that if ‘truthers’ took a multi-pronged approach to enlightening people we’d be far more successful. If we took things from the angle (simultaneous to focusing on forensics) of reminding americans of the threat to basic tenets that we are socialized to hold dear, like due process, etc., we’d fare better. That means pointing out where the government is going with these psy ops and what they’re trying to circumvent. Most people would have major issues with the idea of ‘doctors’ issuing ‘diagnoses’ without any medical science whatsoever (historically the middle class has been more skeptical of the upper middle class’ exploitations and facades). Exposing that the Murphy bill is a way to rob citizens of their right to be judged by a jury of their peers based on some BS upper middle class and Big Pharma racket would get people thinking about the narrative these psy ops promote – and of the sketchiness of the forensics, etc. People believe in innocent until proven guilty – in a transparent court of law.

      Human beings’ minds generally don’t process what their psychological structure isn’t set up to handle, so changing the template or whatever in our psyches works better than ramming home the same narrative that seems esoteric and farfetched or/and emotionally unacceptable.

      No one can deny that there is no science to the assigning of ‘mentally ill’ and the congresscritter shills the orchestrators of these incidents hire are becoming more brazen about using ‘gun violence’ as the reason for passing ‘mental health’ laws.

      Most people won’t countenance that there is a media oligopoly that acts in concert with the administration to subvert the Constitution. Isolating the psychiatrists (and their agenda) as a bunch of psychopath quacks is much more palatable and comfortable a place to start from.

      It’s where I did, and it’s how I knew the minute I watched Sandy Hook that the government had embellished the event. The media’s complicity and what I eventually understood as equal instigation came after, here on MHB.

      1. I have, though not recently.

        Throughout 2013 and 2014 I followed the Sandy Hook developments…all of them, from all sides. It didn’t take too long before Wolfgang Halbig came in and divided the camps. I think that’s when CW Wade and Lenny went one way (with Deanna Springola soon to follow), and nearly everyone else going the other. Oh, there’s been a few folks who fell squarely into the middle, like that kid, Brendan something-or-‘nother (you know, the attorney’s/judge’s son, “QKUltra” is his YouTube handle, I think.). He’s a nit-picker and a loud-mouth, but I still don’t totally discount him.

        There was a load of people digging into SH back in the day (2013-14). Namesnotmary, KateSlate, the group of “Cool Kids” (my own name for the YouTube SH researchers). Our own Larry (“Odinrok”) came out of there.

        But back to the opposition, as soon as it became clear to me that CW Wade was sticking to the official narrative (the Official Report), I was done with him.

      2. The information provided by is not an official source, and, more importantly, contains much less detailed information than the official SSDI. I used the SSDI for research before it was made non-public in 2013 “purportedly” for reasons of cyber-crime against deceased victims. The SSDI, which is no longer public, contained a social security number, date of birth, date of death, and, place of birth FOR EVERY DECEASED PERSON ON IT. Conveniently, right after the December 2012 Sandy Hook Event, mired in lack of transparency, it was removed from the public domain. Does an informed citizenry have a right to be suspicious about what their government is up to anymore?

        1. You’re right about Anyone can add or alter information. I’ve inadvertently messed up some of my own family’s information. Many of these publicly-available databases cross-reference each other, too, so a mistake in one can create a mistake in another.

      3. No point in that. The principle of the impossible must be deferred to. The school had long since been closed. All the actors had been given free houses years before, to create a “legacy.” They all left the region immediately after the pageant was enacted.

        We all love Gene Rosen and the imaginary children he invited into his creepy house.

        We all loved that ecstatic actress who told us her imaginary family “broke out the sharpies” so that they could write graffiti on the poor dead one’s coffin. What a blast they had! How cheerful she was, just like Robbie Parker and the Sotto “siblings”!

        Of course, the top medical examiner in the state, a guy who testified in court many times and knows more about ballistics than the experts in the field do (he said so himself), quite logically left the dying children in situ for half a day before examining their corpses in the wee hours of the morning. Who needs helicopters, or EMTs? He had his “magnificent THING!” to fiddle with the wee tots’ bodies within, once they had time to fully bleed out. He couldn’t count the bullet holes properly though. Or tell how many were girls and how many were boys. Odd, that.

        I could go on. But after three years, the list of impossibilities is so long that sensible people are simply laughing that anyone in your line of work is still assigned to the project. I know you have to pay the bills, and you took the job, presumably, because you have no useful skills. But can’t you tell the boss you are beating a dead horse at this point? Everyone here knows the thing was a ridiculous charade. Your fake web sites won’t undo the fact that the principle of the impossible must be deterred to.

