Category Archives: Sandy Hook massacre

The hounding of Sandy Hook skeptics: Halbig threatened; removes NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK

If you still believe the Sandy Hook school massacre of December 14, 2012 is real, please read this post and ask yourself why the skeptics are being threatened, stalked, and their book now censored by

The Hounding of Wolfgang Halbig

Wolfgang Halbig

Wolfgang Halbig is the former Florida state trooper and school safety consultant who, in February 2013, invoking Connecticut’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), began phoning and sending letters to Newtown and Connecticut officials, asking for answers to his questions about the Sandy Hook massacre. A year after, Halbig had not received even one response.

Worse than not answering his questions, Halbig said that in late December of 2013, two law enforcement officers in plain clothes from Florida’s Lake County Sheriff’s Office warned him that if he would not stop asking questions about Sandy Hook, the Connecticut State police would file felony charges of harassment against him. The two officers then advised Halbig to “hire an attorney.” (See “Sandy Hook massacre was a ‘contrived event,’ says former state trooper Wolfgang Halbig”)

On May 6, 2014, Halbig traveled thousands of miles to confront the Newtown Board of Education, but was met only with silence. On April 24, 2015, the State of Connecticut Freedom of Information Commission finally granted a hearing to determine if Newtown improperly had withheld documents. (Click here for the FOI hearings.)

On November 9, 2015, after doggedly pursuing the truth about Sandy Hook for nearly 3 years, Halbig announced on his Facebook page that he must quit because he fears for the safety of his wife and grandchildren. He writes (I’ve edited his statement for typos):

I need to share with all my Sandy Hook Justice supporters that what happened yesterday to my wife having been harassed at her workplace with her work e-mails and all the people who work for her were also harassed with their work e-mails which is uncalled for.

My wife loves her job and this has now caused me to make a decision. I cannot do this by myself begging for donations and then be slammed by these scumbags everyday that I am FRAUD.

I thought that the donations would also help me in hiring Private Investigators which this case urgently needs. Whoever takes this on in my place I will suport you and transfer funds remaining.

I cannot lose my wife of 39 years and to hurt her and my family when she has nothing absolutely nothing to do with this investigation is very cruel.

They are now stalking me physically, taken pictures of me while traveling and then telling me that I should not give the ducks to my grandchildren because they have been specially prepared makes me think some kind of poison has been added to those ducks. [See “Sandy Hook, Oregon college shooting, and the 10 ducks”]

The ducks make it seem funny but when you specially prepare them for my grandchildren and then give me a warning it must be true.

My phone number will not change, my home address will not change but I need to step away so these people whoever they are will leave my family in peace and not hurt them. censors Nobody Died At Sandy Hook

Less than a month ago, listed for sale a newly published book, Nobody Died at Sandy Hook, which was co-edited by Professor James Fetzer. Contributors to the book include Professor James Tracy, Dr. Eowyn and other professionals.

Nobody Died at Sandy Hook

Almost immediately, a small battalion of “reviewers” who haven’t read the book attacked the book on Amazon, giving it a one-star rating. But they were outnumbered by the 5-star ratings given by readers who had purchased and actually read Nobody Died at Sandy Hook. Below is an example (click to enlarge).

review of Nobody Died At Sandy Hook

Three days ago, I went on the book’s page on Amazon, and saw that the book had more than 80 reviews and an average rating of 4+stars, having received plenty more 5-star than 1-star ratings.

Today, if you go on that page, you won’t find it. Instead, you get this message:

We’re sorry. The Web address you entered is not a functioning page on our site

Similarly, you won’t find Nobody Died at Sandy Hook if you conduct a search on Amazon for books authored by James Fetzer. His other books, however, are still being sold on, including books on other hoaxes and conspiracies — the moon-landing, JFK assassination, and 9/11. But not the newly-published book on Sandy Hook.

You won’t find Nobody Died at Sandy Hook on Amazon because even though Amazon was making good sales on the book — 500 copies in less than a month –they’ve removed Nobody Died at Sandy Hook.

Amazon’s CreateSpace claims that Nobody Died at Sandy Hook “was found to contain material, which may include cover image, title and/or product descriptions, that is in violation of CreateSpace content guidelines. As a result, this content [book] has been suppressed through your account and removed from all sales channels.”