        Lying about James Tracy won’t persuade people who can see that Sandy Hook–everything about it–is impossible. You need to beg for another assignment. Maybe they have openings for defending the Warren Commission Report, or the 9/11 Report, if you’re lucky.

        1. Sorry Patrick, to respond to just an element of your comment, but that Sharpie™ scenario is just too silly to pass up.

          Has anyone here ever tried to fill up a SINGLE piece of 8-1/2″x11″ paper with doodles? If you managed to fill it, how’d it look? Festive? No, it probably looked like a mess. Now, imagine trying to fill an entire coffin (even a child-sized one). And just how long were they doodling away, exactly?

          Doodling the coffin…puh-leeze!

        2. Exactly. That video, where she said that, was the most insane bit of ridiculousness I have ever seen.

          The script writers got her to say those words. And she agreed. With that cheerful, boisterous countenance. As if any human being would do such a thing, much less the whole family. The things people will do for money.

          The impossibility factor is in play in this instance more than in any other. Sofia’s video about the dimensions comes to mind. But also lophatt’s insights. And mine. We are being observed. They are shaping our reactions, to produce a new kind of society, where people act and react in completely unnatural ways. A woman who goes on national television to tell us that she ordered a white coffin for her tragically murdered child, and everyone in the family celebrated the event by drawing cartoons on the casket–and she does it with a joyful telling, as if she’s relating the time she met her favorite rock star–is insane. Yet, the public did not notice. If anyone should be involuntarily institutionalized, it’s she.

          The lab coats are watching. They write down on their clip boards that almost no one thought that scene in the play was insanity incarnate. Check.

          Human beings don’t behave that way. Actors, truly desperate to pay the bills, pretend to be human beings acting that way. For a mess of pottage.

        3. I’ve seen the white casket used for a child once. The boy had fought a long battle with cancer and the family chose this because they wanted his friends to sign the casket.

          Personally, I thought it was an odd choice even then. But the family had already been through a long grieving process as death approached. The funeral process became more of a celebration of life in this case.

          It’s hard to fathom a family whose child was ripped away so suddenly and violently going down this path. Taken alone, I guess I could chalk it up as one strange occurrence. But we all know this was only one small piece of a large puzzle.

        4. The only part I’d disagree with is that it wasn’t the MOST “insane bit of ridiculousness”. For me that honor (pun intended), goes to the autopsies in the parking lot. What could possibly require that? Was it a mysterious, contagious disease that had to be identified and confined to the school? No, it was allegedly lead poisoning.

          The state is going to decide whether you can see your children or not? The state has control of everything? Pure modeling.

          I have never participated in anything approaching a festive funeral for a child. I have attended funerals for children and they make me very sad. But, I suppose that’s why I’ll never be selected for a starring role in one of the NWO productions.

          In fact, when grief has crept into my life I generally don’t want a lot of company. Someone sitting quietly with me is appreciated. I don’t call a film crew, “Up With People”, or GoFundMe. I must be old fashioned that way.

        5. Now, Lophatt, we all grieve differently… (Yeah, all of us except for the Sandy Hook families. They grieve in full makeup in front of cameras.)

          (Excuse me while my eyes roll out of my head.) ?

        6. It’s called schmaltz, exaggerated sentimentalism, as in music or soap operas. It’s easy to identify the origin of this sentiment, it all comes from the same tribe. You can see it repeated over and over again in Hollywood movies and TV shows.

          It’s been around since Shakesaspear (“Lord” Oxford) centuries ago. Witness:

          Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow,
          Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
          To the last syllable of recorded time;
          And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
          The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
          Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player,
          That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
          And then is heard no more. It is a tale
          Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
          Signifying nothing.

        7. I know many have chimed in on how ridiculous this is, but I just have to add to it. It is utterly beyond belief. You would be numb, you would be in shock, you would be suffering under the weight of a grief so intense that you would just never conceive of such an idea as to decorate the coffin with happy memories done in sharpies. I still remember my emotional response when I read the story about how the bodies of the little children were being left over night in the school. Though I still believed the story at that point, I just couldn’t understand how parents would allow that, how awful it would be. I would literally have to be carried out on a stretcher and tranquilized before I would leave my child’s body overnight in an empty school.

        8. As bizarre as it may seem, those white caskets designed to be written on are a thing. If I recall correctly, Matthews donated caskets to the SH cause. That was known publicly.

          If there were no bodies, the implication is that funeral directors were complicit. It’s not unusual for funeral homes to rack up debt to their suppliers (casket companies, for instance). Has to be motive to participate in such a hoax. There are dots there…may or may not connect.