James Fetzer does not believe the reason given by CreateSpace. In a blog post, Fetzer points out that:

Create Space and review every submission for its suitability for publication and conformity to their guidelines before they are accepted for publication. They accepted and published NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK on 22 October 2015, nearly a month ago. There is no good reason for this book to now be taken down for further review other than that it has become a sensation and has the potential to embarrass the administration of President Barack Hussein Obama, which appears to be the underlying problem. 

Fetzer continues:

A book that addresses a politically-sensitive issue that has been central promoting the [gun control] political agenda of the administration turns out to be too threatening and has to be suppressed on any ground the[y] can contrive. What could be more telling than that they have taken the book down but cannot explain the reasons for suppressing it….

Halbig concludes with this ominous question:

Does that make me and the other contributors [of Nobody Died at Sandy Hook] targets for government assassins?

In order that Americans know the truth about Sandy Hook, Fetzer is making the book available for free to anyone to read. To read/download the book Nobody Died at Sandy Hook, click here.

For links to all the posts FOTM has published on Sandy Hoax, go here.

Please help by reblogging this post and distributing it via social media and email. Please pray for the Sandy Hook skeptics who are risking their safety and that of their families in pursuit of the truth.

Thank you.


Sandy Hook School Shooting: A Medical Practitioner Analyzes the Official Report’s Errors and Anomalies

Dr. Eowyn:

A meticulous and well-documented analysis of Sandy Hook by a medical professional (respiratory therapist) with over 25 years of experience, showing how the proper procedures were not followed by the first responders at the scene. Here’s a pull quote:

“Because the school had been declared safe enough to be evacuated and to allow 3 paramedics and other officers to enter into the school, there is no logical reason that other EMS personnel shouldn’t also have been allowed in, to provide assessment and possible care. Knowing this, if more people were available to provide care, equipment and supplies (including assessment and resuscitation equipment) there would have been no reason to continue on with the Triage protocol of declaring a child dead without effort at resuscitation….

To close, in my opinion, certain sections of this document prove that, at the minimum, a new investigation MUST be opened, not only into the shooting and its aftermath, but also into the investigative team, including Newtown Police Department, Connecticut State Police, and any state and federal agencies, who responded to this event. The medical aspects are only one small part of all the inconsistencies, improbabilities and conflicting statements in the official report.”

Originally posted on Memory Hole:

Submitted by Diane Jakopovic

(PDF: Medical-Aspects-of-the-Shooting-at-Sandy-Hook-School-Final)

Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School-400x254Having worked as a Registered Respiratory Therapist (RRT) in a pediatric hospital for over twenty years, over 10 years of which were in exclusively in the intensive care units, and 5 years working as a Registered Polysomnography Technician (RPSGT) in the Neuro/Sleep Lab, I felt qualified to address some of what was written in the official report of the Sandy Hook School massacre. I am also certified as a Specialist in Pediatric/Neonatal Respiratory Care. However, I am not a physician, a nurse, an emergency responder, and I don’t live in Connecticut, so I felt it necessary to defer my logic and opinions to what their guidelines and protocols were, prior to the Sandy Hook shooting. Unfortunately, I was not able to find information to fit the exact circumstances at Sandy Hook (pediatric mass casualty) other than their Triage algorithm. I also found information that…

View original 8,374 more words

Sandy Hook schemers who haven’t read “Nobody Died At Sandy Hook” are attacking the book on Amazon

I am one of the contributors to Nobody Died At Sandy Hook, co-edited by Professor James Fetzer.

The book is being attacked on by a phalanx of Sandy Hook schemers who haven’t even read the book.

Please, in the interest of truth, if you had read the book and think well of it, write a review on

Thank you.


Nobody Died at Sandy Hook


Reblogged from Memory Hole Blog

November 3, 2015

The War on “Nobody Died At Sandy Hook”


Flurry of Negative Reviews Attack New Book

Numerous “trolls” and “shills” have harnessed the world’s most popular retailer to attack Nobody Died at Sandy Hook, posting anarray of “one star” reviews and derogatory remarks on the book’s Amazon page. The collection of essays was released October 22, edited by Prof. Jim Fetzer and author Mike Palecek, and features in-depth contributions from several academics and independent researchers.

A telling aspect of this controversy is that many of the reviewers admit they have not even read the book before submitting their review. There is the strong probability that this is part of a more elaborate organized campaign led by the well-heeled parties that have directly benefited from the false event.

On the other hand, reviewers who have made the effort to purchase and read the book are unanimously submitting “five star” reviews, often with detailed commentaries.

“A titanic war is taking place on over this book,” Fetzer explains to MHB. “Everyone who has read the book has posted a 5-STAR review. A blizzard of 1-STAR reviews is appearing from a legion of phonies, trolls and shills.”

Screen Shot 2015-11-03 at 9.47.08 AM

For example, here is one of several very positive reviews.

review of Nobody Died At Sandy Hook


Such reviews are offset by very negative assessments, such as those below, one of which dismisses the volume as “fictitious propaganda.” The second review is submitted by “HONR,”–referencing Lenny Pozner’s “HONR Network,” the dubious organization that has filed bogus copyright claims against the media outlets of independent Sandy Hook researchers.

Screen Shot 2015-11-03 at 9.38.17 AM

The editors and contributors of NDASH are seeking to get the word out against a clearly coordinated program to suppress the evidence and expert analyses encompassed in the book. Here is a recent presentation of the book by Fetzer on his interview program, The Real Deal.

Fetzer also made an appearance on Susan Lindauer’s Covert Report, broadcast on Truth Frequency Radio.


Jim Fetzer delivers a shattering analysis of his brand new book, “Nobody Died at Sandy Hook,” which relies on his legendary research into primary sourcing to expose the absolute incongruities of that day. Backed by photos of the crime scene– before the shooting ever took place– Fetzer shows how the psychological operation was planned and executed. Keen observers have noted puzzling omissions of death certificates for the 20 children and 6 adults who allegedly died that day. And the absence of blood saturation from the crime scene.

But Fetzer takes it further, examining ballistic reports that no way did shell slugs at the scene get fired from Adam Lanza’s gun. The ATF report that neither Oto Lanza nor his mother frequented gun ranges in the Connecticut area, and therefore could not be labeled “gun aficianados.” Once again, whether you agree with all of Jim Fetzer’s conclusions, his research is highly provocative and necessary to a complete analysis of whatever events transpired— and did not transpire— on that day. It’s another great interview with a tremendous guest, with a genuine expertise in false flag and psychological operations. He makes a powerful argument that Washington’s playing “Operation Gladio” with unsuspecting American citizens for the sake of ramming gun control over the resistance of America’s untrusting citizens. This interview is Jim Fetzer at his best!

The entire interview is available at Truth Frequency Radio.

Sandy Hook: Photo of Adam Lanza is fake?

I don’t do Photoshop, and so am not knowledgeable about Photoshop.

The man who goes by the alias Barry Soetoro Esq., to whom I am grateful for many news tips, presents this video analysis of how a familiar photo of alleged Sandy Hook mass murderer Adam Lanza is a product of Photoshop.

To summarize, “Barry” points to the following evidence that the Lanza photo has been photoshopped:

  1. A circle cut out below Lanza’s left nostril. (Also, his nostrils are asymmetrical.)
  2. Jagged outline of pupil.
  3. Right side of neck is much longer and has a wavy lump.
  4. Hair is layered, with brush marks above his head.
  5. A notch in left jaw.
  6. Strange blur under right eye.
  7. “Blobby” chin, i.e., uneven jaw line.
  8. “Brick mouth” — corners of Lanza’s mouth are brick-shaped.
  9. Left side of shirt goes down the wrong direction.
  10. Blobs and streaks on the sides of neck.
  11. Mouth not centered.
  12. Strange wavy (hair) bangs on his forehead.
  13. Straight line on left side of left pupil.
  14. Different textures when photo is rendered in High Definition.
  15. Lots of chunky straight lines in hair.

I would appreciate the opinion of readers who are adept at Photoshop.

H/t Barry Soetoro Esq. and Jim Fetzer.

See also:


Sandy Hook, conspiracy theorists, and the liberal worldview

A non-profit online magazine, The New Inquiry (TNI), cofounded by Mary Borkowski, Jennifer Bernstein, and Rachel Rosenfelt, recently published an article by someone named Emily Elizabeth Brown, trashing and deriding “conspiracy theorists” who suspect crisis actors are used in false flag incidents like Sandy Hook.

So who is Emily Elizabeth Brown?