        9. I can almost (almost) see the drawing-on-a-casket thing if you lose a child to a terminal illness, something expected. But to lose a five- or six-year old like they did…my heavens, it broke my heart the first time my boy came home and told me another kid made fun of him. (I got over it.)

          Think about it: they had to spend all day at the school, waiting for the news; they gave some interviews; they identified the body; they planned a funeral; they attended a vigil or three; AND they shopped for Sharpies™? All before the funeral (which, if I recall, took place really soon)? No way.

        10. For me, details like writing on a casket, or Robbie Parker laughing add color to what is already an unbelievable story.

          I find it unbelievable that children would be left dead in the school overnight. I find it unbelievable that little to no attempt was made to save lives. I find it unbelievable that none of the assembled media would notice the bodies of the children being removed. I find it unbelievable that a bus driver would drop frightened children at the home of a stranger (Gene Rosen) and let them enter his home unsupervised.

          I could go on, but the gist for me is that there are plenty of facets of this case that don’t hold up against the most basic examination. So I focus more on those elements. No matter how absurd Robbie Parker’s laughter, or the decoration of a casket may be, these can be explained away with the classic, “people grieve in different ways.” It’s a set up.

          I agree that the degree of absurdity reinforces the case for fraud. I’m just more swayed by the many elements that can’t possibly be explained away through emotional manipulation.

          That being said, I’m not disagreeing with any of you. I realize that at one time or another and in one way or another, you have all said the same thing I just said. I sometimes think it’s good to get back to basics, especially with the new attention being brought to the case. The story was page 1 on Reddit yesterday (with plenty of ignorance and trolling on full display).

        11. The free houses thing was a farce. That was one of the first disputes I had with jft. Years ago… My what has changed since then.

          Thanks recynd for answering a question I had. Seems like its pulling teeth to get a straight response sometimes, or if I do, I get holed responding. It’s hard being the bad guy

        12. How do you explain the “free houses” thing? I don’t understand the whole recording process, but all the $0 sales prices seemed anomalous, especially since they seemed to align with participants.

          There were also a lot of fishy ties with the nearby campus (Fairfield Hill? My memory fails…again).

        13. Er, ya’ see, there was this……, er, new program (that’s it), there was this…., new computer program,………and a…..glitch. That’s it. There was a GLITCH. Naturally, in order to make everything…….right, they went down to the office on Christmas to fix it. Ya’ see, it’s all perfectly explainable.

        14. Regarding the free houses let me tell you what I know- My friend’s house is one of those that have the $0 sale price on Christmas 2009. He does not even know it but I saw it on the tax assessor page. Believe me if his house was paid for he would certainly know it. He continues to make his mortgage payment every month and I am sure he would not continue to do so if he did not have to.

          I cannot speak about the many others with the same $0 Christmas price but I think Occam’s razor should be considered here- The explanation was that it was a computer reset ? That is most likely the case.

          Consider also if the owner before the sale is the same as the owner after the sale for $0 then the owner didn’t get anything from anyone did they? (isn’t this the case in all of those situations) If the owner after the sale was different then the owner before the sale then that may indicate impropriety.

          If people’s mortgages were paid off that would be reflected separately. This whole thing is a red herring distraction IMHO.

          Many more productive discrepancies warrant further, IMHO, review but do as you so choose.

        15. I’m definitely not married to the “free house theory”; I’m not married to any of the conclusions. It’s just one in a long list of high weirdness. It might be interesting to know what, if anything, your friend’s taxes have done (I’m not suggesting you ask) in relation to the zero-dollar values.

        16. Ray, thanks for the response. As you say, I simply don’t know. I will not question your account if you tell me that you know someone personally that had this happen.

          It is not a major thing to me, personally. I DO find it strange. I have never seen anything quite like it in fact. If there is no change in status, value or ownership why would there need to be any such entry? If it was needed for every house in the area, why were they not all included?

          I’ll take your word for your friend. I think you can see why this would attract attention. I think you can also see why, taken together, there are a multitude of “strange” things surrounding this.

          I didn’t mean to spin you up. I had not heard any explanation for this other than the computer one, which, frankly, doesn’t make a lot of sense.

        17. I looked up an address in Newtown where I knew the elderly owners, now deceased. This huge property was sold in 2003 after the death of the widow and has not changed owners since. Here too is a sale of zero dollars on 12/25/09. The property is valued at almost 1.5 million.

        18. Could they have “glitched” a whole slew of listings so that the suspect transactions would blend in with others where there doesn’t appear to be impropriety? Food for thought.