If you click on her name, you’ll be told “Page Not Found“.

So much for TNI‘s high-minded description of itself as “a space for discussion that aspires to enrich cultural and public life by putting all available resources—both digital and material—toward the promotion and exploration of ideas.”

TNI explores ideas alright, but never mind who the authors of those ideas are. That information apparently is a secret and not “for discussion”. For that matter, there really is no “discussion” or “exploration of ideas” on TNI because the website does not allow reader comments. Given that, it is not unreasonable for us to think that TNI is really “a space” for the express “promotion,” instead of any discussion or exploration, of ideas.

Another word for “promotion” is “propaganda”.

Back to the mysterious E. E. Brown’s article (h/t Memory Hole Blog). Here are excerpts:

It is true that professional actors are sometimes hired to simulate disasters; their purpose is to help large organizations run through emergency response drills in preparation for possible catastrophic events. In conspiracy theory world, crisis actors are stans and stand-ins employed by the government to carry out affective labor during false flag operations. Websites claim that the Sandy Hook shooting, along with virtually every major tragedy involving human beings on American soil since 9/11, was a false flag drill that the government decided to take live. […]

In an interview, the political scientist Michael Barkun explained that conspiracy theorists try to make sense of a confusing world by “dividing the world sharply between the forces of light and the forces of darkness.” By imagining the evil forces as plants in the general public—the people with whom we’re supposed to sympathize—crisis actor believers erase the lines between good and evil that are usually clearly defined in conspiracy theories. There are no clear lines to separate the people who are ‘in on it’ and the people who aren’t.

An oft-repeated psychological explanation is that conspiracy theories arise as a reaction of disbelief in the face of a tragedy. It is (arguably) more reassuring to believe that a tragedy like Sandy Hook was staged by the government, instead of trying to make sense of the narrative in which somebody decided to walk into an elementary school and shoot 20 children. Then nobody would have died; there was no horrific act of violence. From this perspective, evil is not perpetrated by ordinary people, and the people the government wants us to think are evil are really harmless puppets. The crisis actor conspiracy theory exists in a worldview that is both paranoid and idealistic. Since crisis actor theorists maintain that these acts couldn’t have been carried out by people of their own accord, their view of the common man is much more positive than most people’s. To the believer, evil is primarily created by tangible, external forces. This combination of idealism and paranoia disrupts the real world in a way that other conspiracy theories don’t.

Unlike the typical  9/11 truther, who may hold that the whole event was a hoax but will keep their anger directed at the government, the crisis actor theorist directs their anger and disbelief at the victim. The government is acknowledged as the mastermind, but in the classic conspiracy trope of Us versus Them, each new tragedy brings forth new actors, and nobody is sure which of Them lives among Us.

Did you get that, “conspiracy theorists”?

If you harbor even a suspicion that the U.S. government is capable of conspiratorial machinations and false flags, the mysterious Emily Elizabeth Brown is calling you:

  • Simple-minded, because you “try to make sense of a confusing world by ‘dividing the world sharply between the forces of light and the forces of darkness.’
  • Stupid and can’t handle reality, and instead retreat into wishful thinking, because it’s “more reassuring to believe that a tragedy like Sandy Hook was staged by the government, instead of trying to make sense of the narrative in which somebody decided to walk into an elementary school and shoot 20 children.”
  • Paranoid and out-of-step with “the real world”.
  • Scapegoaters who blame the victims.


Seldom have I read so much pretentious psycho-babble in one single essay as Ms. Brown’s, not even in the worst papers written by the worst of my former students. Brown gives new meaning to the word “sophomoric.”

I — and you — can write armchair dime-store psychoanalysis as good as Ms. Brown (assuming Emily Elizabeth Brown is her real name and she is really a she who is not government’s sockpuppet). Here’s my parody of Brown:

An oft-repeated psychological explanation is that those, such as a writer named Emily Elizabeth Brown, who deride conspiracy theories arise as a reaction of what psychologists identify as denial in the face of reality. It is (arguably) more reassuring to believe that governments do not conspire to carry out false flags like the well-documented Operation Northwoods of the Kennedy Administration or the more recent Watergate conspiracy of the Nixon Administration, instead of having to shed their determined childlike innocence, which psychologists would call determined naivete or outright denial of human beings’ disposition toward deception. And so, the deniers like Emily Elizabeth Brown could remain cocooned in their comfortable worldview — a world of rainbows and unicorns where there are no conspiracies except in the minds of “conspiracy theorists,” and where human nature and government are unfailingly benign and well-intentioned, the only exceptions being those malignant “conspiracy theorists” who would dare question the integrity of persons holding and wielding great power over the little people. From this perspective, evil is not perpetrated by government — notwithstanding the record of the hundreds of millions killed by Nazi and Communist regimes in the 20th century. From this peculiar perspective held by deniers like Emily Elizabeth Brown, evil is perpetrated by those “conspiracy theorists” who would dare imagine that governments could actually plan and undertake conspiracies. To the believer, such as Emily Elizabeth Brown, evil is primarily created by powerless “conspiracy theorists” who actually dare to disrupt the believer’s fantasy of the real world.

Instead of Brown spewing her psycho-babble, it would be so much more useful if she engaged her readers with facts and reasoning, as in:

In the end, Ms. Brown’s essay is simply the latest reminder of the enormous differences in liberal vs. conservative worldviews.


As a study published in the Journal of Ideology reminds us (stripping away the authors’ loaded language), liberals view the world as generally “a hospitable place” where human nature fundamentally is benign and where most people are “warm and caring,” “nurturant” and “supportive” of others. The exceptions, of course, are those nasty, hateful conservatives. The many nice people include people in government, who can be depended on to care for and “nurture” us. All of which render liberals ideal tools– “useful idiots“– of government and the power élite.

In contrast, the conservative sees the world as “a dangerous place” because human nature is not simply benign. In such a world, the individual must be disciplined and self-reliant, instead of dependent on government. Those in government become more dangerous, the more power they accumulate — all at our expense.

So whose worldview better accords with that of America’s Founding Fathers?

Here are two clues:

“What is government itself but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external or internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: You must first enable the government to control the governed, and in the next place oblige it to control itself.” -James Madison in The Federalist No. 51.

“If once [the people] become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress, and Assemblies, Judges, and Governors, shall all become wolves.” –Thomas Jefferson, letter to Edward Carrington, 1787.

That is why the Founders fashioned a polity based on a view of human nature as inherently selfish instead of benign, and of government as a necessary evil that must be constrained and delimited with checks and balances. For the plain fact of the matter is that there really are governments who would stoop to killing little children—and more. Just ask the millions of innocent men, women, and children whom the Nazis had slaughtered, or the hundreds of millions of innocent men, women, and children whom the Communists had killed in the former Soviet Union, the People’s Republic of China and Kampuchea.

Why would Americans, who partake of the same non-angelic human nature, be uniquely virtuous? Compared to the horrors of the Nazis and Communists, Sandy Hook, if it is a false flag, is small potatoes.


Sandy Hook: Adam Lanza’s strange Dec. 13 date-of-death just won’t go away

In a post on June 5, 2014, C. W. Wade of announced that the website and that of Lenny Pozner (father of alleged child victim Noah Pozner),, were releasing the death certificate of Adam Lanza, the alleged mass murderer of 20 first-graders and 6 adults at the Sandy Hook Elementary School on Dec. 14, 2012, in Newtown, Connecticut.

Below is the image of Adam Lanza’s death certificate, dated 1/3/2013. I circled in red the 12/14/2012 date of death and the peculiar skewed signature of Newtown town clerk Debbie Aurelia (why is her signature sprawled out of the box?).

↓click image to enlarge↓

Adam Lanza death certificate

Aurelia had refused Freedom of Information (FOI) requests from media and other sources seeking copies of the death certificates of Lanza and his victims, although death certificates are considered vital public records and historically available for public scrutiny. Aurelia justified her denial on the grounds of preventing identity theft and protecting the privacy of the deceased and their families.

On June 18, 2013, the death certificates were released in a belated response to a Freedom of Information request filed by The New York Post

The Post explains that the State of Connecticut’s Freedom of Information Commission “sided with The Post, maintaining the documents were public record.” In spite of efforts by Aurelia and the state legislature to pass bills to block the release of the death certificates, the bills “never made it to a vote in the Legislature, paving the way for the release of the documents.” (One bill was passed, banning the release of photos and videos of murder victims.)