        19. The way I understand their story, they changed computer programs for storing the records. So far, fine. Then they needed to transfer the existing records into the new program.

          They said that they did that and chose the date based on it being a day that no other business was likely to interrupt the process. OK, if the new records mirror the old, why would you want any amount other than the existing one?

          Some who did research on this showed that the values had changed. Why would that be? Shouldn’t the current value at the time the record was transferred be reflected in the new record?

          I don’t claim to know much about real estate. I own some, but other than that, I don’t “study” it. I think the simplest thing I could say about this is that I do not understand why some of the records would go from having a significant value to zero.

          I have not heard an understandable explanation for why they would do that. I have not heard an explanation for why some homes had this done when others did not.

          It may be a false lead, but it is understandable from the standpoint of SHES research. It does not make sense for someone to do this for no reason. It doesn’t make sense to do this only to selected homes if it is a total makeover of the record-keeping system.

        20. As usual, you make an abundance of sense in this plot twist of the play. It might be innocent, and have an explanation, but none that makes sense has been proffered.

          And given the vast number of crisis actors that arrived a couple years before the show, and left just after the curtain closed, one grows a teensy bit suspicious.

          Added to the ridiculously long list of ridiculous plot twists in this production, I don’t think they would have had an audience in Podunk the second night, were they performing it out of town with an eye on moving it to Broadway.

        21. Would not the mortgage and other liens have been discharged from the deed ? That would be the manner in which a payout would be reflected if there was no change in ownership,

          However if Joe Smith on Riverside Road is the owner of his house on 12/24/2009 and he is the owner of the house on 12/25/2009 because the house was sold to him for $0 then what did he get ? He got nothing.

          My friend continues to complain that he has no money left over after his mortgage payment so if his house is paid for I hope somebody tells his bank LoL.

          I honestly think this is a distraction and waste of time. There are so many many more substantive areas to investigate. Wolfgang’s latest developments on the corrupt dash cam videos ? independent forensic confirmation on the real identity of Avielle Richman ? The latest David Wheeler FBI video and on and on.

        22. I could see it working something like this.

          You are giving away 10 free houses. To keep those transactions from standing out, you screw up the records for 200 houses.

          When someone questions the 10, you point to the other 190. Nothing suspect in those. Just a glitch. Nothing to see here.

          The average questioner says, “Oh, guess that makes sense.”

          Similarly, for the overall operation you could mix fake people with real people. By fake people, I mean operatives who were assigned to this event.

          Blend the fakes with enough real locals and the waters are muddied. Not that many real locals have much to say either.

  16. It seems somebody may be screwing with this comments section. Some links in the comments DO NOT WORK. PaulStaul, No pic of Nancy Lanza comes thru, and PeaceFrogs link is dead. Over and over again, the site defaults to a page where there are no comments section at all. I have to reload everything from the original email. It seems that the “D-bags that be” are attacking the site.

  17. So far, the only link in the comments that has worked for me was Brabants Clash video. Loud & clear. Reconsider link just laid dead, and all the others took me back to the front page of icons on my screen. What’s going on ?

  18. Wolfgang’s forensic report that essentially concluded Avielle Richman is a construct victim based on the identity of Lennie Urbina is drawing attention.

    Based on twitter correspondences It appears that Ryan Graney contacted the son of the forensic expert in an attempt to , somehow, discredit the results. The report appears to be quite objective based on the available pictures of the children so I don’t know how they can walk that back after the fact but they are trying –

    For what it’s worth


  19. Dr. Tracy, is — attempting to claim you failed to run some part of your research through some ‘institutional review board?’ Some academic who claims to have served on a grievance committee for a public university claims this board and protocol is standard, and that such a committee decides when research might be ‘unethical,’ as opposed to unlawful.

    I’m wondering if the orchestrators of this psy op are trying to conflate the protocol of disputing copyright infringement under WordPress with that of submitting research proposals to a university administration or oversight committee or whatever.

  20. The arguments FAU should be presented with are not whether SH happened or not, but whether they have the right to squelch Prof. Tracy’s freedom of speech (they do not). I believe FAU will destroy its own “reputation” by withholding from its students professors who are able to speak freely and teach critical thinking.

    FAU adminstrators fail to realize that the positive reputation can only result from doing the right thing & standing with their professors’ constitutional rights, not doing what the mob (which I imagine is actually quite small) calls for.

    Finally, I’d just like to add that I have always marveled at Professor Tracy’s writing skills. And I admire him for providing students and others with a platform where they can actually examine facts and fallacies. And he’s still posting despite everything.

    Stay strong Prof. Tracy.

Leave a Reply