But neither The Post nor other newspapers that reported on the release published any of the death certificates, not one. Thus far, only two certificates have been published:

  1. That of Noah Pozner, released by his father Lenny, and published by C. W. Wade on on May 12, 2013.
  2. Adam Lanza’s death certificate, also published on

In other words, the public have not seen the remaining 26 death certificates — those of Nancy Lanza and the 19 children and 6 adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

C. W. Wade claimed that since Lanza’s death certificate lists his date of death as December 14, 2012, and was certified by Aurelia, who filed the certificate on January 3, 2013, this refutes the “gimmick” of  “the hoaxer community” (Sandy Hook skeptics) who claimed there is a discrepancy because the Social Security Death Index had listed Lanza as having died on December 13, 2012.

What Wade derisively calls a “gimmick” of “the hoaxer community” is no gimmick, nor is it something contrived by Sandy Hook skeptics. As I had reported in a post, on January 20, 2013, I went on and confirmed a net rumor that Adam Lanza’s Social Security Death Index was listed as December 13, 2012 — a day before the massacre. Here’s a screenshot I took of the SSDI record on, as proof in case the site scrubs the page.

↓click image to enlarge↓

Adam Lanza died 12-13-2012

Note that:

  • I took the screenshot at 2:29 pm, 1/20/2013 (see bottom right of image).
  • SSDI says “Confirmation” is “Proven.”

The information of Lanza’s strange 12/13/2012 SSDI went viral.

13 days later, on Feb. 2, 2013, I discovered that had changed Adam Lanza’s SSDI to December 14, 2012. (See “SSDI changed Adam Lanza’s date-of-death from Dec. 13 to Dec. 14, 2012 !!!.”)

However, another genealogy website,, was slower on the take and still had Lanza’s SSDI as Dec. 13, 2012, days after had made the change to Dec. 14. (See “ still has Adam Lanza’s date-of-death as a day before the Sandy Hook massacre”)

Despite Adam Lanza’s 12/14/2012 death date on his alleged death certificate, the matter is not settled.

John Greenewald, Jr., of the website The Black Vault, obtained a Statement of Death by the Funeral Director for Adam Lanza, which shows his date-of-death as Dec. 13, 2012. Greenewald explains:

As part of the research effort, The Black Vault filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for all documents relating to Adam P. Lanza, his death, and the social security record. Almost two months later, a response was received.

The Social Security Administration sent Greenewald two pages, both statements of death for Lanza by the funeral director.

The first, dated 1/15/13, showed Adam P. Lanza’s death occurred on 12/13/12; the day prior to the shooting.The second document, dated 1/24/13, showed Lanza’s death as 12/14/12, with a handwritten statement at the top, “Amended 1/24/13” and the initials “SMO.”

Below are:

  • A letter to Greenewald from Social Security Administration’s FOI officer, Dawn S. Wiggins, dated March 18, 2013 — 3 months before the New York Post received the death certificates of Adam Lanza and his victims.
  • A Statement of Death by Funeral Director for Adam Lanza, dated 1/15/2013, showing Lanza’s date of death as 12/13/2012. The funeral director is listed as Suzanne M. Ouellette of Brookside Chapel and Funeral Home, 116 Main St., Plaistow, NH 03865. (Brookside’s “About Us” web page, however, says its funeral director is Mr.  Francis J. Berube, Jr.  Suzanne Ouellette is identified on LinkedIn as a secretary at Brookside.)
  • An amended Statement of Death by Funeral Director for Adam Lanza, dated 1/24/2013, with Lanza’s date of death changed to 12/14/2012. This document was also signed by Ouellette.

You can also view the documents for yourself here.

reponse to Greenewald FOI requestAdam Lanza Statement of Death by Funeral Director1Adam Lanza Statement of Death by Funeral Director2

From the beginning, nothing about Sandy Hook is transparent or straight-forward. Instead, everything about this alleged massacre has been complicated, convoluted, secretive and shadowy.

So, which document should we believe? —

  1. The original Statement of Death by Funeral Director for Adam Lanza, dated January 15, 2013, which listed Lanza’s date of death as Dec. 13, 2012, or
  2. Adam Lanza’s death certificate, signed by town clerk Debbie Aurelia on January 3, 2013 — with her signature sprawling out of the box (who signs an official document like that?) — which lists Lanza’s date of death as Dec. 14, 2012.

What do you think?

For the links to all the posts FOTM has published on Sandy Hook, go to our “Sandy Hook Massacre” page.


A reader Auntie Lulu asked a very good question about whether Debbie Aurelia’s home also was acquired for $0, with a sale date of December 25, 2009 when all government offices were closed, like the homes of Sandy Hook victims and those of the town’s three selectmen and non-victims Gene Rosen, the Phelps, and the Wasiks who made themselves readily available for TV interviews. (See “The strange purchase date and price of Sandy Hook homes” and “Sandy Hook: The girl who doesn’t exist and her parents’ $0 home”).

So I found Aurelia’s address and looked it up on Vision Government Solutions, which says her home at 23 Cherry St., Sandy Hook, CT, are co-owned by William Halstead, Sr. & Debbie Aurelia Halstead. There are two sale dates:

  • 12/25/2009: no price listed
  • 10/02/2014: sale price $0

Here’s the screenshot I took of the Vision Government Solutions page. In the lower right corner are the date and time when I took the screenshot. I painted the red boxes and the red arrow.

↓Click image below to enlarge↓

Debbie Aurelia home at 23 Cherry St on Vision Govt Solutions


Facebook is censoring FOTM’s post on gun control

Yesterday morning, I published a post titled “Obama wants to bypass Congress for gun control via Executive Order.”

Any post published on Fellowship of the Minds (FOTM) is automatically linked on FOTM’s Facebook page. But that post isn’t.

I tried manually to link the post to our Facebook page, but each time I got this message:

Facebook censors FOTM

My guess is our readers who tried to post a link to their Facebook page were similarly deterred, which explains why that post has ZERO Facebook counts.

I am, therefore, re-publishing that post below.


This is a follow-up to DCG’s post of Oct. 4, “Obama goes beyond mere gun control, hints at confiscation“.

So much to do destroy, so little time left.

The POS knows he has only a little over a year left in his mal-administration.  At the top of his to-do list is gun control.

Already, when he spoke in reaction to the Oregon college shooting of October 1, Obama went beyond his usual calls for more gun control and suggested that the U.S. do what Australia and Great Britain did in the mid-1990s when their governments instituted virtually complete bans on firearm possession.

Now, as reported by the Washington Post on Oct. 8, Obama is seriously considering bypassing altogether Congress, the law-making branch of the U.S. government, by issuing an executive order to impose new background-check requirements for buyers who purchase weapons from high-volume gun dealers.

Under the proposed rule change, dealers who exceed a certain number of sales each year would be required to obtain a license from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and perform background checks on potential buyers.

Obama actually had proposed that rule, among a list of many gun-control policy proposals, after the Sandy Hoax shooting of Dec. 14, 2012. On Jan. 26, 2013, the POS announced 23 executive actions ranging from restarting federal research into the causes of gun violence to providing parity for mental health coverage under private insurance plans. But his push for legislation mandating universal background checks on gun sales failed in the Senate in April 2013. In August that year, Obama closed two gun-sale loopholes through executive authority, subjecting gun purchases by corporations and trusts to background checks and banning almost all re-imports of military surplus firearms to private entities.

Now, in the wake of the Oregon shooting, Obama is revisiting the universal background checks issue. He said he had asked his team “to scrub what kinds of authorities do we have to enforce the laws that we have in place more effectively to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.”

Note to Obama: Neither alleged Sandy Hook gunman Adam Lanza nor alleged Virginia WDBJ shooter Lester Flanagan nor alleged Oregon Umpqua college shooter Chris Harper-Mercer — all conveniently dead — had a criminal record or a record of being mentally ill.

A senior (but unnamed) Obama administration official said lawyers are still working details to ensure that the rule could pass legal muster. He said, “We are hopeful we can find a way to do this. It’s a lot more clear [sic] today than it was a year ago how to work this out.

I think what the “senior administration official” really meant to say was “It’s a lot easier today than it was a year ago how to work this out.” As Obama’s first senior White House adviser (and now mayor of gun-control Chicago, where never a weekend goes by without reports of multiple gun homicides) Rahm Emanuel famously said, “Never let a crisis go to waste!”

Especially if it’s a manufactured, false-flag crisis. /sarc

See “Gun control does not reduce gun violence“.

Obama makes gun gesture1